BIG FISH: Swimming Space or Water Volume?

[LPS Bum]

Swimming space, hands down. Fish don’t care about total system volume. That’s useful for stability but it’s not going to register with them.

Length is the primary dimension you’re after. Tangs, Angels, Triggers etc need room to swim and lots of rock and caves for security.

 

[Seascapes]

We're talking about BIG FISH this week and we all know that BIG fish need BIGGER tanks. But what qualifies as a bigger tank? More room to swim or more water volume? Of course the BEST option is a a tank with large dimensions and plenty of water volume but you can't always get both of these together. Let's talk about it!

Which do you think is more important for BIG FISH, swimming space or tank water volume?

image via @JuniorMC8704

I believe swimming space is most important, especially for tangs. Water volume helps with stability.

 

[doubleshot00]

I think it depends on the tang. From what ive seen even the smallest tang like a Tomini or Kole tang need long runs as they fly around tanks. But something like a zebrasoma or fox face or blue hippo are lazy and dont fly around a tank.

Maybe im just talking out of my butt. But thats what I’ve observed.

 

[hoytoyed]

I think it depends on the tang. From what ive seen even the smallest tang like a Tomini or Kole tang need long runs as they fly around tanks. But something like a zebrasoma or fox face or blue hippo are lazy and dont fly around a tank.

Maybe im just talking out of my butt. But thats what I’ve observed.

Kinda agree with this. I have a blonde naso, a fairly large purple, about 5” each, and a hippo, as well as a larger juvenile Emporer, about 4 1/2”, and a 4” regal. They tend to cruise in and out of the rocks grazing on whatever they find to eat. I don’t see much in the way of swimming length to length. My CB is about 5” but he’s typically standing on his head with his snoot in a rock. The meleagris wrasse seems to be more of the swimmer.
My tank is a 5x2x2 150g.
And what is the definition of a “big” fish? How big is big?

 

[blackhole88]

We're talking about BIG FISH this week and we all know that BIG fish need BIGGER tanks. But what qualifies as a bigger tank? More room to swim or more water volume? Of course the BEST option is a a tank with large dimensions and plenty of water volume but you can't always get both of these together. Let's talk about it!

Which do you think is more important for BIG FISH, swimming space or tank water volume?

image via @JuniorMC8704

My tank is 12 ft long 3 ft wide and 42” tall holds 1000 gallons and my tangs use every inch of it. I’d say the length is most important for how my fish behave

 

[ShoalSister]

I had to make this choice and went for swimming length over volume for our 125 g. But I'm understocking it so volume is even less important. We have only 2 big fish in it and the goal is 3 or 4 at most.

One of our other setups has more depth and it's a pain when I have to retrieve something. Although the fish in it seem to use all of the space so they're enjoying it.

 

[Tamberav]

A person thinks their tank is enough space... say a 60g cube is fine for my tang, my 55g is fine for my tang...they eat and swim and are fat... yada yada...

then if they upgraded to a8ft, 10ft or 12ft... they would realize.. how behavior can change.

It is impossible to get the same behavior in a 2ft/3ft cube tank as say a large raceway tank for large or even small active fish.

 

[rtparty]

After seeing my tangs and Rabbitfish in my 6x3 tank, I'm starting to think even 6 feet isn't enough room for them.

Can some do okay in a 4 foot tank? For a while I guess.

If I ever get the chance to go larger in a custom home, it will be 10x4 minimum. 12x6 preferred for a peninsula.

 

[HankstankXXL750 Verified Sponsor]

I have to say a combination of both. A huge tank stacked full of rock won’t let big fish stretch their legs (fins lol), yet a smaller tank with more swimming space will get elevated nutrients faster. I like a larger tank with plenty of rock, but arranged to allow for easy movement.

 

[Squidward]

Tall tanks are basically useless. I'll take an 8ft long tank vs tall tank any day any time.

 

[MnFish1]

My tank is 8' x 4' (32 sq ft) and only has 400 gallons. I know of another tank on here that has less swimming space 10' x 3' (30 sq ft) but is nearly double my tanks volume.

I'm using your example - not to criticize your post - but I answered 'other' because the parameters in the question aren't well spelled out. For example - how big is a 'big fish'. In your example The swimming area in the 10x3 tank has more since it has double the volume and 2 feet longer. It must be nearly 2 x as high as the 8x4 tank. The amount of swimming space is proportional to total volume in most cases. For example - I don't think someone would say that a 6x6 foot cube has more swimming space - even though it's 36 sq feet. I.e. the shape of the fish in question is may be more important. A shark would likely do better in a longer tank as compared to a batfish.

 

[PeeperKeeper]

Who’s had a tang that liked to swim at a power head? ‍

 

[PeeperKeeper]

Oops I guess emoji’s don’t work here. That female symbol in my post was supposed to be a woman raising her hand.

 

[zena37]

I would add that varied current is perhaps just as important as how much room they have to swim.

My Vlamingi loves putting his nose to the current and basking

 

[Aspect]

I'm using your example - not to criticize your post - but I answered 'other' because the parameters in the question aren't well spelled out. For example - how big is a 'big fish'. In your example The swimming area in the 10x3 tank has more since it has double the volume and 2 feet longer. It must be nearly 2 x as high as the 8x4 tank. The amount of swimming space is proportional to total volume in most cases. For example - I don't think someone would say that a 6x6 foot cube has more swimming space - even though it's 36 sq feet. I.e. the shape of the fish in question is may be more important. A shark would likely do better in a longer tank as compared to a batfish.

Swimming space is not an opinion it's a fact, sq ft is non negotiable. I have sharks and they would do much better in my tank than a 10' x 3' because that foot difference in the width is a lot. Sharks will swim around the edges of a tank. For tangs possibly longer runs are better, but after 8' that makes a negligible difference. A 3' wide tank would likely start stressing an adult shark as it's just not wide enough.

 

[Timfish]

It depends in the fish, and a good way to tell is the shape of the tail fin and how well the size dorsal and anal fins. Generally if the tail fin is shaped like a large paddle and has large dorsal and anal fins it's good for manuvering around rock but not good for speed while a V shaped tail fin and relaticely small dorsal and anal fins is designed for speed. In a group of fish there will be genus and species variation. Naso elegans and Zebrasoma desjardini are good examples.

 

[DavidinGA]

I'm not sure the language of this poll was written clearly enough imo.

Per the poll choices, this is how I understand the 2 defined options:

#1 More room to swim
That one is clear to me. The tank is going to be larger to have more room to swim. Got it.

#2 More tank water volume
This is a bit vague. To me, this can mean I have a 40g breeder tank and say a 150 gallon rubbermaid stock tank for my sump and my volume is 190 gallons. I'm going to put an 8" naso tang in the 40g display and he's gonna be happy. Obviously it's absurd to believe "more tank water volume" is of any value for housing larger fish when "more tank water volume" places no emphasis on what an appropriate DT size should be.

 

[MnFish1]

Swimming space is not an opinion it's a fact, sq ft is non negotiable. I have sharks and they would do much better in my tank than a 10' x 3' because that foot difference in the width is a lot. Sharks will swim around the edges of a tank. For tangs possibly longer runs are better, but after 8' that makes a negligible difference. A 3' wide tank would likely start stressing an adult shark as it's just not wide enough.

Everything is negotiable It's like the old debate: Owner A has a 4 foot tank they have tangs that are 'doing fine' - conclusion - a 4 foot tank is fine for tangs. Then Owner B comes up - they think a 4 foot tank is too small - and they have a 5 foot tank - and their tangs are doing great. Thus a 5 foot tank is fine for tangs. Then Owner C, D, and E with 6, 7, and 8 foot tanks respectively weigh in - with Owner E stating A, B, C, D all have tanks that are too small. This goes on ad infinitum - to the point where some people say 'tangs should not be kept in aquaria'.

Likewise, your sharks in the 8 x 4 tank would also do better in a 10 x 4 tank, etc etc etc. I guess someone will have to fill me in If you look at a reef or a shelf - in the ocean where the height is far deeper than any of our tanks (except perhaps in a zoo/aquarium) Do we actually know whether swimming space or tank water volume is more important - or are both important? Said another way - which tank is better - an 8 foot by 4 foot by 2 feet tall or an 8 foot x 4 foot x 6 feet tall with lets say a large rock wall?

EDIT - perhaps I'm reading the question incorrectly - swimming space implies the footprint of the tank, tank volume implies (to me) - the footprint and depth.

 

[Aspect]

Everything is negotiable It's like the old debate: Owner A has a 4 foot tank they have tangs that are 'doing fine' - conclusion - a 4 foot tank is fine for tangs. Then Owner B comes up - they think a 4 foot tank is too small - and they have a 5 foot tank - and their tangs are doing great. Thus a 5 foot tank is fine for tangs. Then Owner C, D, and E with 6, 7, and 8 foot tanks respectively weigh in - with Owner E stating A, B, C, D all have tanks that are too small. This goes on ad infinitum - to the point where some people say 'tangs should not be kept in aquaria'.

Likewise, your sharks in the 8 x 4 tank would also do better in a 10 x 4 tank, etc etc etc. I guess someone will have to fill me in If you look at a reef or a shelf - in the ocean where the height is far deeper than any of our tanks (except perhaps in a zoo/aquarium) Do we actually know whether swimming space or tank water volume is more important - or are both important? Said another way - which tank is better - an 8 foot by 4 foot by 2 feet tall or an 8 foot x 4 foot x 6 feet tall with lets say a large rock wall?

EDIT - perhaps I'm reading the question incorrectly - swimming space implies the footprint of the tank, tank volume implies (to me) - the footprint and depth.

Well I'm not saying that a certain size tank won't work for a certain creature, but I know there is a higher chance of stress in a tank with less swimming space. Like in Jay Hemdal's post if your tank has a height of 12" or more than it won't make a difference after that as fish will spend most of their time swimming 2 dimensionally. I'm just stating what I have personally seen and what experts have stated already.

 

[FishOkay]

Well I'm not saying that a certain size tank won't work for a certain creature, but I know there is a higher chance of stress in a tank with less swimming space. Like in Jay Hemdal's post if your tank has a height of 12" or more than it won't make a difference after that as fish will spend most of their time swimming 2 dimensionally. I'm just stating what I have personally seen and what experts have stated already.

Wronggg atleast in my case anyway. Like I said in previous post mine love using the whole height of the tank. Infact it got me thinking why people don't have taller tanks lol. Noone can state fact about what a fish will do in anyone elses tank experts don't know anything because our tanks aren't the ocean and they don't have every fish in every aquarium to compare.