Understanding Water Changes

[JEFFREY STREET]

I am pretty new to fish as the hobby, and one thing I do not understand is
water changes... I read that between 20% to 50% of a water change should be
done weekly. Well, currently, I have a 20 gallon tank with 1 spiny monster
pleco (a little over 3 inches long), and I use an Aquaclear 500 filter and
and a TertaTec 100 air pump with bubble wall...

This seems to keep the tank crystal clear...

I plan on getting a 55 gallon tank and to continue to use the same filter.
I plan on adding maybe 3 discus' and maybe something like a baby Flowerhorn
to be with the Pleco...

What I don't understand is this... are water changes really needed, and how
often, and why... I would think with such a powerful filter, I wouldn't need
to change the water as much... please help me understand in layman terms...

Thanks, Jeffrey

[Dinky]

"JEFFREY STREET" > wrote in message
. ..

>
> What I don't understand is this... are water changes really needed, and
how
> often, and why... I would think with such a powerful filter, I wouldn't
need
> to change the water as much... please help me understand in layman
terms...
>
> Thanks, Jeffrey
>
>

BK's post is right on, allow me to add that you must determine the amount
and frequency of water changes based ammonia, nitrite, and nitrate
concentrations. A 20% water change twice a month would likely be enough once
the tank has fully cycled.

[Racf]

"JEFFREY STREET" > wrote in message
. ..
> I am pretty new to fish as the hobby, and one thing I do not
understand is
> water changes... I read that between 20% to 50% of a water change
should be
> done weekly. Well, currently, I have a 20 gallon tank with 1 spiny
monster
> pleco (a little over 3 inches long), and I use an Aquaclear 500 filter
and
> and a TertaTec 100 air pump with bubble wall...
>
> This seems to keep the tank crystal clear...
>
> I plan on getting a 55 gallon tank and to continue to use the same
filter.
> I plan on adding maybe 3 discus' and maybe something like a baby
Flowerhorn
> to be with the Pleco...
>
> What I don't understand is this... are water changes really needed,
and how
> often, and why... I would think with such a powerful filter, I
wouldn't need
> to change the water as much... please help me understand in layman
terms...
>
> Thanks, Jeffrey
>
>
>

Water changes are used to dilute down primarily Dissolved Organic
Compounds (DOCS). These build up over time. Water changes dilute the
concentration. Activated Carbon also removes them. The volume of water
to be changed depends on your tank and its conditions. The only way I
know of to track this is the use of a TDS/conductivity meter. I track
each of my tanks this way. As more gets dissolved in the higher the
reading goes. I try to keep my water within about 25 - 50 (TDS) or
50 -100 (micro siemens conductivity) than my change water. In my
situation, it varies by tank, but is approximately 50% change per week.
There are exceptions to this....my guppy tank has been running about 75%
per week lately....

By keeping the readings as I stated, this keeps the water very close to
the change water and thereby keeping the stress of a water change to a
minimum. If I were to let my guppy tank go a month with no water
change...the TDS difference would be around 500 - 700 greater than the
change water. A large waterchange at this point would probably cause
harm to the gills of the guppies...and many would not survive.

The filter you mentioned is large in volume of water pumped, but that's
really all. You are just pumping a lot of water through a sponge, that
does not remove DOCs. Its really not that good of a bio-filter either.
An Emperor 400 would have been a much better choice for less money....2
bio-wheels....

Your filter would be ideal for a Oscar tank feeding live goldfish where
there is a lot of debris to clear out....

A inexpensive TDS meter could be bought at Sears in the water stuff
department for about $20. Mine was a Hanna TDS-1 when I got it a couple
years ago. I use it a lot. More than any other piece if measurement
gear....

You need to determine your own schedule and volume for your tank. Most
people just guess and hope what they do is enough... There really is no
pat answer to the question in my opinion.

Concerning the Discus, my advice is to do advance research and try to
buy from a local breeder..... Here is a good link for information:

www.simplydiscus.com

Lots of information.....make no assumptions....

Good luck...

[Graham Ramsay]

"Dinky" wrote
> Not true. In even a moderately planted aquarium, many aquarists (myself
> included) find the need to artificially add nitrogen because the plants are
> using more than the bio-cycle can produce.

Indeed. I add nitrate in the form of KNO3.
A heavily planted tank will suck it out of the water.
I still do water changes though 'cos nitrates aren't
the full story. I do 15% fortnightly.
Discus need a lot of water changes so make sure you
do your research first.
A Flowerhorn would not be a good idea in a 20gal.
(Not a good idea in any tank but that's just MHO)

--
Graham Ramsay
You might be a Bright:
www.the-brights.net

[JEFFREY STREET]

Brain, wow, thanks for the info... I do have one question... but it deals
with the filter I have, Aquaclear 500... should I buy the Amrid Ammonia
Remover fliter insert (number 3)? Do you think that would take care of the
nitrate level?

http://www.petdiscounters.com/aquarium/filters/materials/ha_500_cartridge.html

That is a link to the inserts...

Again, thanks, Jeffrey

[JEFFREY STREET]

http://www.dph.nl/html/discus-q_a.html

I saw if here, it is the answer to question #6

[Buckaroo]

Some discus fanatics advocate daily water changes of fairly large
amounts...one time a guru suggested 30-50% *per day*.

"JEFFREY STREET" > wrote in message
et...
> http://www.dph.nl/html/discus-q_a.html
>
> I saw if here, it is the answer to question #6
>
>

[Racf]

"NetMax" > wrote in message
. ..
>
> "Racf" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "JEFFREY STREET" > wrote in message
> > . ..
> <snip>
>
> To Jeffrey, turn the flow rate on your AC500 to it's minimum. This
will
> be sufficient for your size of tank and will improve the removal of
DOCs.
> Layering some Bio-Max into the filter will also be helpful, as would
> adding a 2nd sponge to be cleaned on an alternate cycle to the first
> sponge. The guideline is 20% a week, but it's really a function of
> bio-load to water volume (or food consumed to waste processing
capability
> & efficiency). Water change guidelines for Discus are far more
> aggresive, which might be what is confusing you. This higher change
rate
> is usually driven by breeders trying to achieve the least mortality
and
> the maximum growth rate. You will need to use your own discretion,
and
> try to assess the feedback from people with Discus in similar
conditions
> as you will be keeping. Note that there is some cautions in keeping
> Discus with algae eaters, as the Discus excrete a tasty slime coat,
and
> could be damaged by the catfish (just something to be aware of and to
> watch for). ymmv
>
> <snip>
> The volume of water
> > to be changed depends on your tank and its conditions. The only way
I
> > know of to track this is the use of a TDS/conductivity meter. I
track
> > each of my tanks this way. As more gets dissolved in the higher the
> > reading goes. I try to keep my water within about 25 - 50 (TDS) or
> > 50 -100 (micro siemens conductivity) than my change water.
> <snip>
>
> Racf, by chance, are you also tracking your NO3 accumulation? I'm
> curious what your NO3 increment would be - using your 50-100 umho
> threshold. For cichlids, I try to keep below a 40ppm NO3 delta from
> source to tank. In your applications, what would a 40ppm NO3 rise
> approximately correspond to in umhos? (I know it's very application
> specific, affected by the filtration and plant set-up). thanks
>
> NetMax

Usually less than 5 ppm...the tanks have plants. I don't know what a
build-up of Nitrate would do specifically to the conductivity..although
it would certainly go up some amount... I believe my biggest rise comes
from dissolved flake food and fish pooh... Power filters do a good job
of dissolving these things into the water column... Some flake foods
dissolve easier than others. It seems the flakes the fish like the
best, dissolve the easiest and have high phosphate content...



>
>

[Dinky]

"JEFFREY STREET" > wrote in message
et...
> Brain, wow, thanks for the info... I do have one question... but it deals
> with the filter I have, Aquaclear 500... should I buy the Amrid Ammonia
> Remover fliter insert (number 3)? Do you think that would take care of
the
> nitrate level?
>

IMO, you don't really *need* any of those products. Your filter will house
the bacteria that convert the ammonia to nitrite, then nitrate, and your
water changes will keep the nitrate level down. With one fish, you have
little to worry about. There are many chemicals out there that claim to do a
great many things, but Mother Nature still has the best methods. Maintain
your filter and keep on the water changes.

billy

[~Vicki ~]

I change 50% once and sometimes twice a week if the mood hits me.

NetMax can tell ya all about why this is good.

Vicki

[Cammie]

and all your parameters are fine by doing such a large and often water
change? no algae, etc.?


"~Vicki ~" > wrote in message
...
> I change 50% once and sometimes twice a week if the mood hits me.
>
> NetMax can tell ya all about why this is good.
>
> Vicki
>

[~Vicki ~]

and all your parameters are fine by doing such a large and often water
change? no algae, etc.?
>
>
>
Yes my parameters are just fine. I keep fish who like slightly soft,
acidic water, which is what comes out of the tap. You also have to
realize that fresh water fish are some what used to vast changes in
nature ie drought, rain etc. which changes there parameters. I have
never had any problem with algae in my tanks. In fact besides a few
spots on a decoration now and again which the pleco gets nothing. I
have also found that the fish really seem to enjoy a water change and
almost seem to dance with anticipation when I do them. And then there
are all the DOCS? (think that is what NetMax calls it) which are non
existent in a tank which has frequent large water changes. I usually do
them on fridays and sometimes monday. My filter is more for moving the
water around and a place for bacteria to grow than for waste removal

This works for me and I can't even remember the last time I had a sick
fish.

Vicki

[Donald Kerns]

Cammie wrote:

> and all your parameters are fine by doing such a large and often water
> change? no algae, etc.?
>
>
> "~Vicki ~" > wrote in message
> ...
>> I change 50% once and sometimes twice a week if the mood hits me.
>>
>> NetMax can tell ya all about why this is good.
>>
>> Vicki
>>

The main thing is to minimize the changes that the fish experiences...

If you do big water changes, with temperature-matched water (and your pH
out of the tap is stable) doing 2 50% changes a week means that the
fish never experience water much different than the tap parameters.

If you let the tank sit for a month and then did a 50%, the fish would
experience a difference (pH drifts down slowly, nitrates, DOCs and
other nasties build up)... So that would be bad.

It really depends on a lot of case by case variables. *I* can't get away
with this because my water drops 0.4 pH within 8 hours of coming out of
the tap... So I stick with 25% (or smaller) water changes 1x per week.

My $0.02US,

-D
--
"When you've lost your ability to laugh, you've lost your ability to
think straight." -To Inherit the Wind

[~Vicki ~]

Well, keep in mind that youir situation is *not* the norm. Recommending
a regimine like yours to newbies may not be a good plan. Good proof,
though, that what doesn't work for one aquarist, may work well for
another.
billy
>
>
>
I said that this works for me. NetMax once said to me that there are
many "recipes" for fish keeping. I keep fish that like my water type.
If yours is hard and has a higher ph and you keep fish that like that
type of water than that would work for you. Also "most" fish will adapt
to this if done slowly at first with small water changes and then moving
to larger ones. Just don't start to do it one month and not the next
one and think that you can jump back to doing it weekly again.

Vicki

Visit me on line at http://shamrock4u.250free.com

[kclmymy]

I have not keep Flowerhorn before, however, in Malaysia you can't go by a
day in LFS not seeing one and some friend who keep them. So here is what
little information I have, ymmv.

If you wish to keep pleco, obviously I don't keep them, with flowerhorn,
start them both very young, better the plec slightly bigger, yet there is no
guarantee that the flowerhorn will not attack the plec when they get bigger.
For a 55gal, you are most likely be able to keep a flowerhorn (average adult
size of 11" - 14" TL) and a plec. The flowerhorn get very aggressive when
mature, the act of following ones hand around was mistakenly regard as
playful, but rather a territorial defense instinct.

Never see flowerhorn / Discus combination, but I guessed that will never
work (as NetMax pointed out). Water parameter just way out.

Good luck

kclmymy

NetMax > wrote in message
.. .
>
> I've no personal experience with Flowerhorns, but from what I've seen and
> been told, they would be inappropriate tank-mates for Discus. Plecos can
> also be a risk with Discus. Determine what your natural water parameters
> will be. This will help you decide if your interests would more easily
> be met by soft water fish (Discus) or harder water fish. Then you can
> look into compatability issues.
>
> NetMax
>

[JEFFREY STREET]

The thought of the discus' with a flowerhorn came to me at the local
aquarium shoppe. I saw a bunch of agressive fish in a tank, and in the tank
with them were some very fast non-aggressive fish. I guess the agressive
fish wouldn't attack each other with the fast fish in the tank so my
thinking was that the flowerhorn would think so much of the fast fishes
(which he couldn't catch) that he would leave the pleco along and then
everyone is happy. I measured my pleco today, he is 4 1/2 inches long from
nose to tail, so I thought a baby flowerhorn would be cool... maybe I am
wrong as I am a little overwhelmed with ph levels, soft and hard water,
water changes... as all I am looking for are some large (for a 55 gal tank)
fish that will a) not eat my pleco, b) not be shy but rather more outgoing
and a great personality for a fish (if that makes sense) and c) I want more
than 2 fish in the tank... d) I do not want to be changing the water in the
tank every other day. The tank is the centerpiece of the living room so
many friends will always be looking at the fish. Money is no object (to a
limit, no fish over $100 dollars), does anyone have any suggestions...



"kclmymy" > wrote in message
...
> I have not keep Flowerhorn before, however, in Malaysia you can't go by a
> day in LFS not seeing one and some friend who keep them. So here is what
> little information I have, ymmv.
>
> If you wish to keep pleco, obviously I don't keep them, with flowerhorn,
> start them both very young, better the plec slightly bigger, yet there is
no
> guarantee that the flowerhorn will not attack the plec when they get
bigger.
> For a 55gal, you are most likely be able to keep a flowerhorn (average
adult
> size of 11" - 14" TL) and a plec. The flowerhorn get very aggressive when
> mature, the act of following ones hand around was mistakenly regard as
> playful, but rather a territorial defense instinct.
>
> Never see flowerhorn / Discus combination, but I guessed that will never
> work (as NetMax pointed out). Water parameter just way out.
>
> Good luck
>
> kclmymy
>
> NetMax > wrote in message
> .. .
> >
> > I've no personal experience with Flowerhorns, but from what I've seen
and
> > been told, they would be inappropriate tank-mates for Discus. Plecos
can
> > also be a risk with Discus. Determine what your natural water
parameters
> > will be. This will help you decide if your interests would more easily
> > be met by soft water fish (Discus) or harder water fish. Then you can
> > look into compatability issues.
> >
> > NetMax
> >
>
>
>
>
>

[kclmymy]

Not sure of Clyde's potential size. For a 55gal I will go with some M.
boesemani, M. trifasciata and/or M. Herbertaxelrodi, these guy can get to
about 4" - 5", very colorful, very active, and very easy to take care.

For larger, peaceful fish look at Semaprochilodus (Prochilodus) insignis,
well that just me.

Cheers

kclmymy

JEFFREY STREET > wrote in message
. net...
> The thought of the discus' with a flowerhorn came to me at the local
> aquarium shoppe. I saw a bunch of agressive fish in a tank, and in the
tank
> with them were some very fast non-aggressive fish. I guess the agressive
> fish wouldn't attack each other with the fast fish in the tank so my
> thinking was that the flowerhorn would think so much of the fast fishes
> (which he couldn't catch) that he would leave the pleco along and then
> everyone is happy. I measured my pleco today, he is 4 1/2 inches long
from
> nose to tail, so I thought a baby flowerhorn would be cool... maybe I am
> wrong as I am a little overwhelmed with ph levels, soft and hard water,
> water changes... as all I am looking for are some large (for a 55 gal
tank)
> fish that will a) not eat my pleco, b) not be shy but rather more outgoing
> and a great personality for a fish (if that makes sense) and c) I want
more
> than 2 fish in the tank... d) I do not want to be changing the water in
the
> tank every other day. The tank is the centerpiece of the living room so
> many friends will always be looking at the fish. Money is no object (to a
> limit, no fish over $100 dollars), does anyone have any suggestions...

[NetMax]

"Donald Kerns" > wrote in message
...
> Cammie wrote:
>
> > and all your parameters are fine by doing such a large and often
water
> > change? no algae, etc.?
> >
> >
> > "~Vicki ~" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >> I change 50% once and sometimes twice a week if the mood hits me.
> >>
> >> NetMax can tell ya all about why this is good.
> >>
> >> Vicki
> >>
>
> The main thing is to minimize the changes that the fish experiences...
>
> If you do big water changes, with temperature-matched water (and your
pH
> out of the tap is stable) doing 2 50% changes a week means that the
> fish never experience water much different than the tap parameters.
>
> If you let the tank sit for a month and then did a 50%, the fish would
> experience a difference (pH drifts down slowly, nitrates, DOCs and
> other nasties build up)... So that would be bad.
>
> It really depends on a lot of case by case variables. *I* can't get
away
> with this because my water drops 0.4 pH within 8 hours of coming out of
> the tap... So I stick with 25% (or smaller) water changes 1x per week.
>
> My $0.02US,

I can't improve on that explanation. My pH rises 0.7 after airing, so I
limit myself to 10% changes, once or twice a week. Theoretically though,
I should be able to set up a constant drip automatic water changer (on my
list of things to do ;o).

NetMax

> -D
> --
> "When you've lost your ability to laugh, you've lost your ability to
> think straight." -To Inherit the Wind

[NetMax]

"kclmymy" > wrote in message
...
> Not sure of Clyde's potential size. For a 55gal I will go with some M.
> boesemani, M. trifasciata and/or M. Herbertaxelrodi, these guy can get
to
> about 4" - 5", very colorful, very active, and very easy to take care.
>
> For larger, peaceful fish look at Semaprochilodus (Prochilodus)
insignis,
> well that just me.
>
> Cheers
>
> kclmymy
<snip>

On rainbowfish, http://members.optushome.com.au/chelmon/Contents.htm and
http://www.rainbowfishes.org/ are very nice sites :o)

NetMax

[Racf]

"NetMax" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Donald Kerns" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Cammie wrote:
> >
> > > and all your parameters are fine by doing such a large and often
> water
> > > change? no algae, etc.?
> > >
> > >
> > > "~Vicki ~" > wrote in message
> > > ...
> > >> I change 50% once and sometimes twice a week if the mood hits me.
> > >>
> > >> NetMax can tell ya all about why this is good.
> > >>
> > >> Vicki
> > >>
> >
> > The main thing is to minimize the changes that the fish
experiences...
> >
> > If you do big water changes, with temperature-matched water (and
your
> pH
> > out of the tap is stable) doing 2 50% changes a week means that the
> > fish never experience water much different than the tap parameters.
> >
> > If you let the tank sit for a month and then did a 50%, the fish
would
> > experience a difference (pH drifts down slowly, nitrates, DOCs and
> > other nasties build up)... So that would be bad.
> >
> > It really depends on a lot of case by case variables. *I* can't get
> away
> > with this because my water drops 0.4 pH within 8 hours of coming out
of
> > the tap... So I stick with 25% (or smaller) water changes 1x per
week.
> >
> > My $0.02US,
>
> I can't improve on that explanation. My pH rises 0.7 after airing, so
I
> limit myself to 10% changes, once or twice a week. Theoretically
though,
> I should be able to set up a constant drip automatic water changer (on
my
> list of things to do ;o).
>
> NetMax
>
> > -D
> > --
> > "When you've lost your ability to laugh, you've lost your ability to
> > think straight." -To Inherit the Wind
>
>

As you have no doubt noticed from other posts, I am no longer a fan of
blaming pH shifts on fish deaths. But, your example concerning the pH
shift out of the tap versus after aeration makes a different point to
me. Your water (just like mine) contains a lot of dissolved CO2. A big
rise in a tanks CO2 content would affect fish since the CO2 is quickly
absorbed in to the fish through his gills. This acidifies its blood and
forces the fish to regulate his internal pH via Hydrogen ions via the
gills. And as the CO2 level quickly drops in the tank, the fish is
forced to perform the same function again only this time to acidify his
blood since its going alkaline.

I would not call this a pH shock condition....but what would it be
called.....a CO2 shock....?

[Donald Kerns]

Racf wrote:

>
>
> As you have no doubt noticed from other posts, I am no longer a fan of
> blaming pH shifts on fish deaths.

ITYM blaming fish deaths on pH shifts... ;-)

> But, your example concerning the pH
> shift out of the tap versus after aeration makes a different point to
> me. Your water (just like mine) contains a lot of dissolved CO2. A
> big rise in a tanks CO2 content would affect fish since the CO2 is
> quickly
> absorbed in to the fish through his gills. This acidifies its blood
> and forces the fish to regulate his internal pH via Hydrogen ions via
> the
> gills. And as the CO2 level quickly drops in the tank, the fish is
> forced to perform the same function again only this time to acidify
> his blood since its going alkaline.
>
> I would not call this a pH shock condition....but what would it be
> called.....a CO2 shock....?

I'll toss a a couple out, how about "ionic shock" or "electrolyte
imbalance shock."

Still have the pH shock thing hanging around. When the pH is changed
more rapidly than the fish's ability to cope with that change, the fish
will "stress" (yet another of those ill defined words...)

The proposed mechanism is illuminating. I'm tempted to claim this is
still a pH shock. The CO2 angle just plays with the time
constants/frame a bit...

-D
--
"When you've lost your ability to laugh, you've lost your ability to
think straight." -To Inherit the Wind

[Racf]

"Donald Kerns" > wrote in message
...
> Racf wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > As you have no doubt noticed from other posts, I am no longer a fan
of
> > blaming pH shifts on fish deaths.
>
> ITYM blaming fish deaths on pH shifts... ;-)
>
> > But, your example concerning the pH
> > shift out of the tap versus after aeration makes a different point
to
> > me. Your water (just like mine) contains a lot of dissolved CO2. A
> > big rise in a tanks CO2 content would affect fish since the CO2 is
> > quickly
> > absorbed in to the fish through his gills. This acidifies its blood
> > and forces the fish to regulate his internal pH via Hydrogen ions
via
> > the
> > gills. And as the CO2 level quickly drops in the tank, the fish is
> > forced to perform the same function again only this time to acidify
> > his blood since its going alkaline.
> >
> > I would not call this a pH shock condition....but what would it be
> > called.....a CO2 shock....?
>
> I'll toss a a couple out, how about "ionic shock" or "electrolyte
> imbalance shock."
>
> Still have the pH shock thing hanging around. When the pH is changed
> more rapidly than the fish's ability to cope with that change, the
fish
> will "stress" (yet another of those ill defined words...)

Fresh water fish adjust their internal pH via specialized cells in the
Gills, moving Hydrogen Ions in or out. An outside pH is not a force
that penetrates. CO2 is a molecule that does penetrate quite easiliy
via the gills. The fish is basically at the mercy of its environment
on this one. Hydrogen ions I do not believe just flow in and out to
equalize their concentrations as would CO2. Salt water fish is a
different story all together as they do equalize internally with the
external water and their gills have no specialized cells to manage their
internal pH. They just swallow water....

>
> The proposed mechanism is illuminating. I'm tempted to claim this is
> still a pH shock. The CO2 angle just plays with the time
> constants/frame a bit...
>

But its the CO2, not the pH that is in play here....right? from the
water perspective. It be a different situation would it not if the pH
was quite a bit lower and there was no weird CO2 level involved.

I have been looking into this for a couple weeks...and I find it a bit
interesting....I hope someone with a bit of a good background can
perhaps explain this well.

> -D
> --
> "When you've lost your ability to laugh, you've lost your ability to
> think straight." -To Inherit the Wind

[Donald Kerns]

Racf wrote:

>>
>> The proposed mechanism is illuminating. I'm tempted to claim this is
>> still a pH shock. The CO2 angle just plays with the time
>> constants/frame a bit...
>>
>
> But its the CO2, not the pH that is in play here....right? from the
> water perspective. It be a different situation would it not if the pH
> was quite a bit lower and there was no weird CO2 level involved.
>
> I have been looking into this for a couple weeks...and I find it a bit
> interesting....I hope someone with a bit of a good background can
> perhaps explain this well.
>

[the following is NOT meant to be argumentative, more like talking an
issue through.]

I have no positive knowledge on this, but...

I would imagine dropping pH a full point on a fish is hard on the fish
whether or not that pH drop is induced by CO2 injection or an increase
in H+ in the water.

The fish has some native ability to cope with pH changes, any pH change
that exceeds that rate is a "Bad Thing" for the fish.

I suppose, given the right chemistry set up, we could move a fish from a
pH / KH / CO2 combination that is high in pH but lowered by CO2
injection to a pH / KH / CO2 that has the same effective pH but with no
additional CO2 and see what that does to the fish... (or vice-verse)

The intuitive-self believes this would also be "a Bad Thing." However,
second order intuition makes me believe that most living things ability
to cope with "rapid" changes in blood CO2 levels would be faster than
their ability to change pH. (WAG based upon blood chemistry/exertion
thoughts...)

-D
--
"When you've lost your ability to laugh, you've lost your ability to
think straight." -To Inherit the Wind

[Racf]

"Donald Kerns" > wrote in message
...
> Racf wrote:
>
> >>
> >> The proposed mechanism is illuminating. I'm tempted to claim this
is
> >> still a pH shock. The CO2 angle just plays with the time
> >> constants/frame a bit...
> >>
> >
> > But its the CO2, not the pH that is in play here....right? from the
> > water perspective. It be a different situation would it not if the
pH
> > was quite a bit lower and there was no weird CO2 level involved.
> >
> > I have been looking into this for a couple weeks...and I find it a
bit
> > interesting....I hope someone with a bit of a good background can
> > perhaps explain this well.
> >
>
> [the following is NOT meant to be argumentative, more like talking an
> issue through.]
>
> I have no positive knowledge on this, but...
>
> I would imagine dropping pH a full point on a fish is hard on the fish
> whether or not that pH drop is induced by CO2 injection or an increase
> in H+ in the water.
>
> The fish has some native ability to cope with pH changes, any pH
change
> that exceeds that rate is a "Bad Thing" for the fish.
>
> I suppose, given the right chemistry set up, we could move a fish from
a
> pH / KH / CO2 combination that is high in pH but lowered by CO2
> injection to a pH / KH / CO2 that has the same effective pH but with
no
> additional CO2 and see what that does to the fish... (or vice-verse)
>
> The intuitive-self believes this would also be "a Bad Thing." However,
> second order intuition makes me believe that most living things
ability
> to cope with "rapid" changes in blood CO2 levels would be faster than
> their ability to change pH. (WAG based upon blood chemistry/exertion
> thoughts...)
>
> -D
> --
> "When you've lost your ability to laugh, you've lost your ability to
> think straight." -To Inherit the Wind

I have read that CO2 will, and also, will not change blood pH. One from
a micro-biology student, the other from a claimed practicing
micro-biologist. It really beats me....whom do we believe. I have
personally witnessed a dozen or more rapid pH shifts of from 3.0 to 4.0
full points without any reaction from the fish in the tank.. By rapid I
mean in less than 5 minutes....I have goggled posts from the past
claiming the same result...they appear to be credible observations. I
posted 2 of them. One is on the Krib....

My tap water is hard and raises a full point after its extra CO2
outgases, from 7.2 - 8.2. I can change 25% of the water in my 29H guppy
tank and it sends them all to the top....

So what gives.....

I no longer believe in the pH thing as much as I believe the Osmotic
pressure thing and now I am wondering about the CO2 thing. So what
gives with my guppy's....?

I am just trying to figure this out..... I am no microbiologist.....but
I am not stupid either..although I imagine that is debatable...

[NetMax]

"Racf" wrote...
> "NetMax" wrote in message...
> >"Donald Kerns" wrote in message...
> > > Cammie wrote:
> > > > "~Vicki ~" wrote...
<snip>

> I would not call this a pH shock condition....but what would it be
> called.....a CO2 shock....?

re: difficult acclimation to the rapid introduction of heavily charged
CO2 water and then acclimation to the CO2 dissipating

I explain it to my customers as narcosis (diver's bends). I have no idea
as to how accurate that description is, but it's something everyone seems
to understand and remember.

I ask my well-water customer's to bring me 2 water samples, aged and
fresh, so that I can figure out if they need to limit their water change
volumes. I could also figure out their CO2 concentration, but no one is
that curious ;~). I'm getting good at telling them how deep their well
is too, by looking at the pH differences.

NetMax

[~Vicki ~]

This has been keeping me up tonight and after doing a little reading in
other sources came up with a little idea.

Y'all know that I am a water change fanatic and if I had the time would
change 50% of my water a day instead of once or twice a week, but some
folks have fish which need constant monitoring for ph and stuff like
that and daily water changes would possibly harm their fish. I also
know that some species like aged water and more than 10% would probably
kill them, like cardinal tetras and discus. Well if you could remove
the DOC'S without doing a large water change than the need for frequent
changes would be gone? I was reading in my Marine fish manual about
removal of DOC'S from the water and was wondering if the same technology
I use in my marine tank would work in a fresh water tank, in fact the
use of this simple filter was even mentioned in my marine fish book for
fresh water use. And that simple filter is called a protein skimmer.
Now I don't keep fish which like aged water (except marine) but I am
sure one of you who does could give it a try. Some of y'all have
special meters which monitor that stuff so it would not be to tough for
you to give it a try and the post your results. I would be interested
to see the results of using one on a tank and having a second tank
without one and than compare the results of a six month test.

Just give me credit when you make the fish keepers news.

Vicki

[Racf]

"~Vicki ~" > wrote in message
...
> This has been keeping me up tonight and after doing a little reading
in
> other sources came up with a little idea.
>
> Y'all know that I am a water change fanatic and if I had the time
would
> change 50% of my water a day instead of once or twice a week, but some
> folks have fish which need constant monitoring for ph and stuff like
> that and daily water changes would possibly harm their fish. I also
> know that some species like aged water and more than 10% would
probably
> kill them, like cardinal tetras and discus. Well if you could remove
> the DOC'S without doing a large water change than the need for
frequent
> changes would be gone?

Activated carbon will remove DOCs really well. It seems activated
carbon is a world upon itself in the various types and their virtues.
Using AC has been rather out of style for a while for some reason. It
seems that advice like:

1. It does nothing, but waste your money.
2. You cannot grow plants
3. It only lasts a few hours
4. Only for dye and medication removal
5. Your filter will not hold enough to do any good

Is parroted fairly consistantly in most news groups for the last few
years. Perhaps AC is poised for a comeback given its virtues. It has
certainly become a standard now in home water purification..... I guess
it always has in commercial water purification. (Of course they have the
facilities to re-activate theirs once used). I wish I had a little kiln
thingy that would do it....

I was reading in my Marine fish manual about
> removal of DOC'S from the water and was wondering if the same
technology
> I use in my marine tank would work in a fresh water tank, in fact the
> use of this simple filter was even mentioned in my marine fish book
for
> fresh water use. And that simple filter is called a protein skimmer.

From what I have read a few times the salt water style protein skimmer
will not work on Fresh water due to the properties of the fresh water.
It does not foam as does salt water. I also read someone has made a
protein skimmer for fresh water, but it uses other technology than the
foam priciple..

I am no expert on this, just read about it the other day on google
reading up on DOCs and their removal.....


> Now I don't keep fish which like aged water (except marine) but I am
> sure one of you who does could give it a try. Some of y'all have
> special meters which monitor that stuff so it would not be to tough
for
> you to give it a try and the post your results. I would be interested
> to see the results of using one on a tank and having a second tank
> without one and than compare the results of a six month test.
>
> Just give me credit when you make the fish keepers news.
>
> Vicki
>

Surface skimmers can help a bit removing those dissolved fatty/protein
films that can sometimes develop. Look like bubbles that never
break.... This build-up depends a bit on the foods used....surface
turbulence...stuff like that....

[~Vicki ~]

Hey it sounded good to me....Thanks,

Vicki

[NetMax]

"Racf" > wrote in message
...
>
> "NetMax" > wrote in message
> .. .
> >
> > "Racf" wrote...
> > > "NetMax" wrote in message...
> > > >"Donald Kerns" wrote in message...
> > > > > Cammie wrote:
> > > > > > "~Vicki ~" wrote...
> > <snip>
> >
> > > I would not call this a pH shock condition....but what would it be
> > > called.....a CO2 shock....?
> >
> > re: difficult acclimation to the rapid introduction of heavily
charged
> > CO2 water and then acclimation to the CO2 dissipating
> >
> > I explain it to my customers as narcosis (diver's bends). I have no
> idea
> > as to how accurate that description is, but it's something everyone
> seems
> > to understand and remember.
> >
> > I ask my well-water customer's to bring me 2 water samples, aged and
> > fresh, so that I can figure out if they need to limit their water
> change
> > volumes. I could also figure out their CO2 concentration, but no one
> is
> > that curious ;~). I'm getting good at telling them how deep their
> well
> > is too, by looking at the pH differences.
> >
> > NetMax
> >
> >
>
> I wish I could understand the phenomenon better......for a number of
> reasons. What ever happened to Nestor.....? He appears to have
> disappeared and I fear the worst..

It's been 7 months since he graced our humble newsgroup, leaving us to
stumble through these technical reports on our own :o( Last time I spoke
with him, he was labouring under greater managerial responsibilities and
workload, but hopefully he will be back to straighten us out before we
wander to far into left field, building freshwater skimmers and backyard
kilns good for 500C ;~)

NetMax

[Dave Millman]

Cammie wrote:

> I know people with large tanks (125 gallons). They did water changes at
> first, but haven't done any changes in 3 years. Just filter changes and top
> off water. And all is fine.

Let's think about this:

You have some friends who have not changed any water in their tank for three
years. Fish have been ****ing and crapping (sorry for the language if you have
delicate ears, but I want to be absolutely clear on what is going on here) in
the water for all that time. When water evaporates, they add more.

Are you recommending this as a healthy environment for fish? Keep in mind that
newbies will be reading your message for all eternity. "Cammie said not changing
water for three years is fine. Cool."

I guess what I'm asking is, why did you post this particular piece of wisdom? Do
you believe it is a good idea?

[Donald Kerns]

Dave Millman wrote:

> Cammie wrote:
>
>> I know people with large tanks (125 gallons). They did water changes
>> at
>> first, but haven't done any changes in 3 years. Just filter changes
>> and top
>> off water. And all is fine.
>
> Let's think about this:
>
> You have some friends who have not changed any water in their tank for
> three years. Fish have been ****ing and crapping (sorry for the
> language if you have delicate ears, but I want to be absolutely clear
> on what is going on here) in the water for all that time. When water
> evaporates, they add more.

While I don't advocate this behavior, a heavily planted tank would
tolerate this a lot better than a non-planted or lightly planted one
would...

Waalstad (sp?) of low tech aquarium fame claims not to do a lot of water
changes...

-Donald
--
"When you've lost your ability to laugh, you've lost your ability to
think straight." -To Inherit the Wind

[BK]

I have a 125 and change 35 gallons every week.

Brian

Dave Millman > wrote:

>Cammie wrote:
>
>> I know people with large tanks (125 gallons). They did water changes at
>> first, but haven't done any changes in 3 years. Just filter changes and top
>> off water. And all is fine.
>
>Let's think about this:
>
>You have some friends who have not changed any water in their tank for three
>years. Fish have been ****ing and crapping (sorry for the language if you have
>delicate ears, but I want to be absolutely clear on what is going on here) in
>the water for all that time. When water evaporates, they add more.
>
>Are you recommending this as a healthy environment for fish? Keep in mind that
>newbies will be reading your message for all eternity. "Cammie said not changing
>water for three years is fine. Cool."
>
>I guess what I'm asking is, why did you post this particular piece of wisdom? Do
>you believe it is a good idea?