You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Small fish suggestions for reef
- Thread starter 105man
- Start date
So true though...I love mine. Mine really has a complex though, his name is 'Heidi' cuz he hid for the first week.....Where do you get this absolute nonsense from? The tank is not doomed, you are by no means an expert, so keep these sort of comments to yourself. How do you think it helps him to be told that his tank is doomed? He needs information about how to take care of his current fish and any future fish he wants to add. Then he can decide for himself if he wishes to keep them of get rid of them. Getting rid of them would be highly stressful on the fish and I reccomend trying to care for them first.manny":35eegrbm said:The visions of doom expressed here are waranted
Good Luck
105, you really should add a refugium to your tank and get rid of the UV sterilizer, you will be on the right track then. I don't think it really matters if it is above, below or in the tank, below is generally more convenient but in-tank or above-tank refugiums are supposed to have less casualties.
zooman can you please explain why and how
"refugiums are supposed to have less casualties"?
truly a remarkable statement
and zoo you shoul dgo work in a lfs. your the guy that wants to sell more and more equipment by telling the guy he can keep more and more fish
keep in mind I am not saying a single bad thing about refugiums. I use one on all of my tanks and I even a have a refugium that is larger then most peoples display tanks
"refugiums are supposed to have less casualties"?
truly a remarkable statement
and zoo you shoul dgo work in a lfs. your the guy that wants to sell more and more equipment by telling the guy he can keep more and more fish
keep in mind I am not saying a single bad thing about refugiums. I use one on all of my tanks and I even a have a refugium that is larger then most peoples display tanks
Sorry Len, I will try to keep the peace. I just think there is no need to try to scare people that are new to the hobby, it serves no pupose.
Secondly I am not trying to sell any equipment at all, that is a truly remarkable statement. Did you just make that up? I have a minimalist approach to equipment, lights, pumps for water circ, a fuge and a protein skimmer are the only pieces or eq I own. I wouldn't even use a skimmer but I have it so I might as well use it.
Not sure if you undestood my point correctly. First of all I was referring to pods being injured as they went through pumps on the return to the tank if you have your fuge under your tank as opposed to having a fuge in or above the tank where they dont go through a pump.TheZooFarmer":3t0i9qrc said:zooman can you please explain why and how
"refugiums are supposed to have less casualties"?
truly a remarkable statement
and zoo you shoul dgo work in a lfs. your the guy that wants to sell more and more equipment by telling the guy he can keep more and more fish
keep in mind I am not saying a single bad thing about refugiums. I use one on all of my tanks and I even a have a refugium that is larger then most peoples display tanks
Secondly I am not trying to sell any equipment at all, that is a truly remarkable statement. Did you just make that up? I have a minimalist approach to equipment, lights, pumps for water circ, a fuge and a protein skimmer are the only pieces or eq I own. I wouldn't even use a skimmer but I have it so I might as well use it.
Please read my post carefully next time before posting. I said that pods were SUPPOSED to be injured by pumps. I have my fuge under my tank. I still get heaps of pods that go through the pump and survive. They are tough and small and I think the chances of them getting injured are slim, however obviously there is a chance that they could.TheZooFarmer":33ktmsbx said:zoo I would like to see the scientific analysis that has given you the idea of pods being injured by pumps
and are they only injured or are they killed?
personally I have never witnessed a pod go through a pump but maybe you have.
The idea that pods are killed from pumps originates from Dr Adey, who did studies on recirculating large plankton like brine shrimp through a pump. Needless to say, a large percentage were eventually killed. In my personal opinion, pumps don't represent a significant danger to the general pod population in a typical reef aquarium.
zoo you are really confusing me
first you say
"I DONT THINK IT REALLY MATTERS if it is above, below or in the tank, below is generally more convenient but in-tank or above-tank refugiums are supposed to have less casualties."
then you say
"First of all I was referring to pods being injured as they went through pumps on the return to the tank if you have your fuge under your tank as opposed to having a fuge in or above the tank where they dont go through a pump."
then you say
"I said that pods were SUPPOSED to be injured by pumps.I think the chances of them getting injured are slim, however obviously there is a chance that they could."
So do these pods get injured or killed? You said they do both.
And have you ever seen a pod go through a pump?
Does it injure or kill the pod?
first you say
"I DONT THINK IT REALLY MATTERS if it is above, below or in the tank, below is generally more convenient but in-tank or above-tank refugiums are supposed to have less casualties."
then you say
"First of all I was referring to pods being injured as they went through pumps on the return to the tank if you have your fuge under your tank as opposed to having a fuge in or above the tank where they dont go through a pump."
then you say
"I said that pods were SUPPOSED to be injured by pumps.I think the chances of them getting injured are slim, however obviously there is a chance that they could."
So do these pods get injured or killed? You said they do both.
And have you ever seen a pod go through a pump?
Does it injure or kill the pod?
This bantering serves no purpose and only inflames the mods with your strong opinions.
Besides his question, what is an appropriate tank size for a purple tang, my wife loves those things and from what I have read those salty critters get to be about 12-14 inches!!!
Specifically, I am eying a 180… How many years of standard growth from say three inches starting size can I expect to keep one of these beautiful things? Is there any recourse or salability of them when they reach such a size?
Come now, there must be thousands of those things out there and the greater majority of tanks seem to be holding there own if not in perfect fitness to the task. Besides the open ocean, just how large a tank is required to keep one of those fish healthy if not exactly happy?
Besides his question, what is an appropriate tank size for a purple tang, my wife loves those things and from what I have read those salty critters get to be about 12-14 inches!!!
Specifically, I am eying a 180… How many years of standard growth from say three inches starting size can I expect to keep one of these beautiful things? Is there any recourse or salability of them when they reach such a size?
Come now, there must be thousands of those things out there and the greater majority of tanks seem to be holding there own if not in perfect fitness to the task. Besides the open ocean, just how large a tank is required to keep one of those fish healthy if not exactly happy?
well digi welcome, since I am sure you are a new poster.
You ask some questions I can not answer. I have never seen a purple tang in captivity close to the 12-14' you speak of. I can not even think of one that is 8". I think this is because of a couple of reasons.
But the main reason being that when they were first were imported they were VERY expensive as was everything from the Red Sea. Purple Tangs would cost $250+. Needless to see they were as common then as black tangs are now.
I currently house a 4.5" purple in my 180 and he is thriving. I am not a tang fan and only own him becasue I rehabilitated him from a nasty case of LLE that almost killed him.
Maybe you should start a thread specifically asking about the Purple Tang. I would love to here who has had one for a long length of time and what size the tang has aquired.
You ask some questions I can not answer. I have never seen a purple tang in captivity close to the 12-14' you speak of. I can not even think of one that is 8". I think this is because of a couple of reasons.
But the main reason being that when they were first were imported they were VERY expensive as was everything from the Red Sea. Purple Tangs would cost $250+. Needless to see they were as common then as black tangs are now.
I currently house a 4.5" purple in my 180 and he is thriving. I am not a tang fan and only own him becasue I rehabilitated him from a nasty case of LLE that almost killed him.
Maybe you should start a thread specifically asking about the Purple Tang. I would love to here who has had one for a long length of time and what size the tang has aquired.
ZooFarmer, please stop picking words to attack.
Zooman, please hold off for a while.
-------------------------------------------------------------
FWIW, I've done test myself on the pump passing test. I collected about 40 or so of each copepods, amphipods, brineshrimp, bristtle worm (only 5), and a baby guppy.
The subjects are placed in the suction path of the sump return pump (MAG 18 ), The return water dumps into a fine mesh net before return back to the tank.
The result is smaller the body size, higher the rate of survival.
Almost 99% of pods survived, with the 1% probably escaped somewhere.......
Strangely only about 75% of brine shrimp comes out in good shape. Maybe it was a bad batch from LFS.
The baby guppy survived, but doesn't swim straight anymore. My wrasse gladily accepted him.
My personal favorite, Bristtle worm. You guys have no idea how happy I was performing the test on the bristtle worm. Being stung 100s of times by it, now I could finally get it to pay back. All bristle worms made throught the pump, and seems to be alive. But honestly, I am not interested to check carefully if they are injured or not.
(FYI, I know bristtle worms are beneficial, but that doesn't means I have to like them)
Of course, the test should be repeated at least 20 times more. But I lack the patience to collect the pods again. The test is a single pass test, unlike the recirculating pump test as mentioned above.
Zooman, please hold off for a while.
-------------------------------------------------------------
FWIW, I've done test myself on the pump passing test. I collected about 40 or so of each copepods, amphipods, brineshrimp, bristtle worm (only 5), and a baby guppy.
The subjects are placed in the suction path of the sump return pump (MAG 18 ), The return water dumps into a fine mesh net before return back to the tank.
The result is smaller the body size, higher the rate of survival.
Almost 99% of pods survived, with the 1% probably escaped somewhere.......
Strangely only about 75% of brine shrimp comes out in good shape. Maybe it was a bad batch from LFS.
The baby guppy survived, but doesn't swim straight anymore. My wrasse gladily accepted him.
My personal favorite, Bristtle worm. You guys have no idea how happy I was performing the test on the bristtle worm. Being stung 100s of times by it, now I could finally get it to pay back. All bristle worms made throught the pump, and seems to be alive. But honestly, I am not interested to check carefully if they are injured or not.
(FYI, I know bristtle worms are beneficial, but that doesn't means I have to like them)
Of course, the test should be repeated at least 20 times more. But I lack the patience to collect the pods again. The test is a single pass test, unlike the recirculating pump test as mentioned above.
hippo I just thought that what zoo was saying was crazy and made no sense. BUT I DID NOT SAY THIS. So all I did was ask repeatedly in a nice fashion for some sort of supporting evidence. Heck if he told me that he sees pods go through his pump and that they come out injured or dead that would have been good enough.
But you on the other hand posted irrefutable evidence of what I already presumed without doing the test myself. You see after taking apart enough iwakis or little giants for maintenance you see that the blades on the impeller actually leave a lot of room for pods or anything else. I truly could not see "pods" being injured or killed. Except for a minuscule percent that is.
But you on the other hand posted irrefutable evidence of what I already presumed without doing the test myself. You see after taking apart enough iwakis or little giants for maintenance you see that the blades on the impeller actually leave a lot of room for pods or anything else. I truly could not see "pods" being injured or killed. Except for a minuscule percent that is.
But, you have to accept that a lot of the wisdom circulated on these boards is hearsay. Much of what we know is based on others research, in all walks of life. Here, people post and discuss things to help sort out the validity of various issues. I don't think thats wrong.
danmhippo, why are you asking me to hold off? I am just trying to give some helpful advice. Please just allow me to clarify my points for theZooFarmer as he seems to have trouble understanding.
That is correct it doesn't really matter if it is above, below or in the tank. The difference would be pretty much negligible. Some critters would be unfortunate enough to get damaged if they had to pass through a pump as in the below tank method. However it would be a very small percentage. Therefore it doesn't really matter which one you choose.
Yes
Yes obviously some will get injured, however not many will and it's not worth worrying about.
Yes the pods that go through the pump may get injured or killed, however only a small number would be injured or killed. It is not really worth worrying about due to the small numbers. No I have never seen a pod go through a pump, my pumps aren't see though. Have you ever seen water got though a pump?
TheZooFarmer":1ok7jb5m said:zoo you are really confusing me
first you say
"I DONT THINK IT REALLY MATTERS if it is above, below or in the tank, below is generally more convenient but in-tank or above-tank refugiums are supposed to have less casualties."
That is correct it doesn't really matter if it is above, below or in the tank. The difference would be pretty much negligible. Some critters would be unfortunate enough to get damaged if they had to pass through a pump as in the below tank method. However it would be a very small percentage. Therefore it doesn't really matter which one you choose.
TheZooFarmer":1ok7jb5m said:then you say
"First of all I was referring to pods being injured as they went through pumps on the return to the tank if you have your fuge under your tank as opposed to having a fuge in or above the tank where they dont go through a pump."
Yes
TheZooFarmer":1ok7jb5m said:then you say
"I said that pods were SUPPOSED to be injured by pumps.I think the chances of them getting injured are slim, however obviously there is a chance that they could."
Yes obviously some will get injured, however not many will and it's not worth worrying about.
TheZooFarmer":1ok7jb5m said:So do these pods get injured or killed? You said they do both.
And have you ever seen a pod go through a pump?
Does it injure or kill the pod?
Yes the pods that go through the pump may get injured or killed, however only a small number would be injured or killed. It is not really worth worrying about due to the small numbers. No I have never seen a pod go through a pump, my pumps aren't see though. Have you ever seen water got though a pump?
Manny, and others, thanks for the kind comments. DanConnor, thanks for that award!
Responding to some of the many thoughts and questions:
My mandarin is definitely eating, not only foraging in the rocks and sand, but often eating a wide variety of food I put in the tank. Whether it is benefitting, I wouldn't know, but by appearance and activity the fish seems healthy and adapted. I will try to be sure any additions to the tank are not pod or otherwise competitors; thanks for those suggestions.
I do have a terrific blood shrimp, which has also been in the tank since near inception, and it acts regularly as a cleaner. The tang, angel and butterfly all lay sideways and find their way in the caves to position themselves for what look like cleaner massages! The cleaner has always eaten well too...peers out often during mealtime.
I have never given thought to a refugium and will try to learn more about it. I got into salt on the notion (amply promoted by LFS, but to some extent seemingly confirmed in some research I had done...including the general premise of Paletta's book) that with live rock, live sand, the advances in equipment, etc., things had become much simpler and more forgiving in the hobby...perhaps along the minimalist lines. I was given to believe that even making it a reef tank wasn't much more complicated or time-consuming. Combined with my son's enthusiasm to see me give it a try (we had freshwater tanks for years), I probably made a bit of a leap.
Initially, I didn't have a skimmer for that reason...was told/heard it really wasn't necessary, particularly if I stick to relatively hardy fish and corals. Anyway, I later decided a skimmer would be worthwhile, so I got the Seaclone...I may have been somewhat misled about it's quality, though I think it's at least a good start and may not have gotten one at all if it was going to be far more expensive or complicated. It was easy to set up, and is simple to use and seems to be working fine.
Hopefully, I won't have the crashing snow problem...Ive cut back on the B-Ionic to only using the calcium part and only 3 times a week. I will keep testing and be on the lookout.
In terms of the UV light, is there a total consensus that I should get rid of it?...that surprises me a little...I thought from all I had read and heard (albeit after I got it, at LFS' urging) that there seemed to be varying views, and that on balance for what I have overall it was probably good and at least not harmful. I would be interested in any further thoughts on that.
Sorry for any redundancy, or if Ive completely misread anything. I am a newbie, and I am sure you appreciate that there's an awful lot of information to process!
Thanks, all.
Responding to some of the many thoughts and questions:
My mandarin is definitely eating, not only foraging in the rocks and sand, but often eating a wide variety of food I put in the tank. Whether it is benefitting, I wouldn't know, but by appearance and activity the fish seems healthy and adapted. I will try to be sure any additions to the tank are not pod or otherwise competitors; thanks for those suggestions.
I do have a terrific blood shrimp, which has also been in the tank since near inception, and it acts regularly as a cleaner. The tang, angel and butterfly all lay sideways and find their way in the caves to position themselves for what look like cleaner massages! The cleaner has always eaten well too...peers out often during mealtime.
I have never given thought to a refugium and will try to learn more about it. I got into salt on the notion (amply promoted by LFS, but to some extent seemingly confirmed in some research I had done...including the general premise of Paletta's book) that with live rock, live sand, the advances in equipment, etc., things had become much simpler and more forgiving in the hobby...perhaps along the minimalist lines. I was given to believe that even making it a reef tank wasn't much more complicated or time-consuming. Combined with my son's enthusiasm to see me give it a try (we had freshwater tanks for years), I probably made a bit of a leap.
Initially, I didn't have a skimmer for that reason...was told/heard it really wasn't necessary, particularly if I stick to relatively hardy fish and corals. Anyway, I later decided a skimmer would be worthwhile, so I got the Seaclone...I may have been somewhat misled about it's quality, though I think it's at least a good start and may not have gotten one at all if it was going to be far more expensive or complicated. It was easy to set up, and is simple to use and seems to be working fine.
Hopefully, I won't have the crashing snow problem...Ive cut back on the B-Ionic to only using the calcium part and only 3 times a week. I will keep testing and be on the lookout.
In terms of the UV light, is there a total consensus that I should get rid of it?...that surprises me a little...I thought from all I had read and heard (albeit after I got it, at LFS' urging) that there seemed to be varying views, and that on balance for what I have overall it was probably good and at least not harmful. I would be interested in any further thoughts on that.
Sorry for any redundancy, or if Ive completely misread anything. I am a newbie, and I am sure you appreciate that there's an awful lot of information to process!
Thanks, all.
Sponsor Reefs
We're a FREE website, and we exist because of hobbyists like YOU who help us run this community.
Click here to sponsor $10:
