# Lighting for low/med tech 5ft tank



## Paul195 (31 Dec 2012)

Hi

I currently have a Hagen Glo 2x40W T8 ballast. I was considering upgrading the lighting to 2x T5's but not sure if this is necessary. I wan't to keep low/medium level plants (including some easy stems) but haven't decided exactly which ones yet.

I don't really want to be injecting CO2, I will be using akadama / moler clay for the substrate. I am prepared to dose ferts and liquid carbon (if necessary?).

As my tank is 5ft, I have been looking for 5ft tubes (both T8 & T5) which it seems are all 58W, so does this mean that if I want tubes that are the full length of my tank then I would need a new ballast? Does this also mean that I have to use 4ft tubes with my current ballast? Do I need to have tubes the whole length of the tank?

Many Thanks

Paul


----------



## ceg4048 (31 Dec 2012)

Paul195 said:


> I currently have a Hagen Glo 2x40W T8 ballast. I was considering upgrading the lighting to 2x T5's but not sure if this is necessary. I wan't to keep low/medium level plants (including some easy stems) but haven't decided exactly which ones yet.


No, it is not necessary and is so unnecessary it's actually inadvisable. The only reason to upgrade the lighting is if the tank looks too dim and boring to you, and even that might be addressed by changing the bulb spectrum to something that has more green/yellow in it.




Paul195 said:


> I don't really want to be injecting CO2, I will be using akadama / moler clay for the substrate. I am prepared to dose ferts and liquid carbon (if necessary?).


Even more reason to stay away from upgraded lighting. It would be very expensive to use liquid carbon on a 5 foot tank. You need to decide whether you want a high tech high maintenance tank - which means adding a greater amount of ferts as well as enriching CO2 via gas or liquid, or a low maintenance low tech tank where these can be avoided. If you select the low tech approach then there is little reason to increase the lighting intensity, yet, you still have the option to add CO2 and ferts. There is no rule stating that high lighting must automatically be used - at any time. Learn to grow plants using the lighting that you have and save yourself a LOT of headaches.




Paul195 said:


> As my tank is 5ft, I have been looking for 5ft tubes (both T8 & T5) which it seems are all 58W, so does this mean that if I want tubes that are the full length of my tank then I would need a new ballast? Does this also mean that I have to use 4ft tubes with my current ballast? Do I need to have tubes the whole length of the tank?


It's always a good idea to match the ballast to the bulb rating, so a 58W tube should be fitted to a 58W ballast. However, depending on your hood configuration you may be able to fit multiple tubes of shorter lengths in the hood. You haven't given a clear picture of just exactly what will be installed. Will the ballasts be mounted in the hood as well as the tubes, or are they separate, for example?

Cheers,


----------



## Paul195 (31 Dec 2012)

> If you select the low tech approach then there is little reason to increase the lighting intensity, yet, you still have the option to add CO2 and ferts





> Learn to grow plants using the lighting that you have and save yourself a LOT of headaches.


 
Thank you. This is the way forward.

The current tubes are 2x T8 40W 48", but not sure of the colour spectrum of them. In any case I shall be replacing these as they are past it. 
The current ballast is a unit with 4 flying leads, and I think it is supposed to be mounted externally with the leads running through the cut out in the rear of the hood. As this unit only has the four connectors then I think I am restricted to two tubes.


----------



## ceg4048 (1 Jan 2013)

Well, you should only replace the bulbs if they are inoperative or if you don't like the colors. Bulbs are never "past it" until they break. Have a look at the sticky thread in this section => Cheap HO T5 fluorescent tubes - Update with photos | UK Aquatic Plant Society to get ideas of which colors appear brighter or more pleasant.

Having external ballasts will give you much more flexibility and if you struggle to achieve an even spread with the two 48 inch bulbs then you might be able to mount smaller tubes in the hood to fill in the gloomy areas. You can stagger the two tubes to get better coverage.

Cheers,


----------



## Paul195 (1 Jan 2013)

Staggering the bulbs is an idea. I read it's best to gradually increase light intensity into the photoperiod, so I guess in my my case I would have one lamp on and then add the second one when the plant has 'geared up' for full photosynthesis?

Do you think it would be an issue If the lights were staggered and I was using one before the other?
Would it matter if I were using two different type bulbs (like in jamesC's tests for example)?
And lastly, can I use 2x36W tubes on my 2x40W ballast?



EDIT: I have realized that I don't think I will be able to stagger the bulb on times (using a timer) with my current ballast. It's both tubes or none.


----------



## ceg4048 (2 Jan 2013)

I know that with T5 bulbs it's no problem to drive a lower wattage bulb with a higher wattage ballast (bulb life may be reduced however). I've not tried it with T8. Perhaps someone else has and can comment on that. It might also be better, if you can afford it, to use two separate single remote ballasts so that you will be able to individually control the light. Inability to control lighting, as well as the poor understanding folks have regarding the effects of lighting intensity is probably the single worst problem in the planted tank hobby.

You can use any combination of bulbs, staggered in any combination you wish, there are absolutely no restrictions.

Staggering the ON time for the bulbs is a really good idea. When plants have difficulty "gearing up" it is usually attributable to the fact that typically, at the beginning of the photoperiod, CO2 is usually not at optimal levels. Using less light at the front end of the period lowers the plants' demand for CO2 and so reduces the stress. Because of the method with which we add CO2, the concentration level often overshoots the target value at a point well into the photoperiod (that's one of the reasons there are so many CO2 toxicity issues), so adding the second bulb at that time is OK. The CO2 demand rises due to more light, but there is also more CO2 available because of the injection overshoot. It is because of this fact that we developed the general rule of thumb to turn on the gas an hour or more prior to lights on to saturate the water with CO2 so that when the lights go on and creates a CO2 demand, the CO2 concentration level is adequate for that demand. You'll see this general rule expressed often as "ensure the dropchecker is a lime green color by lights ON".

I also try to encourage people to take pH readings of the tank water every 30 minutes throughout the entire photoperiod in order to visualize the rate at which CO2 concentration levels change during the period. This can sometimes give an early warning against CO2 related algae.

Cheers,


----------



## Paul195 (4 Jan 2013)

I have created a list of my favorite plants from the 'easy' and 'medium' categories of the Tropica website. According to their website, some of these require 0.5WPL. So 193L x 0.5 = 96.5 WPL.

I'm still confused with this, is this 96.5WPL of T12, T8, T5 or T5HO light? I was hoping somebody in the know could give me an idea if the following would be suitable. 

2 x Ballast ..with two 5' T8 58W Osram tubes. This would allow me to light the whole width of the tank with just the one tube (on timer), and then add the other bulb (on timer) at peak photosynthesis times. 

or if this is too much, perhaps just one ballast and tube with a reflector?

I like the idea of using 5ft tubes to keep things simple and to avoid having to stagger / buy multiple ballasts/tubes.

Thanks for your input

Paul


----------



## ceg4048 (4 Jan 2013)

Hello,
		  Quite frankly you need to completely ignore the so-called lighting requirements listed on any webpage - even the people selling plants. I know that this is a difficult proposition to swallow, because this is a reputable company and they are world famous right? But I swear to you that those numbers are completely meaningless. The fundamental property of light is to accelerate the rate of growth. The actual growing is achieved by CO2. These two factors are related in a way such as when you add more light you must also add more CO2. However, if you add more CO2 then you can REDUCE the amount of light.

What this means is that if you are not adding CO2 then you have to limit the amount of light so that you do not force the plants to require more CO2. The WPL numbers are completely irrelevant and it is specifically because they do not specify what bulb technology, and because they do not provide data within the context of CO2 that renders the value meaningless. We have a general rule of thumb referenced to T5 lighting to give us a clue as to whether the lighting is low, medium or high. These guidelines are only useful for tanks of medium size, say 20-50 gallons. Outside of that range the guideline breaks down because for small and very small tanks the distance the light travels is so much shorter that the actual amount of energy being delivered to the leaf is much higher than what the guideline suggests. For tanks larger than the range the volume increases more quickly than the distance traveled so the calculation overestimates the amount of wattage. This leads to all sorts of troubles. Over the years we have seen many reports of how much wattage people use and what sort of difficulties they encounter. This empirical data allows us to do the calculation and to judge/predict performance using the guideline. For beginners, and especially for non-CO2 enriched beginners, it is absolutely the worst thing they can do to get hooked on WPL/WPG. The guideline becomes even more ludicrous if you are using LED, which is a completely different technology. Do a forum search using the expression "photosynthetically active radiation " to understand more about light.

Plants are easy, medium or hard because of their demand for, and their ability (or lack thereof) to find and use CO2, NOT for their demand for light. No plant "needs" XYZ WPL. Therefore get you 5 foot tubes and start out using one tube only for the first couple of months. After the tank matures and after the plants have grown stronger, then you might be able to add the second tube without issues.

Cheers,


----------



## Paul195 (4 Jan 2013)

Thanks ceg4048

Your points have sunk in and I understand that more light means a higher CO2 requirement. I will opt for a single 58W T8 with reflector.

Initially, I didn't really want to inject CO2 to the tank because I didn't want the extra costs of a pressurized C02 system, and I read that DIY CO2 systems were not really able to accurately control the amount of CO2 going in which is important.
At this stage I think I had sort of committed myself to a non-CO2 tank.

Initially I had inspired to have an aquarium with vivid bright green plants such as this. To obtain this sort of vivid growth, would I definitely need to add CO2? Perhaps in that case, I would be better off reconsidering, and putting my funds towards a CO2 system instead?

The list that I made of my favorite plants was:-

Bacopa australis 
Bacopa carolina 
Echinodorus quadricostatus  
Eleocharis parvula 
Heteranthera zosterifolia  
Hygrophila corymbosa angustifolia 
Lilaeopsis mauritiana  
Limnophila sessiliflora 
Lobelia cardinalis  
Ludwigia glandulosa  
Pogostemon erectus 
Rotala rotundifolia 

..and I think most of these require an amount of CO2 adding. should I consider a DIY CO2 system to keep my costs down, or is it not recommended?

Thanks for your valued guidance.

Paul


----------



## LondonDragon (4 Jan 2013)

Paul195 said:


> and I think most of these require an amount of CO2 adding. should I consider a DIY CO2 system to keep my costs down, or is it not recommended?


For a tank this size pressurized is the only way to go I am afraid, I did run DIY CO2 on my Rio 125 at one stage but I needed to run two mixes and change one on a Sunday and the other on a Wednesday to maintain a good level of CO2, also needed to run an air stone during lights out to give the fish a break as you can't stop it.


----------



## Paul195 (4 Jan 2013)

Can you advise me on what the cost is likely to be on a pressurized CO2 system for the 5ft tank? If I were to say replace the cylinder on a 6 month basis, what sort of size cylinder would suit and what do you think it might cost me? (shop bought / DIY FE)?

Cheers


----------



## ceg4048 (4 Jan 2013)

Hi,
	It is quite feasible to run a 5 foot non-enriched tank. However, the type of growth shown in your example would be very difficult because many on the plants in that tank and in the list you provided are high CO2 loving, and even the ones that aren't don't grow that fast, so it would take quite a while. If you limited your stock to easier plants such as the many different types of ferns, Anubias, crypts, Riccia, swords and so forth, in time, with clever aquascaping, it's entirely possible. We have a member Troi, who has accomplished low tech using nothing more than organic soils, so it's definitely possible. There are many examples of Walstead type tanks.

Most of us are impatient though and we want the ability to grow many more exotic species. CO2 enrichment accomplishes that more easily but is not without complications and certainly adds the issue of toxicity. CO2 enriched tanks also require a lot more maintenance, such as water changes, cleaning filtration and so forth.

Gas pressure regulators range in price from £30 Far East or ebay discount, to over £100 for name brand versions. You can always find used samples for low to midrange prices. CO2 Fire extinguishers vary in prices, and as as long as you keep the lighting low then your CO2 consumption will also be low, keeping the costs under control. Other sundries such as diffusers/reactors, dropcheckers, CO2 tubing are relatively cheap but you may need to upgrade your filter or add circulation pumps such as Koralia.

Cheers,


----------



## Paul195 (4 Jan 2013)

I keep going round in circles in my mind over this! I decided I was going to delve on in to do as much research as possible before starting my first tank so I could be sure that I would make it a success (and then this would keep me inspired and interested in the hobby). Many people that I have spoken to about the hobby before have told me 'I found it a pain in the a*se' or 'its alot of work' but I thought that might have been because they didn't do the proper research before 'diving in'. After spending quite a while now thinking about my options (with your help thanks!), I think I need to 'dive in' and get started with a low tech tank (despite what I have been saying above about certain plants etc).

Although I have been tempted to dive in at the deep end by the more exotic species, I don't want to take on too much as a beginner with high tech this and that, and end up with a tank with lots of complicated processes / problems happening, and be out of my depth. as I'm sure this would curb my enthusiasm. I'm sure that by encountering problems and overcoming them is the right path towards becoming a better aquarist, but this is a path that I can take over time.

A few more basic questions if I may?

1) Should I look for slow or fast growth plants or a combination of both? I understand that more trimming will be required with faster growth plants to keep them neat, are there other pro's and cons for each type?

2) The type of plants that I like the most are the stems with lots of intricate branches / leaves i.e sessiliflora, cabomba, alot of the hygrophila's, and perhaps some easier grasses such as Eleocharis parvula (rather than the larger leaved varieties such as																																																																																																						
	 the Echinodorus and some of the Crypts). Am I likely to be able to keep these looking healthy and vibrant in a non-enriched tank ?

So the basis of my tank will be:-

5ft tank - low tech
1x 58W T8 5ft tube with reflector
Non-Co2
TetraTec EX1200 (1200lph)
Moler clay inert substrate (with osmocote added)
Weekly water changes 1/3 -1/2
Planted Community tank
plants tbc

Sound ok?

3) would I have to / do I have the option to / is it advised to add ferts here.

Cheers

Paul


----------



## ceg4048 (5 Jan 2013)

Hi Paul,
Here are just a couple of threads showing low tech tanks:

Low-tech aquarium | UK Aquatic Plant Society
Diana Walstead style tanks | UK Aquatic Plant Society

There are many more of course, but these were just the easiest to find quickly. Whether you have a high tech or a low tech tank, there will be problems to be solved or issues to address. They are just different problems. At least with the low tech, things are a lot cheaper. I suggest that you study the threads because there are a couple of concepts that are presented which may help give your tank a better chance of success. The first thread discusses the use of an organic soil based substrate and the second is the idea of Dry Start Method, where you install the plants, let them grow with only high humidity for a month or so and then flood the tank. This helps the plants to settle in, grow more mass and it helps to cycle the substrate. So you operate a terrarium for a month and then convert it to a fully scaped aquarium by just adding water.

Anyway, look at the type of plants in the photos and see if that is a worthy goal.

Cheers,


----------



## Paul195 (5 Jan 2013)

I have followed your link to those threads and found them very enlightening, especially the link to Dusko's blog. Based on these threads, I can see that the soil base substrate is well regarded approach for a low-tech tank.

Some questions:-

*Q1)* If you were a beginner like me starting a new low-tech tank, would you advise me to follow a 'soil base' and/or a 'dry start' approach?

*Q2)* In Dusko's blog, he says :-



> This planting method doesn’t suit Low-Light Low-Tech aquariums because the plants are exposed to atmospheric CO2 during the emerged stage. Once flooded the CO2 is cut off almost immediately
> and plants will start melting in a matter of days. (e.g. Cryptocoryne sp). And for this particular reason this emerged planting method suits CO2 injected aquariums (High-Tech) perfectly.
> 
> Once the plants are submerged they get all the CO2 via the pressurised CO2 system (25-30ppm) and no melting will occur.
> I presume that aquariums where Excel or Easy Carbo (instead of the CO2 gas) will be dosed can also try this “Dry Start” planting method.


 
So what about for somebody who doesn't intend on supplying CO2 after the tank has been saturated?

*Q3)*


> When suggesting the use of nutrient rich substrates I don't mean Fluorite or commercially available substrates which are mostly rich in Iron (Fe). I suggest the use of soils which provide most of the macro and micro nutrients required for healthy plant growth.
> E.g. the potting soil I use in some of my tanks is very rich in nutrients.
> It contains N, P, K, Mg, S, Ca, Fe, Mn, B, Cu, Zn, Mo.


 
What type of soil should I be looking for and is this easily available? How will I know that the soil I choose contains the necessary macro/micro nutrients?

*Q4)* I noticed that Dusko had talked about saturating the substrate and leaving for 1-2 months.



> Keep the soil saturated for 1to2 month. Note! Do not flood the aquarium yet. Add more water if it evaporates because the soil must remain submerged at all times to convert (soil cycling) into a settled aquatic soil which the plants require. It is important to wait to ensure sufficient bacteria development involved in nitrification of Ammonium to Nitrates, avoiding NH4/NO2 spikes which are very toxic to fish and crustaceans.


 

but Troi did not wait this peroid and puts less importance on the waiting peroid. If I were to follow this method, would you advise to observe the waiting period or not?

*Q5)* Is the main reason for less water changes in this type of system due to to the fact that the plants are relying mostly on the substrate for their nutrients and therefore less nutrients need to be added, and in combination when used with a low light setup, less CO2 is required and therefore water toxicity is generally lower = less requirement for water changes?

Cheers

Paul


----------



## Paul195 (5 Jan 2013)

Also in his blog, Dusko says:-



> Everything starts with the light





> The stronger the light, the faster the plant will grow, and the nutrient uptake will be greater.
> 
> Less light = slow growth = slow nutrient up-take.
> 
> ...


From what I gather, how much light there is decides many other factors. He is suggesting the WPG/L rule here, which I now know to be unreliable. So if I were to follow my earlier suggestion of 1x 58W T8 bulb, I'm still unsure as to how I know if that constitutes low,medium or high light levels. If lighting levels are so important, how do I 'guess' or measure what I should install?

Or perhaps the light levels are not so critical after all?

Paul


----------



## ceg4048 (5 Jan 2013)

Hi Paul,
			Well I would advise you to use both. Unless you received you initial plants from someones Non-Co2 enriched tank the plants will always suffer trauma when submerged and will always have severe die-off if CO2 is not boosted. That's just a fact of life that we have to get over. If the lighting is kept low then in time, the plants that we mentioned will adapt to the low CO2 environment and will recover. Weaker plants, that require lots of CO2, tend not to regenerate quickly enough and never recover, especially if the light is too high.

When you do the dry start you will have grown more plant mass so you have a greater chance of having a higher population of stronger shoots and so there is more plant mass to work with which give you more margin.
Soil based planting has the advantage over a clay substrate in that the biological activity in an organic sediment produces CO2 as a result of the metabolic process of aerobic bacteria. Many of the plants we categorize as "low-tech friendly" are usually those that have a sophisticated root structure that allows them to uptake CO2 from the CO2 enriched sediment. Many people mistakenly think that the plants which have a very large root structure is because these plants feed NPK preferentially from the roots but that is not necessarily true. Large root structures are normally associated with plants which have the ability to use sediment CO2. So that's one of the advantages of soil. Another advantage of soil/compost is that it is usually high in nutrients, especially the more important ones like NPK. A disadvantage of soil is that it tends to emit ammonia into the water column. Dry starts solve this problem by having the biological activity in the sediment oxidize and convert the ammonia to Nitrate, which is not toxic, and which plants can use. Another disadvantage is if you are continually pulling up plants and rearranging them. This becomes messy with soil. Another issue is simply one of aesthetics. Normally you would "cap" or cover the soil because of the mess issue. You can use any decorative gravel to do that though, so that's easy to address.

For question 3, as mentioned, you can use soil or compost (John Innes 3 is a popular choice) which is the cheapest way to go, or, if money is no object, then ADA Aquasoil or the Oliver Knot equivalent are fully enriched, NPK+micro+peat clay sediments which are lovely to work with and which do not have the mess issue. Doing a dry start with either of these gives you the time to allow the ammonia to be oxidized and de-toxified. Now, remember, you are not limited to these popular sediments, but soil give you the advantage of the possibility of a clever source of CO2 plus nutrients, while the clay product like Aquasoil does not produce as much CO2.

The one to two months IS the dry start procedure. Troi has more experience and so he does not wait to have the sediment mineralized by dry start. He just goes for it. Although it is not an absolute requirement to do a dry start, Ammonia can be problematic. It can cause toxicity problems and can trigger some types of alga blooms. The dry start waiting period gives you a better chance of hassle-free success based on the reduction of Ammonia and to allow the plants to feed stress free and to produce more mass for the rainy day.

Water changes in a low tech system are not as manic because the growth rates are so much lower. The metabolic rate of non-enriched tanks are up to 10 times slower, so not as much organic waste and pollution is produced. Adding CO2 and high nutrient levels as seen in high tech tanks increases the amount of waste produced by the plants tremendously. You should not think of nutrients as toxic. They are not. It is the organic waste that plants produce that is toxic, just like the feces and urine produced by fish.

Cheers,


----------



## ceg4048 (5 Jan 2013)

Paul195 said:


> From what I gather, how much light there is decides many other factors. He is suggesting the WPG/L rule here, which I now know to be unreliable. So if I were to follow my earlier suggestion of 1x 58W T8 bulb, I'm still unsure as to how I know if that constitutes low,medium or high light levels. If lighting levels are so important, how do I 'guess' or measure what I should install?
> 
> 
> 
> Or perhaps the light levels are not so critical after all?


Oh, don't fool yourself. Light levels are THE MOST CRITICAL is in a planted tank. And it's an issue because there are so many Kligons from warped space running around convincing beginners that they need to have as much light as the California Hydroponic Cannabis growers. That's why there is so much algae in the world.

The way to measure the light category is with the use of a PAR meter, because PAR is what plants use, NOT WPG. However if you get the WPG wrong then you are producing too much PAR, which causes radiation poisoning. Stick with your original plan. You can always add more light. The transition of plants from air to water is the most stressful scenario for aquatic plants and it is the second most stressful scenario overall, right behind drought. We happen to know, though experience and through some measurements, what constitutes low, medium and high, so you don't have to worry, the single T8 should be OK and it's possible to dim it even further simply by adding floating plants to create more shade.

Cheers,


----------



## Paul195 (5 Jan 2013)

So to confirm a few things.. to avoid the plants melting after saturation, keep continued low lighting levels and the plants will-auto adapt (assuming I choose the correct species)?

Would it ever be possible to re-arrange the planting layout with a capped soil substrate or would it be too disruptive / cause too much mess? would this mean I would have to restart the tank? Really I am looking to set up a medium-long term tank (1-2 years) and potentially moving house in around 2 years time.



> Even though plants can get most of the nutrients via soils we have to bear in mind that soils will become exhausted after approximately 6-12 month. To prevent this from happening it is beneficial to dose macro and micro nutrients via dry or liquid fertilisers once a week.


 
what method would be best / most cost effective to dose once per week? saw THIS but figure its for EI high tech?

lighting questions all done and understood!

So amended:-

So the basis of my tank will be:-

5ft tank - low tech
1x 58W T8 5ft tube with reflector
Non-Co2
TetraTec EX1200 (1200lph)
soil substrate with capping using 'dry start' method
Planted Community tank
plants tbc

and lastly, does my external filter have a high enough turnover for this proposal? Please say yes as I don't think I will be able to afford a new one just yet! I read somewhere about a rule of thumb of 10x turnover but I believe this will only give around 6.2x.

Many thanks

P.


----------



## ceg4048 (6 Jan 2013)

Hi Paul,
		   The 10X rule of thumb is aimed at CO2 injected tanks. with low tech, the manic attention to flow/distribution is not required. Likewise, the EI nutrient starter pack shown in your link is targeted towards CO2 injected tanks, but can be used in low tech at significantly reduced dosing levels. 

Barr's standard non-CO2 dosing goes something like this:
Add about 1/8 teaspoon of KNO3 per 20USG once a week or two.
Add about 1/32 teaspoon of KH2PO4 per 20USG once a week or two.
Add about 1/32 teaspoon Trace per 20USG once a week or two or, alternatively, about 1/4 teaspoon per 20USG of Seachem Equilibrium or other popular remineralizing agent once every week or two.

When you move plants around, just do it carefully and do it right before a water change so that any mess or cloudiness gets siphoned out. It's less convenient, but it should not require an entire restart. Move the capping media away and gently lift the plant or cut away the roots, then replace the cap. Do the reverse at the new planting site. As I mentioned before, if you're the type of person who rearranges often then it might cause less headaches to use Aquasoil or Oliver Knotts.

Cheers,


----------



## Paul195 (6 Jan 2013)

> soil give you the advantage of the possibility of a clever source of CO2 plus nutrients, while the clay product like Aquasoil does not produce as much CO2





> it might cause less headaches to use Aquasoil or Oliver Knotts.





> Normally you would "cap" or cover the soil because of the mess issue. You can use any decorative gravel to do that though, so that's easy to address.


 
How much of a disadvantage (in terms of losing the CO2 element) would there be if I chose the Aquasoil over the compost? would this have an impact on the low tech 'efficiency' ? If there is no real disadvantage, I think I would prefer to spend a bit more but have less mess if I choose to resite any of the plants.

If I chose the aquasoil, would it still be on the same principle that I would be capping it with gravel? what should the ratio be between them and how deep overall should I aim the substrate to be? and how do I calculate the right amount to buy?
I read that inert clay products (such as moler clay) have good CEC, so would this be a good capping choice?

Is seachem Equillibrium an all in one solution? and is it as effective (and cost effective) as the dry method?

I shall be starting the whole process within the next few weeks and am very excited, and shall keep everyone posted on my progress.

Thanks

Paul


----------



## ceg4048 (6 Jan 2013)

Golly, I wish I had some real numbers for you. It's a very complicated question because the type of plant that you use also is a significant factor. For example, suppose you decided to plant a tankful of Hydrocotle. Hydrocotle has been shown to be incapable of using sediment CO2, so in that case it wouldn't matter at all. Lobelia and Vallis on the other hand are very efficient users of sediment CO2, so sediment choice might make a difference.

There is another twist though. Aquasoil also has organic matter (peat) impregnated on the clay particles, so in time and with organic waste settling into the sediment there will be lots of bacterial action in the substrate which will produce CO2. How much less than potting soil, I have no idea. The thing is that when you do the Dry Start, keeping the sediment moist, you will automatically be culturing bacteria in the sediment which will not only mineralize the ammonia in the substrate but will also start to consume the peat and produce sedimentary CO2.

Measurements have been taken in natural systems. I've seen data from temperate zone lakes where the at a depth of only 5 centimeters, the CO2 concentration was measure to be around 1000ppm. Of course these soils have been sitting around for millions of years so I don't think we can compare their content to what we will produce in the tank, but it's an indication that in time, organic sediments can produce significant amounts of CO2, and if the plants being used are efficient sediment CO2 users then there is a good chance of success.

If you are hesitant to use soil, then no big deal. Go with the Aquasoil Amazonia which is a clay product with high CEC. That decision will not be a "Make or Break" decision. Amazonia is a complete clay substrate and does not require capping, so use it alone. I love Amazonia because I do a lot of replanting and reshuffling, and this substrate is very kind on the hands with a smooth velvety feel. Doing a Dry Start with this sediment for a month or two will allow the ammonia to be mineralized, and as I mentioned, will cycle the sediment properly and will allow the plants to put on weight. It's just that Amazonia is hideously expensive. There is a substrate calculator around but for a 5 footer, to get a couple of inches sediment depth you'll need more than a few 9L bags. If you want deeper then that's even more bags. Remember that to save cost you can also "bulk up" the substrate by inserting a layer of soil, mulch or cheap clay and then laying down the Amazonia on top. There are lots of tricks to bulking up.

Seachem Equilibrium is just a remineralizing powder. It is not a fertilizer per se. You can see the specification here: Seachem Equilibrium
It's used to add hardness to soft water but because it contains Iron, Calcium and Magnesium it functions as a micronutrient for low tech purposes. You can get these components for cheaper elsewhere and that's why I said it's an alternative to the micro mix.

Cheers,


----------



## Paul195 (6 Jan 2013)

Many thanks for all your advice.  

Cheers

Paul


----------



## Paul195 (8 Jan 2013)

I have just tried to purchase an OSRAM 58W Skywhite 880 T8 tube from lampspecs, but it seems that with that particular tube, you have to order a minimum of 6.
Not sure why. I did notice however that they sell the OSRAM 58W Biolux 965 T8 as singles, which are £14 delivered.

I need one 58W tube and wondered if I should just consider perhaps buying an arcadia tube (£18) as I have ordered the arcadia controller and reflector, or whether I should opt for the Biolux. Would anybody know if the Biolux likely to be much different in colour from the Skywhite 880 in JamesC's sticky, and if this would be a good choice for plant growth?

Cheers


----------



## ceg4048 (9 Jan 2013)

Hi Paul,
As you can see in the model number (965) the Osram Biolux is "_supposed to be_" very similar to the first image shown on James's sticky (Philips de Luxe Pro 965). The Osram documents reference the Philips 965 as an equivalent for this model, check page 2 http://www.osram.com/media/resource/hires/335262/light-color-and-lumen-overview--lichtfarben--und-lumenbersicht.pdf

So just get it for 14 quid and get on with it. As we continually try to remind everyone, you will not see any difference in plant growth. It's all about how the tank looks to you. That's the point JamesC was trying to make in that post.

Cheers,


----------



## Iain Sutherland (9 Jan 2013)

Hey Paul, your certainly in good hands with such sound advise from clive, i just thought that while on an entirely different scale to your tank you might be interested in this. i started this as an emersed set up (never planned to flood it) using amazonia but struggled to keep humidity up so filled it after 6 months.








Melt has been really quite minimal, but as you can see dry start does give you the option to use carpet plants in a low tech which otherwise wouldnt take if flooded from the start.  Its all a bit rough round the edges but you get the idea.
Good luck with your tank and look forward to seeing it progress.


----------



## Paul195 (9 Jan 2013)

Hi Easerthegeezer

Thanks for your reassuring words, It's a bit daunting as I still have so many confusions but i'll get there. Your examples are great and has helped my confidence...cheers!

One thing I am unsure about is whether I should choose slow or fast growing varieties of plants at the start. Would I be correct to say that it would be best to plant carpeting varieties and slow growers first and then add the faster growers and stems before submerging, or should I just plant everything straight away?

Thanks

Paul


----------



## Iain Sutherland (10 Jan 2013)

Paul, i planted everything together but different plants behave differently as clive has said, especially when flooding a dry start.  If you wish to do a dry start then id avoid crypts as they do melt a lot when you fill and dont be shy with water changes while the plants make the transition (i did daily 95% as a small tank). Ultimately every tank is different, what worked for one doesnt mean it'll work for someone else.  While we can advise on substrates, keeping light low, water changes, low tech plants etc you just have to bite the bullet eventually.  I would say dont try to be too ambitious, start your tank up and just figure out how to grow healthy plants.

All plants are slow growing low tech 

this isnt my list or concise but its a good starting point for low tech plants.  Bare in mind some of these dont like dry starts.  Find the plants you like then google with emersed in front of the name.  Happy hunting.

Java Fern - Microsorum pteropus
Windelov Java Fern, Windelov Fern - Microsorum pteropus 'Windelov'
Narrow Leaf Java Fern - Microsorum pteropus v. 'narrow leaf'
Java Moss - Vesicularia dubyana
Green Hygro - Hygrophila polysperma
*Sunset Hygro - Hygrophila polysperma 'Rosanervig'
Ceylon Hygro - Hygrophila polysperma 'Ceylon'
Rotala Rotundifolia - Rotala rotundifolia
Rotala Rotundifolia sp. Green - Rotala rotundifolia sp. 'Green'
Rotala Indica - Rotala indica
Hornwort - Ceratophylum demersum
Parrots Feather - Myriophyllum aquaticum
Moneywort, Water Hyssop - Bocapa monnieri
Brazilian Pennywort, Pennywort - Hydrocotyle leucocephala
Crypt Wendtii - Cryptocoryne wendtii
Crypt Balansae - Cryptocoryne Balansae
Pygmy Crypt - Cryptocoryne pygmaea
Guppy Grass - Najas guadalupensis
Anubias barteri - Anubias barteri v. barteri
Anubias barteri 'marble' - Anubias barteri 'marble'
Anubias barteri v. 'glabra' - Anubias barteri v. 'glabra'
Anubias nana - Anubias barteri v. 'nana'
Coffee leaf anubias - Anubias barteri v. 'coffeefolia'
Crypt retrospiralis - Cryptocoryne retrospiralis
Crypt spiralis - Cryptocoryne spiralis
Golden nana - Anubias barteri v. 'nana golden'
Narrow leaf nana - Anubias barteri v. 'nana narrow leaf'
Petite nana - Anubias barteri v. nana 'petite'
Philippine Java Fern - Microsorum pteropus 'Philippine'
Red Java fern - Microsorum pteropus "red"
Crypt Becketii - Cryptcoryne becketii
Pelia - Monosolenium tenerum
Waterwheel Plant - Aldrovanda vesiculosa
Bacopa - Bacopa caroliniana
African Water Fern - Bolbitis heudelotii
Hornwort - Ceratophyllum submersum
Crypt Aponogetifolia - Cryptocoryne aponogetifolia
Micro Crypt - Cryptocoryne petchii
Tropica Sword - Echinodorus parviflorus 'Tropica'
Downoi - Pogostemon helferi


----------



## Paul195 (10 Jan 2013)

cheers


----------



## scapegoat (10 Jan 2013)

Never seen Microsorum pteropus "red" before, Anyone got pics?


----------



## Paul195 (12 Jan 2013)

What height should my T8 be from the water level? I know that the closer to the water it is means higher intensity at the substrate, but I heard that increasing the distance will create a better lighting spread.
Is there any rule of thumb for this? if not, what would be sensible?

I've been making a design for a new canopy for my tank and I currently have the roof face 5" above water level.

Cheers

Paul


----------

