Tell me about Tropheus?

[vfc]

"From what I understand (not my own experience) Tropheus display the most natural behavior in a group of ~30 while in a 260+ gallon tank."

You should find the source of that statement. To me, it sounds like something my local fish store would say to me to get me to buy a larger tank.

Let's say that the above statement is true; that would rule out 99.9% of people who have an aquarium from keeping Tropheus without stressing them.

What's the guideline for Lake Malawi Cichlids? I may have to stop keeping them because I only have a 150G and can't fit a bigger tank in my fishroom.

 

[Dutch]

The source is a dutch website made by people who have a lot of experience with Tanganyika cihlids and base their writings on literature available on Tropheus. They list for instance the work of Ad Konings as a reference. They also list the minimum size as 80 gallons with a 5' length, although Konings lists for all Tropheus species a minimum of 130 gallons and 5'.

Buy books, read, learn and try to understand the reasons for guidelines. They are not always correct, but if you understand the reasons for them you can also understand why they are there and how they might be adjusted.
Don't however press on your own desire to keep certain fish just because you want them while ignoring whether or not they are suitable for an aquarium. There are many species I would love to have, but if I can't house them properly I won't buy them.

As for Malawi, what species do you have? I have a book that lists general guidelines for them.

 

[vfc]

I have Ad Konings book of Cichlids of Lake Malawi. I didn't see the tank size recommendations in this particular book. Do you have the link to the Dutch web site? I have coworkers that work out of our Schiphol-Rijk office. If it's not in English, I can get one of them to check it out for me.

I'm trying to understand what's needed to make the fish I choose to keep, thrive. The poor guy with 5 Tropheus in a 40G tank, that are breeding like crazy, must be confused. I'm confused when people say you need "x" inches of width and "x" gallons; what is the source of this information and is it based on scientific research or the bigger is better rule (bigger being relative to the current popular size tanks). When I was young, I was told my Oscar would get too large for my 10G tank. I went out and bougth one of the biggest tanks at the time; a 29G. Today if I got on this forum and said I had an Oscar in a 29G, I would have people tell me that's way too small.

Now if Tropheus can't see beyond 30" and tire when swimming more that 48", maybe that can be used as a basis for saying a 5' tank is optimal.

 

[Dutch]

Do you have the book by Konings from Back to Nature? Second print?
There might be a difference in the US version vs. the European version, but in mine there is a little gray box that lists the name of the species and then gives five figures below that.
Like this:
Aulonocara baenschi
2/12-9/80cm/100l/30

2/ = level of difficulty to keep on a scale of 1 to 5 where '1' is easy and '5' is impossible
/12-9cm/ = max size of species (we have the metric system)
/80cm/100l/ = minium length and volume of aquarium
/30 = average number of eggs during reproduction

You have an Oscar in a 29 gallon tank?? I can expect people to call that unsuitable.
Check out this link: http://www.fishbase.org/Summary/SpeciesSummary.php?id=3612&lang=English
Do you see the length of the Oscar? 45.7cm is 18 inches!
That is what they can reach in the wild. Due to confinement fish usually don't reach that size in an aquarium, but the maximum length recorded in an aquarium is only 2 inches shorter. I'm willing to bet that such a size was reached in a very, very big tank.

All the figures given are based on observations in nature, but also experience from people in the trade and experienced keepers. Although any amount of logic can tell you that keeping a fish that can grow 18" in nature in a 30" aquarium is a bad idea. The same with keeping a small fish that have a large natural territory.
O. ventralis is given as an example by Konings. This 6" fish requires a minimum 5' aquarium of at least 130 gallons because it has a natural territory of at least 5' in diameter.

The Tanganyika link: http://www.tanganyika.nl/
They have a species list, but also a special Tropheus section (top of the page).

 

[fsc46]

Do you have the book by Konings from Back to Nature? Second print?
There might be a difference in the US version vs. the European version, but in mine there is a little gray box that lists the name of the species and then gives five figures below that.
Like this:
Aulonocara baenschi
2/12-9/80cm/100l/30

2/ = level of difficulty to keep on a scale of 1 to 5 where '1' is easy and '5' is impossible
/12-9cm/ = max size of species (we have the metric system)
/80cm/100l/ = minium length and volume of aquarium
/30 = average number of eggs during reproduction

You have an Oscar in a 29 gallon tank?? I can expect people to call that unsuitable.
Check out this link: http://www.fishbase.org/Summary/SpeciesSummary.php?id=3612&lang=English
Do you see the length of the Oscar? 45.7cm is 18 inches!
That is what they can reach in the wild. Due to confinement fish usually don't reach that size in an aquarium, but the maximum length recorded in an aquarium is only 2 inches shorter. I'm willing to bet that such a size was reached in a very, very big tank.

All the figures given are based on observations in nature, but also experience from people in the trade and experienced keepers. Although any amount of logic can tell you that keeping a fish that can grow 18" in nature in a 30" aquarium is a bad idea. The same with keeping a small fish that have a large natural territory.
O. ventralis is given as an example by Konings. This 6" fish requires a minimum 5' aquarium of at least 130 gallons because it has a natural territory of at least 5' in diameter.

The Tanganyika link: http://www.tanganyika.nl/
They have a species list, but also a special Tropheus section (top of the page).

Not trying to flame you but I'm speaking from experience, not from what I've read. I understand that you trust your source(s) of information but so far I haven't seen any evidence that his tropheus ARE stressed in a 40 gallon.

I can say they breed often. The clutches were 15-25 fry depending on the female. Just the fact that they are breeding is a great sign that they are comfortable in their environment.

As any tropheus owner knows, a stressed tropheus leads to a tropheus with bloat. Which often results in death, but when they breed that's more evidence to suggest they are happy.

I've read that they need to be overcrowded or you will eventually have one left. I had 15 in a 50 gallon and I lost a few to aggression. Then I put them in 20 gallon (until I could set up my 90) and a few weeks later 2 of them were holding! Now I have them with my fronts and since then they haven't breed for me. The aggression towards each other has gone up in the 90 but I haven't lost any yet.

Is fishbase.com your dutch source? I'd would like to lookup what they have posted.

 

[Dutch]

You can be critical fsc46, I don't mind.

As far as Tropheus goes I have several sources that list similar tank sizes and group sizes as a minimum requirement. Ad Konings is a source, although his word isn't sacred, he does have more experience with Tropheus in their natural environment than most with his 500+ hours of diving in lake Tanganyika.
The Tanganyika.nl website is another source. They use the work of Konings, but also other literature and they appear to have serious experience with keeping Tropheus.
Fishbase.org also lists minimum aquarium size as being 150cm or ~5'.
Here a link for moorii: http://www.fishbase.org/Summary/speciesSummary.php?ID=8982&genusname=Tropheus&speciesname=moorii

As for the stress I think I was pretty clear that I have more knowledge about that than the average person since I have done research on stress in fish myself.
I'm by no means an expert yet, but have read a substantial amout of scientific publications on the subject, including this paper by one of my professors: http://physrev.physiology.org/cgi/content/abstract/77/3/591
The reference list will give you an indication what kind of level the paper is, needless to say it's a serious paper.

Stress is extremely difficult to see and never can you generalize like you are doing.
How is their growth-rate? How is their social interaction? How is their blood plasma cortisol level? How is their energy turn-over? How is their ion-regulation? How do their offspring develop? Etc. Etc.
On what do you base your observations? What do you have as a reference for stating those fish are happy and healthy? Have you had experience with a tank set-up that is according to the guidelines? Have you read literature on Tropheus? Do you know their natural behavior?

I've just spent five months on designing my future 100 gallon tank(ordered it yesterday), and will take another three months to do the job right. I did that for a reason, fish are extremely complex animals to work with and a serious amount of knowledge and experience is needed to keep a serious tank.

Just some food for thought....
Inbred fish can under certain conditions appear fitter and stronger than wild-type fishes of the same species, but challenge them and watch the train wreck happen.
I've worked on a research project with common carp that appeared to be happy, yet I measured abnormal scale physiological parameters. Something had been challenging my experimental fish, yet not even our full time caretaker noticed it.