# Is 25% water change every other day to much?



## Cartem2 (Oct 4, 2011)

I have OCD and I can't stand having ANY foreign matter on the bottom of my tank. Their is never all that much just a little under a rock here and some in the corner over their. I have been vacuuming the sand every other day to keep myself happy but am wanting to make sure that this is not bad for the fish in any way. I fill a bucket w/ the new water to make sure temps are right and to add prime before the new water goes in the tank. I test my water every morning and am always at 0 ammonia and around 5.0 nitrate. I know that water changes can be a little stressful for the fish and I try to not do anything to quickly in the tank as to not scare them to much. Some of the fish usually follow my hand around as I'm cleaning, so I don't think I am stressing them to much. I am planning on adding some UGJs soon to help keep the floor clean and hopefully that will keep me from doing so many cleanings.

My question is can frequent changes be bad for the fish?
If so please explain how, I can't learn from yes or no  
Thanks for any advise :fish:


----------



## zimmy (Aug 13, 2010)

If the water being added has the same parameters as the tank water (pH, temperature), frequent water changes shouldn't be bad for the fish.

If you have plants in the tank, it can be another story.


----------



## Number6 (Mar 13, 2003)

I dont have ocd but i clean tanks daily as well. There is no harm whatsoever when the new water matches the tank, only benefits.


----------



## Cartem2 (Oct 4, 2011)

Thanks for the replies, I didn't think it was a problem but wanted to confirm, my OCD also has me always worried I'm going to do something to hurt the fish lol


zimmy said:


> If you have plants in the tank, it can be another story.


I do not have plants now but plan on adding some soon. This will be the 1st time I have had live plants and have little knowledge of their care. Could you explain what harm the frequent water changes could do? Thanks for you help


----------



## prov356 (Sep 20, 2006)

I change out water frequently from my smaller tanks while vacuuming. Been doing it for years. And I have java moss in many, they don't care, grow like weeds. Your approach is fine IME.


----------



## PfunMo (Jul 30, 2009)

The only downside with lots of water changes and plants is some nutrients are removed with the water. As long as the plants have what they need to grow, they will be fine. It would be my labor that I would want to watch!


----------



## 13razorbackfan (Sep 28, 2011)

I do have OCD and just until recently I did 35-45% every two days. Now that my tank has been up and running for a 3-4 months I am doing 50-60% every week. I do have good filtration and water turnover as well. Most of the fish waste gets sucked into my filters with the placement of my powerhead.

PS...I feel you on the OCD. It drives me crazy or close to it. The one thing that I have found that helps just a bit is to tell myself that its not as bad as I think it is. I also try to change things up a bit from my daily routine and habits. This helps a bit.


----------



## Nodalizer (Nov 7, 2011)

Smaller water changes more often are far better then large water changes less often.

You remove not only nasty stuff when you do a water change you take out good bacteria. So large 80% water changes they are becomming more common do upset the ballance of the tank for a short time until the tank gets back to balance.

If you are doing this water change at the same time each day then chances are your tank is used to how you do it and will be a lot better off then a tank like mine done once a week. Because each week my tank has a whole week of water borne bacteria that it has to replace when i change the water.

If you notice plants suffering you can drop it to a 5-10% change each day and still get it all clean.

So in summary, your looking after that tank better then most.


----------



## prov356 (Sep 20, 2006)

> You remove not only nasty stuff when you do a water change you take out good bacteria.


You don't remove good bacteria in any appreciable amount when you do water changes. Shouldn't be a factor in determining how much water to change.



> If you are doing this water change at the same time each day then chances are your tank is used to how you do it and will be a lot better off then a tank like mine done once a week. Because each week my tank has a whole week of water borne bacteria that it has to replace when i change the water.


Water borne bacteria is negligible. What works for you, works for you, but I don't agree with your reasoning behind it. Why do you think there's such a large percentage of nitriying bacteria in the water column?


----------



## Nodalizer (Nov 7, 2011)

prov356 said:


> You don't remove good bacteria in any appreciable amount when you do water changes. Shouldn't be a factor in determining how much water to change.


Just have to differ on this I guess. Yes there is not a lot in the water column.. but each one is there for a reason, Changing a lot of water will cause an ammonia spike (and not only for those with chloramine bonds). Changing little water more often does not even register even if you have chloramine bonds.



prov356 said:


> Water borne bacteria is negligible. What works for you, works for you, but I don't agree with your reasoning behind it. Why do you think there's such a large percentage of nitriying bacteria in the water column?


Its basically the same point twice, but anyway, I never said there was a large amount, just the larger the water change the the more bacteria your removing both from the water column which we both agree is a little, but i say is enough to make a difference, and also from the substrate.

But my underlying point is less water more often at the same time is a lot better then a big amount weekly. So what he is doing is fine.


----------



## prov356 (Sep 20, 2006)

> Just have to differ on this I guess. Yes there is not a lot in the water column.. but each one is there for a reason, Changing a lot of water will cause an ammonia spike (and not only for those with chloramine bonds). Changing little water more often does not even register even if you have chloramine bonds.


You're the only one I've ever heard claim to have that experience and there's really no logical reason why it would happen. And in all the reading I've done, I've never seen this claim made. If it happens to you, so be it, but you seem to be the only one experiencing it or claiming it happens.



> But my underlying point is less water more often at the same time is a lot better then a big amount weekly.


Why? It's an over-generalization. Big water changes weekly have worked well for many including myself. There's been no detriment at all IME.


----------



## zimmy (Aug 13, 2010)

Nodalizer said:


> Smaller water changes more often are far better then large water changes less often.
> 
> You remove not only nasty stuff when you do a water change you take out good bacteria. So large 80% water changes they are becomming more common do upset the ballance of the tank for a short time until the tank gets back to balance.
> 
> ...


I asked a question a few weeks ago about large water changes and mini-cycles and was told unanimously that it's not an issue (validating what I already believed based on experience with doing large water changes). If the beneficial bacteria in the water column is very small, then unless your tank is really overstocked the bb on the substrate, rocks and in the filter should quickly adapt to the slightly greater availability of nutrients in the form of ammonia and/or nitrites. Having plants and algae in the tank would serve as an additional buffer since they are competing with the bb for these nutrients.

What your proposed practice misses though is the potential greater harm that can result in steadily increasing nitrates (which are merely a gauge for many other possible toxins in the water that we don't measure but do remove with each water change). See this thread for an explanation of why frequent small water changes are less effective than fewer larger water changes in controlling nitrates.

nitrates and water changes

Testing water parameters regularly (as the OP does) to guide how much and how often water should be changed is the best practice IMHO.


----------



## Nodalizer (Nov 7, 2011)

Less water more often has benfits over big water changes.. saying its not is just silly.. less changes for the fish in chem and temp, more stable nitrogen cycle due to less breakdowns of waste over long periods, lower nitrates more consistant nitrates. Something wrong with the town water one day has less impact on the tank. The list goes on...

I do weekly water changes myself, but the benefits of small regular water changes (for those who have the time) has always been the case since I have been keeping fish, its always been a given. Nothing wrong with your water changes, I am just saying there is nothing wrong with his either and that it is even a little bit better, not saying its extremely better like you and me are just treating our fish bad, I am just saying its better.

Anyway, I am sure he has heard plenty of points of view and can decide as he sees fit.


----------



## Number6 (Mar 13, 2003)

zimmy said:


> What your proposed practice misses though is the potential greater harm that can result in steadily increasing nitrates (which are merely a gauge for many other possible toxins in the water that we don't measure but do remove with each water change).


nodalizer denies that nitrates above 40ppm will harm sensitive cichlids like Cyps, Discus and sandsifters. He claims that he keeps those species at or above 40ppm. I would say in light of that, this discussion hits an impasse. If a tank had a sensitive species in it with water at or above 40ppm then I could actually agree that large water changes may be less desirable than multiple smaller water changes.

Overall, I view it as a poorer choice for how to care for cichlids to do what nodalizer does, but I can see how the two "beliefs" sort of go hand-in-hand. I can remember back to a time when a tank hitting 40ppm was considered normal and large water changes feared... I'll bet I could dig up a 20 year old email from myself to someone giving out the same advice about sticking to many smaller water changes!

Now-a-days I keep tanks far cleaner than 40ppm and huge 90% water changes are nothing but beneficial. Absolutely no ammonia spike after a huge water change using the best ammonia tests that I can stomache buying!


----------



## Nodalizer (Nov 7, 2011)

I posted before i saw you post sorry.



zimmy said:


> I asked a question a few weeks ago about large water changes and mini-cycles and was told unanimously that it's not an issue (validating what I already believed based on experience with doing large water changes). If the beneficial bacteria in the water column is very small, then unless your tank is really overstocked the bb on the substrate, rocks and in the filter should quickly adapt to the slightly greater availability of nutrients in the form of ammonia and/or nitrites. Having plants and algae in the tank would serve as an additional buffer since they are competing with the bb for these nutrients.
> 
> What your proposed practice misses though is the potential greater harm that can result in steadily increasing nitrates (which are merely a gauge for many other possible toxins in the water that we don't measure but do remove with each water change). See this thread for an explanation of why frequent small water changes are less effective than fewer larger water changes in controlling nitrates.
> 
> ...


Yes the nitrate increase each change is correct for a non planted tank (and if I might say made worse by the ammonia spike I mentioned earlier, but i won't go into that again since it doesn't exist), but not what we are talking about here really. I'll explain:

No matter what your changes may be .. 5,10,20,30,40,60,80,etc and no matter what frequency you do those changes. Due to the nitrate increase, a single larger water change is needed at a tank defined interval to remove the accumliated nitrates of the previous water changes.

This is just simplly monitoring water chemistry, and has nothing to do with the normal water changes. If you do a massvie once a week water change then yes the nitrate effet is lessened, but it WILL happen, it always does (assuming you do the same water change each week). Eventually you will need to take that little bit more or do an extra change to stop it piling up.

So yes your right, but thats just monitoring water chemisry, not your common water change.

But to clarify .. the frequent water changes are best, but you will need to monitor your nitrates as per usual and do a larger water change to combat the nitrate increase effect.


----------



## Nodalizer (Nov 7, 2011)

Number6 said:


> nodalizer denies that nitrates above 40ppm will harm sensitive cichlids like Cyps, Discus and sandsifters. He claims that he keeps those species at or above 40ppm


Well I never actually said any of that, but ok.

I never said I kept them at 40ppm or more. A bit of common sense can be used, obviously discus are more delicate fish, but they love a planted tank and the nitrates are always that bit lower for them.

I do not mind being focused, but atleast make it truthful please.

The details of where the above comment came from:

*I was replying to this quote:*

"rich_t wrote: Times sure have changed. Back when I had my tanks up and running (about 20 years ago or so) the prevailing wisdom was to do 20-40% weekly changes depending on how many fish were in the tank."
*
my reply was:*

"That is because back when you had those tanks (like myself) nitrates were not thought to be a big worry at all. Recently they have suspecting that nitrates do effect fish more then first thought.
I am not so sure about that thou, I mean our fish did fine back in the day. I still don't go overboard with water changes. If nitrates are around the 40 I am happy enough and the fish are lively as ever."
*
And when asked about the discus I said:*

"But, I only kept a school of 6 in a "well planted" large tank for the discus. So obviously the waste didn't come to 40ppm after 20-40% weekly water changes and the plants doing there job."


----------



## Number6 (Mar 13, 2003)

*Nodalizer*
http://www.cichlid-forum.com/phpBB/view ... 8&start=15

It is clear for all to read. If your reply saying " kept them all" did not mean @40ppm, then you should have said so. Instead you said that you knew of discus being kept at 40ppm which really makes the entire reply only interpretable one way...

To keep this on topic, since we can measure and see that large water changes do not cause an ammonia spike, if the frequency of two water changes is equal (say daily) then how are multiple small changes better than big ones? 
It is easy to match water parameters, so change on that front can easily be avoided....


----------



## Nodalizer (Nov 7, 2011)

Number6 said:


> T if the frequency of two water changes is equal (say daily) then how are multiple small changes better than big ones?


Well simply put... If I am sitting in a tank of poop and you remove the poop and dirty water each day, I would be a lot happier then you changing my poop bucket once a week. Yes you clean out my home, but I still suffer the effect each day up until you do the change.

We change weekly because it is normally not possible for us to do daily consistant water changes. If someone is happy to do the other, then there fish is only going to be better off for it. Aquarium water quality is always in a slowly declining state, the frequency does help.


----------



## prov356 (Sep 20, 2006)

In some circumstances, there are good reasons to keep water changes low, but those are special circumstances like delicate fish, where tap is very different from tank, etc. To say one or another is always 'better', just isn't so IME. I use a variety of methods on all my tanks, and have for years with good results. In most cases, and in my situation, it just doesn't make a difference worth concerning myself with. Life happens and I work around that and all fish do great. It's my view and recommendation that all should use their judgment while considering the fish's requirements. Too many variables to say it's best to always do this or that. Measure your nitrates and let that be your guide because that's all we have to go by other than fish health and vitality.


----------



## Number6 (Mar 13, 2003)

Nodalizer said:


> Well simply put... If I am sitting in a tank of poop and you remove the poop and dirty water each day, I would be a lot happier then you changing my poop bucket once a week. Yes you clean out my home, but I still suffer the effect each day up until you do the change


I will be far happier if you remove 90% then if you only remove 25%.

Look, i see your point... But it actually works against you just as it does for you.

If i do more frequent smaller water changes, eventually i reach a point of equilibrium with the nitrate production that results in a high point of nitrate right before the water change and a low point right after the wc. This also happens with less frequent and large water changes. With the tank getting less frequent but large water changes, the tank spends approx half the time cleaner than the tank getting smaller wc, and half dirtier. If you believe that the effects of the time spent dirtier outweigh any benefits of the cleaner time, then you would hold on to your theory. 
Over the years, through journaling multiple tanks, i have come to the personal opinion that fish thrive in clean water and the strength they build up during that time allows them to sail through the occasional dirty tank time like a vacation or missed water change. My "newer method" of aquarium keeping is to favor larger water changes over many small ones. I do so on both my cichlid tanks and my reef tank. Now, you should see the strong opinions i get in the salt water forums to that idea! :lol:


----------



## prov356 (Sep 20, 2006)

> Well simply put... If I am sitting in a tank of poop and you remove the poop and dirty water each day, I would be a lot happier then you changing my poop bucket once a week. Yes you clean out my home, but I still suffer the effect each day up until you do the change.


Fish poop sitting in the tank doesn't harm the fish. They don't care and it doesn't make them 'unhappy'. If allowed to accumulate, then it's broken down into dissolved organics (nitrates) which have been shown to have some deleterious effects on fish. We all seem to agree on that, but much debate as to how much. If the poop never broke down, the water would never become 'dirty'.

Here's one example of some study that's been done, although much more needs to be done. Nitrate toxicity

If the point you're trying to make were true, then we should also be cleaning our filters daily for best results to remove all organic solids as quickly as possible. Battling nitrates is more than just water changes. I suppose you could argue that the water would be 'cleaner' if you did clean filters daily, but would it make any difference at all in regards to the health of the fish? I'm a proponent of the practice of the frequent removal of organic solids from a system, but there comes a point of diminishing return from the investment of time. If we're talking about the difference between weekly vs. monthly or longer, then I can see a bigger difference in the benefits. But, the debate here seems to be weekly vs daily.


----------



## Nodalizer (Nov 7, 2011)

All in all thou.. I think what he is doing is fine and his fish will be nice and healthy.

Can we all agree on that ? I think he may be getting stressed by now that he is doing something wrong. He cannot change what he is doing and IMO he doesn't need to.


----------



## rtirado (Oct 25, 2011)

100% Water changes every other day!!! DU ET!!!


----------



## Cartem2 (Oct 4, 2011)

prov356 said:


> Fish poop sitting in the tank doesn't harm the fish. They don't care and it doesn't make them 'unhappy'. If allowed to accumulate, then it's broken down into dissolved organics (nitrates) which have been shown to have some deleterious effects on fish. We all seem to agree on that, but much debate as to how much. If the poop never broke down, the water would never become 'dirty'.
> Here's one example of some study that's been done, although much more needs to be done. Nitrate toxicity


Once again Tim you have given me some great info! I thought the poo WAS bad!

Thanks guys all the info has been very helpful! I can change my habits if what I'm doing hurts my fish, that is my main worry is hurting my fish. I did not think that small frequent changes would hurt them, but wanted it confirmed and you all have made me confident that my fish will not be harmed as long as I am careful to declor and temp my water and heaven forbid my town water doesn't have any unknown issues.


----------



## Unclescanner (Sep 23, 2011)

i have 8 tiger barbs in a 75 gallon with two emperor 400's. I plan on adding at least 4 cory cats, and a pleco. I would like input regarding tank mates for my school of barbs. I have plenty of rockwork, no wood. All input welcomed.


----------



## Nodalizer (Nov 7, 2011)

you might be better adding another topic specific to what you want?


----------



## prov356 (Sep 20, 2006)

Unclescanner said:


> i have 8 tiger barbs in a 75 gallon with two emperor 400's. I plan on adding at least 4 cory cats, and a pleco. I would like input regarding tank mates for my school of barbs. I have plenty of rockwork, no wood. All input welcomed.


You really should start a new thread. :wink:


----------



## prov356 (Sep 20, 2006)

*Cartem2*

I'm pretty inconsistent with my water changes because all tanks are different. I have tanks from 2.5 gallons to 180 gallons. Some for one purpose, some for another. You get a gut feel for what each needs after a while and couple that to what you have the time to do. I'll change anywhere from 5% because I wanted to vacuum the bottom to 50% with cooler water because I wanted to try to stimulate spawning and everything in between. If your source water is friendly to what you're keeping, it really frees you up to enjoy fishkeeping maintenance. I couldn't imagine having to worry about the % of change and frequency etc for 30 different tanks because it would otherwise harm my fish. The only time I concern myself with it is with delicate fry.


----------



## Cartem2 (Oct 4, 2011)

prov356 said:


> I'm pretty inconsistent with my water changes because all tanks are different. I have tanks from 2.5 gallons to 180 gallons. Some for one purpose, some for another. You get a gut feel for what each needs after a while and couple that to what you have the time to do. I'll change anywhere from 5% because I wanted to vacuum the bottom to 50% with cooler water because I wanted to try to stimulate spawning and everything in between. If your source water is friendly to what you're keeping, it really frees you up to enjoy fishkeeping maintenance. I couldn't imagine having to worry about the % of change and frequency etc for 30 different tanks because it would otherwise harm my fish. The only time I concern myself with it is with delicate fry.


Thanks Tim, I think its because the tank is so new that I worry so much. My worries will slowly dwindle as time goes on and I see the fish doing well. This site really helps, knowing that if I ever have an issue that I can't figure out, I can come here and get a quick answer makes it easier to relax. It probably sounds like I'm not enjoying my tank because of my worries but that's not the case, I love the tank and as long as my tank is clean and the tests show me the water levels are OK I'm good.
Thanks again for all the help guys :fish:


----------



## kodyboy (Dec 9, 2007)

Big changes have been show to remove dissolved organics far better than small changes over time, but the fish will only appreciate it if the water being replaced is replaced with better water that has simliar parameters to what they are in. Huge changes in pH, temp, alkalinity etc. can cause far more harm than the water changes helps. I change about 50% of my water weekly with my 280 gallon tank, but these are tough fish bred in local water conditions, not delicate ones.


----------



## clekchau (Jul 24, 2011)

what is a 'good' nitrate level to strive for with cichlids? i agree that nitrates should be the primary driver in water changes but that's just me.


----------



## Nodalizer (Nov 7, 2011)

You should really start your own thread, this ones done.

about 10-20 is a good level.


----------



## ndblaikie (Oct 12, 2011)

What I like to do is when doing water changes on the weekends I have my son and daughter here, allow my son to vacuum the gravel.

He loves doing it as he is 4 and finds the whole action of starting the Python hilarious.
Not only is it giving him something to do but it hopefully will make him aware of what needs to be done when he gets a tank in later life perhaps.

If he is not here then my usual maintainence is "water change wednesday", 20-30% weekly and nitrates which never go above 5PPM. It is "each to his own" on how much water change in respect to your tank size.

I recently cleaned a tank for someone and was shocked that it has been running for almost a year and the person had no idea about testing water and only changed water as it evaporated off. Nitrates were off the chart, educating the person on the "need to do water changes", nitrates are now constant at 10PPM.

The point being, for some a big change will benefit more, for others a few smaller changes are far better. With a good filtration in place then yes your water will be "squeeky clean" but there are as we know dissolved organics which will be removed during the changes.

Never had a problem with fish getting stressed during changes, in fact my LABS go nuts in the current, they love it. My tap water is about as close to perfect for Mbuna as you can get.


----------



## 13razorbackfan (Sep 28, 2011)

How often do you guys vacuum your gravel/substrate? Once a month? Once every couple weeks?


----------



## zimmy (Aug 13, 2010)

13razorbackfan said:


> How often do you guys vacuum your gravel/substrate? Once a month? Once every couple weeks?


I actually never set out to do water changes. I only vacuum the substrate (and I do it every week sometimes twice per week). While I'm vacuuming I happen to drain about 30-40% of the water and have to replace it.


----------



## 13razorbackfan (Sep 28, 2011)

zimmy said:


> 13razorbackfan said:
> 
> 
> > How often do you guys vacuum your gravel/substrate? Once a month? Once every couple weeks?
> ...


That's a good idea. I should probably do the same. I am currently doing 50-60% twice a week and only doing the vacuum every 3-4 weeks.


----------



## clekchau (Jul 24, 2011)

Nodalizer said:


> You should really start your own thread, this ones done.
> 
> about 10-20 is a good level.


'
not sure why i need to start a new thread considering one of the primary goals of frequent water changes is to reduce nitrate which is directly related to this thread so i thought the question was valid, but i guess you are the judge of when a thread is done? .... :roll:

but thanks for your expert advice.


----------



## zimmy (Aug 13, 2010)

clekchau said:


> what is a 'good' nitrate level to strive for with cichlids? i agree that nitrates should be the primary driver in water changes but that's just me.


If I hit 20, I treat it as a prompt to clean the tank. The usual recommendation is to stay under 20.


----------



## Nodalizer (Nov 7, 2011)

clekchau said:


> Nodalizer said:
> 
> 
> > You should really start your own thread, this ones done.
> ...


Your welcome


----------



## clekchau (Jul 24, 2011)

zimmy said:


> clekchau said:
> 
> 
> > what is a 'good' nitrate level to strive for with cichlids? i agree that nitrates should be the primary driver in water changes but that's just me.
> ...


with my heavy bioload i was hitting 20ish, now with the drip system it's barely to 5 but wasting alot of water, so i think i'll shoot for 10 ppm?


----------



## zimmy (Aug 13, 2010)

clekchau said:


> with my heavy bioload i was hitting 20ish, now with the drip system it's barely to 5 but wasting alot of water, so i think i'll shoot for 10 ppm?


A 10 ppm peak is very respectable. :thumb:


----------

