Aquascaping styles and fish welfare?

Hello, everyone!

Today I need an opinion on differents aquascaping styles and welfare of fishes,
as a lot of you might already know that I have an Iwagumi set up (kinda fail and infested in algae and snails) and after I added cardinal tetra in the tank I feel like it’s not for them as there are no place for them to hide, I’m thinking of recaping it so that there will be more suitable for them.
Aquascape types (all pictures come from the internet):

1. Iwagumi/japanese garden style




2. ADA Nature Aquarium style/ “The Island” style



3. Forest style



4. Dutch



5. Landscaping



6. The Low tech/ classic style



7. Biotope
which includes:
Blackwater
Fast flowing river
Brackish (mollies and hardwater fish)
Cichlid lake
and other nature habitats...



What do you think of all of them andone do you think is the most suitable and healthiest one for fishes in your opinion?

IMO the least suitable one would be an Iwagumi
style...

Tag: @Colin_T @Byron @Slaphppy7
@WhistlingBadger

Personally the low tech style. Reason being that its more wild and woolly and more natural looking which will enable fish to hide and rest easier.

Not a fan of manicured aquariums cos they aren't that way in the wild and fish of all types have a tendency to move the "furniture" around, thus spoiling the perfect manicure look.

I am definitely a wild and woolly fan

Low tech for me, as well....as mentioned above, those perfectly scaped tanks usually only stay looking like that long enough to take pics....

Agree with you guys opinion, really like your crypts tank btw
@Slaphppy7


What about Dutch styles?
I recently bought CO2 (big mistake I know) and do you think dutch style would be good for fishes?

Dutch style would probably sneak in as a second option for me. I have found that some aquariums do not actually suit that heavier style of planting though and they can be alot of work to maintain (mainly in keeping everything well fertilised and trimmed neatly). Whereas the wild and woolly can be allowed to grow out a bit and not look scruffy....if that makes sense.

Cardinal tetras will do well in all of them except 1 and 7 because there isn't enough floating plants for them. But tanks 2-6 are all fine.

I love the look of 3, 4 & 5, but number 3 Forest is really stunning.

It's all down to personal taste and whatever water you have, without chemically messing with it.
I personally like a well planted tank, with bogwood, but then I've been fortunate in being able to have plants that haven't all died on me.
Whilst planted tanks are now more normal and supported than they were a couple of decades ago, they do require a lot of work and, assuming your water's okay, I'd suggest they take take more care than the fish!
Biotopes are great, but can be limited when you want a greater range of fish in your tank and getting hold of all of the 'correct' materials can be a challenge. If I had a dedicated Fish Room, with multiple tanks, then I'd certainly have a series of different biotopes. Until then...

Low tech, Dutch and Forest appeal to me, but I'd be aware of just how quickly the latter two could grow out of hand.
Besides, as I impled earlier, I'm not going to be the one living there.

Try this for a thought process...
What water do I have?
What fish can thrive in that water?
What do those fish need, in terms of surroundings?
What plants can thrive in that water?
What rocks and/or wood would have a neutral effect in that water?

Amano was an incredible artistic designer, but iwagumi tanks are one of the worst habitats for most fish. I don't think I have ever seen a photograph of one of these tanks that does not show the fish under obvious stress. Bad.

No. 2 is almost as bad when it comes to fish. The tank pictured here would maybe be "accepted" by fish that could stay under the wood and plants, but you would not see any of them out and about or in the upper level (except maybe at feeding).

No. 3 is better fish-wise, but like another member said, I too do not like artificial manicured tanks. But the fish would have significantly less problems here than they would have in the first two tanks. No. 5 is related, but too "open." It is no coincidence that the Ember Tetras are all close to the bottom...they need cover.

No. 4 is lovely, but again totally "unnatural," and with this sort of tank the plants are the first priority and thus the fish can have serious issues. There is now evidence that adding diffused CO2 does impact fish long-term, which should really be no surprise to anyone. Many aquarists with this style of tank do not keep fish--I had this discussion with Tom Barr some years back, and he agreed. You would never see a natural habitat like these (which may not matter were it not for the impact on the fish) because so many different species of plants cannot co-exist in the wild,

The last two are obviously better than any of the others if fish are included. I would add floating plants to both for even greater fish benefit.

Thank you all for your opinions!

I will be recaping my Iwagumi to low tech and set up another tank to be a dutch scape.

Colin_T said:

7 because there isn't enough floating plants for them.

Click to expand...

Isn’t their rio negro river like that though? Wouldn’t blackwater keep fish feel secure?

Byron said:

Amano was an incredible artistic designer, but iwagumi tanks are one of the worst habitats for most fish. I don't think I have ever seen a photograph of one of these tanks that does not show the fish under obvious stress. Bad.

Click to expand...

I would say most of Amano aquascape as it claimed to be.

It won’t stop me from scaping the the ADA style as I have a lot of idea for my tank (I have 2 tank left) I woudn’t add any fish though.

Barry Tetra said:

Isn’t their rio negro river like that though? Wouldn’t blackwater keep fish feel secure?

Click to expand...

Deep black water does make fish feel secure because they tend to sit in the deeper water. However, an aquarium is quite shallow and most tetras prefer some floating plants.

If you did something like tank 7, and added a few floating plants, it would be fine for them

I agree with most of what's been said already. Japanese and island tanks look really cool, but they aren't good fish habitat. They might be really good for inverts, but too high maintenance for my taste. Some dutch aquariums are so densely planted that there's little room for fish. I'm really intrigued by forest and landscape tanks, but the good ones are so realistic that fish seem out of place in them...and who wants to do all the maintenance? I tend to do classic tanks with biotope overtones, trying to get all my fish, plants, and general look from a specific body of water or region of the world. Visually, I like my tanks to be all about the interplay between fish, plants, and hardscape.

I am writing from mostly personal experience but also from a wildlife management perspective. A good way of developing a sense of what kind of environment most fish like is to go snorkeling in a local lake or creek. All animals need the following to thrive:

1) Shelter areas - areas that they can hide, even from us, this areas need to have subdued lighting (very important for smaller and non schooling fish)
2) Free, open, space areas - areas that they can swim and move around with other fish or on their own (Of more importance for larger predatory fish)
3) Fringe areas - not fully open, not fully sheltered. These are the areas where most interactions and activities occur. (Of most importance to most types of fish)


Tank 1: no shelter area, no fringe area, fish can only feel secure if schooling. Fish in this kind of habitat typically stay near the surface, or bottom of the tank. No where to run no where to hide.
Tank 2: Some deep shelter for small fish, small amount of fringe. The island means most of the volume is devoted to open area. Most fish will feel exposed in this tank but this might be ok for very small fish that can use the cover in the middle but the tank would have to be located in a low traffic area.
Tanks 3 and 4: Getting a bit better. Still lots of open space, some really deep shelter but that comes at a cost because the density of the plantings make it difficult for the fish to move around in the shelter areas.
Tank 5: Landscaping, plants too dense do not provide any shelter
Tank 6: Best tank. Planting pretty dense but if the tank has more depth then even the larger fish can get some shelter behind the swords. Plants are a better for providing the fringe areas because fish typically cannot get hurt on them if they panic.
Tank 7: Better tank. No planting which can be pretty realistic, though not as many areas of deep cover unless the fish can hide behind some of the wood.

I think every tank should have a zone where the fish can be totally out of view if they want to be. They also need to be able to move in this area. Additional the fringe areas should not be so dense as to make it difficult for the fish to navigate in them. When laying these areas out consider your larger and smaller fish, and where your fish tend to stay, ie bottom of the tank vs top. Having your open areas only at the top of the tank will not help your bottom dwelling fish. In terms of decorations plants are the best, followed by rounded wood and rock, in my opinion. I would even experiment with having large plants at the front of the tank, it is nice to watch the fish swim through the vegetation, and give the fish the sense that they are looking at you from behind shelter. The typical tank layout is mostly to provide viewing opportunities for the owners, which makes sense on one hand, but having more fringe areas provides more comfort for the fish and they will be out more.

Great pics!
Will the tanks be indoors?
IIRC some of your tanks are not and I'd imagine that outdoors would be hard on plants as you have no control over the light.

Barry Tetra said:

Aquascape types (all pictures come from the internet):

Click to expand...

Naughts said:

Great pics!

Click to expand...