does water change once a year!
- Thread starter lowtemp
- Start date
Aquatick, I challenge you to an experiment, Take ten gallons of distilled water (or organic free water) and add 1 tsp ammonia don't stir or aireate, add the ammonia very carefully so as not to disturb the water any more than is necessaryand add it to the very edge (top or bottom ) of the tank. wait 3 minutes and test the ammonia content in any part or area of the 10 gallons of water. You will find the same ammonia level no matter where the test sample is drawn from, now let the water sit overnight, and retest, you will still find the same amount of ammonia anywhere you draw the water from. Repeat with any size volume of water, any testing method, and you will always find the ammonia evenly distributed throughout the volume of water. And please test a sample from the surface and another from the bottom of the water vessel. If we could settle ammonia out of the water, we would all be cycling our tanks with little or no circulation and top dwelling fish.
please share your sources, I would like to see them as Many other here would, Boards like this are great places for alternate ideas and schools of thought. if the science is good, I for one will set up an experiment very promptly. If the science isn't It will be recognizable as myth.
Just like an LFS, a fish farm cannot possibly prevent the introduction of parasites and disease. There is simply too much importation of livestock, and it is cost preventative to treat huge volumes of water. ICH, and most other common parasites do not have a survivable dormant stage, they do hide quite well in the gills of healthy fish and continue their life cycle. Once irradicated, they are gone permanently until we re-introduce them through some outside means. This is why I make the claim that my tanks are parasite free except for the active q-tank, I can't know that the q-tank is clear, I added two fish less than 10 days ago. when their 4 week quarantine and acclimation is done, they will go into a parasite free tank.
I am enjoying this discussion, but as was said I do not wish for myth or unsubstantiated information to be spread. I spent many years beleiving a good bit of what you are saying, but the proof is in the science.
dave
You guys assume that I am referring to your tanks and every tank out there. Even the smallest differences will yield different results. Simply dropping a tablespoon of ammonia into a tank isn't exactly a good test subject, but whatever floats your boat. At this point I'm just going to throw my arms in the air and give up since it seems to be getting nowhere. To each there own.
ok then, let's use a more realistic test subject. place 5 zebra danios into a 10 gallon tank with no circulation. 48 hours later, test the ammonia at the top and the bottom of the tank, anywhere in the tank for that matter, and post your results. I'd be interested to see if it really does sink to the bottom, though I doubt it. if you can offer proof though, I'd like to repeat the experiement myself to see what happens.
Also, even though the molecular weight of ammonium is indeed higher than water, that doesn't mean it will sink in water. ammonium diffuses throughout the water column quite quickly AFAIK. there are plenty of substances that stay dissolved in water even though their molecular weights are more or less than H2O. If they didn't, we could just put water in a big column, wait a few days and draw pure water from the middle. no need for RO units.
The funny thing here is that all of the arguments keep saying that they have valid sources and experiments to back them up (esp the ammonia and disease) but yet still no offer of what these sources are. You can throw your arms up and give up if you want but what is the fun of trying to learn new things if you keep stalling on the important scientific information.
Adding pure ammonia to an un circuation source of 10 gallons of water is the perfect way to start an experiment. You always start with a controled environment.
Another thing you aren't considering is that the ammonia you speak of NH3 is a gas that is readily consummed by mixing with H20 to form NH4+ (an acid). If it reacted with the calculations you mentioned then it would acutally not sink or float but escape the water. It needs to combine with water in order to stay.
Adding pure ammonia to an un circuation source of 10 gallons of water is the perfect way to start an experiment. You always start with a controled environment.
Another thing you aren't considering is that the ammonia you speak of NH3 is a gas that is readily consummed by mixing with H20 to form NH4+ (an acid). If it reacted with the calculations you mentioned then it would acutally not sink or float but escape the water. It needs to combine with water in order to stay.
The gas form of ammonia is also key to this argument - the myth ignores the fact that much of the ammonia in an aqueous solution is a dissolved gas, just like O2, N2, CO2. That dissolved gas in water has one of the fastest diffusion rates rates known. Basic physical chemistry. The part actually present in ionized form is hydrolysed to the NH4+ and OH- form. But there is an equilibrium between the two determined by the pH and the temperature of the water. Equilibrium tables are available on the web if anybody is interested. At the temperature in our homes and tanks, the ammonia will be remarkably evenly distributed very, very quickly. Uneven distribution would be magical, and that is not available in the real world. Mythology 101.
Jim is correct - fish do in effect respire ammonia. Unlike land animals, they can have metabolic ammonia in their circulation, and as their blood pass through the gill is diffuses out into the surrounding water with great speed (high diffusion rates again). Ammonia is also generated from solid wastes by heterotophic bacteria, etc.- all the myriad microbes that re-process solids wastes from the fish and uneaten food and decaying plant materials to mulm. But that ammonia, just like that from the fishes' gills, diffuses to equilibrium within the water column rapidly (high diffusion rates again).
Some parasite have dormant forms, some do not. Ich is a protozoan parasite which has no dormant form. As daveedka stated before, once it is erradicated, it is gone. Chilling the tank/fish or otherwise handicapping their immune system will not spontaneously generate protozoans from the magic ether. Introductory Biology 100. Some parasites do have highly sophisticated dormant forms - Black Spot for one - fish are only an intermediate host, so the parasite encysts and rests until the fish is eaten (generally by a bird - which is the definitive host to the parasite). Unfortunately for the parasite, captive fish are a dead end, they will never be activated under ordinary circumstances. General Parasitology 201.
Pheromones serve many functions. The most easily observed in captive tanks is among the fry of many fish - the largest fry release pheromones which suppress growth of their siblings - it is not just early growth which gives size advantage, biochemical agents are frequently involved as well. Along with general pollution avoidance, frequent water changes in fry rearing tanks dilute out such pheromones and promote more even growth. There are many others involved in mating, in territoriality, and in individual recognition of specific other individuals. Advanced Biochemistry 402.
Thinking about reactions in captive systems only helps if you have tools to understand what you are thinking about, and then have the backup to test and show that those ideas do reflect the real word. Saying that something is real because it sounds logical is not and never has been any part of science. You make your hypothesis, test it, review the test data and conclude from that whether or not the hypothesis holds true. Then you submit that data to peers for reproduction and review. Without the entire process, you are daydreaming and nothing more.
Jim is correct - fish do in effect respire ammonia. Unlike land animals, they can have metabolic ammonia in their circulation, and as their blood pass through the gill is diffuses out into the surrounding water with great speed (high diffusion rates again). Ammonia is also generated from solid wastes by heterotophic bacteria, etc.- all the myriad microbes that re-process solids wastes from the fish and uneaten food and decaying plant materials to mulm. But that ammonia, just like that from the fishes' gills, diffuses to equilibrium within the water column rapidly (high diffusion rates again).
Some parasite have dormant forms, some do not. Ich is a protozoan parasite which has no dormant form. As daveedka stated before, once it is erradicated, it is gone. Chilling the tank/fish or otherwise handicapping their immune system will not spontaneously generate protozoans from the magic ether. Introductory Biology 100. Some parasites do have highly sophisticated dormant forms - Black Spot for one - fish are only an intermediate host, so the parasite encysts and rests until the fish is eaten (generally by a bird - which is the definitive host to the parasite). Unfortunately for the parasite, captive fish are a dead end, they will never be activated under ordinary circumstances. General Parasitology 201.
Pheromones serve many functions. The most easily observed in captive tanks is among the fry of many fish - the largest fry release pheromones which suppress growth of their siblings - it is not just early growth which gives size advantage, biochemical agents are frequently involved as well. Along with general pollution avoidance, frequent water changes in fry rearing tanks dilute out such pheromones and promote more even growth. There are many others involved in mating, in territoriality, and in individual recognition of specific other individuals. Advanced Biochemistry 402.
Thinking about reactions in captive systems only helps if you have tools to understand what you are thinking about, and then have the backup to test and show that those ideas do reflect the real word. Saying that something is real because it sounds logical is not and never has been any part of science. You make your hypothesis, test it, review the test data and conclude from that whether or not the hypothesis holds true. Then you submit that data to peers for reproduction and review. Without the entire process, you are daydreaming and nothing more.
Last edited:
Aquatick, don't get frustrated! Try to see things as possibilities and look for the sience behind what is stated. Just because it is written doesn't mean the science behind it is good. It is this type of discussion that promotes understanding!
Atomic weights aside, like particles (molecules) repulse each other. For instance, NH4+.
I've only been farming fish for 11 years (pardon the lack of experience) but most comercial hatcheries (farms) have an external source of water (refered to as flow thru) be it a lake, stream, wells, etc.... Aside from wells, other source waters will inherently contain parasites and "nasties" that can be controlled at best, not erradicated. Those that have closed systems, no external source water (like a big aquarium) have a better chance at erradicating parasites. But given the size of the filtration unit, the amount of waste produced, and the amount of chemical to effectively treat for the correct amount of time, it is not financially sound to do so. Treatments usually are done so that most of the fish are parasite free.
Bill
Atomic weights aside, like particles (molecules) repulse each other. For instance, NH4+.
I've only been farming fish for 11 years (pardon the lack of experience) but most comercial hatcheries (farms) have an external source of water (refered to as flow thru) be it a lake, stream, wells, etc.... Aside from wells, other source waters will inherently contain parasites and "nasties" that can be controlled at best, not erradicated. Those that have closed systems, no external source water (like a big aquarium) have a better chance at erradicating parasites. But given the size of the filtration unit, the amount of waste produced, and the amount of chemical to effectively treat for the correct amount of time, it is not financially sound to do so. Treatments usually are done so that most of the fish are parasite free.
Bill
Wow Man!
I sure have learned a lot from reading this stuff. Altho I have been keeping fish for 12+ years, I do not claim any sort of expertise. Even now, all that scientific stuff makes my head hurt!
I think I have been very lucky - I have lost very few fish, and most of those were in the early years b4 anyone told me about testing water and doing water changes. I was so ignorant I hadn't bothered to do any research. It's a miracle any of my fish ever lived!
But now, I have developed a routine that seems to work, water stays clear, the fish stay healthy and I haven't lost any fish in several years. In fact I have a pimelodidae that's 11 inches, whom I've had for 11 years. A large (3 inch) emerald green Peruvian cory that I've had for 7 years and 2 red-fin tinfoil barbs that I've had for 6 years.
The thing is - everyone has an opinion - some may be worth more than others and many are backed up by scientific fact of one kind or another. And based on 50+ years of interacting with people - none of us is going to be able to change another's mind!
If I may play the diplomat, allow me to summarize what I have gleaned from this thread:
- seems we all agree that proper filtration is a must;
- cleanliness is also a must - however it is you accomplish that
- water quality & proper chemical balance are a must, so testing is important
All of these things can be affected by multiple variables - tank size; number, size and type of fish and plants; temperature; light; quality of the water when it cames from the tap - whether from a well or a municipal source - and finally - the amount of time one is willing or able to dedicate to the care of their aquatic friends. As each of these variables may shift at any point in time, it's important to recognize those changes and be able to react. If your municiple water administrator dumps a bunch of chlorine in the water at the beginning of each month - you need to be able to recognize that and respond. If you live in Nova Scotia and use heaters in your tanks, but go to Florida for a week in the winter - whoever is fish-sitting for you needs to know to what to do in the event of a power outage - etc etc.
So - what all this means is - no one thing will be right for eveyone. If your water stays clean and balanced and your fish stay helathy without chemicals and/or frequent water changes - great. The important thing is to find what works for you - and it may be different for each tank you have - and to dedicate the time it takes to keep it working.
Can't we all just get along???!!!
I sure have learned a lot from reading this stuff. Altho I have been keeping fish for 12+ years, I do not claim any sort of expertise. Even now, all that scientific stuff makes my head hurt!
I think I have been very lucky - I have lost very few fish, and most of those were in the early years b4 anyone told me about testing water and doing water changes. I was so ignorant I hadn't bothered to do any research. It's a miracle any of my fish ever lived!
But now, I have developed a routine that seems to work, water stays clear, the fish stay healthy and I haven't lost any fish in several years. In fact I have a pimelodidae that's 11 inches, whom I've had for 11 years. A large (3 inch) emerald green Peruvian cory that I've had for 7 years and 2 red-fin tinfoil barbs that I've had for 6 years.
The thing is - everyone has an opinion - some may be worth more than others and many are backed up by scientific fact of one kind or another. And based on 50+ years of interacting with people - none of us is going to be able to change another's mind!
If I may play the diplomat, allow me to summarize what I have gleaned from this thread:
- seems we all agree that proper filtration is a must;
- cleanliness is also a must - however it is you accomplish that
- water quality & proper chemical balance are a must, so testing is important
All of these things can be affected by multiple variables - tank size; number, size and type of fish and plants; temperature; light; quality of the water when it cames from the tap - whether from a well or a municipal source - and finally - the amount of time one is willing or able to dedicate to the care of their aquatic friends. As each of these variables may shift at any point in time, it's important to recognize those changes and be able to react. If your municiple water administrator dumps a bunch of chlorine in the water at the beginning of each month - you need to be able to recognize that and respond. If you live in Nova Scotia and use heaters in your tanks, but go to Florida for a week in the winter - whoever is fish-sitting for you needs to know to what to do in the event of a power outage - etc etc.
So - what all this means is - no one thing will be right for eveyone. If your water stays clean and balanced and your fish stay helathy without chemicals and/or frequent water changes - great. The important thing is to find what works for you - and it may be different for each tank you have - and to dedicate the time it takes to keep it working.
Can't we all just get along???!!!
As long as it is understood that myths abound in this hobby, and no amount of 'what works for you' will change that. Bad advice--advice not based in science, is to be discouraged and corrected whenever possible. If the correction to a myth is offered, and an aquariast chooses to still believe the myth, no one can change that...But we can prevent the spread. Never decide that a newbie isn't interested in, or capable of understanding, the science behind the hobby--it's insulting and unfair.
Basically--if it works for you, fine, but do not assume that means best practice. If you can't find the science to support your viewpoint, consider reviewing the literature that contradicts your opinion.
I think this has remained very civil, and as a mod, would like to thank all participants for that.
Basically--if it works for you, fine, but do not assume that means best practice. If you can't find the science to support your viewpoint, consider reviewing the literature that contradicts your opinion.
I think this has remained very civil, and as a mod, would like to thank all participants for that.
Well I'm glad someone got something out of all of this. Simple fact of the matter is that some tanks may require weekly water changes and others may only require monthly water changes dependant on the specifics of the tank.
For anyone that DOES know, I would be curious to find out how "hard water" and "soft water" effect various toxins etc etc in aquariums.
For anyone that DOES know, I would be curious to find out how "hard water" and "soft water" effect various toxins etc etc in aquariums.
