![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Jen wrote: "Jen" wrote in message ... So what's the general consensus on using undergravel filters? Are they good or bad? Thanks to all the replies. I'll think when I change over to tropical I'll take it out, and see how it goes. Jen Jen, With the types of filters available these days, and ease of care with them, don't bother with an UGF. If they're not maintained properly they become cess pools. With an external power filter, or even a canister, all you need to do is rinse out the pad in old tank water and replace it inside the filter housing. By doing this you don't lose any nitrifying bacteria like you would if you rinsed it under tap water or simply replaced with a new one. The only time a new one is needed is when the old one has holes worn in it. *side note* Could you please not cross post. Thank you. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Undergravel filters are fine, *if* you have appropriate flow and a decent
filter plate. If you can keep the water flowing, and avoid dead spots, a good UG will turn your entire gravel bed into a bio filter. If you have a aspare tank to play with, try this: set it up, with the UG, but don't turn on the UG (powerhead, air drive, whatever. Leave it off). Note that you'll have to have the water level below the top of the exhaust tubes for tghis test. Get the tanks set up, and throw in a bunch of trash fish (feeders). Watvch your water chemistry until it stabilizes, then add fish until its saturated (can't support any more fish). Now, turn on the UG filter, but don't change anything else. Watch your water chemistry change for the better. Now, try adding more fish, and see how many more the tank will support now.... Some folks have problems with plants in their tanks with UG filters. I get around that by only putting UG filters in part of the tank (where plants won't be)..... Keep in mind that the setup and quality of the UG filter are critical... --JD "Tynk" wrote in message ps.com... Jen wrote: "Jen" wrote in message ... So what's the general consensus on using undergravel filters? Are they good or bad? Thanks to all the replies. I'll think when I change over to tropical I'll take it out, and see how it goes. Jen Jen, With the types of filters available these days, and ease of care with them, don't bother with an UGF. If they're not maintained properly they become cess pools. With an external power filter, or even a canister, all you need to do is rinse out the pad in old tank water and replace it inside the filter housing. By doing this you don't lose any nitrifying bacteria like you would if you rinsed it under tap water or simply replaced with a new one. The only time a new one is needed is when the old one has holes worn in it. *side note* Could you please not cross post. Thank you. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Hi, to all...
I don't mean to say that underground filters or dual filter systems are for everyone. Having dropped the hobby for about 20 years I am more or less a newbie or maybe and old novice. But I've had good luck with them and in the right configuration in an aquarium I believe they can be quite an asset. So heed everyone's advice here and proceed with due caution. If my new set up doesn't work out for me I'll try to write back and I'll admit it. Cheers, Trev Sorry about the signature - it is for other unrelated newsgroups and I tried to turn it off with no luck. ??? TS -- Edmonton SCTV Locations: http://members.shaw.ca/pumpkin27/iwebber2 My Blog feed: feed://members.shaw.ca/kitschy/iwebber/TheStenonsNewDigs/Blog/rss.xml |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
jd wrote:
Undergravel filters are fine, *if* you have appropriate flow and a decent filter plate. If you can keep the water flowing, and avoid dead spots, a good UG will turn your entire gravel bed into a bio filter. If you have a aspare tank to play with, try this: set it up, with the UG, but don't turn on the UG (powerhead, air drive, whatever. Leave it off). Note that you'll have to have the water level below the top of the exhaust tubes for tghis test. Get the tanks set up, and throw in a bunch of trash fish (feeders). Watvch Trash fish. hmm. So what do you do with the trash when finished? your water chemistry until it stabilizes, then add fish until its saturated (can't support any more fish). Now, turn on the UG filter, but don't change anything else. Watch your water chemistry change for the better. Now, try adding more fish, and see how many more the tank will support now.... Some folks have problems with plants in their tanks with UG filters. I get around that by only putting UG filters in part of the tank (where plants won't be)..... Keep in mind that the setup and quality of the UG filter are critical... --JD "Tynk" wrote in message ps.com... Jen wrote: "Jen" wrote in message ... So what's the general consensus on using undergravel filters? Are they good or bad? Thanks to all the replies. I'll think when I change over to tropical I'll take it out, and see how it goes. Jen Jen, With the types of filters available these days, and ease of care with them, don't bother with an UGF. If they're not maintained properly they become cess pools. With an external power filter, or even a canister, all you need to do is rinse out the pad in old tank water and replace it inside the filter housing. By doing this you don't lose any nitrifying bacteria like you would if you rinsed it under tap water or simply replaced with a new one. The only time a new one is needed is when the old one has holes worn in it. *side note* Could you please not cross post. Thank you. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "amosf © Tim Fairchild" wrote in message ... jd wrote: Undergravel filters are fine, *if* you have appropriate flow and a decent filter plate. If you can keep the water flowing, and avoid dead spots, a good UG will turn your entire gravel bed into a bio filter. If you have a aspare tank to play with, try this: set it up, with the UG, but don't turn on the UG (powerhead, air drive, whatever. Leave it off). Note that you'll have to have the water level below the top of the exhaust tubes for tghis test. Get the tanks set up, and throw in a bunch of trash fish (feeders). Watvch Trash fish. hmm. So what do you do with the trash when finished? ================== I hope they're not being tossed down the commode....... ![]() -- ZB.... Frugal ponding since 1995. rec.ponder since late 1996. My Pond & Aquarium Pages: http://tinyurl.com/9do58 ~~~~ }((((* ~~~ }{{{{(ö ~~~~ }((((({* |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
*SNIPPAGE*
Get the tanks set up, and throw in a bunch of trash fish (feeders). Watvch Trash fish. hmm. So what do you do with the trash when finished? typically, I feed them to other fish. Alternately, use something that you might be interested in keeping as trash fish. My standard is feeder guppies. If some survive, they become a food source (both adults and fry) for the fish I get once the tank is stable. -JD |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
jd wrote:
*SNIPPAGE* Get the tanks set up, and throw in a bunch of trash fish (feeders). Watvch Trash fish. hmm. So what do you do with the trash when finished? typically, I feed them to other fish. Alternately, use something that you might be interested in keeping as trash fish. My standard is feeder guppies. If some survive, they become a food source (both adults and fry) for the fish I get once the tank is stable. I was just wondering since it's likely any fish you use for cycling will be damaged in the process. And fish are fish. I guess using the term 'trash' fish suggests that they are fish that you aren't required to treat with the same care you would a non-trash fish. Anyway, doing a fishless cycle or getting some media from another tank solves that issue. Start without fish until you have bacteria to cope with the bioload, or with media, start slow with the fish you actually want in the tank. Get the tanks set up, and throw in a bunch of trash fish (feeders). Watvch your water chemistry until it stabilizes, then add fish until its saturated (can't support any more fish). Now, turn on the UG filter, but don't change anything else. Watch your water chemistry change for the better. Now, try adding more fish, and see how many more the tank will support now.... This part is bad advice. Period. Throwing a bunch of fish in there to suffer. 'Saturated'? What the hell does that mean. You put a bunch of fish in a tank with no biofilter then the ammonia levels will climb continuously, damaging gills all the while, eventually to fatal levels. There are no bacteria to support ANY fish at all. Even if you then start a filter after the ammonia spike and by some luck the bacteria take off and drop ammonia levels and you add even more fish, then the nitrites will spike and kill them. Watch the water chemistry until it stabilizes indeed. Watch the nh3 and no2 climb through the roof you mean... Enough new aquarists end up with fish in ammonia soup without that sort of advice. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Sorry, I gotta disagree. I've kept tanks of variouse sizes - from 5 gal to
many thousands of gallons, in both marine and fresh water setups. I've had tanks since the mid 70s. While it *may* be possible to set a tank up and get it running without losing any fish (or damaging their physiology with water chemistry changes as the tank settles in), it is much more realistic to expect to lose some fish. For the tanks I keep for recreation (as oppsoed to commercial breeding or research tanks), I have the luxury of being able to start the tank up slowly, and can start out with fish that I really don't care about (feeder guppies). It makes things a lot easier, faster, and in reality, I only lose one or two with each tank startup. The rest end up as food for the real fish. For the tanks that I don't have the time (or it is not economical) to do a slow startup on, I seed the tank with media from one of the established tanks. This helps, but it still takes a while for the chemistry to settle down. In these tanks, where the fish that are going to be in it are often irreplaceable, I have absolutely no problem stocking heavily with trash fish - the type of "trash fish" depends on the size of the tank - I'm not going to bother with feeder guppies in a tank thats bigger than most ponds, and they certainly are not appropriate for marine tanks (I like to use squalus acanthius as the trash fish for the larger marine tanks).... the simple reality is: by putting fish in a tank, you're trying to create and maintain them in an artificial environment. If you can convince yourself that he environment you create is really comparable to a natural environment (and that the "natural environment" is really the ideal environment), have a blast. If, on the other hand, you opt to be a bit realistic, and recognize that at best any tank you set up is a poor model of a "natural" (polluted or otherwise) environment. Unless you live someplace that you can set up a flow-through system, you are creating an environment that is inherently unstable, and will place artifical stresses on the tank residents. I simply choose to accept this fact, and during the most stressfull tank time (start-up) accept the fact that there is a lot of physiological stress that will take place (no matter what you do). I choose to allow fish I don't care about experience that stress instead of the fish I *do* care about. As for determining the maximum carrying capacity of a tank, you can run all the tests, monitors, etc that you want. The only way to truly determine how the species of fish that you are keeping will react to the myriad of water chemistry issues that are inherent in a tank is to experiment. Yes, this will definitely cost you some fish. Yes, this will also place a lot of stress on the more sensitive fish (assuming a multi-species tank) in the tank. Thi sis an yunfortunate reality of maxing out a tank... If you don't like it, don't max out your tanks. As a side note, the best monitor I;ve found for water chemistry is a fairly sensitive fish. Pick something that is sensitive, but fits the environment you are setting up. If its more sensitive than the fish you are keeping, it will let you know thing are out of whack before the inmportant fish are overly stressed. (Yes, I do monitor water chemestry - I have (and use) all of the resources of a full research lab available to monitor water quality. Doesn't matter. canaries are still the best alarm systems for coal mines....) --JD "amosf © Tim Fairchild" wrote in message ... jd wrote: *SNIPPAGE* Get the tanks set up, and throw in a bunch of trash fish (feeders). Watvch Trash fish. hmm. So what do you do with the trash when finished? typically, I feed them to other fish. Alternately, use something that you might be interested in keeping as trash fish. My standard is feeder guppies. If some survive, they become a food source (both adults and fry) for the fish I get once the tank is stable. I was just wondering since it's likely any fish you use for cycling will be damaged in the process. And fish are fish. I guess using the term 'trash' fish suggests that they are fish that you aren't required to treat with the same care you would a non-trash fish. Anyway, doing a fishless cycle or getting some media from another tank solves that issue. Start without fish until you have bacteria to cope with the bioload, or with media, start slow with the fish you actually want in the tank. Get the tanks set up, and throw in a bunch of trash fish (feeders). Watvch your water chemistry until it stabilizes, then add fish until its saturated (can't support any more fish). Now, turn on the UG filter, but don't change anything else. Watch your water chemistry change for the better. Now, try adding more fish, and see how many more the tank will support now.... This part is bad advice. Period. Throwing a bunch of fish in there to suffer. 'Saturated'? What the hell does that mean. You put a bunch of fish in a tank with no biofilter then the ammonia levels will climb continuously, damaging gills all the while, eventually to fatal levels. There are no bacteria to support ANY fish at all. Even if you then start a filter after the ammonia spike and by some luck the bacteria take off and drop ammonia levels and you add even more fish, then the nitrites will spike and kill them. Watch the water chemistry until it stabilizes indeed. Watch the nh3 and no2 climb through the roof you mean... Enough new aquarists end up with fish in ammonia soup without that sort of advice. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
jd wrote:
Sorry, I gotta disagree. I've kept tanks of variouse sizes - from 5 gal to many thousands of gallons, in both marine and fresh water setups. I've had tanks since the mid 70s. I'm not sure what you are disagreeing with. We all know that you *can* just throw it together and hope it works and lose a few fish. My point is it's not good advice. New fish owners are better off knowing that there are better ways, indeed ways where you lose no fish at all, at least not due to poor water conditions. I've also bee dealing with fish since 1970, but am willing to move with the times. While it *may* be possible to set a tank up and get it running without losing any fish (or damaging their physiology with water chemistry changes as the tank settles in), It's possible and very easy these days. With a good testing regime and water changes it's easy to keep up with what's going on in a tank. With a fishless cycle you can have the tank ready before fish are ever introduced. it is much more realistic to expect to lose some fish. For the tanks I keep for recreation (as oppsoed to commercial breeding or research tanks), Chalk and cheese, of course. With a commercial setup you are only looking for what is commercially viable, and so some losses are acceptable if they are balanced by some other cost. I have the luxury of being able to start the tank up slowly, and can start out with fish that I really don't care about (feeder guppies). It makes things a lot easier, faster, and in reality, I only lose one or two with each tank startup. The rest end up as food for the real fish. It's a different world these days. Cruelty laws are changing and tighter than ever. It's not a responsible attitude to promote what could be seen as cruelty these days. For the tanks that I don't have the time (or it is not economical) to do a slow startup on, I seed the tank with media from one of the established tanks. This helps, but it still takes a while for the chemistry to settle Seeding from another tank is another matter. You can seed a tank with enough media and you will have a small minicycle at worst. It's not the same as starting from scratch with no biological filtration. Again you are comparing pets to a commercial setup. down. In these tanks, where the fish that are going to be in it are often irreplaceable, I have absolutely no problem stocking heavily with trash fish - the type of "trash fish" depends on the size of the tank - I'm not going to bother with feeder guppies in a tank thats bigger than most ponds, and they certainly are not appropriate for marine tanks (I like to use squalus acanthius as the trash fish for the larger marine tanks).... It's better to get the idea across to new people that it's a better idea to minimize damage and fatality to all fish. You are promoting cruelty to fish that you consider not to be worth enough money. So it's okay to let cheap fish suffer so the expensive fish do okay. Not a good message to push. You should try that one on the aquaria central forums. the simple reality is: by putting fish in a tank, you're trying to create and maintain them in an artificial environment. If you can convince yourself that he environment you create is really comparable to a natural environment (and that the "natural environment" is really the ideal environment), have a blast. If, on the other hand, you opt to be a bit realistic, and recognize that at best any tank you set up is a poor model of a "natural" (polluted or otherwise) environment. Unless you live someplace that you can set up a flow-through system, you are creating an environment that is inherently unstable, and will place artifical stresses on the tank residents. I simply choose to accept this fact, and during the most stressfull tank time (start-up) accept the fact that there is a lot of physiological stress that will take place (no matter what you do). I choose to allow fish I don't care about experience that stress instead of the fish I *do* care about. Of course the tank is going to be less than a natural environment, but that does make it okay to make this a deliberately toxic environment for some fish, especially 'trash fish'. An established tank, with regular water changes and testing is not toxic or polluted, and will generally provide an environment where fish will live longer than they would even in a natural environment. With maintenance and sufficient biomedia, it will be stable. If not overstocked and contains compatible species, it will not be stressful. Startup time does not need to be stressful either, and does not require fish that you don't care about. You can avoid ALL stress with a fishless cycle or with a slow startup with low fish numbers and regular water changes, especially with seeding. As for determining the maximum carrying capacity of a tank, you can run all the tests, monitors, etc that you want. The only way to truly And those tests will tell you exactly how much NH3 and NO2 you have, which are the killers in a new tank. You can keep them down with water changes. Or sort all that out during the fishless cycle. determine how the species of fish that you are keeping will react to the myriad of water chemistry issues that are inherent in a tank is to experiment. No need to experiment. the tests are there. The killers in the first week are well known and require a creation of a bacterial colony. You know easily when you have too many fish for the bacteria by the level of NH3 and NO2 Yes, this will definitely cost you some fish. Yes, this will also place a lot of stress on the more sensitive fish (assuming a multi-species tank) in the tank. Thi sis an yunfortunate reality of maxing out a tank... If you don't like it, don't max out your tanks. Exactly. People shouldn't do it and you shouldn't advise it. Experiment on your own. It's not necessary to lose fish and I don't plan on losing ANY fish when I start an aquarium. Zero. You put what fish in a tank that it can support biologically, and you lose none. Simple as that. As a side note, the best monitor I;ve found for water chemistry is a fairly sensitive fish. Pick something that is sensitive, but fits the environment you are setting up. If its more sensitive than the fish you are keeping, it will let you know thing are out of whack before the inmportant fish are overly stressed. (Yes, I do monitor water chemestry - I have (and use) all of the resources of a full research lab available to monitor water quality. Doesn't matter. canaries are still the best alarm systems for coal mines....) Seriously dude. They don't use canaries any more. It would be illegal now in the western world anyway. In these enlightened times of technology we have tests for this sort of thing. These are accurate tests that tell us exactly how much toxin is present. The best alarm is the test. It will tell you there are toxins present *before* you lose any fish. Once you lose a sensitive fish, sorry, you have already done damage to your expensive fish as well... "amosf © Tim Fairchild" wrote in message ... jd wrote: *SNIPPAGE* Get the tanks set up, and throw in a bunch of trash fish (feeders). Watvch Trash fish. hmm. So what do you do with the trash when finished? typically, I feed them to other fish. Alternately, use something that you might be interested in keeping as trash fish. My standard is feeder guppies. If some survive, they become a food source (both adults and fry) for the fish I get once the tank is stable. I was just wondering since it's likely any fish you use for cycling will be damaged in the process. And fish are fish. I guess using the term 'trash' fish suggests that they are fish that you aren't required to treat with the same care you would a non-trash fish. Anyway, doing a fishless cycle or getting some media from another tank solves that issue. Start without fish until you have bacteria to cope with the bioload, or with media, start slow with the fish you actually want in the tank. Get the tanks set up, and throw in a bunch of trash fish (feeders). Watvch your water chemistry until it stabilizes, then add fish until its saturated (can't support any more fish). Now, turn on the UG filter, but don't change anything else. Watch your water chemistry change for the better. Now, try adding more fish, and see how many more the tank will support now.... This part is bad advice. Period. Throwing a bunch of fish in there to suffer. 'Saturated'? What the hell does that mean. You put a bunch of fish in a tank with no biofilter then the ammonia levels will climb continuously, damaging gills all the while, eventually to fatal levels. There are no bacteria to support ANY fish at all. Even if you then start a filter after the ammonia spike and by some luck the bacteria take off and drop ammonia levels and you add even more fish, then the nitrites will spike and kill them. Watch the water chemistry until it stabilizes indeed. Watch the nh3 and no2 climb through the roof you mean... Enough new aquarists end up with fish in ammonia soup without that sort of advice. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
underwater gravel | Jen | Goldfish | 31 | January 14th 07 02:52 AM |
Need more feedback on gravel siphoning.... | [email protected] | General | 4 | March 4th 05 10:18 PM |
Goldfish substrate confusion for a new tank | Stephen Ruiz | Goldfish | 58 | January 5th 05 07:44 AM |
Replacing Gravel Bed for Corys | David J. Braunegg | General | 3 | January 31st 04 04:59 AM |
To gravel or not to gravel | Jon | Goldfish | 5 | October 31st 03 11:07 AM |