- Messages
- 3,379
- Reaction score
- 4
Jenn, I did not make the blatant claim that "fish do worse in hyposalinity". You DID make the claim that they "do better in hyposalinity". The burden of proof is on you. Not me. I wouldnt make a claim like that.
URGENT...VERY sick clown
- Thread starter delpni
- Start date
Jenn, I did not make the blatant claim that "fish do worse in hyposalinity". You DID make the claim that they "do better in hyposalinity". The burden of proof is on you. Not me. I wouldnt make a claim like that.
I certainly take the advice I get on here to heart. If I didn't care to take this and written research seriously, I would not be here seeking the advice I do. 
. I just thought his saying this about Fish not reading was funny; not literal. As for the damsels, I have a blue chromis which I understood to be peaceful, a yellowtail (not sure of this ones aggression?), and a dascyllus, which after some reasearch that was inspired from yours and others advice here, is getting moved to a seperate tank along with the maroon. Thank you again for the advice! :thumbs:
. I just thought his saying this about Fish not reading was funny; not literal. As for the damsels, I have a blue chromis which I understood to be peaceful, a yellowtail (not sure of this ones aggression?), and a dascyllus, which after some reasearch that was inspired from yours and others advice here, is getting moved to a seperate tank along with the maroon. Thank you again for the advice! :thumbs:What would your definition be? Longevity? I have fish, corals and anemones that we've maintained for 8-10 years in multiple tanks that we service, that we maintain at 1.023. Since the fish are still alive, and appear to be thriving, and reproducing (2 sets of clowns, 2 different tanks, one pair spawns regularly, and my own pair just started spawning again)...
Not sure what kind of "proof" you want. If I said I kept a fish for 10 years in that situation and it perished, you could always argue that it could have lived 12 in higher specific gravity...
The only real way to prove or refute the notion would be to set up a controlled experiment that would take a number of years to determine the outcome. I don't know if such an experiment has been done.
Jenn
Not sure what kind of "proof" you want. If I said I kept a fish for 10 years in that situation and it perished, you could always argue that it could have lived 12 in higher specific gravity...
The only real way to prove or refute the notion would be to set up a controlled experiment that would take a number of years to determine the outcome. I don't know if such an experiment has been done.
Jenn
- Messages
- 3,379
- Reaction score
- 4
Thats kinda my point. If no experienment or testing or research ahs ever been done to indicate that fish "do better" in hyposalinity, why does ecveryone state so defintively that it does?
I am arguing the wives-tale that has been passed along for forever that these fish do better in hyposalinity. I understand what it does, and how it can benefit fish in certain situations, but the blanket statement that they do better in those conditions is unfounded. Youre absolutely right, I can make the claim that "they wouldve live longer in NSW conditions", or "they wouldve had higher fecundity in NSW conditions", etc etc etc. But, that is as speculatively untrue as the claim otherwise.
Point in fact, I even have a bit MORE evidence on my side, being that the fishes natural habitat has the conditions I state or more beneficial. Yet, the status quo for it seems to be otherwise. That amkes no sense to me. And if there is data and evidence to show otherwise, Id just like to see. it. Again, not pointing the finger or accusing anyone, but if Im so wrong, please show me and educate me.
As for why retailers or wholesalers may do it (and again, Im NOT pointing the finger at anyone here, or making any acusations. just my theory), it costs a business less money in salt to run systems hyposaline. It helps discourage rampant disease to run systems hyposaline. It may not show any effect for the brief time these fishes are hyposaline. All logical and functional reasons for a store to use less saline water.
I googled for a definition of hyposalinity/hyposaline and couldn't find one. Where's the line between accepted range of normal salinity, and hyposalinity, as you seem to refer to 1.023 as being hyposaline?
It's also worthy of note that most hobbyist hydrometers mark 1.020-1.025 as the "target range"... and the vast majority of hobbyists use these instead of refractometers (which aren't marked with a 'suggested' range).
In my experience, specific gravity of 1.023 doesn't make much of a difference in parasite control... dropping it to 1.018 or 1017 seems (anecdotally) to make more of a difference, but I don't engage in that practice (my former employer did).
It's only my *opinion* that I'd define hyposalinity somewhere below 1.020 - because that's outside of the traditional range that I was taught. Again - just my opinion since I couldn't find an official definition of where that distinction lies.
Jenn
It's also worthy of note that most hobbyist hydrometers mark 1.020-1.025 as the "target range"... and the vast majority of hobbyists use these instead of refractometers (which aren't marked with a 'suggested' range).
In my experience, specific gravity of 1.023 doesn't make much of a difference in parasite control... dropping it to 1.018 or 1017 seems (anecdotally) to make more of a difference, but I don't engage in that practice (my former employer did).
It's only my *opinion* that I'd define hyposalinity somewhere below 1.020 - because that's outside of the traditional range that I was taught. Again - just my opinion since I couldn't find an official definition of where that distinction lies.
Jenn
Howard, I appreciate your point of view.
Knowing Jeremy, I know he's not trying to be disrespectful or anything - he's simply trying to provoke some thought into *why* we do things the way they do. I'm OK with that, and I think there's a lot to be learned from a respectful and civil discussion, which this is, at least from where I stand.
And by no means take anything I say as "gospel"... I have no problem with my ideas/techniques being challenged. Proof is in the pudding - 10 years in the trade, 20+ in the hobby, and I do what works for me and what has worked consistently. Are there different ways? You betcha. Could someone else's way be better? Absolutely. Or, the way I learned from those before me might be also.
Only through doing, and learning, and being open to other ideas, do we as a collective move forward. So I welcome the discussion.
If the mods feel that parts of the thread should be moved to a separate thread, that's OK. The discussion began when the OP mentioned that his SG was 1.026 and the possibility exists that the reason why the fish perished, was due to osmotic shock from a sharp shift in specific gravity.
Yes, we got a bit more involved in that discussion but IMO it's relevant to the original issue.
And we're all behaving So hopefully others reading can understand that the discussion is intended to be constructive, and give them something to ponder too.
Jenn
Knowing Jeremy, I know he's not trying to be disrespectful or anything - he's simply trying to provoke some thought into *why* we do things the way they do. I'm OK with that, and I think there's a lot to be learned from a respectful and civil discussion, which this is, at least from where I stand.
And by no means take anything I say as "gospel"... I have no problem with my ideas/techniques being challenged. Proof is in the pudding - 10 years in the trade, 20+ in the hobby, and I do what works for me and what has worked consistently. Are there different ways? You betcha. Could someone else's way be better? Absolutely. Or, the way I learned from those before me might be also.
Only through doing, and learning, and being open to other ideas, do we as a collective move forward. So I welcome the discussion.
If the mods feel that parts of the thread should be moved to a separate thread, that's OK. The discussion began when the OP mentioned that his SG was 1.026 and the possibility exists that the reason why the fish perished, was due to osmotic shock from a sharp shift in specific gravity.
Yes, we got a bit more involved in that discussion but IMO it's relevant to the original issue.
And we're all behaving
So hopefully others reading can understand that the discussion is intended to be constructive, and give them something to ponder too.Jenn
- Messages
- 3,379
- Reaction score
- 4
Hyposalinity is purposefully running below NSW levels, IMO.
- Messages
- 3,379
- Reaction score
- 4
JennM;533991 wrote: Howard, I appreciate your point of view.
Knowing Jeremy, I know he's not trying to be disrespectful or anything - he's simply trying to provoke some thought into *why* we do things the way they do. I'm OK with that, and I think there's a lot to be learned from a respectful and civil discussion, which this is, at least from where I stand.
And by no means take anything I say as "gospel"... I have no problem with my ideas/techniques being challenged. Proof is in the pudding - 10 years in the trade, 20+ in the hobby, and I do what works for me and what has worked consistently. Are there different ways? You betcha. Could someone else's way be better? Absolutely. Or, the way I learned from those before me might be also.
Only through doing, and learning, and being open to other ideas, do we as a collective move forward. So I welcome the discussion.
If the mods feel that parts of the thread should be moved to a separate thread, that's OK. The discussion began when the OP mentioned that his SG was 1.026 and the possibility exists that the reason why the fish perished, was due to osmotic shock from a sharp shift in specific gravity.
Yes, we got a bit more involved in that discussion but IMO it's relevant to the original issue.
And we're all behaving
Jenn
Yes, I am certainly not trying to be disrespectful or discourteous. I just feel some comments and advice is being made that is not accurate. And in as much, I am asking for any type of evidence to disclose it. IMO, misinformation is WAY more damaging than ignorance in this hobby. In this case, not at all. But, that being said, if anyone is going to give advice which I feel is innaccurate, and they feel strongly the other way, I am going argue/discuss it. I dont feel I am asking for anything too insane or discourteous. I just feel that if anyone is going to claim that hyposaline (as compared to NSW) condition produce "less stress" on a marine teleost, I want to see why and where they have deduced such information. I think people have misinterpreted the idea that hyposalinity treats parasites with less trauma to the host fish into hyposalinity is harmless.
- Messages
- 3,379
- Reaction score
- 4
No need. Ill zip it.
- Messages
- 1,043
- Reaction score
- 0
I wish you would not zip it! Having your input is what is needed to get some people on track. Fact is Fact. Your experiences can teach us much, for those that do not like it well they dont have to read it.
+1....that is....in a true definition of the prefix (hypo)= "less than".....if NSW is 1.026...which in most parts of the world where reefs are found it is.....there is little differentiation....the Red Sea is one of the few and very few at that...places where reef salinity is either higher or lower than .026...in reference to possible osmotic shock this goes back to a slower acclimation processes...IMO...1.5 hrs is more than enough usually....but it also depends on the amount of water the fish is introduced to and how.....drip acclimating IME works great....but it is necessary for it to be a very slow drip.....(i.e.-if youre using a airline tube the drops really dont need to go any faster than about 1-2 drops per second...you can either tie a knot in the line or get a small twist valve) IMO there is no reason to run SG in a reef tank environment lower than 1.026.....if fish have been thriving in the oceans for thousands of millions of years.....then something is right there....it is very easy to get a fish accustomed to 1.026 if it is coming from a LFS with 1.023 system water.....it just takes time and patience....
Well, since the fish died, and it was likely either from osmotic shock and/or aggression from other tank-mates, I'm not sure what else you would like us to suggest.
I believe I suggested keeping one specie of clown - either a single or pair, but not to mingle different species, and I suggested getting rid of the damsels.
OP does not seem to be sure what species he has (maroon and maybe ocellaris or percula I'm unclear which one perished). And upon suggesting removal of the damsels he said there were 2 blue chromis, (which IMO are OK), and a yellow tail. He seemed reluctant to get rid of these and didn't think they'd be aggressive. OK...
I gave all that advice in my first response when there were 2 threads.
Jenn
I believe I suggested keeping one specie of clown - either a single or pair, but not to mingle different species, and I suggested getting rid of the damsels.
OP does not seem to be sure what species he has (maroon and maybe ocellaris or percula I'm unclear which one perished). And upon suggesting removal of the damsels he said there were 2 blue chromis, (which IMO are OK), and a yellow tail. He seemed reluctant to get rid of these and didn't think they'd be aggressive. OK...
I gave all that advice in my first response when there were 2 threads.
Jenn
delpni;533944 wrote: I certainly take the advice I get on here to heart. If I didn't care to take this and written research seriously, I would not be here seeking the advice I do.
Aside from the CONSTANT back and forth about salinity, which I find informative and...well... humerous </em>to read, I did get plenty of advice about my fish. As you can read above, I was not reluctant to rid of the aggressive fish, I clearly said that, based on what I have been advised here, he has been moved to a seperate tank. :confused2: Anyway, thank you all for the advice and entertainment! :lol2: I know there is a serious side to all of this hobby, but if I took it as seriously as some people I have spoke with over the months, I would not be able to find any level of enjoyment, which is the whole reason I began in the first place.
