bergzy

i may not be qualified to reply to this thread as i just started fw plants.

i read as much as i could before setting up my 29g fw planted tank. it is my 'test' tank before i set up my 390g.

i am a total newbie at fw plants but have been dealing with reef aquariums for quite some time. the concept of fw plants and reef are quite similar. low nitrate/phosphate to avoid problem algae, constant discussions on light and of course, the amount of technology one chooses to use.

from my extremely limited fw plant growth...i guess you would call mine a high tech with 5 watts/gallon of 5200k metal halide, co2 injection with a reactor controlled by a pH controller, fertilizer and eco-complete substrate. i also use 3 ro/di water to 2 tap water ratio to get kh of 6 and gh of 9. most likely, i will go with 100% ro/di and treat the water with kents ro right. water changes are 10% 3 times/week.

plant growth, color and thriveness (is that even a word?) has been nothing but phenomenol. i followed the dupla guidleine and havent looked back. now, if i can only maintain this for the long haul!!!

high tech, for me so far, has been relatively little work in comparison to my 180g reef aquarium.

a quick comparison with reef aquaria. reef can be horrifically complex with endless, endless amounts of equipment, additives, foods, etc to use on the tank. for example, a skimmer for a large tank (180g) can cost $3000 with lighting also in the thousands. more often than not, a lot of reefers go overboard on their systems...becoming equipment/tech junkies.

or:

there is a minority of reefers who use 'low tech' equipment to keep their tanks going. having diy lights, diy skimmers and doing frequent large water changes.

i have seen both have excellent results and horrific results. success appears to be in the hands of the one who understands the complexity of the mentioned aquaria and is able to effectively utilize it. in other words...it's a moot point (to me) whether one chooses high or low tech!

Robert Hudson

So, is there a hybrid method inbetween the two?

stcyrwm

I think of mine as low tech but maybe they are hybrids. I currently have three tanks with about 2 wpg compact flourescent. I dose Excel at minimum recommended dosage and dose 1x weekly macros and micros per Tom's recommendations. No CO2. Flourite and Onyx sand as substrate although I may try something more "nutritious" for my next tank. I have five or six plant species per tank. Water changes 10 to 20% per week and use HOT Magnums as my filters on all three tanks.

Bill

patx

bonjour,

almost the same thing for me.

200g (60x36x24inch.)
25% flourite and 75% sand
320w (T8 fluo)
2x eheim 2026 and 1x magnum 350
CO2 injection (10-20ppm)
not fertilizing.
i don't clean the substrat
water change ~ 40% (3-4 month)
almost anything grow in that tank. (except java moss )

the tank around 2 month old

this week plantation (not finish)

is this a low, high or inbetween tech tank ?

(sorry for my english )

bpimm

I think both of you are on the right track, Here is my observations based on three of my tanks.
Tank 1, 29 Gal. Soil substrate 1.5 WPG no CO2. Some natural light.
Tank 2, 80 Gal. Soil substrate 1.5 WPG with CO2. 82.5 CRI lights
Tank 3, 30 Gal. Soil substrate 2.5 WPG with CO2. 92 CRI Lights

Tank 1 is definitely low tech, slow growth with less coloration in the red plants.
Tank 2 has faster growth by a factor of about 2-3 times with better coloration.
Tank 3 has about the same growth rate as tank 2 just has better coloration, but I think that is from better lights not more of it.

My biggest increase came with CO2 and bumping the light may have increased the growth a little but not near as much as the CO2. What I need is a tank without CO2 with 2.5 WPG to compare to but unfortunately I don't have one.

Brian

bpimm

If you consider there to be only two methodologies of tanks then yes there are Hybrids, I would consider mine to fall in that category. But I don't really see the need to have such a narrow view of the methodologies. They are all differing styles of aquaria that overlap each other in one way or another. I find some of the aquascapes quite pleasing to the eye as do I with some of the wild overgrown natural tanks, in fact I have both kinds wild and attempted aquascapes, The attempted is there for a reason.


I think littleguy said it best with this statement.
Brian

lljdma06

This is an interesting thread. I currently use inert substrates (1-3mm gravel) with either laterite or rootabs for supplementation, so what I do doesn't really keep entirely with either the High-tech approach or Walstad's method. I have, however, kept both high light (Above 2.5WPG) and low-light. I've kept red plants, A. reineckii and lotus and have honestly seen little difference in growth rate. In fact, my A. reineckii is actually redder in my non-CO2 8g nano than it was in my EI, 3.86 WPG with CO2 injection, so go figure. This is the same plant too

In addition, I think that there are hybrid methods and actual true methods that neither conform to high-tech nor to the Walstad method, that work just as well. People, after all did keep planted aquariums before Takashi Amano and Diana Walstad came to town. This isn't a new hobby. This has been done for decades.

I also think it is entirely possible to have low-tech/low-light tanks that feature complex, involved scapes. My 8g is modeled after a typical Dutch layout (Unusual considering the size) and requires quite a bit of manipulation than a typical low-light setup.

Again, great thread, pretty eye-opening.

Edward

What feature removes an aquarium from the El-Natural category? I’ve been asked by members and am not sure what to say. Can you clarify this please? Thank you.

Light intensity over specific level?
Light period in hours?
Dosing CaCl2?
Dosing CaCO3?
Dosing CaSO4?
Dosing K2SO4?
Dosing KNO3?
Dosing KH2PO4?
Dosing MgSO4?
Dosing Trace elements?
Dosing baking soda?
Dosing KHCO3?
Injecting CO2?
Inert substrate?
Substrate heating cables?
Aeration?
Filters?
Powerheads?
Pumps?
Water changes?
Using RO / DI water?
Using test kits?
Temperature control?
Plant selection?
Undergound Filter?
?
?
?



Thank you for your help
Edward

Jimbo205

When technology is used more than biology to maintain the tank.

I just read this recently in a book. When I find the name of the author, I will post it.
The author of that book had as his motto:

Less Technology - More Biology.

Jimbo205

Quoted from the foreword (the foreword is written by Martin A. Moe, Jr.)
"This tenet is also the core of John (H.) Tullock's captive aquatic philosophy. "Tullock's Razor," More Biology, Less Technology, defines the structure of the aquarium system by the vitality and ecology of the organisms, and by following his recommendations, an aquarist can be sure to avoid unnecessary technical complexity."

APC has motivated me to purchase some very good books. But I will say this for myself - when he says more biology, that does not mean for the layman (myself) that it will be easy to understand. If anything (for me) it means that understanding and reading more about aquariums is much more complex. My appreciation for biologists and environmental scientists has grown. Each creature, plant, algae, macroalgae is so unique with its own 'rules'.

Google the name. John H. Tullock. Wow. One of the Legends.

If you are not made of money and you want to figure out a way to have an nice aquarium - try very hard to find a biologist or environmental scientist that has the patience to explain the complexity to a layman. If you have found one - you have found a goldmine (in the aquatic hobby world).

And thank you to all those scientists that are willing to share with us laymen (and women).
I appreciate it very much.

Jimbo205