Stocking all at Once

[Azedenkae]

So in a different thread, there seems to be a bit of a consensus that regardless, livestock shouldn't be added all at once (or at least, in higher quantities) and this is somehow inherently bad.

I am generally in the 'do whatever works' camp, and can't really see a specific reason as to why it should be regarded as inherently bad. Of course, I may be missing something. Anyone have any reasons to offer as to why stocking larger numbers is inherently bad?

[bart2546]

Well my general understanding and agreed belief is that if you add too much at once the natural bacteria has not had the time or ability to build up it's army, so to speak, in order to handle all the new bio-load. So you run a higher risk of ammonia and detritus build up causing a chain reaction of bad bacteria and fish "poisons" so on and so forth. So that's my 2 cents and I'm sure others will chime in with varying mileage. But for me what's always worked was stocking at a slower to medium slow rate e.g. 1 or 2 fish plus a coral a month after initial cycle.

[pyithar]

too little time to grow adequate beneficial bacteria colony to handle the massive bioloads will result in fish swimming in ammonia.

[slief]

In this hobby you take it slow. Adding a bunch of fish at once in a newly cycled tank would be foolish. It can take a year or more for a tank to truly become established and just because your parameters look good doesn't necessarily mean that anything you put in the tank thrive.. If you rush things or put too many fish in at once, your success rate will be compromised. Especially with more sensitive fish in the first year.

[rovster]

Go for it! They do it on TV all the time

[Azedenkae]

So essentially, it's about the bacteria in the aquarium not being able to take the bioload, as opposed to anything specifically about the amount of livestock added then?

Because that's what I thought, in which case it's not an issue with stocking levels, rather it's an issue with whether or not an aquarium has a well-established level of bacteria already, yah?

[slief]

Originally Posted by Azedenkae

So essentially, it's about the bacteria in the aquarium not being able to take the bioload, as opposed to anything specifically about the amount of livestock added then?

Not exactly. Bacteria is a key part in the conversion of waste but good nitrate, po4, nitrite or ammonia numbers does't mean your tank is established in my opinion. It means it's cycled and the bacteria is keeping up the waste that is being produced or introduced. That is only one part of the equation. An established tank (IMO) means that you have an ecosystem that is producing life even if it's microscopic, copepods, etc. Food chains become established and instead of a synthetic environment, you have the makings of a mini eco system that not only will sustain life but it will support it. This in addition to having an established bacterial bed that can keep up with and adjust to waste production.

Sadly, many of the fish we acquire are wild caught and don't adjust well to the synthetic environment of a newly setup tank. Once where the only sources of food are frozen, dried or pellet form. It took me years to be able to keep certain Angels, Anthias or certain other fish with great success and I've never had chemistry or detectable nutrient issues beyond po4. I've owned many a tanks and that is something that I found to be true with pretty much every tank. Even the ones that are started with live rock and live sand.

Let me put it this way. The stocking practices you see on shows like Tanked rarely work out favorably for the fish. I'd never condone starting a tank off the way it's shown on TV. You are asking for a high casualty rate.

[pyithar]

yah, that's my understanding. but there're also other benefits in stocking slow;
-the water parameters will be more stable as the tank "gets older"
-the keeper will also be more experienced
-quarantining fewer fish will be easier
and i believe there'll be many more.

[firemedix911]

Don't do it. It doesn't work. Ask me how I know. My GF went nuts and showed up with a bunch of fish at the sme time. Slowly but surely they all died. It sucked. Every morning waking up knowing I was gonna pick up a dead fish. It broke my heart every time and I wanted to kill my gf. I made sure she felt really guilty too. Now she's the one that's saying don't buy another fish.

[gone fishin]

Slief made some very good points. I will just go with a practical side that it is easier for me to QT one or two fish at a time. That way I can ensure I have a disease free DT.

[Azedenkae]

@slief: I totally agree, but what does that have to do with fish stocking though? That's just about waiting for the right moment to add fish (or rather, when your tank is regarded as 'established'). Which, again, I totally agree with. But in the context of whether or not one can add fish all at once, or many of them at once?

@pyithar: Well, wouldn't water parameters taking long mean that one should simply wait for longer?

Same with experience.

I mean, you guys all have good points, but it seems more so about when to stock, not how much can be stocked.

The only thing that I can see make sense is quarantining fish. Which is fair, as it is always easier to deal with less organisms.

To be honest, the reason why I ask this question is because I already know the answer. @firemedix911, sorry for your loss. But it is not always the case, if you know what you are doing (and you should).

When I stocked my tank, I fully stocked it from the moment it finished cycling, with both corals and fish. Five fish in fact, and a bunch of corals that filled up the tank (it is a small tank).

They are doing fine, happy going about being awesome. The corals are great, and everything is coming out to play.

Moral of the story is, you guys are all right - to a certain degree. It is not 'you can't stock with a large amount of creatures at once' though, because that's not entirely correct. There are reasons behind it, be it an established ecosystem, established biological filtration media, stable water parameters or whatever else.

If they were all clearcut though, that would be fine - the reasons. But fact is the reasons are situational, and that's where it is. One needs to know what one can or can't do with one's particular tank, based on the situation at hand.

[Nina51]

Originally Posted by Azedenkae

When I stocked my tank, I fully stocked it from the moment it finished cycling, with both corals and fish. Five fish in fact, and a bunch of corals that filled up the tank (it is a small tank).

just curious...when you say small, how small? and what 5 fish did you stock it with?

[joshky]

There isn't a set number of denitrifying bacteria in a system to where you can wait X amount of time and then fully stock a tank. Denitrifying bacteria is self regulating based on your bioload, stocking slowly gives your tank a chance to catch up.

[Dustyboots]

Stocking a saltwater tank (or any aquarium) should be the same as considering any new pet for their family. Is it going to have adequate maintenance and time from its owner? Is it getting the care it deserves regarding tank mates, feeding, and housing? These are the questions any responsible person should ask themselves before having fish, coral, children....

[tc2007]

I think there are other factors.

- Are the fish taking a long journey or were they at the LFS or your quarantine for a while properly acclimated to packaged food?
- Are there enough hiding places?
- Is the tank size proportionally larger than the # of fish being added + the ones already there?
- Are the fish compatible with each other or some of them going to stress out the others?

Everytime I have added fish in a hurry and had them die, its because one or more of the above points were violated.

[Azedenkae]

@Nina51: A 36L, just Clowns and other stuff.

@joshky: Well... there IS a set number of denitrifying bacteria that can take on a particular amount of bioload, but I get what you mean. The thing is we (the average hobbyist) can't quantify it, nor is there a method to really do it, not with precision.

But it is exactly like you say, there's no set time. It all depends. And what matters is that the biological filtration system can deal with your bioload. But that's the thing! Dealing with fish or corals or food is the same for the bacteria, it doesn't care about the source of the bioload. So if you ghostfeed your tank or essentially feed your bacteria, then you can grow them. And if you feed them as much as you'd feed your fish later, it'd be pretty much the same.

Food is either consumed by livestock then excrement is consumed by bacteria, or it can be consumed by the bacteria.

@Dustyboots and tc2007: Thanks guys! You guys hit it right on the head! The important factor is not whether one is stocking all at once, or one at a time. It's about whether the tank (and you) are ready for the stock. If there are enough hiding places, if the fish are compatible, if you know you can feed all of them, if the filtration can deal with it, if you can keep up with the maintenance, and so on, then it doesn't matter.

One can stock one at a time and if the above isn't true, then they'd lose fish anyways. If the above is true, it doesn't matter either way.

[tc2007]

My goto LFS has a 150G DD cube that violates so many "rules" of RC. It probably will give snorvich a heart attack if he sees it

He has a large black tang, 3 firefish, couple of anthias, flame hawk, couple of cardinals, couple wrasses, goby, blennies, 2-3 clowns, small chevron tang, more than 20 corals LPS + SPS, leathers, branched live rock jammed packed into one tank. I am not saying he added all at once but everything is thriving in it and I am seeing that setup for at least 6+ months now. He has it for way before that. I think it all depends on how much time you spend on managing it. If you make it complex be prepared to add exponentially more time managing it.

[rustyjames]

[QUOTE=Azedenkae;23344284]

@joshky: Well... there IS a set number of denitrifying bacteria that can take on a particular amount of bioload, but I get what you mean. The thing is we (the average hobbyist) can't quantify it, nor is there a method to really do it, not with precision.

So if you ghostfeed your tank or essentially feed your bacteria, then you can grow them. And if you feed them as much as you'd feed your fish later, it'd be pretty much the same.

I'm sorry but ghost feeding a new tank like it's fully stocked seems counter intuitive. Not to mention causing nutrient problems down the road.

[Azedenkae]

[QUOTE=rustyjames;23344367]

Originally Posted by Azedenkae

@joshky: Well... there IS a set number of denitrifying bacteria that can take on a particular amount of bioload, but I get what you mean. The thing is we (the average hobbyist) can't quantify it, nor is there a method to really do it, not with precision.

So if you ghostfeed your tank or essentially feed your bacteria, then you can grow them. And if you feed them as much as you'd feed your fish later, it'd be pretty much the same.

I'm sorry but ghost feeding a new tank like it's fully stocked seems counter intuitive. Not to mention causing nutrient problems down the road.

Why would it be counter-intuitive. You want the bacteria load to adapt to the bioload. So instead of subjecting your fish and corals and stuff to elevated ANN whilst the bacteria load increases, you simply simply subject well, nothing (besides the bacteria) to ANN and stuff. Once the bacteria load has fully adapted to your full feeding regime, then you add the live stock in and bam! No need for further bacterial load adaptation.

I obviously prefer this method as it feels more ethical. Rather than putting your livestock through constant stress, they will enter a quality environment from the getgo. But hey, to each their own.

Note that by 'ghostfeeding', I don't mean the entire full feeding regime. I mean add the amount of as you plan, let the bacteria consume that, add the same amount again, wait and so on until they can consume that quickly enough.

Also, what do you mean nutrient problems later?

[joshky]

That sounds like a complete guessing game to me, but I guess it could technically be done. But I'm going to stick with (loosely) "you don't dose what you can't test for", since you can't physically test for denitrifying bacteria it's a crap shoot whether or not you're ready for all of your fish at once or not.

I disagree that it's unethical to slowly stock a tank after it's been fully cycled.

[Azedenkae]

Originally Posted by joshky

That sounds like a complete guessing game to me, but I guess it could technically be done. But I'm going to stick with (loosely) "you don't dose what you can't test for", since you can't physically test for denitrifying bacteria it's a crap shoot whether or not you're ready for all of your fish at once or not.

I disagree that it's unethical to slowly stock a tank after it's been fully cycled.

If you go back and read my posts, you can see that it can be tested for. How? Simple. Like I said, ghostfeed. If parameters rise then drop quickly enough, then obviously the bacterial load is ready! If not, well, keep growing it.

By the way, I never said that it is unethical to slowly stock a fully cycled tank. What I am saying though, is that my definition of a fully cycled tank is that it is ready for live stock from the getgo, not one that has to constantly adapt to new additions. If one has reached that state of fully cycled-ness, then alow or quick, add away!

[d2mini]

Just personal pref I guess, but I would never want to fully stock my tank from the start even if I could.
Where's the fun in that?!

[Mark9]

Originally Posted by firemedix911

My GF went nuts and showed up with a bunch of fish at the sme time. ...I made sure she felt really guilty too.

Ouch, a bit brutal.
She was just trying to help.

[joshky]

Originally Posted by Azedenkae

If you go back and read my posts, you can see that it can be tested for. How? Simple. Like I said, ghostfeed. If parameters rise then drop quickly enough, then obviously the bacterial load is ready! If not, well, keep growing it.

By the way, I never said that it is unethical to slowly stock a fully cycled tank. What I am saying though, is that my definition of a fully cycled tank is that it is ready for live stock from the getgo, not one that has to constantly adapt to new additions. If one has reached that state of fully cycled-ness, then alow or quick, add away!

That's not actually testing though, you're guessing what your final bioload will be.

and you said that you felt it was more ethical to stock this way, implying it's unethical to do it over a period of time. Maybe that's just me reading too far into it.

[Nina51]

Originally Posted by Azedenkae

@Nina51: A 36L, just Clowns and other stuff.

correct me if i'm wrong but i assume 2 clowns and 3 "other" fish?

getting away from the whole bacteria subject, a 36g tank is pretty small for adding 5 fish all at once just from the standpoint of stress for the fish. you throw 5 fish into a small tank like that and i would think you'd be asking for some serious aggression from the get-go. you'll either end up with beat up fish or fish that hide constantly to try to escape the terror. it just seems really unfair to the fish.

whenever i introduce a new fish, i always use an acclimation box. doesn't matter if it was the kole tang or the wrasses or anything else...they have all spent a few hours isolated in a corner of the dt until ALL of the other fish have had a chance to check them out, decide they aren't either a threat or something to terrorize, and only then is the new fish released.

this method has always given me plenty of time to do my research and run it by snorvich to make sure i am not making any mistakes as to compatibility. just my 2 cents.