Ro Units

[PaPeRo]

Nope. trace elements and minerals are added by the water's path through the ground (and occasionally throught he air as clouds) into the treatment plants.

That's a pretty weak argument since water treatment plants need to TREAT the water. How do you think they treat the water? By letting the water from the mountains drain right into your sink? That acid rain and all that crap must be lovely for fish eh? Those ar some pretty potent trace elements.

Again you have no idea what kind of trace elements are REMOVED or ADDED by the treatment plants so your claim that tap water is better than RO water has no basis in reality.

Actually, I am advocating the use of tap water over RO water for most, if not all, FW set ups. It is you who is using the different water by stating you use RO water. I am saying the presence of minerals and trace elements is beneficial to fish and removing them all can have a detrimental effect on the fish. Of the "MILLIONS" of fishkeepers the vast majority use normal tap water. Of those that use RO, most will cut it with tap water or add something like Kent's "RO-right" to restore the minerals and trace elements.

You don't even realized the flaw in your logic and you've completely missed the point. Tap water is not Amazon water. The presence of the WRONG types of trace elements in tap water cannot be used by Amazonian fish therefore there is no difference between using tap water vs RO water with respect to trace elements. In fact RO water would actually be better in this case because all RO water are VERY similar in makeup unlike tap water which vary widely by region.

I have not said they are healthy, I am asking how you can be so sure there is nothing wrong with their internal osmo-regulation as you so confidently stated a couple of posts ago.

Who are you kidding? You are implying there is something wrong with their osmo-regulation. How do you know this? Where is the scientific evidence that say trace elements are very important to FRESH water fish?

 

[andywg]

Water treatment takes place by myriad of different techniques, many of which are very similar to the process undertaken in our own filters. Most treatment invovles some steps of mechanical filtration before running through a bed of Nitrosomonas spp and/or Nitrobacters spp bacteria to remove nitrogenous waste. After this the water is chlorinated and pumped out. Other steps may be included if the pH of the water is at extremes, or the water still retains a "bad taste" (sorted by carbon).

I am not saying there is no difference between the Amazon and tap water, I am saying that there will be some common elements present in the Amazon as well as tap water such as calcium and magnesium. It is the lack of these things that is the problem. In this respect, tap water is more similar to the Amazon (no matter where it is) compared to RO water.

Here are some links to read over which agree in saying that FW fish need some level of ions and electrolytes in their water which RO removes:

http/fins.actwin.com/aquatic-plants/mont...6/msg00319.html

Fish have mechanisms to take up sodium, chloride, potassium, calcium, possibly magnesium, and probably some other ions. In order to maintain proper internal concentrations of these and other ions, they must have minimum concentrations in their water. These concentrations can be quite low for many freshwater fish, but they can't be zero.

http/kh-aquarium.blogspot.com/

Other needs for calcium:
• Calcium is a vital component in blood clotting systems and also helps in wound healing.
• Calcium helps to control nerve transmission, and release of neurotransmitters.
• Calcium is an essential component in the production of enzymes and hormones that regulate digestion, energy, and fat metabolism.
• Calcium helps to transport ions (electrically charged particles) across the membrane.
• Calcium is essential for muscle contraction.
• Calcium assists in maintaining all cells and connective tissues in the body.

Other needs for Magnesium:
• Normal calcium balance in organs
• Healthy muscles
• Healthy nerve transduction
• Healthy calcium balance in blood vessels

However, to each his own. If you feel your fish are doing fine, no amount of posting on here with links and explanations of why the fish need these basic parts to be present in water will change your mind. "There are none so deaf as those who do not wish to hear".

 

[PaPeRo]

I am not saying there is no difference between the Amazon and tap water, I am saying that there will be some common elements present in the Amazon as well as tap water such as calcium and magnesium. It is the lack of these things that is the problem. In this respect, tap water is more similar to the Amazon (no matter where it is) compared to RO water.

"Some common elements" don't make it better. What about the elements that are not in tap water? How do the fish deal with that? See where your argument is going? How do the treatment plants deal with acid rain? You are aware that carbon removes trace elements right?

BTW that link is not scientific evidence. It's a bunch of people like yourself making claims with nothing to back it up except citing other people on forums...sorry doesnt' cut it.

Other needs for calcium:
• Calcium is a vital component in blood clotting systems and also helps in wound healing.
• Calcium helps to control nerve transmission, and release of neurotransmitters.
• Calcium is an essential component in the production of enzymes and hormones that regulate digestion, energy, and fat metabolism.
• Calcium helps to transport ions (electrically charged particles) across the membrane.
• Calcium is essential for muscle contraction.
• Calcium assists in maintaining all cells and connective tissues in the body.

Other needs for Magnesium:
• Normal calcium balance in organs
• Healthy muscles
• Healthy nerve transduction
• Healthy calcium balance in blood vessels

What a stupid thing to list. Why even post this nonsense? I learned this stuff in Physiology. They serve the same functions for humans and humans get them from FOOD...fish eat FOOD don't they? Do people need vitamin supplements to be healthy and live long? I don't think so.

Please stop claiming FW fish NEED trace elements added to RO water to be healthy when you have no scientific evidence to back it up.

 

[andywg]

Sadly I do not have access to Web of Science so cannot search for peer reviewed scientific journals on this, however, I cannot find a single site on the whole fo google that disagrees with me and agrees with you (all are the other way around). while this is not science, it shows who is holding the most commonly believed and understood opinion on freshwater chemistry and who appears to be the dischordant note.

Seriously, look around this forum where keepers with far more experience than you or I agree that RO needs to either be cut or have the electrolytes and minerals added back in to be used in FW. I also beseech anyone reading this thread to do so. Do not just take my, or PaPeRo's word, look at what other more experienced people do.

 

[PaPeRo]

Yeah and I read a lot about freshwater salt as being helpful for fish too but there is ZERO scientific studies that prove it doesn't mean I should go out and buy some FW salt because a bunch of people on the net are doing it.

 

[andywg]

A brief look around this forum would show a number of knowledgable people stating why Aquarium salt is entirely unsuitable for tonic use in a FW aquairum and as such shouldn't really be sold. One only has to look at the recent topic in which nmonks and bignose pointed out why aquarium salt is a snake oil and that is repeated across a number of posts on these boards.

I cannot see ANY support (here or on the rest of the web) for your view that FW fish do not require electrolytes, trace elements or minerals in the water, yet I have seen many and knowledgable people agree with my view.

Edit--

Finally found the posts made by Bignose on RO water and the effects of a lack of electrolytes and minerals. It specifically refers to humans drinking purely RO water, but the science would apply to fish in aquaria as well:

http/www.fishforums.net/index.php?showto...4274&st=16#

I sincerely hope that you are not drinking pure RO water, as that is very bad for you in the long run. Since the water is so mineral-free it will actually leech minerals back out of your bady in order to restore the balance. Some minerals can be replenished from good wholesome foods and vitamin pills, but your body can much, much more easily take minearls out of liquid form than solid form. For example, calcium will come out of your body if given too much mineral free water, and not only do you need calcium for your bones, but almost every cell wall needs some calcium to keep it together.

This is not unlike how you have to re-mix some minerals back into the water for your fish. You need some minerals, too.

You don't even have to necessarily go acidic or alkaline to explain pure water leeching minearals out of you, just the concept of equilibrium. Simply put, concentrations of any chemical or mineral will always go from higher concentrations to lower concentrations. If the water has a concentration of zero, the concentration of any mineral will be zero or higher in the body. The mineral, in order to achieve equilibrium, will attempt to make the concentrations equal everywhere, so minerals have to leave the body and go into the pure water. There is nowhere else for them to go.

 

[CFC]

Using raw R/O is not only unhealthy for the fish due to osmotic funtion where the pure water will try to draw minerals out from the fish to reach an equilibrium it also creates a dangerous enviroment within the tank which with no calcium buffers present will be prone to massive swings in pH.

All R/O water should have some trace elements added back before it is safe for aquarium use, the ammount you add back is dependent on the specific needs of your particular fish (ie heavy doses for african rift valley species or low doses for discus etc) but to keep safe stable water you must add back some calcium carbonate.

 

[nmonks]

This is a most curious thread.

No aquarium fish come from waters as pure as RO water. That should be obvious. Even something like the Rio Negro has a variety of mineral ions in it. It also has lots more dissolved organic compounds (mostly tannins). So while the Rio Negro might have low conductivity and low hardness, it isn "pure" in any meaningful sense, as its very colour should make obvious! There's a nice table showing the minerals in the Rio Negro compared to a whitewater river (the Amazon) here:

http/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackwater_river

The dissolved organic compounds are crucial: they are acidic buffers that keep the pH steady, at around 5.0-5.5. Without these organic buffers, the pH of pure water changes very rapidly. So fish adapted to very soft water environments are invariably adapted to a low pH as well, and when the pH rises above 6 let alone 7 tend to become sick. Wild discus fall into this bracket, as do things like Asian blackwater rasboras, labyrinth fish, and halfbeaks. So even if you used RO water to create the soft water, you'd still need to treat it with peat and other organic materials to add minerals and dissolved organics (admittedly not raising the conductivity or hardness, but adding to the water nonetheless). Remember: peat itself contain inorganic substances as well as carbon including many of the minerals that the plants contained when they were still alove and before they became peat.

Looking over one modern fish biology text book I have here ("The Diversity of Fishes", Helfman et al.,1997), it's striking that biologists really don't understand how fish get their minerals and vitamins. Fish seem to take them from their food (as we do) but ALSO from their environment. This could be via their gills or through the water they drink. But we don't know for certain.

http/edis.ifas.ufl.edu/FA096
http/www.nap.edu/books/0309048915/html/16.html

Either way, it comes down to that old standby in fishkeeping: try and create water as close as possible to what the fish experience in the wild. Since we don't understand all the mechanisms, the best we can do is give our fish what they're adapted to and let them get on with it. Since no fish lives in anything as pure as RO water, even stuff from blackwater streams and rivers, then there's no need to keep freshwater fish in pure RO water in the aquarium.

(It goes without saying that many freshwater fish absolutely must have hard and alkaline water: livebearers, African and Central American cichlids, rainbowfish, gobies, and many of the non-annual killifish. Likewise, a lot of plants will not do well in very soft water, either.)

Carbon absolutely does not remove most trace elements. Carbon -- by which were talking about the charcoal sold for use in filters -- only removes organic compounds. It removes things like medications but has no effect on the hardness of the water since it doesn't remove carbonates or any other salts. Frankly, I consider carbon to be only slightly less pointless than tonic salt, but that's a debate for another day.

http/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Activated_carbon#Properties

Cheers,

Neale

 

[Spank]

Hi there,

I've recently been looking into investgin into an RO unit as I want to start keeping discus fish.

I was particularly interested in the "3 Stage 50 Gallon Per Day RO System
[OS-2PRO50]" that's advertised on Osmotics Uk

The unit will need to produce enough water for 15% water changes weekly (probably more often), does this mean I'd have to leave the unit on overnight to gain enough water?
Also, I've heard conflicting issues over the maintenance of and RO unit. I have heard that with a flush valve, the unit can be turned off and flushed before use, is this true? or is it recommended to leave the unit running 24hrs a day?. Also how often will the cartridges need replacing? A shop owner today has told me his aquamedic unit has run for 2+ years without a filter change and the water is still pure.

and finally (sorry for so many Q's) how ieasy is it to install and RO unit and to run it? can I just attach it to my household taps? and do I have to wati 24 hrs and drain the RO water into a large bucket? what happens to the waste?

Thanks for all your help

Hank

we have the same unit from osmotics and are very pleased with it

you won't need to leave it overnight unless your doing very large water changes, we can do a 30% change on our 30g marine tank in a few hrs, and that's with all the extra fannying you have for SW changes.

this machine is very very easy to flush, just a little switch you flick.

your recommended to run the machine 2mins every day as if you leave it with water in it can go stale and damage the cartridges lifespan.

if you get a tds meter you can monitor the quality of the RO you are producing and know when it will need replacing. how long it lasts will depend on how much you use it and how well it is maintained.

if you have a 'garden' type tap you can get an attachment to put it on really easily. we have one under the sink (don't ask) so we just hook it up when we need it then put it back in the cupboard after, takes all of about 5 seconds to hook up and get going.

the waste can be very well used on your garden or household plants if you like. there's a waste tube that comes off the machine, you can eitehr run it straight down the sink and away (not v environmentally responsible though) or collect it and use it

think that's an answer for everything, hope that helps!

Thanks for the help Miss wiggle, looks like I'll be investing in an RO unit then in the near future!! maybe I'll try and get one for christmas or put aside some of my student loan for one (I can go without food for a bit.... )

Wow, quite a discussion I've seemed to have started here. Papero, your arrogance absolutely astounds me, not only have you failed to backup any of the arguments you give, but you immediately gunned down much of andywg's points that were fairly delivered and backed-up by an overwhelming majority of information.
Of course everyone is entitled to they're own opinion but to blatantly dispense of comments from other knowledgable and well experianced fish keepers is IMHO rather flipant

IMO, I reckon pure RO water should not be particularly good for fish, rules of physics say particles move from solutions of high concentration to solutions of low concentration. Putting in pure RO water into a tank would cause whatever nutrients/elements within the fish to move into its' surrounding environment. And surely without some element of bicarbonate within the water you would have a very low buffering capacity
There is some science behind this somewhere but I can't be arsed to work it out as it's late, so goodnight and thanks again every1 fir the help

 

[PaPeRo]

I cannot see ANY support (here or on the rest of the web) for your view that FW fish do not require electrolytes, trace elements or minerals in the water, yet I have seen many and knowledgable people agree with my view.

Anyone who knows anything about science knows that a negative doesn't prove a positive. Please go back and reread my original post. I said trace elements (from water) is more important to SW fish and that's true. For FW fish it's not as important since they can get them from food. You were the one who claimed they were equally important.

"I sincerely hope that you are not drinking pure RO water, as that is very bad for you in the long run. Since the water is so mineral-free it will actually leech minerals back out of your bady in order to restore the balance. Some minerals can be replenished from good wholesome foods and vitamin pills, but your body can much, much more easily take minearls out of liquid form than solid form. For example, calcium will come out of your body if given too much mineral free water, and not only do you need calcium for your bones, but almost every cell wall needs some calcium to keep it together."

Again why are you posting this? Are you saying that people who drink only RO water are unhealthy? You are aware that there are MILLIONS of people who don't drink milk right? I guess those people have deteriorating bones, teeth, and *cough* cell walls. Last time I checked human cells have cell membranes not cell walls which plants have. Completely, utterly pointless information. Again all you're doing is citing other people with zero knowledge of your own. Not only that but it doesn't even support your argument even though you hope it would.

"You don't even have to necessarily go acidic or alkaline to explain pure water leeching minearals out of you, just the concept of equilibrium. Simply put, concentrations of any chemical or mineral will always go from higher concentrations to lower concentrations. If the water has a concentration of zero, the concentration of any mineral will be zero or higher in the body. The mineral, in order to achieve equilibrium, will attempt to make the concentrations equal everywhere, so minerals have to leave the body and go into the pure water. There is nowhere else for them to go."

Is that why you claim tap water is better than RO water? Because it contains some minerals that fish have no use for but are forced to absorb anyway because of concentration gradients? Doesn't support your argument does it?

No aquarium fish come from waters as pure as RO water.

Nobody said they did. Fish don't come from tap water with flouride enrichment either.

That should be obvious.

It is obvious that's why nobody made that claim.

Even something like the Rio Negro has a variety of mineral ions in it.

Really? Whoah awesome dude!!

It also has lots more dissolved organic compounds (mostly tannins).

Really? Whoah dude like for sure totally!!!

So while the Rio Negro might have low conductivity and low hardness, it isn "pure" in any meaningful sense, as its very colour should make obvious! There's a nice table showing the minerals in the Rio Negro compared to a whitewater river (the Amazon) here:

Nobody said it was pure therefore -> strawman claim.

Looking over one modern fish biology text book I have here ("The Diversity of Fishes", Helfman et al.,1997), it's striking that biologists really don't understand how fish get their minerals and vitamins. Fish seem to take them from their food (as we do) but ALSO from their environment. This could be via their gills or through the water they drink. But we don't know for certain.

Thank You. Finally some scientific evidence that support MY claim.

Carbon absolutely does not remove most trace elements.

It removes SOME trace elements that's why carbon shouldn't be used for SW tanks but are perfectly fine for FW.

Papero, your arrogance absolutely astounds me, not only have you failed to backup any of the arguments you give, but you immediately gunned down much of andywg's points that were fairly delivered and backed-up by an overwhelming majority of information.

You haven't been paying attention have you? Overwhelming majority of information? From scientific publications? Or from wannabe biologist on the net who haven't even taken a college course in Physiology, Biology, Zoology? Even the real biologists don't know how this actually works yet some ameuture fish keeper on the net knows for sure? Riiiiight.

Oh btw I'm not arrogant I just prefer scientific evidence over net hearsay.

Of course everyone is entitled to they're own opinion but to blatantly dispense of comments from other knowledgable and well experianced fish keepers is IMHO rather flipant

I have more faith in real biologists who admit they don't know how it actually works. I'm glad you have total faith in armchair experts.

 

[carpus]

ive got that 3 stage ro unit and yes it is good aslong as your water comes out of the tap at 36p.s.i.

i turned my unit on 2 pm friday and still didnt have 80ltrs of water 2 pm monday.

so i'll be buying a booster pump

 

[Tolak]

I have more faith in real biologists who admit they don't know how it actually works. I'm glad you have total faith in armchair experts.

I'll take an "armchair expert" any day over a biologist. Biologists generally don't spend years working with breeding fish in their spare time out of their home, using their own money just for the love of aquatics. Sure, a biologist can point out scientific research & evidence, but there is more to it than that. Talk to a breeder who has been into aquatics for decades, you will learn more than you will talking to a biologist. They have no scientific backing for what they know, many times nothing even written down. Most haven't spent a day in college. All hands on experience & gut instinct, on a minimal budget.

 

[Mr Miagi]

I'll take an "armchair expert" any day over a biologist. Biologists generally don't spend years working with breeding fish in their spare time out of their home, using their own money just for the love of aquatics.

Talking about keeping aquarium fish, and breeding a fish, id prefer an armchair expert anyday of the week. Not all "Biologists" keep fish though, so the term is very broad, and you have to realise this. I know people studying marine biology without having kept marine fish, in the future dont plan too, and arnt interested in any of its aspecs at all (although I find this hard to believe ).

Sure, a biologist can point out scientific research & evidence, but there is more to it than that. Talk to a breeder who has been into aquatics for decades, you will learn more than you will talking to a biologist. They have no scientific backing for what they know, many times nothing even written down. Most haven't spent a day in college. All hands on experience & gut instinct, on a minimal budget.

When talking about the osmo-regulatory system of a fish, id much rather peer reviewed papers, scientific studies, and a real biologist over a fish keeper who has bred fish, kept fish, but has no idea, nor poof, that any statements he/she makes is credible, or scientifically plausible.

 

[andywg]

PaPeRo

Just face it, you were wrong. Trace elements are just as important in both FW and SW fish, they all need them.

The only thing is, you were only aware of the need in marine as you had personal experience in adding salt that had the essential minerals in it for a marine tank after obtaining RO water. Most people don't cover those things in FW as they are already in the tap water.

And to follow your line, I say that trace elements are necessary in fish for the scientificially (osmosis) based reasons given above in my quoted posts and the posts of experts. Until you can find peer reviewed scientific papers that say the opposite I am right and you are wrong.

 

[PaPeRo]

Take a college Physiology class then get back to me. You're just yelling from a sinking ship.