Most ammonia tolerant fish species? Or species for unfiltered tanks?

"Now if you want to know if its possible to keep a fish in a tank with enough plants if you will be devoted to enough water changes with a really really really light bioload- so much so that there won't be detectable ammonia in the tank- then ask that and we might be able to help you."

Look Brontosaurus and Jbratt, that IS what I asked. READ. And beating dogs?! Oh boyza, get a grip.

I made it very clear - by, um, saying so - that I am not a fan of unfiltered tanks. I made it very clear that such a setup would need to be planted and have good light, etc etc. Fear not, I have been keeping fish for 25 years. I am very, very well versed. So settle already kids, and either answer the question helpfully or please step away from your keyboard and go make a nice calming cup of Chamomile tea.

The reality is that some fish are better than others at adapting to imperfect environments, such as seeding a tank and getting by while it stabilizes. e.g. the Gardneri, which in nature often find themselves in small puddles - tiny bodies of water - have adapted to breeding there despite a bit of ammonia and massive daily temperature swings. Other fish could not handle this for a single day.

It's those hardier freshwater fish that I'm curious about. Which species would be on that 'resilient' list?

Thanks, helpful people :rolleyes:
 
Turbosaurus said:
let me get thie striaght...

You just asked us which species of fish can survive the most torture?

Which species can I burn off their gills, slowly suffocating them, and causing their organs to fail, infections to set in, fins rot off- with ammonia- which one will survive this the longest? that's your question?

FISH CAN NOT LIVE IN A TANK WITH AMMONIA. IT BURNS OFF THEIR GILLS AND THEIR SLIME COAT AND IT MAKES THEM SICK AND SUCEPTABLE TO DISEASE AND INFECTION.

You might as well ask which Dog can I beat the hardest before it dies? What type of rabbit can starve the longest without dying? Although I do not think that just because a fish CAN live in bad conditions that it SHOULD live in bad conditions. I would still work to keep ammonia/nitrite at 0 and keep everything stable. It's better for the fish not just to survive, but thrive in their tank.

Now if you want to know if its possible to keep a fish in a tank with enough plants if you will be devoted to enough water changes with a really really really light bioload- so much so that there won't be detectable ammonia in the tank- then ask that and we might be able to help you.
Click to expand...

Calm down, he DID say it was going to be planted. Plus, if you're willing to do large water changes daily ammonias not going to get out of control, I've done it before with no problems. (25% daily) Although I do not think that just because a fish can live in bad conditions that it should live in those conditions. It's better if the fish thrives in the tank as opposed to surviving. I would still work to keep everything stable with ammonia/nitrite at 0.
 
what size tank would this be? you couldnt even use something small like a red sea nano? sponge/corner filter?
 
Finley said:
"Now if you want to know if its possible to keep a fish in a tank with enough plants if you will be devoted to enough water changes with a really really really light bioload- so much so that there won't be detectable ammonia in the tank- then ask that and we might be able to help you."

Look Brontosaurus and Jbratt, that IS what I asked. READ. And beating dogs?! Oh boyza, get a grip.

I made it very clear - by, um, saying so - that I am not a fan of unfiltered tanks. I made it very clear that such a setup would need to be planted and have good light, etc etc. Fear not, I have been keeping fish for 25 years. I am very, very well versed. So settle already kids, and either answer the question helpfully or please step away from your keyboard and go make a nice calming cup of Chamomile tea.

The reality is that some fish are better than others at adapting to imperfect environments, such as seeding a tank and getting by while it stabilizes. e.g. the Gardneri, which in nature often find themselves in small puddles - tiny bodies of water - have adapted to breeding there despite a bit of ammonia and massive daily temperature swings. Other fish could not handle this for a single day.

It's those hardier freshwater fish that I'm curious about. Which species would be on that 'resilient' list?

Thanks, helpful people :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

First of all, take your own advice "make a nice calming cup of Chamomile tea."

Secondly, I don't doubt your fish keeping ability and I'm sure most other won't either. The simple fact is, you should use a filter and it makes no sense not to. If you don't use a filter the biology of the tank will never be correct, you will have to spend more time checking the water and doing more water changes, and you will ultimately make your fish unhappier. If you feel like spending more time and money and having your fish not be as happy then by all means don't get a filter. That being said...

In terms of the most hardy fish, zebra danios win hands down.

GL :thm::thm:
 
I guess it's hard for people to understand because there are filters for even the smallest tanks, so when you say "unfiltered tank" people think of betta bowls and the like, which are indeed torture chambers. More flower vases than aquariums.

It's so much more common for people to ask the kind of question Turbosaurus thought you were asking than the kind of question that you are actually asking (which remember was "Which kinds of FW fish have YOU kept in unfiltered tanks successfully?")

Most people think if you want an unfiltered tank, it's because you're too cheap to buy a filter - and being too cheap to buy a filter is indeed despicable! The same way that some people don't want to buy a heater so they get goldfish, even though goldfish are so much harder to keep than small tropical fish.

So my question to you, Finley, is what everyone is probably wondering here - why NOT a filter? Most of us can't imagine running a tank without a filter.

As one of our members said, a betta tank can be unfiltered...but it's boring. Likewise, I know many killi keepers keep them in unfiltered tanks the size of a shoebox. I can see a paradisefish working in an unfiltered 15 long or so. And probably a shrimp and Briggs snail tank could probably easily be unfiltered, too.

What sized tank are you thinking about? What kind of plants will you be using?
 
When I started in the hobby in the early 70s, I used to buy old fish keeping books at garage sales...books written primarily in the 50s, and the idea of the balanced aquarium was pretty common back then. I think it may have been Aquarium Fish Magazine that had several articles on balanced aquariums in the past year or two, and the key was lots of plants with a fish load just large enough to fertilize the plants. Plants are wonderful filters...the right kinds - such as watersprite with their huge roots soaking up nutrients in the water column, are ideal for non-filtered tanks.

With enough plants, there is no reason a tank cannot be ideal for a small bioload of fish and/or shrimp. There are fish that are adapted to living in small bodies of water which means they can handle varying water types and temperatures and in fact come from bodies of water similar to a balanced aquarium - many killi fish and labyrinth fish fall into this category.

I do agree that the thread topic was poorly worded, but the initial message by the original poster clearly explained his intent and it's not to abuse fish.

Eric
 
Jayhawk said:
When I started in the hobby in the early 70s, I used to buy old fish keeping books at garage sales...books written primarily in the 50s, and the idea of the balanced aquarium was pretty common back then. I think it may have been Aquarium Fish Magazine that had several articles on balanced aquariums in the past year or two, and the key was lots of plants with a fish load just large enough to fertilize the plants. Plants are wonderful filters...the right kinds - such as watersprite with their huge roots soaking up nutrients in the water column, are ideal for non-filtered tanks.

With enough plants, there is no reason a tank cannot be ideal for a small bioload of fish and/or shrimp. There are fish that are adapted to living in small bodies of water which means they can handle varying water types and temperatures and in fact come from bodies of water similar to a balanced aquarium - many killi fish and labyrinth fish fall into this category.

I do agree that the thread topic was poorly worded, but the initial message by the original poster clearly explained his intent and it's not to abuse fish.

Eric
Click to expand...

Wisteria would be one I recommend as a good nutrient soaker. Hornwort is also commonly used.
 
You're right...wisteria and hornwort also work well as nutrient soakers.

I'm going to say something many consider a heresy...but duckweed really rocks as a plant filter. There is a reason that stuff grows so well in polluted bodies of water.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
AquariaCentral.com
Top Bottom