Just_Keep_Swimming
New Member
What would suggest would count as big filter then for my size of tank?
I was actually a little worried this one might have been too big but not sure its big enough now lol
Stocking Numbers
- Thread starter Just_Keep_Swimming
- Start date
I was actually a little worried this one might have been too big but not sure its big enough now lol
The 350 is definitely enough. It’s generally recommended for your filter to be 4x your water volume. So the minimum recommended for your tank, would be a filter that has a 440lph filter.
like @PheonixKingZ says the 350 will be fine, if you feel you need more you can always use the internal as well
I tried “putting” 10 Neon Tetras in a 10g tank, and it said my stocking level was only at 81%.
Neon Tetras need a minimum tank size of 15g, preferably more. They are active swimmers and need room; more room than a 10g...
With proper filtration, 10 neons in a 10G is fine....they aren't THAT active in behavior
My 10G has 15-20 embers and 8 WCCM, with no issues...
Your 10g is overstocked, according to the recommendations on SF, which is an extremely accurate/knowledge site.
Neon Tetras need a tank with a base dimension of 60cm x 30cm (24in x 12in). A 10g tank has a base dimension of 20in x 10in.
Close enough...Neon Tetras need a tank with a base dimension of 60cm x 30cm (24in x 12in). A 10g tank has a base dimension of 20in x 10in.
I'm well aware of that site, but like all, their guidelines are general, not concrete
That was assuming you have say 10 Neon Tetras tops. You have 20 Ember Tetras and 8 WCMM’s in a 10g tank.
I guess if they are alive and everything's working, then they must be happy/healthy.
*heavy sarcasm implied*
This is partly true. The "site" referred to in @PheonixKingZ post is Seriously Fish, and here we are dealing with a scientific-fact based site. Most of the data comes from trained ichthyologists, biologists, and those who have researched such sources. So there is sometimes a factual scientific certainty to the data, sometimes a scientifically-reasoned conclusion in the data, depending upon the subject. This is not to say the data is guaranteed perfect, but it does give the data in general a much stronger certainty of being accurate.
If you compare the data among similar sites--meaning those owned/operated/managed by other professional biologists and ichthyologists and knowledgeable individuals, it becomes apparent that they tend to agree very closely on such data. These sources are more reliable for obvious reasons than someone who posts a couple of videos on Youtube spouting some fanciful often ludicrously half-baked idea that has no scientific basis. Now, I am being very general, but the point is that knowing the source of the data is crucial to knowing how much one can rely on it.
Having just read this thread, something stands out. Nothing has yet been mentioned about what really does decide whether a tank is or is not overstocked. It is not the filter size, or even the bioload (number of fish per volume of water)--important as these certainly are. It is the species of fish and their individual numbers and the tank's aquascape that most impact the tank's biological system in terms of the effect on the fish's well-being. And this is why calculator sites cannot really provide reliable numbers. It is not easy, if it is even possible, to programme all of this data into a calculatory site.
Filters for example move water around and provide filtration, mechanical and biological in all cases, and sometimes chemical depending upon the filter media. Obviously the size of the filter will have some impact on mechanical, but it might surprise some how small a sponge you need to have clear water which is what mechanical filtration is--just water clarity, not water cleanness. Bilogical filtration will occur in any operating filter whatever the media, on the sponge/pad, carbon, sides of the filter, and elsewhere like throughout the aquarium's substrate especially. This goes on with or without any filter. And live plants are important in this area too. The degree of biological filtration depends entirely upon the production of ammonia, then nitrite, then nitrate, then denitrification. This level of biological activity will be in proportion to the bioload, always, because that is how the natural processes operate. Adding larger filters or more filters does not increase biological filtration beyond what the system needs. @AbbeysDad has written of this frequently, he may have more to add here, I have been as brief as I can to get the point across. Mike has looked into this more than I have, and I'm sure other members have too.
The number of fish (and their size) in relation to the water volume is certainly important. But not all fish of "x" size will have the same impact on the system. If the species is shoaling and needs say 10 to be "settled," the impact on the bioload of those ten will generally be less than will fewer. This may seem odd, but it involves what the fish species needs or expects in its habitat, and when these species' expectations are not being met the fish can be stressed, and stress impacts the fish detrimentally, weakening it, and ultimately creating more stress--all of which further impacts the system because it impacts all the other fish too. Environmental factors like providing the right habitat conditions that every species in the tank must share; the same water parameters that each species requires; providing the numbers of each shoaling species that will improve its life; ensuring other species are compatible, not combatable, to every other species in the tank.
So a given tank might for example support 25 cardinal tetras. But the same tank will not support 25 Zebra Danio in good health because the space is too small, even though the fish adult size of both species is roughly the same. Swimming activity here determines tank length, just one factor. Numbers are not the key, but the behaviours of the individual species. Having the danios in with sedate fish is going to detrimentally impact the system more, because the active fish are stressors to sedate fish.
Having likely aggressive-behaviour species like the Tiger Barbs mentioned earlier in with sedate fish is never going to work long-term, unless things are bad enough to cause behavioural changes in the TB, which can occur, but that in itself is detrimental to the fish and the system. Or if the group of TB is sufficient in number, and the tank considerably larger in area, to allow multiple species--which is not the case here. And there is more to this aspect, but I've probably given enough examples to illustrate my original point that the fish species themselves are really the key to stocking levels and healthy fish. I'll try to further clarify anything if asked.
Filters for example move water around and provide filtration, mechanical and biological in all cases, and sometimes chemical depending upon the filter media. Obviously the size of the filter will have some impact on mechanical, but it might surprise some how small a sponge you need to have clear water which is what mechanical filtration is--just water clarity, not water cleanness. Bilogical filtration will occur in any operating filter whatever the media, on the sponge/pad, carbon, sides of the filter, and elsewhere like throughout the aquarium's substrate especially. This goes on with or without any filter. And live plants are important in this area too. The degree of biological filtration depends entirely upon the production of ammonia, then nitrite, then nitrate, then denitrification. This level of biological activity will be in proportion to the bioload, always, because that is how the natural processes operate. Adding larger filters or more filters does not increase biological filtration beyond what the system needs. @AbbeysDad has written of this frequently, he may have more to add here, I have been as brief as I can to get the point across. Mike has looked into this more than I have, and I'm sure other members have too.
The number of fish (and their size) in relation to the water volume is certainly important. But not all fish of "x" size will have the same impact on the system. If the species is shoaling and needs say 10 to be "settled," the impact on the bioload of those ten will generally be less than will fewer. This may seem odd, but it involves what the fish species needs or expects in its habitat, and when these species' expectations are not being met the fish can be stressed, and stress impacts the fish detrimentally, weakening it, and ultimately creating more stress--all of which further impacts the system because it impacts all the other fish too. Environmental factors like providing the right habitat conditions that every species in the tank must share; the same water parameters that each species requires; providing the numbers of each shoaling species that will improve its life; ensuring other species are compatible, not combatable, to every other species in the tank.
So a given tank might for example support 25 cardinal tetras. But the same tank will not support 25 Zebra Danio in good health because the space is too small, even though the fish adult size of both species is roughly the same. Swimming activity here determines tank length, just one factor. Numbers are not the key, but the behaviours of the individual species. Having the danios in with sedate fish is going to detrimentally impact the system more, because the active fish are stressors to sedate fish.
Having likely aggressive-behaviour species like the Tiger Barbs mentioned earlier in with sedate fish is never going to work long-term, unless things are bad enough to cause behavioural changes in the TB, which can occur, but that in itself is detrimental to the fish and the system. Or if the group of TB is sufficient in number, and the tank considerably larger in area, to allow multiple species--which is not the case here. And there is more to this aspect, but I've probably given enough examples to illustrate my original point that the fish species themselves are really the key to stocking levels and healthy fish. I'll try to further clarify anything if asked.
Similar threads
Most reactions
-
238 -
210 -
198 -
170 -
164 -
152 -
140 -
131 -
103 -
100 -
95 -
85 -
83 -
82 -
63