The right L for my planted low tech tank?

ofird · Post by **ofird** » 17 Apr 2009, 22:24

Lately I have taken great interest in these lovely creatures and I am trying to find a real nice one or two for my tank.

I have setup this low tech -

Specs:
the temperature is around 27 C, and I plan to change 10% monthly. I have excel and low dose of ferts added to the tank on a schedule, the PH is around 7.2, the volume is 200 L (net)

The Ls I am seeking for should be small enough for this tank (up to 10-12 cm) and capable to survive in this conditions (being algae effective is an advantage), of course that I will feed with the appropriate food

I got the L80, L260, L201 and L204 under the radar...

Anyone got some suggestions / experience with planted low techs?

MatsP · Post by **MatsP** » 18 Apr 2009, 14:56

Doing 10% water changing monthly sounds far too little, no matter what sort of fish you are keeping (except perhaps guppies and some other very hardy species).

None of the fishes you mention are good algae eaters, and at least L260 would prefer a higher tempeture. All of them would prefer good circulation - which doesn't seem to be the case in your tank.

Others may have a different opinion.

--
Mats

ofird · Post by **ofird** » 18 Apr 2009, 17:02

perhaps I should provide more info:
the water in my tank are in mint condition! even though the water exchange is reletavily low, due to the low tech concept)

I test the water regulary - the ammonia, nitrite is 0, ph is aroud 7.4 and the circulation is powered by rena xp3 filter which pumps 1350 l/h

i also use a uv sterilizer post the filer outtake.

so no prob there.

i have narrowed my choices to

- what d0 you think?

Post by **Birger** » 18 Apr 2009, 23:42

the water in my tank are in mint condition! even though the water exchange is reletavily low, due to the low tech concept)

Can you explain this low tech concept a little more...to me it seems like any regular tank setup? (maybe just the wording does not translate to me properly)
As a matter of fact with the UV sterilizer yours is more high tech than what I regularly run.

I think whichever of these, and I would suggest the L204 because I would think they are the most adaptable, would as previously suggested not be algea eaters and would need more of a water change and higher circulation. The waste a pleco produces can be a fair amount even for the small to midrange species.

If this low tech concept just means minimizing bio load than I would suggest going with a few or one of the other smaller pleco's which come with all the same personality the mid range ones have, you would also find algea eaters among them.

MatsP · Post by **MatsP** » 18 Apr 2009, 23:56

No matter of low or high-tech, you will have a buildup of nitrate in the water over such a long period of time. Almost all plecos are very good eating machines - unfortunately, that also means quite a large amount of "used food" coming out the other end. And no matter what you do, all the nitrogen in the food you put into the tank will turn into nitrate - it is just the way it works. To remove the nitrate, you either need to have such good plant-growth that you can remove grams of vegetable-protein every week, or change enough water to keep the nitrate level in check - 20ppm would be a recommended max for the fish you show.

So I still think you need to change more water than 10% every WEEK if you plan on keeping exotic plecos. My tanks are perhaps what you'd call high-tech - I'm not sure what you mean by low-tech and what classes as high-tech in your terms, but I'm replacing roughly half the water every week in all my tanks. Yes, they are fairly heavily stocked, but it's never a bad thing to replace the water in a tank.

And I see that Birger wrote almost the same thing as me, at almost the same time. ;)

--
Mats

Farid · Post by **Farid** » 19 Apr 2009, 01:30

hi there,
i keep L204 L260 and also L201
the L204 are now 14-15cm large and eating a lot of vegies too so plants will be eaten as you eat your salad for dinner

Loricaridae's need a bunch of wood, and hiding places. the best are clay pipes (closed on one end) also called caves.

the point about the water changement is this:
imagine you got your water. there's a sertain amount of germs. with 10% /months the germs will get more and more. after a few months they will be stable more or less.

i change 60-80% a week! i also got germs in my tanks...also getting stable after a few months but the average is much lower than it will be in your tank.

if any problem occurs,and the fish mabe get weak ...a high germ saturation is not the best to have at this moment. the faster they could catch anything...

the most important thing is not to clean your filter as long the filter works well...this is your one and only insurance to keep the water quality good. but dont save with fresh water!

here i got some of my tanks(to give you an idea about the deco..maybe you like it...

10x L134 & babies 80x40x50cm

8x LDA33 & 12x(Brycinus longipinnis) 100x60x40cm

4x L204 100x60x40cm

7x L200 120x60x40cm:

regards
farid

Post by **Birger** » 19 Apr 2009, 01:49

the L204 are now 14-15cm large and eating a lot of vegies too so plants will be eaten as you eat your salad for dinner

Good point about the plants...I was only thinking of the water conditions

Birger

racoll · Post by **racoll** » 19 Apr 2009, 06:16

Hi ofird.

I'm not really sure what you mean by "low-tech" either.

Do you just mean a planted tank with very low stocking, and without CO2 injection or intense lighting?

Also, does the "low-tech" method require you to not carry out more water changes for some reason?

Regarding the plecs, if you ask me, adding a to this tank would be a big mistake, so I would rule out the L204 and LDA31. These fish are wood eating machines and will make a huge mess. They need an aquarium with oversized filtration and big weekly water changes. For this reason they will not be suited to a "low-tech" approach.

The are a better bet, but you may also find with the meaty diet (they won't touch algae) they require, you have to carry out more frequent and larger water changes to keep on top of the nitrates.

Of the fishes you are interested in, the Brazilian ones (L260, L270, L066) are now banned from export, so you will have trouble finding these. Of the Colombian species, L340 is pretty rare, so you may not find them either. You should be able to get L201 though.

The may work and you can get hold of these.

Hypancistrus are pretty nocturnal though, so do be prepared to spend a lot of money on a fish that you see once a month.

One thing to remember is that L numbers need well oxygenated water, something which is at odds with a planted approach where you want to maintain higher CO2 levels.

Birgers suggestion of A. claro is a good one. This fish would work well in your tank I think, as would perhaps or . They would take care of the algae and contribute a smaller bio-load. They will be cheaper and also more active in the daytime.

ofird · Post by **ofird** » 19 Apr 2009, 08:53

Hi all

Thanks for taking such an interst in this post, I know that this not a planted tank forum, so I will be happy to say a few words about this concept.

Taken form this article (there are many more but I find this one reach): http://azdhan.googlepages.com/thelostworld2

Low tech basically means rich substrate, low light (less than 2 WPG) with the right plants and bio-load in order to remove the drugery, time, and frustration of doing weekly water changes. A secondary benefit to such tanks are the potential savings gained by not having to invest in expensive high tech equipment such as regulators, c02 tanks, and the cost of having ro refill c02 tanks. It is said that low tech tanks are also more forgiving of errors and make it easier to achieve and maintain stability and balance. Also, in theory, algae should not be a huge issue given that low light is used.

The suface is agetated to insert air into thae tank ON TOP of the air inserted by plants.

One of the biggest gurus in this turf is Tom Barr, who has experimented a lot with these with great success: http://www.barrreport.com

My goal is to reach such a setup, without building the nitrate so high (I am monitoring constantly), this is possible - I have done it before with 60L (algae free).

In regards to the Ls I am looking for, I already have a few in there which are doing fine: Albino ancistrus, L10a, Otocinclus, Buldog Pleco and corydoras Pygmy - all looking great, 2 months post the setup.

I want to add 2-3 more, exotic ones from the list above.

So now focusing maily on L201,L260, L270, L066, L340 and farawella - you say?

Peckolita looks a bit "less exotic" to me...

Mike_Noren · Post by **Mike_Noren** » 19 Apr 2009, 12:32

Be warned that lowtech setups rely on heavy feeding, so the fish generates enough nutrients for the plants, or you'll get the algae garden God forgot. I also suspect that unless you have a lot of floating plants you may have too little vegetation in that tank initially to outcompete the algae.

Mileage definitely varies, and I quite like the lowtech approach as a means to quickly get a "matured" aquarium, but I've found it to be finicky and prone to algal explosions, and the plants grow extremely slowly. Dosing EasyCarbo Excel will help a lot with the algae (as it's toxic to most algae), but may not be sufficient.

ofird · Post by **ofird** » 19 Apr 2009, 16:16

My 2 little cents

1) I have 50% planted (should be around 80%, but I closely monitor)
2) I daily dose with Excel (half the recommnded dasage)
3) weekly of Micro, Trace and Macro (NPK) (the N will come later from the fish waste / food as mentioned)
4) the tank had some minor algae issue, which I overcame
5) its all about acieving the "balance" and for the maturity I use Easy Life FFM weekly.

So far (knock wood) doing just as I expected, I do have floaters and I am adding more plants here and there.

So please, I am kind to my fish and to my Ls

help me find the right one ....

Currently the prioirty is based like this:

and farawella ...

Which ones will you say be the hardiest?

Bigpig · Post by **Bigpig** » 19 Apr 2009, 17:29

I had a lo tech tank running for a while. Great for the plants, but in order to get the right balance it needed very heavy planting, and very low fish stocking.
I was trying to get the plants to take care of cleaning the water for me,(as I believe is possible) resulting is fewer water changes. I have read of people only changing the water every few months!!!
For this to work I believe you need your set up to be a heavily tank with just a few fish to add movement.
To keep L numbers you need to set up the tank to suit their needs, and work out if you can plant it up in a way that suits this.
I have L numbers in all my tanks, which are heavily planted. this took a bit of trial and error to get sussed. Now i follow a sort of middle ground approach; rich substrate under suitable sand or gravel, good filtration and flow, daily dosing with EasyCarbo, weekly dosing with Ferts, weekly 30/50% water changes.
As most L numbers produce lots of poo, you really need to be doing much bigger water changes than 10 %very week.
With low tech set ups the only real difference to any other set up, (cost aside) is if using garden soil the new tank is cycled much faster.
One other point, I find it very pleasing to try an set my tanks up as biotopes, making everything as close to the area where the fish would have occured in the wild.This is not always possible regarding plants, but it is great fun trying.
I hope this thread is helpful to you.
all the best,
Bigpig

apistomaster · Post by **apistomaster** » 19 Apr 2009, 17:57

I don't find any difference in level of difficulty among any of the Hypancistrus or Peckoltia spp you are considering but the Farlowella always are in fragile condition when purchased so a higher loss rate initially with them would not be unusual. If your Plecos are wild caught instead of tank raised then they too will have a delicate period of acclimation. If you have access to tank raised species i strongly advise you to buy them. Just choose one the species you like the most and can afford if you hope to spawn them. I think L340 is less often bred than some of the others you seem to like. In NA at least, this may have more to do with the relatively low cost of wild imports than actual difficulty in breeding.
L201 and L260 are being bred regularly. One of the photos shows what appears to me to be a L66. That would be the largest species ai would consider for your tank. L204 I have kept, 8 at one time, grew to be pretty large and as others have pointed out, were very messy compared to the Peckoltia and Hypancistrus spp. due to both their largish size and their diet, including wood. I can't say mine were very hard on my plants so perhaps they were receiving enough vegetation from the Spirulina sticks I fed them. They were usually kept in tanks where I used a lot of wood with Anubias attached once they had reached adult size. Anubias are a good choice for a plant whenever you are keeping a pleco that may be hard on softer leaved plants like Echinodorous spp.

I can only emphasize what the other highly skilled fish keepers/breeders have already told you about making higher volume and more frequent water changes. This really isn't a negotiable item if you hope to keep any of these fish well. I would not even entertain any notion of doing without good filtration. if you want to go that route i would not recommend keeping any of the fish you are interested in.
There is no way to accurately duplicate nature in a small closed water fish culture system. The inadequacies must be made up for by providing sufficient filtration and water changes. I would recommend making at least 2 water changes a week of 50% of the volume. More is better.

My idea of a "low tech aquarium" excludes high intensity lighting, UV sterilization and no CO2 supplementation.
All my tanks are planted to some degree but even those that are well planted i only use one fertilizer.
I use Nutrifin PlantGro Sticks. I pot all species of larger rosette plants like Echinodorous spp in pots made from cutting the base off 2 liter plastic juice bottles to make pots about 3 inches tall. I include one of the PlantGro sticks and replace them about every 10 months. In the case of large Amazon swords, I may use 2 sticks as the plants grow larger. even though these will become root bound they will continue to grow well as long as they are fed the sticks. Enough of the fertilizer will enter the water column plus whatever is produced by the fish to ensure that the other plants will do well. This method completely eliminates supplemental fertilization. I regularly grow Amazon swords, E. bleheri to over 20 inches high and 20 inches in diameter using the above described method. My tanks never have more than 1.75 watts per gal and 1.5 is most typical for most of my tanks. I use FloraBase exclusively for my potted plants substrate.

ofird · Post by **ofird** » 19 Apr 2009, 20:02

Thanks for the inputs all -

The potential list by priority now looks like this:

L201 - http://www.planetcatfish.com/catelog/sp ... es_id=2178
L134 - http://www.planetcatfish.com/catelog/sp ... ies_id=213
L066 - http://www.planetcatfish.com/catelog/sp ... ies_id=174
L260 http://www.planetcatfish.com/catelog/sp ... ies_id=229
L270 - http://www.planetcatfish.com/catelog/sp ... ies_id=232
L340 http://www.planetcatfish.com/catelog/sp ... es_id=1116

and farawella ...

apistomaster · Post by **apistomaster** » 19 Apr 2009, 21:31

and farawella ...[/quote]

You mean Farlowella spp. such as

All your finalists are fine species. I am biased for
because I raise them and they are so colorful.
Here are 3 of 12 youngsters I released into my 125 gal, wild Nhamunda Blue Discus tank.
They always keeps some distance from each other. If they get much closer they will have an entertaining but brief fight.

ofird · Post by **ofird** » 19 Apr 2009, 21:50

apistomaster wrote:and farawella ...

You mean Farlowella spp. such as

Farlowella acus

I am not sure , their temp range might be a little low for me, the summer here can bum up to 28 Celsius. Do you think this is the right one for my setup? I like just one of this kind.

Your L134 are soooo adorable, I am glad they are on my list

BTW - do you think can also be a candidate?

nvcichlids · Post by **nvcichlids** » 19 Apr 2009, 23:09

MatsP wrote:Doing 10% water changing monthly sounds far too little, no matter what sort of fish you are keeping (except perhaps guppies and some other very hardy species).
Mats

Not to sound mean or anything, But I NEVER do water changes on my tanks. My levels are perfect for everything and never run into problems. I know the only thing I do is re-fill when water evaporates. I think if you can accurately set up biotopes, then waterchanges are not nessecary.

racoll · Post by **racoll** » 20 Apr 2009, 02:19

Bigpig wrote:As most L numbers produce lots of poo, you really need to be doing much bigger water changes than 10 %very week.

I can't emphasise this point enough. If you are looking for a low maintenance tank, then don't keep L numbers!

nvcichlids wrote:Not to sound mean or anything, But I NEVER do water changes on my tanks. My levels are perfect for everything and never run into problems. I know the only thing I do is re-fill when water evaporates. I think if you can accurately set up biotopes, then waterchanges are not nessecary.

Hmmm. Controversial. If your fish are healthy and your water parameters are okay, then you must be doing something right, but this is not how I keep fish.

Remember there are many other toxins that build up in the water other than those which you measure with a test kit. You dilute these substances with regular water changes. A tank also needs a stable pH, and over time the acids produced in the tank eat away your buffering capacity (i.e. old tank syndrome). Water changes replenish these pH buffers.

Regarding the plecs, and even the Farlowella, as Larry says they are all hardy providing they have been acclimated correctly and are feeding at the store. If you buy poor condition fish they are much more likely to die. When you buy, check for sunken eyes, sunken bellies and whether they are eating the food given to them. Do they show normal behaviour such as hiding under a piece of wood, or are they stuck to the side at the surface in the filter effluent?

It is also worth considering that the Brazilian Hypancistrus have been banned from export due to risks of overfishing. They are found in very restricted areas, and ornamental fish exploitation have been occurring in these regions unregulated for many years. I would encourage people to only buy breeding groups, or purchase tank raised stock. This way these lovely fish can stay in the hobby. Single fish languishing alone, are not going to be doing much good. Additionally, the Brazilian rivers where these fish are found are likely to be destroyed by hydroelectric dam projects. They may end up being extinct in the wild.

ofird wrote:I am not sure , their [Farlowella] temp range might be a little low for me, the summer here can bum up to 28 Celsius

You will not find F. acus in the aquarium trade, and I guarantee each of the 14 registered owners has misidentified their fish.

The species commonly traded is from the Llanos and these will be fine at 28C, but they do not like it over 30C. They are hardy once established and eat algae. I would go for these, as your tank is well set up for them.

MatsP · Post by **MatsP** » 20 Apr 2009, 09:40

nvcichlids wrote:Not to sound mean or anything, But I NEVER do water changes on my tanks. My levels are perfect for everything and never run into problems. I know the only thing I do is re-fill when water evaporates. I think if you can accurately set up biotopes, then waterchanges are not nessecary.

Really? You mustn't have many fish in each tank, and a huge amount of plants. Or a nitrate test that doesn't work - it wouldn't be the first time...

I haven't measured nitrate levels for a long while, but I sure get nitrate levels rising if I don't change the water. But I have a lot of fish in all my tanks ("one small bristlenose in the hospital-tank" is the exception) - the only tank I have with less than ten fish is the 200 liter/55g Hemiancistrus sp(L128) tank.

Remember, in nature, in rivers, there is a whole lot more water per fish, and the water is constantly being circulated (rain down, river runs to the ocean and evaporation goes up to form new rain).

--
Mats

MatsP · Post by **MatsP** » 20 Apr 2009, 10:00

apistomaster wrote:You mean Farlowella spp. such as

Farlowella acus

Note that what is sold as is not that species, it is most likely . Read the comments on F. acus cat-eLog page.

--
Mats

Post by **Barbie** » 20 Apr 2009, 10:33

Whenever I see these discussions, I wonder WHY? Just because you can test for nitrates and use plants to keep them from being out of control, why would you risk concentrating any contaminants you're introducing with foods and even your tap water? Dissolved organics, heavy metals, even overspray from scented cleaners that could build up over time. Why is a water change that dilutes potential issues such a heinous labor? I change a minimum of 1/3 of the water in the 1600 gallons of tanks in my house every week. That's just the stuff at home, not the 2600 gallons of water on centralized systems at my shop that are also changed weekly, or sometimes twice a week when I have time. I regularly have fish spawn that are supposed to be "difficult" with no additional incentive from me.

Honestly, most Hypancistrus are going to like warmer water than plants will see the humor in, as will L134. LDA31 will be hard on plants, as can L204. Farlowella can be very sensitive to water parameters, but would at least be the most suited to the environment with a willingness to eat algae.

While this is not a planted forum, I know a few of us have planted tanks, I do keep a couple high tech planted tanks with pressurized CO2 and high lighting. All of which get 50% water changes weekly. There's more than one way to accomplish a beautiful tank, but for my fish, the tank is more of the setting for the fish, rather than the fish being accessories, I guess.

Barbie

MatsP · Post by **MatsP** » 20 Apr 2009, 10:50

And if changing water really is that much of a labour - perhaps either:
1. Fishkeeping is not for that person.
2. An automatic water-change method should be sought. I built my sump-system with the direct intention of avoiding changing water on those tanks - I now have four tanks that I haven't changed water on for weeks - but they get about 4x the volume of water changed every week - all whilst re-using the waste-water from my RO system!
3. At least look at alternative solutions for water changes - in my "in the house" tank, I use two long hoses, one to empty out the water and one to fill it up - Python does a gadget that is a single hose to do both of these in one go. It's not that much hard work, compared to when I used buckets!

--
Mats

L number Banana · Post by **L number Banana** » 20 Apr 2009, 11:55

Hi Guys,

I think this forum has got so many wonderful experts in their area but there seems to always be a conflicts with people who are experts in another area if it's different.

There's a whole group of people who enjoy the challenge of creating the balance of an el natural tank. There's experts who are really low tech and would certainly never do a normal water change to trash the balance. They have huge followings and sell millions of books, write articles, help as moderators and experts on forums etc etc. If you don't think natural tanks where fishload = plantfood works, no problem but we should at least do our research. For the thousands of people who are fanatical about this technique, they don't deserve to be written off. All the myths surrounding these tanks are laughable to someone who's running these type tanks. There's cool water plants and very warm water plants. And thousands of people can't all have bad test kits. Many people freak when they learn the tank should have some sunlight. Tom Barr is a brilliant source and there is Diana Walstad's book Ecology of the Planted Aquarium, too techie for some, but it explains the science behind the method at least

On forums that poo-poo the traditional filtered style tank like most of us here have, I have the same to say to them.

Let's learn from each other, huh?

L number Banana:
1 traditional
1 el natural
1 happy medium tank

Cheers!

MatsP · Post by **MatsP** » 20 Apr 2009, 12:16

I'm not saying it can't work. But there are right and wrong fishes to keep in such a system. There are plenty of fish suitable for tanks with heavy planting and little water changing - just not that many of the L-number pleco's. Surely the books on the subject discuss suitable and unsuitable fish as well?

--
Mats

L number Banana · Post by **L number Banana** » 20 Apr 2009, 12:33

Glad you replied MatsP because your opinions/knowledge are always really helpful to me. You're right, the various sources do discuss the fish and unsuitable ones would be ones that dig through your soil of course and ones that have a voracious appetite for specific plants. Unfortunately I don't own a copy of Diana's book so I can't give you something more specific. I borrowed it ages ago when I started my first tank.

Can I ask why it would be natural to assume that L's and the like would be thought of as unsuitable? I'm guessing it would be the woodwaste or just lots of poo? My only idea if that's the case is that natural ponds etc still deal with decaying wood and plants thrive on it. Heavy metals are stored/held in plants too. The whole purpose of the plants is to clean the water for the fish. (And they look nice) There's a water treatment plant in Bear lake that uses this system for drinking water. I'll see if I can find info on that and something more specific with regards to these fish on on of the forums.

You know of course that you would be the perfect candidate to try one of these tanks and fill everyone else in

L number Banana · Post by **L number Banana** » 20 Apr 2009, 12:36

Just found this wiki, a much better explanation:
http://theaquariumwiki.com/Walstad_method

ofird · Post by **ofird** » 20 Apr 2009, 13:17

L number Banana wrote:Hi Guys,

I think this forum has got so many wonderful experts in their area but there seems to always be a conflicts with people who are experts in another area if it's different.

There's a whole group of people who enjoy the challenge of creating the balance of an el natural tank. There's experts who are really low tech and would certainly never do a normal water change to trash the balance. They have huge followings and sell millions of books, write articles, help as moderators and experts on forums etc etc. If you don't think natural tanks where fishload = plantfood works, no problem but we should at least do our research. For the thousands of people who are fanatical about this technique, they don't deserve to be written off. All the myths surrounding these tanks are laughable to someone who's running these type tanks. There's cool water plants and very warm water plants. And thousands of people can't all have bad test kits. Many people freak when they learn the tank should have some sunlight. Tom Barr is a brilliant source and there is Diana Walstad's book Ecology of the Planted Aquarium, too techie for some, but it explains the science behind the method at least

On forums that poo-poo the traditional filtered style tank like most of us here have, I have the same to say to them.

Let's learn from each other, huh?

I couldn't have said it better myself!

Thanks - I started to feel "guilty"

Low tech is not due to laziness, or lack of care for fish and their tanks - ITS A CONCEPT, it suits me best due to my lifestyle, which gives me little time to "work" on my tanks.

Even if I had the option to do water changes, I would do them more or less with the same volumes if I were to build a low-tech or EL tank.

This concept is all about "balance" too much water changes will break this balance in a matter of days.

I have learned from all the replies, that this is the right list for me (the one above) I will select a few from there and let you know on the progress - probably start with Farlowella acus (we can get them here), Peckolita SP, L270, L134 and L201 of course not all at once

More pinions are always welcome

MatsP · Post by **MatsP** » 20 Apr 2009, 13:23

Basically, I don't think the amount of light needed to keep enough plants growing quickly enough to consume the waste will work well with this type of fish. I'm happy to be proven wrong.
They also tend to require high levels of oxygen during the night, which may not work well with heavily planted tanks.

I also do not believe that "too much water change" can ever be a problem. None of the bacteria that are involved in the breakdown of nitrogenous waste live in the actual water column [at least not enough to make any difference], what else would be we be "upsetting".

See my previous point on "Farlowella acus" - it is certainly not that species, most likely F. vittata. .

Edit: And finally - perhaps most importantly but not a very "technical" argument, hence added on at the end: this style of tank doesn't represent the environment that the fish lives in naturally - the majority of Loricariidae known to us, with the exceptions of:
Hypoptominae (Oto's etc)
Loricariinae (RIneloricaria, Sturisoma, Loricaria, etc)
live in fairly fast-flowing water with no vegetation at all. Most Loricariinae are also not living in planted areas, as they prefer a open sandy substrate in which they will burrow and dig for food. Sturisoma and Farlowella are suitable for a heavily planted tank, although some of the larger Sturisoma species may be to rough for the circumstances.

--
Mats

L number Banana · Post by **L number Banana** » 20 Apr 2009, 13:39

Hi ofird,

Has your tank been running a while? I have some wonderful farlowella and they definitely like super good water like a stabilized tank- (got eggs once but they're still too young).

The reason people feel that your chances of getting a real F.acus is next to impossible is many things but you can read up about one of the forum owners going on a trip to try to find one, it's a cool read. All the twigs here are listed at F.acus but none of them are, no harm done. They're really tough to distinguish for a new-to-catfish person like me but it's suffice to say that if none of the experts can find them for sale, most likely I never will

Here's the article:http://www.planetcatfish.com/shanesworl ... 3C%2Fem%3E

You'll find more fish info here: http://www.aquaticplantcentral.com

Thanks - I started to feel "guilty"

I know what you mean

but everyone here is usually just worried about the fish, which of course is wonderful and confuse planted tank people or natural tank people with 'plants first' people.

I'm new to filtered tanks and this forum is the best as far as helping me learn and there's certainly no better place to learn and ask questions about your planned catfish

L number Banana · Post by **L number Banana** » 20 Apr 2009, 13:59

the amount of light needed to keep enough plants growing quickly enough

Not all plants need high light to grow properly and vigorously and some plants just 'melt' in low light.
The fish:

They also tend to require high levels of oxygen during the night, which may not work well with heavily planted tanks.

The water movement should provide enough oxygen for everyone, I think some people use bubblers too but most I've read about just have a high enough current. If you add co2 by gas methods, that's a whole new ball game and monitoring and on/off oxy/co2 timers are sometimes used along with the Pearson (?) scale that determines safe oxygen levels for the fish (not the plants). That's not low tech though!
water changes:

what else would be we be "upsetting"

I guess it's just the change? I only know from experience and I'm certainly not the expert but when your readings are lovely and you do a big water change, you seem to have to start all over because your perfect water does a little 'new tank syndrome' thing. I'm not a chemist either

this style of tank doesn't represent the environment that the fish lives in naturally - the majority of Loricariidae known to us, with the exceptions of:
Hypoptominae (Oto's etc)
Loricariinae (RIneloricaria, Sturisoma, Loricaria, etc)
live in fairly fast-flowing water with no vegetation at all. Most Loricariinae are also not living in planted areas, as they prefer a open sandy substrate in which they will burrow and dig for food. Sturisoma and Farlowella are suitable for a heavily planted tank, although some of the larger Sturisoma species may be to rough for the circumstances.

You're so right, but even a fish in an accurate biotope is still in a glass box so I guess what really matters is if you're the kind of person that wants to recreate a little bit of nature like a real biotope or just want to keep lovely fish in the type of tank you like. Neither one is 'wrong' I suppose, eh?

The right L for my planted low tech tank?

The right L for my planted low tech tank?

Re: The right L for my planted low tech tank?

Re: The right L for my planted low tech tank?

Re: The right L for my planted low tech tank?

Re: The right L for my planted low tech tank?

Re: The right L for my planted low tech tank?

Re: The right L for my planted low tech tank?

Re: The right L for my planted low tech tank?

Re: The right L for my planted low tech tank?

Re: The right L for my planted low tech tank?

Re: The right L for my planted low tech tank?

Re: The right L for my planted low tech tank?

Re: The right L for my planted low tech tank?

Re: The right L for my planted low tech tank?

Re: The right L for my planted low tech tank?

Re: The right L for my planted low tech tank?

Re: The right L for my planted low tech tank?

Re: The right L for my planted low tech tank?

Re: The right L for my planted low tech tank?

Re: The right L for my planted low tech tank?

Re: The right L for my planted low tech tank?

Re: The right L for my planted low tech tank?

Re: The right L for my planted low tech tank?

Re: The right L for my planted low tech tank?

Re: The right L for my planted low tech tank?

Re: The right L for my planted low tech tank?

Re: The right L for my planted low tech tank?

Re: The right L for my planted low tech tank?

Re: The right L for my planted low tech tank?

Re: The right L for my planted low tech tank?