Aquatic Plant Forum banner
401 - 420 of 451 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
4,116 Posts
Ok, here's an observation that I find interesting. It has been what, about 2 or 3 weeks now, since I obliterated my tanks by doing a water change with no dechlorinator. The tanks got super clean, no algae in sight. Plants died, fish died, biofilter died. But today the Clado is back.

I find that interesting because it really looked like I sterilized the entire tank (2 tanks to be exact). They looked like ADA close-up pictures - meticulously hand scrubbed for the photo shoot, except that I had done an accidental chemical bleaching instead. I really thought that the Clado is completely, absolutely, 100% gone. But it is not.

That makes me think that suppressing algae is an on-going effort. It is about the processes that constantly take place in the tank. Not so much about swift, aggressive, actions that clean the tank.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
4,116 Posts
Haha! Back to the.tap water quality... Today I met someone that told me that some students at the local college where testing the tap water as part of some project. The tests showed that the water was polluted to the level of being non-potable. Ain't that swell!

I really think that a planted tank in this day and age has to be run considering our environment. Gone are the days when I was collecting rain water for my tank. Maybe the bad tap water is indeed the culprit for my friend's tank having super healthy and fast growing plants covered with super healthy BBA. I am getting a new RO system today. Will be fighting bad water through wasting water. 3 parts water will be discarded to get 1 part clean RO water... For those of you that did not know - that is how bottled water is made too. Except that the waste is closer to 7 to 1 because of bottle manufacturing and transportation! Clean here means dirty somewhere else. Which in my area has come back to bite my donkey.


Sent from my RM-893_nam_att_206 using Tapatalk
 

· Registered
Joined
·
4,116 Posts
Ok. A tale of two tanks happening right now:

So here I am every Tuesday changing 30 gallons of water in a 65 gallon tank. I collect 2 piling handfuls of clippings. Anubias make 1 full leaf and have another started every week. Swords have huge leaves. BBA is doing well. I too am doing well with the light, CO2, ferts, cleaning filters, using Purigen meant for a 500 gal. tank, flow. The whole 9 yards with lots of effort.

Few blocks away one of our local club members runs a 150 and a 75 gallon tanks. Water change about every 3 months. About 10 gallons. All along adding tap water to compensate for evaporation. Tanks are stuffed with plants. Tanks are stuffed with fish (Angelfish included). The 150 tank does not even have a filter. I am not sure I saw any water movement but there is a pump on the 150... Algae can be found only one one Anubias - spot algae from low P. He said he can run CO2 or not run CO2 - tank does not care. About 20 species of plants. Some show slight deficiencies but algae are deficient way more - they do no exist.

So here we have it - lots of maintenance and internet "wisdom" vs. Old School clay substrate with inert cap on top, barely any Traces and completely hands off.

Jeffy, if you are still up for it I can get samples from the Old School tanks and send them to you. Let's see how high his organics are so I can tell him how to fix his tanks!
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
6,409 Posts
Going back to page 22 post number 216 the question of CO2 toxicity level is asked.

I came across this study today that discusses CO2 + HCO3's effects in water culture on pea roots. It seems that concentrations of 30-150 ppm CO2 stimulated longer roots, but 150-250 ppm CO2 caused root length to be drastically reduced.

http://www.plantphysiol.org/content/38/1/77.full.pdf+html?sid=774eabb5-c2ec-4976-9191-29f9a058bfdc

From:
http://www.plantphysiol.org
Morphogenetic Influence of (CO2 + HCO3-) on Roots' G. Geisler C.S.I.R.O., Division of Plant Industry, Tobacco Research Institute, Mareeba, Queensland, Australia​

Take it for what you will (since the study used pea plants) but I think it is interesting to know that CO2 in water cultured plants does have measurable effects on plants. Now whether reduced root length = toxicity or reduced uptake that is something the study didn't cover, but then again, how can reduced root length be a good thing?

Perhaps this study is useful for giving us a ballpark idea of what ranges of CO2 in water are beneficial and harmful? What do you think?
 

· Registered
Joined
·
4,116 Posts
Perhaps, Zapins, you didn't get my sarcasm. Fred's neglected super clean tanks do not need any help. If anyone needs help this is me with my big water changes and flourishing plants AND BBA.

Come to think of it in my own tanks the two that are doing very, very well are the ones that get minimal interventions. One of them is behind me right now. Evaporated 4 inches. No algae in sight, tons of fish, looking ugly allright. But I can do anything I want with this tank - increase light, CO2, feed fish or not feed fish. Heck, just a week ago I dumped 20 new fish in it. Nothing bad happened.

Just an hour ago I got a new RO system. And started looking for organic removing resins. Brightwell's resins are not easy to buy. While looking for them I started to get the feel that I'm going away from common sense once again. This is not about what I can add to a tank. This is about how the tank runs and establishes itself. I think that that is exactly what Fred does - lets the tanks be. There is a meeting at his house in a month or so. Hope that there will be pictures. His Madagascar lace has 3 ft long healthy leaves. He has some swords that I had never seen before - the leaves are dark maroon color, almost metallic, like dark chocolate maybe. That is in addition to all the other plants. Pretty good for a no-filter, no water changes, no fertilization tank stuffed with fish. Only "secret" - some kind of local clay capped with about 2 inches of coarse gravel. A secret, allright...
 

· Registered
Joined
·
4,116 Posts
On the topic of plant health <--> CO2 levels; Back when I was growing HC hydroponically I was always astonished at the long, thick, snow white roots that the HC made. I did not use any CO2 or fertilizers. The setup was just AquaSoil flooded for 1 hour a day with water that I just topped off (never changed).

I've mentioned that many times before - that HC was a unique high quality. Something no one has seen since. I say that because apparently the hydroponic setup was perfect for the HC. Meaning that the levels of CO2 may have been low in the air but the plant was growing in conditions that allowed it to make use of whatever it needed VERY well. My point is - we can try to figure out what are "optimal" CO2 levels but I think that what we will find is that it all depends on the other factors. Look at an EI tank - this thing must have 30 ppm CO2 or else. For that kind of half-baked environment a lot of CO2 is optimal. That does not make high CO2 a golden rule for everything.
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
6,409 Posts
Right, but unfortunately neglect is not something that you can recommend to others as a surefire way of having a good looking tank. He might have a nice tank, but he could just be lucky that a constellation of factors aligned and produced the tank you see. I've seen plenty of tanks that got neglected and turned out terrible. I can accept your frustration and the idea that it seems almost crazy to go to the extent that we all do trying to purify our water in order to remain algae free. But look at it this way, you are experimenting and pushing the frontier of what we know by using RO and trying out every setup rather than accepting the mystery and relying on neglect to get you an algae free tank.

We need to figure out what is going on, understand the parts and then the whole. I refuse to believe algae just randomly decides to bloom and grow without a trigger or set of triggers.

Still interested to hear everyone's opinion on the CO2 excess study I found.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
4,116 Posts
Yes, we do need answers. For now the only advice that a newbie can get is along the lines of "do X because everybody does it". Same thing like 15 years ago. Not good enough.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
403 Posts
Zapins,
I did not read the report but from the results you gave; I would imagine that no one comes near to the CO2 concentrations given in the report for fear of gassing the fish. My KH changes during the seasons from 2.4 to 3.5 and that puts me in the range of 47 to 56 ppm CO2. My plants are growing well and I do not want them to grow any faster.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
251 Posts
I hope you all don't mind me jumping into the conversation. I've been following the thread and it's all very interesting and really encouraging to see some "advanced" thinking ( for lack of a better term ) concerning the hobby.

To follow up Yo-han's comment. I recall Tom Barr mentioning something similar when I asked him about limiting nutrient levels to control algae. He said that algae is never limited, their requirements are so low.
I hope you don't mind me guys jumping in as well but I've been reading with interest and all the information is very much appreciated.

Here is my story on BBA.

I have a tank that had a never ending BBA problem. The tank was dosed with Excel and micros/macros, overfiltered, very good flow. I tried everything written around the forums such positioning the outlets of the filters/powerhead to create circular flow, lowered the light(though the tank had run a year with no algae whatsoever with same lights), increased excel dosing to 3x at some stage, increased all ferts to EI doses(in not so densely planted tank), big weekly water changes, etc... but no luck whatsoever. If anything BBA was happier than the plants. At some stage people were saying the big water changes were the problem but I have another 4 tanks on which I did same large water changes and they had no BBA so I refused to believe(and still don't believe water changes cause fluctuations that trigger algae)
Then of course the advice was I need injected CO2......at which point I gave up as I wasn't going to.

One day after BBA destroyed my plants to the point I no longer cared about them(I have some massive anubias inside and it was the end for them) I gave up. I stopped dosing anything at all. Left it to fend for itself. The only thing I kept doing is 50% weekly water changes as I always used to do that on any tank.
Well, two months the most after that and BBA was gone completely. It died. However the plants suffered severe deficiencies too but free of algae on the leaves which were discoloured for lack of some sort of nutrients. That happened more than 6 months ago. I hadn't dosed anything since yet, but for the record the plants were getting worse as in colouration and quality of growth but still no BBA. So plants are way more resistant to lack of nutrients than BBA the least. At some stage due to laziness I didn't do water changes for a couple of months, still no BBA...Now I want to give the remaining plants a chance and start dosing again but I am afraid to even start in this tank.

I have been able to have deficient tanks with no algae whatsoever at least 3 times and it was always in a plain substrate tank. Dosing the water colum with excel and ferts has caused BBA in two tanks so far(maybe I was doing something wrong but stopping dosing of any kind has cured the BBA in both but would never advise anyone repeating that because the plants will suffer massively too).

Since I switched to soil substrates I have been keeping algae free tanks with very healthy plants with or without water changes, high organic loads, etc... The one thing in common they all have is being overfiltered if that matters, light was never on the low side. In fact the lowest lit tank was the BBA ridden one because I decreased to a minimum at some stage. It seems to me that low amount of ferts in the water colum but nutrients in the soil instead has worked best for me so far. I know the water column is deficient of nutrients because floaters such as salvinia and frogbit eventually refuse to look good and even completely die off but the planted plants have no issues whatsoever at the same time. Hence with anubias, my best results were when I plant the roots in the substrate with the rhizome above of course.

I happen to have a picture of my old nano tank(plain sand) which was on the border of nutritient deficiency although no algae(despite the window sunshine on top of a light period). It was very ugly so my point is not to show aquascaping skills here :) But the deficiencies in my tanks show up like this and if I leave it, the plant will eventually suffer to the point the leaves will turn completely yellow/r develop big holes/ or fall apart literally/or die but without any algae issues to follow or precede. There's no way I can grow salvinia or frogbit when the tank is in this state, neither can I grow algae at the same time.

The picture below is not the worst scenario I've had of plant deficiencies but as someone else said we avoid taking pictures when tanks aren't at their best.
Mind you the tank was not waterchanged or cleaned for that picture. I took it just before taking the tank apart to put soil in it. The tank was never fertilised with anything at all.



This below on the video is the tank now a year after but with soil substrate, no water changes at all(presuming it has higher organic load than before as I used to do weekly water changes before putting soil) , no fertilisers as usual, same light, same duration, same location of tank and no algae again but no deficient plants. Now I've never cleaned the glass either, so it has some sort of hazy biofilm which the snails and shrimp eat vigorously but it's nothing much for a year to be honest.

Macro shot of the ludwiga
 

· Registered
Joined
·
4,116 Posts
Whoa! That SBS guy just flew in from another planet!

Planet "Common Sense".

On the internet algae can not be starved by doing water changes. But in real life you can do it.

On the internet deficient plants grow algae. But in real life they make it through while algae barely creeps along and is a few water changes away from disappearing.

On the internet circular flow is magic. But in real life stagnant water tanks are clean and stable.

On the internet you have to add ferts to the water to make it polluted to toxic levels. But in real life nowhere in Nature plants find such virtual paradise, yet have lived for millions of years.

On the internet there are gurus. In real life there is glass box full of water.


Sent from my RM-893_nam_att_206 using Tapatalk
 
401 - 420 of 451 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top