The Significance of pH for cichlds

  • We are currently upgrading MFK. thanks! -neo
Each 10th,”lower” in the pH scale, it is 10 times more acidic than the previous tenth.
Not to take away from your overall point, which I agree with within reason, as I mentioned earlier. But I've seen people say this before and it's a common notion in the hobby. But it's an apparent misunderstanding, mistaking 10ths for integers (whole numbers).
https://chem.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Physical_and_Theoretical_Chemistry_Textbook_Maps/Supplemental_Modules_(Physical_and_Theoretical_Chemistry)/Acids_and_Bases/Acids_and_Bases_in_Aqueous_Solutions/The_pH_Scale#:~:text=The pH scale is logarithmic,than a pH of 10.
"The pH scale is logarithmic, meaning that an increase or decrease of an integer value changes the concentration by a tenfold. For example, a pH of 3 is ten times more acidic than a pH of 4. Likewise, a pH of 3 is one hundred times more acidic than a pH of 5. Similarly a pH of 11 is ten times more basic than a pH of 10."

"Since pH can be affected by chemicals in the water, pH is an important indicator of water that is changing chemically. pH is reported in "logarithmic units". Each number represents a 10-fold change in the acidity/basicness of the water. Water with a pH of five is ten times more acidic than water having a pH of six."

"By this, for every one decrease (due to the negative sign) in the pH, the acidity increases by a factor of ten (A pH of 3 is 10 times more acidic than a pH of 4, and is 100 times more acidic than a pH of 5)."

"Logarithmic Scale: It's essential to note that the pH scale is logarithmic, meaning each unit change represents a tenfold difference in the acidity or alkalinity. For example, a solution with a pH of 4 is ten times more acidic than a solution with a pH of 5."

--So the ten times difference (or ten times ten, ten times ten times ten, etc.) is between whole numbers, not between each tenth. This is a MASSIVE distinction-- the difference between pH 7.5 and 6.5 is 10, not 10 billion (ten to the tenth power).
 
Last edited:
One of my points in this soliloquy.
Is that there are always resonable alternatives availble for waterever water parameters we are dealt with.
One of the species I always liked were Heros severus, but with my high pH, hard water, keeping them was always a bit futile.
So instead, I kept these,

View attachment 1561264View attachment 1561265
Having the experience that you do, would you say a ph difference of 0.7-1 from their normal habitat is too much, or is that within the range of what most would deem "acceptable"?
 
Having the experience that you do, would you say a ph difference of 0.7-1 from their normal habitat is too much, or is that within the range of what most would deem "acceptable"?
I realize you didn't direct this at me, but the answer is you can't put a blanket rule on it because it depends on species or type of fish. For one thing, people tend to make assumptions about natural habitat that aren't necessarily true.

I'll give you just one example, discus. Conventional wisdom is they come from very warm, acidic water. However, this depends on the type of discus, and one type (considered S. haraldi by Bleher; however, discus nomenclature isn't agreed upon by all sources, which is a whole other subject) is found in pH anywhere from 6.0 to 7.8 (look at Symphysodon haraldi in the article below), telling you S. haraldi is an adaptable species and explaining why some people can keep them in pH 8 without any issues. This doesn't mean you should keep (pure) heckel or green discus this way and illustrates my point that you can't make blanket rules. Another thing this illustrates is the common idea that Amazon region waters are always either acidic or neutral pH is incorrect.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: jjohnwm
MonsterFishKeepers.com