# Changing over from Tropical to Cichlids? Many questions



## blue-sun (Jan 17, 2015)

Hello,

This is my first post here. I've currently got a 75G tank stocked with some freshwater fish, 4 Colombian Tetra's, a GloFish Tetra (roughly the same size as the Colombian Tetras)) 2 danios, a common pleco and a cory catfish. We're thinking of changing the tank over to a Cichlid tank. I'm not sure if we want to go with African or South American yet, still doing research.

Which, if any, of our tropical fish can we keep in the tank if we do switch over? One of the Colombian Tetras seems to be pretty aggressive and is the dominate one. If the Cichlids are young and small enough, would they be ok in the same tank as the Colombians? What about the Cory and Plecos? I'm assuming the danios, since they are pretty small, would be easy prey for the cichlids, so we'd probably try and find a home for them, possibly in my 15G shrimp tank if push comes to shove.

Now, about the water in the tank, what's the best way to get the PH to the correct Cichlid level? Crushed coral in the back of the HOB filters? I'm not a fan of the HOB's that we currently have, Emperor 400's, they are very loud, so I'm thinking of going with a Canister filter instead. I like the Fluvals from the research I've done, they seem to be pretty popular. Any recommendations?

Thanks in advance, links to other threads and resources for a noobie to the cichlid world are appreciated.


----------



## DJRansome (Oct 29, 2005)

Start reading articles in the CF Library and also research husbandry for your existing fish. I'd say you would not want to mix any of your current fish with Africans but SA IDK. The pleco will outgrow the tank so I would rehome.

You need to test your water for pH and KH...then see if it is already good for the fish you want to keep, or if you have to raise the pH. Check Reviews for canister recommendations.


----------



## Catfisher7 (Jan 24, 2013)

Your current fish would be fine with some south/central americans, as long as they are on the smaller side. (convicts, firemouths, sajica)


----------



## sumthinfishy (Jan 26, 2013)

Catfisher7 said:


> Your current fish would be fine with some south/central americans, as long as they are on the smaller side. (convicts, firemouths, sajica)


your current stock would def NOT go well with convicts or firemouths. the convicts and especially the firemouths would kill them


----------



## blue-sun (Jan 17, 2015)

DJRansome said:


> Start reading articles in the CF Library and also research husbandry for your existing fish. I'd say you would not want to mix any of your current fish with Africans but SA IDK. The pleco will outgrow the tank so I would rehome.
> 
> You need to test your water for pH and KH...then see if it is already good for the fish you want to keep, or if you have to raise the pH. Check Reviews for canister recommendations.


 I'll head over to the CF library shortly. I thought that our 75G was big enough for the Pleco, I thought 55G was the minimum size for one.



Catfisher7 said:


> Your current fish would be fine with some south/central americans, as long as they are on the smaller side. (convicts, firemouths, sajica)


I hope the Colombian's are ok, I don't think the Danio's would be though. Still going to do some research.



sumthinfishy said:


> Catfisher7 said:
> 
> 
> > Your current fish would be fine with some south/central americans, as long as they are on the smaller side. (convicts, firemouths, sajica)
> ...


thanks


----------



## DJRansome (Oct 29, 2005)

I found this by googling common pleco size:
These guys tend to max out, in the average home aquarium, at between 12 and 24 inches.

For a 12" fish I would want a 72" aquarium minimum.


----------



## BC in SK (Aug 11, 2012)

Most common plecos (_Pterygoplichthys paradilis_ will get around 11"-13" at most. Very few will get any larger then this; never seen one much above 13". Of course there are other species of "plecos", some of which get larger then this but are not too common in the hobby.
Plecos live on surfaces. Not at all the same as fish that swims in the water column. IMO and IME, a 75 gal. is more then enough space for one.
It's a 200 gram fish at a 13" size....about equivalent to a large male salvini, large male bumble bee, or a jack Dempsey. Not that large of a fish and plus the fact it lives only on surfaces, hard to see why some see a 75 gal. at too small to house one!


----------



## PhinFan1981 (Nov 15, 2014)

Personally I don't see any 13" fish fit for a 4' tank. Why would you want a 12" pleco in a 75 Gallon anyways? I would think a 12" pleco in a smallish tank would look ridiculous.


----------



## DJRansome (Oct 29, 2005)

I am probably applying my Rift Lake mentality to common plecos in error. I'd go for bristlenose personally. But I'm no expert on new world fish.

A 13" bumble bee? Are you talking about crabro?


----------



## PhinFan1981 (Nov 15, 2014)

Talking about pleco...Previous post was talking about 11-13" pleco.But I'm saying any 13" fish is too big for a 4' tank. I think BC in SK was comparing the weight of a 12" pleco to a mature Crabro. I think???


----------



## BC in SK (Aug 11, 2012)

DJRansome said:


> A 13" bumble bee? Are you talking about crabro?


The size of a fish = body weight. Just like any other animal, because it's long and skinny does not necessarily make it large .
Nobody said anything about a 13" crabro.

On top of that, the space a fish needs really depends on what it is. A fish that lives on surfaces can find plenty of space on the 5 surfaces of a tank. Not at all the same as avery active swimmer that needs open water for swimming space.


----------



## PhinFan1981 (Nov 15, 2014)

How big do bristlenose get? I know the common pleco can get huge.I've seen common pleco in the showtank at LFS that was bigger than 13".


----------



## PhinFan1981 (Nov 15, 2014)

You seem to compare Crabro to pleco. Crabro max out at 9". I wouldn't stock a 9" fish in a 4' tank either. I am not one to own pleco,but my opinion is a big fish deserves a big tank. A pleco needs room to move as does any fish.


----------



## BC in SK (Aug 11, 2012)

To the OP, what your current stock list would work with really depends on which cichlids you are interested. Some SA and African riverine cichlids would do fine with what you currently have. Smaller CA like convicts and FM would likely prove too aggressive for most of your stock. Even cories seldom do well with aggressive CA like convicts.

IMO, the only reason why crabro is unsuitable for a 75 gal. is because of the large numbers of fish that are usually stocked in a mbuna tank. Pack 20 cichlids in a tank, then of course there isn't room for more then one 8" fish.

Here is an example of three 10" fish in a 75 gal., including a common pleco. IMO does not look cramped nor ridiculous from my perspective. Of course a bigger tank is always better, but it does these fish just fine. More active, fast moving fish might not do well at these sizes in a 75 gal., but then were talking about different fish http://vid192.photobucket.com/albums/z116/Bern-C/034_zpse27a462e.mp4
I know a common pleco at 10" is really 1/2 size (around 100 grams), but I've had 13" in the past in 4 ft. tanks, and IMO it is little different then this. IME, takes about 4-5 years from purchase for a common pleco to grow to 10". Takes 7-8 years plus, from purchase, for them to grow to around 13" if it ever get's to that size at all.


----------



## dsiple3 (Mar 4, 2014)

@ Blue-Sun, I am in sort of the same situation as you. I am trying to figure out what fish to put into a 95g. I am not trying to save any specific species of fish though. My advice on this is an add on to DJRansome's initial advice for the library articles. I suggest going to the profiles for different species of the different regions. When you have seen examples from the major areas, then narrow down to the fish you would like to be a centerpiece in your tank. Then build around that and see which of your current stock would play well with what you want. You may find that you will have to rehome them all or only a few.

As for the pleco concerns for this size of tank, I am by far not a fan of pleco's, especially common pleco's. The biggest problem for me when it comes to big pleco's is the increased bio-load they add. You are looking at moving to some dirty fish, cichlids, and will have a concern with filtration. Adding a canister or 2 depending on your final bio-load can combat this issue. I look at the final length of the fish at its adult size when determining the appropriateness of a tank for it. If it cannot turn around comfortably in the tank with aquascaping taken into account, I would omit it from the stock list. So a completely bare 75G would be fine for me to keep one of these in. A 75 with plants and aquascaping for the rest of the fish, I would reconsider.

I personally prefer canisters. I had 2 canister filters on my old 55G because of the bio-load of the fish I had in that tank. Before that, I ran 2 Whisper 60's.


----------



## blue-sun (Jan 17, 2015)

BC in SK said:


> To the OP, what your current stock list would work with really depends on which cichlids you are interested. Some SA and African riverine cichlids would do fine with what you currently have. Smaller CA like convicts and FM would likely prove too aggressive for most of your stock. Even cories seldom do well with aggressive CA like convicts.
> 
> IMO, the only reason why crabro is unsuitable for a 75 gal. is because of the large numbers of fish that are usually stocked in a mbuna tank. Pack 20 cichlids in a tank, then of course there isn't room for more then one 8" fish.
> 
> ...


Thanks. I think we're leaning towards the Mbuna type of cichlid, but I still need to do more research. I don't want to have to buy feeder fish for anything at this point (not a fan of purposely buying anything to have it be fed/killed). We've also recently found at a LFS a 93 gallon cube tank for the same price as the 60G cube at the other LFS, so we might do that instead. I'm also leaning towards a Fluval FX5 or a pair of Eheim canister filters. Again, first I need to get the new tank and figure out the fish before I do anything.



dsiple3 said:


> @ Blue-Sun, I am in sort of the same situation as you. I am trying to figure out what fish to put into a 95g. I am not trying to save any specific species of fish though. My advice on this is an add on to DJRansome's initial advice for the library articles. I suggest going to the profiles for different species of the different regions. When you have seen examples from the major areas, then narrow down to the fish you would like to be a centerpiece in your tank. Then build around that and see which of your current stock would play well with what you want. You may find that you will have to rehome them all or only a few.
> 
> As for the pleco concerns for this size of tank, I am by far not a fan of pleco's, especially common pleco's. The biggest problem for me when it comes to big pleco's is the increased bio-load they add. You are looking at moving to some dirty fish, cichlids, and will have a concern with filtration. Adding a canister or 2 depending on your final bio-load can combat this issue. I look at the final length of the fish at its adult size when determining the appropriateness of a tank for it. If it cannot turn around comfortably in the tank with aquascaping taken into account, I would omit it from the stock list. So a completely bare 75G would be fine for me to keep one of these in. A 75 with plants and aquascaping for the rest of the fish, I would reconsider.
> 
> I personally prefer canisters. I had 2 canister filters on my old 55G because of the bio-load of the fish I had in that tank. Before that, I ran 2 Whisper 60's.


Thanks, still need to do more research!


----------



## DJRansome (Oct 29, 2005)

I would not do a cube for mbuna...very limiting. Better to get a 48" long 33G than a 30" 93G cube.


----------



## sumthinfishy (Jan 26, 2013)

DJRansome said:


> I would not do a cube for mbuna...very limiting. Better to get a 48" long 33G than a 30" 93G cube.


i disagree. i know that the height does not help, but u would actually have more surface area with the 93 cube (30"x30") then u would with 33 long (48"x12").


----------



## dsiple3 (Mar 4, 2014)

Do you have a floor space limitation or do you just like the look of a cube more?

I got a new 125G for less than I am seeing many of the 93G cubes. My LFS had them for $300 tank only and $600 with stand.

I would say get the biggest tank, floor space wise, as you can. Height is less important than floor space, especially for mbuna.

Keep doing your research and make wise decisions in the beginning. You and your fish will be happier for it in the future.


----------



## DJRansome (Oct 29, 2005)

And length is more important than width (front to back). You want to stretch out those territories and minimize neighbors. I'd don't go by surface area...that is the point I was trying to make.


----------



## sumthinfishy (Jan 26, 2013)

surface area is more important in spacing them out than length is. more surface area equals more space. the only bennefit to the longer tank is for our viewing experience.


----------



## sumthinfishy (Jan 26, 2013)

after thinking about i agree with DjRansome to an extent. i would agree that if i were trying to space out 2 fish or 2 specific groups of fish then having 48" seperating them is better. however, if i had multiple fish or groups that i were trying to give space to then i believe overall surface are is more important.


----------



## noddy (Nov 20, 2006)

sumthinfishy said:


> after thinking about i agree with DjRansome to an extent. i would agree that if i were trying to space out 2 fish or 2 specific groups of fish then having 48" seperating them is better. however, if i had multiple fish or groups that i were trying to give space to then i believe overall surface are is more important.


I know that you keep furcifers and I'll bet that you agree that a 6' x 2' tank is better than a 4' x 4' tank to house them even though the 4' tank has 4 square feet of surface area more than the six footer. I think that's what DJ is getting at. Same for schooling fish like cyps. 72" x 18" would be better than 36" x 36".


----------



## sumthinfishy (Jan 26, 2013)

we are talking about mbuna right? my comments here are based on mbuna. furcifers are completely different. even haps and peacocks i would say are better with length. however, i thought were were talking mbuna setup.


----------



## PhinFan1981 (Nov 15, 2014)

While more width is better than less width...length is much more important than width. The length serves better for Mbuna because it gets more distance between rivals and sub-dominant fish. In my experience breaking the line of sight is a very good method to reduce aggression between rivals.
(Out of sight-Out of mind) It is easier to pull this off with a greater distance between territory's. The 48" length tanks are better than square-like ones even if they have equal surface area. Width is good,but less important than the distance you gain with a long tank.


----------



## sumthinfishy (Jan 26, 2013)

however with multiple groups they are limited to taking space in a straight line rather than scattered because of width constrictions. now u have groups inches apart instead of spread out. as i already stated 48" is better than 30"x30 if u only have two groups to seperate. if u have multiple then a 48"x12" will not be as good as 30"x30. "line of site is side by side in 48"x12" with multiple groups


----------



## The Cichlid Guy (Oct 18, 2014)

sumthinfishy said:


> however with multiple groups they are limited to taking space in a straight line rather than scattered because of width constrictions. now u have groups inches apart instead of spread out. as i already stated 48" is better than 30"x30 if u only have two groups to seperate. if u have multiple then a 48"x12" will not be as good as 30"x30. "line of site is side by side in 48"x12" with multiple groups


Fish on opposite sides of a 48" inch tank = 48" apart.
Fish on opposite corners of a 30" tank = ~40" apart.

It's more about the distance fish can put between themselves, not the area they can occupy.


----------



## sumthinfishy (Jan 26, 2013)

i will explain again. TWO groups in a 48" tank is better because they are further apart. MULTIPLE groups will be better with overall surface area. with only 12" back to front u would end up with MULTIPLE groups side by side. do we understand? please read post before responding


----------



## PhinFan1981 (Nov 15, 2014)

I disagree. I have an all male mbuna setup in a 48" long tank and would not recommend this in a square tank with equal surface area. I have a 48" setup with 1 group of Ps.Flavus and Danio and again would not recommend this in a square tank. I read your post before I responded. Reading your post is why i responded. Understand?


----------



## sumthinfishy (Jan 26, 2013)

well we will have to agree to disagree. however your last post stated the distances between TWO groups of fish as 48" and 30". i was simply enforcing my point that i was not talking about 2 fish. and an all male setup is different then having groups of fems and males. we all that right?


----------



## sumthinfishy (Jan 26, 2013)

sorry wasnt your post. it was another one. my reference to reading before responding was to that person. not u


----------



## PhinFan1981 (Nov 15, 2014)

But I understood that you have stated unless you are dealing with two groups... then a square tank without length but more surface area is better than a tank with better length. I just was sharing my input/experience regarding 90gal. cube vs 55gal standard. I don't agree that the length in a 4' tank is less ideal than a 30x30 cube tank.Im not a fan of square tanks at all.


----------



## sumthinfishy (Jan 26, 2013)

to be honest, either am i. i am solely speaking in regards to the comment that a 33 long would be better for the op's situation than his 93 cube. i dont believe that comment to be true in the op's scenario. if we are talking about personal preferences and what i use. then yes i prefer long tanks and dislike cubes


----------



## PhinFan1981 (Nov 15, 2014)

We can agree to disagree...I have had pretty good success with my long tanks. And your setups prove you have had success with yours as well.My opinion is the O.P. Would be better for what he will be stocking to avoid the cube.Long is better than wide! LoL


----------



## blue-sun (Jan 17, 2015)

dsiple3 said:


> Do you have a floor space limitation or do you just like the look of a cube more?
> 
> I got a new 125G for less than I am seeing many of the 93G cubes. My LFS had them for $300 tank only and $600 with stand.
> 
> ...


A little of both, the 75G is tight in the room that it's in, the cube would work a little better overall in it and my wife likes the look of the cube better.

Still researching and reading as much as I can. Lots of good info here!


----------



## PhinFan1981 (Nov 15, 2014)

The cube would work too. I just believe you would be much more limited to what you would be able to stock.Saulosi or Demasoni may work well in this footprint. Both are gorgeous fish.


----------



## dsiple3 (Mar 4, 2014)

blue-sun said:


> A little of both, the 75G is tight in the room that it's in, the cube would work a little better overall in it and my wife likes the look of the cube better.
> 
> Still researching and reading as much as I can. Lots of good info here!


Given the space limitations and your wife's preference (gotta keep the wife happy), my preference would be the Demasoni and Yellow Lab set up. They normally get along together given that Dems aggressive focus is primarily intraspecies. Yellow Labs IME have quite a bit less aggression and don't antagonize the Dems much. However, to keep dems, you really want 12 with maybe only 2 males. Optimal would be 15 with 2 males. From experience, in this setup, the dems will stay on the rocks, the yellow labs will occupy the lower part and mid levels of the tank. A species that tends to occupy upper levels as well as lower is the Yellow Tail Acei as a possible 3rd species.

Another Option would be Salousi (or any other dimorphic species you and your wife like) and Yellow Tail Acei (or another monomorphic species). You get the look of 3 species with only 2.

With a 30x30 footprint, I personally wouldn't do more than 2 species although you could get away with 3. It really is going to come down to how you plan to aquascape as well. I would take a close look at the rule of thirds, especially for this type of tank. A larger pile of rocks in the back corner with a smaller but distinctly separate pile in the opposite front corner would provide a good enough cover and line of sight break for most aggressive fish. With dems, they will go as high in the water column as the rock pile is with their belly almost always facing the rock.

This footprint is very doable, but you really want to be selective on fish conspecific aggression and adult size among other factors.


----------



## blue-sun (Jan 17, 2015)

My buddy who had Cichlids just told me about Hoplarchus psittacusm, a Colombian Cichlid. My parents were both born in Colombia, hence why I have Colombian Tetras, so I'm off to do some research on those! LOL

Also, it appears that we'll be heading over to the LFS this weekend and picking up the 93 Gallon Cube. We're going on a Disney World vacation in 2 weeks, so the tank will likely sit in the Garage/Basement until we get back from vacation and set it up then, but we'll see what happens.


----------



## blue-sun (Jan 17, 2015)

Back from vacation and we're getting going on the switch over.

Ordered the 93G cube last night from the LFS, it'll be here in 2 weeks. A different LFS had a door buster sale yesterday, so we got there early and grabbed a pair of Fluval 306's canister filter for cheap, a 150W heater, some black sand and some other misc items that were on sale. Also picked up some Malawi buffer to start changing the pH of our tank over for when we get the mBuna's (still researching exactly which ones we're going to get, but at this point I want to get the new tank set up and the new filters with biofilm on them. Local on CL also has Texas Holey rock for $2/pound (the LFS was $4 a pound with 25% off, but the CL one is still cheaper) to also help with the pH.

I have about 2 weeks to really research and find the fish I want to get. Also, still trying to unload my Colombian tetras with no avail. I guess worse case scenario, I'll rehome them to the LFS that I got them at.


----------

