Ira

The specs don't seem to add up. They're 800 lumens at 30 watts for $400, that's about 26 lumens per watt, not much better than incandescent. They suggest for a 4 foot tank that you use 3. So $1200 and 2400 lumens. That doesn't seem very bright since I'd estimate my 4 foot tank is pretty low light and I have somewhere around 8000 Lumens of lighting. So need 9 at $3600 and 270 watts to match 145 watts of cheapie fluoros Oh, that's probably USD so make it $4400nzd.

I seriously doubt it. It's quite difficult to have too much light, so it causes damage. I don't know what the specs on the lights you're thinking of are, but average sunlight in places like the amazon is around 4-5 kw/square meter. So the energy of sunlight falling on your tank would be about 855 watts, about 43% of that is visible light being 368 watts. To match that amount of visible light, assuming perfect reflectors you'd need a light setup that produces 368 watts of actual light. A really GOOD T5 setup produces about 100 lumens/watt. 100% efficiency is 683 giving it, rounded a 15% efficiency. That means to produce the 368 watts of actual light needed to match the sun you'd need 2453 watts of T5s with very good reflectors. And that's over just a tiny little 60 liter tank.

Soon...

Wow, that redspot is TINY!

Those feeders look a bit big. Maybe they need to be fed to the sharks and something smaller used to feed the koi?

Frequency is, most likely, irrelevant. But the specs on the adapter probably also say 50/60 or 50-60 hz. It's probably using an electronic transformer to convert the power to the 3-6ish volt DC the LEDs would use anyway.

Those look like some nice green severums though.

Go with the first one. A bog plant planted in the hollow and growing over the tank sounds cool.

The "Watts per liter" rule of thumb is based on fluoros, not incandescents. Incandescents produce heat with a tiny bit of light as a byproduct.

I'm a big fan of uvular fricatives.

Many people don't approve of spreading mutts and hybrids, especially when they're going to likely be sold falsely labeled to people who don't known any better and will then insist they're pure because that's what the LFS said. It's part of the reason many species are difficult or impossible to find good quality fish.

I think your parents should have explained this to you a long time ago, but here it goes... When a bird and a bee really love each other they find some flowers and make little bees. But when when a bee is alone and doesn't have anything better to do he'll grab a national geographic, flip to the article with half naked africanized honeybees and find somewhere private. Does it all make sense now?

Smelt/cucumber fish would be not particularly educated guess. But yours look a bit bigger bodied than that.

Well, here's a pic, not a really nice one, of her 2-3 minutes ago..

Alright, here... I have my own pin.

Nope, no barbels and upwards rather than downwards facing mouth.

Same breed yeah, all three are. Alright, here's the real me...

Here's a picture of him: And here's me collecting some seawater.

That used to be in case we had children visiting, we could throw them in the cage.

Few more pics... Be so much easier if everything was perfectly square, but noooo despite measuring and checking and adjusting for hours nothing is perfect. :an!gry

No, they're on the top of my head.... :sage:

That sounds about right. Most cichlids are in the $15-20ish range. That's not particularly expensive really. A small school of tetras can easily be $50-60.

Quite happily, yeah. I once nearly had my finger bitten off by a puffer once... Ok, I was holding some bloodworms and he got my finger a little.

Should be better than nothing, but I doubt it would be as good as a coarse sponge.

A lot of point and shoots do macro shots pretty well. Better than a DSLR without a macro lens. Small sensor=closer focusing. Just an average fishy one with a 9 year old point and shoot. And this one from one about 7 years old