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 > Fish Disease Treatment
Register Blogs FAQ Calendar Mark Forums Read

Notices

Reply
Thread Tools
Old 02/23/2008, 07:46 AM   #51
Dawn II
Premium Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Cape Coral, FL,
Posts: 609
HLLE- I want to try adding Beta Glucan- the capsules are 10 mg each. I usually feed 2 frozen cubes of food in a.m.- how much should I add? Thank you.


Dawn II is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02/24/2008, 10:39 AM   #52
kb27973
Registered Member
 
kb27973's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Denver, CO.
Posts: 723
Quote:
Originally posted by capn_hylinur
what is the scoop on Rod's . People are treating it like the be all and end all of fish food.
It's just darned good food. Contains a little of everything from big chunks of meat down to oyster eggs and rotifers. It's like the Borneman recipe only I don't have to go through the mess. Highly recommended.

Ken


kb27973 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12/20/2008, 07:51 PM   #53
SnookSlayer08
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Jupiter, FL
Posts: 275
Rod's soaked in Vita-Chem is the only food that goes into my nano unless I get lazy, then it's Hikari Marine S pellets. What I like about Rod's is the colors of the fish really pop and my corals think it's yummy too! As it says on the package it's the complete reef food. I tried making my own food but that was a mess and my mom didn't like how the blender smelled...........


__________________
-Nick

Current Tank Info: AGA 40 BRD SPS Tank
SnookSlayer08 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12/21/2008, 05:51 AM   #54
Dawn II
Premium Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Cape Coral, FL,
Posts: 609
Nothing I have tried help my tangs- they still look raggedy; the corals look great, though. What is Rod's, and how do I get it?


Dawn II is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12/21/2008, 07:41 AM   #55
Aquarist007
Registered Member
 
Aquarist007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Hamilton, Canada
Posts: 28,272
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally posted by Dawn II
Nothing I have tried help my tangs- they still look raggedy; the corals look great, though. What is Rod's, and how do I get it?
http://www.reefcentral.com/wp/?p=302


__________________
I prefer my substrates stirred but not shaken

Current Tank Info: 150gal long mixed reef, 90gal sump, 60 gal refugium with 200 lbs live rock
Aquarist007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03/14/2009, 01:02 AM   #56
danica
Moved On
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 1
spam removed



Last edited by billsreef; 03/14/2009 at 06:22 PM.
danica is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03/14/2009, 12:41 PM   #57
Insane Reefer
Registered Member
 
Insane Reefer's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Mid-Missouri
Posts: 1,680
Quote:
Originally posted by danica
spam removed
I'd really like to know what this post has to do with FISH HEALTH? Or why you felt it necessary to spam this thread with a commercial link?


__________________
-------------------------------------
'Ocean is more ancient than the mountains, and freighted with the memories and the dreams of Time.'

Current Tank Info: Oceanic Biocube 8

Last edited by billsreef; 03/14/2009 at 06:24 PM.
Insane Reefer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04/13/2009, 08:45 PM   #58
stickyhops
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sandusky, Ohio
Posts: 47
i agree............rod's food is really good. they have like 3 or so different formulations as well.


stickyhops is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04/14/2009, 12:43 AM   #59
laverda
Registered Member
 
laverda's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Anaheim, CA
Posts: 5,879
Rod's is good food, but I do not believe it contains the veggies tangs and other herbivores really need. You should be feeding the tangs seaweed/nori every day. They are just like kids and will eat all the junk food you give them, but you have to make sure they eat their greens first! I always feed seaweed first and let them have that mostly before adding other foods. I would soak the seaweed with a few drops of vitamins for a few min before giving it to them.


__________________
240G mixed reef, 29G SPS/LPS clam tank, 50G mixed reef

Current Tank Info: 240g reef with light mover, 29g Cardiff, 50g cube
laverda is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04/16/2009, 05:09 PM   #60
roxsburyrage
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Northern New Jersey
Posts: 374
As far as Tangs I have been using Dried Purple Seaweed I find it has the most Vitamins compared to Nori sheets.They only hard part is finding it at times.


roxsburyrage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05/07/2009, 12:11 PM   #61
xJake
Registered Member
 
xJake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,385
I made some comments on thread in another thread, and I was asked to post them here.

This was my original post in that thread, regarding feeding, along with several replies.

Quote:
Originally posted by xJake
Basically, I feed w/e is available in our lab or w/e live food culture I have ready to feed out.

The list includes:

Frozen/Refigerated Foods:

Raw "Cocktail" Shrimp (chopped)
Raw Whitefish (Cod or Pollock) (chopped)
Raw Squid (chopped)
Silversides (chopped)
Raw Muscles or Clams (or w/e bivalve we have in stock) (shucked and chopped)
Jumbo Krill
Baby Krill
PE Mysis
Hikari Mysis
Cyclop-eeze
Blood Worms
Daphnia
Brine Shrimp
Baby Brine Shrimp
Spirulina Enriched Brine Shrimp

Herbivorous "grazing" foods (provides limited nutritional value, but allows for behavioral enrichment for grazing animals):
Blanched Chinese Cabbage (Bok Choy)
Blanched Romaine Lettuce
Blanched Spinach
Blanched Iceberg Lettuce (only occasionally, usually as a last resort; almost no nutritional value - cellulose and water are the two main components)
Blanched Collard/Mustard Greens

I simply "blanch" the greens in the microwave by wetting the leaves with water and then heating them for a few seconds just to soften everything. I'll usually do this in a plastic bag or another partially-sealed container.

Live Foods:

Mysid (Mysidopsis bahia)
Baby Brine Shrimp
Rotifers
Phytoplankton (only occasionally; about twice a month)
Various Marine Macroalgae/seaweed (we will occasionally have leftovers from research projects and classes where it was needed; it is kept refrigerated)
Cultured Caulerpa, Ulva, and Chaetomorpha Macroalgae (to those fish who will eat them)

Freeze-Dried/Dried Foods:

Raw "Sun-dried" Nori (un-toasted) (ordered in bulk wholesale packages)
Pellets and Flakes (only occasionally)
Jumbo Krill
Blood worms
Cyclop-eeze
Daphnia
Baby Shrimp (Sun-dried Gammarus Shrimp; Tetra-brand)
Red, Brown, Purple, and Green Dried Marine Algae (TLF-brand mostly, but sometimes SFB-brand)

We have a few dozen types of HUFA, and Vitamin supplements, but I don't normally use them for feeding the reef systems.

These supplements include:

Garlic Guard
Vitachem
Super Selco
Selcon
Zoecon
Various Vitamin tablets and pastes for certain animals and for animal research purposes (the only one that specifically comes to mind is a shark/ray nutritional supplement)
etc. (chances are if it exists then we have a bottle of it somewhere)

We also feed gelatin-based mixes. You can buy commercially manufactured mixes (herbivorous, carnivorous, or omnivorous blends) and then simply add hot water and refrigerate or freeze (then thaw; obviously). These are great for feeding doses of internal medications as they can be blended right into a whatever amount of food the animal will eat in a day/week. Then the animal receives the correct dosage when fed the correct amount of the medication-laced food. Also, the gelatin creates a much more rubbery/meat-like texture, which I assume is more appealing to most animals than hard/crunchy/dry pellets or flakes.

Basically, you can pretty much feed w/e you'd like or w/e is most available and affordable. Most of the meaty foods contain the same basic nutritional profile, and most herbivores (notably your Yellow Tang) will eat the dried marine algae that I mentioned above.
quote:Originally posted by capn_hylinur
a great list Jake

this thread also has a great introduction on what and how to feed nutritionally

It was also written by a biologist--you guys are handy to have around
http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/s...25&pagenumber=1




I don't agree with a lot of what he has posted in that thread. The following jumped out at me, forcing me to question his credibility:

quote:
No matter the types of foods you use, you must use some supplements. Your fish are caged. They can't seek out the tidbits that provide those trace compounds (e.g., vitamins and fats) they need to round out their optimal health. Fish can't produce all the vitamins and fats they need to live. So, you have to provide it.




If you provide your fish with a varied diet containing items that they would feed on in nature, then you don't need to supplement your foods for "optimal health." Just the simple fact that he states "No matter the types of foods you use..." should make you question the accuracy of his claims. He provides absolutely no evidence to support his claims, so unless I see a comprehensive study that even comes close to supporting this statement then I won't believe it.

quote:To a small degree the health of our fish depend upon obtaining some nutrients directly from the water they swim in. They need and use trace elements found in their water environment. Where we fail them sometimes is keeping them long term in water that doesn't contain these elements or contains these elements in concentrations too low for them.

The use of synthetic sea salts and saltwater mixes isn't the problem. The problem is sometimes we aquarists 'over clean' the water. The worst offender is activated carbon. Activated carbon removes organics the first week it is put into our system. After that it removes trace elements (and sometimes adds phosphates). It's the removal of trace elements we need to be watchful for. I've had long-term success with using carbon or carbon-like substances every other week and each time no more than 5-7 days, then removing it from the system to prevent the abnormal depletion of trace elements.

Adding small quantities of trace elements to a fish only aquarium is recommended.

In addition, for this reason (if not for the many other reasons) make sure you perform regular water changes (10% per week; 25% every three-four weeks; or more often).




Again, his claims seem rather sketchy. He doesn't support them with any credible sources, and I've never heard of a fish being able to directly absorb elements (or anything, except water, for that matter) from the water column, so this sounds extremely far-fetched to me.

Also, I've never heard of a fish's health being negatively affected by a "lack of trace elements" in the water column due to overusing activated carbon. Commercially produced flakes and pellets designed for ornamental marine fish provide virtually every major and minor element that a fish needs for "optimal" health.

Feeding a varied diet that is appropriate for your individual animals is enough to maintain their "optimal" health. If I were to be worried about a lack of trace elements negatively effecting ANYTHING in my tank, the first thing I would consider is my corals - NOT my fish. It just doesn't make sense to me.

Most of his "suggestions" and ideas (which he seems to be stating as "fact") seem to be supported only by speculation and his own hypotheses, and it doesn't seem very accurate to me. I'm sure he meant well, but I just don't buy into most of his claims.


xJake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05/07/2009, 01:21 PM   #62
Insane Reefer
Registered Member
 
Insane Reefer's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Mid-Missouri
Posts: 1,680
Quote:
Originally posted by xJake
I made some comments on thread in another thread, and I was asked to post them here...
hmmm...
Quote:
...Again, his claims seem rather sketchy. He doesn't support them with any credible sources, and I've never heard of a fish being able to directly absorb elements (or anything, except water, for that matter) from the water column, so this sounds extremely far-fetched to me.
Perhaps you should do a bit more reading then, kiddo.

Manufacturer: Mardel

Benefit: Due to its unique properties, Maracyn-Two is absorbed by the fish through the skin. During the prescribed treatment, the concentration of Maracyn-Two in the fish fluids rises to a therapeutic level and is available to fight systemic infections susceptible to its action.


_____________________________________________
Methylmercury is absorbed by fish as the water passes over the skin and gills.
_____________________________________________

And, according to the BOOKS I've read, (like this one: http://books.google.com/books?id=dIL...um=16#PPA17,M1),
a good many of the things like vitamins and minerals (calcium for one) that a fish needs are absorbed through the skin as well as the gills.

Quote:
Most of his "suggestions" and ideas (which he seems to be stating as "fact") seem to be supported only by speculation and his own hypotheses, and it doesn't seem very accurate to me. I'm sure he meant well, but I just don't buy into most of his claims.
Might expand your knowledge base before bashing someone else's knowledge, dude - just because YOU haven't heard of it or read it doesn't mean it isn't reliable or factual...


__________________
-------------------------------------
'Ocean is more ancient than the mountains, and freighted with the memories and the dreams of Time.'

Current Tank Info: Oceanic Biocube 8
Insane Reefer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05/07/2009, 06:21 PM   #63
Aquarist007
Registered Member
 
Aquarist007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Hamilton, Canada
Posts: 28,272
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally posted by Insane Reefer
[B]hmmm...


Perhaps you should do a bit more reading then, kiddo.

Manufacturer: Mardel

Benefit: Due to its unique properties, Maracyn-Two is absorbed by the fish through the skin. During the prescribed treatment, the concentration of Maracyn-Two in the fish fluids rises to a therapeutic level and is available to fight systemic infections susceptible to its action.


_____________________________________________
Methylmercury is absorbed by fish as the water passes over the skin and gills.
_____________________________________________

And, according to the BOOKS I've read, (like this one: http://books.google.com/books?id=dIL...um=16#PPA17,M1),
a good many of the things like vitamins and minerals (calcium for one) that a fish needs are absorbed through the skin as well as the gills.



Might expand your knowledge base before bashing someone else's knowledge, dude - just because YOU haven't heard of it or read it doesn't mean it isn't reliable or factual...
sorry--I feel bad here--the first post this gentleman makes on here after I coaxed him---you are all over it

I don't feel that there is any bashing here--just a different perspective---that's how we learn on here.
I was actually the guy who invited him to post here because he took the time to post using some of his expertise.
So please don't stiffle the exchange of ideas here or we all lose

that said--I have a question for Jake---how is vitachem that we add to the water taken in by fish if they do not have the capability to absorb through the skin


__________________
I prefer my substrates stirred but not shaken

Current Tank Info: 150gal long mixed reef, 90gal sump, 60 gal refugium with 200 lbs live rock
Aquarist007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05/10/2009, 11:20 AM   #64
xJake
Registered Member
 
xJake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,385
Quote:
Originally posted by Insane Reefer
[B]hmmm...


Perhaps you should do a bit more reading then, kiddo.

Manufacturer: Mardel

Benefit: Due to its unique properties, Maracyn-Two is absorbed by the fish through the skin. During the prescribed treatment, the concentration of Maracyn-Two in the fish fluids rises to a therapeutic level and is available to fight systemic infections susceptible to its action.


_____________________________________________
Methylmercury is absorbed by fish as the water passes over the skin and gills.
_____________________________________________

And, according to the BOOKS I've read, (like this one: http://books.google.com/books?id=dIL...um=16#PPA17,M1),
a good many of the things like vitamins and minerals (calcium for one) that a fish needs are absorbed through the skin as well as the gills.



Might expand your knowledge base before bashing someone else's knowledge, dude - just because YOU haven't heard of it or read it doesn't mean it isn't reliable or factual...
First of all, I don't appreciate the "kiddo" comment. I was, in no way, personally attacking anyone, and I don't appreciate being met with such a hostile response.

I didn't consider medications, but I suppose you are correct. If fish are able to absorb medications, than it can safely be said that they do in fact absorb some elements from the water. I mean, they basically are respiring w/e is present in their environment through their gills. These uptake rates, as demonstrated by the source you posted, are widely unknown. So, I still don't seen any need to be dosing trace elements as long as relatively regular water changes are performed with a quality salt mix, and proper diet is maintained.

It's a bit like the idea of humans taking a multi-vitamin. You shouldn't have to as long as you maintain a proper diet, that is, do what your body requires for proper health.

I wasn't trying to state that simply because "I hadn't heard of it" it must be wrong. I was trying to say that he was making claims without a shred of evidence to back up his "facts." Anyone would be skeptical, especially someone like me with a background in scientific research.



Last edited by xJake; 05/10/2009 at 11:26 AM.
xJake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05/10/2009, 11:32 AM   #65
Aquarist007
Registered Member
 
Aquarist007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Hamilton, Canada
Posts: 28,272
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally posted by xJake
First of all, I don't appreciate the "kiddo" comment. I was, in no way, personally attacking anyone, and I don't appreciate being met with such a hostile response.

I didn't consider medications, but I suppose you are correct. If fish are able to absorb medications, than it can safely be said that they do in fact absorb some elements from the water. I mean, they basically are respiring w/e is present in their environment through their gills. These uptake rates, as demonstrated by the source you posted, are widely unknown. So, I still don't seen any need to be dosing trace elements as long as relatively regular water changes are performed with a quality salt mix, and proper diet is maintained.

It's a bit like the idea of humans taking a multi-vitamin. You shouldn't have to as long as you maintain a proper diet, that is, do what your body requires for proper health.

I wasn't trying to state that simply because "I hadn't heard of it" it must be wrong. I was trying to say that he was making claims without a shred of evidence to back up his "facts." Anyone would be skeptical, especially someone like me with a background in scientific research.
Thanks for continuing to post here Jake--I for one appreciate your expertise and welcome it with an open mind--which I am sure you will find with the majority of the reefers here.

I look at vitamins---as the anti ingnorance pills----I feel I still have a lot to learn about fish nutrition---and until I feel very confident then I will add vitamens to ensure I am meeting all their needs.


__________________
I prefer my substrates stirred but not shaken

Current Tank Info: 150gal long mixed reef, 90gal sump, 60 gal refugium with 200 lbs live rock
Aquarist007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05/10/2009, 11:45 AM   #66
Freed
It's what it's
 
Freed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: 41 2' 45" N 85 8' 43" W
Posts: 7,757
Don't fish ingest large amounts of water daily to balance their internal salt content as well as H2O content?


__________________
Freed

Current Tank Info: 180gal(1120 watts of MH/VHO light), 60gal "sump", Deltec 601 calcium reactor, Euro Reef CS8-3+ skimmer, 20 gallon QT
Freed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05/10/2009, 11:51 AM   #67
Insane Reefer
Registered Member
 
Insane Reefer's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Mid-Missouri
Posts: 1,680
Quote:
Originally posted by xJake
I wasn't trying to state that simply because "I hadn't heard of it" it must be wrong. I was trying to say that he was making claims without a shred of evidence to back up his "facts." Anyone would be skeptical, especially someone like me with a background in scientific research.
Quote:
Again, his claims seem rather sketchy
Quote:
...seem to be supported only by speculation and his own hypotheses, and it doesn't seem very accurate to me
Quote:
...so unless I see a comprehensive study that even comes close to supporting this statement then I won't believe it.
boy, this speaks volumes- have you read EVERY scientific writeup about fish that there is??? Atheists never get away with that argument, lol...

So what were you doing, Jake? You were telling us all that he was wrong, based on the "fact" that you hadn't heard of any of it or didn't buy into it and that he didn't provide any sources for his info. And you now admit you were wrong about parts of that other guys post.

Were are your facts?
Were are the links to your info?


__________________
-------------------------------------
'Ocean is more ancient than the mountains, and freighted with the memories and the dreams of Time.'

Current Tank Info: Oceanic Biocube 8
Insane Reefer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05/10/2009, 01:26 PM   #68
xJake
Registered Member
 
xJake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,385
Quote:
Originally posted by Insane Reefer
boy, this speaks volumes- have you read EVERY scientific writeup about fish that there is??? Atheists never get away with that argument, lol...

So what were you doing, Jake? You were telling us all that he was wrong, based on the "fact" that you hadn't heard of any of it or didn't buy into it and that he didn't provide any sources for his info. And you now admit you were wrong about parts of that other guys post.

Were are your facts?
Were are the links to your info?
First of all, I'm going to ignore the fact, for the sake of time, that you decided to bring religion into the conversation. It's entirely inappropriate for these forums, and you should really reconsider what you are posting before making a post. If I were to say something negative about Christianity, or theism in general, then I'm sure there would be a huge uproar. So, please show some dignity on these forums and refrain from using religion, or lack thereof, as fodder for your arguments. Chances are, if you feel the need to shrink the font size to make a comment less noticeable, then it's probably not a good idea to be posting it in the first place.

Back to the topic at hand...

I was NOT saying he was WRONG. I was saying that his claims are not supported with evidence, which means they COULD BE wrong. "Could be" meaning that they COULD BE absolutely 100% correct, but no one can really know, because he has no evidence to show otherwise. I admitted I was wrong on part of my argument, because I was. You thoroughly demonstrated that through the source you posted, which is exactly my point. The OP didn't post any sources, he simply makes claims without any hard evidence to back up their legitimacy.

If you are familiar with anything regarding the concept of "proof" then you should realize that it is up to the person making the positive claim to provide evidence of his/her claims. I can poke all the holes I want to in his argument without a shred of evidence. I don't need evidence, because I'm not claiming anything other than he hasn't provided sufficient evidence. Basically, I'm using the fact that he has given no evidence, as evidence for why my argument holds clout.



Last edited by xJake; 05/10/2009 at 01:35 PM.
xJake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05/10/2009, 03:02 PM   #69
Insane Reefer
Registered Member
 
Insane Reefer's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Mid-Missouri
Posts: 1,680
LOL - whatever dude...
Sit up on your little high horse all you want.

You DO NOT sound like an undergrad in Biology (don't know the basic functions of the animals you supposedly specialize in), and I would recommend anyone reading your posts take it with a grain of salt - since you can't/won't debate, you have very little cred in my book.


__________________
-------------------------------------
'Ocean is more ancient than the mountains, and freighted with the memories and the dreams of Time.'

Current Tank Info: Oceanic Biocube 8
Insane Reefer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05/10/2009, 03:03 PM   #70
Freed
It's what it's
 
Freed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: 41 2' 45" N 85 8' 43" W
Posts: 7,757
Quote:
Originally posted by Freed
Don't fish ingest large amounts of water daily to balance their internal salt content as well as H2O content?



__________________
Freed

Current Tank Info: 180gal(1120 watts of MH/VHO light), 60gal "sump", Deltec 601 calcium reactor, Euro Reef CS8-3+ skimmer, 20 gallon QT
Freed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05/10/2009, 03:21 PM   #71
Aquarist007
Registered Member
 
Aquarist007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Hamilton, Canada
Posts: 28,272
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally posted by Freed
I agree with you Freed---and would think that is how they ingest most things you dissolve in the water for them. Hopfully someone will clear this up for us


__________________
I prefer my substrates stirred but not shaken

Current Tank Info: 150gal long mixed reef, 90gal sump, 60 gal refugium with 200 lbs live rock
Aquarist007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05/10/2009, 03:26 PM   #72
Freed
It's what it's
 
Freed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: 41 2' 45" N 85 8' 43" W
Posts: 7,757
Yes, not discounting that meds can be absorbed thru the skin but would think a huge % of the meds would be ingested just as they are in a human or a pig or... thru the mouth. Some meds are topical and would be absorbed thru the skin on other animals because that is what would be intended but to suggest that these meds would be solely Rx for absorption thru the skin would be less than efficient.


__________________
Freed

Current Tank Info: 180gal(1120 watts of MH/VHO light), 60gal "sump", Deltec 601 calcium reactor, Euro Reef CS8-3+ skimmer, 20 gallon QT
Freed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05/10/2009, 03:38 PM   #73
laverda
Registered Member
 
laverda's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Anaheim, CA
Posts: 5,879
Jake
Quote:
Basically, I feed w/e is available in our lab or w/e live food culture I have ready to feed out.
Just because you feed whatever is handy into the tanks does not make it right for the fish!

I am not an expert on fish nutrition, but know people who are. Many people including fish nutritionists do not feel blanched land vegetables have any place in a marine environment and are nutritionally all but empty. Clearly there are elements that get depleted from the water that fish need. Even human doctors still argue over what the human body needs nutritionally. To think we get all the proper vitamins we need just by eating properly is unrealistic. What is eating properly? Some people feel you should not eat meat, others feel you should limit carbs, others food low in fat. Who is to say we all need the same foods to make us healthy and happy? I do not think Fish are any different. To think our class boxes provide everything needed for the health of our fish that the ocean does is just unrealistic!


__________________
240G mixed reef, 29G SPS/LPS clam tank, 50G mixed reef

Current Tank Info: 240g reef with light mover, 29g Cardiff, 50g cube
laverda is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05/10/2009, 03:54 PM   #74
Aquarist007
Registered Member
 
Aquarist007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Hamilton, Canada
Posts: 28,272
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally posted by Freed
Yes, not discounting that meds can be absorbed thru the skin but would think a huge % of the meds would be ingested just as they are in a human or a pig or... thru the mouth. Some meds are topical and would be absorbed thru the skin on other animals because that is what would be intended but to suggest that these meds would be solely Rx for absorption thru the skin would be less than efficient.
I just read through the article that Insane Reefer posted above.
There was mention a number of times that ionic substances like calcium were absorbed in the mouth and through the gills--even the fins.
However when it came to vitamins there was no mention on how they are absorbed other then from the food.
I have not as a habit soaked my food in vitamens --rather added them directly to the tank once a week using Vita-Chem.

I am curious in the light of what Jake has brought up if this is indeed a useful practise or not.


__________________
I prefer my substrates stirred but not shaken

Current Tank Info: 150gal long mixed reef, 90gal sump, 60 gal refugium with 200 lbs live rock
Aquarist007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05/10/2009, 04:10 PM   #75
xJake
Registered Member
 
xJake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,385
Quote:
Originally posted by Insane Reefer
LOL - whatever dude...
Sit up on your little high horse all you want.

You DO NOT sound like an undergrad in Biology (don't know the basic functions of the animals you supposedly specialize in), and I would recommend anyone reading your posts take it with a grain of salt - since you can't/won't debate, you have very little cred in my book.
Again, your hostility is unwelcome, and entirely uncalled for. I'm not trying to get into personal attacks, as I have repeatedly stated. I never said that I specialized in fish biology, in fact, my concentration is in aquatic invertebrate biology. I have taken no ichthyology classes as of yet (ichthyology being the study of fishes; in case you didn't know), and I only know as much as I've learned as a hobbyist this respective field.

I'm extremely willing to debate, but I will not debate someone who does not seem to understand the difference between a debate and personal attacks. If not wanting to personally insult someone over an academic debate is "sitting on [a] high horse" then perhaps you should learn to ride the horse, because you simply haven't demonstrated any amount of respect towards myself or any others. That, sir, is a basic step in earning the respect and trust of others.

I was mistaken on one subject, and I even had the fortitude to admit that I was incorrect. I would say that that demonstrates how credible of a source I am if anything. I'm willing to yield when I realize I am mistaken.

So, in conclusion, I've gotten my point across, or at least I hope. Feeding vitamins and dosing trace elements to maintain fish health is all fine and dandy, but I still haven't seen any demonstrations of conclusive evidence that it is a requirement of captive husbandry. This holds especially true when you examine the nutritional content of the many of the foods I've listed. Some are better than others, but as long as one feeds a variety of these food to their fishes, then a healthy nutritional input can be achieved.

I suppose I should specify that when I say "I feed w/e is available..." it's not as if I simply pick at random for each fish, because obviously that would never achieve a nutritionally complete diet. I am more selective about what I feed to which fish, with respect to what their diet is in the wild. I'm simply trying to say that vitamin supplements, while potentially useful, are unnecessary as long as a varied and natural diet is maintained.

As for whether trace element dosing is vital to a fish's health, I'm still not convinced that the uptake of these minor elements is significant enough to prompt everyone to begin dosing seemingly random amounts of trace elements that are provided from commercially available supplements. From my experience, there is no necessity to do this as long as relatively regular water changes are performed with a high quality salt mix.


xJake 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 04:14 PM.


TapaTalk Enabled

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Powered by Searchlight © 2017 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