Long term effects of hard water on SA cichlids?

  • We are currently upgrading MFK. thanks! -neo
And thanks RD for posting this link, I always hate to try and explain the difference between alkaline, and alkalinity. They do a really user friendly explanation in the link.
I would also like to add one more nut to the mix. In tropical countries, from about 11AM until 1PM, UV rays penetrate the water at a very serious concentration, and I believe this is another factor in keeping bacteria in check. I started conducting an experiment where I had 3x40watt UV bulbs suspended above a tank. These were on a timer for about 3 hours per day, with the intention of seeing if there was any improvement (or not) in the fishes health compared to a similar tank with normal lighting. We know reptile keepers are using UVB bulbs to aid in the digestion of food for animals such as iguanas. I didn't do it long enough to get results, but think it would be worthwhile, especially for fish (such as haitiensus) that are seemingly prone to bloat issues. I don't think using an in-line UV light would have the same effect, because in nature, fish are bombarded with UV during those mid day hours, but it might be worth a comparison to see. I wondered whether that lack of daily UV exposure in aquariums could be another piece of stress to add to the many other stressors we put our fish thru like high nitrate, too small aquariums, and foreign water conditions and parameters.
 
And thanks RD for posting this link, I always hate to try and explain the difference between alkaline, and alkalinity. They do a really user friendly explanation in the link.
I would also like to add one more nut to the mix. In tropical countries, from about 11AM until 1PM, UV rays penetrate the water at a very serious concentration, and I believe this is another factor in keeping bacteria in check. I started conducting an experiment where I had 3x40watt UV bulbs suspended above a tank. These were on a timer for about 3 hours per day, with the intention of seeing if there was any improvement (or not) in the fishes health compared to a similar tank with normal lighting. We know reptile keepers are using UVB bulbs to aid in the digestion of food for animals such as iguanas. I didn't do it long enough to get results, but think it would be worthwhile, especially for fish (such as haitiensus) that are seemingly prone to bloat issues. I don't think using an in-line UV light would have the same effect, because in nature, fish are bombarded with UV during those mid day hours, but it might be worth a comparison to see. I wondered whether that lack of daily UV exposure in aquariums could be another piece of stress to add to the many other stressors we put our fish thru like high nitrate, too small aquariums, and foreign water conditions and parameters.
when you use UVB bulbs, you have to consider the results can be greatly varied by A.) spectrum - is it a 2.0, a 5.0, a 10.0, etc and also B.) are you using a universal bulb ("power-twist") that screws into anything or are you using T-5s, or T-8s or whatever strip lights you have on hand. There is quite a difference in both range and concentration of UVB rays in every which way to factor into the equation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kaia
My intention, was to see if some (any) direct UV was better than none.
Here in Panama the mid afternoon UV can be effected by, cloud cover, pollution haze, and many factors, so I see now, having random changes, would be quite natural.
And I had access to germicidal lab cast off bulbs, these bulbs were changed out regularly, and (at what I considered) a time before their usefulness was up, especially for my loose experiment.
I figured if the UV lit tank didn't get a disease(s), when the other un UV lit tank did, I might have been on to something.
 
+1 to the alkalinity vs. ph link and associated comments. Not the same thing and that's why some tanks will ph crash and others don't-- it's not the pH it's the alkalinity.

I would also like to add one more nut to the mix. In tropical countries, from about 11AM until 1PM, UV rays penetrate the water at a very serious concentration, and I believe this is another factor in keeping bacteria in check.
+1. Something I did some research on a few years ago and, in effect, while a lot of people avoid sun into their tanks for worrying about algae, on the other hand it's giving you some passive UV benefits, which is why I like some sun in my tanks.

On soft water fish, or what some people think are soft water fish-- Many are not all that exacting and some species, like discus, almost universally considered low ph, high temp fish are not so much as people think over their geographical range. And-- just because a fish is SA doesn't make it a soft water fish, it's a big continent with varying conditions. Green terrors, for example are not a low ph, soft water fish. Many are more adaptable to a range of conditions than some people think, not to say there aren't some sensitive species. Sure, some are more sensitive than others.

Somehow I had the hardness/pH goofed up in one of my tanks a couple of years ago, it was way higher than I thought. Only realized it when I checked into what was going wrong with the guinacara in the tank, meanwhile my geo OH tapajos in the same tank were just as happy as always-- Tapajos river is not black water but is 6.5 ph from the references I've seen.

In any case, I've kept all kind of SAs in medium to medium hard water, pH in mid to upper 7s and they lived long healthy lives. Had a wild rotkeil live to at least 14-15 years, full grown when I got it, so at least two by then, and I had it 12,13 years. Not sure where they come from, but I have a wild L260 pleco that I got full grown 12,13 years ago that's still going strong.

At least in my experience and opinion, if parameters like hardness or ph are too far from the comfortable or adaptable range for a fish you're going to see problems in the shorter term, whether you recognize the cause or not. But if they're happy and healthy in your water for 4,5,6, years, but don't live somewhere near their life expectancy, I'd look at what you feed or other variables, not so much ph or hardness.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kaia
Thanks for all your input everyone! I have quite a bit of wood in there now which I got quickly after testing the water here and I do regular water changes my RO filter does not make enough water fast enough to do any substantial effect so I only use it for topping off the tank currently the rainbows (especially the splendidas) are quite happy and the severum and acara seem fine as well I think the angel which is the fish I have owned the longest is the one that had the hardest time adjusting
 
In Florida fish farms, they breed and raise many Amazonian tetras in hard Florida water with no issues. May be only Amazonian cichlids that are sensitive. Hard water causes HITH in SA which don't kill them, just disfigure them for life. To me, it's worse than killing them outright.
 
Not really, but it's a common misconception with many hobbyists. The link below should help explain the differences pH (acidity), GH (hardness), and KH (alkalinity).

http://fins.actwin.com/mirror/begin-chem.html
That is a good article.
But one thing I have to point out that is very wrong and continues to perpetuate misinformation, though maybe a little off topic. In their categorization of hardness levels they list lake Malawi as the very hardest, as liquid rock. That is based off of common recommendations over the years, not actual measurements form lake Malawi. Here are the measurements: http://malawicichlids.com/mw01011.htm Equates to a dGH of less then 4-5. By there own categorization, should be listing lake Malawi as soft to very soft!
I have my own theories as to how the common recommendation is to keep lake Malawi cichlids in water that is 2 to 5 times harder then lake Malawi. Lake Malawi is high pH and somehow that got confused with hardness. Also, from way back, these cichlids were generally referred to as "rift lake cichlids". Even though many of us knew what lakes they came from, the water parameters got confused with lake Tanganyika and a few of the other rift lakes which are in fact very hard. Also, in terms of maintaining there might actually be some benefit to keeping them in harder water (??) as it might be more stable......and overstocked tanks with little water change might need harder water to remain stable (?). Though I think Malawi are generally hardy cichlids that do well despite being kept in water that does not resemble lake Malawi!
I'm also curious to know if it's common for Oscars to get HITH in places where the tap water is soft and/or acidic. Pretty much every oscar4 I have owned had some HITH, even if it was just a bit around the nostrils. Sometimes young Oscars even come from the LFS with some HITH already. The HITH would get better then get worse but never completely go away. IF it is very much linked to water parameters, Oscars with HITH should be much less common in cities with soft water?
 
Never read the entire article, missed the Malawi reference. lol Yes, very true what you say, Lake Malawi is not nearly the liquid rock that many authors state.

As far as HITH, it is caused by stress, so determining what the stress trigger is in each set up is typically near impossible - unless all other factors are equal, including the individual immune response of each individual fish, which of course can vary as well. For many years researchers in this field believed that overall poor husbandry, which leads to stress & immunosuppression in many species of fish was the leading cause of HITH disease. (Becker 1977, Goldstein 1979, Bassleer 1983, Andrews et al. 1988, Ferguson 1989, Vickerman 1990)



If one follows the more current research, most researchers also now believe that the parasite that causes the holes are S. vortens, in which there are two main forms - intestinal (aka Malawi bloat) and histozoic (systemic) infections, with HITH being a result of the latter form.

We also now know that the parasites that cause HITH prosper under certain water parameters. (at least under lab conditions)

Ironically at elevated pH levels, this parasite doesn't fair so well.



http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10715818

In vitro studies on optimal requirements for the growth of Spironucleus vortens, an intestinal parasite of the freshwater angelfish.
Sangmaneedet S1, Smith SA.
Author information
  • 1Department of Biomedical Sciences and Pathobiology, Virginia-Maryland Regional College of Veterinary Medicine, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg 24061, USA.
Abstract
Spironucleus vortens were cultivated in either an artificial medium at different temperatures, or in medium at various pH conditions or supplemented with different bile concentrations at 25 degrees C. Temperature, pH and bile requirements for the optimal growth of the parasite were determined. Parasites multiplied quickly at 28 and 31 degrees C and reached maximum numbers on Day 4 of cultivation, whereafter they did not survive. At 25 degrees C, parasites survived longer than those at 28 and 31 degrees C with no difference in multiplication rate during the exponential phase. The longest survival period was seen at 22 degrees C, although the growth rate of the parasite was not as high as those at 25 degrees C. At a higher temperature of 37 degrees C, no parasites were observed alive after the second day of cultivation. Optimal pH range for the parasite's growth was 6.5 to 7.5, with the highest cell number at pH 7.5. Parasites survived longest (15 d) at pH 6.0, although the maximum number of cells was lower than those at the optimal pH. Parasites were dead within 24 h at pH levels above 8.5 or below 5.5. All cultures supplemented with either bovine or fish bile yielded numbers of parasites lower than cultures with no bile. In addition, parasite growth was significantly suppressed in medium supplemented with higher concentrations of bile. These results indicate that the optimal condition for the in vitro cultivation of S. vortens is 25 degrees C and pH 6.5 to 7.5 without supplementation with bile.

................................................................

There is also evidence that demonstrates what may start as a case of intestinal infection, can end up resulting in a systemic infection in some fish. And one of the best reads on this subject is one that I have linked to numerous times over the years.

https://theses.lib.vt.edu/theses/available/etd-120399-140825/unrestricted/ANGEL.PDF

If one wants to totally eliminate the possibility of HITH, all one needs to do is to fully understand, and then eliminate the pathogen that causes it. Unfortunately just like Lake Malawi being liquid rock (which it is not), there is much misinformation on the subject of HITH.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Rohaus and Kaia
MonsterFishKeepers.com