mixed answers about water change schedule????

  • We are currently upgrading MFK. thanks! -neo
This keeps my nitrates in the orange zone, under 20.



Add the dechlorinator before adding fresh water. With a Python you can get the water to 80 before any goes in. Big water changes can be a problem if your Ph changes over the course of a few days. Make sure it doesn't before doing anything over 50%. (Fill a bucket and test the Ph. Add an airstone to the bucket and test again in three days. No change and you're good to go.)
 
neutrino said:
I don't find large water changes to be a problem. One of my tanks routinely gets a 50-70% weekly water change and just this past couple of weeks, due to remodeling, moving tanks around, etc. just about all my tanks have gotten two or three 80% water changes within just a day or two. Filtration and fish didn't skip a beat; in fact, they look great since as long as I was going that far I also rinsed just about all my filter media at the same time (non-chlorinated water). I won't speculate or try to explain why some people have issues with large water changes. And, in fact, every so often I like to do successive water changes within just a couple of days that replace most, all, or even more of a tank's total water volume as a sort of refresh/tonic for the tank.

But you'll always get different answers on this. So it's is a subject where you should do what works best for you. There's just way too many variables involved for there to be a one size fits all formula, including: size of tank, number of fish, size of fish, species of fish, age of fish, type of substrate, depth of substrate, type and volume of filtration, type of media, how often you clean (or replace) your media, plants, no plants, number of plants, species of plants, areas (like driftwood) for bio-film to grow, whether you even allow algae or other bio-film in your tank or keep it spotless (whether using plecos, etc.), what you feed, how much, how often, water temperature, pH, dissolved oxygen in your tank, even whether you run UV or not (in combo with filtration and other factors, can affect redox and, therefore, breakdown of wastes)... quality and chemistry of your replacement water.

I don't even treat my each of my own tanks the same, because even with the same water and basically the same food for all my tanks, different setups are different in some of the other factors, though someone else might prefer to do the same % water change across the board on every tank-- but I do or have done anything ranging from 30% weekly, 70% weekly, 10% weekly, 50% monthly, and 60-70% bi-weekly on different tanks. I've slowed down some the past couple of years, but over the years I've spawned and raised thousands of fry, raised I couldn't tell you how many species, and have had stretches of five years or more without a sick fish, so I must be doing something right, not that this hobby won't throw anyone a curve, no matter how expert. But there are a lot of very skilled and knowledgeable hobbyists around, some of them way ahead of me, so I'm not trying to brag-- just making the point that there's too many variables to make a one size fits all recommendation.

Finally, from a post of mine on another forum:


Sorry for the long post, hope it's helpful...
Click to expand...

Thank you for this very informative approach! I do not mind the information being too long because this is also more thorough, and this is my preference so I can better understand the material and gain more potential insight! I also agree with you about the nitrates because although the theory seems plausible, I do not think they are factoring the nitrates versus the total volume of water correctly. 50% water volume does not necessarily equal 50% nitrates. I realize the two almost go "hand in hand" presuming the contents of the water are being thoroughly mixed efficiently. Mathematically, the theory makes sense, but the idea seems to be neglecting another factor or influence, and I am just trying to identify what is missing link. A person that is doing water changes correctly for the amount and size of fish versus the water volume should not accumulate with regular consistent water changes. Another aspect to consider is in the wild (nature), all the fish, including freshwater and saltwater life would all be dead or have adapted to accept all nitrates such as becoming almost immune to there effects; I use the term immunity referring to no negative effects as a result. Over the millions of years of aquatic life on the planet, the number of nitrates should be astronomical. This is just another idea why I am skeptical of the reasoning.


Sent from my iPhone using MonsterAquariaNetwork app
 
GreenTerror3003 said:
Another aspect to consider is in the wild (nature), all the fish, including freshwater and saltwater life would all be dead or have adapted to accept all nitrates such as becoming almost immune to there effects; I use the term immunity referring to no negative effects as a result. Over the millions of years of aquatic life on the planet, the number of nitrates should be astronomical. This is just another idea why I am skeptical of the reasoning.


Sent from my iPhone using MonsterAquariaNetwork app
Click to expand...

I'm confused by this statement, are you saying that denitrification or nitrate consumption does not occur in the wild?
 
Rocksor said:
I'm confused by this statement, are you saying that denitrification or nitrate consumption does not occur in the wild?
Click to expand...

For more clarity, I was referring to the concept and process of evolution. Additionally, nitrates are converted in the wild so they do not just keep accumulating. I understand this is not totally relevant, but I was just meaning the claim that they just keep accumulating in an aquarium seems ludicrous because other factors may be involved. Considering previously mentioned information, an aquarium cleaned with regular and consistent maintenance (water changes and filter) should not ever just keep accumulating because no one can change 100% of the water, nor is this even practical, just in an attempt to even BEGIN to see a minute amount of nitrate decline to break the trend... Sorry, I should have conveyed my information more clearly with more clarity. ;)


Sent from my iPhone using MonsterAquariaNetwork app
 
interesting statement. let's face it our aquariums cannot replicate what evolution or god(which ever you believe in) has accomplished over millions of year of symbiotic relationships to result in perfectly filtered water.. I think the addition of plants like pothos can really cut down on the need for water changes at all but, then you run into the need for replacing the minerals lost over time too.
GreenTerror3003 said:
For more clarity, I was referring to the concept and process of evolution. Additionally, nitrates are converted in the wild so they do not just keep accumulating. I understand this is not totally relevant, but I was just meaning the claim that they just keep accumulating in an aquarium seems ludicrous because other factors may be involved. Considering previously mentioned information, an aquarium cleaned with regular and consistent maintenance (water changes and filter) should not ever just keep accumulating because no one can change 100% of the water, nor is this even practical, just in an attempt to even BEGIN to see a minute amount of nitrate decline to break the trend... Sorry, I should have conveyed my information more clearly with more clarity. ;)

Sent from my iPhone using MonsterAquariaNetwork app
Click to expand...
 
GreenTerror3003 said:
Mathematically, the theory makes sense, but the idea seems to be neglecting another factor or influence, and I am just trying to identify what is missing link.
Sent from my iPhone using MonsterAquariaNetwork app
Click to expand...
A missing factor is the naive/simplistic nature of a formula that leaves other variables out of the equation. It's just not as simple as:
Total nitrates in your tank exactly equals total nitrates removed via water changes subtracted from total nitrates produced as the end product of fish waste.

The classic ammonia becomes nitrite, nitrite becomes nitrate cycle is not the only cycle in your tank. There are other cycles and also a de-nitrification process, where-- not only plants if you have them-- but the algae/bio-film on various surfaces (like driftwood), the bacteria in varying oxygen gradients in your substrate, and, potentially, bacteria deeper within your bio-media are all processing nitrate, several of these processes ultimately producing gases that are released into the atmosphere. Advanced reefkeepers know this and try to take advantage of the process with live rock, deep sand beds, etc. At least one product (Seachem Matrix-- link) claims their media is capable of removing some nitrates and I've seen some people say it worked for them.

As far as all this pertains to water changes, it means there are multiple factors involved (not just water changes) and the net balance of nitrates in your tank can depend on more than just your water change schedule. Some tanks are virtually designed to produce a lot and remove very little nitrate-- example: a bare tank, lots of protein, lots of beef heart discus tank-- and, therefore, are virtually designed to require massive water changes. Another tank with the same fish-- example: discus fish, no beef heart, balanced protein/amino acid profile intake, substrate, plants, media, algae/bio-film on driftwood, etc. that are all removing nitrate-- won't require nearly the same water changes for the same fish. I know this from my own discus experience.

All tanks are not created equal when it comes to water changes.
 
jagsandpits said:
naa dude no prob its very helpful. im a big aggravated cuz I feel like my fish growth is bottoming out, my jag,dempsey,mayan are all at around 5- 6 inches respectively and I feel as though its been this way for a month or two, they grew very rapidly now its much slower. I wish I cud snap my fingers and they all be monsters overnight. I always dream of owning a MONSTER jag/mayan/Dempsey but its taking soo long :(( lol persistence I have tho
Click to expand...

I feel the same way. Before I bought my firemouth I read that they reach 6-7". Mine is currently about 3", and I've had him for 7 months. I feed strictly NLS pellet with some frozen mysis/bloodworms twice a week, and do 50% water changes once a week. I seen all the fully grown adult firemouth pictures which got me into wanting one and want him to be like that, but I came to the realization that I just have to be patient.

As for the topic, there is a lot of good information here. This is a good discussion on water changes and I'm learning a lot.

For my tank, I do 50% water changes weekly. No water quality issues, although I've recently discovered my firemouth is a murderer. What's funny is my friend, who has a 20g with a ram, gourami, a school of tetras, a school of corys, and a BNP, hasn't done a water change in almost 2 months. He just tops his tank off. I'm thinking he has no issues because he has about a dozen stems of Anacharis, each about 16-20 inches in length.
 
it's vey simple. you can never change enough water, and more is better than less. When I raised discus it was 80-90% a day, the more water changes the faster the fish grew
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
MonsterFishKeepers.com
Top Bottom