# R.O Filtration



## krazypara3165 (3 Dec 2012)

ive recently set up a planted aquarium and im determined to make it discus friendly. in my eyes there is nothing more amazing than watching the reds, blues and yellows of discus against the greenery of a planted tank. 

  I have been in contact with several breeders who all tell me not to adust my water, to leave it as it is as long as its stable. my worry is that my nitrates as standard out the tap are 30ppm and id imagine with 6 discus this will only get worse. contrary to the breeders theres a lot of people on the internet including other breeders that say 30ppm is far far too high. 

  what does everyone on here think? i am seriously contemplating getting a ro machine, im aware it needs to be connected to the mains but can anyone describe me through the process? what they do to reguarly change the tank water using an ro machine and does anyone have any recommendations? tbh, i want to try and get away with standard tap water but i will consider all options to make sure the fish stay healthy.

pictures of peoples setups would be greatly appreciated!!!

cheers, craig


----------



## REDSTEVEO (3 Dec 2012)

I used an RO Filter for years and had no problems. However when you consider with EI we are adding minerals to the water and I used to use SERA mineral salts to re-mineralise the water, in the end I thought what's the point so now I just use tap water and did so when I had my Discus.

The real reason people use RO filters with discus is to keep the water as soft as possible when trying to breed their Discus. The RO takes out the salts along with everything else and the salts would penetrate the discus eggs making them go white and they would not hatch.

If you are just keeping discus to watch and not to breed I would stick with the tap water, if your local tap water is high in nitrates then just adjust your EI mixture to compensate.

Steve


----------



## ceg4048 (3 Dec 2012)

You really need to get over your paranoia regarding nitrates. Nitrates are not harmful to your fish. It's what they start out as that causes the problems.

Cheers,


----------



## Antipofish (3 Dec 2012)

ceg4048 said:
			
		

> You really need to get over your paranoia regarding nitrates. Nitrates are not harmful to your fish. It's what they start out as that causes the problems.
> 
> Cheers,



Why is it that many discus breeders of high repute as well as those who breed other fish considered more fussy such as hypancistrus sp or certain south american dwarf cichlids all swear that high nitrates cause breeding problems Clive ?


----------



## krazypara3165 (3 Dec 2012)

ceg4048 said:
			
		

> You really need to get over your paranoia regarding nitrates. Nitrates are not harmful to your fish. It's what they start out as that causes the problems.
> 
> Cheers,



cheers, i do remember reading your other posts on nitrates which is what made me think keeping discus in tap water is achievable, however after seeing an awful lot of posts on British and International Discus Keepers Association forum, it was near enough unanimous that nitrates for discus are detrimental to the health of the fish, whereas a lot of other species are more tolerant, thats whats got me thinking about the R.O route. however as stated in my post id like to keep it simple


----------



## krazypara3165 (3 Dec 2012)

REDSTEVEO said:
			
		

> I used an RO Filter for years and had no problems. However when you consider with EI we are adding minerals to the water and I used to use SERA mineral salts to re-mineralise the water, in the end I thought what's the point so now I just use tap water and did so when I had my Discus.
> 
> The real reason people use RO filters with discus is to keep the water as soft as possible when trying to breed their Discus. The RO takes out the salts along with everything else and the salts would penetrate the discus eggs making them go white and they would not hatch.
> 
> ...


my gh is only 7 and kh 3 so im not really worried about that. how would i adjust my E.I mixture (apologies, im new to E.I dosing)


----------



## foxfish (3 Dec 2012)

My main issue with RO units is the terrible waist of water, up to 90% goes to waste & the 10% left is usually mixed back with 50% tap water!!  :? 
At one time I was an avid RO user because I was led to believe that in order for my corrys to breed I would need super soft & pure water.....well I don't as my corrys breed thought out the year & I pour in more salts & Co2 than you can shake a stick at.
I would agree that it is well documented that discus need certain conditions to breed but, I suspect they just need to be happy.


----------



## krazypara3165 (3 Dec 2012)

well what ive read from one of ceg's previous posts and what one of the breeders has told me is that as long as the conditions are stable, and i continue with regular maintenance and water changes they will be fine! its just annoying because a lot of breeders still stick to the 'it has to be a bared bottom tank, no plants ro water must be used' rule. i think i will leave it a few weeks just to see if the conditions in my tank stay stable as it is relativly new, and once im happy buy the discus and prove the so called dexperts wrong!


----------



## geoffbark (3 Dec 2012)

I think that the key for fresh water fish is keep everything constant. You had another post asking about water changes and you where worried about the cost. 

I would say concentrate on setting up your tank getting it stable. And don't worry about your nitrates. 

If you add plants 30ppm nitrates will soon be sucked up. 

I do however use RO and I find that there is no substitute. But I am a minority and I like to know exactly what my water perimeters are  

Plus I also use RO to clean my windows. I know strange!


----------



## krazypara3165 (3 Dec 2012)

yes, your right jeff. i now have a pond dechlorinator, that treats a few thousand liters, so that was that sorted. i already have plenty of plants in there, and things are stable so far but i want to continue running it for a few more weeks and keep up with the research before i go out and buy them.


----------



## geoffbark (3 Dec 2012)

Sounds like you are on the right track


----------



## Antipofish (3 Dec 2012)

foxfish said:
			
		

> My main issue with RO units is the terrible waist of water, up to 90% goes to waste & the 10% left is usually mixed back with 50% tap water!!  :?
> At one time I was an avid RO user because I was led to believe that in order for my corrys to breed I would need super soft & pure water.....well I don't as my corrys breed thought out the year & I pour in more salts & Co2 than you can shake a stick at.
> I would agree that it is well documented that discus need certain conditions to breed but, I suspect they just need to be happy.



When the water supply companies do something to reduce the (up to) 30% waste of water through leaks, by utilising some of the massive profits they make, I will start worrying about wastage through domestic RO filtration.  But at a consumption rate of 30 cubic metres to produce the amount of RO water I would need over the period of a year, frankly I don't see a point of concern.  Especially when industry uses billions of cubic metres of water for their RO requirement.


----------



## geoffbark (3 Dec 2012)

And don't forget you can put that waste water to good use. 

I pass it through a second stage and then collect the waste for washing car and watering garden


----------



## krazypara3165 (3 Dec 2012)

true, i am tempted. what r.o kits does everyone use? and have you got any pictures of the setup? my worry is the amount of hoses id imagine i need and possibly a water butt outside. if i got one the only way i can think of rigging it up is by using my empty washing machine space and connecting it to the inflow and outflow adaptors for it and feed it into a 25l drum that i should be able to hide there. that way, although i wouldnt be able to do large water changes, i could supplement my regular water change with nitrate free water and reduce the amount nitrates in the water. but to be honest i would like to try it with tap water to start and then only go down the R.O route if the fish show signs of stress or stunted growth as apparently they are the main symptoms.


----------



## Nathaniel Whiteside (3 Dec 2012)

Search Ro-Man on eBay, they're decent bits of kit, and easily replaceable filters too.

I've got a 3 stage with a DI Resin unit.


----------



## geoffbark (3 Dec 2012)

+1 for RO-MAN. 

But last time I tried their site ( some years ago now ) he had ceased trading


----------



## krazypara3165 (3 Dec 2012)

just had a look on ebay and there does not seem to be a mamber. however there is now a website ro-man.com


----------



## ceg4048 (3 Dec 2012)

Antipofish said:
			
		

> ceg4048 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...





			
				krazypara3165 said:
			
		

> cheers, i do remember reading your other posts on nitrates which is what made me think keeping discus in tap water is achievable, however after seeing an awful lot of posts on British and International Discus Keepers Association forum, it was near enough unanimous that nitrates for discus are detrimental to the health of the fish, whereas a lot of other species are more tolerant, thats whats got me thinking about the R.O route. however as stated in my post id like to keep it simple


I've kept discus in tap water and have had no problems at all. CO2 was a different issue though. Dan Crawford has had his discus breed in his EI tank. Just because many people believe something, this does not validate the belief. Discus breeders grossly overfeed their fish in order to promote rapid growth, and in so doing, severely pollute the tank water with organic waste that if left unchecked, turns into ammonia, an extremely toxic substance, and later to nitrite, which is only slightly less toxic. The Nitrogen cycle demands huge amounts of Oxygen. As we've explain countless times, leaving organic waste in the water not only produces the real toxic products, but also robs the water of oxygen, so the fish suffer both nitrogen poisoning and hypoxia. So Discus breeders must change the water frequently. Of course there is nitrate in the removed water. Have the British and International Discus Keepers Association actually done autopsies on fish to determine cause of death? Have they done studies to compare the growth rates of fish in high inorganic nitrate water? All these people know is that they have to change the water frequently in order to improve health. What they don't realize is that they are throwing away the organic waste that results in toxicity and at the same time they happen to be throwing away nitrate, so they guess that nitrate buildup is the cause of their troubles. So they all tell each other about the nasty nitrate and everyone becomes hysterical. The nitrate we dose and the nitrate in the tap is inorganic. It does not go through the nitrification cycle and does not rob the tank of oxygen because it is already the end product. Other chichlid breeders assume that their fish are less susceptible to nitrate, but their waters are less polluted and they are not feeding things like beefheart. There is a lot of circumstantial evidence that suddenly becomes fact if no one questions it or if no one tests the evidence.

For how many years and how many people have insisted that NO3/PO4 in a tank causes algae? Maybe if NO3 has nothing to do with algae, it may also be that it is not toxic as well.



			
				geoffbark said:
			
		

> I think that the key for fresh water fish is keep everything constant.


This is not true at all. Firstly because you can never keep the water constant. It is always under attack by microbes, pollutants and other chemicals, which change the water quality, always for the worse. Secondly because the water quality deteriorates, it's necessary to replace these small volumes of water. There are a couple of parameters which should be held within strict limits, such as temperature, but there are not very many others that need to be held constant. Why is it OK for Discus breeders to perform massive and frequent water changes because of nitrate, but yet water must be held constant to avoid stress? These two cannot both be true.

In the Amazon fish swim from stream to stream in the pursuit of food. Each stream is different in temperature, pH , GH and so forth. Fish have no problems making the adjustments as they navigate the different waters. This whole business of keeping things constant, which is a fantasy, is what paints people in a corner. Concentrate more on keeping the tank clean and stop worrying about NO3, or about keeping things constant. Cleanliness is the most important constant. If you want to keep the conductivity low and if the tap conductivity is very high, then sure, partial RO changes are a good idea but it shouldn't be something to be obsessive over.

Cheers,


----------



## krazypara3165 (3 Dec 2012)

BOOM! and i believe that is what people call a 'ceg bomb!' thanks for that, its made me feel more confident about keeping them in tap water!


----------



## Antipofish (3 Dec 2012)

krazypara3165 said:
			
		

> BOOM! and i believe that is what people call a 'ceg bomb!' thanks for that, its made me feel more confident about keeping them in tap water!



Im not so sure it has given me that confidence.  Whilst tarring most mainstream discus keepers with the same brush (of overfeeding and using unsuitable foods) Clive has also implied that just because a couple of named people we are all familiar with have had success keeping them in tap water, that everyone will be as successful.  Its a double edged whammy that Im not prepared to accept so easily, simply on the grounds of its author (in this instance).  I know people who keep discus, and one who lives very close to me (who knows his cichlids well enough to write for various publications as well as giving talks to Aquarist Societies) neither over feeds his discus nor holds with the idea that tap water is ideal.  He has just "kept" them in tap water but having started using an HMA filter, has noticed that they are far happier.  This has nothing to do with depleted oxygen caused by excessive feeding, but the water quality itself.

And wanting to use RO water is not obsessive.  I find that notion somewhat offensive in fact.  From a conversation I had with him before he went on his current tour of duty (which is thankfully soon to end), I know that George Farmer uses RO water because he believes it provides a better environment for his fish.  And I would not expect he can be accused of overfeeding either.  

Not all water is equal out of our taps too.  Water supply companies tend to add cr4p as and when they feel like it.  At least having RO filtered water that is then adjusted back to what we want in terms of mineralisation, we can give some kind of continuity to our fish.


----------



## krazypara3165 (3 Dec 2012)

Antipofish said:
			
		

> krazypara3165 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



true, but i think the point he was getting at is that a lot of people seem to believe you need r.o and the various other stuff, i for one have been told by one person i need 5x 20 min feedings a day which to me seems excessive, and would pollute my water (he was another discus breeder) whereas there seems to be a lot of information surfacing in the recent years saying that discus can thrive and breed in standard tap water (altho you are right, everyone has different water parameters) as you said before about seeing a noticeable difference after using R.O water but surely that would be the case with most fish?


----------



## Antipofish (3 Dec 2012)

krazypara3165 said:
			
		

> Antipofish said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Yes it probably would be the case with most fish.  Does that not tell you something about what RO water does/is ?  If nothing else it indicates it is probably better for the fish.  And it revolves around the question of "SHOULD WE ?" not "CAN WE ?" if you get my drift.  Can we keep discus in cr4ppy tap water ? Can we keep other fish in it too ?  YES, of course.  But the surely if RO water enables us to give better conditions and we are happy to use RO then its a no brainer.  I fully agree with Clive's claims that a lot of Discus keepers (in particular but in no means limited to them only) over feed and feed inappropriately.  But I am not convinced that that was the only cause of poor water in terms of keeping them.  My example is case in point.... a local guy (who lives a mile away from me but is lucky enough to have nice soft water rather than the horrid stuff I have) has good tank maintenance regimes in place, he does not overfeed, nor does he feed beefheart and all that rubbish that is used to bulk up fish.  All those factors being equal, he now uses an HMA filter to remove heavy metals along with a few other things from the water, and he has noticed a marked difference in his fish.  Better colouration and a more spritely attitude being the two main changes he has cited.  That speaks volumes to me, and I don't thing that he is being "obsessive" in using the filter.


----------



## Matt Warner (3 Dec 2012)

Krazypara, I honestly wouldn't bother wasting your time and money on an RO unit unless you are wanting to keep corals in a saltwater tank


----------



## krazypara3165 (3 Dec 2012)

i think this is the plan now, to keep in tap water. if any problems arise i will invest in a small unit and throw 25l worth of treated water every other day in to dilute nitrates ect. however that will be a last resort. i am now determined to show everyone you can keep discus in great condition without R.O.


----------



## Antipofish (4 Dec 2012)

krazypara3165 said:
			
		

> i think this is the plan now, to keep in tap water. if any problems arise i will invest in a small unit and throw 25l worth of treated water every other day in to dilute nitrates ect. however that will be a last resort. i am now determined to show everyone you can keep discus in great condition without R.O.



But how will you show that they might not be even happier and in better condition !?


----------



## krazypara3165 (4 Dec 2012)

that could be said for all fish kept in tap water, as long as they continue to grow without stunted growth, colours stay vibrant, eat and swim thats a pretty good indication.


----------



## ceg4048 (4 Dec 2012)

Antipofish said:
			
		

> Im not so sure it has given me that confidence.  Whilst tarring most mainstream discus keepers with the same brush (of overfeeding and using unsuitable foods) Clive has also implied that just because a couple of named people we are all familiar with have had success keeping them in tap water, that everyone will be as successful.  Its a double edged whammy that Im not prepared to accept so easily, simply on the grounds of its author (in this instance).  I know people who keep discus, and one who lives very close to me (who knows his cichlids well enough to write for various publications as well as giving talks to Aquarist Societies) neither over feeds his discus nor holds with the idea that tap water is ideal.  He has just "kept" them in tap water but having started using an HMA filter, has noticed that they are far happier.  This has nothing to do with depleted oxygen caused by excessive feeding, but the water quality itself.


I think you're mixing apples and oranges. What do heavy metals have to do with NO3? The OP has targeted the removal of NO3 via RO as a mechanism of water quality control. I specifically stated that the use of RO to reduce issues such as conductivity is a good idea. Neither did I state that tap water was ideal. If the tap water in an area is high in heavy metals or in other toxins such as pesticides then this is a good idea. There are good reasons for using RO but removal of NO3 is not a good reason because it's a misguided reason and is almost always a result of someones obsession with the belief of NO3 toxicity or NO3 causing algae. The penalty of using RO is cost and complication, which reduce the odds of success. At no point has the OP shown us a copy of the water report, which may contain enough information to determine whether this extra cost and complication is warranted.



			
				Antipofish said:
			
		

> And wanting to use RO water is not obsessive.  I find that notion somewhat offensive in fact.  From a conversation...I know that George Farmer uses RO water because he believes it provides a better environment for his fish.  And I would not expect he can be accused of overfeeding either.


Wanting to use RO to eliminate NO3 in a planted discus tank is obsessive.  Sorry, but you'll need to come to terms with that. What I know is that George Farmer does not use RO to eliminate NO3, although NO3 is automatically removed when using RO it must then be added back into the water if the tank is a CO2 enriched planted tank. The fish are just as happy despite the fact that inorganic NO3 is re-introduced to the water.

Cheers,


----------



## Antipofish (4 Dec 2012)

krazypara3165 said:
			
		

> that could be said for all fish kept in tap water, as long as they continue to grow without stunted growth, colours stay vibrant, eat and swim thats a pretty good indication.



But my point, especially with the Discus was that when an HMA filter was used, their colours became more vibrant and behaviour became more perky.  Surely, all other factors having remained equal, that indicates that the improvement to water being used was the cause of that ?  Everyone will make their own decisions of course, but I thought you had asked originally if RO water would give you better conditions for keeping your Discus. And to me the evidence is undeniably yes.


----------



## Antipofish (4 Dec 2012)

ceg4048 said:
			
		

> Antipofish said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I did not say George uses RO specifically to remove nitrate, rather to improve the quality of water for the fish in general.  Whilst the OP cited nitrates  as his main reason for wanting the RO, the use of such a filter *in general terms* cannot be decried as being of no use.  

I feel somewhat that your answer(s) are sometimes too specific Clive.  Surely being an 'expert' means that when replying you should try to give a broader picture and response to peoples questions.  Because whilst it is true that an RO unit _purely to remove nitrate_ is possibly (cant tell without the water report) not necessary, having an RO unit is beneficial for a whole host of other reasons ?  Its like (to use a non specific example) someone says "How much CO2 should I push into my aquarium?"  Your literal answer might be "As much as you can throw at it so the plants have as much as they need".  The result could be that their fish die. Whereas a more global reply would have been of more help.  Again, just my observation.  And your input is always valuable. But I think sometimes you are too focussed and miss the bigger picture.  I trust you will not take offence, as this is observation on my part only and not meant to be a personal insult.


----------



## dw1305 (4 Dec 2012)

Hi all,
First up, I have never kept Discus, but I'm still going to have my 2p's worth. 

I don't think every-ones tap water is suitable for keeping Discus, or any-other soft water fish, because much of the tap water in the S and E of the UK is extremely hard and full of agricultural pollutants, including fertiliser residues, there is also the potential at any time for an emergency dose of chloramine to be added to your water supply.

Personally I don't use RO, but I'm a hypocrite because I flush the loo with drinking water etc.  

I think that a lot of the mythology about Discus has come from keepers who have come from a cichlid keeping back-ground, where planted tanks are relatively unusual. This has led to a situation where keepers change large amounts of water, are OCD about tank cleanliness, use nitrate/phosphate ion removal resins, often don't have a substrate if they feed beef heart etc. They only need to do this because they have started from a position where they have really severely handicapped themselves.

If you start form the premise that Discus are fish originally from warm, soft, tannin stained, pollutant free water, where they eat a varied omnivorous diet, and probably are going to be easiest to maintain under these conditions long term, things become a lot more straight-forward. 

Plants are the single largest factor in maintaining water quality, once you have actively growing plants, the water you add to your tank will improve in quality over time, rather than decline. If you start with water low in all salts, you can fertilise your plants using the "Duckweed index" and maintain TDS at ~ 100ppm.

There is a free supply of naturally distilled water, the one I use, rain-water. There is a possibility that it might absorb pollutants during its supply to your water butt, but these have been over-stated. Actually we don't have to rely on our rain-water being pollutant free, but can use a simple bioassay technique (almost universally used in the water industry) to assess the quality of our stored rain-water, the bioassay organism also functions as an additional live food source. What is the wonder organism? step forward _Daphnia magna_, something we can buy over the counter in any reasonable LFS: <http://ei.cornell.edu/toxicology/bioassays/daphnia/index.html>.

Warm is easily dealt with and we now have a planted tank with warm, good quality soft water, almost there in fact, only filtration, habitat and diet to deal with. 

I'll ignore physical filtration, other than to say that I like an easy clean sponge pre-filter, and I'll ignore chemical filtration full stop. Biological filtration is then all about maintaining high levels of oxygenation in the filter material, and also remembering that other surfaces, and the substrate, will provide additional biological filtration <http://www.skepticalaquarist.com/substrate>. Water changes, I'll stick with small and frequent, say 10% a day. I don't need huge volume water change, I've got plants to improve water quality. 

Discus come from tannin stained water with dead leaves and sunken wood, the tannic substances from dead leaves and wood act as chelators for heavy metals etc. I'm also fairly sure that dead leaves have other less quantifiable benefits for fry survival etc., some bits here <http://www.skepticalaquarist.com/humic-acids>.

This is also the approach Discus, L number and _Apistogramma_ breeder Larry Waybright ("Apistomaster") uses, and I've found that he is a pretty reliable source.
<http://forum.simplydiscus.com/showt...quoise-Pair-s-first-spawn&p=473267#post473267>.






That just leaves the contentious subject of diet, Heiko Bleher in his books on Discus found that they ate what-ever came their way, which is true of most black-water fish. What would I feed them? A balanced diet including some shell on Mysis shrimp, live Blood-worms, Mosquito larvae, Daphnia, Earth-worms, Grindal worms, BBS, some vegetables to pick at, topped off by a Astax crumb and Earth-worm / Spirulina flake. A diet that works for other omnivorous SA cichlids from similar habitats, so why should Discus be any different? and also pretty much what is recommended in "Enjoying Cichlids" by Ad Konings.

cheers Darrel


----------



## Nathaniel Whiteside (4 Dec 2012)

Fantastic post Darrel, I've just skimmed over it, so will come back to it later. 

Cheers,


----------



## Antipofish (4 Dec 2012)

I will second that Darrell, great post covering all the angles.  Just one question.. you wrote "Water changes, I'll stick with small and frequent, say 10% a day. I don't need huge volume water change, I've got plants to improve water quality. "  How does that tie in with scapers who are using the EI method of ferts ? Or is the duckweed index you referred to (I need to read up on that) a required alternative that makes your model work ?  How do you ensure you have sufficient rainwater at all times to provide your needs, because in recent years we have all been suffering elongated periods of water drought (certainly in the South and East of the UK).  Is there a need, or benefit to pass rainwater over a carbon filter ?  Cheers.


----------



## dw1305 (4 Dec 2012)

Hi all,


> Just one question.. you wrote "Water changes, I'll stick with small and frequent, say 10% a day. I don't need huge volume water change, I've got plants to improve water quality. " How does that tie in with scapers who are using the EI method of ferts ?


You would need to keep the EI water change. I've never used EI or added CO2, so I'm not sure how well Discus and high tech would work. Clive and Tom have successfully kept "difficult" soft-water cichlids successfully high-tech so it is possible.


> Or is the duckweed index you referred to (I need to read up on that) a required alternative that makes your model work ?


 The "duckweed index" is just a technique for keeping your plants ticking over, it doesn't aim for maximal plant growth, rather it aims for the lowest sustainable rate of plant growth, you only add fertiliser dependent your floating plant health and growth. Have a look a this one <http://www.ukaps.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=14400>.


> How do you ensure you have sufficient rainwater at all times to provide your needs, because in recent years we have all been suffering elongated periods of water drought (certainly in the South and East of the UK)


I've got a 1500 litres of water storage, but even that may not be enough in a real drought.


> Is there a need, or benefit to pass rainwater over a carbon filter


 It won't do any harm, but that is the beauty of the _Daphnia_, they are your "Canary", as long as you have swimming _Daphnia_ in the water you draw off for the water change you are good to go. I draw some water every evening to warm up and just check every morning that the _Daphnia_ are OK.

cheers Darrel


----------



## Antipofish (4 Dec 2012)

Thanks Darrel.  An interesting approach.  Though I can imagine WW3 breaking out if I were to buy 10 water butts @ B&Q and slinging them on the Patio, LOL.


----------



## geoffbark (4 Dec 2012)

geoffbark said:
			
		

> I think that the key for fresh water fish is keep everything constant.



Sorry i should have clarified what i meant by constant, i meant keep everything you do constant, this will help in diagnostics for problem areas. There is no right or wrong weather a person uses an RO system, harvests rain water uses good old tap water is a personal choice. The OP was asking about high nitrate and RO filtation and the answer is yes RO water will lower your nitrates. But so will other methods.

I believe that discus breaders are not worried about high NO3, but use the NO3 reading as a guide to how polluted the water is. The same way someone may use an fe reading as guide for micro content


----------



## krazypara3165 (5 Dec 2012)

Wow, it seems i have caused quite a debate. However its all been an interesting read and has given me a lot to think about! its nice to get such wide opinions, as although sometimes it can be conflicting it gives me the bigger picture and a variety of solutions! much better than the standard "you need R.O to keep discus" reply thats constantly thrown around on the internet.


----------



## Antipofish (5 Dec 2012)

krazypara3165 said:
			
		

> Wow, it seems i have caused quite a debate. However its all been an interesting read and has given me a lot to think about! its nice to get such wide opinions, as although sometimes it can be conflicting it gives me the bigger picture and a variety of solutions! much better than the standard "you need R.O to keep discus" reply thats constantly thrown around on the internet.



Lol, RO water, along with test kits and a few other topics will always give rise to debate, often a little spirited, because there are always different approaches to our hobby.  I believe a lot of the answers boil down to whether the respondent is a "Could I"? or "Should I"? person.  I.E. "Should I keep my Discus in the best possible quality water OR Could I keep them in something not quite so akin to what they are used to"? is the question here.  Although you mentioned the topic from a nitrate only point of view, I believe there is a broader picture to be addressed, hence the answer I gave   Glad its all been useful for you though.  

I am hoping Santa brings me an RO unit this year


----------



## dw1305 (5 Dec 2012)

Hi all,


> There is no right or wrong weather a person uses an RO system, harvests rain water uses good old tap water is a personal choice. The OP was asking about high nitrate and RO filtation and the answer is yes RO water will lower your nitrates. But so will other methods.


 RO will lower nitrates, along with all other ions. The difference isn't so much in the water you use, but really between planted tanks, where the plants remove ammonia, nitrite and nitrate from the water column, and non-planted tanks where you are reliant on water changes, anaerobic out-gassing of N2 and microbial filtration to deal with NH4+ > NO2 > NO3. 

I'll ignore the anaerobic reduction (de-nitrification) of NO3 and out-gassing as N2, as it only occurs under specific circumstances, and why any-one would want to use a de-nitrifying coil, Jaubert plenum or deep-sand bed if they had access to other methods of NO3 removal is beyond me.

If you have access to a clean water supply (like RO) you can use it for water changes, which is where "_the secret to pollution is dilution_" mantra comes from. This is true, but huge volume water changes are only required if levels  of pollutants creep up over time. 

In planted tanks they don't, quite the opposite, *nearly all ions* are removed from the water column by the plants, the substrate, humic compounds etc. and water quality improves over time, rather than declines. _"You need huge water changes to keep Discus"_ is based upon a premise that just isn't true if you have plants.   





> I believe that discus breeders are not worried about high NO3, but use the NO3 reading as a guide to how polluted the water is.


 I think you are right and this is exactly what they are doing, because for them NO3 is the smoking gun that indicates that they have had high NH3 and NO2 levels. EI may not be to every-ones taste, but what it has shown fairly conclusively is that if you add high levels of NO3-  ions (from KNO3 etc ) to a tank with high oxygen levels and healthy plant growth those NO3- ions don't have any effect on fish health. 


> The same way someone may use an Fe reading as guide for micro content


 This is back to the subject of test kits, and it isn't only iron (Fe) levels that are impossible to measure with test kits, it is nearly all other ions as well. If some-one says to you "I know I had 40ppm NO3", they either have access to analytical lab. or they are misguided.

cheers Darrel


----------



## krazypara3165 (5 Dec 2012)

Right, i visited puncharddiscus up in lancashire today to ask some questions about this topic and was shocked to hear the results! (basically steve that runs the gaff is considered one of, if not the best breeder/importer of quality discus in the uk and if anyone has ever been to his store you can see the quality of his discus is second to none!) and was told that they keep their discus (probably close to 1000) in standard tap water! all they do is fill a res, leave it to stand for two days and use that to fill their tanks. i was quite surprised! and altho this is not a stab at ro water as their is defiantly advantages, i dare someone to show me a better discus kept in R.O water!


----------



## Matt Warner (5 Dec 2012)

Why do they leave the water to stand for a few days before using it? There is probably a good reason, I just wondered why they do this?
Cheers


----------



## Antipofish (5 Dec 2012)

krazypara3165 said:
			
		

> Right, i visited puncharddiscus up in lancashire today to ask some questions about this topic and was shocked to hear the results! (basically steve that runs the gaff is considered one of, if not the best breeder/importer of quality discus in the uk and if anyone has ever been to his store you can see the quality of his discus is second to none!) and was told that they keep their discus (probably close to 1000) in standard tap water! all they do is fill a res, leave it to stand for two days and use that to fill their tanks. i was quite surprised! and altho this is not a stab at ro water as their is defiantly advantages, i dare someone to show me a better discus kept in R.O water!



How do you quantify what constitutes "better" ?  How can you tell that the ones he has would not be "even better" ? Or more to MY point, "even happier" ? How can you refute a recognised cichlid expert (incidentally, he knows his Discus too, having just given a talk on the subject at one of the Aquarist Society Conventions) stating that upon filtering his water he noticed a marked improvement in colouration and behaviours ? Come to think of it, the fact that this chap you mention is successfully keeping his Discus in "tap water" really means nothing at all.  He might be lucky and have decent quality tap water, but as already discussed, all tap water is not made equal.  So just because he is successful, it does not logically follow that everyone will be.  What you are basically saying is "Because this guy does it and he is the best, everyone can" when there are so many other variables, that there is no logic whatsoever to what you are saying. 

Furthermore, he is a Discus expert.  He knows exactly what to look for with them and can react accordingly if any problems arise.  And he has a massive system which can compensate more easily for any problems, than most domestic Discus setups. Most people who aspire to keeping these fish know very little about them, and have even less experience and therefore their potential for success is much reduced.  Why then would anyone not wish to improve those chances by providing the best possible environment for them ?  I've said it before and I will keep on saying it. Its not "CAN I" that we should be asking, its "SHOULD I".

At the end of the day, I daresay you can keep fish in less than perfect water conditions.  And I have not coughed up for an RO unit so I do feel a hypocrite. But Im not telling you that you must buy one, Im just saying what my instincts and beliefs are about there being definite and verifiable benefits to having RO filtered water.


----------



## Antipofish (5 Dec 2012)

Matty1983 said:
			
		

> Why do they leave the water to stand for a few days before using it? There is probably a good reason, I just wondered why they do this?
> Cheers



Temperature equalisation (or at least warming up a bit) possibly.  But also because it allows the chlorine to gas off.  Another method is to aerate the water with an airstone.


----------



## krazypara3165 (5 Dec 2012)

Antipofish said:
			
		

> krazypara3165 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



i agree to an extent, as i am not a cichlid expert but in comparison, i have never seen discus like his. Furthermore, colour is not directly related to water quality, more so genetics from what he has been telling me. But your right it is all Dependant on the quality of the tap water, but as you said what works for one may not work for another, so in the case of seeing a noticeable difference its obviously Dependant of tank conditions and many factors could of affected that not just changing to R.O. and in regards to his tap water being good, they keep discus in several locations so i would be really surprised that the tap water is the same at all of them. 

      I also never said that everyone could do it. It's just after all the debates on the internet regarding keeping discus, that one of the best breeders in the uk does not even consider R.O water and i am incredibly shocked! you also say about running a massive system? this is not the case. the tanks are only filtered by the air lines connected to sponges (sorry i do not know what type of filters these are classed as) and water is directly siphoned out and replaced with 48h tap water only if anything its less complicated than most home systems. 

    Finally you you ask about saying "should i?" this could start a debate so huge....... E.G why only keep discus in R.O water, shouldnt EVERY fish be kept in it? then we can compare tank sizes, why are we keeping fish that have a range of miles and miles in aquariums 1/1000000000th (and the rest) of the size of their natural environment?

    This is not a dig at everyone and i am enjoying everyones opinions, but i believe there has to be a compromise to keeping any pet, there will always be compromises (tank size, r.o or not ect......) but at the end of the day if the fish are looking healthy, growing, and acting normal and happy i dont see a problem.


----------



## Matt Warner (5 Dec 2012)

> Temperature equalisation (or at least warming up a bit) possibly. But also because it allows the chlorine to gas off. Another method is to aerate the water with an airstone.


Gotcha


----------



## dw1305 (5 Dec 2012)

Hi all,


> puncharddiscus up in lancashire


 I think location is possibly more important than anything else in the post, this tap water probably comes from a reservoir high up in the mill-stone grit Pennines N. of Blackburn. The tap water will be very different in quality from that in the SE of the UK.


> Furthermore, he is a Discus expert. He knows exactly what to look for with them and can react accordingly if any problems arise. And he has a massive system which can compensate more easily for any problems, than most domestic Discus setups.


I think that is all true as well and very relevant, I'm sure he can see things that I certainly wouldn't. 

I'm not condoning this, and I think we have had this before, but this is Discus water change time somewhere in SE Asia.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=YWMnPZKJWaE#t=0s

cheers Darrel


----------



## Antipofish (5 Dec 2012)

One thing we agree on Krazy, is that it can spark a mammoth debate, LOL.  And btw, I was not only meaning Discus alone would be better off in RO water, I agree, it applies to all.  Im not sure most of the fish we keep in our aquariums have a range of the million times the space we provide, like you allude to though.  I know for a fact all of the fish I keep are quite used to being in a much more localised domain.  In fact, with regards my Apistogramma sp, for example, you can find hundreds all within the space taken by one cubic metre


----------



## Ady34 (5 Dec 2012)

Surely all of this RO discussion is largely irrelevant as it depends on where the stock are from, what water they were bred in and what they are used too. No point using ro if the discus you buy are born and bred in tap water.... this is then down to researching your purchase. RO has its place for those in areas of high tds where the hobbyist wishes to recreate more closely the natural living conditions of the fish. You most likely wouldnt try to keeep discus in rock hard water and then ro has its place to cut, but its use is probably most likely to dilute to closely match the breeders/source water.
I think in designated breeding systems, then bare bottom, no hardscape tanks are the norm (which in itself some may see as a should i or could i arguement) and in these systems nitrates are usually the end product of the nitrogen cycle and are more likely a sign of poor water conditions down to excessive organic waste which wont be good for the fish. However in our planted tank systems we add extra nitrogen to help feed our plants to a range of 30ppm per week (3-5ppm per day ish), which if left without dosing would quickly be used up by our plants which also use up all sorts of other more potentially damaging toxins. A healthy thriving planted tank only has nitrates due to those we add, and we add at safe levels. A non planted tank with nitrates is a sure sign of an unhealthy system with water in need of a change and a filter overhaul. The two are very different and as such its difficult to argue a definitive answer. A healthy planted tank in my opinion is as good a place as any for a discus fish.
Just my thoughts.
Cheerio,
Ady
Ady.


----------



## Antipofish (5 Dec 2012)

Ady34 said:
			
		

> Surely all of this RO discussion is largely irrelevant as it depends on where the stock are from, what water they were bred in and what they are used too. No point using ro if the discus you buy are born and bred in tap water....



I don't think any discussion or debate on UKAPS is irrelevant Ady.  In every instance they raise valid points for all of us to ingest and learn from, whether it is to accept and embrace something, or to avoid it.

I also disagree that there is no point using RO for fish that were born and bred in tap water, because we have already said more than once on this thread that tap water is not created equal.  What if someone living where I do, purchases discus that were bred up north somewhere ?  

My tap water is a far cry from the tap water in other locations.  In fact, my water is vastly different to a cichlid breeder I know who lives less than two miles away.  With such variances, surely RO is a very good way of providing good quality water.  I daresay that plenty of people in the UK are lucky enough to have tap water that is close to ideal, but there are many who do not.


----------



## Iain Sutherland (5 Dec 2012)

All very interesting but id just like to say that i loved RO until i got my first water bill.... they even came round as they thought i had a severe leak      RO for nano's only for me now.  My bigger tanks will always have fish that are happy in my tap water.


----------



## Ady34 (5 Dec 2012)

Antipofish said:
			
		

> Ady34 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Indeed, i think you have misunderstood the point i was making though. Maybe i wasnt clear but i meant largely irrelevant in tandem with my point about where the discus are sourced as surely this is the most important consideration. Some are breeders within the uk, but others are sourced from further afield. It is then important for the importers to provide similar water conditions for these fish, and then to pass on this information to the buyer. My point was meant to show that ro would be pointless if the source tap water matched more or less the water of the buyer. Its clear already from this thread the value of discussing as there are some breeders who swear by ro and some who are having great success with tap water....again i think this has a lot to do with where the fish are originally sourced and the water conditions they are used too. Maybe its easier to source fish from dealers/breeders with similar water conditions to yourself, but research is key. Also i think what is clear is that clean water is also important. In a breeders tanks then water changes and filtration is important to reduce organics, in our planted tanks water quality is managed largely through these things automatically (as we do large and frequant water changes and look after our filters as a matter of course) and additionally through the actions of the plants themselves.
I also mentioned that ro has its place in enabling buyers to replicate water conditions of the source. Hard water areas for example use ro to cut with tap water to get the desired quality. I suppose you could argue that using full ro and remineralising allows you to know more precisely exactly what is going into your water, but local water authorities do provide reports which breakdown what is in our tap water, so we could use this to see if there is anything particularly nasty. Im not sure what there could be though in our drinking water that could be that harmful (that we cant eliminate simply through dechlorinators and heavy metal removers...or a good old airstone for a day or two). 
RO certainly has its place and there are those that will swear by it. If your tap water is extremely hard and you want soft water fish obviously your going to use it to soften water, but i dont think its necessary to use it to remove nitrates, especially in a planted tank.  
Ro helps us to replicate the water in which some of the fish we buy live, but i dont think in planted tanks it helps improve the quality?? 
There are a lot of different things going on in this discussion which i think is mixing up and confusing the points made   
Cheerio,
Ady.


----------



## Antipofish (5 Dec 2012)

easerthegeezer said:
			
		

> All very interesting but id just like to say that i loved RO until i got my first water bill.... they even came round as they thought i had a severe leak      RO for nano's only for me now.  My bigger tanks will always have fish that are happy in my tap water.



Im shocked.  How many litres were you changing each week out of interest ?  I calculated my additional bill to work out at £30 a year if I got RO.  What rate of wastage was your kit working on ?  I have contemplated selling excess to pay for the water.  Local LFS charges £4 for 25L  I figured I could charge half or a quarter of that and still make money.


----------



## Antipofish (5 Dec 2012)

Ady34 said:
			
		

> Indeed, i think you have misunderstood the point i was making though. Maybe i wasnt clear but i meant largely irrelevant in tandem with my point about where the discus are sourced as surely this is the most important consideration.



I must have misunderstood then because you wrote... _"Surely all of this RO discussion is largely irrelevant as it depends on where the stock are from, what water they were bred in and what they are used too"_

Which I read to mean that the discussion was irrelevant because the important factor was what water the fish are used to.

And I still disagreed with that, because where fish are bred or what water they are used to still bears no relevance (IMO) to the water they are destined for when they are purchased and put into *other* water. (Unless the purchaser is lucky enough to have exactly the same water parameters of course). Therefore I believe that the discussion was acutely relevant because it was highlighting exactly what you said... it depends on a multitude of factors.  We are rarely in control of most of those factors, since the water is supplied to us however it comes, and that delivery varies in quality on a daily basis for some. Thus, even with knowing what water the fish were bred in or kept in, there is no guarantee we can replicate it.  But with RO water at least, we can give the fish water that is as good as possible.

You mentioned planted tanks and water quality, and also mentioned confusion Ady.  I think that was one of the things being confused, because there is always potentially a conflict between what water is ideal for plants and what water is ideal for fish.  I am with Clive in his belief that nitrates do not affect most fish, and to that end, adding ferts to my tank does not bother me (with the caveat that there are possible some fish that are the exception).  BUT I do believe there are other parameters and constituents in some of our water, that would mean our fish benefit from their removal (either by RO, which can also get the hardness to what is preferable, OR by HMA filter which will remove a lot of the heavy metals).


----------



## Nathaniel Whiteside (5 Dec 2012)

I use pure RO for my CRS tank, remineralised with Mosura plus . In my main tank I use 50/50 mix to get the TDS at around 120. 

Why have a debate about it? If you want the ability to cater for fish outside your 'tap water parameters' then INVEST. If you don't then don't. 

Shrimples.


----------



## Antipofish (5 Dec 2012)

Whitey89 said:
			
		

> Shrimples.



Shrimples,  love it !


----------



## Ady34 (6 Dec 2012)

Antipofish said:
			
		

> Ady34 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I actually think your right, I'm arguing against my own point as ro does become relevant when your tap water is hugely different from your stockist or from nature especially with more sensitive species. 
With regards krazyparas original post about nitrate removal, I don't think RO is necessary, as fert dosing can be adjusted to compensate for high levels of nitrate from the tap. 
Cheerio,
Ady


----------



## nayr88 (6 Dec 2012)

Whitey89 said:
			
		

> I use pure RO for my CRS tank, remineralised with Mosura plus . In my main tank I use 50/50 mix to get the TDS at around 120.
> 
> Why have a debate about it? If you want the ability to cater for fish outside your 'tap water parameters' then INVEST. If you don't then don't.
> 
> Shrimples.



Spot on 

My water is hard as stone...I CBA to buy the ro stuff and get involved soooooo u don't  haha if u wanted CRS that badly then is invest in the kit.


----------



## Antipofish (8 Dec 2012)

Just to add to the confusion, here is a quote from Clive whilst he was addressing the issue of water parameters on a reply to someone else's post... (http://www.ukaps.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=24382)  

"For tanks containing "New World" and Congo River Basin tropicals, such as tetras, angels, discus and so forth, the situation is just the opposite, and since the waters are almost devoid of Ca, Mg and other metals, fish from these areas do better in tanks filled with water having been filtered with a Reverse Osmosis filter."

So whilst I understand that the answer he gave on here was targetted at the question asked in the context of nitrates, it seems clear to me that in the general picture RO water works better for certain fish IF you have certain water parameters.  

I'm hoping for an RO unit from Santa   (but I think I will probably get a britta filter instead, lol, cos Sussex Santa is a cheapskate.


----------



## foxfish (8 Dec 2012)

Fish keepers have been using RO units for as long as I can remember, I was selling the Purity on Tap range 30 years ago so certainly nothing new there!
The problems I have with using them revolves around the extremely high amount of waste water they produce, the high maintenance, the really slow production of the desired pure water & the cost of a decent sized unit!
You really need a decent sized carbon pre filter as well & you really need very good mains water pressure.
A booster pump can make all the difference to the ROs performance & reduce the waste considerably but again more maintenance & hassle. 
The small pores in the membrane of a reverse osmosis plant cannot block dangerous chemicals like pesticides, herbicides, and chlorine!
So in order to remove them a carbon filter has to be used & regularly maintained.
Another disadvantage of reverse osmosis is that it ends up removing the healthy, naturally occurring minerals meaning you need to add minerals back to the pure water!
In comparison to the other water treatment options, reverse osmosis is a very slow option but it does produce very pure water - especially if used with a large carbon filter & booster pump. 
Finely ... how do you know if the filter is working at it best potential?
 How can you accurately test the outflow to check the unit is doing its job without taking a sample to a test lab?
Performance would be pretty much guaranteed when new but, even units fitted with a flow meter & by using the manufacturer guideline about changing the Carbon & RO membrane wont guarantee the purity of the outflow after a certain amount of use?
Having said all of that I would still advise RO water for certain applications especially in reef keeping & breeding certain fish.
They are part of our hobby, everyone should try one out but I doubt many will keep up their prolonged use unless you are very dedicated!


----------



## Nathaniel Whiteside (8 Dec 2012)

Why allow your beloved fish or shrimp to merely survive, when you could allow them to thrive?

That is the question.


----------



## basil (8 Dec 2012)

HMA filters for me all the way!! They don't suit everyone of course.


----------



## krazypara3165 (8 Dec 2012)

All very valid cm


----------



## Ady34 (8 Dec 2012)

Whitey89 said:
			
		

> Why allow your beloved fish or shrimp to merely survive, when you could allow them to thrive?
> 
> That is the question.


.....strong statement Nath, most likely for most down to affordability or simply not the need to use RO. Most fish are hugely adaptable and many species thrive in tap water of all chemistries. More sensitive species will benefit from matching more closely their natural waters, but that's then down to researching your purchase, or choosing species suited to your tanks/local authority water. I think for most simply implementing good tank husbandry is more important in keeping healthy fish. 
RO is an extension of the hobby much like co2, which is considered by some but not all. I think saying that your fish/shrimp merely survive in non RO water is a bit ott....some species may require it, but most do not and then it's down to the hobbyist and retailers to ensure the correct fauna is put into our tanks.
Cheerio,
Ady


----------



## Nathaniel Whiteside (8 Dec 2012)

Ady34 said:
			
		

> Whitey89 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Hey mate, 
It's not merely a claim about Fauna. If I used my regular tap water, my CRS would not be anywhere near as happy as they are currently. 

You have a luxury in that your tap water is around 80 TDS straight out the tap, so you do not require an RO unit whatsoever. Which is bliss. But my tap readings can come out between 250-300. Which in terms of breeding CRS doesn't work.

I was speaking very specifically, in a sense as my tap water doesn't suit my needs. And that's having happy, breeding CRS.

Cheers,


----------



## Nathaniel Whiteside (8 Dec 2012)

You can even see then smiling


----------



## foxfish (8 Dec 2012)

Whitey89 said:
			
		

> Why allow your beloved fish or shrimp to merely survive, when you could allow them to thrive?
> 
> That is the question.


Well I dont know the answer to that but, you certainly dont need RO water to achieve that!
Adding or using a trickle tower might be the answer you are looking for


----------



## Ady34 (8 Dec 2012)

Whitey89 said:
			
		

> Hey mate,
> It's not merely a claim about Fauna. If I used my regular tap water, my CRS would not be anywhere near as happy as they are currently.
> 
> You have a luxury in that your tap water is around 80 TDS straight out the tap, so you do not require an RO unit whatsoever. Which is bliss. But my tap readings can come out between 250-300. Which in terms of breeding CRS doesn't work.
> ...


Yeah I appreciate this, for those who want more sensitive species its a no brainer when tap doesn't suit. For others they choose species which will live happily in their tap water perameters


----------



## Antipofish (8 Dec 2012)

foxfish said:
			
		

> Fish keepers have been using RO units for as long as I can remember, I was selling the Purity on Tap range 30 years ago so certainly nothing new there!
> The problems I have with using them revolves around the extremely high amount of waste water they produce, the high maintenance, the really slow production of the desired pure water & the cost of a decent sized unit!
> I don't have a problem with this. As already stated, our domestic water consumption for aquariums is negligible to the billions of gallons of water used in industry, or even compared to the massive waste allowed to occur by water supply companies who do nothing about the endless leaks on the mains supply.
> 
> ...


----------



## Nathaniel Whiteside (8 Dec 2012)

I think we're all pretty much agreed on the benefits when linking livestock to bad tap parameters. 

Why are we having this discussion again ?   

An RO will offer you a management to bad conditions, if its soft out the tap, then you don't need one!


----------



## NatureBoy (8 Dec 2012)

It's great to read people's views on this.

I think everyone's agreed that looking for alternatives to tapwater is totally valid when your local parameters don't suit your specific needs. 

RO units should come under the hosepipe ban regulations....


----------



## Nathaniel Whiteside (8 Dec 2012)

NatureBoy said:
			
		

> RO units should come under the hosepipe ban regulations....



I'd ninja it.


----------



## krazypara3165 (8 Dec 2012)

ive been keeping tabs on this with interest! and whitey, your shrimp look very happy indeed! my original argument was in respect to the amount of high nitrates in my tap water......aside from them my tap water is very good, around 4-6 gh and kh and is near enough identical in tap water to my breeders, in fact he breeds his discus in tap water! (altho he did say he occasionally uses a hma filter for breeding) and he has the highest quality discus i have ever seen which is not surprising seeing as he is one of the most respected discus breeders in the u.k. Since starting the post and seeing that my tank is very well planted i have realized that i can reduce the amount of nitrates i dose and i am currently working on a mixture that will balance between the fish and the plants although because i will be doing regular water changes with my high nitrate tap water i might be able to reduce the amount i dose further. But thats another story and i am in the trial and error phase atm.

    As it has been stated many a time its down to everyones tap water to start of with, in my case i could of gone out and bought one only to remineralise to the same hardness i have now and to add nitrates for my plants as they need them anyway when there was a good alternative solution. granted, i admit i will be taking a huge chance on unknown water parameters (nasties that the water company puts in) and there is the potential for variations of consistency but a good regime with testing will keep on top of that.


----------



## Antipofish (8 Dec 2012)

NatureBoy said:
			
		

> RO units should come under the hosepipe ban regulations....



Don''t you think that would be a bit disastrous ??  All of a sudden you go from keeping your fish in tip top water to keeping them in parameters totally different to what they are used to ?  For marine tanks it could wipe them out, and most fish would not be happy.  I don't think you have thought that through. People might lose £1000's worth of fish and livestock.


----------



## NatureBoy (8 Dec 2012)

Antipofish said:
			
		

> NatureBoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



It's a contentious point, but perhaps it needs to be made, particularly when weighing up the choice to go with RO. I like Darrel's approach - a massive storage of rainwater. Gardeners face the same worries I'm sure with the plants they may lose in their gardens should a hose pipe ban be enforced. I've thought it through enough to have made my mind up to never keep marine, or buy an RO unit but to live within the parameters that come out the tap.


----------



## Nathaniel Whiteside (8 Dec 2012)

Your still allowed to water your plants with a hosepipe ban in force.. Just you have to 'fill a watering can' rather than leave sprinklers on. So it isn't really that relative, as you can still use as much water as you please, just break your back doing it!

Once water becomes a luxury, were all F*cked.


----------



## NatureBoy (8 Dec 2012)

Definitely an "each to their own" kind of choice, of which there are many in this hobby, and not one to get too flustered about...


----------



## Antipofish (8 Dec 2012)

NatureBoy said:
			
		

> Antipofish said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Your choice is commendable, especially if you choose fish that match those parameters as well.  I'm not convinced that because you have chosen that path, that you should feel it acceptable to impose the same on others, or actually worse, since others might be using RO already and then they have water parameters enforced upon them by a "hosepipe ban".  Apart from anything else such a notion would be unenforceable.  I am also not convinced that you can compare plantlife to living fish either.  Thats a rather odd comparison.  Unless its all about money.  But for me the lives of the fish would be the key factor here.  Not everyone has the capacity for storing the amount of rainwater as Darrell either.  Others live in a part of the country where even with 1000L of storage, the weather would not provide enough rainfall.  Darrell has said himself that sometimes its a problem for him I recall.  

And as I have said more than once on this thread, how can we compare domestic water usage to the billions of litres used by industry ?  Would my 30 cubic metres of water (that I have paid for I hasten to add) REALLY affect the environment ?  NO.  So I'm sorry, the "I'm trying to save the planet by not using an RO to filter my fish water" argument is not one that holds much store with me.  Not when the water companies themselves allow wastage of TOTAL water consumption of amounts up to 30% to go on.

I would also point out that when the hosepipe ban was in place I was forced to wash my car with buckets of water and rinse it off the same way.  This actually used MORE water than had I been able to spray it off to rinse it !


----------



## geoffbark (9 Dec 2012)

Very well said.

And I would like to stress again. An RO system used correctly can save water. 

Direct that waste water for the garden, washing car, hosing the dog down after a muddy walk. Etc etc etc.


----------



## Clifford (9 Dec 2012)

If you have a decent sized tank you'd need truly epic amounts of storage.

Considering the size of the OP's tank and assuming "standard" 50% weekly changes and an optimistic 5:1 rejection rate he'd need to find storage for over 700l a week.

If you had that much storage you'd be better off harvesting rainwater.

I'm by no means anti RO but unless you're running a Nano or a commercial car wash you are putting an awful lot of clean, fresh water straight down the drain.


----------



## Antipofish (9 Dec 2012)

Clifford said:
			
		

> If you have a decent sized tank you'd need truly epic amounts of storage.
> 
> Considering the size of the OP's tank and assuming "standard" 50% weekly changes and an optimistic 5:1 rejection rate he'd need to find storage for over 700l a week.
> 
> ...



Read the post above you. It need not go down the drain.  And from your post it seems you think the OP needs to store 700L of RO water each week. Is that correct or did I misread what you said ?


----------



## krazypara3165 (9 Dec 2012)

I think what he was trying to say is.that if I have a 300l tank and im doing 50% change a week (the case is actually 3 x 50%) I would need an awful lot of storage to save the waste water.


----------



## Clifford (9 Dec 2012)

My reply was to the post suggesting that you use the waste water for other purposes.

700l is how much waste water you would need to find a use for each week. You'd either need to store it or use it as it was generated, which is a big ask if you're going to "save" water by using RO.


----------



## Antipofish (9 Dec 2012)

krazypara3165 said:
			
		

> I think what he was trying to say is.that if I have a 300l tank and im doing 50% change a week (the case is actually 3 x 50%) I would need an awful lot of storage to save the waste water.



Ahh, thats an interesting angle.  You do 3 x 50% a week ? Thats just while the tank is new though right ?


----------



## krazypara3165 (9 Dec 2012)

Initially yes, but I will be getting juvinile discus (around ten) so Im debating keeping it up for good practice or knocking it down to two a week...


----------



## Antipofish (9 Dec 2012)

krazypara3165 said:
			
		

> Initially yes, but I will be getting juvinile discus (around ten) so Im debating keeping it up for good practice or knocking it down to two a week...



Im pretty sure that 20% every day or every other day is better for that situation as it creates less fluctuation in temperature and parameters.  Im looking forward to these discus though.  Lovely fish.


----------



## krazypara3165 (9 Dec 2012)

Antipofish said:
			
		

> krazypara3165 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



   I have not crossed that out yet, however i would like to aerate and heat the water for 24 hours prior to it going in which means for a 20% change id need a 50l drum sat in my living room 24/7 whereas i'd rather bring a 100l drum in twice to three times a week before i go to bed and fill the tank in the morning with it. 

    However its all about the fish, so if it doesn't stress them out changing water everyday and i can find a way of doing it, i will.

   I am also really looking forward to getting the fish! i feel i am jumping straight into the deep-end somewhat, by going head first into a 300l high tech planted discus tank, however with the knowledge on here and the advice i have received from Steve Punchard and his team at Punchard discus, i know it can be done! i was initially going to go for fully grown ones, but due to the cost, and as Steve recommended, i will now be going for 8-10 juveniles.


----------



## Antipofish (9 Dec 2012)

Have you looked into whether there is a conflict between O2 requirements of Discus vs the amount of CO2 you will need for a 300L High Tech planted tank ? (If there is a conflict at all... I don't know).  I applaud you for jumping in though... BTW, if 50L is too much, would 25L every day work better ?  You could look into plumbing into an auto top up system with a reservoir that sits under the tank.  There is one on Ebay at the moment with a 99p reserve I believe.


----------



## Nathaniel Whiteside (9 Dec 2012)

All the best of luck mate, you've definitely put the graft in.


----------



## krazypara3165 (9 Dec 2012)

Antipofish said:
			
		

> Have you looked into whether there is a conflict between O2 requirements of Discus vs the amount of CO2 you will need for a 300L High Tech planted tank ? (If there is a conflict at all... I don't know).  I applaud you for jumping in though... BTW, if 50L is too much, would 25L every day work better ?  You could look into plumbing into an auto top up system with a reservoir that sits under the tank.  There is one on Ebay at the moment with a 99p reserve I believe.



Ive looked into it a little, and I should be able to get away with it. Worse case scenario i'll drop an air line in during the evening. Im also hoping that during the day when the co2 is on that the plants will be able to provide the o2. I dont think I have the space to set up an auto top up but do you have the link?


----------



## krazypara3165 (9 Dec 2012)

Whitey89 said:
			
		

> All the best of luck mate, you've definitely put the graft in.



Cheers, ive put in far more money than I had originally anticipated, but it will be worth it if I can pull it off!


----------



## Antipofish (9 Dec 2012)

krazypara3165 said:
			
		

> Whitey89 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Tell me about it.  A year ago I was meant to be buying a 60L clearseal tank for £50 with a few cheap fish in it !

No link but search auto top up on ebay and you will find it.

BTW. I run 02 24/7 and it allows me to inject higher amounts of CO2.  And thats not to replace what the o2 has displaced, it just means I have higher of both in the tank so enough for the fish to be happy AND the plants. Best of both worlds.


----------



## krazypara3165 (9 Dec 2012)

That might be worthwhile, Is that co2, or o2 that you run 24/7? and I originally started of with a second hand 4ft that split before I got to put fish in, had to buy a new tank and a new light system as the old light system (brand new, now sat doing nothing) no longer fitted, and then decided I wanted to go high tec. To top it off im now going.down the discus road......... I can only see me spending more in the future haha


----------



## Antipofish (9 Dec 2012)

krazypara3165 said:
			
		

> That might be worthwhile, Is that co2, or o2 that you run 24/7? and I originally started of with a second hand 4ft that split before I got to put fish in, had to buy a new tank and a new light system as the old light system (brand new, now sat doing nothing) no longer fitted, and then decided I wanted to go high tec. To top it off im now going.down the discus road......... I can only see me spending more in the future haha



My CO2 comes on 3 hours before lights on.  And stays on until an hour before lights out.  The O2 is on 24/7.  Not only does it increase the available O2 and allow me to increase the CO2 levels, but its constantly breaking the surface so I never get any surface scum (which itself locks the CO2 in and can cause further problems for the fish as well as looking manky). So you win all round


----------



## NatureBoy (9 Dec 2012)

Antipofish said:
			
		

> krazypara3165 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I do similar and it feels good to supersaturate with O2, the fish seem so energetic, etc. One thing I note that's slightly different is that I cannot add more CO2 without the fish displaying signs of hypoxia (gasping at the surface), even if I supersaturate O2. I've learnt that to complete respiration fish must _diffuse_ CO2 from their gills and the rate of diffusion is strictly dependent on the CO2 concentration in the water (diffuses quicker the greater the difference in CO2 concentration between bloodstream and water going over the gills). So fish have loads of O2 available to respire, but the removal of CO2 from blood is independent and poses a separate concern.


----------



## krazypara3165 (9 Dec 2012)

wow, the amount i have learnt from this thread is unreal! i doubt it will help me out no end! ive seen a few air pumps knocking around with two outlets. i shall invest in one of these so i can have one permanently on in the aquarium and another to throw into the standing water for water changes!


----------



## Antipofish (9 Dec 2012)

NatureBoy said:
			
		

> Antipofish said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Interesting concept. Do you have a link to where you referenced that ?  Im basing my actions on what Tom Barr does with high O2 saturation and no ill effects to fish.


----------



## foxfish (9 Dec 2012)

Tom Bar uses trickle towers, I dont know if that if a different concept compared to an air stone in the tank?


----------



## NatureBoy (9 Dec 2012)

was initially based on observation, as couldn't figure why a fish would be at the surface when there was all this O2 around, thought they were being fussy at first but then read this...it's called the "Bohr-Root" effect. 
Reducing the rate of CO2 injectioncaused the fish to return to normal behaviour.

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=ca ... pwtCTKtfng 

Sorry about the crap link, and may require google docs, but the reference is on page 28. 

cheers


----------



## Antipofish (9 Dec 2012)

foxfish said:
			
		

> Tom Bar uses trickle towers, I dont know if that if a different concept compared to an air stone in the tank?



He also says, on several of his posts, that he has high levels of O2 in his tanks which allow for increased levels of CO2.  Trickle towers most definitely would help with O2 saturation levels.


----------



## Ady34 (9 Dec 2012)

Think theres an auto top up system in our for sale section...Katfish i think is selling it....havnt looked on the thread but sure i saw it.


----------



## krazypara3165 (9 Dec 2012)

Just out of curiosity what use would a auto top up be? As it would only replace evaporated water to my knowledge......


----------



## foxfish (9 Dec 2012)

Antipofish said:
			
		

> foxfish said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I think that the trickle filtration serves to not only work as incredibly effect biological filtration but by exposing the contents of the tank to air several times an hour the effect also offers huge gas exchange & adds oxygen more efficiently than any other method?


----------



## Ady34 (9 Dec 2012)

krazypara3165 said:
			
		

> Just out of curiosity what use would a auto top up be? As it would only replace evaporated water to my knowledge......


Well emptying the tank at water change time is a quick form of evaporation  .... at the end if the day if the water drops so far then it will be topped up.


----------



## foxfish (9 Dec 2012)

krazypara3165 said:
			
		

> Just out of curiosity what use would a auto top up be? As it would only replace evaporated water to my knowledge......


For me the main benefit is the ease of water changes, I syphon out water through air line into a remote drain & the topup replaces the water = very very easy daily water change with no stress or mess but not much use if you are using a RO unit that only produces 2 gallon an hour or less!


----------



## krazypara3165 (9 Dec 2012)

Ahhhhh so I could syphon water through a small tube and the topup can replace it from say a water bucket underneath my cabinet? Would it be enough to do around 50l a day though?


----------



## Antipofish (9 Dec 2012)

krazypara3165 said:
			
		

> Just out of curiosity what use would a auto top up be? As it would only replace evaporated water to my knowledge......



It doesn't only replace evaporated water. It does not know what evaporated water is. It replaces water.  Water leaves the tank and the top up system replaces it, whether its caused by evaporation or by water changes.


----------



## foxfish (9 Dec 2012)

Well actually I was thinking about a direct top up from a mains water supply, very easy to install but the small ball valve will be visible unless you have a sump of course & if you have a sump you can then have a trickle filter !!


----------



## Antipofish (9 Dec 2012)

foxfish said:
			
		

> Well actually I was thinking about a direct top up from a mains water supply, very easy to install but the small ball valve will be visible unless you have a sump of course & if you have a sump you can then have a trickle filter !!



I dont think Discus will appreciate water changes from mains water though. That would be a problem surely in winter.


----------



## Ady34 (9 Dec 2012)

Really auto top up is best when connected to a main feed permanently, otherwise you may as well just use a transfer pump from your holding drums at water change time.


----------



## foxfish (9 Dec 2012)

Antipofish said:
			
		

> foxfish said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Oh why is that?  I thought that most of the top breeders used tap water!

The method I use by syphoning water to a drain via air line restricts the flow to a liter or so a minute so virtually any water purification unit that removes chlorine & heavy metals will easily coupe with the flow its just the super inefficient method of the RO system that will struggle to keep up unless you have a booster pump & a big unit.
I have never had a heating issue as changing relatively small 10-15% amount daily at a slow rate just wont effect the temp - although it might effect a 30c tank to a small extent.


----------



## Antipofish (9 Dec 2012)

foxfish said:
			
		

> Antipofish said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Not freezing cold mains water, I imagine they equalise the temperature.   And I would not think that "most" of the top breeders use tap water.  Some do, as we have heard, but I dont think we can assume that just because some do, it applies to all of them.


----------



## dw1305 (10 Dec 2012)

Hi all,


> I do similar and it feels good to supersaturate with O2, the fish seem so energetic, etc. One thing I note that's slightly different is that I cannot add more CO2 without the fish displaying signs of hypoxia (gasping at the surface), even if I supersaturate O2. I've learnt that to complete respiration fish must diffuse CO2 from their gills and the rate of diffusion is strictly dependent on the CO2 concentration in the water (diffuses quicker the greater the difference in CO2 concentration between bloodstream and water going over the gills).


I like lots of O2 as well, the majority of fish are going to come from water that is pretty fully oxygenated naturally. You can tell this from the fact that relatively few fish have evolved adaptations for atmospheric air breathing (some that have are some catfish, anabantoids etc), it would have evolved in plenty more fish if they experienced periods of hypoxia. 

If your water is fully oxygenated 99.99% of the time, but de-oxygenated for the remaining 0.001% that is still a huge evolutionary pressure over time for the survival of those fish with behavioural and genetic pre-disposition to air breathing. You can also see this in the catfish super-family the *Loricarioidea*, where some members of both *Loricariidae* and *Callichthyidae* have a gut wall adapted for air breathing (_Corydoras, Hypostomus_ spp.), and show air gulping behaviour, because it occurs across families, this indicates that this is likely to be a trait preserved from their common ancestor. Rheophilic Loricariids like _Hypancistrus_ spp. still show air gulping under conditions of lower oxygen (levels that would be normal for a lot of other fish), even though they have lost the ability to make use of that atmospheric oxygen. 



> So fish have loads of O2 available to respire, but the removal of CO2 from blood is independent and poses a separate concern............was initially based on observation, as couldn't figure why a fish would be at the surface when there was all this O2 around, thought they were being fussy at first but then read this...it's called the "Bohr-Root" effect. Reducing the rate of CO2 injection caused the fish to return to normal behaviour.


"Natureboy" is right, they aren't entirely independent of one another, because it is the same haemoglobin molecules that are carrying both CO2 and O2. At the interface between the fishes gill and the tank water, the diffusion gradients  of both gases are relevant. 

I know I've posted this before, but I wrote an article on oxygenation for Plec keepers, which is presently hosted at "Plecoplanet": "*Aeration and dissolved oxygen in the aquarium*" - <http://plecoplanet.com/?page_id=829>


> I think that the trickle filtration serves to not only work as incredibly effect biological filtration but by exposing the contents of the tank to air several times an hour the effect also offers huge gas exchange & adds oxygen more efficiently than any other method?


These are the advantages of trickle filters, they aren't really separate, they are one and the same thing. The trickle filter has a huge gas exchange surface, this means that gas exchange will occur even with a small diffusion gradient between levels of dissolved and atmospheric gases. 

If you keep a planted tank, but don't add CO2, this is a win-win situation, as levels of both CO2 and oxygen will be close to their natural maximum saturation. This is also where the "nitrate factory" tag comes in. Trickle filter are nitrate factories, because the filter media is all aerobic, even if we have water with a large BOD (Biochemical Oxygen Demand), the filter has the potential for enough oxygen to diffuse in to keep the biologically mediated oxidation of NH3 > NO2 > NO3. This is another advantage of being fully oxygenated (whatever filtration system you are using) in that it gives you some extra capacity for biological filtration if you have an unnoticed fish death, emergency chloramine in your tap water etc.

cheers Darrel


----------

