The Puffer Forum

I know every puffer is different but if an inch a month is average mine is below average ... 3 whole months of having him and only an inch n half growth?
amn 0ppm
N02 0ppm
N03 10 ppm
30% wc every 4 days
Sand substrate
200 gallon tank
fed 6 days a week ( craw fish, mussels, shrimp, snails)
Just updated lighting from 30 watts to 80

The old lighting was 30 watts 4500 k new 80 watts 6500 k and did treat for IP two weeks ago

Hey sw

Why did you get more powerfull lights? Do you have lots of plants?

I am planning on adding live plants but the main reason is I had two 15 inch bulbs so it wasn't lit very well at all lots of shadows and very poor lit areas then I had a bulb burn out and it cost 10 bucks a bulb so 20 bucks to do the two or 20 for a double bulb 48 inch ballast and the bulbs long story short it looks so much better his color is better and now my fake plants pop

sw10mm wrote:I know every puffer is different but if an inch a month is average mine is below average ... 3 whole months of having him and only an inch n half growth?
amn 0ppm
N02 0ppm
N03 10 ppm
30% wc every 4 days
Sand substrate
200 gallon tank
fed 6 days a week ( craw fish, mussels, shrimp, snails)
Just updated lighting from 30 watts to 80

How old is the puffer and what is the current size?

IME, 80 watts on a 200 gallon tank is quite low light, even with the better color tenp.

He's 5 n half inches about 5 months old and yes 80 is too little I want to get another 200 watts or so... I think I found my problem my heater is broke for who knows how long the tank is 72 degrees ugh time to get some new heaters

Actually I thought that 80watt is quite decent. Light is not important to fish. In most cases it is to our own preferences. Your sand substrate does not support plants very well unless well supplement with root ferts. Imo.

FYI: 80 watts over 200 gallons = 0.4WPG, very low light for photosynthesis. One WPG is considered low light. Less than half that figure might support some Java Moss, but not much in the way of vascular plants.

Totally agree.

What I meant was if the substrates used is sand, I do not really see a point increasing the light as the vascular plants are not going to do well in them either.. Unless with very good supplement or some kind of fertilised base.. Might as well go with just anubias or something with low light requirements and keep things simple. 80w just for fish seems pretty decent to me..

5 months,5 inches. Sounds normal. Keep in mind in a month he will be six, then seven

I have used a number of inert substrates. It is not that difficult. I really am quite lazy about tanks. I do keep up with the mindless work(water partials and filer rinsing). Planted tanks with full supplements are not hard if you don't have to test everything routinely - just do 50% weekly partials and dose routinely. But lighting would be a lot brighter. My Fahaka tanks all had clumps of submerse Crinum. They were simple to maintain. But I had fine gravel, not sand. Perhaps due to that only one of my Fahakas buried himself, and that was while he was quite small. He stopped when he was still immature.

Filbert has almost never attempted to bury himself, even when he lived in black sand. He still has the opportunity if he wishes, the substrate is 1/2 black sand.