Fish load factor
- Thread starter nipat
- Start date
I'd guess not. Bristlenose and any other ancistrus spp. are smaller than many other fish, but they're crap factories with fins. I'm guessing digestive efficiency, food sources and metabolism have a whole lot to do with it.
My bet would be on the neons producing more; they're much more active little fish.
My bet would be on the neons producing more; they're much more active little fish.
You can gauge things better if you consider how much is fed to the fish, some folks feed their anegls fish a lot more than some one else, what goes in, must come up.
So even the comparison for the fish size etc, is not the same, let alone different groups etc of species.
You can measure and weight the fish food, and analyze that for N and P etc based of dosing frequency.
Just treat fish food as fertilizer.
About 10% is retained in growing fish, 90% is NH4/PO4 etc.
Regards,
Tom Barr
So even the comparison for the fish size etc, is not the same, let alone different groups etc of species.
You can measure and weight the fish food, and analyze that for N and P etc based of dosing frequency.
Just treat fish food as fertilizer.
About 10% is retained in growing fish, 90% is NH4/PO4 etc.
Regards,
Tom Barr
One big Poop Or Many Little Poops
Hi Nipat,
While I entirely agree with Tom Barr, the amounts of food in are all that can be in the system eaten or not. Once upon a time, I dosed my plants by over-feeding the fish.
I would like to answer your question as asked.
Neon Tetras, Paracheirodon innesi are omnivores with, in my humble potted-plant opinion, a definite carnivore bent. I suspect that gram for gram the Neon Tetra is as messy as any Angelfish.
Given the Neon Tetras higher energy lifestyle, as compared to Angelfish, I would not be surprised if someone were to do a serious study that it would turn out that our little Neon Tetras were “dirtier” from a waste perspective than the Angelfish.
As to Dan’s observations regarding Bristlenose and Ancistrus in general. My suspicion after having watched these marvelous little creatures in quite a bit of detail in the past six months is that like any predominantly vegetarian critter the Bristlenose consumes more plant material to gain equivalent nutrient value compared to net consumption of carnivores or omnivores. That the resulting poop is simply more fibrous and less nutritive value, therefore less associated microbial activity, less overall potential for toxic effects than that of a carnivore/omnivore.
Viewing our tanks as the miniature wastewater facilities they are, wastes of vegetarians requires less “treatment” effort than that of carnivores and omnivores.
Biollante
nipat;47557 said:
Hi Nipat,
While I entirely agree with Tom Barr, the amounts of food in are all that can be in the system eaten or not. Once upon a time, I dosed my plants by over-feeding the fish.
I would like to answer your question as asked.
Neon Tetras, Paracheirodon innesi are omnivores with, in my humble potted-plant opinion, a definite carnivore bent. I suspect that gram for gram the Neon Tetra is as messy as any Angelfish.
Given the Neon Tetras higher energy lifestyle, as compared to Angelfish, I would not be surprised if someone were to do a serious study that it would turn out that our little Neon Tetras were “dirtier” from a waste perspective than the Angelfish.
As to Dan’s observations regarding Bristlenose and Ancistrus in general. My suspicion after having watched these marvelous little creatures in quite a bit of detail in the past six months is that like any predominantly vegetarian critter the Bristlenose consumes more plant material to gain equivalent nutrient value compared to net consumption of carnivores or omnivores. That the resulting poop is simply more fibrous and less nutritive value, therefore less associated microbial activity, less overall potential for toxic effects than that of a carnivore/omnivore.
Viewing our tanks as the miniature wastewater facilities they are, wastes of vegetarians requires less “treatment” effort than that of carnivores and omnivores.
Biollante
Huh?
Hi Nipat,
I am not being contentious, I am just curious.
What were you looking for?
I am glad it was "helpful," but you got three contradictory answers.
Was this some kind of Rorschach test?
Biollante
nipat;47615 said:Thanks everyone, it's helpful.
Hi Nipat,
I am not being contentious, I am just curious.
What were you looking for?
I am glad it was "helpful," but you got three contradictory answers.
Was this some kind of Rorschach test?
Biollante
I was thinking about the suitable number of fishes in an aquarium and
wondered how much fish size mattered. The Angelfish and Neon were
just for example, actually I was not specific about species then.
So your and Dan's replies are helpful. Because they inform me that
size alone is not enough. I've to be specific about species too.
And Tom's reply gives new way to think about it: just watch how much
food I put in.
wondered how much fish size mattered. The Angelfish and Neon were
just for example, actually I was not specific about species then.
So your and Dan's replies are helpful. Because they inform me that
size alone is not enough. I've to be specific about species too.
And Tom's reply gives new way to think about it: just watch how much
food I put in.
I'd go with Tom's idea since that would most accurately account for nutrients into the tank. However I used to see stocking recommendations based on length. Something like inches of fish squared ( or cubed ) x some square inches. Take the number of square inches of your tank surface and then subtract as needed. Tends to give very low stocking numbers and I suspect has roots as it were in things like dutch aquascaping. It does seem like they were trying to account for body mass in that equation though, which would probably indirectly account for food intake but may tie some of the ideas together for you.
-
S
-
S
On the opposite end, I've found that you can stuff a tank full of fish and it's going to be social stress that kills them before anything hits toxicity. One pair of apistos spawning will impact your maximum bioload far more than twice as many schooling fish.
Classic EI means WC every other week, and it's good practice if you want spawns. A higher bioload is naturally an option with that kind of turnover.
Classic EI means WC every other week, and it's good practice if you want spawns. A higher bioload is naturally an option with that kind of turnover.