Geophagus without sand

So I’ve always wanted to keep Geophagus having kept an array of cichlids before. But I am 100% against sand, I’ve tried it before and hate it. I know Geophagus are supposed to be kept with sand to sift for food, but after a trip to BluePlanet the other day, I saw a beautiful tank with angels and Geophagus, and the substrate was river pebbles and rocks, which I much prefer. I am wandering if it is acceptable to keep Geophagus with this kind of substrate? I take it they are also okay in planted tanks, as the tank at BluePlanet was heavily planted. I have attached some pictures

"The most essential item of décor is a soft, sandy substrate so that the fish can browse naturally (see ‘Diet’). Coarser materials such as gravel or small pebbles can inhibit feeding, damage gill filaments and even be ingested with the potential of internal damage or blockages."

I wouldn't keep them with any other substrate, regardless of what you see in the shops...

BluePlanet is not a shop, it is a nationwide, massive aquarium in the UK that houses and educates on a number of fish from tetras to sharks, hence why I thought there would be some method behind the substrate?

Oli said:

BluePlanet is not a shop, it is a nationwide, massive aquarium in the UK that houses and educates on a number of fish from tetras to sharks, hence why I thought there would be some method behind the substrate?

Home Page | Blue Planet Aquarium

Head to the Blue Planet Aquarium homepage to find what we offer. From shark dives and animal listings to educational visits and visitor info.

www.blueplanetaquarium.com

Click to expand...

I see....they may have feeding regiments that don't require sand-sifting, but why alter a fish's natural behavior?

Seems odd to me...

I’ve kept a few different species without sand, and they’ll probably be fine. I’ve used larger pebbles/rocks that were much too big to be swallowed and the fish didn’t seem to care one way or the other. I didn’t get any unusual illnesses or unexpected deaths. I definitely preferred them on sand though - it’s a lot more fun watching them sifting and constantly rescaping the tank.

To deprive a fish of what it considers essential is cruel and inhumane. Period. You cannot ever rely on anything in a fish store when it comes to their tanks. Permanent housing at home for the entire life of the fish is a very different matter. Do your research, and be prepared to provide what the fish needs.

I'm really surprised to see it to be honest Blue Planet is a great place. I suppose you could argue in a home aquarium the issue with the substrate is not to have a grain size they can sift and get stuck in their gills, which is why you should really only keep them on the very fine sand.

If you were to replicate this in a home aquarium I think the fish would probably be 'fine' but you would deprive them of a natural behaviour and the way they would naturally eat. Personally I wouldn't and would look at other options.

In terms of not wanting a sand substrate what is it you don't like? Just wondering if there are any tips we can give that might help change your mind? There are sooo many advantages to using sand over gravel.

I guess one thing to bear in mind is that we have very little idea what fish consider to be essential. Assuming fish have the ability to consider anything at all. It’s natural for many of the fish we keep to catch and eat other fish, but that doesn’t mean we must set up our tanks to encourage this natural behaviour. Maybe a more sensible approach is to find a balance between what makes you happy as a hobbyist and what keeps your fish healthy and comfortable. If no harm or distress is caused to your fish, then that’s a good start.

Part of the fun of keeping geos is their sand sifting. It’s cool to watch (there’s a reason why most of my tanks over the last 10 years end up with one geo species or another), and IME they help keep the sand clean (their sifting churns the substrate a lot of the detritus gets picked up by the filter).

That said, I’d be surprised if there were any harmful effects of avoiding sand (assuming whatever alternative used is too big to be a choking hazard). I’d bet there’s no scientific or anecdotal evidence showing geos are harmed by the absence of sand, so I think this realistically comes down to personal preference.

I kept a geophagus over gravel for years and he did ok. But he might have been the exception. I got a couple of young geophagus from a breeder a couple of years ago and lost both of them to gravel. so now, I just probably won't keep geophagus.

In the wild, you don't find Geophagus far from geo they can phage (earth they can 'eat'). My view is if you want to keep them as ornaments, no sand is fine. If you have any interest in them as fish, sand is essential. It's the age old aquarist's dilemna - do we make the fish adapt to us, or do we adapt to the fish?

Any Geophagus kept sandless will just wander about being pretty. A friend in the business told me he sells Geophagus in bare tanks with the bottom and back painted black, so people can see them. His own Geophagus at home are in tanks with lots of sand, because he says he likes to watch them. Seeing is for selling, watching's for fishkeeping. That seems reasonable to me.

my geophagus ate all the small fish instead of sifting sand. He was fine until he realized the platies would fit in his mouth

Alice B said:

my geophagus ate all the small fish instead of sifting sand. He was fine until he realized the platies would fit in his mouth

Click to expand...

I only had trouble with Geo aggression (other than sp Araguia, who were rough characters) in tanks with large gravel. I wondered if the boredom or frustration of not being able to eat and behave as they are wired to added to the aggression - the lion pacing in an old school cage effect. But I never followed up - I just changed what I was doing with the tanks. After that, even though any fish will eat another fish that fits in its mouth - even goldfish can predate - I never had trouble with any Geo species eating their companions. They were too busy sifting all day to bother with fish higher up the water column, and the tanks I had them in allowed other fish to scoot away.

malfunction said:

I guess one thing to bear in mind is that we have very little idea what fish consider to be essential. Assuming fish have the ability to consider anything at all. It’s natural for many of the fish we keep to catch and eat other fish, but that doesn’t mean we must set up our tanks to encourage this natural behaviour. Maybe a more sensible approach is to find a balance between what makes you happy as a hobbyist and what keeps your fish healthy and comfortable. If no harm or distress is caused to your fish, then that’s a good start.

Part of the fun of keeping geos is their sand sifting. It’s cool to watch (there’s a reason why most of my tanks over the last 10 years end up with one geo species or another), and IME they help keep the sand clean (their sifting churns the substrate a lot of the detritus gets picked up by the filter).

That said, I’d be surprised if there were any harmful effects of avoiding sand (assuming whatever alternative used is too big to be a choking hazard). I’d bet there’s no scientific or anecdotal evidence showing geos are harmed by the absence of sand, so I think this realistically comes down to personal preference.

Click to expand...

There are a few misconceptions here.

Each species of fish considers everything in their environment to be essential. This is programmed into the genetics for the species. There have been some studies done which clearly illustrate the detrimental effect on fish that occurs when what they "expect" is not provided.

It is not "natural" for many of the fish we keep to catch and eat other fish. The vast majority of aquarium fish are not piscivores. However, they can be forced into being such by the environment we provide.

As for what keeps fish healthy, it is the proper environment. Environment includes tank space, numbers of the species, water parameters, hardscape, water flow.

Any departure from what the fish is programmed to need will cause stress. This is a scientific fact.

And any aquarist who is prepared to ignore the needs of the fish is in the wrong hobby. An aquarium is a permanent home for the fish in it, not an ornament to suit the aquarist. The two citations in my signature block are pertinent to this discussion.

Byron said:

There are a few misconceptions here.

Each species of fish considers everything in their environment to be essential. This is programmed into the genetics for the species. There have been some studies done which clearly illustrate the detrimental effect on fish that occurs when what they "expect" is not provided.

It is not "natural" for many of the fish we keep to catch and eat other fish. The vast majority of aquarium fish are not piscivores. However, they can be forced into being such by the environment we provide.

As for what keeps fish healthy, it is the proper environment. Environment includes tank space, numbers of the species, water parameters, hardscape, water flow.

Any departure from what the fish is programmed to need will cause stress. This is a scientific fact.

And any aquarist who is prepared to ignore the needs of the fish is in the wrong hobby. An aquarium is a permanent home for the fish in it, not an ornament to suit the aquarist. The two citations in my signature block are pertinent to this discussion.

Click to expand...

Reading through your post, I suspect there are several assertions that aren’t backed up the scientific literature. It’d actually be quite useful if you could identify what research supports the following points you made:

1. “Each species of fish considers everything in their environment to be essential.” I’m very dubious about this. I could understand and agree if you said there are key factors in in a fish’s environment that’re essential, but a blanket statement saying everything is essentially seems like a gross generalisation to me. Although genetics heavily influence behaviours, they do no operate in a vacuum, and I would be very surprised if any ichtyologist has identified a gene that controls geophagus behaviour to the extent that it is harmful for them to live in the absence of sand. It’d be great to understand what research led you to this conclusion.
2. “It is not "natural" for many of the fish we keep to catch and eat other fish.” Actually, I disagree with this. Most of the fish we keep are either carnivorous or omnivorous and are opportunistic. So they’ll eat whatever is readily available, including other fish if they don’t have to expend too much energy.
3. “Any departure from what the fish is programmed to need will cause stress. This is a scientific fact.” This is kind of a broad statement, so I’m not sure if it adds anything. The trouble is how you define what is needed. Whilst I can understand that there will be genes that determine some fish characteristics, I suspect there is no research supporting the “scientific fact” that geos are harmed by a lack of sand. I’d happily revise my opinion if you can point me in the direction of such research though, as geos are some of my favourite fish. I wonder if it’s also exploring whether all stress is bad stress. When we look at the stress in humans, it tends to be more of a problem when it’s chronic or acute - I’d suspect that the same is true of fish too. And I don’t think lack of sand is going to cause chronic or acute stress to geos to the point of causing them harm. It’d be great if you have some research that contradicts this though, there are quite a few posts on different forums about whether or not they need sand, so it’d be nice if there was a definitive answer rather than personal opinion.

This is probably a convoluted way of saying that in this instance I’m sceptical of your assertions. I think they’re either misapplied overgeneralisations or unsupported by any robust evidence. I often see some interesting scientific papers on this forum, so it’d be a welcomed surprise if you could back up your arguments with robust evidence. If there isn’t any evidence, then I stand my earlier post where I say although it’s cool to see geos on sand, it’s a matter of personal preference for the hobbyist as it does them no harm.

"Having considered the form and function of fish and the chemistry of their watery environment, our attention now turns to the practical aspects of providing healthy conditions for pond and aquarium fish. The first step is to gather as much information as possible about the natural environment and behavioural characteristics of the fishes you wish to keep. The more the conditions you provide differ from those in the wild, the more likely the fishes are to be stressed and susceptible to disease. A little forethought in planning and subsequent regular maintenance can go a long way towards keeping your fishes healthy."
[Chris Andrews, Adrian Exell, Neville Carrington, Peter Burgess, The Manual of Fish Health, p. 67]

Fish do not learn how to feed, they are born with the knowledge imbedded in their DNA. The genus Geophagus is Greek for earth eater, because of their manner of eating. The fish expect to find their food this way. Preventing this is inhumane.

The majority of aquarium fish do not eat other fish in their habitats. Examination of stomach contents makes this abundantly clear. In the habitat, the possible predator and prey never come into contact, but within the confines of an aquarium things can be different. @GaryE did a thread a few weeks back about how it is the fault of the aquarist through not providing these things that cause bullies and such.

Fish experience stress from every negative factor. Stress is responsible for over 90% of all disease in aquarium fish. All stress is negative because if the stressor is not removed, it continues. Biology Online defines stress:
The effects of stress on fish are very complicated physiologically, and are often subtle. There may or may not be external signs discernible to us—it can continue for weeks and even months, sometimes up to the point when the fish just suddenly dies. The reasons for this are involved.

Adrenaline released during the stress response increases blood flow to the gills to provide for the increased oxygen demands of stress. The release of adrenaline into the blood stream elevates the heart rate, blood flow and blood pressure. This increases the volume of blood in vessels contained within the gills, increasing the surface area of the gills to help the fish absorb more oxygen from the water. The elevated blood flow allows increased oxygen uptake for respiration but also increases the permeability of the gills to water and ions. This is what is known as the osmorespiratory compromise (Folmar & Dickhoff, 1980; Mazeaud et al., 1977). In freshwater fish, this increases water influx and ion losses. This is more critical in small fish than larger due to the gill surface to body mass ratio (Bartelme, 2004).

Short-term stress will cause an increase in heart rate, blood pressure, and respiration as described in the preceding paragraph. The fish can only maintain these altered states for a short and finite period of time before they will either adapt or (more often) the stress will become chronic. During this initial stage the fish may look and act relatively normal, but it is depleting energy reserves because of the extra physiological requirements placed upon it. At the chronic stage the hormone cortisol is released, which is responsible for many of the negative health effects associated with stress.