Reef Central Online Community

Home Forum Here you can view your subscribed threads, work with private messages and edit your profile and preferences View New Posts View Today's Posts

Find other members Frequently Asked Questions Search Reefkeeping ...an online magazine for marine aquarists Support our sponsors and mention Reef Central

Go Back   Reef Central Online Community > Marine Fish Forums > Seahorses & Pipefish
Register Blogs FAQ Calendar Mark Forums Read

Notices

User Tag List

Reply
Thread Tools
Old 07/19/2006, 12:43 PM   #76
pledosophy
Premium Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Beaverton
Posts: 5,267
Quote:
Originally posted by FishGrrl
No, it isn't! A theory has to be tested to be a theory. There is no way around this and saying otherwise is a fundamental lack of the scientific process.
I'm sorry if my use of the word theory or research is offensive to you. I am using the words correctly.

Definition of theory
Definition of research

I do think you are arguing semantics. I did not call it a scientific theory, or scientific research. The analogies are becoming more and more ridiculous. I am not one who really likes to argue, for the sake of arguing. I come here to try to help people with there questions based on my research and experiences. Based on your earlier statements nothing I have ever posted on this site or others has any validity, but the people who have received it have been thankful, and have success. Hard to argue with results.

It is one thing to find constructive criticism, or alternative lines of thinking, I am very open to new ideas (I took you up on one of them ); but that is not what is happening here. If you wanted to bring up the theory about the rising PH level in a seahorses blood causing acidosis which would create poor respiration and CO2 exchange, kidney disease and gill disease; that would be welcomed. At least you would be making a contribution besides skepticism.

It is discouraging that while I continually grant the request for more information on the content I have posted, the favor is not returned by those granting the requests on the matters that they post.

So here it goes.

Quote:
And none of them mean anything without knowing what percentage of the general populus is using protien skimmers. THats where the whole crux of the argument is.
Since Rich never gave us the link to his poll, I decided to make my own. It can be found
here

I would have like to get more responses, but I only have 60 right now. I do hope that the number of responses will keep increasing. I posted the poll on some other sites as well, but never got more then 3 responses off of a different site. The link is to the largest response I was able to gather.

Since that site limits each member to one vote per person, people who kept multiple tanks were allowed to post there different setups and then the poll numbers were adjusted to reflect multiple tank setups. The largest vote by any member was 6 (5 tanks with HOB skimmers 1 without). The survey was only of hobbyists not of any commercial breeding facilities. All the info posted in the replies and all the votes were counted. Nothing was disqualified.

Current stats

No protein skimmer 45.9%
HOB protein skimmer 31.15%
Protein Skimmer in sump 22.95%

So just under 70% of seahorse keepers from this poll do not use a HOB protein skimmer. Just under 46% of the keepers from this poll do not use a protein skimmer at all. However the poll for GBD from the same site showed that 80% of those keepers used a protein skimmer.

Quote:
Fishgrrls example is pretty much the same. 100% of seahorses with GBD have had long term exposure to Sodium Chloride.

Without knowing that 100% of seahorses have long term exposure to salt, it appears that the salt is causing it, when in fact theres absolutely no causation going on there (there is correlation though)
Do you have any documented cases of any of the forms of GBD appearing in the wild? I have never heard or read any report of a seahorse with GBD in the ocean. All other seahorses diseases, but not GBD. Since it has never been observed in the wild it is thought that something in our aquarium systems is the cause. Sorry but for now, salt's out. The analogy is just a bit too far fetched, as are some of the others.

Quote:
We have suggested ways, Pledosophy just keeps denying that theyre needed.
You have suggested that GBD was caused by salt, that it was a mycobacteria infection, and that it is caused by a stress response deriving from powerheads. All of which I have given you reasons, backed by research, on why these suggestions were not accurate. Truthfully all of them show that you have very little idea what you are talking about.

The only other suggestion you had that could be construed as somewhat helpful, was to get a survey of the number of people who use protein skimmers . I offered you the task since you so readily dismiss any link to research that I provide, however you were not up for it. If you really did survey 20 other keepers (minimuim needed to reach the 95% stat you gave) I would love to see the results.

Since the GBD survey is ongoing, the link provided above in response to the number of people on that site currently using protein skimmers is accurate. As stated it would be nice if there were more responses, but the level of participation should give some insight in to the number of people using HOB protein skimmers on that site. Hopefully people will continue to be involved in the survey and as the numbers increase we can get a better picture.

Quote:
And I think that is my grip; dissuading aquarists from skimmers can be a huge disservice to them and their charges. Seahorses are big pooping machines, and without a good way to remove the waste, it can cause many problems. Skimmers help with that. Of course its not the only way, but for many people its the easiest.
Giving people the facts related to a desicion is not a bad thing IMO. In fact I believe this site is fueled by people who seek other peoples experience. You don't like my input because I clump a bunch of people's experiences into numbers fine, the members could dig through the posts themselves; there are several hundred on GBD that I have read.

If you think my remarks are disuading people from using skimmers fine. Please reread my first post where I stated I used one.

There are several ways to run a system. Many people keep seahorses without skimmers and at the same time have good water quaility. It is not hard to do. In fact if you read through this thread I have even explained different ways to accomplish that without using a protein skimmer.

Sometimes there's a big difference between the easy way and the right way. I'm not syaing using a skimmer is the wrong way, but making an informed desicion on the husbandry practices we choose to follow is definetly the right way IMHO.

Quote:
Pledo I cant see why you couldnt post polls here and the second syngnathid board to get as many responses as possible. Particularly for the "do you run a skimmer" / "do you not run a skimmer" question. You may find that some groups of aquarists are natively predisposed to run one or not run one.
Honestly, I'm kinda burnt. I think I'm going to take a break from here for awhile.

I ran the poll on SH.org because that is where the GBD poll was taken. I'm on the site everyday so it is easy. I also ran it on the WAMAS board and Fish Forums, but the responses where limited at best. I don't go to the other syngnathid board much anymore, it's pretty slow.

Sh.org has just under 6,000 members. We are kind of a diverse group; we actually have a reefer or two. I know with me and many other people, we got into seahorses and then those trips to the LFS got us all into reefing. I have had a tank or 6 at a time. The thing that almost every member has in common is that they keep seahorses, which makes it in ideal place to gather info on seahorses. Many of the members there are members here.

It would be great if the different sites could all work together, I think the reluctance is less political and has more to do with some hurt feelings possible on both sides; much of them stemming from some events that happened recently. It is unfortunate things transpired the way they did to say the least.

Quote:
I really feel this thread has run its useful course.
I agree.




pledosophy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07/20/2006, 09:57 AM   #77
RichConley
Registered Member
 
RichConley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Bostonian in Chicago going to DC
Posts: 9,910
AGAIN,

the percentage of users using protien skimmers NOW has absolutely, positively, 100% NOTHING to do with the survey. You NEED to know what the percentage was at the SAME date of the survey.

Your spewing out "OMG, SKIMMERS ARE BAD" has influenced the population on that site and created an environment in which skimmers are feared. The data is valid, but it is not valid in combination with the other survey, because the population is different than it was at that point.

quote: Fishgrrls example is pretty much the same. 100% of seahorses with GBD have had long term exposure to Sodium Chloride.

' Without knowing that 100% of seahorses have long term exposure to salt, it appears that the salt is causing it, when in fact theres absolutely no causation going on there (there is correlation though) '



"Do you have any documented cases of any of the forms of GBD appearing in the wild? I have never heard or read any report of a seahorse with GBD in the ocean. "

How is that relevant? That has absolutely nothing to do with it. My analogy still stands. 100% of Seahorses with GBD have been exposed to salt water. It must cause it.
Just like saying that 85% of GBD cases occur in tanks with skimmers without any of the needed relevant info.


When did this become about me Pledosophy? Everytime anyone questions the validity of YOUR data, you start making personal attacks.



The FACT is, your research is incomplete, and because it is incomplete, it leads to ASSUMPTIONS that are NOT supported by your data. You are passing those assumptions off as fact, and that is leading people to follow your advice, which is IN NO WAY supported by your data.



"DONT USE SALT. IN 100% of GBD CASES, THE SEAHORSES WERE EXPOSED TO SALT"


__________________
NO TANKS!!!
RichConley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07/20/2006, 10:04 AM   #78
TamiW
Seahorse Wrangler
 
TamiW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Greater Milwaukee Area, WI
Posts: 917
Kevin, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. Hopefully this thread though has given everyone different perspectives and thoughts on the subject to make an informed decision.

(Also, just a minor point, the example of salt causing gbd was strictly to show why correlation doesn't equal causation. But I digress, and I'll stop now, I promise.)

Okay, rather than making this thread a further ****storm, I'd like to take Samala's idea and make polls here on RC. Nanook has agreed to sticky them. Of course, there will be problems with the limited nature of these polls, but it might give some background information on a different population of people keeping seahorses.

Since there can only be one question per poll, and we don't want to get crazy, I am thinking two polls. The first will be just how many people use skimmers vs those that don't. The second will be the occurance of gas bubble disease with skimmers vs not. Here are the questions I was thinking of.

Use of skimmer.

1) I use a hob skimmer on my seahorse system(s)

2) I use a sump skimmer on my seahorse system(s)

3) I use other skimmer skimmer on my seahorses system(s)

4) I use skimmers on some seahorse systems, and some I do not.

5) I do not use a skimmer on my seahorse system(s)


Occurance of Gas Bubble Disease

1) I had gas bubble disease occur on a system with a skimmer

2) I had gas bubble disease occur on a system without a skimmer

3) I've had gas bubble disease occur on systems with skimmers and without skimmers

4) I've never had an occurance of gas bubble disease

Please add your thoughts regarding these question. Anything I missed? remember, we're limited to one question per poll, so the answer need to relate to one question only. We could probably do more than two polls but that may get excessive and dissuage people from posting.

Please try to get your thoughts in asap, I'd like to get these up today.


__________________
Tami

It's all about the snick!

Current Tank Info: I have a fish room.
TamiW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07/20/2006, 10:11 AM   #79
RichConley
Registered Member
 
RichConley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Bostonian in Chicago going to DC
Posts: 9,910
Quote:
Originally posted by pledosophy


Sometimes there's a big difference between the easy way and the right way. I'm not syaing using a skimmer is the wrong way, but making an informed desicion on the husbandry practices we choose to follow is definetly the right way IMHO.
I 100% agree. The problem is, your 'survey' is so flawed that it is leading people to make decisions on things that are not supported by any real data.

For someone who doesnt understand statistics, the survey looks like an overwhelming example of skimmers causing it, when in reality, it doesnt suggest that. It doesnt have a wide enough scope of data to suggest that. Its too incomplete.

heres another analogy. It is supported by as much data as your inference that skimmers cause GBD.

85-90% of women who are abused by their husbands write with their right hand.

That seems like a strong suggestion that being right handed makes you more likely to be abused, (The same percentage more likely as skimmer-gbd) when it is in fact just a side effect of population dynamics.



To PROPERLY survey to figure out something like this (and not even this would prove anything)

The survey would need to go like this.

1. Do you use a skimmer RIGHT NOW.
2. Do your seahorses have GBD RIGHT NOW.



If skimmers have ANY effect, you would see a higher ratio of 1Y2Y:1Y2N than 1N2Y:1N2N


RichConley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07/20/2006, 10:17 AM   #80
RichConley
Registered Member
 
RichConley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Bostonian in Chicago going to DC
Posts: 9,910
Fishgrrl, the problem is, your surveys cover too much time. If there is no corelation, than someone who kept their tank for 2 years without a skimmer and then 1 year with a skimmer would be twice as likely to have GBD occur during the time without a skimmer. Thats going to seriously skew the rates.


__________________
NO TANKS!!!
RichConley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07/20/2006, 10:51 AM   #81
TamiW
Seahorse Wrangler
 
TamiW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Greater Milwaukee Area, WI
Posts: 917
Quote:
Originally posted by RichConley
Fishgrrl, the problem is, your surveys cover too much time. If there is no corelation, than someone who kept their tank for 2 years without a skimmer and then 1 year with a skimmer would be twice as likely to have GBD occur during the time without a skimmer. Thats going to seriously skew the rates.
Rich, I agree there are flaws in the survey, but I'd like to try and establish what the population of seahorse aquarists with and without skimmers is. It will fluxutate over time, I'm sure, but it might give a basis for what additional data collection needs to be done and what direction to take any research.

I was also laying in bed and thinking (I'm home with a migraine that keeps hitting on and off, yay!) that we could do more than two questions. One thread could be sticked with links to different polls. For example, we could do a state of your seahorses and tank now, and do what you're suggesting above, something like:

What is the current state of you're seahorse system
1) I have a skimmer on my seahorse system and at least one of my seahorses is experiencing GBD

2) I have a skimmer on my seahorse tank and none of my seahorses are currently experiencing gbd

3) I do not have a skimmer on my aquarium and at least one of my seahorses is experiencing GBD

4) I do not have a skimmer on my aquarium and none of my seahorses are experiencing GBD

2 & 4 will probably be much higher percentages, but the few 1 & 3 answers will give some interesting insight.

We could also do a percentage of the types of gbd that appear. And what percentage of "known cures" have worked.

But above all, I'm thinking a disclaimer along the lines of "These polls were created for the process of data collection which will hopefully lead to a better understanding of the types of research needed to determine the cause of gas bubble disease and if it related to skimmers. This information will fluctuate. The population itself may be biased in one way or another and is limited to a sampling of internet users that frequent Reefcentral.com. This information should in no way be taken as the definiative answer to what causes gas bubble disease. Further research is needed to fully understand this ailment." Something along those lines...


__________________
Tami

It's all about the snick!

Current Tank Info: I have a fish room.
TamiW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07/20/2006, 11:16 AM   #82
Samala
Registered Member
 
Samala's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 2,930
How long are you intending to run this poll?

If you use the last set of questions you are going to end up with a single snapshot in time of some keepers of seahorses who may or may not have SH with GBD and may or may not run a skimmer.

How will this single point in time be meaningful to a larger population of SH keepers who keep their horses over large scales of time?

Who's to say GBD incidence rates do not increase or decrease in response to seasonal patterns? Perhaps high temperature variations in tanks causes stress that leads to disease.. it is summertime.

Or.. perhaps tanks go longer between cleanings and this effects GBD rates.

Also, do we know the typical rate of GBD occurrence in captive seahorses in any environment? What is the real likelihood that in this short capture survey you are going to get cases of GBD at all?

For instance: I kept H. zosterae for six months, no skimmer. One GBD case only, that lasted two days before decompression treatment was used to cure the problem. No re-occurrence. Two days out of 182 total. Incidence rate something like 1 in 90 days for 1 seahorse out of a group of 20~.

I'm not trying to dissuade you, just curious to know how you apply the data that will result from these polls any better than the data from the other survey.

>Sarah


__________________
"Seaweed is cool, seaweed is fun, it makes its food from the rays of the sun!"
Samala is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07/20/2006, 01:37 PM   #83
RichConley
Registered Member
 
RichConley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Bostonian in Chicago going to DC
Posts: 9,910
Samala, Fishgrrl, You can run the who has a skimmer/who doesnt have a skimmer for a period of time and thats fine.

"If you use the last set of questions you are going to end up with a single snapshot in time of some keepers of seahorses who may or may not have SH with GBD and may or may not run a skimmer."

Right, the problem is that if you use any longer period of time, (in the past) you start getting into more instances of totally unrelated cases. Pretty much everyone at some point or another is going to get some GBD in a horse.
If you go and ask
"Have you every had GBD in a tank with a skimmer"
"Have you every had GBD in a tank without a skimmer"

You start running into issues of
User A ran his tank for 3 months without a skimmer and had no cases of GBD.

User B ran his tank for 6 years with a skimmer and had one case of GBD. It paints a picture that isnt neccesarily true.


If you're going to use a time frame, it has to be controlled. IE get a whole bunch of people and say "You can't change from having a skimmer or not having one for 6 months" and then collect everyone's data at the end of 6 months.

Trying to take data from someone who had one condition for 6 months and had x problems and someone else who had the other condition for 10 years and had y problems is just too incongruous.


__________________
NO TANKS!!!
RichConley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07/20/2006, 01:40 PM   #84
RichConley
Registered Member
 
RichConley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Bostonian in Chicago going to DC
Posts: 9,910
Quote:
Originally posted by Samala

Who's to say GBD incidence rates do not increase or decrease in response to seasonal patterns? Perhaps high temperature variations in tanks causes stress that leads to disease.. it is summertime.

Or.. perhaps tanks go longer between cleanings and this effects GBD rates.
Thats the whole point Me an Fishgrl have been trying to make. Even if this shows that there is a higher rate in tanks with (or without) skimmers, you still can't say its skimmers doing it. It may be something that people who own skimmers do (or dont do). It could be that people with skimmers do less water changes, or keep higher stocking levels, or....

We need huge amounts more data before ANY conclusions can be made.


RichConley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07/20/2006, 01:51 PM   #85
DanU
Registered Member
 
DanU's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Ft. Pierce, FL
Posts: 698
Guys, the problem is, you will never get a good snapshot of what is really occurring. I would contend that the majority of seahorse keepers do not actively post online. Since I sell seahorses both retail and wholesale, and I visit LFS in Southern Florida regularly, I get the opportunity to see just how many don't participate online. I would be surprised if 1 % of the seahorse keepers do.

Dan


DanU is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07/20/2006, 02:07 PM   #86
Samala
Registered Member
 
Samala's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 2,930
My point is that you can pick apart any single scientific project in an attempt to discredit it. No matter how rigid your methodologies and protocols are there are going to be areas of gray and unknowns.

Your desire to have perfect 'science' applied to this question of skimmers and GBD, and the potential relationship existing between the two, is a disservice.

This survey is, what my advisors and group like to call, a "quick and dirty". A simple inexpensive inexhaustive glance at the data available and look for a relationship between two or more things. It isnt perfect, it isnt meant to be. It searches for hints of a relationship, and does not establish without doubt that one exists (or doesn't exist). It is the beginnings of a more indepth exploration.

I was serious when I suggested undertaking some polls here on RC, I think more data would be a wonderful thing. I wasnt really suggesting constructing an entirely other GBD/skimmer survey. Pledosophy's reasons for not constructing polls here seem sound, so I thought it would be left at that.

I'm just curious as to how polls here at RC are going to produce better or more reliable or more sound results. It seems like this whole thread has been arguing over interpretation (and granted the missing control group, but Pledo's started to amend that if you saw his link).

There is no way to get untainted "perfect" data from a survey of this kind and structure. You need several test tanks, several hundred hours of time, several hundred SH and lots of guidance to even approach an answer to this question.

>Sarah


__________________
"Seaweed is cool, seaweed is fun, it makes its food from the rays of the sun!"
Samala is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07/20/2006, 03:11 PM   #87
RichConley
Registered Member
 
RichConley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Bostonian in Chicago going to DC
Posts: 9,910
Samala, Pledo's link doesnt help.

Its two different groups. The percentage of seahorse keepers using skimmers now is VASTLY different from when that survey first started. (mostly because of that survey).

Data collection needs to start NOW. You cant use the old data because its too incomplete, and theres no way to complete it.

Like I said, get everyone you can to sign up, and then in 6 months, check up on all those users. You can do this over a time frame, but the time frame CAN NOT be open ended. That has to be controlled.


__________________
NO TANKS!!!
RichConley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07/20/2006, 07:48 PM   #88
TamiW
Seahorse Wrangler
 
TamiW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Greater Milwaukee Area, WI
Posts: 917
Quote:
Originally posted by DanU
Guys, the problem is, you will never get a good snapshot of what is really occurring. I would contend that the majority of seahorse keepers do not actively post online. Since I sell seahorses both retail and wholesale, and I visit LFS in Southern Florida regularly, I get the opportunity to see just how many don't participate online. I would be surprised if 1 % of the seahorse keepers do.

Dan
I've wondered about that as well. You might have those on the internet more saavy and interested in using more advance aquarium keeping techniques, including skimmers. Alternatively, if someone isn't active on the internet, then they may not know that there is speculation related to skimmers and problems with seahorses, so there might be a greater number of people using skimmers.

Samala, I don't think the sample here is going to be better or worse than that at seahorse.org, just different. With the addition of a control survey, it could add a lot to the knowledge available for trying to develop a testable hypothesis. Same as if the survey at seahorse.org was restarted and the number of cases with gbd and skimmers restarted so the data time frames matched - but I have no control over that.

A more in depth survey would be interesting too. I personally have always wondered about a link between ph, CO2 and gbd, but have no data to back it up, just some musings about the cause. However, the polls on message boards aren't really set up for it. I could write a script that stored more complicated surveys into a database; in fact, this was one of the goals of the original owner of seahorse.org. Not just a gbd survey, but a general disease survey database for seahorse related diseases. But that is getting beyond the scope of this thread.

If a consensus is reached regarding a more indepth gbd poll with a list of questions and either true false or multiple choice answers, I can write that script.

And Samala, in your last post, you make the point I've been trying to make. Without testing the ideas gathered from surveys, there is no way of knowing if the conclusions drawn are anyway accurate.

Here is what I propose:
Because of the questions regarding the purpose of the "snapshot in time" poll, it be skipped.
Two polls made, on regarding the overall skimmer use in seahorse aquaria, one regarding the occurance of gbd in systems with or without skimmers - the same as I proposed above unless someone can come up with more/better questions.

The time frame the polls are kept open is 6 months since that's been the number thrown around.

Polls are linked in one thread, and that thread is in returned sticked. That way, if we want to add either more related polls OR an off-site, indepth survey, it can be linked there. Disclaimers, thoughts, etc . . . can be added to that stickie.

Why? Because maybe we can up up with some data that would give suggestions to how to construct an experiment that would give a change to test any hypothesises (I really dont' know how to spell the plural of hypothesis ). Maybe some organization would eventually see the data and persue further organization. Or some student, some graduate student would choose to follow up with it as a thesis. ???


__________________
Tami

It's all about the snick!

Current Tank Info: I have a fish room.
TamiW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07/21/2006, 09:10 PM   #89
Qcks
Registered Member
 
Qcks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Northern Utah
Posts: 66
Just to pop in and de-lurk for a moment, i'd like to interject a few things.

it has been stated the Gas Bubble Disease mainly occurs in seahorses in tanks that are under 4 ft in height. Further, this issue seems related to the maintenance of Carbon dioxide in the blood of sea horses.

i have a limited experience with sea horses, but i do have a fairly advance knowledge of human medicine and biochemistry.

It seems that the issue is pressure.

The Seahorses seem to be suffering from a fish only version of pulmonary edema or decompression sickness. enviromental stress can worsen either of these two pressure related problems in humans.

****
While i'm not a moderator, y'all seem to be attacking each other pretty savagely. i can instantly gauge each of your opinions on this issue after having read the first page. pledosophy and RichConley have radically different approaches to fish keeping; after reading page 2 i highly doubt either of you like each other. While i'm a general pessimisst, i think everyone has at least that level of perception. As for the use of protein skimmers on a sea horse tank, I've never heard of a protein skimmer messing with the water pressure of a tank. Having said that, use of a protein skimmer is a matter of personal preference.

anyway


Qcks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07/22/2006, 06:44 PM   #90
RichConley
Registered Member
 
RichConley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Bostonian in Chicago going to DC
Posts: 9,910
QCKS, I dont dislike Pledosophy.

Its just that in the course of me going from keeping a betta, to breeding African Cichlids and killifish, to breeding tons of freshwater, to marine FO, to fOWLR, to full blown reef, and now keeping 4 or 5 saltwater tanks running at any given time, I've been given a LOT of bad advice that was based on incomplete 'research'. Too much incorrect information is thrown around in this hobby.


Like the whole "4 foot tank thing," It may be something with pressure like you're saying, or it could just be that any tank thats 4' deep is a big tank, and its easier to keep big tanks stable. It may be that depth has absolutely nothing to do with it, and it sreally an issue of parameter stability, or food availability, or whatever.


Back when I was breeding Cory cats, someone (another breeder) told me that cory cats liked dirty water, and that he'd determined that by not maintaining his tank for a couple weeks, and having the fish spawn. It turns out, what was happening was that as the water evaporated, the PH in the tank would change. You'd have pretty drastic changes as he got down to half volume. Then he'd notice the tank was low, and dump a couple gallons of cold tap water in. He was having great results doing this.

It turns out it had nothing to do with the tank being poorly maintained, and actually had everything to do with him doing a phenomenal job replicating storms during the monsoon season.

Thats a case where passing along what appears to be happening is going to hurt your average hobbiest. I'm trying to prevent that: People making incorrect conclusions from limited data, and passing it on as fact.


__________________
NO TANKS!!!
RichConley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07/26/2006, 06:43 PM   #91
mal40
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 50
FishGrrl, you have said that the data from Pledosophy has no scientific basis and that you are a trained mind with attention for detail, and then you run a poll which is rubbish?

I dont get it.

Your poll is definately useless. Why dont you rather work on establishing a survey or poll that will actualy stand up to the scientific methodology you claim to adhear to?


RichConley, why dont you answer the questions put to you? You have made some statements about the cause of GBD and when asked your basis for the information, you decline to answer. You are very clever with the argument, but it appears that you have no anecdotal evidence at all to back up your statements? How can we trust your figures? 95% of people you surveyed? So you really surveyed 20 people exactly? Or did you just make up the figure?


Samala, you appear to have a scientific background, based on your posts. Can you offer some advice on what would constitute a survey that would not be 'quick and dirty'?


Right now I am running a tank with two reidii, and a HOB skimmer. I have no GBD. I hate the skimmer because it eats the fry when they are born, but apart from that it does a good job of cleaning out the gunk in the water. I have run this setup for 2 years. Would I make up four sets of six month intervals in a survey? What happens if I suddenly get a case of GBD? Do I then have a 4 to 1 ratio? 4 six month periods without GBD and then one six month period with GBD? Or do I just fill in that I have GBD and I have a skimmer? I really dont like statistics unless I can see and understand the context in which the data was collected.


This thread appears to be a situation where someone is trying to make sense of the problem using inaccurate or non-scientific research, and he is being shot down by others who appear to be offering their thumbsucked ideas. I dont know which is worse, but I would like to get an idea.


Pledosophy, you run a skimmer yourself, yet you prepare a theory that says they are bad? That also confuses me.


mal40 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07/26/2006, 08:01 PM   #92
TamiW
Seahorse Wrangler
 
TamiW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Greater Milwaukee Area, WI
Posts: 917
mal40, I don't get it. Did you actually read the thread? Or did you just join rc just so you could **** all over this thread?


__________________
Tami

It's all about the snick!

Current Tank Info: I have a fish room.
TamiW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07/26/2006, 09:10 PM   #93
JennyL
Registered Member
 
JennyL's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Texas
Posts: 406
mal40,
I think what you have posted is extremely insulting and rude to a number of members here.

Not exactly a winner for your first post on RC.


JennyL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07/27/2006, 01:11 AM   #94
mal40
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 50
But hold on.

Why is it insulting? Does a sticky poll with one of four options become scientifically valid because FishGrrl has started the poll?

RichConley has been arguing against Pledosophy by producing facts which he has not provided any substanciation. And he makes some statements which I believe shows that he has not researched the issue further than forming his own opinion, and is now thowing theories around about bacterial infection without offering any data, not even anecdotal data to back it up.

This whole thread has been quite insulting towards my concept of fair play. It has been one sided with Pledosophy offering insite and examples and others rejecting his points without any substanciation, other than "your data is flawed" and "you can not call what you have done research", yet this is appropriate because the person being insulted is from another forum?

The sticky polls are going to provide meaningless data from the outset, and this should be obvious. In fact most of the answers why the poll should not be run in the format it was run were given by RichConley and FishGrrl. I find it amusing that the person who has started these polls is the same person who rejects Pledosophy's data because she wants scientifically valid data. Then suggests tagging her poll with a disclaimer saying that the poll is essentially useless, and should not be relied apon to provide anything usefull.

So apart from writing to me saying I am being insulting, why not write to these others, and say that they are being insulting? Is this the way it works around here? If you disagree with FishGrrl you are told your information is flawed, and then you get bullied into leaving the forum?

I still want to know why Pledosophy is anti skimmer, yet has a skimmer. What is it with that? I also want to know if RichConley actually has any information to back up his point of view, or is he making up his numbers as it appears. If he has real facts, they could be usefull.

Finally I want to work out what people think would be a valid way to test these theories, because it looks like the people who argue against Pledosophy have closed the door on most of the options I could think of.


mal40 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07/27/2006, 02:59 AM   #95
pledosophy
Premium Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Beaverton
Posts: 5,267
Quote:
Originally posted by FishGrrl
mal40, I don't get it. Did you actually read the thread? Or did you just join rc just so you could **** all over this thread?
From the post it looks like he/she read the thread. Sited some pretty specific examples.


__________________
120g mixed reef
90g QT
pledosophy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07/27/2006, 03:25 AM   #96
pledosophy
Premium Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Beaverton
Posts: 5,267
Hi Mal. Welcome to Reefcentral.

I do not think protein skimmers are bad. I think that protein skimmers can be a trigger for Gas bubble Disease in seahorses that are predisposed to it, due to the enzyme carbonic anhydrase that regulates the amount of CO2 in the tissues and the blood. IMO if you choose to use a HOB skimmer fine, if you have repeated bouts with GBD, you should remove it, or move it to the sump. IMO it is best just to leave the protein skimmer in the sump, which is where mine resides most of the time. I have attached it to the tank when I was having pump problems, and before I had a sump.

If your seahorse is not predisposed to GBD and has a carbonic anhydrase enzyme that can handel a protein skimmer, great.

IMO through the research that I have been exposed to and have conducted there are numerous examples where removing the HOB protein skimmer from a system will completely cure the disorder. After the disorder is cured, if the HOB protein skimmer is reconnected to the tank it is likely that another epsiode of GBD will follow.

This is my opinion which was formed by looking at hundreds of cases of GBD that occured in home as well as public aquariums, and from reviewing the preliminary results from the Gas Bubble Disease survey which was designed and is being maintained by a team of scientist including PHD Marine Biologists; the survey is ongoing.

IME with correspondence from members of Scripts, Shedd's, Marc Lamont, Keith Gentry, Pete Giwonja, Dr.Belli, Jeff Mitchell, and others it is widely accepted that there are multiple triggers for the disorder, it has also been theorized that it is different disorders presenting itself with the same symptoms. The design of the GBD survey that I have referenced was to help identify these multiple triggers, not to eliminate all causes besides protein skimmers. IMO other potential triggers in home and public aquariums are lack of flow, lack of surface agitation, as well as lack of depth of tank, to name a few.

Again these opinions were formed from looking at hundreds of cases of reported GBD, and results from what I consider to be indepth survey's.

IMO starting a survey based only on protein skimmers being the cause of GBD is a waste of time and only shows further the lack of understanding of what GBD actually is.

I also believe the new survey presented on this site is biased in the way the questions are asked. The question does not state the word "protein skimmer" which is what the poll was designed for but is abreviated to skimmer, which a can be mistaken for surface skimming done by overflow boxes as it was in the protein skimmer thread on seahorse.org. The survey fails to address any other tank conditions that would approach the understanding of multiple triggers. The people anwsering the survey might not have an idea what GBD is and could easily confuse it for early preganancy, or mycobacteria like Rich Connley has done. If the people forming the survey cannot properly identify the disease then it is a large assumption that the people who anwser the question will be able to.

The survey that was conducted by the team of scientist (the same one that has been slandered on this site for being unscientific) that I have referenced experiences none of these problems. People were asked to fill out the survey after an expert had diagnosised the problem as GBD so no false positives were included.

As far as finding a valid way to test the therioes, it's being worked on. The people involved in the formation and upkeep of the survey are some of the brightest minds in syngathid care IMO (and not just because I consider many of them mentors). I believe the survey was laying the foundation for future projects. I currently know of a large scale experiment being done in relation to HOB skimmers and GBD. It may take quite some time to gather the needed information, as it can take time for a seahorse to develop GBD with a HOB skimmer (Might have to do with the threshold of the enzyme, but that is a way off guess at best and JMO not substantiated by anything other then an educated guess).

Mal, I do not know what justification there is for the way I have been treated in this thread. I find it fultile to continue to argue with these people.

Rich Connley argues with everyone over everything (go to his profile and read through his posts). It must be why he comes to this site. He posts multiple posts in a row quoting different individuals to raise his post count. If you read through what he is saying in this thread it shows a clear lack of understanding of the subject matter. He has not been able to contribute anything concrete. He has not anwsered any questions in regard to the "facts" he has stated. He has made up reasons to discredit groups of people to further benefit his ranting, it is likely he is fabricating his numbers as well IMO. If you question the validity of his statements he calls them personal attacks. Perhaps if he becomes a martyr he won't have to anwser for his allegations.

Post after post Fish Grrrrl has stated the the nature of my research is unscientific without understanding the definition of the word research or theory. Now after blasting my collection methods for weeks claiming they are unscientific (even though they are being run by a team of scientists who are published on syngnathid disease, are internationally recognized, and have been guest speakers on syngnathid at several different venues, and were never stated or quoted as scientific research) she has decided to start a biased and useless poll to defend her "idea's". This poll she has started is completely bias in a way in which she accused another survey of being, even though the other survey and her accusations have nothing in common.

This alone would not bother me as much as them implying that I am doing a diservice to the hobby by posting constructed, researched based theories and lableing them as theories. Throughout this thread as well as my history on this site I have not misrepresented myself, my opinions, nor my theories to be anything more then they are.

The only diservice to the hobby I have seen on this thread are Fish Grrl and Rich making up facts and staments to suit there needs to continue there banter. The average hobbyist is just going to be confused by your statements and be led into inaction, or worse actually believing some of what you are posting.

I have tried to be nice, and respectful up until this post. I even took a week off to think about it. I think the record needs to be set straight.


__________________
120g mixed reef
90g QT
pledosophy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07/27/2006, 03:26 AM   #97
pledosophy
Premium Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Beaverton
Posts: 5,267
Quote:
Originally posted by RichConley

I was under the impression that GBD was caused by bacterial infection.
This is completely false.


__________________
120g mixed reef
90g QT
pledosophy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07/27/2006, 03:29 AM   #98
pledosophy
Premium Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Beaverton
Posts: 5,267
Quote:
Originally posted by RichConley

Skimmers will remove bacteria from the water column, and will generally keep the amount of waste in your water to a minimum, both of which would lower the chance of bacterial infection.
Protein skimmers have not been shown to have any significant affect on bacterial diseases common to seahorses.

Please site your source.


__________________
120g mixed reef
90g QT
pledosophy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07/27/2006, 03:30 AM   #99
pledosophy
Premium Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Beaverton
Posts: 5,267
Quote:
Originally posted by RichConley
[B
A lot of the symptoms for it sound like mycobacterium infection to me. [/B]
This is completely inaccurate.

Please site your source.


__________________
120g mixed reef
90g QT
pledosophy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07/27/2006, 03:31 AM   #100
pledosophy
Premium Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Beaverton
Posts: 5,267
Quote:
Originally posted by RichConley
Kevin, I highly doubt different genetic makeups is the reason for some horses showing symptoms,
Why?

Please site your source.


__________________
120g mixed reef
90g QT
pledosophy is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:10 AM.


TapaTalk Enabled

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Powered by Searchlight © 2018 Axivo Inc.
Use of this web site is subject to the terms and conditions described in the user agreement.
Reef CentralTM Reef Central, LLC. Copyright 1999-2014
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.