Science/in Depth Forum

[andywg]

I mentioned about this and SH requested a little more info, so I thought I would put it in a new thread.

I am usually less than supporting of new forums that will have low traffic, however this is slightly different. By having an in depth forum it would create a reference like section to get the more "advanced" threads.

As an example, from a Marine point of view we could discuss the effects of stray voltage vs stray current on live stock and the possible causes/remedies.

Or else, we could discuss the functions and relationships that zooanthellae experience. This would be especially good now as last weekend there was a great program on the exact relationship between them and corals on BBC Radio 4 (probably still on their site for listen again)

From FW one could look at the actual science behind the effects of chlorine and chloramine on bacteria colonies, or the purposes and effects of adding aquarium salt to a FW aquarium.

Then there are the brackish water things such as how salinity levels and temperatures seem to affect different fish.

It is something I would like, as the more involved debates truly interest me, and often bring out the best in a number of posters, as well providing an easy reference point if someone desires a little more information on something.

Similarly, it would provide a good place to ask the more involved questions and ensure they do not get lost in the normal site traffic.

Just a thought. something I think which would benefit the forum greatly, since we have some fantastic minds here (I am aware of at least 3 people working on their Ph.Ds and one or two who already have them) I think we should utilise them.

Cheers

Andy

 

[WILDER]

I actually think its a good idea, never seen it on other forums, lets be different. lol

 

[steelhealr]

In medicine, we would call this a journal club. It's actually an interesting thought. Imagine if a modern scientific article could be discussed periodically. I'm not sure if there would be any copyright issues tho'. Thoughts? SH

 

[OohFeeshy]

Hrm, the thing is, every time something remotely scientific comes up on the rest of the forum, you end up with the same arguements over one persons source is unreliable or non-existant, the other persons is proven etc etc, which just ends up going round in circles. Take the carbon threads.

 

[andywg]

But feesh, it could be pinned that these threads are based on scientific principles. The problem with the carbon threads is that someone took a misguided approach to science and evidence and theory. they adopted a line very similar to those stating ID is true, that being "This is my opinion, science can't disprove it, therefore it is valid" whereas science actually works on "here are the results, this idea I have seems to fit it, and now these extra tests fit as well, in the absence of anything better, my idea appears to describe it correctly".

I would guess that so long as we only repeated the extracts and possibly the general observations of a recent scientific paper we would be alright. Consider how many text books state the outcome of a paper and then reference the paper and date. A number of Bignose's posts point towards the sort of referencing of recent scientific research, most notably his one on the effects of chloramines on water supplies.

As an example of one thing I would love to see: The effects of nitrates on fish.

I am aware of one paper which refers to previous pieces whcih found 100ppm to be a safe long term level of nitrates for fish. however, many amateurs will testify that lower amounts have killed more sensitive species. I would love to have a forum where these sorts of questions could be raised.

That to me would be the best thing, not just the ability to discuss what is found, but for people to ask more involved questions with the possibility of getting answers. If it really went well, then a couple of more environmental issues could come in, such as the effects of collection on wild stocks, conservations of the collecting sites etc.

Surely if we could have a full discussion where the more experienced (in practical terms, but perhaps less learned in scientific journals) fishkeepers could start to reconcile their experiences of what has been found in the scientific research labs/sites then we would have an entirely unique idea? (as pointed out by Wilder).

However, I fully understand that the forum would probably be of minority interest, and I would be a hypocrite if I didn't re-iterate the likelihood of very little traffic, though as mentioned above, this is slightly different to most sub forums proposed.

Andy

 

[Tolak]

Surely if we could have a full discussion where the more experienced (in practical terms, but perhaps less learned in scientific journals) fishkeepers could start to reconcile their experiences of what has been found in the scientific research labs/sites then we would have an entirely unique idea? (as pointed out by Wilder).

I think this sums up why I think this is an excellent idea. There are so many aquarists out there who have put in at least as many hours working with their fish as someone who has obtained a doctorate degree. Each form of knowledge is just as valuable as the other, just a different method of education. A combination of the two could come to some conclusions that have previously evaded either.

 

[Danno]

Could help a lot. With all the aquarium/fish supplies the actually chemical/physical ways that it performs could make decision making a lot easier; that, and it could inform more then lets say "Cycling the tank" to going to "the tank is going through the nitrogen cycle..yattayatta.."...

Cools

 

[Bignose]

I think it is no surprise that I would be a wholehearted supporter of such a forum. The more science-y threads are by and far my favorite threads as it is anyway.

 

[aquaticadmirer]

All in favor say aye! I'd be interested in such a forum as well. I'm constantly trying to find websites that explain the chemical reasoning behind certain theories, without having to do a literature review of journal articles, and half the time all I can find is a bunch of unsupported opinions. I think as long as the forum gives real scientific evidence and not a whole bunch more of unsupported opinions, it would be very helpful.

 

[laurasbetta]

as a science major, i'm always interested at taking a more in-depth look at how things work. i think this would be fascinating and even if i couldn't contribute because my fish keeping experience is still rather limited, i would most definitely read what others had to say.

 

[Fella]

A big part of fishkeeping for me is the science behind it, but I'd be the first to confess I don't have much of a scientific background, and I'd be very grateful for the advice that those who are more scientifically orientated, on things that have me confused or unsure in the hobby.

100% behind this suggestion.

 

[Lateral Line]

I'm in!

 

[geo7x]

i think it would be a good idea, and i dont think argueing would be much of a problem as alot of it would be about fact and evidence, and people who just want to argue wouldnt be very good at that

 

[steelhealr]

Fine...I will add this link in to our moderator section and see what William thinks. I believe that this forum would not be an 'opinion' section, but one either based on scientific research, fact or the new more common situation, 'evidence based results'. I would also think that the section could border on being a journal club...where a member could discuss a current finding or paper in the aquaristic world...or, perhaps, someone with extensive experience in one area could present findings they've observed in their tanks. Again, I would not want this section to be a " I don't use carbon because it...."...but, " a paper presented at such and such" or...." in my 10 years of keeping 50 angel fish tanks, I've kept records and found that.....".

I'd appreciate other further comments.

SH

 

[Miss Wiggle]

I think it would be really good, I don't have the most scientific mind and doubt if I could contribute a hell of a lot to it but i'd definatley be reading, every time a thread comes up where the likes of bignose and andywg get to debating something i tend to bookmark it and sit down on my lunch break to have a really good read and try and get my head around it.

when i joined this forum i knew a bit about fish and all the basics of how to care for them, but since i've been here i've learnt a lot from you guys about the science behind it, i've questioned assumptions that I'd made previously and I think I'm a better fishkeeper for it, as such I think it would be really useful for a lot of the 'average' fishkeepers and I think it may help attract some of the more experienced people back into posting.