What Other "centerpieces" Would Work?

[Carlovel1]

If it really comes to this

http/www.seriouslyfish.com/profile.php?genus=Melanotaenia&species=trifasciata&id=835

http/www.seriouslyfish.com/profile.php?genus=Melanotaenia&species=boesemani&id=811

Seriously fish one of the best profile sites on the net written by a lot of the best fish keepers and collectors (meaning those that collect them in the wild) in the world - a lot of the other profile sites I read and hold in regard dont often state tank size because its often down to common sense.

Even by the practical fish keeping concept on how to choose a tank size for a fish which states 6 times the length of the fish and 2 times width for the length of the fish - so in this case yeah okay it comes to 30 inches x 12 inches BUT that is the middle point its always stated as going above this for active fish like barbs and rainbows etc but at the same time the stocking rule gets shrunk for less active fish like some catfish (ie banjos etc) and often plecs.

But at the end of the day its not about what this website says and what that website says its just common sense if you want to justify putting a highly active schooling group of 5 inch fish in a 20 gallon tank (taking the smaller sizes you say is okay) then go ahead the fish are going to be cramped in end of story.

I agree bigger is better but there is no point in getting stupid about these things we are clearly not going to agree and I refuse to accept you as right because its just a joke.

Yeah but it says, 110 litres tank minimum, which is 30 gallons not the exaggerative 55 gallons people are saying

Well IMO from seeing them fully grown in a 8 foot tank and them using the hole tank i know for a fact i would never put and in my 30G let alone a 20G. Evan if the websites do say that IMO they best way to learn is through experience and i would trust what people of here say that have kept them over any website that you dont know the reliability of.

LOL my best friend has the rainbowfish and they have been 9cm for 2 years

Fair enough. if you think its fine go for it and see what happens all im saying is i know that i wouldnt and wouldnt recommend to others keeping them in anything less than a 4 foot tank.

It the end of the day, I was advising a person with a 46g tank which is big enough , then you lot come out saying that Rainbows shouldnt be kept in 20g/30g tanks. Im like what the hell, youre all jumping to conclusions, I was just reporting what a website said. Dont take it out on me, take it out on them , you have the links

I wasnt taking it out on you just saying that IMO a 30G is to small. Every one has different opinions and i was just saying mine.

Hmm, it all just started withsomeone saying that a 5 inch fish has to be kept ijn aquariums from 55g and more which is absurd and exaggerative

 

[kizno1]

If it really comes to this

http/www.seriouslyfish.com/profile.php?genus=Melanotaenia&species=trifasciata&id=835

http/www.seriouslyfish.com/profile.php?genus=Melanotaenia&species=boesemani&id=811

Seriously fish one of the best profile sites on the net written by a lot of the best fish keepers and collectors (meaning those that collect them in the wild) in the world - a lot of the other profile sites I read and hold in regard dont often state tank size because its often down to common sense.

Even by the practical fish keeping concept on how to choose a tank size for a fish which states 6 times the length of the fish and 2 times width for the length of the fish - so in this case yeah okay it comes to 30 inches x 12 inches BUT that is the middle point its always stated as going above this for active fish like barbs and rainbows etc but at the same time the stocking rule gets shrunk for less active fish like some catfish (ie banjos etc) and often plecs.

But at the end of the day its not about what this website says and what that website says its just common sense if you want to justify putting a highly active schooling group of 5 inch fish in a 20 gallon tank (taking the smaller sizes you say is okay) then go ahead the fish are going to be cramped in end of story.

I agree bigger is better but there is no point in getting stupid about these things we are clearly not going to agree and I refuse to accept you as right because its just a joke.

Yeah but it says, 110 litres tank minimum, which is 30 gallons not the exaggerative 55 gallons people are saying

Well IMO from seeing them fully grown in a 8 foot tank and them using the hole tank i know for a fact i would never put and in my 30G let alone a 20G. Evan if the websites do say that IMO they best way to learn is through experience and i would trust what people of here say that have kept them over any website that you dont know the reliability of.

LOL my best friend has the rainbowfish and they have been 9cm for 2 years

Fair enough. if you think its fine go for it and see what happens all im saying is i know that i wouldnt and wouldnt recommend to others keeping them in anything less than a 4 foot tank.

It the end of the day, I was advising a person with a 46g tank which is big enough , then you lot come out saying that Rainbows shouldnt be kept in 20g/30g tanks. Im like what the hell, youre all jumping to conclusions, I was just reporting what a website said. Dont take it out on me, take it out on them , you have the links

I wasnt taking it out on you just saying that IMO a 30G is to small. Every one has different opinions and i was just saying mine.

Hmm, it all just started withsomeone saying that a 5 inch fish has to be kept ijn aquariums from 55g and more which is absurd and exaggerative

But with rainbow its not the size that matters its the fact they need to be kept in groups and are very active.

 

[N0body Of The Goat]

If it really comes to this

http/www.seriously...fasciata&id=835

http/www.seriously...oesemani&id=811

Seriously fish one of the best profile sites on the net written by a lot of the best fish keepers and collectors (meaning those that collect them in the wild) in the world - a lot of the other profile sites I read and hold in regard dont often state tank size because its often down to common sense.

Even by the practical fish keeping concept on how to choose a tank size for a fish which states 6 times the length of the fish and 2 times width for the length of the fish - so in this case yeah okay it comes to 30 inches x 12 inches BUT that is the middle point its always stated as going above this for active fish like barbs and rainbows etc but at the same time the stocking rule gets shrunk for less active fish like some catfish (ie banjos etc) and often plecs.

But at the end of the day its not about what this website says and what that website says its just common sense if you want to justify putting a highly active schooling group of 5 inch fish in a 20 gallon tank (taking the smaller sizes you say is okay) then go ahead the fish are going to be cramped in end of story.

I agree bigger is better but there is no point in getting stupid about these things we are clearly not going to agree and I refuse to accept you as right because its just a joke.

Yeah but it says, 110 litres tank minimum, which is 30 gallons not the exaggerative 55 gallons people are saying

Well IMO from seeing them fully grown in a 8 foot tank and them using the hole tank i know for a fact i would never put and in my 30G let alone a 20G. Evan if the websites do say that IMO they best way to learn is through experience and i would trust what people of here say that have kept them over any website that you dont know the reliability of.

LOL my best friend has the rainbowfish and they have been 9cm for 2 years

to be fair it just looks like your looking for something to tell you what you want to hear - I used to do that when I started keeping fish as well and I quickly learned not to do it because at the end of the day you can find profiles that say keeping oscars in a 30g is fine.

You really do think you know it all...
Quote:
'The minimum tank size recommended is 33 gallons, and this is only if you plan on housing one individual alone, without any tank mates. The recommended tank size for housing Oscar fish is 100 gallons, of course the bigger the better'

I have seen Oscars and I know that they need a tank larger than 30g.

Oh I love people who interpret information differently for their own cause...

"An active species requiring an aquarium measuring at least 48" x 12" x 12" (120cm x 30cm x 30cm) - 110 litres." This quote is telling you exactly what I've said from the start, along with Wills and Kizno.... A 4-foot tank is the minimum! 110 litres may well be 30 gallons, but the vital measurement here is the length of the tank providing the volume.

 

[Carlovel1]

I know, if that didnt matter website would be saying a 10galllon would be ok

If it really comes to this

http/www.seriously...fasciata&id=835

http/www.seriously...oesemani&id=811

Seriously fish one of the best profile sites on the net written by a lot of the best fish keepers and collectors (meaning those that collect them in the wild) in the world - a lot of the other profile sites I read and hold in regard dont often state tank size because its often down to common sense.

Even by the practical fish keeping concept on how to choose a tank size for a fish which states 6 times the length of the fish and 2 times width for the length of the fish - so in this case yeah okay it comes to 30 inches x 12 inches BUT that is the middle point its always stated as going above this for active fish like barbs and rainbows etc but at the same time the stocking rule gets shrunk for less active fish like some catfish (ie banjos etc) and often plecs.

But at the end of the day its not about what this website says and what that website says its just common sense if you want to justify putting a highly active schooling group of 5 inch fish in a 20 gallon tank (taking the smaller sizes you say is okay) then go ahead the fish are going to be cramped in end of story.

I agree bigger is better but there is no point in getting stupid about these things we are clearly not going to agree and I refuse to accept you as right because its just a joke.

Yeah but it says, 110 litres tank minimum, which is 30 gallons not the exaggerative 55 gallons people are saying

Well IMO from seeing them fully grown in a 8 foot tank and them using the hole tank i know for a fact i would never put and in my 30G let alone a 20G. Evan if the websites do say that IMO they best way to learn is through experience and i would trust what people of here say that have kept them over any website that you dont know the reliability of.

LOL my best friend has the rainbowfish and they have been 9cm for 2 years

to be fair it just looks like your looking for something to tell you what you want to hear - I used to do that when I started keeping fish as well and I quickly learned not to do it because at the end of the day you can find profiles that say keeping oscars in a 30g is fine.

You really do think you know it all...
Quote:
'The minimum tank size recommended is 33 gallons, and this is only if you plan on housing one individual alone, without any tank mates. The recommended tank size for housing Oscar fish is 100 gallons, of course the bigger the better'

I have seen Oscars and I know that they need a tank larger than 30g.

Oh I love people who interpret information differently for their own cause...

"An active species requiring an aquarium measuring at least 48" x 12" x 12" (120cm x 30cm x 30cm) - 110 litres." This quote is telling you exactly what I've said from the start, along with Wills and Kizno.... A 4-foot tank is the minimum! 110 litres may well be 30 gallons, but the vital measurement here is the length of the tank providing the volume.

So whats with the 55G?
And people are saying that 30G is too small for them , basically saying PFK is wrong

 

[Wills]

The 55g was because of the added room for the activity alongside as I said how the PFK guide is adaptable to the activity levels of the fish in question in this case rainbows would be in very high rating IMO.

 

[Carlovel1]

Rainbows can be kept in 46g right?

 

[kizno1]

Rainbows can be kept in 46g right?

Not in one thats 36" like Channti's is.

 

[Carlovel1]

I still disagree....

 

[kizno1]

I still disagree....

Well your obviously not going to change your mind and i know that i wouldnt keep one in anything less than a 4foot but that all im going to say i cant be bother to get into a argument about it if im honest.

 

[meguro]

Rainbows can be kept in 46g right?

yes

any pseudomugil spp. would be suitable
a few melanotaenia species are also suitable

 

[ajs2294]

It depends on the tank shape really. But the point is that The rainbowfish I mentioned can fit into a bowfront 46 gallon tank. You cant say that the rainbowfish need a 55gallon tank minimum(even if its preferable) when a large portion of websites say they can live in a 20 galllon, 30 gallon, 25 gallon and so on.

You have obviously over looked your own words. "It depends on the tank shape really" well If you knew about tank shapes you'd know that for shoaling fish like rainbows swim space is a necessity thus you need a large footprint for your tank for them to swim in a unobstructed manner. The minimum advanced tank size 55 gallons is to provide these fish with a 48 inch length to happily and easily swim without feeling crammed into a tank. 20 gallon (30 inch length), 25 gallon (24 inch length) and 30 gallon (36 inch length) do not provide the swimming room necessary for most rainbows. Just because a "large portion" of websites say you can do something doesn't mean they have any more knowledge than you or that the information is correct. Anyone can post anything on the internet fact or lie, experience or no experience.

 

[Carlovel1]

It depends on the tank shape really. But the point is that The rainbowfish I mentioned can fit into a bowfront 46 gallon tank. You cant say that the rainbowfish need a 55gallon tank minimum(even if its preferable) when a large portion of websites say they can live in a 20 galllon, 30 gallon, 25 gallon and so on.

You have obviously over looked your own words. "It depends on the tank shape really" well If you knew about tank shapes you'd know that for shoaling fish like rainbows swim space is a necessity thus you need a large footprint for your tank for them to swim in a unobstructed manner. The minimum advanced tank size 55 gallons is to provide these fish with a 48 inch length to happily and easily swim without feeling crammed into a tank. 20 gallon (30 inch length), 25 gallon (24 inch length) and 30 gallon (36 inch length) do not provide the swimming room necessary for most rainbows. Just because a "large portion" of websites say you can do something doesn't mean they have any more knowledge than you or that the information is correct. Anyone can post anything on the internet fact or lie, experience or no experience.

My own opinion is that these rainbowfish can be kept in 30 gallon tanks minimum (36 inches).
If you think that other websites are unreliable and not trusted then look at this forums Fish species index on the forum says 20-30-40g is sufficient, that the make good centrepiece fish and that they dont grow to 6 inches.
Now I would appreciate it if you would all stop trying to say the same thing over and over because its gettin sad!

 

[ajs2294]

It depends on the tank shape really. But the point is that The rainbowfish I mentioned can fit into a bowfront 46 gallon tank. You cant say that the rainbowfish need a 55gallon tank minimum(even if its preferable) when a large portion of websites say they can live in a 20 galllon, 30 gallon, 25 gallon and so on.

You have obviously over looked your own words. "It depends on the tank shape really" well If you knew about tank shapes you'd know that for shoaling fish like rainbows swim space is a necessity thus you need a large footprint for your tank for them to swim in a unobstructed manner. The minimum advanced tank size 55 gallons is to provide these fish with a 48 inch length to happily and easily swim without feeling crammed into a tank. 20 gallon (30 inch length), 25 gallon (24 inch length) and 30 gallon (36 inch length) do not provide the swimming room necessary for most rainbows. Just because a "large portion" of websites say you can do something doesn't mean they have any more knowledge than you or that the information is correct. Anyone can post anything on the internet fact or lie, experience or no experience.

My own opinion is that these rainbowfish can be kept in 30 gallon tanks minimum (36 inches).
If you think that other websites are unreliable and not trusted then look at this forums Fish species index on the forum says 20-30-40g is sufficient, that the make good centrepiece fish and that they dont grow to 6 inches.
Now I would appreciate it if you would all stop trying to say the same thing over and over because its gettin sad!

You are too ignorant to realize that there is more than one type of rainbowfish and fish such as Boesmani Rainbowfish will not live happily without a large amount of swim room. I'm not arguing any further on the matter as you are obviously extremely experienced and educated in keeping fish and know everything and will continue to do everything your own way. I'm just asking you not to spread your opinionated recommendations that won't be in the best interest of the fish.
Have a nice day.

 

[N0body Of The Goat]

The sad truth is that there is a good reason why it is "you versus the world" in this thread...

End of!

Enough of the troll bait, you have your opinion, a lot of others (whom I would trust their valued opinions in fish matters) have different views.

 

[Carlovel1]

If thats what you think