Goldfish are Nutritious

[sjkoi]

Pharaoh, what is trolling and am I crossing a line here?

 

[Pharaoh]

Pharaoh, what is trolling and am I crossing a line here?

Nope. This is a discussion. If you're contributing to the topic, you're fine.

 

[RD.]

Rich,

Here's your initial comment in this discussion.

Goldfish are Nutritious
There, I said it. This has bothered me for sometime because I have fed feeder goldfish for years with great results. I use goldfish as an example, but this comment would apply to all the feeder fish as well. Using dried, frozen or commercially prepared diets is a ridiculous alternative to live foods. As I have researched the issue it is clear that the common wisdom concerning feeder fish is all wet. I invite an honest discussion of the facts and "best science" available

Had you just stated that goldfish are nutritious, and left it at that I would have never entered this discussion. Obviously goldfish have some nutritional value.

You dropped the ball when you then stated that dried, frozen, and/or commercial diets are ridiculous alternatives to live foods, and mentioned things such as "research" and "best science" ...... and how many pages later you have still offered NOTHING that substantiates ANY of your claims.

It wasn't that your title was provocative, or even misleading, it was what you stated in your initial post. Total nonsense, and I have clearly demonstrated that time & time again in this discussion yet you seem to only see what you want to see. You haven't thrown a glove on the ground Rich, you dropped a dirty hanky, and I have already squished it into your mud pond.

You talk about an issue such as thiaminase as though it only affects cold water fish, such as lake trout & salmon, yet it has also been proven to affect the health of semi-aquatic reptiles. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20218498

It took several years of studies, by several teams of scientists, just to understand exactly why a massive die off of approx 450 alligators in Lake Griffin Florida took place over several years, and it was eventually determined to be connected to the high thiaminase content found in the local Gizzard Shad.

Mink ranchers have known since the 1940's that thiaminase causes health issues in their stock, and when raw fish were fed to their animals serious health issues arose. This too is all well documented via numerous studies. (Green, Evans, and Carlson, 1937), (Lee, 1948), Deutsch and Hasler (1943), Neilands (1947).

For the most part unless it involves commercial fish raised for human consumption, no one within this industry seems to be willing to spend the time or $$ for any type of in depth long term feed trials (or even short term for that matter) involving ornamental species. The vast majority of hobbyists do not feed thiaminase rich feeders, exclusively, so it will most likely never be considered a serious issue as far as the aquatic industry is concerned.

The study that involved the alligators on Lake Griffin would have never taken place had there not been such a massive die off, and massive outcry from the locals. And still, it took several teams of researchers several years, just to connect the dots & figure out exactly what happened.

I don't care what author/researcher told you what, no one on the planet can state with any type of certainty that thiaminase does not cause B1 deficiency in ALL warm-water species when fed live or frozen. No one, as the data is simply not available. What is currently known is that thiaminase affects at least some species of fish, some reptiles, and some mammals. There is no debate there. What we don't know is how many other species of fish, reptiles, or mammals are being affected by this.

It was less than 10 yrs ago that scientists & researchers figured out that alligators can be severly affected by thiaminase consumption via live fish. Less than 10 yrs ago ........ yet we are somehow supposed to believe that someone knows for certain that every last ornamental species of fish found on the planet is not going to be affected in any way (long term or otherwise) from the uptake of thiaminase via live food? Say what?

When it comes to warm water ornamental species, much is still unknown, so all one can really do is extrapolate the known info that is out there, and modify things to stay on the safe side. For myself, that means recommending live/frozen food that is known NOT to contain thiaminase, period. IMO this is a no-brainer.

From this point forward i will simply use the term live and leave specific mention of any one species out of the discussion where possible. I am motivated to find good solid facts. For a live diet what would a healthy, diverse menu look like? What are good candidates for feeder fish that could be raised economically in a temperate climate at home or a farm? What non-fish live foods have hobbyists had good success with?

Just so there are no misunderstandings, Rich. I didn't enter this discussion to help further your personal knowledge base, or to assist you with your feeder pond business.
I posted in this discussion with the hopes that those that may not fully understand this subject could make a more informed decision after weighing in all of the so called facts, and science, surrounding this topic.

And on that note I believe my mission has been accomplished.

 

[ballinouttacntrol]

By providing actual data do you mean if he can copy and paste or are you asking for our actual opions as we do feed live so ie. we have input? I have seen you around and spoke with you through pm a few times but I really do not know what you keep or what your raising so I don't know if you use live at all or are against it.

I will say this we keep Cichla and I am not sure if you have ever noticed how many people say look at my new Cichla then a few months later there never heard from again until there new thread "Im back in the game" just picked up some more new Cichla because I lost the ones I had. Well I am curious as to how many of these losses were due to not providig a nutritional diet and when you lost them what was the reason and looking for the easy route and forcing one of the Cichlids with an extremly fast metabolisim the bare minimium (Pellet's) because that's all they can afford to buy. How many bags of Pellet's is going to cost you to to fill up 3 or more adult 2' plus Cichla? The truth is there isn't one Cichla keepers need to understand that this is a fine line to a BALANCED diet as stated in the papers that were copied and pasted here in this post we have all read these papers three years ago before Hulon was even keeping Cichla and my fish are still alive and healthy so what more proof do you need?

i am not against live, have no moral belief against it, my problem is when people suggest a pure goldfish diet which is what a few people have originally said and then later changed to "no wait, i feed a varied diet" which misleads people that may be reading this thread

what i keep doesn't really matter as the topic was weither or not goldfish are nutritious. everyone has admitted repeatedly that fish will still grow on a bad diet, even the original poster is suggesting an indepth look and study of the internal organs of fish, not the physical appearance. So how pretty or ugly my own stock is doesn't factor into things.

For the record, i DO feed live, not goldfish or rosey reds though but is that is not at all my fish's diet. my diet is completely varied. it's mainly pellets but includes convicts, talipia, fish i've caught, filleted and froze myself, worms, crickets, veggie etc etc

 

[sjkoi]

You talk about an issue such as thiaminase as though it only affects cold water fish, such as lake trout & salmon, yet it has also been proven to affect the health of semi-aquatic reptiles. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20218498

It took several years of studies, by several teams of scientists, just to understand exactly why a massive die off of approx 450 alligators in Lake Griffin Florida took place over several years, and it was eventually determined to be connected to the high thiaminase content found in the local Gizzard Shad.

Um, Thank you for confirming my information on thiaminase. As you can see there are no known cases of a warm-water species of fish suffering thiamin deficiency due to consuming live fish. I suspect that there are no known situations of mink or alligators either that ave suffered vitamin deficiencies due to eating live fish. Captive alligators fed a shad exclusive diet? Do you have the full paper you can send. There is no reference in the abstract as to whether or not the alligators were fed live, frozen or dead fish. However, since they had a shad only diet in captivity, and these were alligators on a farm, I expect to find that they were fed a diet of shad caught elsewhere and stored for feeding at a latter time just like the mink were. If these captive alligators were feeding on a school of live shad, then I would say that this is new information in as much an alligator can be compared to a fish. Thiaminase is not a virus. It does not pass into the bloodstream. It has been around for millions of years. Everyone knows, or should know, that you do not feed or consume an exclusive diet of dead or frozen thiaminase containing fish without expecting to see thiamin deficiency after a very prolonged period of time.

With regard to the fat composition of a fry that has eaten almost exclusively a natural diet rich in rotifers, daphnia and aquatic insects and supplemented lightly with a nutritionally complete diet compared to adult species that are fed nearly 100% rations of a carbohydrate rich diet for several years, its an illogical jumping off point for Robert Toonen's article. It holds as much value as to say that an 8 year old who eats mainly vegetables and fish will have the same fat levels and composition as a 50 year old man who has sat on a sofa the last 20 years of his life eating Big Mac's and fries. You just can't do it.

I am trying to figure out if there is a reason to keep our new acreage in feeders. Not promote my business. If there is no value in live foods then there is no point in wasting the pond space. I'll raise something that has value. If the hobby needs something else, then maybe we could go in that direction, but aquaculture is a large and diverse field and the tropical fish food business is only a small niche. However, I am not going to walk away from something, or into something else, without the facts. I will work on this until I am satisfied with the answers here. I have taken the pro-side because that information has not been well defended. I appreciate your counter points, but try as you have, so far I am more confident of the value of live vs. dead than when I started. My thoughts now are turning more to conducting my own feed trials and see where that leads. If you are serious about getting to the bottom of this, and I suspect you are not, then your input on using canned feed would be helpful. But, as the trial progresses, and you refuse to help set up a meaningful one, excuse my eye rolling if you hop in with your critique and captive alligator stories.

Rich

 

[MN_Rebel]

Have varied diet is way better than 100% goldfish diet....There I said it.

 

[RD.]

I suspect that there are no known situations of mink or alligators either that have suffered vitamin deficiencies due to eating live fish.

Those 450 alligators that died from thiaminase ingestion, via live fish, were not captive raised, they were wild gators, living in a natural body of water.

http://natgeodigitalsignage.com/film/2574/predator-csi-zombie-alligators

This isn't new information, at least not to myself or anyone else that has been following the thiaminase issue over the years. I'm actually quite shocked that the "leading expert on thiaminase in the Country" that you have spoken with didn't mention any of this to you?

Perhaps his expertise only involves Salmon & Trout?



I copied the following info off of another site, overall an accurate summation of the program linked to above, and saved me a lot of typing.

Did anyone see this very interesting documentary on five, a few days ago?, i watched it last night.


There was a spate of alligator deaths in Lake Griffin, Florida. They found a lot of alligators turned over floating in the water with their bellies up, dead.

But suddenly some of them came back alive, they were not dead, but completely lethargic. Some were dead, the scientists were puzzled. Eventually the sick alligators did die. So the tests started with autopsies, they checked every organ for a lot of things and they came back normal. Then they checked the blood, put some of the worlds deadliest virus, bacteria in with the blood, from e-coli, even the aids virus, the blood cells beat of all enemy viruses (wonder if they can cure humans in the future).

The sick alligators show a lack of response, were very lethargic, so next they checked the brain. I could not believe what they pulled out of the skull, the brain is the size of a golf ball!, they sent this off for analysis, and this is where things started to show up, all these tests etc, went over months, years, anyway someone noticed amongst the healthy pink cells, there were lighter paler cells, looking closer they noticed the neurons were dead, this would explain the problem with moving the muscles, alligators drowning in the water, unable to keep their heads up above water.

So the next thing was to find out how this was happening, these creatures have been around for millions of years, and it is unheard of 100's of alligators dying and the most common thing that has really changed is the environment, people and pollution, so they started tests on the water checking for the common pollutants like lead, mercury, pesticides, but again the test came back normal, from the 'muck' farms close by, the people's houses with their swimming pools with chorine, the boats with their marine fuels, and more, none of these chemicals, etc were to any dangerous levels.

So digging deeper and checking the water more, they found invisible to the naked eye, algae, microscopic algae was unnaturally high in concentration in the lake, and they traced nutrients back to the 'muck' farms that were being flushed into lake, nutrients are needed for plants and animals to survival, but large amounts caused a richness and density in the lake that changes the eco system to a extent that blue/green algae is running wild, but when they die, they released neuro toxins into the water, that attacks the central nervous system, killing off the brains neurons, 2yrs into the investigation they finally find the cause, or did they?


But there is a twist, at a scientific conference elsewhere, a Lake Griffin scientist talked to another scientist, who is investigating a spate of salmons and trouts dying, they found the symptoms very similar to the alligators. They found the baby salmons (fry) were just healthy and then just eventually died, they lose equilibrium, roll over and fall to the bottom of the tanks they were kept in whilst being studied.

They checked the brain, and found very the same thing. So over a course of 6yrs, trying to find out what is causing this, instead of looking for something that is there as a cause to this, they looked for something that is not there, could the de-generation of the brain be caused by the animal lacking an essential substance, so they experimented, and applied a variety of essential substances to the fish, and one particular substance 'thiamine', had a profound impact, they found when thiamine eventually gets into the baby fishe's bodies, these once close to death fish, were getting healthy again and would spring back to life, the results were miraculous!.

So it was just a simple lack of thiamine, or commonly known as Vitamin B1, this vitamin feeds the cell regeneration, controls movement, cell reproduction, otherwise the body starts to shut down. In a healthy body, cells die and regenerate, but the brain cells are much harder to generate and without thiamine, the body lacks the energy to replace them.

So while everybody was thinking the alligators were originally dying because of pollution or some disease, instead could it be just be a dietary inefficiency of vitamin B?, so they go back to check the bodies, and indeed thats what they found a lack thiamine, but how could these animals in their wild environment, eating their natural diet have this vitamin deficiency?, it does not make evolutionary, or ecological sense.

The answer to this made the scientists of Lake Griffin view the lake in a completely different way forever...

Over 7 months, alligators were captured and all had their stomaches pumped, what they found test after test was one particular species, a fish called 'Gizzard Shad', these fish have high levels of Thiaminase which is a enzyme, this in turns destroys Thiamine. So they tested this theory, over the next 12 months alligators on a farm were fed Shad 3 times a week. Slowly they changed, became lethargic, the back legs paralyzed, hardy moved...the living dead, zombies.

But alligators have always eaten Shad, so why the deadly effects now?, Gizzard Shad levels have increased greater, and other species have decreased, so the bio-diversity is less, so the alligators are not getting their vitamin pill in forms of their other animals, such as Bass and Bluegill fish. So the authorities took drastic steps, they extracted the Shad from all 9,000 acres of Lake Griffin, once the water quality started improving, the alligators stopped dying.

It took 6yrs of intensive investigation by a team of scientists from 13 different agencies to arrive at this solution, but it was not only the Shad to blame, firstly people and the muck farms colonized the region, bit by bit the chemical reactions seeped into the lake, causing a chain reaction, this paved the way for a toxic alien invader, an aglo bloom that almost suffocated the lake, killed all the plants, and huge numbers of fish died, but the Gizzard Shad found this rancid conditions ideal, they ran amok in the lake - a chain of events triggered by people, agriculture, development, ended in the death of hundreds of alligators and a demise of a lake.

This situation in Florida caused a lot of confusion among researchers, to the point that there are some that have written papers that allude to an "unknown factor" that created a far more severe problem with alligator ingestion of gizzard shad in Lake Griffin, compared to other nearby lakes.

It basically all came down to this ....... the main hypothesis is that under certain conditions and with high shad densities the gators consumed a critical level of gizzard shad, which resulted in increased mortality and reproductive failure. (Ross et al 2009)

The scientists can ponder all of this into the next millennium, but the bottom line is that when they netted out the vast majority of shad, especially those that were of size that an adult gator could prey on, and the consumption of shad (and thiaminase) by gators in this lake was suddenly drastically reduced, the high mortality rates stopped, and went back to normal.



Some might ask what does any of this have to do with goldfish?



Well let's go back to the beginning of this discussion, and review a few bold statements that have been made thus far.

First off, a paper was quoted that I first read probably a decade ago, which does mention thiaminase issues in feeding piscivores in captivity, and the need to supplement B1 as well as other nutrients that are typically lacking in fresh/frozen foods.

From that, another poster made sure to point out the following, by underlining the work "killed", as though "live" fish would never be a problem.

"Thiamin and vitamin E are nutrients that are known to be limiting or problematic in fish and marine invertebrates. Both of these are relatively quickly degraded in killed fish, even when fish are frozen under ideal conditions"

That poster later goes on to state:

In dead or frozen fish thiamin and Vitamin E levels should be considered as suspect and in need of supplementation. This is especially true in species of fish that contain the enzyme thiaminase, as most fish in the families clupeidae and cyprinidae do. In fact it could be generalized that many lower trophic species of fish do contain thiaminase either in their tissue or their guts. Upon freezing, or tissue degradation, the thiaminase will begin to degrade thiamin leading to nutritional deficiencies. That, for the most part, is where the story has ended in regards to thiaminase, but it gets a lot more interesting. A problem though is that the science needed to be done here is still evolving and incomplete. But, consider this, there is no record of thiamin deficiency in wild populations of warm-water species even when feeding on species containing thiaminase. I'll leave it at that for now, but that is why the science gets a little thin. There is no funding, because there is no problem to study.

Again, the reference to "dead" feeders, and "frozen" fish, as though live fish, even those such as goldfish that are known to have thiaminase issues, are perfectly safe to feed ANY/ALL aquarium species of fish. But offers no facts to back up that claim, just the fact that the lack thereof is somehow PROOF enough.

More .......

Thiaminase is believed to be contained within individual cells encapsulated to prevent the degradation of thiamin. What it's function is within the cell is a mystery. Its source is also a mystery. Freezing ruptures the cell and releases thiaminase which in time will deactivate thiamin, even while frozen under the best of conditions. In live fish that contain thiaminase these cell structures are still intact at the time the prey is captured.

If thiaminase in live foods was such a non issue, what happened to those 450 gators on Lake Griffin? Suddenly science has discovered that even a tough as nails semi-aquatic reptile species that has been kicking around this earth for thousands of years, can also be affected by thiaminase, even when feeding on live fish in the wild.

As I previously pointed out, in wild populations of warm water species of fish there typically aren't any issues with thiaminase toxicity, as most populations of wild fish do not just consume prey that contain large quantities of thiaminase. Their other various prey would typically contain enough B1 to negate any effect from those food stuffs that do contain thiaminase.

This is the key issue.

The same poster later states;

Why, no one knows, but again, not much is known about thiaminase.

Bingo! Not much is known, period.

Which is precisely why I recommend that anyone who is going to feed live, fresh, or frozen, should consider species that are known to NOT produce thiaminase.

Everyone knows, or should know, that you do not feed or consume an exclusive diet of dead or frozen thiaminase containing fish without expecting to see thiamin deficiency after a very prolonged period of time.

But there's the real rub, Rich, - the average hobby fish keeper has never heard of thiaminase, or ever considered health issues from a potential B1 deficiency.

If I ran a poll here on MFK asking what the mg/l level of chlorine or chloramine is in everyone's local tap water, the vast majority of MFK'ers wouldn't even know that.

So no, everyone does not know this. And I would wager a bet that the vast majority of those in this hobby that feed live goldfish, have never even considered the need for additional vitamin/mineral supplementation, let alone B1. How advanced do you think the average hobbyist is in the science of animal nutrition, specifically aquatic nutrition, when there are those that are members on an advanced online forum such as this one, that feed foods such as hot dogs, vienna sausages, dog food, and worse, to their fish?


Have you ever seen or heard of a LFS employee mentioning potential thiaminase issues to a customer that purchases goldfish feeders, and perhaps even feeds those goldfish exclusively? I sure as hell haven't, and I can guarantee that not a single LFS in my area has even heard of the term thiaminase, let alone know what it means in regards to animal nutrition.


I agree that in some cases the problem may not be with goldfish themselves, but more the potential to cause nutritional deficiencies &/or potential health disorders in some species of ornamental fish if OTHER nutrient rich foods are not supplemented at proper levels. Of course this can still occur even when non-thiaminase fish are used as feeders, but at least thiaminase is ONE anti-nutrient element that can easily be removed from the equation.

Just like those wild gators in Florida, remove the gizzard shad, get the gators back on to their previous more balanced diet, and like magic the problem goes away.

My thoughts now are turning more to conducting my own feed trials and see where that leads. If you are serious about getting to the bottom of this, and I suspect you are not, then your input on using canned feed would be helpful. But, as the trial progresses, and you refuse to help set up a meaningful one, excuse my eye rolling if you hop in with your critique and captive alligator stories.

I mean no disrespect when saying this, but I am light years ahead of where you currently are regarding this subject matter. What you personally feel the need to do in order to come to some kind of a decision regarding your new feeder pond is none of my business, and doesn't interest me in the least. Is that clear enough for you?

Captive alligators indeed ........


Cheers!

 

[screaminleeman]

Nice post RD. Wow am I relieved. Several years ago I seriously planned on stocking my pond with Gizzard Shad as a foraging fish base. I just never got around to doing it (Thankfully). Now all I have to "hope" for that the 20 of so Feeder goldfish that survived the season that I threw them in the pond by the thousands (I estimate 3 years ago, prior to my getting into the fish keeping hobby), do not breed until at least 2013 when my pond is adequately stocked with predatory fish (Gar & Bowfin).

I read in a post of someone keeping a carnival goldfish for 15 years, and is 11" (Or maybe 11 years/ 15"). Is that outrageously slow growth? Like I say, the thousands of Goldfish feeders were only like 4" - 5" range when I put them in. Only like twenty survived the winter, and had grown large enough in six months to NOT be prey for the LMB. They were somewhere near that 11" mark well within the first year. The 20 or so survivors are all well over a foot and fat as NFL footballs. The only loses of these large goldfish (two to be exact) were from the infamous Blue Heron that I have down at the pond.

 

[probassfisher010]

That goldfish is mine, actually his picture is in this thread. Sadly, I do not have a pond to grow him in, so he maxed out around this mark. But he still eats like a pig and is healthy...although I do with I had better accomations for him.

 

[ballinouttacntrol]

That goldfish is mine, actually his picture is in this thread. Sadly, I do not have a pond to grow him in, so he maxed out around this mark. But he still eats like a pig and is healthy...although I do with I had better accomations for him.

do you think it's stunted?