|
Forums36
Topics42,113
Posts571,676
Members19,115
| |
Most Online13,561 22 hours ago
|
|
|
0 members (),
5,001
guests, and
226
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 29,788 Likes: 1295
Moderator Ambassador Field Correspondent  Lunker
|
|
Moderator Ambassador Field Correspondent  Lunker
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 29,788 Likes: 1295 |
You know what assume means? I don't know if the fish actually consumed all the food that was fed. That is an assumption that I am not willing to make. If there was uneaten food for any reason, that was not collected and weighed as it would be in a lab. The pick and spit percentage was not tallied. etc. etc. Fish were put in a cage, fed the smallest available floating food like a typical pond owner would feed and the results are shown.
I am not the one that is throwing numbers out there without knowing 100% the details and I don't know 100% of the details because this was not done in a laboratory environment, it was done in a pond environment.
Like I said earlier, all I can do is put out there what the test was and the results. Nothing more, nothing less. Unless you want to do the test in laboratory conditions, I suggest that you take your own advice and consider the information that you are putting out there. I am not the one making statements except what was observed.
|
|
1 member likes this:
Heppy |
|
|
Moderated by Bill Cody, Bruce Condello, catmandoo, Chris Steelman, Dave Davidson1, esshup, ewest, FireIsHot, Omaha, Sunil, teehjaeh57
|
|