I've been using that thing like crazy. My 16g is only 60% stocked. I was considering getting two more corys so they'd be more comfortable. With two more it would still only be 74%.

Like you, my 5 gallon hex is overstocked with one betta. I imagine that's due to less surface area. I like the hex but I wish it was long vs. high.

 

I did my 10g with three male bettas in it and it says it's only 61 percent stocked.. Haha, not that I will be adding anything....

 

I love this thing! thanks for posting it! I wish they took into account substrate and algae content too, though those variables might not be so accurate.

I am gonna keep using this thing.

My 20g long with an Aquaclear 20 filter and 3 Albino Corys, 3 Cardinal Tetras and 1 Male Betta makes me have:

Recommended temperature range: 75.2 - 80.6 F. [Display in Celsius]
Recommended pH range: 6 - 7.6.
Recommended hardness range: 5 - 15 dH.

You have plenty of aquarium filtration capacity.

Your aquarium filtration capacity for above selected species is 140%.
Recommended water change schedule: 15% per week.
Your aquarium stocking level is 47%.

~TPF

 

He said he is working on taking stuff like plants, algae, substrate into account but its hard to quantify stuff like that. Like I said its a work in progress but a great tool. Surface area is a big factor in stocking so thats why a 5 gal hex will be more stocked than a standard 5 gal

 

ahh I see. It is still even without that really informative though.

For the 55g I want to set up, All of the fish I mentioned above plus 4 more Bettas Would still be wayy under the the maximum capacity I could put in there if I had 2 20g Aquaclear filters. I could add three more cardinal tetra and albino corys to my community side. And if any of my future Bettas are tolerant add some companions into their section on the other side of the 55g too.

~TPF

 

Eep, I need a bigger filter on my 10g... but I'm afraid that it will blow Finn all over the place if I get a big one.

 

you can always get two small ones and buffer them

 

My 3 gallon with a Betta is 115% stocked...? :question:

 

Do you have anything else in with it? What filtration are you using?

Edit... You don't have a filter.(Yes I'm psychic ). I just put your specs in and got the same answer. I believe this calculator is calibrated for cycled tanks. Like I said its not 100% accurate but its a good start. I also don't like that it only says for you to do 11% weekly because on an uncycled 3 you have to do at least 1 100% change a week and probably should do more like 2 or 3 a week.

 

Correct - for this release, I did not look into the case when the user didn't select any filter. For 99.9% of the species, you need filters so I didn't really think about this case very hard before.

As for the stocking level, it all depends on the footprint of your tank. 3g tall tank doesn't have as much bioload room compare to 3g long.

 

Correct - for this release, I did not look into the case when the user didn't select any filter. For 99.9% of the species, you need filters so I didn't really think about this case very hard before.

As for the stocking level, it all depends on the footprint of your tank. 3g tall tank doesn't have as much bioload room compare to 3g long.

Thats why I posted this. I see so many people on here that say.. I have a 12 gallon hex and I want to put this, this, and this in there.. and I just think poor fish are going to be constantly bumping heads. People don't realize that its not the gallons its the horizontal space that determines your stocking level.

 

Yeah, my three gallon eclipse system 3 (has a filter) is 115% with just a betta... a very happy betta

 

Yeah, Eclipse 3g is a relatively tall tank compare to the standard 2.5g tank hence footprint-wise I don't think it gives you any more than 2.5g.

 

Hi guys,

I'm sure some of you are aware already, but I have been continuing with my weekly releases for AqAdvisor.

To those who are not familiar, this is the release note that went out yesterday:

What's new for 2010 04 18 build:

- Added Ctenochromis horei.
- Added Achara Catfish/Marbled Pim (Leiarius marmoratus).
- Added False Julii Cory (Corydoras trilineatus).
- Added Mono Sebae (Monodactylus sebae).
- Added Telmatochromis dhonti.
- Minimum tank size requirement for Neolamprologus Similis has been increased to 20x10.
- Marked all Otocinclus species as being compatible with Dwarf Puffer.
- Minimum tank size requirement for Flag Tetra has been increased to 20x10.
- Reassigned Rubberlip pleco as an alias to Rubbernose Pleco.
- Minimum tank size requirement for Otocinclus cocama has been increased to 20x10.
- Minimum tank size requirement for Von Rio Tetra has been increased to 20x10.
- Minimum tank size requirement for Neolamprologus Multifasciatus has been increased to 20x10.
- Minimum tank size requirement for Head and Tail Light Tetra has been increased to 20x10.
- Minimum tank size requirement for Hatchet has been increased to 20x10.
- Minimum tank size requirement for Harlequin Rasbora has been increased to 20x10.
- Minimum tank size requirement for Flame Tetra has been increased to 20x10.
- Minimum tank size requirement for Dwarf Pencilfish has been increased to 20x10.
- Minimum tank size requirement for Black Neon Tetra has been increased to 20x10.
- Minimum tank size requirement for Red Phantom Tetra has been increased to 20x10.
- Minimum tank size requirement for Neon Tetra has been increased to 20x10.
- Minimum tank size requirement for Mosquito Rasbora has been increased to 20x10.
- Minimum tank size requirement for Golden Dwarf Barb has been increased to 20x10.
- Minimum tank size requirement for Rasbora rubrodorsalis has been increased to 20x10.
- Minimum tank size requirement for Swift Rasbora has been increased to 20x10.
- Minimum tank size requirement for Panda Tetra has been increased to 20x10.
- Minimum tank size requirement for Emerald Eye Rasbora has been increased to 20x10.
- Minimum tank size requirement for Yasuhikotakia sidthimunki has been increased to 20x10.
- Minimum tank size requirement for Endler has been increased to 20x10.
- Minimum tank size requirement for Pygmy Cory has been increased to 20x10.
- Minimum tank size requirement for Dwarf Cory has been increased to 20x10.
- Minimum tank size requirement for Green Neon Tetra has been increased to 20x10.
- Minimum tank size requirement for Espei Rasbora has been increased to 20x10.
- Minimum tank size requirement for Ember Tetra has been increased to 20x10.
- Minimum tank size requirement for Dwarf Rasbora has been increased to 20x10.
- Minimum tank size requirement for Celestial Pearl Danio has been increased to 20x10.
- Minimum tank size requirement for Nana Rasbora has been increased to 20x10.
- Minimum tank size requirement for Microrasbora kubotai has been increased to 20x10.
- Minimum tank size requirement for Honey Blue Eye has been increased to 20x10.
- Minimum tank size requirement for Danio erythromicron has been increased to 20x10.
- Minimum tank size requirement for Dwarf Livebearer has been increased to 20x10.

- Fixed a bug: When only 1 kind of species are selected, territorial space calculation was not being reported correctly, hence did not report a warning when too many of the same species were present by themselves. This has been fixed.

- Added Hydor Prime 10/30 filters.
- Added All Pond Solutions EF series filters.
- Added Hagen Fluval G3/G6 filters.

- Total number of filters in DB has been increased to 303.
- Total number of tanks in DB has been increased to 83.
- Total number of species in DB has been increased to 869.

To access the application, please click on AqAdvisor site.

If you have any species that are missing in AqAdvisor DB, please let me know!!!

I have been working hard on the salt water version of AqAdvisor. Initially, it will be somewhat simple and will only feature few species at a time. Hopefully with some help, saltwater species DB will grow as well. I am hoping that the early version will see its light starting next Sunday! I'd like to focus on few species at a time and get the accuracy nailed earlier on. I will continue to develop the freshwater version though - features like support for plants and sumps are still planned.

As usual, if you have any suggestions or found some results that you don't agree with, please let me know!

 

aqadvisor, in my opinion, is a very one-dimensional application. It basically has about the same accuracy as silly rules like "one inch per gallon," but it pretends to provide a complicated calculation. Finally, the effect for filtration seems to be amplified far beyond reason and there don't seem to be as many options for other types of filtration (sponge, for example) as there ought to be. Why the calculator is "frozen" on a once-weekly water change schedule is beyond me, and why this isn't provided as a variable is puzzling. The amount of work someone wants to put into their aquarium is one of the utmost "inputs" to determining the stocking capacity of their aquarium.

BTW...your "minimum tank sizes" happen to disagree with some highly reputable and renowned authors! Not to mention, some of the best fishkeepers in the world as well! I would go so far as to classify the "minimums" on your calculator as capricious and random, at best.

Your calculator should present the reality of the situation, such as the range of capacities and the different variables for each equation. For example, it should present a calculation for allowable fish under a given water surface area which takes into account various methods of improved oxygenation, with a SECOND calculated estimate of maximum biological filtration capacity, and a statement that the "calculations" are designed to be SUPER conservative.

In essence, for a "capacity calculator" to be anywhere near as authoritative and precise as yours pretends to be, its answers would have to be a lot less specific. Specificity and fishkeeping are pretty much at odds with one another.

 

Before responding to your feedback, I want to say that I do appreciate all feedback, so please don't take this the wrong way. I am going to see if I can learn anything from this.

aqadvisor, in my opinion, is a very one-dimensional application. It basically has about the same accuracy as silly rules like "one inch per gallon," but it pretends to provide a complicated calculation.

I can comfortably tell you this is incorrect. One inch per gallon is something I can implement in 5 mins. Its one formula calculation. It doesn't require hundreds of formula and on top of that a large DB to handle all the exception cases. I am curious why are you under this impression?

Finally, the effect for filtration seems to be amplified far beyond reason and there don't seem to be as many options for other types of filtration (sponge, for example) as there ought to be.

Actually some of them on the list are sponge filters. The list in the app contains power filters, canisters and sponge filters. I will be looking at sumps in the future but that's another story. When you say "amplified far beyond reason", are you saying it is too generous or too stingy when it comes to filtration capacity?

Why the calculator is "frozen" on a once-weekly water change schedule is beyond me, and why this isn't provided as a variable is puzzling.

That's actually a good suggestion. Someone else also suggested something of a similar nature, coming from a different angle - some species like smaller water changes more frequently.

The reason it has only one weekly change routine (which actually splits into two if it reaches to certain % level hence I sort-of tried to handle this concern in an easier way) is because the calculator (just like 99% of the software in the world) is a work-in-progress. When was the last time you used a software that didn't feature a new version with more features? Do you remember Windows 1.0? How about Word Perfect 1.0? Lotus 123 v1.0? Think of this the same way. It is impossible to add all features everyone want in the world in v1.0. As I mentioned, this is a good feature to add eventually.

The amount of work someone wants to put into their aquarium is one of the utmost "inputs" to determining the stocking capacity of their aquarium.

Yes, but amount of work will not overcome certain restrictions that people should know before implementing the plan. No matter how much work you do, you can't raise a clown loach in a 10g. No matter what you do, you can't raise Frontosa with smaller mbuna species. Common pleco in a 15g tank? There are many many examples like this, but unfortunately many new fish keepers still start off this way without receiving any warnings from anyone. Obviously, AqAdvisor will report these warnings.

And as I mention constantly, if you do your maintenance, over 100% is perfectly fine. My mbuna tank is 130% as per AqAdvisor.

BTW...your "minimum tank sizes" happen to disagree with some highly reputable and renowned authors! Not to mention, some of the best fishkeepers in the world as well! I would go so far as to classify the "minimums" on your calculator as capricious and random, at best.

Then you are saying all profile sites on the net and suggestions on the forum are random at best. Also keep in mind that significant amount of info used in AqAdvisor comes from everyday forum posts, recommended by experienced keepers. I started off with data in those sites, then I "fine tune" them. When I say this, that means someone with experience comes along and give me a data that may not match what's on the net but are indeed true. I can count hundreds of cases like this already. I am going to admit that in some cases, this information simply isn't there. In those cases, I take similar species and use their data.

Also, please give me examples of when it reports it wrong. At least I have a chance to fix them if they are indeed true. Your claim is rather general.

Your calculator should present the reality of the situation, such as the range of capacities and the different variables for each equation. For example, it should present a calculation for allowable fish under a given water surface area which takes into account various methods of improved oxygenation,

It does work on the surface area level. But you are correct, I don't provide a way to improve oxygen levels. I am reluctant because if they artificially increase the oxygen levels and loose power for an hour or two, you could be looking at a disaster in your hand. I can always provide this as an option, but I really don't want people to add more fish by just adding an airstone. This is my opinion obviously.

with a SECOND calculated estimate of maximum biological filtration capacity, and a statement that the "calculations" are designed to be SUPER conservative.

Actually it is NOT super conservative. Why am I getting feedback on both sides that it is too conservative and too aggressive on similar setups from different sources? That's because people's perception on "working stocking level" is a range. Yours obviously is more on the aggressive side than others. I admit I am little more on the conservative side but not at extreme levels. I can assure you, I get many "complaints" that the app is too aggressive as well.

In essence, for a "capacity calculator" to be anywhere near as authoritative and precise as yours pretends to be, its answers would have to be a lot less specific. Specificity and fishkeeping are pretty much at odds with one another.

I respectfully disagree with you. As I mentioned, a working stocking level is a range. I happen to select one line within that range. Others with their own lines within this range will claim AqAdvisor is wrong because it does not match their lines. I'm sure both lines will work ok with appropriate amount of maintenance.

It is easy to say that since you saw an example where it din't report the correct answer, hence the app is garbage. But what about the other 90% of the time when it is correct? Also, this % is improving since the knowledge DB is not standing still. Personally when I started this hobby 8 years ago, if someone was building a project such as this, I would gladly help out. Once again, this is my own opinion, of course.

 

Alright...let me come right out and apologize for emoting on you a bit. You didn't deserve that. Your calculator is free, and your intent is to help people (mostly newbies). It was wrong of me to come at you like you're peddling snake oil. In fact, the source of my frustration is really with the people who are treating your application as though it is the newest "scripture" in fishkeeping.

Now, in terms of the comment regarding filtration...what I meant was that you list a specific type of sponge filter and don't really have an option for selecting it by surface area of the sponge. In essence, this is the part that matters in a sponge, which is a very basic implement. Many of us use homemade sponge filters and the "hydro" filters aren't very forthcoming about some of their basic specs. However, if you have some "typical" dimensions available for generic sponges, it can usefully calculate filtration for us! I have a HUGE sponge that Hydro WISHES it could match with their biggest filter, with about as much surface area (thanks to the design) as 2 of their biggest models (rated for 125-gallon aquariums) put together. I use it in smaller aquariums, and I can tell you right now that their listed "flow rates" are complete puffery! But the gph on a sponge filter is actually less important than it would be on an external, canister, or even an internal filter. The kind of flow rate Hydro advertises would make a sponge filter completely unacceptable for the typical use of a sponge! What matters most is surface area for biological filtration.

Yes, I would really appreciate if the calculator could treat water changing as a variable. I can see why it is a usable outcome, but maybe if I can plug in to the calculator that my schedule is to provide 3 or 4 water changes per week, it can give me a "minimum" amount of water to change each time. Ideally, if I provide a frequency AND amount for water change regimen, it would calculate into the final capacity as a similar function of filtration/bioload reduction/oxygenation, and might even make recommendations in terms of greater volume changed etc. However, I do realize that this would be an EXTREMELY complicated function (which becomes somewhat self-dependent in its own right, perhaps only capable of resulting in the dreaded ol' "E" from our calculators of yesterday!) and would be incredibly difficult, if not impossible, to implement. Perhaps a sort-of "canned statement" added to the calculator to the effect that 'more frequent/voluminous water changes can have a significant effect on the calculations' would be about all one could really expect.

One immediate example of a species whose "minimums" aren't quite correct is the swordtails. Granted, the consensus on the net is actually wrong about this as well, based on a misquoted early "rule" that you wanted to keep swordtails in groups of at least TEN (a rule that has since been roundly debunked, though the capacity needed for 10 swords lives on!). But I'll go ahead and cite Kathleen Wood, a successul keeper and author, who has demonstrated success in care, long-term housing, community inclusion, and breeding of swordtails in standard-dimension aquariums HALF the size your site lists as the "minimum" for a breeding trio. She has even recommended them to newbies as a good use of 10-gallon aquariums, and I haven't heard about any complaints that it was creating failure. Some sites (fishlore.com) do reflect this as a "more correct" minimum. One reason that the minimum size of an aquarium for a swordtail is often greatly overstated is the effect that their tail has on the overall length of the fish. Up to half of a swordtail is tail! I know Kathleen's been successful with them in 10 gallons for a great deal of time. I've experienced a lot of success with them in a 15-gallon standard, and I just recently became aware that even Sea World regularly keeps them in a 15 gallon (why Sea World is keeping swordtails, I don't know, but I digress)! This is just the example I can most readily recall, as I've played with various mixtures of fish in your calculator since it was brought up to me as the "best thing since sliced bread". Again, my frustration is more with the fact that people treat it as definitive rather than as the "guide" that you clearly intended it to be. In terms of the guidance you provide, however, I would place printed publication in a higher position of authority than the internet. A web page doesn't usually check an author's resume as closely as a well-respected publisher might...for example, aqua-fish.net suggests that swordtails require 200 liters (that's 53 gallons!!!!!!) of aquarium for a quartet. Equally disturbing is that the range for maximum TL among web sites ranges from 2-5 inches...that's a 150% margin for error! :shock:

That's actually a pretty good reason for remaining reluctant to calculate for oxygenation. Perhaps, again, a mere "canned answer" that oxygenation will improve conditions/capacity, along with a proviso regarding the potential disaster from a loss of power, is all one can hope for.

OK...you've got me on the "aggressive stocking" issue. I AM known to pack more fish (comfortably, safely, and properly I must add!) into an aquarium than your average bear! :lol:

Finally, I will reiterate that you are right. I should help you, rather than criticize. You're trying to do a helpful thing, and it only makes sense you'd want it to be as useful as possible. Again, the true source of my frustration is with the way people are treating it (as "gospel") and forgetting that trial-and-error is a time honored facet of fishkeeping. I chastise myself for taking it out on you for merely trying to be helpful.

 

Alright...let me come right out and apologize for emoting on you a bit. You didn't deserve that. Your calculator is free, and your intent is to help people (mostly newbies). It was wrong of me to come at you like you're peddling snake oil. In fact, the source of my frustration is really with the people who are treating your application as though it is the newest "scripture" in fishkeeping.

That's a fair statement and I have seen this before. So I understand where you are coming from.

Now, in terms of the comment regarding filtration...what I meant was that you list a specific type of sponge filter and don't really have an option for selecting it by surface area of the sponge. In essence, this is the part that matters in a sponge, which is a very basic implement. Many of us use homemade sponge filters and the "hydro" filters aren't very forthcoming about some of their basic specs. However, if you have some "typical" dimensions available for generic sponges, it can usefully calculate filtration for us! I have a HUGE sponge that Hydro WISHES it could match with their biggest filter, with about as much surface area (thanks to the design) as 2 of their biggest models (rated for 125-gallon aquariums) put together. I use it in smaller aquariums, and I can tell you right now that their listed "flow rates" are complete puffery! But the gph on a sponge filter is actually less important than it would be on an external, canister, or even an internal filter. The kind of flow rate Hydro advertises would make a sponge filter completely unacceptable for the typical use of a sponge! What matters most is surface area for biological filtration.

Agreed. This is why I stuck to relatively well known brands for sponge filters. At least those are known quantities. I also use DIY sponge filters which I cannot enter in AqAdvisor. The problem (as you mentioned) is not only that I need to know the air pump capacity but the surface area and what type of sponge being used. Not sure if I can capture this in a software. Size of holes? Weight of the sponge? Not sure if any of that will work. Hence I have not provided a way to do this - I am open to suggestions.

Yes, I would really appreciate if the calculator could treat water changing as a variable. I can see why it is a usable outcome, but maybe if I can plug in to the calculator that my schedule is to provide 3 or 4 water changes per week, it can give me a "minimum" amount of water to change each time. Ideally, if I provide a frequency AND amount for water change regimen, it would calculate into the final capacity as a similar function of filtration/bioload reduction/oxygenation, and might even make recommendations in terms of greater volume changed etc. However, I do realize that this would be an EXTREMELY complicated function (which becomes somewhat self-dependent in its own right, perhaps only capable of resulting in the dreaded ol' "E" from our calculators of yesterday!) and would be incredibly difficult, if not impossible, to implement. Perhaps a sort-of "canned statement" added to the calculator to the effect that 'more frequent/voluminous water changes can have a significant effect on the calculations' would be about all one could really expect.

Let me see if I got this right. So are you asking for a feature where a user can specify his/her own frequency of water changes and let AqAdvisor calculate the volume for each water change?

And the other component, I believe, is that you want to see stocking level become more generous when user is willing to do more water changes, correct? This is as if water changes become part of filtration capacity?

One immediate example of a species whose "minimums" aren't quite correct is the swordtails. Granted, the consensus on the net is actually wrong about this as well, based on a misquoted early "rule" that you wanted to keep swordtails in groups of at least TEN (a rule that has since been roundly debunked, though the capacity needed for 10 swords lives on!).

Did my app report that you need to keep 10 swordtales as a minimum? That needs to be fixed if that is what is being reported.

EDIT: May be not. The app doesn't report this so you must mean that you need to keep 10 of them? This is a news to me if that is the case.

But I'll go ahead and cite Kathleen Wood, a successul keeper and author, who has demonstrated success in care, long-term housing, community inclusion, and breeding of swordtails in standard-dimension aquariums HALF the size your site lists as the "minimum" for a breeding trio. She has even recommended them to newbies as a good use of 10-gallon aquariums, and I haven't heard about any complaints that it was creating failure. Some sites (fishlore.com) do reflect this as a "more correct" minimum. One reason that the minimum size of an aquarium for a swordtail is often greatly overstated is the effect that their tail has on the overall length of the fish. Up to half of a swordtail is tail! I know Kathleen's been successful with them in 10 gallons for a great deal of time. I've experienced a lot of success with them in a 15-gallon standard, and I just recently became aware that even Sea World regularly keeps them in a 15 gallon (why Sea World is keeping swordtails, I don't know, but I digress)!

That's a nice story. As I mentioned before, I do listen to users and correct DB as I go along and this is a perfect example where people's experience influences the knowledge DB. Just tried it in AqAdvisor - 1 male and 2 females makes up a 89% bioload so I assume that is ok. So I only need to worry about minimum tank size.

This is just the example I can most readily recall, as I've played with various mixtures of fish in your calculator since it was brought up to me as the "best thing since sliced bread". Again, my frustration is more with the fact that people treat it as definitive rather than as the "guide" that you clearly intended it to be. In terms of the guidance you provide, however, I would place printed publication in a higher position of authority than the internet. A web page doesn't usually check an author's resume as closely as a well-respected publisher might...for example, aqua-fish.net suggests that swordtails require 200 liters (that's 53 gallons!!!!!!) of aquarium for a quartet. Equally disturbing is that the range for maximum TL among web sites ranges from 2-5 inches...that's a 150% margin for error! :shock:

I agree. This is one of the reason why I created this tool. Most profile site data are static - they never get updated. So if the initial data were wrong, they are wrong forever. But AqAdvisor is very dynamic. I spend about 20 hours per week on this app, and about half of that time is being spent on improving the accuracy rather than implementing new features. I intend to continue for the next foreseeable future.

OK...you've got me on the "aggressive stocking" issue. I AM known to pack more fish (comfortably, safely, and properly I must add!) into an aquarium than your average bear! :lol:

Oh yes. And I've had users complain to me that their tanks are 300% stocked and did fine for years. I believe them. If I ask them if that is what they would suggest to beginners, they usually say 'no'. So the moral of the story is that experts can push the envelop further than beginners. I sometimes do too. But for beginners, I believe they should start more conservatively.

Finally, I will reiterate that you are right. I should help you, rather than criticize. You're trying to do a helpful thing, and it only makes sense you'd want it to be as useful as possible. Again, the true source of my frustration is with the way people are treating it (as "gospel") and forgetting that trial-and-error is a time honored facet of fishkeeping. I chastise myself for taking it out on you for merely trying to be helpful.

I understand what you mean 100%. Had the very same discussion at different places multiple times now so this is not new to me. Its an argument between two (relatively) experienced users who both care about fish and are interested in educating new keepers. Each time, the conclusion was to make people aware that use this app as a guideline, not a bible. It is a useful tool to quickly narrow down the possibilities, but always check on their forums with their final candidate stocking plans. On the positive side, I've seen many novice keepers who come up with all kind of interesting stocking plans that are not common but doable, as confirmed by the experts on the forums. This was one of the things I hoped the app would achieve.

 

A new version of AqAdvisor has been released with significant updates. One of the update is the change to the message suggested by Mister Sparkle.

 

Very cool!

 

I am getting some "positive" comment on that message you suggested that I added into the app, by the way. Now the experienced guys are taking it as a challenge rather than just flat out saying your tool is wrong. I think the message is working.

 

I'm glad to hear that. I've found myself using the tool a lot more, trying to come up with "interesting" scenarios...and also to see where I might be able to give you some more constructive input.

 

That's excellent and appreciated.

 

Amazing app! It seems like you've spent a LOT of time and effort in this!! I think it's an excellent way to start a tank!

 

Thanks.

For this weekend's update, I am focusing on the betta compatibility - more like for the male betta spleden since it is so popular but it does not follow anything like any other species of similar physical profile. I'm sure I won't get it right the first time but with some feedback, hopefully I will get it exactly right eventually. Too many beginners come up with an incredible mix of betta plus something else. :shock:

 

The hardest part about it is that betta's can be so variable! One betta might be fine with certain other species, while another one is completely unmanageable. Some male bettas just don't work with ANY kind of neighbors.

 

I do have another suggestion, which is to lower the "minimum" number of corys in an aquarium to 3. While more than 3 is always preferable, and I in fact feel that they act most natural in groups of at least 5, I do believe that 3 is the most "standard" minimum cited in literature.

 

Haha. I actually had a debate on this topic with many people already. I started with 3, then 5 then eventually settled with 4. Each person has a good reason behind why it should be the number they claim. I'm not sure if I want to get into the same argument again by switching back to 3... :twisted:

 

What's new for 2010 05 09 build:

- This release is really a special edition for Betta (Splenden)! They are a common species for fish keepers but with peculiar compatibility requirement so I want to make sure compatibility is accurately addressed. Basically it is an attempt to address compatibility of betta vs everything else (well, at least a shot at it, I'm sure it will need further adjustments). Please see the long message at the bottom of this post for the details and let me know if any of it sounds inaccurate! Apology in advance for the length of this post.
- Added Bearded/Checkerboard/Filigree Cory (Scleromystax barbatus).
- Added Lacerda Cory C015 (Scleromystax lacerdai C015).
- Added a note to male Betta that they can become stressful under presence of too many shoaling species around it in a small tank.
- Added Hi Fin Peppered Cory (Scleromystax macropterus).
- Added Scleromystax prionotos.
- Size of Dwarf Petricola has been adjusted down to 3.5 inches.
- Congo Tetra has been marked as a fin nipper.
- Tiger Loach has been marked as a fin nipper.
- Aggression for Yoyo Loach has been increased.
- Dwarf Loach has been marked as a fin nipper.
- Yoyo Loach has been marked as fin nipper.
- Bioload factors for larger cories have been increased slightly.

- Total number of species in DB has been increased to 879.

To access the application, please click on AqAdvisor site.

If you have any freshwater species that are missing in AqAdvisor DB, please let me know!!! If you disagree with any of the results produced by AqAdvisor, please let me know that too.

If you want to check out the details of the most recent saltwater release (build 2010 05 07), please check out the following thread.

-----
"A note on betta compatibility. For the male betta (splenden only), I went through a great deal of trouble to identify compatible species in greater depth.
At a higher level, I have created the following groups:
- ""Corydoras""
- ""Large Snail""
- ""Small Peaceful Loach""
- ""Small Peaceful Shoaling""
(I may need to create more groups in the future)
I've marked Betta male as being incompatible (will recommend user to do further research) with EVERYTHING except these groups. ""Corydoras"" group is self explaning - it contains those species. ""Large Snail"" group contains all snails that are larger than 0.5 inches. Ramshorn is considered small and there are reports that Betta consumes them. ""Small Peaceful Loach"" group contains currently only one family of species - Kuhli Loach family. ""Small Peaceful Shoaling"" group currently contains the following species listed below. They are basically anything that shoals in the mid/upper level, peaceful, under 3 inches, and not fin nippers. If anything here shouldn't belong in this group, PLEASE LET ME KNOW (especially the fin nippers)."

Species listed under "Small Peaceful Shoaling" group:

- Allens Rainbowfish
- Australian Smelt
- Axelrods Rainbowfish
- Black Neon Tetra
- Blackline Rasbora
- Bleeding Heart Tetra
- Blind Cave Tetra
- Bloodfin Tetra
- Blue Back Blue Eye
- Blue Emperor Tetra
- Cairns Rainbowfish
- Cardinal Tetra
- Celebes Halfbeak
- Celebes Rainbowfish
- Celestial Pearl Danio
- Checkered Barb
- Cherry Barb
- Cherry Spot Rasbora
- Clown Killifish
- Danio erythromicron
- Delicate Blue Eye
- Diamond Tetra
- Dwarf Pencilfish
- Dwarf Rainbowfish
- Dwarf Rasbora
- Ember Tetra
- Emerald Eye Rasbora
- Emperor Tetra
- Espei Rasbora
- Five Banded Barb
- Flag Tetra
- Flame Tetra
- Fly River Rainbowfish
- Flyspeck Hardyhead
- Forktail Rainbowfish
- Furcata Rainbowfish
- Galaxy Rasbora
- Gardneri Killifish
- Garnet Tetra
- Glass Bloodfin Tetra
- Glowlight Danio
- Glowlight Tetra
- Gold Barb
- Gold Tetra
- Golden Barb
- Golden Dwarf Barb
- Golden Pencilfish
- Green Barb
- Green Fire Tetra
- Green Neon Tetra
- Harlequin Rasbora
- Hatchet
- Head and Tail Light Tetra
- Honey Blue Eye
- Kamaka Rainbowfish
- Kamaka Rainbowfish
- Kiunga Blue Eye
- Lake Eacham Rainbowfish
- Lake Mbuta Rainbowfish
- Lampeye Killifish
- Lemon Tetra
- Marble Hatchet
- Melon Barb
- Microrasbora kubotai
- Misool Rainbowfish
- Mosquito Rasbora
- Nana Rasbora
- Neon Dwarf Rainbowfish
- Neon Tetra
- Odessa Barb
- Ornate Rainbowfish
- Ornate Tetra
- Pacific Blue Eye
- Panda Tetra
- Pearl Danio
- Platinum Hatchet
- Pygmy Rainbowfish
- Red Dwarf Rasbora
- Red Phantom Tetra
- Redline Rasbora
- Redstripe Rasbora
- Redtail Rasbora
- Redtail Splitfin
- Rose Danio
- Rosy Red Minnow
- Rosy Tetra
- Ruby Barb
- Rummynose Rasbora
- Rummynose Tetra
- Sawbwa Barb
- Spotted Blue Eye
- Spotted Rainbowfish
- Swift Rasbora
- Tami River Rainbowfish
- Threadfin RainbowFish
- Tiger Danio
- White Cloud Mountain Minnow
- Zebra Danio

Species currently listed under "Small Pleco" group: (any pleco under 5 inches)
- Albino Bristlenose Pleco
- Bristlenose Pleco
- Chocolate Zebra Pleco L270
- Clown Pleco
- Flash Pleco
- Goby Pleco
- Golden Bristlenose Pleco
- King Tiger Pleco
- Mega Clown Pleco L340
- Pitbull Pleco
- Rubberlip Pleco
- Rubbernose Pleco
- Spotted Rubberlip Pleco L187a
- Starlight Bristlenose Pleco L183
- Zebra Pleco

In summary, it would be greately helpful if you could point out for me:
- If you find species from the above list that are not safe with Betta splenden with long fins.
- Point out species that are not talked about in this post but safe with Betta splenden. I have not covered any non-shoaling species so I must have missed something there. So far, I have the following in the list: (African Dwarf Frog, Oto).

Thank you!

 

Wow, REALLY? Guppies? Fascinating! In my experience, that's the EASIEST one! But, then again, you just never know until it's been put out there among MANY experienced keepers!

 

I guess we all live and learn. ;-)

 

yeah Guppies would be a No No, I stupidly put 6 guppies in with my Betta, he was pretty stressed at them, flaring, biting them, eventually he stopped attacking them, or so I thought, I returned a couple of hours later, he killed 3 guppies. Poor guppies....

 

Ok, so this release has addressed some further feedback about last "betta release".

 

What's new for 2010 05 17 build:

- Added Gold Laser Cory Cw010.
- Added Leopard Frog Pleco (Peckoltia sp. L134).
- Added Banded Gourami (Colisa fasciata).
- Added Betta smaragdina.
- Added Long-Finned African Tetra (Alestes longipinnis).
- Added Bluefin Notho Killifish (Nothobranchius rachovii Beira 98).
- Added Exochochromis anagenys.
- Added Opaline Gourami as an alias to Blue Gourami.
- Added Silver Flying Fox (Crossocheilus reticulatus).
- Gold Barb has been taken out from the "small peaceful shoaling" group.
- Platy has been marked as safe with male Betta splendens.
- Molly has been marked as safe with male Betta splendens.
- Swordtale has been marked as safe with male Betta splendens.
- Ameca splendens has been marked as safe with male Betta splendens.
- Added more notes to the male Betta splenden about unexpected potential aggression.
- Oscar has been marked as a jumper.
- All arowana species have been marked as jumpers.
- Scleromystax barbatus has been updated to be compatible with temperature up to 24.

- Added Atman (Amtop) AT-3388 1200L filter.

- Added 125L Fluval Roma tank dimension.
- Added 90L Fluval Roma tank dimension.
- Added 200L Fluval Roma tank dimension.
- Added 240L Fluval Roma tank dimension.

- Total number of species in DB has been increased to 893.
- Total number of tanks in DB has been increased to 88.
- Total number of filters in DB has been increased to 305.

To access the application, please click on AqAdvisor site.

If you have any freshwater species that are missing in AqAdvisor DB, please let me know!!! If you disagree with any of the results produced by AqAdvisor, please let me know that too.

If you want to check out the details of the most recent saltwater release (build 2010 05 07), please check out the following thread.