My Apistogramma borellii

[Yoannikko]

Hello,

As promised, I'm making a thread dedicated to my pair of Apistogramma borellii, which I bought two months ago from a private seller at a local fish expo. And sorry in advance for the long-winded post…

They are currently housed in a 54 liter (about 15g) 60*30*30 tank, along with a school of around 20 Corydoras pygmaeus. The tank has been running for almost 3 years now, so is well established.
For substrate, I used a base of pozzolan (pouzzolane in french ; it’s a type of 100% natural volcanic rock) and an upper layer of Tropica aquarium soil. The water is 100% RO water remineralized with GH+ from LC Shrimp. I admit that I haven’t checked parameters in a while now, but the last I did, I had a PH of 6.5, KH of 0 and GH of 7-8. Temperature is around 79-80°F.
For hardscape, I have a couple of branches and that’s it. And for plants, I have a lot of Valisneria, Cryptocorynes, a couple of Java ferns, one Anubia. I’ve also recently added a couple of Lobelia cardinalis and Echinodorus bleheri, but I don’t think I’m going to keep the latter as I’ve seen that they get huge (for the size of my tank, anyway).

Stock-wise, I currently have some blue-carbon rili cherry shrimp, 20 Corydoras pygmaeus, a pair of A. borellii and, up untill recently, a young male bristlenose pleco (which was rehomed last week).

I have plans to make this tank a species-specific tank for my Apistos, and so plan on rescaping it soon. I’m looking to make a natural-looking tank that approaches the natural habitat of the Apistos, but not necessarily a biotope aquarium.
The Corys will stay at first, but will eventually go into a « cat-fish » tank that will more closely meet their specific requirements (mostly flow rate).

Plans are as follow :
- Substrate : Pozzolan and aquasoil as a bottom layer in mesh bags. Thinking of switching to ADA Amazonia. Or should I just stick with Tropica (I could re-use some of the soil already in the tank if I went with this option)
- Sand and rocks from Wio (Everglades River Kit + Green accent) OR Everglades Riverbed (sand only) and some smoother stones, like the Black Venom Boulders (+ appropriate accents)
- Re-use the pieces of wood in my current tank
- Add some leaf litter
- Plants : 1-2 mid-sized Echinodorus, maybe some Althernathera reineckii, a smaller species of Echinodorus (tenellus, quadricostatus, magdalensis), a few Lobelia cardinalis and some Limnobium laevigatum
- Filter : JBL CrystalProfi e402
- Lighting : re-use my current Chihiros A601

And that’s it. Am I going in the right direction with all of this, or are there some things that need changing ?

 

[MacZ]

- Substrate : Pozzolan and aquasoil as a bottom layer in mesh bags. Thinking of switching to ADA Amazonia. Or should I just stick with Tropica (I could re-use some of the soil already in the tank if I went with this option)
- Sand and rocks from Wio (Everglades River Kit + Green accent) OR Everglades Riverbed (sand only) and some smoother stones, like the Black Venom Boulders (+ appropriate accents)

Just as a sidenot before I forget and I'm on my way out to town: I'd simply go with inert fine sand and nothing else. For rocks: River pebbles, also inert if possible.

- Add some leaf litter

For many other Apistogramma I'd say take a lot, but considering the habitat of A. borellii, a handfull every month (of course leaving the rest to rot) is plenty.

 

[Yoannikko]

Thanks for your reply !

For the substrate, I was thinking of going with aquasoil in order to lower the PH. But maybe the leaf litter will be enough ? Have to check the parameters of my tap water now.
And will inert sand provide enough nutrients for plants ? Because I still want some aquatic plants in the tank.

For the sand, here's the description on the website for the Everglades Riverbed :
- Color: a mixture of sand and organic materials including dried seed pods, magnolia leaves, crushed leaves, and fallen wood pieces
- Material: 100% natural and non-toxic materials
- Size mix: 0.1cm to 40cm
- Water hardness: Does not affect water hardness

As for the rocks, ok I'll go for river pebbles.

 

[anewbie]

Thanks for your reply !

For the substrate, I was thinking of going with aquasoil in order to lower the PH. But maybe the leaf litter will be enough ? Have to check the parameters of my tap water now.
And will inert sand provide enough nutrients for plants ? Because I still want some aquatic plants in the tank.

For the sand, here's the description on the website for the Everglades Riverbed :
- Color: a mixture of sand and organic materials including dried seed pods, magnolia leaves, crushed leaves, and fallen wood pieces
- Material: 100% natural and non-toxic materials
- Size mix: 0.1cm to 40cm
- Water hardness: Does not affect water hardness

As for the rocks, ok I'll go for river pebbles.

borelli are frequently found in harder water than other species. Domestic borelli do just fine in neutral water.

 

[MacZ]

For the substrate, I was thinking of going with aquasoil in order to lower the PH.

Don't. Soil is not designed for this. The optimal use is in a planted (caridina) shrimp aquarium, used with RO and GH+ without raising KH above 2. In tapwater it loses its properties after a few months of regular waterchanges.

But maybe the leaf litter will be enough ?

Adds humic substances. Doesn't change anything about water chemistry as long as the KH is measurable.

The only way to safely get pH down while keeping low conductivity (which is more important than a low pH) is using unaltered RO/rainwater combined with high dosage humic substances, either from lots of leaf litter and botanicals like elder cones or by using peat.

And will inert sand provide enough nutrients for plants ? Because I still want some aquatic plants in the tank.

No, but the mulm of rotting botanicals will leach into the substrate. I haven't many plants in the substrate, but without addition of any fertilizers my Nymphea lotus grows really great. Patience does it. Until the tank was properly seasoned I used small doses of liquid fertilizers in the water column. Does the trick.

For the sand, here's the description on the website for the Everglades Riverbed :
- Color: a mixture of sand and organic materials including dried seed pods, magnolia leaves, crushed leaves, and fallen wood pieces
- Material: 100% natural and non-toxic materials
- Size mix: 0.1cm to 40cm
- Water hardness: Does not affect water hardness

As for the rocks, ok I'll go for river pebbles.

Well, you can use it and cut it with extra sand. Also not a too high layer. 4-5cm are enough for most plants.

borelli are frequently found in harder water than other species. Domestic borelli do just fine in neutral water.

True that. Well... not much harder, except in coastal regions almost all water bodies in South America are considered softwater by European or North American standards. But seasonally the rain washes sediments in the flood plains A. borellii live in and raise conductivity, turbidity and pH considerably from very low (EC < 50µS/cm, pH ~ 6) to quite high (EC ~ 300-500µS/cm, pH 7.8). (Values are the average of several reports and sources I could find over time.)

 

[Yoannikko]

Thanks to both of you for your replies. After doing some more research, I see that A. borellii are found in waters with PH ranging from 5.0 to 8.0. So I think I'll go for the middle ground, which would mean that I can keep using aquasoil.

@MacZ Don't worry, I know about the effect of tap water on aquasoil, which is why both my tanks run on 100% RO water (remineralized, of course). My current tank has been running for 2 years now and the soil is still doing it's job
Going by what you said a little further down though, should I forego the remineralization part, and just use lots of leaf litter ? because A. borellii doesn't seem to require too low of a GH it would seem (1-15 seems to be the concensus). So I was thinking that RO & GH+ would be ok ? This is the method I'm currently using and they seem to be doing pretty well.

Yeah, for the sand, I'll probably use the one I posted, mixed in with another bag that I already have. And I'll get some more leaf litter as well.

 

[MacZ]

which is why both my tanks run on 100% RO water (remineralized, of course).

Must have missed that. It's only 100% if NOT mineralized. The moment you add minerals to more than 1° hardness, it's not softwater anymore.

Going by what you said a little further down though, should I forego the remineralization part, and just use lots of leaf litter ?

For A. borellii you don't have to use tons of leaf litter as I would (and do) e.g. for my Dicrossus filamentosus or A. agassizii. While I cover basically 80-90% of the footprint of my tank with leaves, you can easily get away with 10-20%. Their habitat simply lacks in trees. Floodplains have quite little botanicals.
But yes, 100% RO is absolutely fine for these fish. Of course you would have to acclimate them by doing several waterchanges with pure RO.

because A. borellii doesn't seem to require too low of a GH it would seem (1-15 seems to be the concensus).

Actually that is an artificial consensus. The numbers in the wild are 0 (or rather below detection) for GH and KH for most of the year.

Water values South America (Map pH) - Southamerica fans

To explain the markings on the map The color scale is based on the droplet tests for pH: red: appr. 4 to 5,5 yellow: appr. 6,0 three green: 6,5 7,0 and 7,5 blue appr. 8 to 9,5. Gray points stand for measurements without pH. For measurements where the exact location is known, the GPS data was

www.suedamerikafans.de

Click around in the range of the species in that map. Most values are very low conductivity (almost impossible to reach in an aquarium) and a pH between 6 and 7. Please check the dates to each entry, our spring/summer is their autumn/winter.

So I was thinking that RO & GH+ would be ok ? This is the method I'm currently using and they seem to be doing pretty well.

That would be the correct thing to do for bee shrimp. If it doesn't impact the fish negatively, do it. if I had to remineralize I'd keep it at 1-2° GH.

 

[Yoannikko]

Must have missed that. It's only 100% if NOT mineralized. The moment you add minerals to more than 1° hardness, it's not softwater anymore.

By 100%, I meant that I didn't mix any tap water into the mix. But I did not know that it wasn't considered "soft water" if Gh was more than 1 ?

For A. borellii you don't have to use tons of leaf litter as I would (and do) e.g. for my Dicrossus filamentosus or A. agassizii. While I cover basically 80-90% of the footprint of my tank with leaves, you can easily get away with 10-20%. Their habitat simply lacks in trees. Floodplains have quite little botanicals.
But yes, 100% RO is absolutely fine for these fish. Of course you would have to acclimate them by doing several waterchanges with pure RO.

Allright, so a little bit of botanicals/leaf litter should be fine then. In any case, I'll always have the option of adding more in the future.

Actually that is an artificial consensus. The numbers in the wild are 0 (or rather below detection) for GH and KH for most of the year.

Water values South America (Map pH) - Southamerica fans

To explain the markings on the map The color scale is based on the droplet tests for pH: red: appr. 4 to 5,5 yellow: appr. 6,0 three green: 6,5 7,0 and 7,5 blue appr. 8 to 9,5. Gray points stand for measurements without pH. For measurements where the exact location is known, the GPS data was

www.suedamerikafans.de

Click around in the range of the species in that map. Most values are very low conductivity (almost impossible to reach in an aquarium) and a pH between 6 and 7. Please check the dates to each entry, our spring/summer is their autumn/winter.

Thanks for the link ! I checked it out quickly, and yeah conductivity seems really low in most places. Will have to do a deeper dive

That would be the correct thing to do for bee shrimp. If it doesn't impact the fish negatively, do it. if I had to remineralize I'd keep it at 1-2° GH.

I'll try to bring the Gh down, then. Have to do a water change today or tomorrow anyway. For my tank, I'm guessing 10 Liters would be too much, but would a WC of 5 Liters pure RO be ok, or should I do it in smaller amounts ?
I also have Corydoras pygmaeus in the tank. I saw that the range of Gh for them should not exceed 8. So a Gh of 0-2 should be ok for them also, right ?

Thanks for all your help !

 

[Yoannikko]

Well, I just checked my parameters and here's the results :
Ph - 6.5 (roughly, only have the 3.0-10 Ph test, as that's all that was available at the store)
Kh - 0
Gh - 5

I ended up doing a 5L water change, but I don't think I'll go any power untill I rescape the tank as I still have some shrimp in the tank.

 

[MacZ]

For my tank, I'm guessing 10 Liters would be too much, but would a WC of 5 Liters pure RO be ok, or should I do it in smaller amounts ?

I add 3 Liters daily just to counter evaporation. You can do 20 Liters, no problem.

I also have Corydoras pygmaeus in the tank. I saw that the range of Gh for them should not exceed 8. So a Gh of 0-2 should be ok for them also, right ?

I wouldn't have recommended the change, if they wouldn't like it. With South American fish you can almost always expect them to do well in soft water. Exceptions are rivers and lakes on the atlantic coast of Brazil and the Guyanas and in Northern Colombia and Coastal Venezuela.

Ph - 6.5 (roughly, only have the 3.0-10 Ph test, as that's all that was available at the store)

The JBL-test kit, right? It can be quite off at that KH. The test chemically needs a certain KH to work properly. But no worries, as long as you add enough humic substances all is well. I'd only use a EC/TDS meter. That's a more reliable value to follow in softwater. Once KH and GH are down to 0-2° the test kits won't help you much, same as with pH which becomes erratic. On a meter you can check simply by looking at the numbers: 1° hardness is roughly 17.8 in mg/l, so if you get a TDS value of between 40 and 50 you'll have 2°GH + whatever is also in the water (NO3 etc.), in EC that's somewhere around 100µS/cm.

 

[dw1305]

Hi all,

I'd only use a EC/TDS meter. That's a more reliable value to follow in softwater. Once KH and GH are down to 0-2° the test kits won't help you much, same as with pH which becomes erratic. On a meter you can check simply by looking at the numbers: 1° hardness is roughly 17.8 in mg/l, so if you get a TDS value of between 40 and 50 you'll have 2°GH + whatever is also in the water (NO3 etc.), in EC that's somewhere around 100µS/cm.

This is good advice. A conductivity meter is inexpensive, simple to use, accurate and conductivity is a linear scale. If there was a nitrate (NO3-) test meter etc. that worked as well? I would unreservedly recommend it, but there isn't.

You can test for nearly all the water parameters that we are interested in, but you would need a lot of time and money.

I actually have access to analytical equipment <"https://www.ukaps.org/forum/threads/new-bit-of-kit-mp-aes.67549/">, but I don't often use it, mainly because it doesn't tell me anything that I can't deduce from inferential methods.

A complete run through, with all the reagents and other analytical equipment (spectrophotometer, ion selective electrode etc) would take me a full working day. Somebody who did it as their full-time job would be quicker, but it is still a long job.

cheers Darrel

 

[Yoannikko]

I add 3 Liters daily just to counter evaporation. You can do 20 Liters, no problem.


I wouldn't have recommended the change, if they wouldn't like it. With South American fish you can almost always expect them to do well in soft water. Exceptions are rivers and lakes on the atlantic coast of Brazil and the Guyanas and in Northern Colombia and Coastal Venezuela.


The JBL-test kit, right? It can be quite off at that KH. The test chemically needs a certain KH to work properly. But no worries, as long as you add enough humic substances all is well. I'd only use a EC/TDS meter. That's a more reliable value to follow in softwater. Once KH and GH are down to 0-2° the test kits won't help you much, same as with pH which becomes erratic. On a meter you can check simply by looking at the numbers: 1° hardness is roughly 17.8 in mg/l, so if you get a TDS value of between 40 and 50 you'll have 2°GH + whatever is also in the water (NO3 etc.), in EC that's somewhere around 100µS/cm.

All right, I thought as much about the corys but wasn't 100% sure, thanks ! I'll keep my parameters as is for the time being though, as, like I said, I still have a few shrimp in the tank and I do they would like soft water all that much. They will go elsewhere when I rescape this one, though, so I'll lower my Gh then.
And yep, it's the JBL test kit. I didn't know that the low KH could affect the readings... Even so, given that I'm using aquasoil, the PH shouldn't be much higher (though it could be lower). How could I measure PH in this case ? the aquasoil should keep it stable, but I'd still like to be able to measure it if I ever need to.
I think I have a TDS-meter somewhere, will have a look tonight or tomorrow.

Hi all,

This is good advice. A conductivity meter is inexpensive, simple to use, accurate and conductivity is a linear scale. If there was a nitrate (NO3-) test meter etc. that worked as well? I would unreservedly recommend it, but there isn't.

You can test for nearly all the water parameters that we are interested in, but you would need a lot of time and money.

I actually have access to analytical equipment <"https://www.ukaps.org/forum/threads/new-bit-of-kit-mp-aes.67549/">, but I don't often use it, mainly because it doesn't tell me anything that I can't deduce from inferential methods.

A complete run through, with all the reagents and other analytical equipment (spectrophotometer, ion selective electrode etc) would take me a full working day. Somebody who did it as their full-time job would be quicker, but it is still a long job.

cheers Darrel

Hello,

Yeah, having the right equipment surely helps out a lot. But like you said, time and money ^^

i've seen electonic meters from HANNAH, which seem to be available for pretty much all the parameters one would need to check. They are a bit pricey, but I've always wondered if they were worth it ?

But the way I see things is that, once a tank has been running for a while and you keep up with maintenance and don't make any drastic changes to it, there should be no reason for the parameters to vary significantly. And if the tank is well planted, nitrates should not be a problem either.

 

[Yoannikko]

Hello,
The wheels are in motion, as I've just ordered the substrate and stones from Wio. As a reminder, here is what I ordered (clickable links below) :
- Everglades RiverBed
- Druid Boulder Set: Box - up to 60cm

I think this'll be enough stones, and with my 2 "big" roots, I think the hardscape should be good to go. Will have a play with the stones when I receive them to see how they would fit together.

Will also give feedback on what I think about the products from this company. But from what I've seen/heard, the quality should be very good.

 

[MacZ]

I know the company, a friend is a massive fan. The stuff is good, though overpriced in my opinion.
I myself am a massive fan of going outside foraging forests and river banks for nice pieces. The few pebbles in my tank come from the River Rhine, the leaf litter from a nearby forest and the twigs and branches from another forest. Only the bigger rootwood pieces are storebought as I don't have the storage room to properly cure wood.

 

[dw1305]

Hi all,

i've seen electonic meters from HANNAH, which seem to be available for pretty much all the parameters one would need to check. They are a bit pricey, but I've always wondered if they were worth it ?

The advantage of conductivity meters, over pretty much all other testing methods, is that they need very little in the way of consumables and you can <"make up your own conductivity standards">. <"Ion selective electrodes"> are also reasonably straightforward to use, but expensive to buy. You can get pH meters that work reasonably well, but they <"struggle in low conductivity water">, you have to buy the calibration buffers, the electrodes have a finite life, pH is a log10 unit etc.

Personally I've got a <"pretty jaundiced view"> of the companies that sell test kits and water treatments.

But the way I see things is that, once a tank has been running for a while and you keep up with maintenance and don't make any drastic changes to it, there should be no reason for the parameters to vary significantly. And if the tank is well planted, nitrates should not be a problem either.

That is very much my view as well, change some water, feed some live food, have plenty of plants and let the tanks largely get on with it. Plants are much more effective at maintaining water quality than most traditional aquarium literature, LFS, forums etc acknowledge.

I won't post them all here, but if you go to the <"UKAPS forum">, there are plenty of threads relating to <"plant / microbe biofiltration"> etc.

cheers Darrel

 

[Yoannikko]

I know the company, a friend is a massive fan. The stuff is good, though overpriced in my opinion.
I myself am a massive fan of going outside foraging forests and river banks for nice pieces. The few pebbles in my tank come from the River Rhine, the leaf litter from a nearby forest and the twigs and branches from another forest. Only the bigger rootwood pieces are storebought as I don't have the storage room to properly cure wood.

Yeah, it's true that their products are a bit pricey, but I've been interested in the company for a while and wanted to try it out on this tank. I will try to find materials in nature and/or via private sellers for my future "big" tank to lower costs, though.

Hi all,

The advantage of conductivity meters, over pretty much all other testing methods, is that they need very little in the way of consumables and you can <"make up your own conductivity standards">. <"Ion selective electrodes"> are also reasonably straightforward to use, but expensive to buy. You can get pH meters that work reasonably well, but they <"struggle in low conductivity water">, you have to buy the calibration buffers, the electrodes have a finite life, pH is a log10 unit etc.

Personally I've got a <"pretty jaundiced view"> of the companies that sell test kits and water treatments.

That is very much my view as well, change some water, feed some live food, have plenty of plants and let the tanks largely get on with it. Plants are much more effective at maintaining water quality than most traditional aquarium literature, LFS, forums etc acknowledge.

I won't post them all here, but if you go to the <"UKAPS forum">, there are plenty of threads relating to <"plant / microbe biofiltration"> etc.

cheers Darrel

Hi Darrel,
Thanks for your input ! I guess I'll have to look more into digital PH meters eventually, then.
What I like about these digital meters is that there's no messing with different chemicals, and trying to match the color of the test to a scale in order to get the final result. Just plop the end of the meter in the tank and call it a day. Though the caveat is that the meter has to be well calibrated. But test kits also have expiration dates...

Anyway, I found my conductivity meter, it's an HM Digital EC-3 (pretty much the same one as the Chihiors digital TDS meter, I believe). Tested the water in my tank and I get 350us. If I follow what MacZ said previously, this should equate to about 7°Gh, which sounds about right.

And thanks for the link, will defo have to check it out. Even though I'm not the most science-savvy person out there, I do enjoy reding and learning about how nature does what it does !

 

[Ben Rhau]

Thanks for your input ! I guess I'll have to look more into digital PH meters eventually, then.
What I like about these digital meters is that there's no messing with different chemicals, and trying to match the color of the test to a scale in order to get the final result. Just plop the end of the meter in the tank and call it a day.

pH meters can certainly be more accurate, and are the only way to measure pH that's outside the range of test kits. The downside is that they are more time consuming to use than test kits. If you've used pH meters before in lab, you know what I'm talking about. If not:

• The probe is a buffer-filled membrane. So when you measure two samples of sufficiently differing pH, it can take a long time for the meter to stabilize.
• They ought to be calibrated regularly (I'm too lazy to do this every time, but that's what's recommended).
• The probe should not dry out, so you need to store it carefully in a neutral buffer.
• If your TDS is below 100, you need to add a neutral salt to your sample to get a stable measurement.
• The probe also requires periodic maintenance (cleaning).

For all these reasons, it's a more expensive way to meausre. To me, it's worth it. I wouldn't say it's for everyone.

Cheers

 

[dw1305]

Hi all,

The downside is that they are more time consuming to use than test kits.

I don't do it any more (we still do it, just somebody more conscientious than me), but I hated calibrating and servicing the lab. pH meters, particularly knowing that when the students used them, they just dipped them in the water and took an arbitrary reading, often long before the meter had stabilised.

cheers Darrel

 

[dw1305]

Hi all,

Tested the water in my tank and I get 350us.

That is a high value if you started out with RO.

If I follow what MacZ said previously, this should equate to about 7°Gh, which sounds about right.

That is much higher than you need. What are you re-mineralising with?

cheers Darrel

 

[Yoannikko]

pH meters can certainly be more accurate, and are the only way to measure pH that's outside the range of test kits. The downside is that they are more time consuming to use than test kits. If you've used pH meters before in lab, you know what I'm talking about. If not:

• The probe is a buffer-filled membrane. So when you measure two samples of sufficiently differing pH, it can take a long time for the meter to stabilize.
• They ought to be calibrated regularly (I'm too lazy to do this every time, but that's what's recommended).
• The probe should not dry out, so you need to store it carefully in a neutral buffer.
• If your TDS is below 100, you need to add a neutral salt to your sample to get a stable measurement.
• The probe also requires periodic maintenance (cleaning).

For all these reasons, it's a more expensive way to meausre. To me, it's worth it. I wouldn't say it's for everyone.

Cheers

Dear god, I didn't think it was this involved of a process with a digital PH-meter ! I honestly thought it would be quicker than test kits, like the EC-meter, wich apparently doesn't need recalibrating (but maybe I'm wrong about that, too).
Thing is; I'll need to check the PH (or KH/GH) at some point to make sure my aquasoil is still doing it's job... Guess I'll just have to bite the bullet, then.

Hi all,

I don't do it any more (we still do it, just somebody more conscientious than me), but I hated calibrating and servicing the lab. pH meters, particularly knowing that when the students used them, they just dipped them in the water and took an arbitrary reading, often long before the meter had stabilised.

cheers Darrel

Hi dw ! Well without knowing what Ben Rhau mentioned, I could have very well been one of those students ! ^^'

Hi all,

That is a high value if you started out with RO.

That is much higher than you need. What are you re-mineralising with?

cheers Darrel

I remineralize with GH+ Shrimp from Trace One, as I have shrimp in the tank as well. And I aimed for a value of around 8 when dosing. And since I did a 5L water change of pure RO earlier this week, the value that I calculated today doesn't seem far-fetched.
When I re-scape the tank I will go 100% unremineralized RO because I plan on re-homing the shrimp. Untill then, I'll keep the GH around 7.