Do fish eat better in captivity or in the wild?

[Bhor217]

I feed my fish a variety of food and they seem to eat it without hesitation; almost without effort. I’d say that carnivorous fish tend to eat any and everything meaty fed to them, hence my thinking: fish eat better in captivity. They’re guaranteed a meal, they have a meal schedule and high quality foods being fed to them. Or so I think...

But omnivorous fish like tangs (with a preferred herbivorous diet) probably eat better in the wild. Sure, you can feed them well but do fish like that eat better in captivity than the wild? Grazing and all. How about mandarins? For certain, parrotfish are best left in the sea. Triggers as well IMO. What’s your experience with different fish?

Thoughts are all welcomed.

What is your reasoning that triggers should be left in the ocean? Just curious. Thanks!

 

[siggy]

What is your reasoning that triggers should be left in the ocean? Just curious. Thanks!

Dont they require live mussels to sustain there health. (in the shells) advanced skill level ?

 

[Halal Hotdog]

Very interesting topic. As a whole, I would say fish eat much better and more diverse in the wild.

My logic: Captive juvenile fish rarely get close to the size of their wild counterparts (for the most part). Many argue that is has nothing to do with tank size (I semi-disagree). If we hold this assertion true then it could only be diet driven.

Secondly: Dead and frozen food rarely has the same nutritional equivalence of fresh.

Even for us that feed frozen, usually it is a handful of seafood that we feed everyday.

As we have learned with Anthias, frequency is as important to volume of food being offered. This is somewhere most reefers come up short.

Now this is not to say that what we feed is inappropriate. I feel nutritionally we are giving our fish everything they need to thrive, not just survive. Is it perfect? No, but seeing that we can maintain coloration, moderate growth rates, and 20+ years of longevity are good indicators.

 

[siggy]

@Halal Hotdog gota love that handle

 

[lonelyfloat]

Depends on the fish.

 

[Jacked Reefer]

You guys also have to consider if what we are feeding is even natural. In what world does a butterflyfish eat squid. And is the non naturalness of that detrimental to the fishes health?

 

[shred5]

I feel like the eat MORE in captivity because it is easier to obtain. I feel like they eat BETTER in the wild because of they can follow their naturally adapted feeding habits without any processing or freezing.

Yea plus something like some anthias should have lots of feedings during the day and I bet most lucky if they get three..

So yea it depends on the fish and on the reef keeper and what he feed or how often.

 

[Dr. Dendrostein]

I’ve been watching lots of diving videos recently which has got my brain running. Watching fish I keep and have kept in the wild is really intriguing. It begged me to think, am I providing?

You made back one piece from ocean trip. I knew you would. Any pictures?

 

[Aquanaut WA]

We try at best, but fish fall ill or perish if not meeting “minimum” diet requirements. When nutrition and environment is met then breeding completes the answer...are they better off in our care. Alas, if your fish live 5 to +10yrs, then that is acceptable husbandry. Abiet imperfect.

 

[Aquabuddy8]

100% fish in the wild are better fed, even aquarium fish that grow large never really reach their true size compared if they grew in the ocean, especially in reefs, where an almost never ending supply of food from currents bringing in plankton, eggs, worms, algae and other microfauna. I’ve been on dives where I was literally swimming in a huge soup of millions of tiny plankton, baby fish and who knows what. However fish in an aquarium never have to worry about being eaten either.

 

[Peach02]

I would say that in the ocean fish have to compete constantly for food but in the aquarium they have a constant source of food, you.

What I’m trying to say is if your feeding your fish well they are better fed in your tank however some fish which are difficult to get eating are sometimes better in the ocean depending on your setup

 

[Cell]

Wild food sources don't maintain a steady supply. Sometimes there is an abundance. Sometimes little or none. I don't see why it would be any different in the ocean than it is on land, in that regard. Having said this, one might argue having controlled daily feedings is a superior option in the long term. Of course, the quality of food also matters.

 

[Cell]

Does maximum size of a fish have more to do with nutrition or the amount of space to grow?

 

[Auquanut]

Great question, but I think there's no one right answer. In the wild, fish supposedly eat what the species evolved with. But things are changing. Also, I'm sure there's a certain amount of feast or famine involved in the natural world. I can't imagine that the availibilty of food stays constant throughout the year in any natural reef. In our tanks, we all feed differently and have a wide variety of fish living in the same tank. While one might be feeding the equivalent of cheeseburgers and milkshakes everyday, someone else may be just doing the bread and water thing. In the end, we can only do what we think is best for our own reef. Bottom line, I voted other.

 

[CaliReefs]

It all depends on the origin of the specific fish. But I like to think that captive fish eat best when they have a knowledgeable and responsible keeper, that feeds a natural variety of foods for their fish.

The worst I’ve seen is pellet food that use rice or corn as a binder, because wild Fish don’t naturally eat rice of corn. The diets we fed at the farms included algae based pellet food in combination with frozen and live food. The goal was to replicate its natural environment and diet.

 

[CaliReefs]

Does maximum size of a fish have more to do with nutrition or the amount of space to grow?

Both The enzymes and the food effect growth (maximum growth).

 

[Zuma]

Fish typically become obese in captivity; not sure if I would call that "better."

 

[CaliReefs]

Exactly. This is mostly because pellet foods using corn and or rice as the binder, is like feeding fish and coral McDonalds.

 

[AGBReef]

I'm a scuba diver and in my experience the reefs typically have fat fish swimming on them. I feed my reef tank occupants a big variety of live, frozen, flakes and pellets. I think they look similar in size and shape to their wild cousins. I give them plenty of flow so they have to work to catch it, similar to in the wild. I'm suggesting that maybe they have more variety in the wild, and that maybe what they are eating is slightly differently in my tank, but I do believe their nutritional needs are met. I have had the same fish in my 400 for the past 6 years with few changes. Like humans that come from a variety of areas and eat a variety of foods, I think the fish we keep are well able adapt to a variety of foods similar to what they would experience on the reef.

 

[SMB]

I have been fortunate enough to spend hours and hours on coral reefs. Our best kept fish rarely reach the size and girth of wild fish. Some of that is environmental and some is certainly diet.
When not spawning fish primarily have one task and that is to eat. That’s because they never know when/where their next meal will show up. I don’t think we can supply the quantity of food in our enclosed environments that fish encounter in the wild.
A school of Tangs will graze all day on algae but then attack a Damsel egg mass. They never stop. Looks like 50 footballs swimming, not pancakes.