Demonic
Premium Member
I have seen a blue hippo outgrow a 90 gallon tank quickly. Not all fish can be kept in small to medium sized tanks. Outgrowing a tank can happen if people are dumb. But 99% of the time it will not happen.
Is it true? Size of tank=Size of fish!
- Thread starter stumpovrtyme
- Start date
I have seen a blue hippo outgrow a 90 gallon tank quickly. Not all fish can be kept in small to medium sized tanks. Outgrowing a tank can happen if people are dumb. But 99% of the time it will not happen.
agreeive?fish
New member
personally i believe that it is a combination of
Tank size.. even public aquariums cant duplicate the size of the ocean
Tank mates.. we as people tend to put fish A with fish B in a glass box who in nature would never run across each other
tank mates again.. could it be that fish need the certain external stimulas to grow such as the constant threat of being some one elses meal to stimulate biological proceses..or even mating hormon stimulas, or hunting/food gathering stimulas
Diet.. there is no way we can provide every thing that a fish may possibly eat in the wild nor could we provide the food that a preditor fish would eat that has eaten everything the food fish needs to provide the preditor with 100% of its natural nutritional requirments from that one meal
lighting.. there is no way in a glass box we can duplicate the natural lighting the fish recieve in the wild nor can we give the fish the open to light/shaded from light/dark holes exct that they would see minute by minute on the reef to include cloud cover, rough seas,ect
Temp. we have pumps/lights/heaters/chillers ect to adujust the temp (directly or inderectly intended) where in the wild temps change from many varriables such as season,wave action,depth,that days weather high tide, low tide ect and we cant recreate mother natures moods
Flow we have power heads and return pumps, wave makers,wave boxes ect to create flow with in the tank but it cannot be compared to the many variations in the natural flow of water with in and around a reef nomatter how much $$$$$ you throw at "circulation"
the only way we can accomidate a fish to reach its maxium potential size is to look at it in the ocean you cannot duplicate millions of years of evolution buy throwing techology and or $$$ into a glass box..unless you have more time to devote to your tank than mother nature has to devote to her tank and i dont see where 70 years of human life and a few hundred years of techology , limited $$$ and resources can come close to millions of years of evolution with the resources mother nature has had at her disposal for these millions of years
people like to say they are doing the best for for thier fish compared to life in the ocean but in reality are we really doing so.. i doubt it.. but thats a whole nother thread considering everybody on RC keeps fish in glass cages including myself..zoos have been fighting the same issues with many types of animals for a very long timeagain another disscussion for another time
end of my ramblin (lol) since i dont know the answer to the origional question
Tank size.. even public aquariums cant duplicate the size of the ocean
Tank mates.. we as people tend to put fish A with fish B in a glass box who in nature would never run across each other
tank mates again.. could it be that fish need the certain external stimulas to grow such as the constant threat of being some one elses meal to stimulate biological proceses..or even mating hormon stimulas, or hunting/food gathering stimulas
Diet.. there is no way we can provide every thing that a fish may possibly eat in the wild nor could we provide the food that a preditor fish would eat that has eaten everything the food fish needs to provide the preditor with 100% of its natural nutritional requirments from that one meal
lighting.. there is no way in a glass box we can duplicate the natural lighting the fish recieve in the wild nor can we give the fish the open to light/shaded from light/dark holes exct that they would see minute by minute on the reef to include cloud cover, rough seas,ect
Temp. we have pumps/lights/heaters/chillers ect to adujust the temp (directly or inderectly intended) where in the wild temps change from many varriables such as season,wave action,depth,that days weather high tide, low tide ect and we cant recreate mother natures moods
Flow we have power heads and return pumps, wave makers,wave boxes ect to create flow with in the tank but it cannot be compared to the many variations in the natural flow of water with in and around a reef nomatter how much $$$$$ you throw at "circulation"
the only way we can accomidate a fish to reach its maxium potential size is to look at it in the ocean you cannot duplicate millions of years of evolution buy throwing techology and or $$$ into a glass box..unless you have more time to devote to your tank than mother nature has to devote to her tank and i dont see where 70 years of human life and a few hundred years of techology , limited $$$ and resources can come close to millions of years of evolution with the resources mother nature has had at her disposal for these millions of years
people like to say they are doing the best for for thier fish compared to life in the ocean but in reality are we really doing so.. i doubt it.. but thats a whole nother thread considering everybody on RC keeps fish in glass cages including myself..zoos have been fighting the same issues with many types of animals for a very long timeagain another disscussion for another time
end of my ramblin (lol) since i dont know the answer to the origional question
Demonic
Premium Member
This was not my fish but a friend's fish. It was about 2" at the time of purchase, about 2 years later it was almost 8" long. I purchased a hippo about 6 months ago, less than an inch in size. It is now over 3" long. It seems he is not going to stop growing either.
Beaun
It's pronounced Bone
This is sort of the opposite end of the question, but if you go to a public aquarium like Atlantis Marine World with a 20,000g reef. They have some of the largest individuals of each species I have seen. They may not all be "max size" but they certainly are close. The Vlamingis are not all 24" but they are all massive, ~20". So large tanks certainly benefit the fish in getting to full size.
dan223
Custom User Title
Finally someones on base, phenols/hormones possibly nitrates followed by poor or limited diet cause stunting not size of tank, fresh or salt water.
Ive seen discus raised from fry become 9"-10" monsters in 30 and 40g tanks. The key was heavy feeding, andheavy waterchages to remove waste products, like 50% WC or more per day.
stumpovrtyme
Reef Junkie
These are all very interesting examples and situation. Me personaly I have no clue I kinda think it has to do with a lot of the things said though. Such as
h2o quality, food quality and quanity, tank size, and prolly a few others we will never know.
h2o quality, food quality and quanity, tank size, and prolly a few others we will never know.
Western_reefer
Reef keeper
This is exactly the same point I try to make. In fact, the maximum recorded size for a human is 8'11", but if you get one and put it in a tank, that doesn't mean it will grow that large
The general rule of thumb is that a home aquarium fish can be expected to reach two-thirds the maximum recorded size.
This is not necessarily stunting; sizes recorded are maximums.
Matt
Nope, the maximum record size for humans is 12 feet. They have found several human skeletons 12 feet tall. The skeletons are thousands of years old tho.
RicksReefs
New member
oh Ok. I guess we can all stop wondering now, we have the answer...
iamwhatiam52
New member
What about tiny fish like yellow clown gobies? Space may be less of a factor for them. Do they grow larger in nature?
I have seen royal grammas in a few tanks that appear larger than the ones I have seen in the wild.
I have seen royal grammas in a few tanks that appear larger than the ones I have seen in the wild.
iamwhatiam52
New member
Generalizing to mammals, particularly humans, may be a bit of a stretch, but brings to mind another question: Do fish do all their growing by a certain age? Mammals reach maturity and stop growing in a relatively short time, even if their full genetic potential has not been reached. If conditions change for a the better, a poorly nourished 5 year old dog will not start growing again.
Has anyone had a fish stop growing for a few years in a small tank, then start growing again when put in a larger one?
iamwhatiam52: Yes, I've seen that quite often with pacu. I can't say they've stopped growing completely, but they slow WAY down, but when moved to a larger tank, the give a growth spurt.
Personally, I feel it is much less of a diet issue and much more of a toxic metabolite issue (phenols, organic acids, hormones, pheromones, whatever). There are cases where trout were kept in tubes filled with flowing pristine water and fed trout chow - they grew to fill the tubes. I've seen discus kept in groups that something builds up in the water that inhibits the growth of some of the fish, change lots of water all the time, and they start growing again (already mentioned by Rick?)
Some of you have seen this, but I'm going to toss it out there again. Captivity does stunt fish, even those kept in large publich aquariums. People use the FishBase maximum size to determine how big their fish will grow, and this is actually an major over-estimation. I now use 80% of the FishBase size as the normal captive size, and a study I ran showed it may actually be smaller than that (66%). The work that I did is here:
http://microcosmaqx.typepad.com/jay...-of-fish-in-captivity-an-estimation-tool.html
Oh yeah, and there are some exceptions: clownfish and gobies for example often reach their FishBase maximum. I once saw a 10 year old royal gramma that was 6" long - what a freak!
Jay
Personally, I feel it is much less of a diet issue and much more of a toxic metabolite issue (phenols, organic acids, hormones, pheromones, whatever). There are cases where trout were kept in tubes filled with flowing pristine water and fed trout chow - they grew to fill the tubes. I've seen discus kept in groups that something builds up in the water that inhibits the growth of some of the fish, change lots of water all the time, and they start growing again (already mentioned by Rick?)
Some of you have seen this, but I'm going to toss it out there again. Captivity does stunt fish, even those kept in large publich aquariums. People use the FishBase maximum size to determine how big their fish will grow, and this is actually an major over-estimation. I now use 80% of the FishBase size as the normal captive size, and a study I ran showed it may actually be smaller than that (66%). The work that I did is here:
http://microcosmaqx.typepad.com/jay...-of-fish-in-captivity-an-estimation-tool.html
Oh yeah, and there are some exceptions: clownfish and gobies for example often reach their FishBase maximum. I once saw a 10 year old royal gramma that was 6" long - what a freak!
Jay
I think this topic is worth further discussion. I think the real answer must largely depend on which type of fish you're talking about; there is no generalization that will apply to all fish.
This is my experience:
Yellow watchmen goby: 3 in. to start. Stayed this size in my 29 for a year, in my 90 for 2 years now and still 3 in.
Tomato clown female: 1in. to start in my 34. Grew to 3 in. in the 34 over a year. In my 90 for 2 years and still 3 in.
Tomato clown male: 3/4 in. to star in my 34. Grew to 1.5 in. in the 34. In my 90 for 2 years same size.
Yellow tang: 3 in. to start in a 55. Grew to 4 in. in 1 year. In the 90 for 2 years, still 4 in.
Maroon clown: Grew from 2 in. to 5 in. in 55. Now in a 34 for a year, same size.
Blue-green chromis: 1in. in a 90 for 2 years now.
Blue-throat trigger: Grew from 4 in. to 6 in. in 1 year. Same size for 1 year now.
This is my experience:
Yellow watchmen goby: 3 in. to start. Stayed this size in my 29 for a year, in my 90 for 2 years now and still 3 in.
Tomato clown female: 1in. to start in my 34. Grew to 3 in. in the 34 over a year. In my 90 for 2 years and still 3 in.
Tomato clown male: 3/4 in. to star in my 34. Grew to 1.5 in. in the 34. In my 90 for 2 years same size.
Yellow tang: 3 in. to start in a 55. Grew to 4 in. in 1 year. In the 90 for 2 years, still 4 in.
Maroon clown: Grew from 2 in. to 5 in. in 55. Now in a 34 for a year, same size.
Blue-green chromis: 1in. in a 90 for 2 years now.
Blue-throat trigger: Grew from 4 in. to 6 in. in 1 year. Same size for 1 year now.
anbosu
New member
Please provide a link. Almost all human ancestors were shorter, not taller, than the humans of today.
Western_reefer
Reef keeper
Cantonesefish
with active cooling
Will do in a bit. That is if you believe in evolution.I don't believe in evolution.
I'm not sure it's really a matter of evolution, even 100 years ago people were shorter, basically because they didn't have the same nutrition we have today.
Which makes it crazy that there's a 12 ft skeleton from a few thousand years ago :eek1:
anbosu
New member
Yeah I wasn't talking about evolution, it's just basic dietary improvements in society. If there are legitimate skeletons of humans 40% taller than the tallest recorded human I would be really surprised if I had never read anything or heard about it before.
"They have found several human skeletons 12 feet tall. The skeletons are thousands of years old tho..."
Meh,
Hopefully this discussion hasn't drifted to an obscure discussion of biblical giants, like Nephilim ....those are the only giant "humans" I've heard about existing in the past few thousand years...well, excepting the Cardiff giant of course(grin).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nephilim
As I mentioned, I just don't buy it that the stunting of fish in captivity is diet related in most cases. Certainly there is not an issue with caloric intake, and careful analysis of other nutrients and vitamins indicates that they are not usually lacking (unless the aquarist simply doesn't make the effort to offer a complete diet). Why do so many aquaculturists rely on raising fish in open water sea pens and feeding them artificial diets?
IT'S THE WATER!
Jay
Meh,
Hopefully this discussion hasn't drifted to an obscure discussion of biblical giants, like Nephilim ....those are the only giant "humans" I've heard about existing in the past few thousand years...well, excepting the Cardiff giant of course(grin).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nephilim
As I mentioned, I just don't buy it that the stunting of fish in captivity is diet related in most cases. Certainly there is not an issue with caloric intake, and careful analysis of other nutrients and vitamins indicates that they are not usually lacking (unless the aquarist simply doesn't make the effort to offer a complete diet). Why do so many aquaculturists rely on raising fish in open water sea pens and feeding them artificial diets?
IT'S THE WATER!
Jay
Similar threads
