 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Pet Forum / Aquaria / Goldfish / January 2007underwater gravel
So what's the general consensus on using undergravel filters? Are they good or bad? Jen > So what's the general consensus on using undergravel filters? Are they > good or bad? > > Jen Well, I've always used them in my tanks, but I suspect the rate at which the water is drawn through them must be incredibly slow. That said, I still use them because I assume they do some good, expecially with "good" bacteria etc built up in the gravel. However I always regard them as secondary only, and install more aggressive "slip on the outside of the tank" filters. To sum up - under-gravel filters beneficial, but don't rely on them as your main filtration. Others on the group here who are more experienced than me may want to comment too. Hope this helps.  SignaturePeter in New Zealand. (Pull the plug out to reply.) Collector of old cameras, tropical fish fancier, good coffee nutter, and compulsive computer fiddler. > So what's the general consensus on using undergravel filters? Are they > good or bad? They work and are still a reliable filtration method, but somewhat higher maintenance. I used to use them for many years. I don't think I'd use them with goldfish. Just too much waste. With an external filter, like a canister (or HOB or wet/dry) you get the wastes out of the tank into a place you can easily clean up, and with goldfish you need to do that a bit. With other fish it's not so bad, but the same applies. If you are willing to do very regular gravel vacuuming and maybe break down the tank every couple of years, then UGF is fine. It's a good biofilter, but you can replace it with enough media in some other filtration system. It's a personal choice. Use a canister filter and NO GRAVEL - no waste at all building up in the bottom of the tank - as long as you have other structures in the tank that bacteria can colonize on (rocks, etc.) the benefits that the gravel bed were providing will be taken care of - and no more of that pain in the neck gravel vacuuming. >> So what's the general consensus on using undergravel filters? Are they >> good or bad? [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > It's a personal choice. I have always used U/G filters in conjunction with an outside filter, aside from the beneficial bacteria they hold, they are also great if you want to have live plants in your tank. > So what's the general consensus on using undergravel filters? Are they > good or bad? ============== I gave them up years ago. They're too hard to keep clean. SignatureZB.... Frugal ponding since 1995. rec.ponder since late 1996. My Pond & Aquarium Pages: http://tinyurl.com/9do58 ~~~~ }<((((*> ~~~ }<{{{{(ö> ~~~~ }<((((({*> > 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 > So what's the general consensus on using undergravel filters? Are they good > or bad? > > Jen I have used UGFs extensively over the years. I personally do not recommend them do to the extra maintenance sometimes needed (especially with flat plate UGFs), especially if poorly cared for. But UGFs do not deserve all the flack they get either. Proper gravel (#3) with about 2-3" of depth works best. The Nektonics UGF was actually very good and I actually clocked higher flow rates with the same air pump with these UGF filters vs. the more common flat plate design (placing a 1 gallon jug just under the out flow and timing the rate of fill). There are better filters now, but even some newer ones popularity are based in hype (bio wheel comes to mind). I recommend redundancy with two filters. In a smaller aquarium a HOB with an internal or sponge filter is effective, or at least a HOB with a pre filter attached for improved bio filtration. For more aquarium filtration information: http://www.americanaquariumproducts.com/Aquarium_Filtration.html Also I have an article about Bio Wheels here: http://aquarium-answers.blogspot.com/ Carl > > So what's the general consensus on using undergravel filters? Are they good > > or bad? [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > Carl I totally concur with the UG proponents. Hi, haven't been around this NG much since I set up a tank about a year ago. I had tanks through most of my teenage years and recently as an adult - 20 years latter - I set up another. First of all before I chime in on UG filters I have to say that I guess I forgot how much work and constant care an aquarium requires to get it in good balance and keep it that way. I just don't have the time to watch my tanks that I did as a youth. As a result I have set up a stringent tank-care schedule and keep mostly hardy fish. What surprised me, though, when I went to buy my current aquarium is that I couldn't find a UG filter system at any retail store. The staff would also keep telling me that they simply don't work. I agree that they have a bad, and I think, undeserved reputation these days. However, I'm a also big proponent of the dual-filtration system: having say an outside power filter combined with an UG filter. I had this as a youth in a 25 gallon tank and I swear that regular aside from normal required attention this tank was a beautifully balanced system. I nice stable ecosystem. The trick is not to overfeed, use relatively large gravel and do your normal tank care. I recently put a UG filter in my current tank and already notice a definite difference in the quality of the environment and the health of my fish. A lot of that may have to do with my annual 'big clean' that I just did - but I think the UG filter (that I had to buy online) is helping as well and will continue to do so if used properly. In addition to Carl's points, which I obviously agree with, I've found a really good online article that talks about the proper use of the UG filter including the use of a dual filtration set-up: http://www.aquariumfish.com/aquariumfish/detail.aspx?aid=9401&cid=3806&se arch= I'm not typically a conspiracy theorist but It seems to me that a cheap UG filter has given away to the numerous chemical treatments that the stores hook you into buying to keep you tank biochemistry healthy. I don't remember having to buy all that stuff as a youth - and like I said I had good success with my aquariums for years. Cheers, TS Edmonton SCTV Locations: http://members.shaw.ca/pumpkin27/iwebber2 My Blog feed: feed://members.shaw.ca/kitschy/iwebber/TheStenonsNewDigs/Blog/rss.xml > > > So what's the general consensus on using undergravel filters? Are they good > > > or bad? [quoted text clipped - 75 lines] > My Blog feed: > feed://members.shaw.ca/kitschy/iwebber/TheStenonsNewDigs/Blog/rss.xml That was an interesting article you posted. I have been the process of writing a more in depth article about this subject, I have just been too busy to finsih and research the article for any relevant studies (I do discus UGFs in somewhat in my filtration article: http://www.americanaquariumproducts.com/Aquarium_Filtration.html ) The interesting point about UGF and many other aquatic subjects is that these methods and products seem to go thru fads (I have got caught up in them too, even in my service business), but when I stop and go back and look at the facts, such as UGFs, these filters are not as bad as all the bad press they get (this is not to say they are without some problems). As I pointed out earlier the type of plate makes a BIG difference in flow and mulm that will cause problems with UGFs. What I find interesting is that many of these UGF bashers have not done their homework when it comes to HOB filters, in particular the Penguin. These filters are riding the crest of un-deserved popularity (and I admit to helping before I did my homework). As your article pointed out HOBs are not very good biologically, and the bio-wheels in particular are over rated. The theory behind the bio wheel is excellent, but in practical application water deposits and more destroy the surface area of these wheels and the point of more oxygen in the air for bio bacteria is true, there is plenty in a properly maintained aquarium, otherwise you have more serious issues for the fish (compare live rock in the tank to a wet dry out of the tank). I have a more in depth article about bio wheels in this blog: http://aquarium-answers.blogspot.com/ I do have to differ with the article in regards to Sponge filters. These too were filters that have swung in popularity (and again I also fell victim too). When I originally used them I used the cheaper Tetra and others, but these had poor flow designs and even more important poor sponge media designs. When I re-discovered the Hydro Sponge (as I started testing many different products in my service business often side by side with business clients such as the Bahooka Restaurant), I found them to have a much better sponge design than the others (they hold a patent) that allows much more bio bacteria and less mechanical clogging (one of the week spots for some sponge filters). I have found when comaparing apples to apples when comes to sponge filter with other filters for bio capacity they come out favorably. Here is my article about sponge filtration: http://www.americanaquariumproducts.com/sponge_filtration.html Carl > > > So what's the general consensus on using undergravel filters? Are they good > > > or bad? [quoted text clipped - 75 lines] > My Blog feed: > feed://members.shaw.ca/kitschy/iwebber/TheStenonsNewDigs/Blog/rss.xml That was an interesting article you posted. I have been the process of writing a more in depth article about this subject, I have just been too busy to finish and research the article for any relevant studies (I do discus UGFs in somewhat in my filtration article: http://www.americanaquariumproducts.com/Aquarium_Filtration.html ) The interesting point about UGF and many other aquatic subjects is that these methods and products seem to go thru fads (I have got caught up in them too, even in my service business), but when I stop and go back and look at the facts, such as UGFs, these filters are not as bad as all the bad press they get (this is not to say they are without some problems). As I pointed out earlier the type of plate makes a BIG difference in flow and mulm that will cause problems with UGFs. What I find interesting is that many of these UGF bashers have not done their homework when it comes to HOB filters, in particular the Penguin. These filters are riding the crest of un-deserved popularity (and I admit to helping before I did my homework). As your article pointed out HOBs are not very good biologically, and the bio-wheels in particular are over rated. The theory behind the bio wheel is excellent, but in practical application water deposits and more destroy the surface area of these wheels and the point of more oxygen in the air for bio bacteria is true, there is plenty in a properly maintained aquarium, otherwise you have more serious issues for the fish (compare live rock in the tank to a wet dry out of the tank). I have a more in depth article about bio wheels in this blog: http://aquarium-answers.blogspot.com/ I do have to differ with the article in regards to Sponge filters. These too were filters that have swung in popularity (and again I also fell victim too). When I originally used them I used the cheaper Tetra and others, but these had poor flow designs and even more important poor sponge media designs. When I re-discovered the Hydro Sponge (as I started testing many different products in my service business often side by side with business clients such as the Bahooka Restaurant), I found them to have a much better sponge design than the others (they hold a patent) that allows much more bio bacteria and less mechanical clogging (one of the week spots for some sponge filters). I have found when comaparing apples to apples when comes to sponge filter with other filters for bio capacity they come out favorably. Here is my article about sponge filtration: http://www.americanaquariumproducts.com/sponge_filtration.html Carl What has changed is more people are keeping much fussier fancy GF with deep bodies. those plain old comets or pond fantails won at fairs can stand pretty bad conditions without dying. not so the fancier GF with long fins. We still call them "goldfish bowls" and they were never appropriate for GF because too little water and high maintenance. the same is now true for UGF, they are high maintenance compared to bare bottom tanks with good external filters. a bare bottom tank does not require chemical treatments. for an absolute newbie who has never had any kind of fish, and for people who want a low maintenance set up, nothing compares to BBT. Typically the tank is set up with double the usual amount of external filters. So a 20 gallon tank would have a filter rated for a 40 gallon tank. 2 big airstones and a heater to keep temps constant. it is not easy to get a couple fish and cycle this kind of tank without using some biofilter startup, either a filter pad from a cycled tank, some biospira, or start with some fish food and do a fishless cycling before getting the fish. however, once this is up and running it is very stable and easy to maintain. water changes once a week, rinse out the filter pad(s). the only thing easier is a pond with a veggie filter. Ingrid >I agree that they have a bad, and I think, undeserved reputation these >days. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >UG filter has given away to the numerous chemical treatments that the >stores hook you into buying to keep you tank biochemistry healthy. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ List Manager: Puregold Goldfish List at http://weloveteaching.com/puregold/ sign up: http://groups.google.com/groups/dir?hl=en&q=puregold&qt_s=Group+lookup www.drsolo.com Solve the problem, dont waste energy finding who's to blame ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I receive no compensation for running the Puregold list or Puregold website. I do not run nor receive any money from the ads at the old Puregold site. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Zone 5 next to Lake Michigan > What has changed is more people are keeping much fussier fancy GF with deep bodies. > those plain old comets or pond fantails won at fairs can stand pretty bad conditions > without dying. not so the fancier GF with long fins. > We still call them "goldfish bowls" and they were never appropriate for GF because > too little water and high maintenance. the same is now true for UGF, they are high > maintenance compared to bare bottom tanks with good external filters. Yes Goldfish bowls are hardly appropriate and never have been. But to imply that UGFs worked before and do not now as compared to others is presumptious. There are definately better filters, I have not sold a UGF for years to a client. But there is a difference between UGFs and the cheaper flat plate UGF that took over the maket and made aquarists who do not do there home work think that they are all equal. Also as for HOB external filters this where more aquarist homework needs to be done as most are poor bio filters (although a pre filter attached to htem improve this). The bio wheels are not as effective as a good Sponge filter (not all sponge filters are equal either, of which I admit to the assumption after poor results with some Tetra Sponge filters that they do not work, the patented Hydro Sponge Filters are superior) http://americanaquariumproducts.com/SpongeFilter.html A properly aerated aquarium (with a proper Redox Potential) provides all the oxygen the bacterial colonies in a sponge filter need. > a bare bottom tank does not require chemical treatments. for an absolute newbie who > has never had any kind of fish, and for people who want a low maintenance set up, No arguing with the ease of a BBT, especially with a Sponge filter which is how my breeder and hospital tanks are set up. But most new aquarists are NOT going to want this spartan a set up. > nothing compares to BBT. Typically the tank is set up with double the usual amount > of external filters. So a 20 gallon tank would have a filter rated for a 40 gallon [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > pad(s). > the only thing easier is a pond with a veggie filter. Ingrid Again veggie filters are great, although my pond installations always included a pressurized filter such as the Clear Stream and/or a Hydro Pond Filter for mechanical and additional bio filtration. In So Cal I usually included a UV Sterilizer too. > >I agree that they have a bad, and I think, undeserved reputation these > >days. [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > Zone 5 next to Lake Michigan Carl http://americanaquariumproducts.com/Aquarium_Information.html http://www.americanaquariumproducts.com/sponge_filtration.html http://weloveteaching.com/puregold/care/care1.htm#GRAVEL GRAVEL Gravel is not recommended for keeping goldfish. 1. Gravel is the leading cause of sudden death when gravel gets stuck in their throat. 2. Food drifts down into gravel and rots. Goldfish will sift and work thru the gravel looking for food. Rotting food is toxic for goldfish. 3. Gravel creates "dead" spots where anaerobic bacteria thrive and secrete toxic gases. 4. Organic compounds contribute to the waste in the tank, driving up nitrate levels. High organic loads in gravel can easily equal the waste output of an extra fish for two which drastically lowers the "carrying capacity" of the tank (1 gf per 10 gallons). 5. Organic compounds are acidic and can lower the pH to the point that it kills off the biobugs. The nitrite converting bacteria are the first to die, which causes a nitrous acid spike. This will cause a sudden crash that kills the entire biofilter. Unlike cycling, where the keeper knows and is checking for wastes and changing water, sudden crashes are not detected until the fish are showing severe symptoms. 6. It is more work to clean gravel and do water changes. Any gravel or rocks on the bottom require a bell of some kinds to suck up debris that gets caught under the items. In a bare bottom tank, the circulation of the water in the tank means all the crud and wastes are sucked out by the filter intake. There is no siphoning required. 7. Fish can be sucked up into a siphon bell and be maimed or killed every time the gravel is cleaned. When there is no gravel to clean, a nylon sockie can be put over the siphon and even fry wont get sucked out with the waste water. >So what's the general consensus on using undergravel filters? Are they good >or bad? > >Jen ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ List Manager: Puregold Goldfish List at http://weloveteaching.com/puregold/ sign up: http://groups.google.com/groups/dir?hl=en&q=puregold&qt_s=Group+lookup www.drsolo.com Solve the problem, dont waste energy finding who's to blame ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I receive no compensation for running the Puregold list or Puregold website. I do not run nor receive any money from the ads at the old Puregold site. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Zone 5 next to Lake Michigan > http://weloveteaching.com/puregold/care/care1.htm#GRAVEL > GRAVEL > Gravel is not recommended for keeping goldfish. Interesting opinion, but... > 1. Gravel is the leading cause of sudden death when gravel gets stuck in > their throat. Possible perhaps, but never seen it actually happen. > 2. Food drifts down into gravel and rots. Goldfish will sift and work > thru the > gravel looking for food. Rotting food is toxic for goldfish. I imagine rotting food is potentially bad for all fish, but then that's why you clean the gravel. Mind you I notice fish tend not to eat 'rotting food'. They tend to be a little selective. > 3. Gravel creates "dead" spots where anaerobic bacteria thrive and secrete > toxic gases. Toxic gasses? Ammonia perhaps. Of course that's why you clean gravel. > 4. Organic compounds contribute to the waste in the tank, driving up > nitrate levels. High organic loads in gravel can easily equal the waste > output of an extra fish for two which drastically lowers the "carrying > capacity" of the tank (1 gf per 10 gallons). Nitrate factory, sure. That's why you clean the gravel. Nitrates can be great, but we know about plants and goldfish :) > 5. Organic compounds are acidic and can lower the pH to the point that it > kills off the biobugs. The nitrite converting bacteria are the first to [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > wastes and changing water, sudden crashes are not detected until the fish > are showing severe symptoms. That's why you clean the gravel. And of course with correct kH the pH is not going to crash on you... And we all check the parameters now and then, right ;) > 6. It is more work to clean gravel and do water changes. Any gravel or > rocks on the bottom require a bell of some kinds to suck up debris that > gets caught under the items. In a bare bottom tank, the circulation of the > water in the tank means all the crud and wastes are sucked out by the > filter intake. There is no siphoning required. If you want to save work maybe, but I like the look of gravel and it gives you somewhere to stick plants (anubias with gf of course - as well as some salad for them to snack on). But even in a bare bottom you have to clean up wastes. The crap still sits all over the bottom anyway. > 7. Fish can be sucked up into a siphon bell and be maimed or killed every > time the > gravel is cleaned. When there is no gravel to clean, a nylon sockie can > be put over the siphon and even fry wont get sucked out with the waste > water. This is the silliest one. The whole idea of the bell siphon is to reduce the suction so that the gravel isn't sucked out. Fish don't get sucked into the siphon. And fry? In a goldfish tank? Yum! Not great reasons to go to a bare bottom. Point 6 to make vacuuming easier maybe. But this was about UGF, and with UGF you change many of the points above in that there is circulation in the gravel and so it's not "anaerobic"... >> http://weloveteaching.com/puregold/care/care1.htm#GRAVEL >> GRAVEL [quoted text clipped - 66 lines] > But this was about UGF, and with UGF you change many of the points above in > that there is circulation in the gravel and so it's not "anaerobic"... Whew! I can see all these points, but I have a little tank of about 40 litres with four decent goldfish and two white cloud minnows in it. There's gravel on the bottom and all the plants are plastic. It's away from any direct sunlight and I allow algae on the end and back panels. I have a very good external pump/filter hung on the outside of the tank, and change around half the water three or four times a year. I dump chlorinated water straight from the tap on the assumption that what's already in the tank will dilute anything unpleasant for the fish. Apart from that all I do is feed them lightly once a day. This little tank has run without a single hiccup for over two years now, and brought endless enjoyment to me and the grandkids when they come to stay. In fact each grandchild has his/her own fish they have named. Now, my point in all this is simply this - people often remark on how clean and fresh the tank looks, and how healthy and energetic the fish are. I never check Ph or any other parametres - the only three principles I use are - (a) watch the feed quantity, (b) understock the tank, (c) have a good filter setup and keep it running sweetly. So, ahem, why the need for all these other things, or am I just plain lucky? I am not seeking to be provocative, and I respect the obvious experience and knowledge of others in this group, which is far greater than mine. I just want to know if all this extra stuff is good for the fish. Cheers, SignaturePeter in New Zealand. (Pull the plug out to reply.) Collector of old cameras, tropical fish fancier, good coffee nutter, and compulsive computer fiddler. >>> http://weloveteaching.com/puregold/care/care1.htm#GRAVEL >>> GRAVEL [quoted text clipped - 70 lines] > Whew! I can see all these points, but I have a little tank of about 40 > litres with four decent goldfish and two white cloud minnows in it. I can't imagine 4 goldfish in 40 litres. I think you are pulling our leg :) We have a very overcrowded (temporary) situation, but still have only 8 in 220 litres. They grow so fast, and even here we will need another tank or pond soon... > There's gravel on the bottom and all the plants are plastic. It's away > from any direct sunlight and I allow algae on the end and back panels. Algae is okay if you don't mind it. It eats nitrates and so forth. > I > have a very good external pump/filter hung on the outside of the tank, > and change around half the water three or four times a year. I dump > chlorinated water straight from the tap on the assumption that what's > already in the tank will dilute anything unpleasant for the fish. The main risk there is that the chlorine in the water will kill some of the good bacteria that convert the toxins in the tank. Best to leave the water stand for 24 hours before adding to the tank, especially in a larger water change. > Apart > from that all I do is feed them lightly once a day. This little tank has > run without a single hiccup for over two years now, and brought endless > enjoyment to me and the grandkids when they come to stay. In fact each > grandchild has his/her own fish they have named. My sister kept goldfish in a small tank for a few years. But in a larger tank they will actually grow and live longer. They are a large fish. > Now, my point in all this is simply this - people often remark on how > clean and fresh the tank looks, and how healthy and energetic the fish > are. I never check Ph or any other parametres - the only three > principles I use are - (a) watch the feed quantity, Yes, well, goldfish will eat all day. > (b) understock the > tank, well, 4 in 40 litres isn't under stocked tho. 1 in 200 litres might be. Most people recommend 1 in 80 litres at least... These guys get over 30cm long (more, depending on the type). > (c) have a good filter setup and keep it running sweetly. A good filter is a big help with goldfish. They need twice as much as most other fish. > So, > ahem, why the need for all these other things, or am I just plain lucky? > I am not seeking to be provocative, and I respect the obvious experience > and knowledge of others in this group, which is far greater than mine. I > just want to know if all this extra stuff is good for the fish. I don't think you need a lot of 'other stuff'. With enough tank and basic maintenance and a good filter, it all works fine. >>>> http://weloveteaching.com/puregold/care/care1.htm#GRAVEL >>>> GRAVEL [quoted text clipped - 120 lines] > I don't think you need a lot of 'other stuff'. With enough tank and basic > maintenance and a good filter, it all works fine. Ummm, my tank measures 50 X 26 X 30 cm high. Have I done something really silly with the calculation? The residents all look healthy, happy and active. If it was allowed in a news group I could attach a quick pic of it to show you. Maybe my filtration system is robust enough to increase the apparent carrying capacity of the tank enough for them. I just never worry about it. If the fish are not entirely happy I know what to look for, and would do something about it, but they're perky, eating well, clean of any sign of trouble, and the water is clear and clean. I know goldfish are an inherently "dirty" species, and I would not want to leave the water circulating and filtering system turned off for a day or two, but as it stands now, they have remained happy and healthy for about two years. SignaturePeter in New Zealand. (Pull the plug out to reply.) Collector of old cameras, tropical fish fancier, good coffee nutter, and compulsive computer fiddler. > Whew! I can see all these points, but I have a little tank of about 40 > litres with four decent goldfish and two white cloud minnows in it. I'm not familiar with the metric system. ;-) The recommended amount of filtered water per goldfish is 10 gallons. GF are large fish and to starve them into a stunted condition (which some people unknowingly do) to keep them in small tanks (less than 10g per GF) is considered cruel by many people. They're big eaters and grow quickly when well fed and well housed and cared for. I > have a very good external pump/filter hung on the outside of the tank, and > change around half the water three or four times a year. I dump > chlorinated water straight from the tap on the assumption that what's > already in the tank will dilute anything unpleasant for the fish. Most of us do partial changes at least every few weeks to remove the dissolved solids (pollutants the filter doesn't get). Apart > from that all I do is feed them lightly once a day. This in my opinion is cruel. Would you feed a puppy or growing child "lightly?" GF are not once a day eaters. They're browsers or grazers who nibble all day long in nature - and grow rapidly if healthy. This little tank has > run without a single hiccup for over two years now, and brought endless > enjoyment to me and the grandkids when they come to stay. In fact each [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > are. I never check Ph or any other parametres - the only three principles > I use are - (a) watch the feed quantity, Which seems to mean you are underfeeding them if they're still small. A normal 2 year old GF is a good 6" long or longer. b) understock the > tank, (c) Each GF needs 10 gallons of water for maximum health and growth, MORE when an adult at 8 to 12" long. have a good filter setup and keep it running sweetly. So, > ahem, why the need for all these other things, or am I just plain lucky? Luck and starving fish perhaps? One light meal a day? :-( > I am not seeking to be provocative, and I respect the obvious experience > and knowledge of others in this group, which is far greater than mine. I > just want to know if all this extra stuff is good for the fish. All they really need is enough space, clean water, plenty of decent food and a running filter. SignatureZB.... Frugal ponding since 1995. rec.ponder since late 1996. My Pond & Aquarium Pages: http://tinyurl.com/9do58 ~~~~ }<((((*> ~~~ }<{{{{(ö> ~~~~ }<((((({*> >> Whew! I can see all these points, but I have a little tank of about 40 >> litres with four decent goldfish and two white cloud minnows in it. > > I'm not familiar with the metric system. ;-) Well, 40l would be about 10 gallons... > The recommended amount of filtered water per goldfish is 10 gallons. GF > are large fish and to starve them into a stunted condition (which some > people unknowingly do) to keep them in small tanks (less than 10g per GF) > is > considered cruel by many people. They're big eaters and grow quickly when > well fed and well housed and cared for. I have some in a somewhat overcrowded situation with about 40l per goldfish, but that will change as they grow. tim Many people on various goldfish lists have had this happen. come home to find a fish dead that was perfectly healthy when they left the house. most people dont do a necropsy on their fish to find out what happened. Fortunately, many have long handled tweezers to get the rock out of the GF mouth since this most often happens at feeding time when GF are aggressively sucking up off the bottom of the tank. Even a good cleaning does not really get rid of all the mulm and crap that accumulates in and under gravel and ornaments. many people who thought there were doing a smashing good job of cleaning their tanks were shocked when they pulled the underground filter plates out and saw what stirred up into the water. the other indication is a persistent high nitrates, indicative of rotting stuff under plates where water channelizes. Another drawback is after a while people get tired of the water changes and cleaning and it gets increasingly cursory. as this happens, nitrate and organic acids rise and the fish start suffering. the pH drops and kills off the good bacteria and then there is a toxic stew. Actually the toxic gases are produced anaerobically .. hydrogen sulfide and other partial breakdown products, typically much like those in crude oil. they stink badly, and when undergravel plates are pulled the smell of sulfur is very strong. nitrates are not removed by cleaning the gravel, but by replacing the water. anything in the tank that drives up nitrates will mean more water changes. looks are an obvious consideration. but with big flashy goldfish I prefer the zen appearance, and the bottom does grow its own algae covering, which I leave alone like I do the back and sides of the tank. this provides a living filtration system that can be a life saver if the electricity goes out. and no, with proper filtration and proper placing of air stones there is no residual poop on the bottom of the tank. actually, any kind of string of poop is a sign that the fish are either being overfed at one time, or the food is wrong. in ponds, GF normally graze all day long and their poops fall apart after exiting the end. plants can be attached in other ways. http://weloveteaching.com/puregold/care/plants.html tied to suction cups, planted, allowed to grow free a very good suction is required to get the detritus out of the gravel. http://weloveteaching.com/puregold/care/care1.htm#cleaning%20techniques GF are not just nosy and curious, they have an excellent sense of smell and will be drawn to where the "action" is by the smell of leftover food. they can also be quite fast in moving to where the bell is. I have never suctioned up a single tail nor a koi (my mistake having koi in a tank, but I was a raw newbie). however, fancy GF are slow compared to single tails and any with a big head or hood will suction up even faster. circulation in a ugf gets quickly channelized. the water flows to those areas with least resistance. debris piles up where the water isnt flowing as strong and soon the water is only flowing in the channels. most people who follow your techniques would have dead fish in a short period of time. that is the reason that Jo Ann Burke (the Goldfish Guru) came up with the essentials list for newbies.... to maximize success. http://weloveteaching.com/puregold/care/care1.htm#essentials I set up a 20 gallon tank, 3 GF, for my mother. It too did fine with almost no care at all and then all the fish died, the tank had gone toxic despite the plants, the gravel, the string algae all over the inside. and the fish frankly hadnt grown at all, a sign of severe stunting due to chronic toxic water conditions. only then did I find out she was not changing water. Ingrid >>> http://weloveteaching.com/puregold/care/care1.htm#GRAVEL >>> GRAVEL [quoted text clipped - 91 lines] > >Cheers, ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ List Manager: Puregold Goldfish List at http://weloveteaching.com/puregold/ sign up: http://groups.google.com/groups/dir?hl=en&q=puregold&qt_s=Group+lookup www.drsolo.com Solve the problem, dont waste energy finding who's to blame ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I receive no compensation for running the Puregold list or Puregold website. I do not run nor receive any money from the ads at the old Puregold site. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Zone 5 next to Lake Michigan amosf ? Tim Fairchild wrote: > > http://weloveteaching.com/puregold/care/care1.htm#GRAVEL > > GRAVEL [quoted text clipped - 66 lines] > But this was about UGF, and with UGF you change many of the points above in > that there is circulation in the gravel and so it's not "anaerobic"... All great points!! Especially the final one. I was typing my answer while doing other computer work and answering calls (which took a while), so I appolgize for any similar answer. Carl >> http://weloveteaching.com/puregold/care/care1.htm#GRAVEL >> GRAVEL [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Possible perhaps, but never seen it actually happen. <brevity snips> ================== I have gravel in my GF tanks and only once did I have to use tweezers to remove one. I can't stand the "hospital" tank look of the graveless bottom. It's too unnatural for my tastes, and I do have live plants in every tank. Also there is nothing for the fish to do in "glass cages." They love picking over the bottom for dropped bits of food. If food is rotting on the bottom someone is over-feeding their fish. PH remains stable because I keep the gravel vacuumed and do regular partial water changes. But everyone has their own way of doing things. SignatureZB.... Frugal ponding since 1995. rec.ponder since late 1996. My Pond & Aquarium Pages: http://tinyurl.com/9do58 ~~~~ }<((((*> ~~~ }<{{{{(ö> ~~~~ }<((((({*> >1. Gravel is the leading cause of sudden death when gravel gets stuck in their throat. I have seen this happen, but can happen with any aquarium with gravel, obviously this happens less with pea sized gravel. But with proper feeding technique (soaking pellets before feeding for 5 minutes +) this is very rare, and I have maintained hundred of goldfish aquariums over the years in my maintenance business. >2. Food drifts down into gravel and rots. Goldfish will sift and work thru the gravel looking for food. Rotting food is toxic for goldfish. Again true, but this is true for all fish al again proper feeding technique is important here as well >3. Gravel creates "dead" spots where anaerobic bacteria thrive and secrete toxic gases. This is much more common with sand, which is why sand is best near the roots of plants, where the chance of hydrogen sulfide producing bacteria is low. This is VERY rare with Nektonics UGF. >4. Organic compounds contribute to the waste in the tank, driving up nitrate levels. High organic loads in gravel can easily equal the waste output of an extra fish for two which drastically lowers the "carrying capacity" of the tank (1 gf per 10 gallons). This is where plants can help or again proper cleanings. This is just as common or more so with a poorly maintained canister filter (and canister filters are excellent, they just cannot be ignored just because of their large capacity) >5. Organic compounds are acidic and can lower the pH to the point that it kills off the biobugs. The nitrite converting bacteria are the first to die, which causes a nitrous acid spike. This will cause a sudden crash that kills the entire biofilter. Unlike cycling, where the keeper knows and is checking for wastes and changing water, sudden crashes are not detected until the fish are showing severe symptoms. Nitric acid production is on going in all healthy well cycled aquariums. Proper kH is what is important here, and not just the old school method of baking soda, which does not add the calcium needed by all fish (in fact all animals), and also does not add necessary electrolytes. There are many excellent ways of doing this from Wonder Shells to bags of aragonite in the filter. >6. It is more work to clean gravel and do water changes. Any gravel or rocks on the bottom require a bell of some kinds to suck up debris that gets caught under the items. In a bare bottom tank, the circulation of the water in the tank means all the crud and wastes are sucked out by the filter intake. There is no siphoning required. This describes an excellent hospital aquarium, but not an aesthetically pleasing display aquarium. Also gravel can and does perform aerobic bacterial filtration; it provides a place for healthy plants to take root (sand mixture is best here). And in saltwater, anaerobic activity is useful for nitrate removal. And even in freshwater a thicker layer of coarse gravel utilizing a "void space" called a plenum is often used for Nitrate removal. These are not to be confused with under gravel filters. >7. Fish can be sucked up into a siphon bell and be maimed or killed every time the gravel is cleaned. When there is no gravel to clean, a nylon sockie can be put over the siphon and even fry wont get sucked out with the waste water. Good point as to proper vacuuming procedure. With proper manipulation of the vacuum and using your other hand to pinch the tubing when the flow gets to strong, this should be a non occurrence. I cannot say it has never happened to me, but in over 56,160 aquariums I estimate I have cleaned over the last 27 years, it has maybe happened three times (the math is based on 8 aquariums per day times 5 times 52 weeks time 27 years) Carl http://www.americanaquariumproducts.com/Aquarium_Information.html > Nitric acid production is on going in all healthy well cycled > aquariums. Proper kH is what is important here, and not just the old > school method of baking soda, which does not add the calcium needed by > all fish (in fact all animals), and also does not add necessary > electrolytes. There are many excellent ways of doing this from Wonder > Shells to bags of aragonite in the filter. Can you explain this please? Are you saying that Wonder Shells are needed in all aquariums? What are they? Jen > > Nitric acid production is on going in all healthy well cycled > > aquariums. Proper kH is what is important here, and not just the old [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Jen No, but they or some other form of calcium, magnesium and electrolytes are very important to a healthy aquarium. Proper electrolyte balance is also important for proper Redox Potential (reduction), which recent research shows is very important. Even soft water fish such as discus need calcium. What these blocks are a basically calcium with minor, and trace elements. They are good buffer kH control, but only then if you do not have an over abundance of decaying organics supplying nitric acid. These Wonder Shells (this is just a trade name, the name tends to over state them) are my preferred way, but many like to use Aragonite sand, I have found the Wonder shells to dissolve at a rate needed based on kH, where as aragonite tends to dissolve at a rate less affected by kH and electrolyte needs. Here are some facts about Calcium: Calcium carbonate in your aquarium will keep a more stable Kh, while magnesium is another important element that works with calcium. A proper amount of Calcium and Magnesium in your aquarium will affect the fish' health positively. Besides helping to keep a stable Kh, magnesium and calcium have been shown to increase resistance to degenerate diseases by lowering the acidity in the body. This will help with prevention of ich, fungus, and general "wear and tear" in your fish. Calcium also helps in healing and stress, and without proper calcium levels healing may be difficult or impossible. The addition of antibiotics (such as Tetracycline) will lower calcium absorption. Another note about calcium; Calcium is very important to proper discus health, yet calcium can adversely affect the pH of a discus aquarium, which is generally kept at a pH below 6.5. I have successfully used calcium (Wonder Shells or Calcium Polygluconate) in discus aquariums by using a mix of RO (Reverse Osmosis) water and tap water (dilution will vary depending on your tap and tank water parameters). I then add electrolytes to the RO water and add peat to the filters. I have used this method successfully with discus and added the needed calcium with no pH climb. Other needs for calcium: ? Calcium is a vital component in blood clotting systems and also helps in wound healing. ? Calcium helps to control nerve transmission, and release of neurotransmitters. ? Calcium is an essential component in the production of enzymes and hormones that regulate digestion, energy, and fat metabolism. ? Calcium helps to transport ions (electrically charged particles) across the membrane. ? Calcium is essential for muscle contraction. ? Calcium assists in maintaining all cells and connective tissues in the body. There is more information about Calcium, Magnesium, and kH here: http://www.americanaquariumproducts.com/AquariumKH.html Carl it is best to be careful of "wonder shells" because there has been this idea of making "calcium pucks" from plaster of paris and in acid water it can really jerk the pH around ... lethally. the absolute best way to stabilize calcium or "hardness" is with dolomitic limestone (not dolomite) which also has magnesium in it (which oyster shells do not). it comes powdered and the right stuff looks off white with bits of black flecking in it. even limestone chunks are good (but not marble). powdered dolomitic limestone stays in the bottom of the tank dissolved on demand. getting the right stuff is not always easy, but a lot is not needed either. Ingrid >> Nitric acid production is on going in all healthy well cycled >> aquariums. Proper kH is what is important here, and not just the old [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > >Jen ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ List Manager: Puregold Goldfish List at http://weloveteaching.com/puregold/ sign up: http://groups.google.com/groups/dir?hl=en&q=puregold&qt_s=Group+lookup www.drsolo.com Solve the problem, dont waste energy finding who's to blame ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I receive no compensation for running the Puregold list or Puregold website. I do not run nor receive any money from the ads at the old Puregold site. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Zone 5 next to Lake Michigan > it is best to be careful of "wonder shells" because there has been this idea of > making "calcium pucks" from plaster of paris and in acid water it can really jerk the [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > the bottom of the tank dissolved on demand. getting the right stuff is not always > easy, but a lot is not needed either. Ingrid Are you even familiar with this product? It is not new, nor is it perfect. Although dolomitic limestone is a good control for pH and somewhat for kH, magnesium in small quantities is essential for proper osmotic function, and even more so as a Redox reducer which new research shows is very important for proper water chemistry. I have used these Wonder Shels in literally thousands of aquariums I have maintained without ever experiencing what you are talking about. These products are admittedly poorly named, as they do not do wonders, nor are they a cure all, but they are a usefull tool in good aquatic husbandry. As to water channeling in UGFs, you are absolutely correct, but this is a problem in many poorly maintained filters, including wet drys. The design of the Nektonics unit tends to somewhat alleviate this problem. I am not however promoting this filter, as it is not even available any more, but those who have been involved in the aquatics industry for any amount of time are familiar with it (such as Netmax). The site you posted is very good beginner information, but there is newer research that can be added (such as the fact that Redox plays a larger roll in aquatic health than pH for many fish, especially dirty fish such as goldfish). Anearobic activity is not hard to control in properly maintained aquariums, and as I stated earlier, I have only accidentally suctioned goldfish 3 times in over 56,000 cleanings, not bad odds (and those accidents were years ago). The Nylon sock is however a good idea, but others still can gravel vacuum properly without one, and honestly the Lees is amuch better value than the Python. >> it is best to be careful of "wonder shells" because there has been this >> idea of [quoted text clipped - 44 lines] > others still can gravel vacuum properly without one, and honestly the > Lees is amuch better value than the Python. By the mere name alone 'wonder shells' I am sceptical. I like to know exactly what it is I am adding. pH is such a small part of the game anyway I keep mine good with partial water changes If I wanna be lazy I throw a few bits of coral in a filter. Only thing I actually buy to add is dechlorinator everthing else is easily knocked up As a cure all go buy some human food grade bentonite clay. health food shops a tablespoon in a bottle of aquarium water shake it up pour it in go to bed yes it will cloud the tank up for a bit try a small dose first but it will rip any crud out of the water how this effects pH I don't quite know but I just solved a wacky swingin' one with it. Keep in mind water needs to degass after coming out of tank before it shows true pH and plants swing pH up and down thru day so always test at same time if possible. ALmost every fish can handle the pH 7.6 to 7.8 that a bit of shellgrit in the gravel provides. 5am and ramblin on usenet w000t livin the dream eh > >> it is best to be careful of "wonder shells" because there has been this > >> idea of [quoted text clipped - 78 lines] > w000t > livin the dream eh I agree with your point "'wonder shells' I am sceptical.", this is poorly named, but if you look at this product: http://americanaquariumproducts.com/MedicatedWonderShell.html You will see that the main ingredients are listed. Also I have repeatedly made the point thatthese are not a cure all or a pH adjuster. These are a useful "tool" for kH, calcium, magnesium, and electrolyte control, but they do not take the place of sound aquarium hesbandry. They are not even new, I have used them for years. I also especially agree with your comment about Spnge Filters over UGF (I stated this earlier too), I just think UGFs do not deserve the slamming they sometimes get, especially the Nektonics brand. Even all sponge filters are NOT the same, some such as the Tetra use a sponge media that clogs easily and does not have the internal surface area to support as many bacterial colonies as the Hydro Sponge. >> >> it is best to be careful of "wonder shells" because there has been >> >> this [quoted text clipped - 99 lines] > media that clogs easily and does not have the internal surface area to > support as many bacterial colonies as the Hydro Sponge. moving into aquaculture now...... the scale of things is really begining to change hey. We change water conditions with sacks of stuff....... but despite the fact it's bigger and more exe...... we really keep it simple. Line the dirt ponds with bentonite clay, the concrete ones are still sweet and we got a load limestone gravel for the driveway in the fibreglass tubs. Filters range from suspended buckets of gravel, huge pvc pipes with sponge prefilters that feed our stacked milk crate bio-towers. At the end of the day it's really piss all work for how many fish we have..... I am trying to bring the theory into practise with me tanks at home. yea OT and shite but...... I know everything I add now. anything I'm not sure of I call aquaculture free helpline and the fish scientists explain ingredients and stuff. HA! so much for secret tricks of the trade. W0000000000t!!! Sponge filters and calcium carbonate..... too bloody easy! Now keeping it stable nice and soft and low to trigger tetra's thats a bit more tricky..... tho slightly less when ya pass the 2,000L mark Swarvegorilla > So what's the general consensus on using undergravel filters? Are they > good or bad? > > Jen absolute pain to clean. now obselete with the air powered sponge filter so cheaply available they can be handy for fish only marine tanks and they hide well but compared to a sponge filter under gravel is a pain. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.