# Messy fish vs. Clean fish. How to tell?



## FinnFan (Aug 28, 2007)

Is there some sort of general rule or helpful guide for determining how "messy" a fish is? For example, all the time I hear people say "livebearers are messier fish than egg layers". Why is this? How can you tell how messy a fish will be, aside of size?

Why is a goldfish messier than other fish its size? What makes livebearers messier than other fish their size? What makes a white cloud or a danio a relatively clean fish?

Just something I've been curious about for a while now.


----------



## BV77 (Jan 22, 2005)

I think it's all in the amount of waste they excrete.


----------



## FinnFan (Aug 28, 2007)

So, two fish that are the same size, don't excrete the same amount of waste?

For example, I believe a guppy max size is about 1.5 to 2 inches. A zebra danio is also 1.5 to 2 inches. Yet, if I understand correctly, most people would say the guppy is a "dirtier" fish. How does the guppy excrete more waste, if it is the same size fish, and you feed it the same as the danio?

Just trying to understand this concept, so I don't accidentally stock a tank with too many "dirty fish" without realizing it.


----------



## Guest (Oct 10, 2007)

It also has alot to do with diet, I believe.


----------



## Guest (Oct 10, 2007)

So does plant matter give fish more wate than animal? I've noticed that plant eating fish produce more waste than animal eating.

(POST #1000!!!!)


----------



## Corydora_FREAK (Feb 21, 2007)

Yes this is true becasue cellulose in plant matter is very fiborous and hard to digest so much of the plant matter is fiberous and not digested thus creating more waste, so plant eating fish need to eat lots of food compared to fish who predate because meat is broken down much better. Pleco's for instance are much more "messy" than say a Zebra Danio


----------



## FinnFan (Aug 28, 2007)

Well, oscars are considered "messy" and don't they eat a more protein based diet?


----------



## Fishfirst (Jan 24, 2005)

they are omnivores, but they also have a lot of biomass, they are thick, heavy fish, a 8" angel would be much less of a bioload than an 8" oscar because the angel doesn't have as much biomass... oscars are also usually fairly active as well... making them a bit "dirtier"


----------



## jones57742 (Sep 8, 2007)

Off Topic

fby:

Congratulations!!! (POST #1000!!!!)

(Poor Ron is still only very, very slowly working toward 200).


Back on Topic


FF:

Your question just "has to be one for the ages".

I have never seen this question asked or any literature which discussed it.

I have been "through everything in my brain" with cold bodies animals and have only come up with this (and this is really a WAG which I typically do not post).

Various species of not only cold bodied animals but warm bodied animals as well not only are more efficient digesters as well a ingesters (in the absorption "sense") of their food than other species.

This efficeincy appears to not be relative to the proportionate quantity of waste generated by a species and would be independent of size, body shape, etc.

TR


----------



## Fishfirst (Jan 24, 2005)

all I have to say is... huh???


----------



## FinnFan (Aug 28, 2007)

So, in other words, there really isn't a way to know if a fish is messy or not, just by knowing its dimensions, its diet, or anything of the nature. Though, overall mass is somewhat of an indicator. It is simply the experience of other aquarists who may report a fish to be messy or not. Trial and error. YMMV.


----------



## Danh (Feb 19, 2007)

I think he said....... there's no real explanation of why. 

All I know is that goldfish (at least comets) and EVERY pleco I've had are freaking nasty. I will never buy another one of either ever again.


----------



## Fishfirst (Jan 24, 2005)

well no... we are saying that diet, mass, activity level all play apart in why a fish is "messy" although "messy" isn't a great term... I would say "bioload" instead both terms are hard to quantify, unless you physically could record the amount of ammonia produced in a set period of time... in that case, large, active, herbivorous fish (plecos, goldfish) would be at the top of the list, where as small, inactive, carnivorous fish would be at the bottom... take cory catfish or a dwarf gourami for example.


----------



## Guest (Oct 10, 2007)

Excellent explanation FF.


----------



## FinnFan (Aug 28, 2007)

Good food for thought. Thanks for the explanation


----------



## redpaulhus (Jan 18, 2005)

I agree that it has alot to do with body mass (oscars and the various carps - goldfish/koi) and diet (plecos, etc).

It also has to do with eating habits (and feeding habits).
Oscars (and many other cichlids) have pharyngeal mills -- grinding "teeth" in the back of their mouths that they use to crush food.
Feed an oscar pellets, and you'll often see half of the pellet coming out of the gills as a cloud of particles.
Add this to the fact that far too many Oscar owners treat Oscars as stomachs with fins ("wanna see my fish eat ?" or "wanna see em kill ?" ) - and therefor overfeed their fish (or feed poor food choices) and you end up with a "messy" fish.
When you include the fact that Oscars are most likely the #1 sold "big" cichlid in the western world (look at how many Oscars your LFS has - now look at how many other cichlids they carry that truly get THAT large) -- Oscars get all the attention.
Anytime we have large-ish breeding pairs of cichlids at my LFS (5"+ -- not truly large) -- I get at least one person a week who points to them and says "Oscars?" - because thats the only large fish they know.
Your common one-tank fishkeeper - not a hardcore aquarist, just somebody who has a tank and kinda takes care of it - is likely to pick up an Oscar for $1.99 at Petco at least once - then the fish overwelms them because they had no idea what they were getting into. Its less likely that they pick up a $30 Frontosa, or $40 wild festae, without (hopefully) finding out what their in for.
I firmly think Oscars are the #1 oversold, unwanted, abandoned, dumped, homeless fish in the hobby - again leading to them being considered "messy".


----------



## Fishfirst (Jan 24, 2005)

true eating habits also affects the bioload of the fish


----------



## Betta1 (Jan 5, 2007)

I think one part your missing that jones mentioned (i'm not sure though I just got a haze of understanding from his post) Is that if you take everything into consideration, amount and type eaten per gram of fish, activity etc theres still one factor which can make a fish messier then another and thats how much they can absorb or how efficient they are at digesting their food. I'd imagine this again has alot to do with diet as some fish are made to digest certain things and not the general hodgepodge of what fish food is made out of, yet I'd imagine that even then theres some fish who simply digest better then others resulting in less or even more waste produced. (uhh I think)


----------

