Rightio Team,
I've been down the shed this evening and set it all up ready to go.
Here's the tanks the fish will go in:
[img:86cdcc706b]http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d135/Fishtraderlau/Fish%20Food%20Trial/apr06fishfoodtrial001.jpg[/img:86cdcc706b]
Note the foods in the trial.
Go Pet Flakes
HBH Cichlid Frenzy (kindly donated by Aquariums Alive).
and NLS flake (kindly donated by Aquariums Alive).
and here's the measurement device to be sure the exact same amount of flake will be given to each sectioned tank part.
[img:86cdcc706b]http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d135/Fishtraderlau/Fish%20Food%20Trial/apr06fishfoodtrial002.jpg[/img:86cdcc706b]
Tomorrow arvo when i get home from work, i'll move some fish around and we'll get it going.
Electric Yellows and Blue Dolphins will be the fish in the trial so i'll split even numbers of each into the divided tank (4ft tank, top one is divided into 3 even sections).
Tank is on a well established sump system with a new UV light i just fitted yesterday as well to be sure to be sure to be sure.
Measurements and photos will be regulars during the trial so it'll be interesting to see how it goes!
Cheers all,
Andrew.
Brad should of sent you a "proudly sponsored by..." banner to hang behind the tanks :lol:
Andrew, you could be on a winner here. People will want to test there favourite or most hated food now.
or Home brew food compared to dry food...
You may not have to buy any food for a while now, :lol: good thinking. :idea: :wink:
Frenchy :D
All three foods have different Calorie/kilojoule densities. IMO it would be unfair to measure the feeds by weight alone because the more Calorie/kilojoule dense feed will have a huge advantage. Sure, you will have to make some phone calls and do the math, but then all three feeds will be on a level playing field.
If the feeds are going to be measured on weight alone, i'm willing to make bets that the more Calorie/kilojoule dense feed will produce the greatest growth.
Wasnt it the best value for money on the ammount you buy? and basing it on the Calorie/kilojoule's in the feed wont work, because fish will only eat so much, thats like trying to feed someone 20litres of grain mash instead of one steak.
Doesnt work.
Hi someone, that's right.
The trial is to test the value of foods gc.
We buy food by a gram or kg amount, not by calorifica value like thermal coal :) so, feeding identical quantities by mass of food is how to best compare the foods.
I'll also be trialling another product..the Spectrum grow (again donated by Aquariums Alive).
So 4 prods on the trial here, given i will have to make up an enclosure to get these fish in the same size as the others in the same sumped system, i might make up another and compare the main bulk foods i use of Sera and OSI...i am looking forward to the results.
Cheers,
Andrew,
[quote:b0833c38bc] thats like trying to feed someone 20litres of grain mash instead of one steak.[/quote:b0833c38bc] These feeds arn't that different :roll:
[quote:b0833c38bc]We buy food by a gram or kg amount, not by calorifica value like thermal coal[/quote:b0833c38bc] Why not? It has already been proved many times that higher calorie diets produce more growth than lower calorie diets.
My point was no one could eat the 20 litres of grain mash in a sitting, where we could all down a steak (unless your a vegie, then your growth rates are gonna be lower lol.)
So comparing them on the amount of Calorie's or kilojoule's will not prove anything in growth rates, they should technically (depending of vitamins and trace elements in the food) grow at the same rate.
But the point was, even if you do this, they grow at the same rate, after a month you have none of one food left, and and 70% of another. You still get the same result. The one with 70% left is the most cost effective feed (also taking this percentage and comparing it against the price percentage of the product). and hence if you feed the same ammounts those fish on should be bigger, marketable faster and a more healthy fish.
Same results in my thinking.
someone your realy blowing things out of proportion. I think the Calorie difference between the feeds would be a very lot smaller than nearly 300% :roll:
[quote:ea205f3fe9]So comparing them on the amount of Calorie's or kilojoule's will not prove anything in growth rates, they should technically (depending of vitamins and trace elements in the food) grow at the same rate.[/quote:ea205f3fe9] :? ... Please explain, I dont get it.
I just think the test results, If we controlled the calories, would provide us with allot more info. Thats all.
[quote:13f4f8d41a]The trial is to test the value of foods[/quote:13f4f8d41a]
Couldn't you work this it out as a math?
I think that you are missing the point GC.
You will feed you fish based on quantity (what they will eat in so much time) and buy the product based on quantity ($ per kilo).
The idea is to see what product, feeding the same quantities, produces the best growth rate and produces the best colours from the fish. Then you can easily work out what product is the best value.
Anyone can read the back of a packet and see the breakdown on protein, fat, ash etc. What you cant read on the back is how that impacts on the growth, colour and health of the fish.
Michael
I think we should do it on a mass value, because, to simple me, who doesnt understand calorie content and stuff, it would be more helpful just to know if i should invest in quality food,
when I feed my fish, I dont work out calorie contents and stuff, I just feed buy amount (approx.)
even if the results show that the food which worked best was the one with the most calories, i still think that that is more worthwhile than knowing whatever you might find out otherwise (i dont know that exactly)
wow, I just read that back and it doesnt really make sense sorry, but basically I would understand what practical info can be obtained buy scaling calories values
just my $0.02
kathryn
The calorie difference will probable be under 10%, but enough to tamper with the test results.
Q: What if one of the feeds produce lots more growth and color, with calories being equil? This would be very interesting.
Q: What if one of the feeds produce lots more growth and color, with calories being different? I just think it would be a bit dodgy.
I guess that is why they run the test trial base of weight and not the calories. Calories come from fat, carbohydrate and protien. A high calories doens't meant it will provide fast growth. The only thing that will promote fast growth and colour is a balance diet/ingredient and that is why they are doing it with different brand of food and do it in weight. and with the result, u will know which brand food is best for fish and value for money.
U don't buy a food just based on the calories unless u are on diet and weight loss program. Furthermore, if u seriously interested in counting calories, u will need to look at the different component as well..
[quote:12afce6051] if u seriously interested in counting calories, u will need to look at the different component as well..[/quote:12afce6051] If the number of calories are controlled, the feed with the better types of calories will show up in the test. eg: if the amino chains are short, that group will go into a catabolic state earlier than the rest.
Protien, the primary builing block for a high percentage animal tissue, is a calorie.
A shortage of calories = more catabolic hormones, less anabolic hormones.
I thought this was all about testing fish food not whats in it?
And r we testing food for Joe Blow or for people in the know?
And if you added the food to cover whats in it you will end up with a mess
And a poluted tank (and I know their hooked to a sump)
Sorry if I'm stepping on any ones toes :twisted:
Andrew
I think this is going a bit too far, I dont think Andrew is intending on publishing his article in New Scientist!!! If he was, im sure he'd address sample size first!!!
Essentially he's looking which product provides the best value for money. Value for money is necessarily linked to volume, price and the results you get for that volume and price.
I would imagine the results will be something like feeding x grams per day of xyz provided an average growth of x mm. The fishes colour using this product was poor/great etc.
This is no different to Wheels testing the Falcon against the Commodore. Sure the Holden may have more power and be more expensive, but it doesn't mean that it will be the best value for money.
Michael
its only the difference between about 2g and 2.2g of food each feeding and it would have a very positive effect on the results. Oh well, I may have to do my own tests...
Exactly, if we where trying to make a new brand of fish food, using different ingredients then fine, But this was meant to just be a comparison of foods.
but gc if you are keen to get really into it and do an in depth test, we would all back you, I think the work envolved in tracking it though would be huge.
but seeing some of the crap artwork the government sponsers, you could probably get a grant to do it :lol:
Agreeing with Grum here Andrew has offered his tanks his fish so he is doing the way he wants I personally think the results will be interesting and am looking on with eagerness to see what happens.
We are only testing product against product not ingredients against ingredients.
We all know these products and we all think the one we use is best so this should shut a few mouths and open others.
LET THE GAMES BEGIN.
yee-ha!! email me for the form guide. the hot tip from my source is that go-pet is good in wet conditions!!!
[size=18:01c9f9d237]HBH ALL THE WAY[/size:01c9f9d237] [size=12:01c9f9d237][/size:01c9f9d237]sorry i thought i was at work :lol: :lol: :roll:
I'm thinking people may get a big surprise and find the cheapie GO PET comes in better than expected.
Look forward to the results.
Cheers Linda
GC....i think i have the perfect solution for this..
Get three tanks at YOUR house put them on a sump and then measure out calouries and conduct the experiment yourself :roll: :roll:
Cool idea
it will be interesting to see which food works best, i am cheering for the NLS stuff myself, i have seen marked improvements in colour and growth/breeding regularity in my fish in just 2 months.
BUT the one thing that will definately need to be taken into account will be the sex of the fish..
I would measure all the fish first , and also when done and work out growth as a percentage of length gained, i think weight might not take into account the fact that the fish got FAt from eating crappy food and not being able to get much exercise in a tiny tank...
HAve fun Andrew!
any chance of an update?
:P :P :P :P
Sure thing...I have been looking at the little critters while feeding them each night and there are already some noticable differences....
Without naming names...you should be able to tell foods from the descriptions.
I fear to say but #1 is not doing as well as some hoped. It's stiffer "cardboard-like" structure makes it harder for the little fellows to enjoy, even when crushed between fingers, and it doesn't soften a well as the other stuff either- not readily taken although being the only choice the fish have been coming around to it so expect to see better results as they actually eat a little more of it than leave it on the bottom.
#2 is going great guns, small granules of food and they lavish it up- a good 3mm over #1 at this stage and showing colour as well.
#3- tough call here vs #2, this flake is good stuff, friable for the little fellas and definatle more accepted than #1. Growth-rates on par with #2 and no real noticable differences at this stage.
#4- good stuff here too- another good flake with some part of a plant root in it, said to make it better and at least i reckon ward off the vampires but it seems to be working, little fellas on par with #2 and #3.
Photos will be up shortly team- i just need to get back down to the shed with the camera one night this week.
Cheers,
Andrew.
haha I like the not so cryptic clues there Andrew :D
Michael
Look forward to more results and interest is growing. Good stuff Andrew.
great work mate.
im looking forward to future reports.
one has to wonder how gc's test is going.
gc's test.... no offence to gc and i'm only speaking for myself but i have a feeling others agree when i say, who cares.
I've got the same feeling.
For those who are interested; it's going, but still young.
Anyways, ...I hope the race isn't over for #1.
just out of interest what food has the most protein in it
out of the ones your testing as i am sure that will be the winner
i only use 45% or more protein with all my foods but 95% is NLS
hey andrew, you must be getting close to finnishing this trial, can we have the results please?
I'm curious about it as well.
Those tanks won't happen to be still in action in 2-3 weeks will they?