becker@cs.rochester.edu (Tim Becker) (01/15/88)
Well, I'd like to get something bigger than my 20 gal long (for fresh water fish). The tank is in my living room so a mega-gallon 6 foot long tank is not within my limits. I'm thinking about a 29 gallon that has the same footprint as my existing tank. My stand, light, gravel, ... would all work with the new tank. I might need a bit bigger heater. However, I wonder what other folks think about bigger tanks -- like hexagonal tanks? Or a 45 gal that is about the same width as my 20 long, but higher and deeper. Are there problems with high tanks - lots of water depth? I just keep thinking that a bigger tank would be much more interesting. I could keep "schools" of fish as opposed to 2-4 of a couple of different kinds. Comments? Tim. becker@cs.rochester.edu ..!rutgers!rochester!becker
whitling@andromeda.rutgers.edu (Donna Whitlinger) (01/18/88)
In article <5927@sol.ARPA> becker@cs.rochester.edu (Tim Becker) writes: >Well, I'd like to get something bigger than my 20 gal long (for fresh >water fish). The tank is in my living room so a mega-gallon 6 foot long >tank is not within my limits. > >[stuff deleted about specific tank sizes] > >However, I wonder what other folks think about bigger tanks -- like >hexagonal tanks? Or a 45 gal that is about the same width as my 20 >long, but higher and deeper. Are there problems with high tanks - lots >of water depth? > I have a 20 gallon extra high tank. It has the same footprint as a standard ten gallon tank. I bought the tank because it was attractive and fit the space I had available, but had twice as much water. Therefore, I reasoned it should be able to support twice as many fish. Well sort of. It may be the water depth, but the fish don't swim around it the way they do in my 20 gallon long tank. They tend to stratify: catfish on the bottom, zebras near the top, neons at about 3/4 down. No matter what I put in the tank there's a "bald" spot right in the middle (depthwise) and crowding in one of the other "layers." Has anyone else experienced this? Right now the tank is sitting empty because I'm so frustrated with it. Donna Whitlinger Rutgers University ..!rutgers!andromeda!whitling
hammy@steeleye.rutgers.edu (hammy) (01/19/88)
Hi. I currently have a standard 30 gallon long tank. Previously I had a 30 gallon high, (2 feet wide, 2 high, 1 deep). I changed to the longer tank last time I moved (since the fish were going to be disturbed anyway...), largely because of the problems I had with the high tank. It's been pointed out several times on this newsgroup about the importance of surface area for oxygenation: well, high tanks just don't have that surface area. The water tends to stagnate unless you have a really powerful air pump and plenty of circulation. I couldn't get plants to grow, although algae loved it. The only fish I found that used that blank space in the middle of the tank that you spoke about were angelfish. In general, I'd advise against the high tank. If you decide to try it, get a filtration system that really moves the water around, moving it from top to bottom (or v.v.), and get an air pump at least twice the recomended power. Plants you might have some luck with are *Hygrophila Difformis*, *Ceratophyllum Demersum*, or *Cabomba spp.*. Make sure they are really well anchored. The nice thing about these plants is that they all grow fairly long, and can help to fill up that space in the middle of the tank. Fish like to have some cover, and this might help to bring them up from the bottom of the tank. A few other fish that I have found like to use open areas of a tank besides angels are mollies (I have a pair of large sailfins), tricolor and irridescent sharks, and maybe platties, if you have enough of them. Good luck! John. _____ (hammy@paul.rutgers.edu)
richard@gryphon.CTS.COM (Richard Sexton) (01/20/88)
The question was asked "are hex tanks any good".
Well, yes and no. They are very decorative, but remember that
the fish holding capacity of a tank is a function of the area
of the air/water interface (serial ? parallel ?) and not the
capacity in gallons.
In other words, they look *real* neat (I have a couple in my
living room) but pretend they are only 6-10 inches tall and
you get a better idea how many fish they can hold.
--
"...and the morning sun has yet to ride my hood ornament"
richard@gryphon.CTS.COM
{ihnp4!scgvaxd!cadovax, philabs!cadovax, codas!ddsw1} gryphon!richardrichard@gryphon.CTS.COM (Richard Sexton) (01/20/88)
In article <348@galaxy> whitling@andromeda.UUCP (Donna Whitlinger) writes: >In article <5927@sol.ARPA> becker@cs.rochester.edu (Tim Becker) writes: >> >>However, I wonder what other folks think about bigger tanks -- like >>hexagonal tanks? Or a 45 gal that is about the same width as my 20 >>long, but higher and deeper. Are there problems with high tanks - lots >>of water depth? >> > >I have a 20 gallon extra high tank. It has the same footprint as a standard >ten gallon tank. I bought the tank because it was attractive and fit the >space I had available, but had twice as much water. Therefore, I reasoned >it should be able to support twice as many fish. Well sort of. It may be >the water depth, but the fish don't swim around it the way they do in my >20 gallon long tank. They tend to stratify: catfish on the bottom, zebras >near the top, neons at about 3/4 down. No matter what I put in the tank >there's a "bald" spot right in the middle (depthwise) and crowding in one >of the other "layers." Has anyone else experienced this? Right now the >tank is sitting empty because I'm so frustrated with it. > Well, what you are seeing is *exactly* what you would see if you were to see those fish in the wild. If you want something that will "go everywhere", try platies (esp. the hi-fin ones) or fancy guppies. -- "...and the morning sun has yet to ride my hood ornament" richard@gryphon.CTS.COM {ihnp4!scgvaxd!cadovax, philabs!cadovax, codas!ddsw1} gryphon!richard
richard@gryphon.CTS.COM (Richard Sexton) (01/20/88)
In article <2924@steeleye.rutgers.edu> hammy@steeleye.rutgers.edu (hammy) writes: >Hi. I currently have a standard 30 gallon long tank. Previously >I had a 30 gallon high, (2 feet wide, 2 high, 1 deep). I changed >to the longer tank last time I moved (since the fish were going to >be disturbed anyway...), largely because of the problems I had >with the high tank. > >It's been pointed out several times on this newsgroup about the >importance of surface area for oxygenation: well, high tanks just >don't have that surface area. Well, they have surface are. Just not as much of it :-) >The water tends to stagnate unless >you have a really powerful air pump and plenty of circulation. >I couldn't get plants to grow, although algae loved it. The only >fish I found that used that blank space in the middle of the >tank that you spoke about were angelfish. Hmm. My experiences counter this. My best tank for plants is a 35 hex tank with NO filter or aeration, about 8 platies, 5 LARGE Aponogeton sp., 1 VERY LARGE Java Fern, and a whole mess of Java moss. The lights are fairly strong though. No, I cant explain it. Convection currents ? Active fish ?? >In general, I'd advise against the high tank. If you decide to >try it, get a filtration system that really moves the water around, >moving it from top to bottom (or v.v.), and get an air pump at least >twice the recomended power. Plants you might have some luck with >are *Hygrophila Difformis*, *Ceratophyllum Demersum*, or *Cabomba >spp.*. Make sure they are really well anchored. The nice thing about >these plants is that they all grow fairly long, and can help to fill >up that space in the middle of the tank. Fish like to have some >cover, and this might help to bring them up from the bottom of the >tank. Oh, I dunno. Hex tanks are OK as long as you understand the drawbacks. As for plants. Anything will grow if its close enough to the light. The Java moss in mine wasnt doing real good, so I stuck it onto a piece of driftwood halfway up the tank. Scientific names 101: The genus name (ie. Caratophyllum) is capitalized, but the species name (demersum) is not. Unless it is a proper name: It's Lamprologus lelupei But it's Lamprologus Brichardi (after Pierre Brichard) -- "...and the morning sun has yet to ride my hood ornament" richard@gryphon.CTS.COM {ihnp4!scgvaxd!cadovax, philabs!cadovax, codas!ddsw1} gryphon!richard
agd@homxb.UUCP (A.DEACON) (01/20/88)
In article <2196@gryphon.CTS.COM>, richard@gryphon.CTS.COM (Richard Sexton) writes: > The question was asked "are hex tanks any good". > > Well, yes and no. They are very decorative, but remember that > the fish holding capacity of a tank is a function of the area > of the air/water interface (serial ? parallel ?) and not the > capacity in gallons. > > In other words, they look *real* neat (I have a couple in my > living room) but pretend they are only 6-10 inches tall and > you get a better idea how many fish they can hold. > > > -- > "...and the morning sun has yet to ride my hood ornament" > richard@gryphon.CTS.COM > {ihnp4!scgvaxd!cadovax, philabs!cadovax, codas!ddsw1} gryphon!richard To reinforce what Richard says: The higher the ratio of surface area of the filter bed to tank volume, the better. Hex tanks and the "High" models are the worst offenders. I too have a hex in the family room but only because it suits the decor of the room. IT DOES NOT SUPPORT AS MANY ANIMALS AS A RECTANGULAR TANK OF SIMILAR VOLUME!!!!!! DO NOT TRY TO MAKE IT DO SO!!! On the positive side, the tanks with the best ratio, in most manufacturers lines, are the 75 gallon rectangular. The ratio maybe 50% larger than for other tanks in the line. This is not a scientific study, just some general observations based on calculations of a couple of makers. Art Deacon ihnp4!homxb!agd
jnp@calmasd.GE.COM (John Pantone) (01/23/88)
> The question was asked "are hex tanks any good".
Many folk have, correctly, pointed out the relationship between surface area
and number of fish - but there is more to the story.
What we're really after here is oxygen/carbon dioxide exchange (O2 into the
water - CO2 out) - this normally occurs at the surface of the water/tank.
If nothing else is done a hex tank is really not "very big" and can't handle
too many fish. There is a solution, though, wich we used in our hex tank
several years ago:
put a glass or plastic tube 1/2 to 1 inch in diameter into the tank - and
support the bottom in such a way that water can enter the tube (we propped
it on a piece of lava-rock). Get one of those air-bubble stones and a
plastic tube (can run down the large tube) and connect to an air pump. This
will do 2 things - 1 it will "lift" water up the tube, and cause increased
gas exchange at the surface - 2 it will aerate the water "artificially" with
all those bubbles - increasing the gas exchange again.
I tried to calculate the efficiency of this, and ran across some figures
about moving water in streams, etc. which indicates that it could as much as
double the effective surface area of a tank.
--
These opinions are solely mine and in no way reflect those of my employer.
John M. Pantone @ GE/Calma R&D, 9805 Scranton Rd., San Diego, CA 92121
...{ucbvax|decvax}!sdcsvax!calmasd!jnp jnp@calmasd.GE.COM GEnie: J.PANTONEbruceb@telesoft.UUCP (Bruce Bergman @spot) (01/25/88)
In article <2634@calmasd.GE.COM>, jnp@calmasd.GE.COM (John Pantone) writes: > > The question was asked "are hex tanks any good". > > Many folk have, correctly, pointed out the relationship between surface area > and number of fish - but there is more to the story. > > [ some stuff about numbers, figures, and (ick!) ratios... :^) ] > > put a glass or plastic tube 1/2 to 1 inch in diameter into the tank - and > support the bottom in such a way that water can enter the tube (we propped > it on a piece of lava-rock). Get one of those air-bubble stones and a > plastic tube (can run down the large tube) and connect to an air pump. This > will do 2 things - 1 it will "lift" water up the tube, and cause increased > gas exchange at the surface - 2 it will aerate the water "artificially" with > all those bubbles - increasing the gas exchange again. I did the same thing in my tank. I've got a 15 gal hex tank which sits on my desk here at work and did two things. One, I filled it with mutant goldfish rather than warm water folks. And two I used a filter which "lifts" water from the bottom to the top. This does a much better job of keeping the water full of oxygen, and for fish who need to surface often, this is important to making sure they're willing to venture to the bottom. Now, I HATE heaters in tanks that are for display (like the one here at work), so I haven't broken down and used warm water folk yet, however I'm getting the itch to do this. The filter and method of aerating that John mentioned above (and the method I'm currently using) will mean no change except the heater. A change of subject and general question: At TeleSoft, we've always been a very special company. Before we moved into our current new building, employees brought their animals to work. Dogs, cats, fish, whathaveyou. Since moving, we've not been allowed to have the four leg kind, however they haven't said no to fish. We HAD a 8x2x2 marine tank in our lunchroom, filled with clowns, octopi, invertebraes, etc. When we moved to the new building (which was now two stories), there wasn't any room to put the tank back in operation, and the tank weight exceed the second floor limit (besides, the octopus died from a bad crab he ate for dinner). So now it sits in an unused corner of the building. There are four smaller tanks in operation, one of which is a marine tank. Two hexs. One normal tropical rectangle. We've been playing with the idea of starting another medium-to-large marine tank, however we'd have to find room for it first... My question is, how many people keep fish at work? What kind of tanks are you keeping (cold, warm, marine, etc.)? Swim well, bruce -- allegra!\ TeleSoft, Inc. gould9! \ crash!--\ (619) 457-2700 x123 ihnp4! \ \ >--sdcsvax!---->--telesoft!bruceb (Bruce Bergman N7HAW) nosc! / / scgvaxd! / log-hb!--/ 5959 Cornerstone Court West ucbvax! / San Diego, CA. 92121-9891 All expressed opinions belong to "Bill the Cat" or me. :^)
sterling@cbmvax.UUCP (Rick Sterling QA) (01/25/88)
In article <2634@calmasd.GE.COM> version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site cbmvax.UUCP cbmvax!rutgers!ames!aurora!agate!ucbvax!sdcsvax!sdcc6!calmasd!jnp jnp@calmasd.GE.COM (John Pantone) writes: > > The question was asked "are hex tanks any good". > > Many folk have, correctly, pointed out the relationship between surface area > and number of fish - but there is more to the story. > > What we're really after here is oxygen/carbon dioxide exchange (O2 into the > water - CO2 out) - this normally occurs at the surface of the water/tank. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > If nothing else is done a hex tank is really not "very big" and can't handle > too many fish. There is a solution, though, wich we used in our hex tank > several years ago: > > put a glass or plastic tube 1/2 to 1 inch in diameter into the tank - and > support the bottom in such a way that water can enter the tube (we propped > it on a piece of lava-rock). Get one of those air-bubble stones and a > plastic tube (can run down the large tube) and connect to an air pump. This > will do 2 things - 1 it will "lift" water up the tube, and cause increased > gas exchange at the surface - 2 it will aerate the water "artificially" with > all those bubbles - increasing the gas exchange again. > > I tried to calculate the efficiency of this, and ran across some figures > about moving water in streams, etc. which indicates that it could as much as > double the effective surface area of a tank. > > -- > These opinions are solely mine and in no way reflect those of my employer. > John M. Pantone @ GE/Calma R&D, 9805 Scranton Rd., San Diego, CA 92121 > ...{ucbvax|decvax}!sdcsvax!calmasd!jnp jnp@calmasd.GE.COM GEnie: J.PANTONE I've always been under the impression that O2<>CO2 transfer can only occur at the surface where atmospheric and water pressure are at equillibrium and that air lift systems will help increase water turn-over at the surface but no appreciable gas exchange occurs in the bubbles. Any authorities out there? ============================================================================= Rick Sterling COMMODORE AMIGA TEST ENGINEERING UUCP ...{allegra,ihnp4,rutgers}!cbmvax!sterling // /_ |\/||/_ /_ PHONE 215-431-9275 \X/ / \| ||\// \ ` CALM DOWN ! It's only 1's and 0's ! ' =============================================================================
aaraya@ut-emx.UUCP (Aaron J. Seltzer) (01/17/90)
In article <15670@boulder.Colorado.EDU> atk@boulder.Colorado.EDU (Alan T. Krantz) writes: > >This brings up an interesting question - well interesting to me - >do people treat tall tanks significantly different than long tanks in >terms of the fishes and plants purchased? Specifically what fishes do >well in a short tall tank? I think the 30L has a very nice aspect ratio >- long enough for schooling fishes - short enough for good plant >lighting from above ... what are other favorite dimensions and why? For what it's worth (not much), I STRONGLY prefer the ``breader'' type tanks. I have a 45 breader, and have seen them in 95 gallon varieties. In my opinion, nothing comes close for practicality and for fish happyness. This tank has most of it's dimenions in the horozontal directions (i.e. width and depth, not height). Advantages: 1) More surface area ==> more O2. 2) More gravel area ==> more biofilter (if UGF). 3) More room for fish to swim. That is they can swim both back and forth and forward and back. This allow you to view a more natural behavour, and see different views of the fish. (How many of you only know what the side of your Oscar looks like?) 4) More bottom area for plants and or landscaping. Makes the tank look much nicer, and allows territorial and or schooling fish to set up more interesting areas than just left - right - left. 5) Easy lighting. Not too deap, and very easy to mount your standard shop lights on top of, with as many bulbs, reflectors, etc. as you want. A qualitiative reason I like it, is that breader tanks makes your fish more a part of your place, rather than just a `show' picture against the wall. It looks more like a habitat, than a TV. Well, that's my two cents. Not worth much, but it didn't cost you much either. Aaron J. Seltzer (seltzer%aaraya.ee.utexas.edu@cs.utexas.edu)