PH problem....solution?

[jcardona1]

So sending lil Pbass from the amazon to RO would be OK but then when they go to a tank that runs straight tap water even if dripped they could still be belly up within hours due to this "shock"?

No that's not what I'm saying at all, quite the opposite LOL!!! You see, the amazon has fairly soft water. Lots of people go nuts trying to re-create this environment. But the fact is that fish will adjust to nearly any hardness level. As long as it's done SLOWLY! This is why we drip acclimate fish. Not only for the temperature, but mainly the hardness levels. When you don't acclimate slowly, the fish's osmoregulation is affected, their cells take into too much water or expell too much water, depending on the hardness levels. The result, dead fish!

If fish couldn't adapt to different hardness levels, we could never keep any of these fish alive. They have changed and adapted to our specific water. And what I'm saying, is that large, and consistent water changes are a GOOD thing, even directly from the tap. The reason is that the hardness levels from your tank and those from your tap will be nearly identical when you keep up with the water changes. So even if they ph may appear to be different (due to co2 levels) the hardness is the same and your fish won't be affected. The problem is when you go 6-7 months without doing a water change. By then your tank's buffering capacity will have been used up (kh) and the hardness will have changed. Adding a lot of water from the tap could be deadly because odds are the hardness levels will be different.

Take discus folks for example. Many of them like to age their water before doing a water change because they believe they're "stabilizing" the ph. I argue that this is a silly practice because all they're doing is looking at ph. If they would look at the kh and gh, they might learn something new. My wild discus receive water changes directly from the tap. Guess what, no dead fish!!!

 

[jcardona1]

The next day the rays died when the water bounced back up to the normal tap ph.
Ph bounce to me is for sure not a myth.

Ah but it is a myth. You're not looking at the bigger picture. Kh, Gh, and Ph are all directly related. Sure, it may seem like your ph is what killed them, but this isn't the case. If you had tested your gh you would have seen why.

Those ph buffers are probably the worst thing you can add to a tank. All they do is mess with your kh. Kh is your carbonate hardness, or your tank's buffering capacity. It's the minerals in your water that resist changes to ph when acids and buffers are added. Those ph up/down products are acid buffers. They attempt to change your ph by using up your tank's buffering capacity, the kh. But if your tank has an adequate kh reading, the buffering capacity will absorb the buffer and the ph will go right back to what it was. Think of your kh as one big "sponge". Keeping adding enough of these acid buffers and the sponge will fill up, allowing your ph to easily change. But at the same time you're leaving your tank susceptible to wild swings, which can be deadly to your fish. Dangerous game to play, which you experienced first hand.

What you experienced was osmotic shock by trying to play with your kh/gh levels. Sure, you thought your were changing your ph but it's a lot more complicated than that. You were changing a lot more, and were directly affecting the TDS of your water (total dissolved solids). These salts and mineral are what affected your fish's osmoregulation, sending them belly up, not your ph.

This is why serious folks in the hobby maintain that ph shock is a myth. Ph can be changed "artificially" via co2, and no fish die. But start messing with your hardness (which will also change your ph), and you'll have some dead fishies on your hands

 

[DavidW]

Take discus folks for example. Many of them like to age their water before doing a water change because they believe they're "stabilizing" the ph. I argue that this is a silly practice because all they're doing is looking at ph. If they would look at the kh and gh, they might learn something new. My wild discus receive water changes directly from the tap. Guess what, no dead fish!!!

nope, not at all...they do it for control and safety, because it gasses off chlorine for free without chems and to bring the water to a decent temp and to adjust pH if needed outside the fish tank , in case of blunder, so the fish are not caught up in the middle of a chemical reaction. It works as a security net.
However, your larger point is right, that it is better to have a pH that is not ideal with stable water perams than to be bouncing the pH etc all over the place.

BTW, the Amazon water as I read it when there, had a maximum uS conductivity reading of 14...as mineral free as R/O water, but full of organics. The lowest reading I got was 4.
pH was a fairly consistent 6.5 =/- 0.5 up and down the various tributaries, except the Rio Negro, which had a pH of 2.8 in some places ( eeek! it burned my feet!)...and very few fish live in those areas but tend to congregate more at the Negro's tributaries where the pH is again around the 6-6.5 mark.
On the rio Negro larger boats have to be hauled out every year for a hull re-paint as the water is so corrosive.

The reason folks can't do this in their tank is because with almost zero buffers in the water pH will crash and also pH meters will give false readings. It is stable ( in mild oscillations) in the Amazon due to the vast amount of water.

 

[Tor-Eriik]

I have an TDS reader, and my tap water TDS is 108,in my tanks they are around 130-150, depends on what day i test. How will a large waterchange with 108 affect fish, when they swim in 140? Are we looking at much bigger differences for it to affect fish?

 

[wing888]

Tds reading will always be slightly different from tap to tank as fish waste and foods will increase tds reading. As mentioned its the big difference in k.h. that causes problems.

My tank reads a tds of 300-320 and my tap/ro mixture is around 280.

I have done 60% changes with no problems.

Out of tap its around 420 tds!

 

[Tor-Eriik]

I do think my kh in the tank is slightly different then the tap water as ive added some coral sand to stable ph, at my tap i think kh is around 0-1, the test never changes color. What it is in my tank i dont know, i have really never thought of all this, very intresting thread! Ive had it this way for 1,5 year now, so i dont think i do anything wrong..I have the total of 9 rays.

 

[wing888]

Yes crushed coral is a good buffer, I use it in when I lived in Asia but now I have too much calcium in my London tap water

 

[skynoch]

Ah but it is a myth. You're not looking at the bigger picture. Kh, Gh, and Ph are all directly related. Sure, it may seem like your ph is what killed them, but this isn't the case. If you had tested your gh you would have seen why.

Those ph buffers are probably the worst thing you can add to a tank. All they do is mess with your kh. Kh is your carbonate hardness, or your tank's buffering capacity. It's the minerals in your water that resist changes to ph when acids and buffers are added. Those ph up/down products are acid buffers. They attempt to change your ph by using up your tank's buffering capacity, the kh. But if your tank has an adequate kh reading, the buffering capacity will absorb the buffer and the ph will go right back to what it was. Think of your kh as one big "sponge". Keeping adding enough of these acid buffers and the sponge will fill up, allowing your ph to easily change. But at the same time you're leaving your tank susceptible to wild swings, which can be deadly to your fish. Dangerous game to play, which you experienced first hand.

What you experienced was osmotic shock by trying to play with your kh/gh levels. Sure, you thought your were changing your ph but it's a lot more complicated than that. You were changing a lot more, and were directly affecting the TDS of your water (total dissolved solids). These salts and mineral are what affected your fish's osmoregulation, sending them belly up, not your ph.

This is why serious folks in the hobby maintain that ph shock is a myth. Ph can be changed "artificially" via co2, and no fish die. But start messing with your hardness (which will also change your ph), and you'll have some dead fishies on your hands

Okay I can relate to the acid buffer using up the tanks buffering capacity so if this is the case in a bare bones tank like I was using would your kh go down and then go back up after adding he ph down?
Now I'm just trying to fully grasp this because if the osmotic shock is what was killing the rays then why would it not be killing the same type of rays when introduced to my main tanks with a very high kh and gh.
Do scaleless fish perhaps react different to ph swings than scaled fish?
One other question, when we look at a ray with what we call ph burn is it actually a burn from the alkaline minerals or from the swings in ph either up or down?
Thanks for the post to help us further undestand.

 

[skynoch]

BTW, the Amazon water as I read it when there, had a maximum uS conductivity reading of 14...as mineral free as R/O water, but full of organics. The lowest reading I got was 4.
pH was a fairly consistent 6.5 =/- 0.5 up and down the various tributaries, except the Rio Negro, which had a pH of 2.8 in some places ( eeek! it burned my feet!)...and very few fish live in those areas but tend to congregate more at the Negro's tributaries where the pH is again around the 6-6.5 mark..

Wow, what type of fish are adapted to that? Very cool that you actually got to experience this first hand.

 

[Just Toby]

Okay I can relate to the acid buffer using up the tanks buffering capacity so if this is the case in a bare bones tank like I was using would your kh go down and then go back up after adding he ph down?
Now I'm just trying to fully grasp this because if the osmotic shock is what was killing the rays then why would it not be killing the same type of rays when introduced to my main tanks with a very high kh and gh.
Do scaleless fish perhaps react different to ph swings than scaled fish?
One other question, when we look at a ray with what we call ph burn is it actually a burn from the alkaline minerals or from the swings in ph either up or down?
Thanks for the post to help us further undestand.

I think ph burn would be ammonia burn due to a low ph stopping the bacteria and causing an ammonia spike