PlanetCatfish.com

Oh, I just remembered on more thing. I think the oxygen bubbles all over the plants from their 'breathing' may disperse into the water. I guess that helps too.

Sure, nothing we can (realisticaly) build in a home will actually represent the natural environment of any of our fishes, except possibly some of the fish that live in puddles their entire life.

But my point is more that we should do our best, in at least a few ways, to reproduce an environment that at least to some extent represents the natural habitat. A fish that lives on a rocky bottom with lots of big stones and fast flowing water is not exactly the right fish for a tank with a lot of plants.

Particularly: The original post asked for our advice. My advice still, no matter what you others think, is that this type of tank is not suitable for most of the fancy L-numbers.

--
Mats

Particularly: The original post asked for our advice. My advice still, no matter what you others think, is that this type of tank is not suitable for most of the fancy L-numbers.

That's why we always read your posts - we learn valuable stuff I don't think the poster is looking to make an accurate biotope but that's still okay, to each their own. Look at Haarvards tanks - a plant would muck up the whole mystique! Are they totally accurate? I don't have a clue but they're so stunning to look at, I don't think many people would mind if they weren't. His fish are obviously really happy and healthy. On the other hand, I like Glenny's tanks too with plants and L-numbers. Different and wonderful.

fish that live in puddles their entire life.

Hmm, M. thoracata says "plant infested pools"...cool.
I know real el natural tanks can't be told apart from high techs and certainly don't look like puddles but I understand the desire to recreate something accurate. It's a tough goal and some of you succeed and excel at it. That's why I asked about what critters to put with the hoplos, i.e. trying to recreate their environment in the same way. If I want to make it as accurate as I can, would anyone care if I had it hooked up to filters or not? Nope, as long as I'm a responsible fishkeeper.

In one way, some people buy biofilters and some people create them. Some do both. No harm done.

Particularly: The original post asked for our advice. My advice still, no matter what you others think, is that this type of tank is not suitable for most of the fancy L-numbers.

That's quite harsh, I am not saying they will spawn or grow as big as possible, but they will certenally strive if I take care of them

If any issues will arrise and it can be seen on the fish, I will either move them to a different aquarium or go mid - tech

What I was trying to say, which may not have come across there, is that "I don't believe this is the right sort of setup for a L-number catfish" - and others may differ in that opinion - that is fine, and allowed. I also think there are PLENTY of beautiful fish that can live nicely in this sort of tank.

I'm also not saying you can't have plants and L-number fish together. But if you want a balance between feeding and plants, you need quite a lot of plants and fairly few fish. And this is where we have the conflict. If there is not enough plants, too much nitrate in the water will cause the fish trouble. Too much plants is at the very least unnatural, and certainly not biotopically correct, even if the fish are technically OK with it.

Haavards tanks are beautiful, and at least in spirit biotopically (or habitatually [is that a word]) correct for the fish he's keeping. They are completely accurate, as the stone he's using is a different kind than that of the rivers in South America - but that's pretty much impossible to ask for. But they are definitely following the type of under-water situation that the fish will find themselves in when they are in the natural habitat.

Now, there are some people who import rock and sand from the river the fish came from - that's going far too far in that direction.

It is of course not my tank, not my fish and not my money, so in the end, it's not my decision.

--
Mats

Hi Ofird,
Here's the tanks we're referring to and it will help explain things when you see them. The L-numbers are from places that are 'furnished' like these tanks so this is where they would be most suitable as MatsP explained. http://www.planetcatfish.com/forum/my_a ... d%20Stoere

Beautiful eh?

Here's the other beautiful tanks with L-numbers, these are pics from Glenny's tanks. Not at all a true recreation of where the fish are found but stunning none the less. Very picture heavy.http://www.planetcatfish.com/forum/view ... =4&t=21831

I think your biggest challenge aside from finding the desired fish is to make the oxygen, current etc suitable to start with. There's several plants that like a nice whoosh of water around them and suck up nutrients like there's no tomorrow. Are your current plants going to be happy at the higher temps? Lots of them are but maybe look into that first just in case you have to swap one or two out. Better done now than later when the roots have already formed a big mat on the bottom.

The best of luck and don't forget to post pictures of your fish when you get them, there always room for fish pictures

Yep - more than beautiful, I like it so much when people create a complete biotope, I didn't have the guts to do one just yet, since I am really keen on "combining more specifies together" - although I wont be mixing Cardinals and Cyclids of course ...but from the South Americas basin - I am looking for a vaster community of species that can make the same conditions.

My plants can tolerate 28, the reason is that they are preparing for the next beauties to land....which I wouldn't dare raising here...oh well, what the heck - WILD GREEN DISCUS

My south american tank has a syno in it but I didn't know then what I know now and I love the little guy so he's "a tourist visiting South America"

Wild green discus?? ooo, I'll have to look those up, not catfishy but there's nothing wrong with me learning about other fish

Hi...okay I get the low tech thing, it has been around awhile just keeps getting renamed but thanks for the explanations, I think for the size of pleco's you are looking at the size of tank may be too small, you will need more volume...are the Discus going in there as well?

Interesting discussion.

I must agree with Mats and Barbie on this one though.

L number Banana wrote:There's a whole group of people who enjoy the challenge of creating the balance of an el natural tank. There's experts who are really low tech and would certainly never do a normal water change to trash the balance.

I know that these low-tech methods do work, but only I feel when you stock low numbers of the right species of fishes. Small anabantoids, rasboras, tetras, killifish, Otocinclus or Corydoras would be perfect. These types of fishes generally come from vegetated lentic habitats and are adapted to slow-moving lower oxygen environments.

You will indeed be able to run a low nitrate setup with the above fishes, but my concern is that this will not be possible with carnivorous and messy poo machines like L numbers. Will the plant growth be able to deal with the nitrates they will produce? You do have a good sized tank though ofird, so that will help.

L number Banana wrote:if you're the kind of person that wants to recreate a little bit of nature like a real biotope or just want to keep lovely fish in the type of tank you like. Neither one is 'wrong' I suppose, eh?

MatsP wrote:A fish that lives on a rocky bottom with lots of big stones and fast flowing water is not exactly the right fish for a tank with a lot of plants.

As far as "biotope" goes, my observations indicate that the fish (i.e. L numbers) don't seem to care in the slightest about what your aquascape looks like (whether its wood, rock, plants or clay pots), providing they have the correct temp, constant high oxygen levels, clean water (low organic waste) and places to hide.

What I think Mats was getting at, was that it is far far easier to provide this in a tank set up for the specific needs of the fish (i.e. a "biotope"). Rheophilic loricariids are more sensitive to organic pollutants than the lowland lentic species I mentioned above. They do far better in heavily filtered rock decorated tanks with large regular water changes - basically a biotope aquarium.

Biotope for me is not about getting the geology or the exact species composition geographically accurate. It is more about having an environment in keeping with the habitat requirements of the fish in question.

ofird wrote:My plants can tolerate 28, the reason is that they are preparing for the next beauties to land....which I wouldn't dare raising here...oh well, what the heck - WILD GREEN DISCUS

I'm not sure if the discus are planned for this tank... so I will reserve judgement on that one

I'd have to agree with Mats and Barbie too.
The amount of different things besides Nitrate that build up in aquariums, even in a short space of time, are pretty astronomical. Phosphate is probably the worst as it's common in most fishfoods, not to mention aquatic plant fertilisers. Some fish even seem to react badly to the buildup of hormones produced by other fish!
Shaun

I have to agree with everyone on this and that point but there's still misunderstandings about the tanks.

A natural tank doesn't use fertilizer at all, it's only what the fish give. You would certainly have to test for NPK etc because there shouldn't be an excess of any of those.If it's not used up, it's not in balance. As far as the organic matter/waste, everyone gets stuck on that one, same deal - it should be broken down, if it's not then you can see it (yuck), it would show up in tests and it would mean that it's not being broken down fast enough (bad for fish!). It should behave like an underwater compost - banana peel goes in rich soil comes out only the aquatic version. Remember a real natural tank uses soil underneath, you can use whatever you want on top, big rocks, slate, gravel but sand kinda sucks because the soil that used to be shrimp pellets or wood poo has to find it's way down.

Some fish even seem to react badly to the buildup of hormones produced by other fish!

You're absolutely right, I've just never heard of anyone having this issue but that doesn't mean it hasn't happened!

Racoll:

I know that these low-tech methods do work, but only I feel when you stock low numbers of the right species of fishes. Small anabantoids, rasboras, tetras, killifish, Otocinclus or Corydoras would be perfect. These types of fishes generally come from vegetated lentic habitats and are adapted to slow-moving lower oxygen environments.

There's no reason to have slow moving, low oxygen water unless of course that what the fishkeeper wants. In fact most I've actually followed the threads about or are shown as set-ups in recent magazines and books recommend a good flow. No one would want algae to have a chance to build up. Sorry, I haven't actually read about or even seen a low flow etc tank so I don't really know what would happen.

The poo machines and carnivores should be fine, plants need alot of micro nutrients, molybdemum, selenium, copper, manganese etc and forgive the spelling. BUT if I were to start a tank tomorrow, I'd have to use some very mature and healthy plants, THEN start adding the fish and monitor. That's all part of it, if your plants are growing like crazy, you could have bad water from too much unused nutrients and must stock less until your plants catch up and are using it all. If your plants are stunted, you need to add more fish or feed more. Balance.

the fish (i.e. L numbers).........providing they have the correct temp, constant high oxygen levels, clean water (low organic waste) and places to hide.

Exactly! So everyone's in agreement about what's needed but there are different ways of achieving it.

Biotope for me is not about getting the geology or the exact species composition geographically accurate. It is more about having an environment in keeping with the habitat requirements of the fish in question.

That's a good definition so obviously anyone wanting to do a biotope with L-numbers wouldn't opt for a planted tank. You could only do the "health requirements" of the fish, high ox, good current and low or no organic waste.

Maybe we're all making a big hoo-haa out of nothing. In one tank, my biofilter is the big root-crammed mat on the bottom, on the other tank it's that thing that sits in the filter on the back. In one tank, I test the water and don't change but top it up if needed. In the other, I test the water, change a bunch regardless of what the tests say. The filtered tank was a breeze to set up but requires maintenance, the unfiltered tank took forever to set-up and play with until finally it settles, now it has no maintenance. Six of one, half dozen of another? Fish death in the old tank 0, fish death in the filtered tank 3. I'm very much still learning and ALL input is valued.

You know of course that there will never be agreement with people who keep one or the other style until one of you very experienced people try a natural tank and fill everyone in
Someone out there has room for another tank, eh?

Most of our favorite L-# fish are rheophilic fish.
I make a distinction between fish surviving and fish thriving.
Even well filtered aquariums with regular water changes have more in common with waste water treatment plants than our fishes' natural habitats.

If one wishes to go au naturale, then I would recommend keeping small Anabantoids or Killiefish.

I began breeding wild Discus over 4 decades ago. Good luck with them if you are unwilling to provide water changes and decent filtration.
Most Discus keepers who attempt to create wild Discus biotopes actually tend to imitate the conditions when and where wild Discus can be collected. That is at the peak of the low water season when conditions are at their very worst for Discus. The most stressful period of the year when they are most vulnerable to their predators. Remember, Discus wait until the wet season when the rivers overflow into the wooded flood plains and they choose to spawn among the submerged trees. The water is at it absolute freshest and there is an abundance of foods the Discus need to get into spawning condition and when there is an abundance of zooplankton that provides the fry their first foods.

The"natural aquarium' is as much an artificial construct as those which rely on technology only with a lower carrying capacity.

apistomaster:

I make a distinction between fish surviving and fish thriving.

Couldn't agree more, I don't think people who are so well known for their tanks, books, lectures, articles etc would ever want to keep miserable fish Do any of them keep L-numbers? Don't know, never asked.

The"natural aquarium' is as much an artificial construct as those which rely on technology

Yup!

Good point about changing 'seasons'/inducing spawning behavior, can't do that in el naturel aquarium, I don't think? I'll have to see what the experts do, just out of curiosity, have no intentions of going there myself but good discus info for Ofrid

I'll just butt out of this one here, nothing I could say would be of any use to people who just don't like/want/agree with the idea of this. And there's nothing wrong with that, diversity is the spice of life. If anyone wants to try one though, the authors of all those books etc are very approachable and show up at a lot of conventions.

Cheers all!

I just went through this topic, and i must say, I'm very annoyed

The problem is, the 'low tech' (better put, low water change) tank is not intended to suit the fish perfectly, it is intended for other purposes.

Fish are living organisms, and they need good care. All technical measures - be it filtering, water change, heating - are intended for their well being.

I did not mention CO2 adding to the water, as this hurts the fish. OK, some plants grow faster from it, but are the plants therefore happier? Stupid question, plants have no nerves and are therefore unable to be happy. Or unhappay, contrarily to fishes

This is precisely my point - fish happiness is what it is all about

Larry - Apistomaster - wrote about Discus in the wild. I once heard about people finding huge shcools of Corydoras in Peru, collecting them and than all died - because the Corydoras were so unfortunately as to be caught in a wrong pond

I myself found cichlids in a smelly pond, but they survived, and are now living in clean, unsmelly water. They don't need, however, water movement, just clean water suffices (in spring I put water resulting from a water change in a outdoors tank, wait a few weeks for the algae to develop and disappear, collect the resulting daphina and use the left over clean water for these fish)

Therefore, I think, if one would not want to change water, make a system, consisting of 90 % water oudoors, to regenerate it, and 10 % in the tank

but saying 'the concept does not allow this' is, to express me mildly, strange to me

MatsP wrote:

nvcichlids wrote:Not to sound mean or anything, But I NEVER do water changes on my tanks. My levels are perfect for everything and never run into problems. I know the only thing I do is re-fill when water evaporates. I think if you can accurately set up biotopes, then waterchanges are not nessecary.

Really? You mustn't have many fish in each tank, and a huge amount of plants. Or a nitrate test that doesn't work - it wouldn't be the first time...

I haven't measured nitrate levels for a long while, but I sure get nitrate levels rising if I don't change the water. But I have a lot of fish in all my tanks ("one small bristlenose in the hospital-tank" is the exception) - the only tank I have with less than ten fish is the 200 liter/55g Hemiancistrus sp(L128) tank.

Remember, in nature, in rivers, there is a whole lot more water per fish, and the water is constantly being circulated (rain down, river runs to the ocean and evaporation goes up to form new rain).

--
Mats

Yeah, my tanks are actually cich lid breeding tanks for the most part (the way I make money), so there are normallya couple of breeder adults and fry, oh my are there fry lol. I have recently set up another 180 with a breeding group of pike cichs and guiacara species. Most of my breeding cats are also in low number tanks

Bas Pels wrote:the 'low tech' (better put, low water change) tank

Well put. I fail to see the "concept" here?

The tank in question:

* is filtered and well circulated
* has plants
* has a nutritious substrate
* has low level florescent lighting
* has added bottled fertilisers
* is well stocked with greedy fish like discus and L numbers

Heck, that applies to nearly every tank I've ever owned, except I change the water frequently!

I kept a slightly bigger tank with discus and L numbers, and I had rampant plant growth. I pulled out handfuls of hornwort and Amazon frogbit each week. Did this keep the nitrates at an acceptable level? Not a chance. Only weekly water changes with RO water could achieve this.

With no injected CO2 supply and limited carbon from a bottle, the plants here won't be able to keep up with the waste from discus and L numbers. This will mean rapidly rising organic pollutants - something that won't be tolerated by wild discus.

Just to reiterate, I am not disagreeing with the Walstad method. I just think ofird's not quite going about it the right way.

In fact, I quite fancy setting up a Walstad style nano-tank on my desk at work with some Trichopsis and Boraras

In fact, I quite fancy setting up a Walstad style nano-tank on my desk at work with some Trichopsis and Boraras

Yippee! Write us an article as you go!

I always thought "low tech" meant a planted tank without fancy lighting or CO2...at least that's what the books and magazines tell me? And most of the recent planted tank literature I read refers to large frequent water changes to cope with the extra ferterliser/nutrient loading. And all methods, whether low or high tech, recommend using low-impact livestock: small tetras, livebearers, shrimp...not Discus or L-Numbers!
I think you are confusing "low tech" with "little or no maintenance"?
Shaun