29 Gallon Upgrade

[sharkweek178]

There is no reason to be adding two or three fish at a time, that can cause more trouble for the fish. Shoaling species must be added together, the entire intended group, for various reasons. If the tank is adequately sized, with sufficient fast-growing plants, this is not going to cause any issues. Quite the reverse.

That was exactly my concern. In addition to not having a sufficient number in the shoal for a given amount of time, I was also concerned about the shoal repeatedly having to re-establish a pecking order (or whatever kind of hierarchy or organization they have) by adding new fish more than once.

 

[Byron]

That was exactly my concern. In addition to not having a sufficient number in the shoal for a given amount of time, I was also concerned about the shoal repeatedly having to re-establish a pecking order (or whatever kind of hierarchy or organization they have) by adding new fish more than once.

I'll detail this now. First, with all shoaling species, the more of them there are added at the same time, the less stress will be caused to the fish, and they will settle in much quicker. That means less risk of ich, because stress directly causes ich, as indeed it (stress) does with over 90% of all aquarium fish diseases. So reducing stress by having the entire shoal/group is a big benefit.

Second to the above, is that some species do have an hierarchy need. Loaches for example. Some of the larger Corydoras species, and the species in Scleromystax. Angelfish and discus have the same, and some of the characins, atherinids and cyprinids too. When new fish are added to an aquarium, it is surprising how quickly they may develop this hierarchy; adding the entire intended group at the same time allows this to play out naturally, which causes far less stress and trouble.

Third, related to both above points, is the now proven fact that numbers really do matter. Scientific studies have shown that shoaling fish that are in groups less than 10 are very likely to have serious consequences, and this occurs from the moment they are netted into an aquarium. Naturally aggressive species become more aggressive with fewer numbers, while normally peaceful species become aggressive to some degree. A second ramification is perhaps even more telling. Shoaling fish that have too small a group show a latency to feed. When a fish is hesitant to eat food, it is a clear sign that something is wrong.

 

[Essjay]

Byron, this is the current plant/cycling method, see what you think.

Planted/silent cycling

So ya got yourself a fish tank, and now you're wondering how to cycle it. You have a few options: 1) Fishless cycle: Set up your substrate and filter (decorations and plants are optional), buy pure ammonia, add enough to your tank to read 3ppm, wait. Full instructions here...

www.fishforums.net

 

[Byron]

Byron, this is the current plant/cycling method, see what you think.

Planted/silent cycling

So ya got yourself a fish tank, and now you're wondering how to cycle it. You have a few options: 1) Fishless cycle: Set up your substrate and filter (decorations and plants are optional), buy pure ammonia, add enough to your tank to read 3ppm, wait. Full instructions here...

www.fishforums.net

Thanks Essjay. I have no significant issues with these instructions, except for the numbers and shoaling fish. It all comes down to the aquarium size, and primarily the plant species and numbers. I would never counsel anyone to only add a few fish of a shoaling species, this is risky and can even be dangerous. I discussed this with Tom Barr some years ago, and he said assuming the tank was adequately planted, it was absolutely impossible to add too many fish (obviously, all else being within reason). People have seen photos of my tanks showing the coverage of surface plants, and they are ammonia sinks. That is not easy to get across in general terms without seeing/knowing the plants and numbers.

Having said that, if members are going to take the numbers suggested for shoaling fish as some sort of necessity, I certainly disagree. That is just not fair to the fish, and it is adding stress at an already stressful time.

 

[sharkweek178]

Interestingly enough, I was digging atoms in the archives and found this...

Why We Should Not Fishless Cycle Planted Tanks.

When I first start up a new planted tank, I have a different goal to those that start their tanks with a fishless cycle. My aim is to maximise plant growth from the word go to produce healthy, vibrant plant growth, and create an environment hostile to algae blooms. The fishless cycle requires...

www.fishforums.net

 

[Byron]

Interestingly enough, I was digging atoms in the archives and found this...

Why We Should Not Fishless Cycle Planted Tanks.

When I first start up a new planted tank, I have a different goal to those that start their tanks with a fishless cycle. My aim is to maximise plant growth from the word go to produce healthy, vibrant plant growth, and create an environment hostile to algae blooms. The fishless cycle requires...

www.fishforums.net

I read the first post (and those following on the first page but did not read all the subsequent 9 pages). The method outlined in post 1 will apparently work, I assume; but it has risks and a lot of completely unnecessary fussing over algae and zeolite, etc. I would never do this, and I certainly would never add CO2. If fish are present, this is dangerous. There is now evidence that diffused CO2 does harm fish, which makes perfect sense to anyone who knows fish physiology and what CO2 does. I have written elsewhere about my cory experience where the CO2 naturally produced at night clearly affected the cories.

It can be so simple, why make it complex for no reason. If you want an aquatic garden, fine, that's a different thing entirely from an aquarium with fish. I posted photos of my tanks in another thread this morning. It simply does not require all this complication. Plant the tank however you want it, making sure you have substantial floatying plants, give it a few days and if the plants are showing growth, you're all set to add fish, and you can add all the fish together if the plants are fast-growers and not dying.

 

[Essjay]

That thread is 13 years old, and methods have changed since it was written.

 

[sharkweek178]

That thread is 13 years old, and methods have changed since it was written.

I know. I just found it interesting that this discussion has been ongoing for so long. In my short time in the hobby, I did a lot of reading up on cycling and planted cycling doesn't get as much attention as fishless cycling. Maybe because for newer people like myself, live plants can be intimidating. But I've realized that that doesn't have to be the case.

 

[sharkweek178]

This is a 29g so water flow will not be excessive and it is easy to find something suited to cories and gourami. You could have a dual sponge filter connected to an air pump which is pretty much minimal water current, or a step up with an Aqueon Quiet Flow which would allow placement in a rear corner and current thus directed across the back to the opposite end and back again, and by the time it reaches the front it is pretty low flow. I used this well in my cory tank. And the honey gourami is OK, some more sensitive gourami might not be, but not here. Pictures below.

Neons, or cardinal tetra or the green neon tetra are all good (not mixed, better with a single species), you want 12-15 of whichever. The species (some of them) in the "Rosy" clade in Hyphessobrycon, such as the Rosy Tetra, in a group of 10-12 would work. Just avoid the troublemakers in this genus, esp Serpae Tetra (fin nippers) and the too large Bleeding Heart Tetra. The two phantoms, Black and Red, are in this clade. With most all of these you want at least 10-12. None are active swimmers.

So I tried the double sponge filter and didn't like it. So I got an Aqueon Quiet Flow AT10 that you pictured here, which is more to my liking. That thing is sleek too. I also have a smaller sponge filter for supplemental filtration. Only thing is that I could swear from the manual that there should be a way to adjust the output and I can't seem to figure it out. In fact, I think I might have accidentally turned it up.

 

[Byron]

You adjust it by taking hold of the directional thing (sorry, can't remember the name, the part where the water comes out) and push it down to allow you to turn it. At least, I think that is the method. Check the instructions, I remember they have this.

 

[sharkweek178]

Next step is getting some lights and a heater. I think I'm going to start with Nicrew lights and maybe down the line upgrade.

 

[Byron]

Next step is getting some lights and a heater. I think I'm going to start with Nicrew lights and maybe down the line upgrade.

As plants are intended, do not get "x" light intending to upgrade. The aim in a natural/low-tech planted tank is always to achieve the balance of light (intensity and spectrum) and nutrients such that this balance is suited to the specific plants. I don't know how many threads I have seen on this forum (and elsewhere) that detail sudden problems of problem algae or dying plants solely because the light was upgraded. One can control the duration to tweak the balance, but it is not at all easy to change the lighting without some degree of trouble.

I don't know anything about Nicrew lighting so will leave that for any who do. But balance the system at the outset and your problems going forward are next to nil.

 

[sharkweek178]

As plants are intended, do not get "x" light intending to upgrade. The aim in a natural/low-tech planted tank is always to achieve the balance of light (intensity and spectrum) and nutrients such that this balance is suited to the specific plants. I don't know how many threads I have seen on this forum (and elsewhere) that detail sudden problems of problem algae or dying plants solely because the light was upgraded. One can control the duration to tweak the balance, but it is not at all easy to change the lighting without some degree of trouble.

I don't know anything about Nicrew lighting so will leave that for any who do. But balance the system at the outset and your problems going forward are next to nil.

FWIW, It's either Nicrew or Hygger. I was going to Nicrew at least initially because they also offer a timer that seems pretty handy. Although, I don't really know if the built in timers on other models are just as good. Like you said, hopefully someone else can chime in.

 

[sharkweek178]

Kind of a funny story. I have sand and water in this tank. So the floor it's on is uneven which causes a tilt in the water line. So I went and got a couple of pieces of wood to even it out. So I remove the filters and rock I had in there, drain the tank, scoop out all the sand, then move the tank so I can safely put these pieces of wood under the feet on one side of the sand. So after that, I put the tank back, put the wet sand back in, refill the water, put the filters back in, replace the rock and then add some driftwood that I had soaked and was ready to go in.
And then I notice the waterline was even more uneven than before. I put the wood under the wrong side!
So now I have to drain the tank again, remove the filters and rock and driftwood again, scoop out the sand again, move the tank again and rearrange the wood so it's under the feet on the other side. Feeling like a ****ing idiot the whole time.
After I put the wet sand back in again, filled the tank again, put the filters back again, replaced the rock and driftwood again the waterline is ok now. Still felt like an idiot.

 

[sharkweek178]

So this is what it looks like now.