Overstocked or Understocked? You Decide
- Thread starter Pyramid_Party
- Start date
The BGK may not get that large, but there are some larger ones on the site (14"+). Plus he's the one with the most potential to be a showpiece specimen.
i would say understocked but like other said, they have the potential for being big fish. i would maybe add a poly
You are both under and over.
As of right now, with amount of fish and size of fish, you are understocked. However, if you are planning on keeping these fish in this tank for life, you are waaaaaay overstocked.
As of right now, with amount of fish and size of fish, you are understocked. However, if you are planning on keeping these fish in this tank for life, you are waaaaaay overstocked.
I've raised several BGKs and I've seen plenty that others have raised... You will be 'lucky' if yours gets 12" long... the 20" might be the species max but it's sure as hell not what we should expect in our aquariums (not even huge aquariums).
I would suggest replacing the common pleco with something more appropriate for a 55 gal and if you wanted to add another Jewel or something of similar size, feel free...
I would suggest replacing the common pleco with something more appropriate for a 55 gal and if you wanted to add another Jewel or something of similar size, feel free...
Yeah, Originally I didnt even want a pleco. I put it in there for an algae issue. I cleaned most of the algae out and justr put the pleco to keep it under control, plus I like plecos too. I know they get big and all, so if he gets about 8 inch or so I will get rid of him, Im pretty sure someone will like him for their tank. Thinking about rhe BGKs size I know its pushing it, but I think its acceptable. I mean they say they grow like 16-20 inch but Ive never seen one. Most get about a foot some may reach 14-16 inch but doesnt happen alot.
Plus the fish is more on the slender side and flexible, so its not as bad on the fish, if it were a cichlid that had a bulkier body then yeah its not cool. I'd prefer the BGK be in a bigger tank, so more than likely when it reaches that size I'll have it in a larger tank.
Well, I dont want to add another Jewel cichlid because I dont want the chance of breeding. Im also a bit worried about adding another smaller cihclid for chance of cross breeding. I dont know, Its either gotta be a smaller cichlid that doesnt have much in common with the Jewel or some other kind of fish not related at all.
Plus the fish is more on the slender side and flexible, so its not as bad on the fish, if it were a cichlid that had a bulkier body then yeah its not cool. I'd prefer the BGK be in a bigger tank, so more than likely when it reaches that size I'll have it in a larger tank.
Well, I dont want to add another Jewel cichlid because I dont want the chance of breeding. Im also a bit worried about adding another smaller cihclid for chance of cross breeding. I dont know, Its either gotta be a smaller cichlid that doesnt have much in common with the Jewel or some other kind of fish not related at all.
nc_nutcase;2330897; said:
Lucky? I had one 13-14", and still young when I got rid of it. There are plenty on this site far larger than that.
Im sometimes not sure about people when they measure their fish. Alot of times people add in an inch or 2 or they give a rough estimate. Some may say its 13 inch, but in reality its only 11 inch. I mean, if you take out a ruler and measure the fish then thats the only way. I think some people arent accurate all the time.
But this is not to say its untrue about a fishes size, or one you may have owned. I know instances where a fish is suppose to max out no more than 6 inch and it got 8 inch etc. Anythings possible.
But this is not to say its untrue about a fishes size, or one you may have owned. I know instances where a fish is suppose to max out no more than 6 inch and it got 8 inch etc. Anythings possible.
