| Algae Algae Control - Get some advice for your algae problems. Control algae in your aquarium with the solutions given here. |
|
View Poll Results: What lighting changes will have a positive impact on the reduction of algae?
|
|
Reduce lighting period
|
  
|
76 |
32.76% |
|
Reduce lighting intensity
|
  
|
24 |
10.34% |
|
Reduce lighting period and intensity
|
  
|
54 |
23.28% |
|
Program a "noon" burst of light (ie 3hrs 1.5wpg, 4hrs 3wpg, 3hrs 1.5wpg)
|
  
|
24 |
10.34% |
|
Program a lights off "siesta" (ie lights on 5hrs, off for 5hrs, on for 5hrs)
|
  
|
18 |
7.76% |
|
Change the spectrum/color temperature of lights
|
  
|
17 |
7.33% |
I don't know: I never have algae! 
|
|
19 |
8.19% |
 |
|
10-30-2005, 01:59 AM
|
#1
|
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Geneva, Switzerland
Posts: 2,307
Plant Points: 65072
|
Is lighting the ultimate algae control?
Curious to know what people think...
Given that all your other plant nutrients (including CO2) are available to your plants in adequate (or more than adequate) amounts for your level of lighting, what lighting changes will have a positive impact on the reduction of algae?
Assume that you have let's say 3-4wpg.
|
|
|
|
10-30-2005, 04:23 AM
|
#2
|
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 1,445
iTrader Positive Rating: 100%
Plant Points: 37170
|
To me the control of nutrients in the water is the ultimate approach in algae control.
But I chooze the "noon light burst" as most efficient if we talk about the light.
--Nikolay
|
|
|
|
|
10-30-2005, 05:50 AM
|
#3
|
|
Moderator
Join Date: May 2004
Location: at home
Posts: 1,981
Plant Points: 98955
|
The answer would be Reduce lighting period.
In my sunroom some aquariums are receiving strong direct sunlight. Interestingly, only the aquariums with additional artificial lighting increasing the lighting period are developing GW green water.
Extra long lighting periods makes plants weak and less resistant to algae. The old saying that plants need sleep time is true.
Edward
|
|
|
|
10-30-2005, 05:56 AM
|
#4
|
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 217
Plant Points: 3600
|
False premise? Lighting, nutrients (including bioavailable carbon), and plant mass must all balance. Changing one requires sampensating changes in the others.
|
|
|
|
|
10-30-2005, 06:53 AM
|
#5
|
|
Moderator
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 7,171
iTrader Positive Rating: 100%
Plant Points: 165123
|
I voted for reduction of lighting period and intensity. But I also agree with RTR, change one aspect you have to change another.
|
|
|
|
|
10-30-2005, 07:35 AM
|
#6
|
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Norway
Posts: 132
Plant Points: 4350
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by trenac
I voted for reduction of lighting period and intensity. But I also agree with RTR, change one aspect you have to change another.
|
reduction will also promote algea off you are not talking about massive reduction |
|
|
|
|
10-30-2005, 10:49 AM
|
#7
|
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Geneva, Switzerland
Posts: 2,307
Plant Points: 65072
|
I can understand the comments re balance.
However, are your tanks *that* delicately balanced that a "fine tuning" of the lights will throw everything off? I don't think so. If so, then you're constantly walking a tightrope and that can't be too much fun!
Remember, I'm talking about fine tuning here; not massive changes... |
|
|
|
|
10-30-2005, 03:07 PM
|
#8
|
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 217
Plant Points: 3600
|
That is exactly why I quit running high light fast growth tanks. I had more algae issues. Lower and slower has a wider safety zone.
|
|
|
|
|
10-30-2005, 03:23 PM
|
#9
|
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Geneva, Switzerland
Posts: 2,307
Plant Points: 65072
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by RTR
That is exactly why I quit running high light fast growth tanks. I had more algae issues. Lower and slower has a wider safety zone.
|
I couldn't agree with you more!  But many people are still convinced that high light plants means that they need 5+wpg. At that high of lighting if you fall behind on ferts it's an algae disaster waiting to happen. That is definitely a tight rope...
I still hear comments about how 2 to 2.5wpg will only let you grow low to medium light plants.
More opinions please! 82 views and 8 votes?  ... speak up! |
|
|
|
|
10-30-2005, 07:40 PM
|
#10
|
|
Moderator
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Dayton, Ohio
Posts: 3,814
iTrader Positive Rating: 100%
Plant Points: 133125
|
I've said this before, but I grew some of my nicest Rotala macrandra and Pogostemon stellatus with 136 of T-8 (96w, 9325K) and T-12 (40w, 5500K? Nutrigrow) lighting. I did have pressurized CO2 which was a big help. Algae was practically non existent and P. stellatus rarely if ever stunted. The plants grew much slower with that amount of light, but so did the algae.
Why is it that such high light levels are recommended and do we really need it for most plants?
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Thread Tools |
|
|
| Display Modes |
 Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:26 PM.
|
