Growth Hormone Relative To Stunting In Crowded Conditions

[koicluboftheair]

Quote: Your above statement makes me smile and I have to admit, I find it slightly comical. Do you really think that is what the breeders tanks all look like?

Certainly no two tanks look alike in this regard.

Quote: These, as I'm sure you can see from the picture, are tosai. The picture was taken to show the kaleidascope of color that is created by them, not the mass overcrowding of fish. The pond itself is many times larger than the picture depicts. The fish are simply gathering at the movement of the photographer thinking they are going to get fed, as is the case in every breeders tosai ponds no matter where you go. It's the nature of the beast.

Surely one cannot determine the volume of water those fish are in by a narrowly focussed photo. And indeed one would think they are gathered for feeding. It does prompt those concerned with good husbandry to question how many gallons of water each fish has to grow in considering hobbyists are constantly warned against crowding. I'm sure those are well cared for, but how this translates to the caring hobbyist mind might cause one to expect the total number of fish there to be multiplied by 1000gal/fish to determine proper tank/pond volume.

Quote: Also, it is coming on to winter, the fish have been pulled from the mudponds and are now being kept in the greenhouse ponds for their own protection. Crowded? Yes, by our known standards of koikeeping they are, but remember, these are mainly "flow thru" systems so they are not really crowded at all.

Is a "flow-thru" system where freshwater constantly is added while wastewater drained? If so I appreciate the benefits of such a system of course this dramatically increases water consumption that the industry recognizes as one of their achielles heals relative to permiting, regulation and control. That being said if it is an appropriate system for industry it should translate into a good practice for hobbyists.
However, back to the main thrust of the studies what do you think of the possibility that there could be a chemical trigger in the koi system that could result in stunting? Do you disbelieve that this is possible? Could a "flow-thru" system in fact help in preventing this concern?

[jnorth]

Quote: Originally Posted by koicluboftheair However, back to the main thrust of the studies what do you think of the possibility that there could be a chemical trigger in the koi system that could result in stunting? Do you disbelieve that this is possible? Could a "flow-thru" system in fact help in preventing this concern?

Yes. Yes. And yes. Isn't that pretty much common knowledge though? That's why so many of us either trickle fresh water in constantly or do 2-3 water changes a week. A true flow thru would be better but that isn't always easy or cost effective.

[koicluboftheair]

Quote: Originally Posted by jnorth Yes. Yes. And yes. Isn't that pretty much common knowledge though? That's why so many of us either trickle fresh water in constantly or do 2-3 water changes a week. A true flow thru would be better but that isn't always easy or cost effective.

Indeed, Right on!

[PapaBear]

You are trying to equate radically different environments to each other as though they are somehow equal. They are not.
An ordinary backyard pond, fully enclosed, well filtered, with weekly 10% water changes is in no way comparable in terms of carrying capacity to one with a trickling overflow of say 5-10% daily or a mud pond with subterranian spring feed or continual stream flow in/out. They are each unique environments with their own limitations.
A 10,000 gallon closed system will not have the same carrying capacity as one with constant fresh water exchange of the same dimensions. The "real effective" water volume is different (in terms of water chemistry) by the different water exchange rates, even if they have otherwise identical filtration/degassing. Mud ponds, no matter what the water exchange rate, are an entirely different universe as the mineralization and biodiversity within the water/mud are a radical departure from an enclosed concrete or liner pond.
The concentration of hormones/pheremones in these ponds will be altered not only by the above mentioned conditions, but quite likely by the age of the fish as well. Mature adult secretions will be different from their juvenile pondmates not only in terms of sheer volume, but chemical composition as well. If you tried to put a mathematical equation together to calculate ideal population densities for growth it would have to incorporate a massive number of variables to give an answer worth a plug nickel.

[koicluboftheair]

Quote: A 10,000 gallon closed system will not have the same carrying capacity as one with constant fresh water exchange of the same dimensions. The "real effective" water volume is different (in terms of water chemistry) by the different water exchange rates, even if they have otherwise identical filtration/degassing. Mud ponds, no matter what the water exchange rate, are an entirely different universe as the mineralization and biodiversity within the water/mud are a radical departure from an enclosed concrete or liner pond.

Then if you can mimic the "mineralization and biodiversity within the water/mud" within the 10,000 system as a hobbyist or larger system with tighter density in a commercial operation with a constant fresh water exchange the results might be similar yes aside from depth, temperature, sunlight penetration, etc.

Quote: The concentration of hormones/pheremones in these ponds will be altered not only by the above mentioned conditions, but quite likely by the age of the fish as well. Mature adult secretions will be different from their juvenile pondmates not only in terms of sheer volume, but chemical composition as well. If you tried to put a mathematical equation together to calculate ideal population densities for growth it would have to incorporate a massive number of variables to give an answer worth a plug nickel.

That is a terrific concept I think in terms of putting together an equation even with the variability or at least an outline. Best management practices for the commercial side versus hobbyist side obviously require delineating between the variables as is generally done. And as you say pheremones are another issue in older fish. With the young fry again though providing the cysteamine as a dietary supplement to stop production of somatostatin, which inhibits gh production still seems like a reasonable application for aquaculturists and the hobbyist.

[PapaBear]

Quote: Originally Posted by koicluboftheair Then if you can mimic the "mineralization and biodiversity within the water/mud" within the 10,000 system as a hobbyist or larger system with tighter density in a commercial operation with a constant fresh water exchange the results might be similar yes aside from depth, temperature, sunlight penetration, etc. That is a terrific concept I think in terms of putting together an equation even with the variability or at least an outline. Best management practices for the commercial side versus hobbyist side obviously require delineating between the variables as is generally done. And as you say pheremones are another issue in older fish. With the young fry again though providing the cysteamine as a dietary supplement to stop production of somatostatin, which inhibits gh production still seems like a reasonable application for aquaculturists and the hobbyist.

Doing a decent job of mimicking the biodiversity of mud in a closed system has a nice ring to it, but getting the job done is another matter. We're not just talking about green water. We're also talking about the wide variety of micro crustaceans, worms, etc.. living in the mud and feeding on the algae, etc... Replicating those food sources in any meaningful way in a closed system would be no small feat.

[koiczar]

Quote: Originally Posted by PapaBear Doing a decent job of mimicking the biodiversity of mud in a closed system has a nice ring to it, but getting the job done is another matter. We're not just talking about green water. We're also talking about the wide variety of micro crustaceans, worms, etc.. living in the mud and feeding on the algae, etc... Replicating those food sources in any meaningful way in a closed system would be no small feat.

Larry
Your last two posts are very well related to the topic. I agree, replicating mother nature in this enclosed type of environment would basically be IMPOSSIBLE! The mud at the bottom of a mud pond is constantly being rejuvinated by minerals and trace elements within the soil compound itself, simply by the porosity of the soil and the fish constantly stirring it up. In an enclosed system, even with a trickle exchange, there would not be this exchange within the soil bottom going at constantly. I do agree, however, that a semi-open system with trickle exchange is better than most static ponds.

John

I don't think you are grasping the concept I previously mentioned concerning tosai rearing ponds in Japan and the pictures you mentioned. I also seem to have a hard time trying to follow your explanations as they seem to be roaming and not staying within the parameters of the discussion you started. Yes, you do somehow find a way to include the original gh point near the end of a question or statement by something gets left by the wayside during.

Mike

[koicluboftheair]

Quote: Originally Posted by koiczar Larry John I don't think you are grasping the concept I previously mentioned concerning tosai rearing ponds in Japan and the pictures you mentioned. I also seem to have a hard time trying to follow your explanations as they seem to be roaming and not staying within the parameters of the discussion you started. Yes, you do somehow find a way to include the original gh point near the end of a question or statement by something gets left by the wayside during. Mike

Point taken Mike. I'll stick to the stunting issue and relationship of this chemical being marketed out of China that may prevent it and you can discuss everything else. I thought you wanted my comment on what you and others were bringing up and trying not to be rude.
Regards,
John

[koiczar]

John

No rudeness read into your posts. Just was that I was starting to get confused over which issue was being discussed and when.

Okay

I wouldn't be surprised, in fact, I'm sure there is something to what you're saying about gh and stunting of fish, especially at an early age. I was trying to point out that in Japan, for example, the tosai in the pictures you were talking about, actually do grow quite well over the winter. However, fish kept like that are not considered as high class koi, only chuppa destined for export. The high class fish are given much more room via fewer fish per determined area so they can grow at a more accelerated rate, better referred to as "jumbo tosai" and the best (at that time) the breeder has. So, you see, there are differing reasons why fish are raised the way they are.

As far as the average hobbyist trying to use some chemically produced gh for growing on their own private collection, I don't see anyone really believing this would be good for their private collection. I could certainly understand the aquaculture industry using it on food grade carp or salmonid species to bring in more profit per cu.ft. of space but I don't think the nishikigoi industry would benefit. Some breeders who try to "push" their fish end up creating a very weakened product as evidenced by fish that don't live past age 6 or 7 yet have attained a massive body size. The internal organs, especially the heart and respiratory system, evidentally don't grow at the same rate. Just like obese people, more strain on the heart results in heart attacks at a young age not to mention the potential for a weakened immune system. So, where would the advantage of this gh product coming out of China be for the "Average Hobbyist"?

[koicluboftheair]

Quote: Originally Posted by koiczar John Okay I wouldn't be surprised, in fact, I'm sure there is something to what you're saying about gh and stunting of fish, especially at an early age. I was trying to point out that in Japan, for example, the tosai in the pictures you were talking about, actually do grow quite well over the winter. However, fish kept like that are not considered as high class koi, only chuppa destined for export. The high class fish are given much more room via fewer fish per determined area so they can grow at a more accelerated rate, better referred to as "jumbo tosai" and the best (at that time) the breeder has. So, you see, there are differing reasons why fish are raised the way they are. As far as the average hobbyist trying to use some chemically produced gh for growing on their own private collection, I don't see anyone really believing this would be good for their private collection. I could certainly understand the aquaculture industry using it on food grade carp or salmonid species to bring in more profit per cu.ft. of space but I don't think the nishikigoi industry would benefit. Some breeders who try to "push" their fish end up creating a very weakened product as evidenced by fish that don't live past age 6 or 7 yet have attained a massive body size. The internal organs, especially the heart and respiratory system, evidentally don't grow at the same rate. Just like obese people, more strain on the heart results in heart attacks at a young age not to mention the potential for a weakened immune system. So, where would the advantage of this gh product coming out of China be for the "Average Hobbyist"?

Okay, I find your latter points very thought provoking. I appreciate hobbyists as end users of low, medium, and high end koi may not be the best market for this product as a general purpose treatment, but as I've noted to prevent stunting in homegrown spawns it seems feasible. To reiterate though I find your post quite thought provoking as obviously many koi breeders produce fish for different markets including everything from the low to the high end fish. If the "jumbo tosai" market could be harmed by having fish grow too large in early development that wouldn't necessarily translate into harm for the other grades of fish does it? Plus, I believe this would only be of use for early development particularly to prevent the stunting response while grown in tight quarters or in hobbyist ponds under less than ideal circumstances. Feeding this to a fully grown finished koi would have adverse effects, but that isn't really what this is about.
Does that answer where this product would be of value to hobbyists and aquaculturists?
Regards.