Liquid VS strip tests

Jaysee

Everyone ALWAYS says that the liquid tests are better and more accurate than the test strips. Personally, I don't have experience with either as I do not test the water. Ever.

Here's my question....how accurate does the test really need to be in order to be effective??

I mean, if the test shows anything but 0, there's a problem. So what difference does it make if the result is 0.5 ppm vs 1 ppm? Sure it's twice as toxic, but you'll have to do a water change either way. I understand that someone might do a smaller water change with a lower concentration, but it seems to me that that is the only benefit of the liquid test. And IMO that's not much of a benefit since the vast majority of people have tanks that are small enough that a large water change is not an ordeal.

and how about reliability. So the margin of error might be greater....the result is the same - water change. Besides, anyone who is having issues with their tank should be doing large regular water changes ANYWAY, so again I don't see the benefit in knowing the exact concentration.

False positives. So what? You do a water change. The tank could probably use one anyway

And as with any testing instrument/method, the more you use it the better you get at using it.
 

cletus

I get what you're saying, but why do you not test your water?
 

Girlsbeforefish

I agree. All I look at when I test my water is if it is yellow for the ammonia test and blue for nitrite test. I don't use the color chart.
 

pirahnah3

The liquid is actually a more controled reaction, that aside, the liquid is only as accurate as the person using it.
 

GemstonePony

My test strips showed 0 nitrates in an underfiltered, not-planted, overstocked tank(pre-fishlore days) where few water changes were performed.. I would consider not registering readings a problem, but maybe that's just me...
 

Jaysee

I get what you're saying, but why do you not test your water?

Because I don't need to - the tanks are cycled.


Not registering nitrates is hardly a problem IMO. I hear people have trouble with the liquid nitrate test as well. I assume there were no issues with ammonia and nitrite readings or you would have mentioned it.
 

Disc61

Interesting, I use the liquids I guess more than any reason because that is all I've read.
but I like you Jaysee very seldom run a test if everything is doing well. if I see something different from normal that is usually when I test. right or wrong, and I guess maybe if I tested more often I could see a issue coming, not sure. seems to work for me.
 

GemstonePony

I assume there were no issues with ammonia and nitrite readings or you would have mentioned it.
I had no idea if there were any problems. during that time I only kept fish that were "hardy", like zebra danios, platies, and killifish, and would have tolerated it... They got sick a lot, though- myxobacteriosis, finrot, ich, velvet- you get the idea.. but ammonia, nitrites, and nitrates always tested 0.
 

Girlsbeforefish

I used strips when I first got into fish. Everything was zero. I used Mardel's test strips and API strips. The tank was just started too.
 

iadubber

I have a terrible time differenciating the colors on some of the API liquid tests. Same goes for strips. I always have to ask my wife what she thinks. Now that my cycle is ending I'm looking forward to not testing multiple times per day.
 

toosie

When I used strips, the major factors that affected their performance seemed to be if the lid was not properly snapped on and either air drying out the chemicals in them, or humidity being allowed into the container (was never sure which it was) prevented the strips from performing a chemical reaction. Double dipping into the container also affects their performance, because usually the first strip taken is done with dry hands, but if the colors bleed and the person testing is unsure of the actual reading, they will often dig in to pull another strip. Often the second trip into the container isn't with completely dry hands so then moisture gets trapped into the container and affects the test results next time down the road.

Bleeding from one test on the strip to another (for multiple test strips) does present a bit of a problem, and care does have to be taken to try to minimize the bleeding as much as possible so that you can read the final results.

So, if strips are used some care does need to be taken in order to keep them as accurate as possible.

1: Replace the lid ASAP after removing a test strip.
2: Be sure the lid is fully snapped on
3: Always use dry hands or a dry tool such as tweezers to remove the strips.
4: They can be expensive to use, but DO NOT try to re-use a previously used strip, even if only a protion of it was used the previous time. (Sounds silly but I have seen it done)
5: Store the container in a dry place.

Liquid for me is less pain in a lot of ways, and is ultimately cheaper to use, but I do agree with your line of thinking Jaysee. Trouble is trouble in a fish tank. The only difference maybe in how quickly you can expect your fish to get sick or possibly die due to the amount of trouble involved, and the best solution no matter what the trouble is, is a water change.
 

Everythingzen

I've never found any issue with the test strips, and don't really understand the majority dislike of them on here. If the instructions are followed precisely and the bottle is kept in a cool, dark place, then they are going to give you a correct reading. The strips will only react, I believe, if there is the thing you are testing for on there. I don't know of strip testing that is prone to numerous false positives. There might very well be, but I'm confident in the ability of strip tests to test for things. I've been a diabetic for 26 years, and strip testing for blood and ketones was the norm for many a year. It's obviously not comparable, but they were certainly accurate enough. A trace of glucose will alter the colour. Simple as that. A trace of ammonia will alter an API strip. I don't buy into the fear that the strips are utterly false and a waste of time, etc. I know I'm in the minority, but it doesn't really matter. And really, it's just an already cycled fish tank I'm testing; not looking for a cancer cure on a Petrie dish... Unfortunately.
 

sirdarksol

To answer the people who wonder why the test strips are disliked on the forum: There have been multiple cases over the years where a test strip has shown a significantly lower ppm of a toxin than was present in the water. Sometimes, there was even a false complete negative. The strips are not hard to use. You dip them in the water, you pull them out, you watch for the change. And yet, they repeatedly fail. I cannot attribute this to user failure in every instance.
Further, the liquid test kits are significantly cheaper in the long run.

Is it important to know if it's .25ppm ammonia, .5ppm ammonia, or 2.0ppm ammonia? Of course it is. At .25, you're doing a lot smaller water change than 2.0.

Lastly, though each aquarist can, of course, do what they feel works best for them, I would discourage people (especially those new to the hobby) from not testing simply because their tanks are cycled and they know how much water to change out to take care of normal nitrate production. I certainly test a lot less on my aquaria that have cycled, but I still spot test them, to catch if something has changed that is producing more nitrogen.
 

Aquarist

Good morning,

I have moved your thread from General Discussion to Test Kits section of the forum.

Personally I prefer the liquid test kits. They are much easier for me to read compared to paper test strips and also cheaper for me in the long run.

Ken
 

Jaysee

surely the test strips can differentiate between 0.25 ppm and 2 ppm. The margin of error cannot be that big. And, if you've got 2 ppm then you missed at least one water change. I don't thnk that most people determine how much water to change based on their test results, and the same goes for those suggesting water changes. It is my observation that people do/suggest arbitrary volumes of water changes, such as 30%, 50% or "massive".

Because I don't need to - the tanks are cycled.

I didn't explain myself well here. I never tested my water the first time around - when I got back into the hobby I learned about how and why things work. I developed a routine centered around large regular water changes and that is what I live by. Since the end result is having to do a water change, I didn't see a need to concern myself with any testing. Water changes and massive filtration setups are my keys to success.
 

soltarianknight

Yeah, I test my water once a month in my cycled tanks to insure that everythings running smoothley, I would NEVER suggest not testing your tank under any circumstance, that's simply not a good idea. Some times the local water may change, if I don't know this and say my PH decided to drop due to local water I will find out when I test and can correct the issue. I also like to know what might have killed my fish if one die, and to see if that fishes breakdown over night might have set off any ammonia levels. Test strips just tend to be not worth their money. After about a month they start becoming inaccurate. Exsposure to moisture in the air is all it takes. Its not worth something that may be inaccurate or may not be. Liquids when used properly are very much acurate, worth their money and have better detailed resaults. I typicaly run 3 of each test in a row to insure absolute accuracy, I used to do 5 test strips. In a cycled tank its also nice to know you nitrate amounts and how much builds up over a week, or what you average out. This is importent when stocking certain fish such as clown plecos who perfer a low nitrate count, or when adding plants to determine if fertilizer will be needed(high nitrates call for less ferts).
 

e_watson09

I hate test strips, simple as that.

At work we have to use them so I tested the water 3 times (same bottle of strips) and got 3 completely different readings on the SAME WATER SAMPLE. Weird huh? It was a 100% new bottle of strips and my hands were not wet when I grabbed the strips, I had separated the water into three separate baggies (all new fresh from the box).
 

btate617

Because I don't need to - .

Exactly. Although I am sure we are doing it wrong.
Do we dare mention unless your city water has chloramines in it you could do away with using water conditioners??

Is it important to know if it's .25ppm ammonia, .5ppm ammonia, or 2.0ppm ammonia? Of course it is. At .25, you're doing a lot smaller water change than 2.0.
.
surely the test strips can differentiate between 0.25 ppm and 2 ppm. The margin of error cannot be that big. And, if you've got 2 ppm then you missed at least one water change. I don't thnk that most people determine how much water to change based on their test results, and the same goes for those suggesting water changes. It is my observation that people do/suggest arbitrary volumes of water changes, such as 30%, 50% or "massive".

Perhaps if we stopped suggesting 10% water changes all together this wouldn't be as much of a concern ever. There seems to be some phobia against doing larger water changes which I just don't understand. It doesn't matter guys if you do a 50% water change and this shouldn't be considered massive, really it should be the minimum you are doing during your regular maintenance.
Clean water = Good.

Yeah, I test my water once a month in my cycled tanks to insure that everythings running smoothley, I would NEVER suggest not testing your tank under any circumstance, that's simply not a good idea. Some times the local water may change, if I don't know this and say my PH decided to drop due to local water I will find out when I test and can correct the issue. I also like to know what might have killed my fish if one die, and to see if that fishes breakdown over night might have set off any ammonia levels. This is importent when stocking certain fish such as clown plecos who perfer a low nitrate count,

I do not see the need for it if a proper schedule is set up and followed. Followed being the key, as most people do slack off on their water changes then are surprised when their readings tell them so.

I just have a question when you mention the local water and the ph drop for example.
If there is a drop, and lets face it the drop will not be be huge/massive, what exactly are you going to do about it. If it is water change day, you need to do a water change. So what if the water coming from your tap is different by a half point or really even a full point, what can you do at that point in time to fix it and procede with your water change.
I am just curious what you would do at that point to make adjustments is all?
This isn't questioning what you do, I am really curious what you would do if you did notice a slight difference in ph.

The ph thing is another thing I think people get really nervous over. They buy a fish from a store, in their city using the same water they use I might add, come home thinking oh boy the store ph is 7.1 and mine is 7.4 what to do what to do. Its ok people get the bag up to temp of your tanks and in they go.

I also like to know what might have killed my fish if one die, and to see if that fishes breakdown over night might have set off any ammonia levels.

When fish die they put off some ammonia, why not just do a 50% water change, isn't that what the testing is going to say to do? Or it possibly may say to do several smaller water changes.

This is importent when stocking certain fish such as clown plecos who perfer a low nitrate count

There really are no single fish or group of fish that prefer a low nitrate count.
They all would prefer that, from Guppies to Dovii.
All fish need the same things, food and clean water.

Brian
 

Jaysee

I think there are a lot of people out there that don't need to be testing their water, and I think you'd be surprised at how many don't. BUT, that's a decision people have to come to on their own - they have to have a level of comfort.

I tested the water 3 times (same bottle of strips) and got 3 completely different readings on the SAME WATER SAMPLE. Weird huh?

And what real difference did it make?


Brian, I think a lot of the phobias people have are a reflection of a lack of understanding about how things work. Some of it I can understand - not everyone is willing to take the same risks. But, the only way to really know where the line is is to cross it. Lets take nitrates as an example. "you have to keep nitrates under 20 ppm" - there's always at least one person touting this any time nitrates comes up. I'm sure my nitrates are significantly higher than that.

A dead and decomposing fish (assuming it's not a tank buster) ought to not register any ammonia. If it does, the filtration system is weak.

And as for knowing why fish die..... the overwhelming majority of the time, we have NO IDEA why fish die. We can speculate and attribute it to this or that, but the reality is we just don't know unless there is some obvious physical signs, like being covered with ich or fungus or something.
 

pirahnah3

I agree with the two of you, the only time I worry about testing things is when I'm working on fertlaizers for the plants (Ill soon be testing a lot switching from liquid to dry fertz) but this is a different testing than most people would think to do anyways as I am trying to measure uptake of the plants not the filtration.

I have actually taken and tested one sample of tank water with four diff methods.

The first two are test strips One from a local store, one from work, the third was the API kit (Yes shaken to heck and back) and the fourth is a peice of lab equipment that is calibrated on a regular basis and used for testing water and wastewater samples daily. It uses a chemical reaction with a dry powder. After seeing this I tossed all the strips that I had aquired from the LFS and other craigslist purchases.

Lab grade test strips got me a 20
Fish store strips said 100
Liquid dropper bottle said 15
Spectrophotometer (Lab equipment) gave me a 12.8
 

callichma

I don't test on a regular basis, but I do when the fish are acting strange or when I've made a big change like adding substrate. Then I mostly check pH and ammonia. If there's ammonia, I'll test for nitrite. The multI strips I used to use didn't test for ammonia.

When I add new fish, I always check the pH in the bag. Two of the stores I buy fish from have a pH in the mid 6's, and mine is mid 7's.
 

soltarianknight

If the city water has changed(youd be surprised how much it can) I use a slight buffer. Yes we can all go ahead and do big waterchanges(I do 50%) but its nice to know what your common nitrate is, still a importent factor. It can determine how much of a change you really need to do. I honestly don't see why you shouldnt test your water, but I see plenty of reasons why you should. So what about water hardness? Do you test that?? Very importent to know when stocking. Also, ph adjustment is importent when acclimating fish, PH shock is not a myth.
 

Jaysee

I don't test for anything. I don't even know my pH. IME it's not very important for stocking. It's not even a little important my water is probably average, whatever that means.
 

soltarianknight

Its extremely importent for stocking, show me proof it isnt. There are tons of sensitive fish we keep. Ottos,discus,chocolate gourami, wild betta, loaches, plecos. They all have their specifications.
 

GemstonePony

I don't test (don't use water-conditioners, either), but If you have a reason to test, like setting up a new tank from scratch and keeping an eye on the nitrogen cycle, or working with planted tanks and needing to know your level of minerals to know when/how much to dose, accuracy is important or you needn't bother testing.
Again, just my 2 cents..
 

Jaysee

sure there are a handful of fish that require specific conditions. There are tons that do not.
 

e_watson09

It did make a HUGE difference one test read 0 ammonia 0 nitrite and like 80 nitrate but then the pH read like 7.2 or something

Second test the ammonia read like 2 nitrite 0 nitrate was like 20 and pH was like 7.6

Third test ammonia read .25 nitrite was like reading a little I forget the number and nitrate read zero and the pH read like 7.4

So yes it made a huge difference.
 

btate617

If the city water has changed(youd be surprised how much it can) I use a slight buffer. Yes we can all go ahead and do big waterchanges(I do 50%) but its nice to know what your common nitrate is, still a importent factor. It can determine how much of a change you really need to do. I honestly don't see why you shouldnt test your water, but I see plenty of reasons why you should. So what about water hardness? Do you test that?? Very importent to know when stocking. Also, ph adjustment is importent when acclimating fish, PH shock is not a myth.

So how much will your city's water ph change? And what are you using as a buffer?
Is there a chart that says if nitrate is this perform set % of a water change, or do we just guesstimate? If most people are testing once a week before a water change, wouldn't say a 50-80% water change take care of most of their problems?

Why is water hardness so important for stocking?

ph shock is not a myth I agree with you. However people who buy a fish down the street from a fish shop then come home an acclimate for 17 hours because the fish shop has a .2 higher ph than their own..... that is just silly. You are not, I will say it again you are not, going to buy a fish locally bring it home and have it die from ph shock, it isn't going to happen. Adjust the bag temp accordingly and put the fish in your tank.



Its extremely importent for stocking, show me proof it isnt. There are tons of sensitive fish we keep. Ottos,discus,chocolate gourami, wild betta, loaches, plecos. They all have their specifications.


Show me proof it is.

All fish are sensitive, period.
People don't have trouble keeping Otto's because they are a sensitive fish, people have trouble keeping them because they starve them to death.

Discus are no harder to keep than any other South American fish. The fascination surronding Discus and the fear of God that people get when talking about them is nuts. Why would you treat a Discus differently than say a species of Apistogramma? Both are found in the same waters. We recommend Apisto's all the time, even to people new to cichlids and sometimes new to the hobby. Why not have them get Discus? After all the same care is needed for both fish. They all need the same thing, clean water. Maybe feed them once in awhile, change their water regularly and you will be successful.

Loaches and Plecos the same thing, most people are starving them. They aren't keeping them in the wrong ph or at the wrong temp they can't feed them.



Brian
 

soltarianknight

Fish exspend quite a bit of energy going through osmoregulation trying to adjust to the water stats that they are not used to, there's one reason its importent to get the perams to the fishes liking or atleast know where they are so you can exspect any unsual behaviour in the fish. Still wanting that answer as to why it would be bad to test the water. It takes very little time, has benifits and cost very litte. Only reason I can think is that people either just don't care or are to lazy to do it. Of course maybe they don't have acess to a kit.
 

Girlsbeforefish

Its extremely importent for stocking, show me proof it isnt. There are tons of sensitive fish we keep. Ottos,discus,chocolate gourami, wild betta, loaches, plecos. They all have their specifications.
You say pH is extremely important for stocking but all I have read/heard contradicts that. pH only needs to be "ideal" when attempting to breed. Any stable pH between 6.0-8.0 is fine.
 

toosie

soltarianknight, you're right, osmoregulation is an important factor for fish, however one thing a person has to keep in mind is the ideal specifications you read about when researching fish are based on the water parameters of the water these types of fish are native to. Although SOME fish are wild caught and would appreciate certain efforts being made in having water closer to what they have been accustomed to all of their lives, the vast majority of fish sold on the market have been raised in waters with totally different parameters than their wild caught counterparts, and adjusting the aquarium water parameters to more readily be viewed as acceptable for that fish (based on their native water) is everybit as harmful.

Acclimating fish is important, but the guys are right in the fact that if you are buying locally, these fish have already become accustomed to your town's or city's water, and the chances of the fish having problems do to differences in water chemistry are slI'm to none, UNLESS the home aquarist has been making adjustments to their home aquarium's water trying to obtain certain specifications.

The thing I would like to point out in regards to this, is that when you are bringing home new fish, soooo many people worry about the pH reading, but know nothing about GH/KH. They will try to obtain that magic pH number by dumping into their tanks only to cause themselves disaster. Why is this? Because pH isn't the number you should be trying to adjust in the first place. KH dictates and stabilizes pH, so it is the KH that should be adjusted IF anything, but very few people test GH/KH or know the slightest thing about it. So yes, I would have to say that sometimes people ARE better off NOT testing, because it can lead them to wrong conclusions, and false impressions. Sometimes it would be a blessing if people didn't know what the pH of their water was and simply practiced acclimating their fish.

I think it's important to have Newbies to the hobby test their water for ammonia, nitrites and nitrates solely for the purpose of getting them familiar with and understand the nitrogen cycle. Also, so they can see for themselves what plopping a fish into an uncycled tank, building up ammonia and nitrite levels can do to their fish. If the fish come down with popeye and finrot or just up and die, you can tell them it's because they have ammonia/nitrites in their tank, but why would they believe you unless you can give them a visual way to comprehend what you are telling them, they can't understand. After a tank is completely cycled, and good water changing habits are developed, there really should be no need to test the water. Even for nitrates, if large water changes are being done regularily, your tank isn't obscenely overstocked, there should be no need to test for those either, unless you have a planted tank and need to monitor the levels as a plant nutrient.

The problem with these theories is that people do get lax and don't upkeep their aquariums properly. Water changes slide, not just by a few days, but a few weeks. Hey, that didn't seem to harm the fish, maybe I'll only change water once a month, I really don't have time for more than that anyhow. The fish still seem to be doing fine, so I'll get some more. Plop those fish in, and they die, due to old tank syndrome, and then that starts the whole ball rolling again by that person coming to a forum like this and saying, "why did my fish die", and we say........ "What are your test results."

So, IF you know what you are doing..... don't test. You really don't need to. If you are somebody that is unsure of themselves and their techniques, by all means test. If you are somebody that IS lazy (because I think this is where the laziness comes in) and doesn't give this hobby your all, and practice good fish keeping techniques in general, test ammonia, nitrites and nitrates, but please leave your pH test alone. People with planted tanks that use CO2, pH can be a valuable tool for you and I won't knock you for using it, in fact in your case you should.

Ummmm, sorry. I think I went on a bit of a rant. :-[
 

btate617

Still wanting that answer as to why it would be bad to test the water. It takes very little time, has benifits and cost very litte. Only reason I can think is that people either just don't care or are to lazy to do it.


I don't believe I ever said it was bad to test your water, I was more along the lines of it just doesn't need to be done in almost all cases.

Your last line I agree with you but I would flip it around for most people. Yes people are lazy, so they don't do their regular maintanence until they test one day and go everything is screwed up maybe a water change will help. Many people stretch out their water changes based on test results, however getting those numbers down are not the only benifits of doing a water change.


I have a "few" tanks going and don't test, I don't believe anyone who has been on this forum for a bit of time and knows me would consider me lazy for not testing or would they say I just flat out don't care. Or maybe I am wrong, but I have a preety good feeling about it.
For a lot of people it adds to the hystyeria when they read there tests results which are often wrong because either they did the test wrong or just don't know how to read the results. So are they being helpful in a case like this. Or are they now frantic and trying to change something that should be left alone in the first place.




pH only needs to be "ideal" when attempting to breed. .


Not necessarily. Since Discus have already been brought up in this thread lets use them as an example. Most domestic Discus these days are coming out of Asia, and those farms over there are breeding them very successfully in water far from what would be considered ideal.

Most fish will spawn regardless, it is just what they do. They want to eat and they want to reproduce. There are a few species, very few species, that will have a lower survival rate of fry in a ph this is not to their liking. Often times with these species you won't even get past the egg stage.




Brian
 

Jaysee

I never said it was bad to test - I said it was largely unnecessary. Though I can now see how it could be situationally bad.

brian, excellent points as always.

thank You for that wonderful contribution Toosie
Unless we are buying from someone we know, there is just NO WAY to know what kind of water they were raised in.
 

soltarianknight

As far as discus are concerned, their deffinetly not what they used to be, and I'm beginning to wonder why we treat them soo much more diffrent. I understand their not a beginner fish but as brian(I belive it was you) said, they come from the same place as other cichlids that we keep with ease. I'm probably being bias as I have had quite a few wild caughts and have changed my water to meet their perffered range. I keep bettas in soft water to maintain proper bodily function(new research suggests hard water screws with their organs and can cause dropsey) of course that's a suggestion. Monthly water test arnt need that is true, I just do them BUT I do belive that it is importent to be able to test your water if say your fish start acting weird or show signs of problems. I had an instance where I had 5 shrimp get trapped under an orniment and die, 5 days later my betta has cloudy eyes and isn't eating, lo and behold the dead shrimp spiked my ammonia to 2ppm. (shrimp were new and the tank hadn't adjusted to their bioload yet). I relize there's a TON of factors here but you have to understand that circumstance will meet and water tests can save lives. This has certainly been an intresting discussion.
 

Jaysee

back to the original topic

It did make a HUGE difference one test read 0 ammonia 0 nitrite and like 80 nitrate but then the pH read like 7.2 or something

Second test the ammonia read like 2 nitrite 0 nitrate was like 20 and pH was like 7.6

Third test ammonia read .25 nitrite was like reading a little I forget the number and nitrate read zero and the pH read like 7.4

So yes it made a huge difference.

I can see what you mean, those are some very different readings. It would be hard for beginners to build any confidence in the stability of their tank if the numbers were all over the place. pH seemed consistent though.

but I think this does illustrates my point in a way - With the first test you would suggest a water change, right? and in the second test, wouldn't you suggest a water change? and a water change would be in order for test number three. So as it turns out, despite widely varying test results, the thing for the person to do is a water change.
 

e_watson09

back to the original topic



I can see what you mean, those are some very different readings. It would be hard for beginners to build any confidence in the stability of their tank if the numbers were all over the place. pH seemed consistent though.

but I think this does illustrates my point in a way - With the first test you would suggest a water change, right? and in the second test, wouldn't you suggest a water change? and a water change would be in order for test number three. So as it turns out, despite widely varying test results, the thing for the person to do is a water change.

In all of them you should do a water change but all of them are different and some are much more severe than others. Knowing exactly what is wrong with your tank helps you make a plan for what you need to do. Since this water tested so different 3 times how are you ever going to know when your tank is back to normal readings if each time you test its different.

A water change often won't fix problems, often you need to do multiple water changes often daily until you have everything cleared up but how will you know when things are cleared up if the test is never accurate?
 

sirdarksol

@ Jaysee:
Yes. There have been reports of a difference between .25 and 2ppm ammonia reading.

@ btate:
I rarely see anyone on this forum balk at the idea of large water changes. In fact, when there are issues of ammonia or nitrite in the water, we often suggest them.
The only time that I ever suggest small water changes is when fish have been acclimated to certain water conditions (such as a tank that has been neglected for many months, only being topped off when running low). In those cases, I suggest a series of smaller, daily water changes for the purpose of slowly acclimating the fish to a new water hardness.
 

btate617

@ btate:
I rarely see anyone on this forum balk at the idea of large water changes. In fact, when there are issues of ammonia or nitrite in the water, we often suggest them.



Perhaps you can read through some old threads then and I am sure you will find them .

I am not only talking about when something goes wrong and the cure all is always do a "huge" (huge meaning what should be your normal) water change. I am talking about those who on just a regular old day think "huge" (theres that word again) water changes are going to do something horrific to their tanks.
I guess this goes to those who believe their cycle is floating around in their water column so they do not want to disturb this.



Brian
 

Themehmeh

Not gunna lie, I use the liquid because I feel like a super cool scientist.
 

Jaysee

I didn't know that the test strips were so grossly in accurate. I thought that they would have been able to get you fairly close.


Something that has not been brought up yet.....what kind of testing strips are we talking about? 5 in 1, 3 in 1, individual tests (if there are such things)? Perhaps that makes a difference
 

Similar Aquarium Threads

  • Question
Replies
7
Views
132
mattgirl
  • Question
Replies
2
Views
103
CMachell
Replies
1
Views
123
Arvil
Replies
22
Views
271
Azedenkae
Replies
1
Views
59
LowConductivity
Top Bottom