# First Low-Tech attempt - any thoughts?



## IvanF (20 May 2015)

Hi All,

I thought I would share my first low-tech attempt (work in progress), in order to gauge whether I'm on the right track or missing anything. Any advice, critique  or suggestions welcome.....:





I'm trying to keep things relatively simple and have gone for epiphytes and floating plants only:

Java Fern (normal and narrow)
Anubias (Nana, Barteri var. angustifolia.) (var. caladiifolia to be added shortly) 
Will be adding some floating Ceratopteris thalictroides tonight.
Tank is 310L and relatively deep - 54" (l) x 15.5" (w) x 22.5" (h).

Substrate is black sand only (Unipac). Lighting is two TMC Grobeam 1500 tiles resting on the cover-glass - set at 30% intensity with a photoperiod of 5 hours daily. For the remainder of the day it receives relatively dim ambient light with no direct sunlight. No additional CO2 being added.

Has been set up a fortnight, and am dosing trace elements with TNC Lite (no N or P) on a weekly basis. Nitrates out of the tap are about 25ppm (water company data). Water is moderately hard (TDS 350 out of the tap, pH approx. 7.5, dH 13, kH 11).

Filtration is provided by 2 Eheim Biopower 240s (each rated up to 240 litres). Historically, I would use a large, external canister filter, but have opted for internals due to the fact it would only be a matter of time before my inquisitive toddler decides to flood the house. Currently, these are placed together,  with both spray-bars directed slightly upwards to provide a moderate surface ripple. This does mean that water flow on the far side of the tank is relatively limited (populated exclusively with anubias). Am considering removing the spray-bar on one of the filters. I would be interesting on people's thoughts on whether this is likely to cause issues or aid circulation etc?

It's early days, but the plants seem to be responding pretty well across all areas of the tank. Whilst the odd leaf of all species appeared to be suffering, there are now a good number of new leaves coming through. Minimal signs of algae as yet, apart from a faint dusting of diatoms. I did introduce amazon frogbit very early on but that resulted in a total melt within 48 hours (although to be fair, it didn't look great when I originally received it). I hope the Ceratopteris fares better......

I'll be stocking relatively slowly and moderately:

8x _Melanataenia lacustris_ (Lake Kutubu rainbowfish)
10x _Ambastaia sidthimunki_ (Dwarf Chain Loach)
4 x Platies (not my choice - selected by my 2 year old budding-fishkeeper)
1x _Crossocheilus siamensis_ (Siamese Algae Eater)
5x Amano Shrimp

Possibly a contentious decision - but I'm currently leaving for a few more weeks before adding "Dr Tim's One and Only" bacterial starter. I'll probably dose up to 2ppm ammonia (in the form of ammonium chloride) a couple of times to validate it's effectiveness before introducing some of the fish. I'm used to fishless cycling with ammonia (previous set-up was a non-planted Tanganyikan Cichlid set-up), but hopefully this strikes a happy medium and avoids prolonged, high-level ammonia exposure to the plants.

I plan to do fortnightly water changes of 25-30%. For the first time, I'll actually be using an automatic water changer (from Reefloat) that slowly mixes new water over a 4-hour period. Would be interested to hear whether such a set-up would benefit/harm a low-tech planted set-up in terms of CO2 etc.

Anyway, that's all for now - many thanks for any comments/advise or feedback received.....

Ivan


----------



## ian_m (20 May 2015)

It is an often repeated mistake many beginners make, is to rely on the N & P from their water supply. . It is starting down the path for disaster. The nitrate (and P) value will most likely vary day by day and the 25ppm quoted was when the water company did the test from its taps and it wasn't from your tap and wasn't done when you changed the water. So you must add some K & N & P in some form. Excess K & N &P does no harm.

Do not add ammonia to your tank, adding a seriously strong bactericide won't help matters, and people wonder why their tanks never cycle as they are always killing the bacterial life each time they add ammonia. Just be patient, add some dirty soil (in a container so it can be removed when cycled) or wee in your tank  (or not) if you really want to move things a bit faster. http://www.skepticalaquarist.com/fishless-cycling

If you are intending to keep low tech liquid carbon is an easy source rather than CO2.  http://www.aquaessentials.co.uk/neutro-co2-medium-p-6377.html

Automatic water changers are nice, but will do nothing with all the detritus (both fish and plant) that settles in the tank. You will find after a couple of weeks piles and piles of detritus collecting in "dead spots" (which is basically most of the plants) that normally would be vacuumed up during a water change. So a manual water change (fortnightly or greater if low tech) removes the settling detritus as well as "bashing" the waste that accumulates on the plants.


----------



## Julian (20 May 2015)

Not sure those LED's resting on the glass like that is such a good idea. I think they will conduct more heat this way, probably reduce the life span of them if anything.


----------



## IvanF (20 May 2015)

Thanks for your feedback - very much appreciated.



ian_m said:


> It is an often repeated mistake many beginners make, is to rely on the N & P from their water supply. . It is starting down the path for disaster. The nitrate (and P) value will most likely vary day by day and the 25ppm quoted was when the water company did the test from its taps and it wasn't from your tap and wasn't done when you changed the water. So you must add some K & N & P in some form. Excess K & N &P does no harm



Thanks - that's interesting. I might well consider switching from TNC Lite to TNC Complete which has NPK. I think I was relying on the fish/food for the N and the P in combination with the tapwater - plus the fact that my plants are slow-growing. Having said that, if the Ceratopteris takes hold like I hope it will, then I can certainly see the value in additional N and P.



ian_m said:


> Do not add ammonia to your tank, adding a seriously strong bactericide won't help matters, and people wonder why their tanks never cycle as they are always killing the bacterial life each time they add ammonia. Just be patient, add some dirty soil (in a container so it can be removed when cycled) or wee in your tank  (or not) if you really want to move things a bit faster. http://www.skepticalaquarist.com/fishless-cycling



Yes, adding ammonia with plants doesn't rest easy with me after what I have read. I did choose 2ppm as a limit as I understand that might well be a more reasonable level in terms of short-term toxicity to plants and bacteria - and if the bacterial starter does work as well as reported, then that that level of ammonia would drop in a matter of hours.

I have previously had very good success with fishless (and plantless) cycling with 4ppm ammonia (without a bacterial starter) - albeit with plenty of diatoms.

As a side note - my intention to use a bacterial starter is primarily due to concern for the well-being of the fish rather than a lack of patience. Reports of this starter seem very good, and I am not necessarily available on a daily basis to perform an emergency water change should the plants/bacteria not be able to cope with the (albeit relatively small) influx of fish.

I guess an alternative would be to add the bacterial starter, not add any ammonia,  add a few fish within a day or two and dose the tank with Seachem Prime on a daily basis for a week or so to ensure that any short-term toxicity spikes are avoided. I understand the concept of a "silent cycle" - but don't really know whether my tank contains sufficient plant biomass as to ensure the well-being of the fish.



ian_m said:


> Automatic water changers are nice, but will do nothing with all the detritus (both fish and plant) that settles in the tank. You will find after a couple of weeks piles and piles of detritus collecting in "dead spots" (which is basically most of the plants) that normally would be vacuumed up during a water change. So a manual water change (fortnightly or greater if low tech) removes the settling detritus as well as "bashing" the waste that accumulates on the plants



That's true. I haven't used the water changer yet, but I think I would envisage stirring the substrate and disturbing the detritus sporadically throughout the water change process - hopefully this would capture the detritus. The water changer does have a pre-filter for the purpose of capturing debris - I just need to work out a system of ensuring that it is successfully syphoned out.


----------



## IvanF (20 May 2015)

Julian said:


> Not sure those LED's resting on the glass like that is such a good idea. I think they will conduct more heat this way, probably reduce the life span of them if anything.



Unfortunately, the large oak hood (not shown in the pictures) makes mounting the LEDs pretty difficult.

TMC do say that they can be placed on cover glass effectively - but then one might argue that they have a vested interest!  To be fair, they do come with a 5 year warranty.....

I'll look into ways of raising the a little higher - I think this might further enhance the shimmer effect if I do manage it.


----------



## Rahms (20 May 2015)

really like your hardscape, once its grown in it will look great (still has that "a human has put these plants here" look).  Make a journal!


----------



## dw1305 (20 May 2015)

Hi all, 
Tank looks good, I'd definitely add the _Ceratopteris. _If you are in the UK and want some floaters I can send you a mix for the cost of postage. I always have spares. 





IvanF said:


> "Dr Tim's One and Only" bacterial starter. I'll probably dose up to 2ppm ammonia (in the form of ammonium chloride) a couple of times to validate it's effectiveness before introducing some of the fish.


 Have a look a this thread: <"PlanetCatfish: Cycling question">.

cheers Darrel


----------



## IvanF (21 May 2015)

dw1305 said:


> Hi all,
> Tank looks good, I'd definitely add the _Ceratopteris. _If you are in the UK and want some floaters I can send you a mix for the cost of postage. I always have spares.  Have a look a this thread: <"PlanetCatfish: Cycling question">.
> 
> cheers Darrel



Thanks for the offer Darrel. I added a couple of floating _Ceratopteris_ last night, so I'm hopeful that it will establish well.

Thanks also for the link - an interesting read. At the risk of starting another cycling discussion, I'm now in two minds about adding ammonia - and may well go for the gradual introduction of fish combined with a healthy plant biomass and Seachem Prime dosing for a week etc.

By the time I plan to introduce the bacterial starter (am open to being convinced that I shouldn't), the tank would have been running for about 4 weeks and hopefully the plants would be continuing to be do OK (and the _Ceratopteris_ growing quickly). Worth noting that I was only intending to dose ammonia once (or maybe twice) to check that the tank could handle an increased bioload before adding the fish - but in retrospect I guess if I'm only adding 4 platies into a decent-sized planted tank then I really don't have much to worry about.....

Interesting about  the different ways of measuring ammonia. As a side note, I was actually intending to dose with Dr Tim's ammonium chloride (as referenced within the link) which would provide 2 ppm NH3-N. 1 ppm NH3-N - 1.2 ppm NH3 and 1 ppm NH4-N = 1.3 ppm NH4.)


----------



## sciencefiction (21 May 2015)

IvanF said:


> Thanks also for the link - an interesting read. At the risk of starting another cycling discussion, I'm now in two minds about adding ammonia - and may well go for the gradual introduction of fish combined with a healthy plant biomass and Seachem Prime dosing for a week etc.



The point of cycling a tank with plants and not with ammonia is to not add fish for several weeks until the plants establish. It takes about the same time as doing an ammonia cycling.
Plants do produce waste too and while establishing, some leaves will die off producing more, helping with the cycle.
With the type of plants you have, you can hardly rely on much ammonia consumption from them. They are all slow growers. You need a mass amount of plants, lots of fast growers....Darrel may have other ideas. But with this type of setup, I won't rely on the plants just yet.

If it were me, I'd go fishless and ammonia to up 2ppm. I'd not let the nitrite go over 2-3 ppm at any time and not let the Ph drop. The ammonia will be 0-ing out in no time, less than a week but not nitrites. Therefore, do water changes to keep nitrites in the 2-3, max 5ppm otherwise you'll be dealing with hundreds of ppm of nitrites and the cycle will take ages to finish.
1ppm ammonia does not produce 1ppm nitrite. I can't recall the exact ratio but it's something of the sort of 1ppm producing 3-4ppm nitrites. If you are adding 2ppm ammonia for a week, that will build up 28ppm nitrite or so, therefore the tank will not cycle until there's enough bacs to convert 28ppm nitrite and at the same time that same bacteria is sensitive to both high ammonia and high nitrite levels, so it never multiplies, thus stalling the cycle.

The second biggest reason for a stalling cycle is the Ph drop. With that amount of ammonia dosed that some folks dose, the acidification goes beyond normal and quickly drops both the Kh and in turn the Ph, then that same bacteria does not like it and stops being efficient.

You do not need to dose ammonia every day even if it falls down to 0 every day, thus keeping the nitrites low.  Normally when the nitrites start falling too, I only dose ammonia when nitrites have nearly cleared up and it may take a few days for that.  This way you'll be done cycling in 3 weeks. The nitrite will start falling in 24/48 hrs by then and I reckon it's then ready. You can wait longer if you want, no harm.  Do a mass water change. Then you can add your fish.
While dosing ammonia, it won't hurt the plants if you have high plant biomass. Ammonia is nitrogen and plants love it more than nitrates.
If you are dosing the Dr. Tim One and Only bacteria, it will take even less to finish the cycle. With Tetra Safe start I've cycled a tank in week from scratch without established media.


----------



## sciencefiction (21 May 2015)

Another point to note to the above, regardless of how one cycles a tank, adding fish to an ammonia/nitrite prone tank will not kill you fish outright, especially if you are doing regular water changes to counteract a huge rise, plus temperature and ph determine toxicity.
However, fish exposed to minor undetected spikes soon start having "diseases" down the line. It could be two days, it could be 2 months. That way you'll know if you cycled your tank well before adding fish or whatever method you chose stabilized the tank completely for the new fish.
People tend to think that if the fish made it through the cycle, one cycled the tank well and it was safe and then start promoting their method of cycling. When you ask them how long their fish lived after that, most didn't make it the first year....


----------



## dw1305 (21 May 2015)

Hi all,





IvanF said:


> Interesting about the different ways of measuring ammonia


This is where a lot of the problems start. People say "_my nitrite was 2ppm_" etc. but it is really difficult to get accurate measures for NO2-, NO3- or NH4+ and NH3 is a dissolved gas, and all dissolved gases are difficult to measure. 

Often the discussion centres around the best test kit etc., but none of them can give you more than a ball-park figure at best. Even with lab. quality analytical kit it is difficult to get repeatable values (in relatively clean water). 

For NO3 the best rapid method is probably <"ultra performance liquid chromatography-electrospray ionization-mass spectrometry">. 
There is also a bit of kit that would make water testing relatively straight-forward for metals (like K+ etc), and that is <"INDUCTIVELY COUPLED PLASMA-ATOMIC EMISSION SPECTROMETRY">.    We have a HPLC and GC, but we don't have a Mass Spec. or a Inductively Coupled Plasma Emission Spectrometer (we have an Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometer, that should give you the same values, but it will take a lot longer).





sciencefiction said:


> You need a mass amount of plants, lots of fast growers....Darrel may have other ideas. But with this type of setup, I won't rely on the plants just yet.


 Yes that is right, you need quicker growers, but also plants that have access to aerial CO2 levels.  We know that CO2 is often the limiting nutrient in aquatic plant growth, but if you use Duckweed (_Lemna_) or Nile Cabbage (_Pistia stratiotes), _they have access to 400ppm of aerial CO2 and that limitation is removed. _Ceratopteris_ and _Ceratophyllum_ are quick growers, but because they are sub-surface floaters their growth may still be CO2 limited. In terms of nutrient reduction _Pistia_ is the <"best option"> for most of us, but I choose Amazon Frogbit_ (Limnobium_ _laevigatum_) in the the "Duckweed index", because it is easier to detect deficiency symptoms in a non-hairy plant. 





sciencefiction said:


> However, fish exposed to minor undetected spikes soon start having "diseases" down the line. It could be two days, it could be 2 months. That way you'll know if you cycled your tank well before adding fish or whatever method you chose stabilized the tank completely for the new fish.


 I'm a great believer in this as well. This is really a problem with the concept of "cycled/non-cycled", it isn't a binary division, it is all "shades of grey". 

From our work with phytoremediation I knew that plant/microbe systems, with high levels of dissolved oxygen, can deal with huge bioloads, from there it is reasonably small step to  realise that the same approach can produce very clean, high quality  water if you start with a less polluted effluent (our tank water).

cheers Darrel


----------



## IvanF (21 May 2015)

Thanks to all for your replies.



dw1305 said:


> Yes that is right, you need quicker growers, but also plants that have access to aerial CO2 levels. We know that CO2 is often the limiting nutrient in aquatic plant growth, but if you use Duckweed (_Lemna_) or Nile Cabbage (_Pistia stratiotes), _they have access to 400ppm of aerial CO2 and that limitation is removed. _Ceratopteris_ and _Ceratophyllum_ are quick growers, but because they are sub-surface floaters their growth may still be CO2 limited. In terms of nutrient reduction _Pistia_ is the <"best option"> for most of us, but I choose Amazon Frogbit_ (Limnobium_ _laevigatum_) in the the "Duckweed index", because it is easier to detect deficiency symptoms in a non-hairy plant.



Oh - I was working under the assumption that _Ceratopteris _would be able use aerial CO2, although having now introduced it into my tank I can see that it is largely sub-surface. Looks great though. I may well consider some more Amazon Frogbit at some point as well, but the handful I introduced on day one underwent a quite spectacular total melt. It did look as if it was already melting when I received it, so maybe I owe it a second chance..... I've read about the "Duckweed index" with some interest and would like to give it a go if I can get the plants to survive longer than 48 hours. If I wanted to take you up on your kind offer of a few floaters, should I PM you?

I'm trying to keep things relatively simple with this set-up. Ironically, since setting this tank up 2 weeks ago, I've read Diana Walstead's book and really like much of her approach. Choosing the plants I have in a low-tech set-up, I'm not realistically looking for a plant-based filtration solution, but I'm hopeful of reaching a happy medium of healthy plant growth that  oxygenates the water, shares some of the filtration burden, meets the requirements of my fish and looks pretty good too. Whilst I am happy to dose NPK/trace elements on a weekly basis, I ideally want to keep things pretty low-tech and avoid adding CO2 or liquid carbon if I can help it.


----------



## IvanF (21 May 2015)

sciencefiction said:


> Another point to note to the above, regardless of how one cycles a tank, adding fish to an ammonia/nitrite prone tank will not kill you fish outright, especially if you are doing regular water changes to counteract a huge rise, plus temperature and ph determine toxicity.
> However, fish exposed to minor undetected spikes soon start having "diseases" down the line. It could be two days, it could be 2 months. That way you'll know if you cycled your tank well before adding fish or whatever method you chose stabilized the tank completely for the new fish.
> People tend to think that if the fish made it through the cycle, one cycled the tank well and it was safe and then start promoting their method of cycling. When you ask them how long their fish lived after that, most didn't make it the first year....



I completely agree. This is the main reason why I am/was considering dosing with (a relatively low concentration of) ammonia chloride after adding the bacterial starter - to verify whether the tank/filter is established enough to support additional bioload before I add a few fish. As Darrel points out, testing for this with kits is problematic - but I do subscribe to the fact that the kits can often be "good enough" to determine whether there is some ammonia/nitrite present.  I also plan to dose with Seachem Prime on a 48-hour basis for a week or two to detoxify any spikes that may occur.

The alternative is to add the bacterial starter (which does have very good reviews), avoid the ammonia, add a small number of fish, dose daily with Prime to prevent toxicity and then monitor the situation. I think I'm leaning towards this strategy currently.


----------



## dw1305 (21 May 2015)

Hi all,





IvanF said:


> If I wanted to take you up on your kind offer of a few floaters, should I PM you?


Yes, just PM me your address and I'll post a mix. You can have as much as you like for £5, and I can put in some _Bolbitis_ etc. 





IvanF said:


> I'm trying to keep things relatively simple with this set-up. Ironically, since setting this tank up 2 weeks ago, I've read Diana Walstad's book and really like much of her approach.


I'm a Diana Walstad fan as well, and I'd recommend her book to every-body. The two bits of advice in the original edition I didn't agree with were not having a filter, and not doing water changes.

Have a look at <"Fish health in relation to..... ">.

I like a reasonably chunky filter (all of mine are second hand Eheims) and I change ~10% water every day, which is probably over-kill.





IvanF said:


> I also plan to dose with Seachem Prime on a 48-hour basis for a week or two to detoxify any spikes that may occur.


 It definitely won't do any harm. 





IvanF said:


> The alternative is to add the bacterial starter (which does have very good reviews)


 As you probably gathered from the <"PlanetCatfish"> threads I'm a bit of sceptic, but again it isn't going to do any harm, <"Talking with Diana Walstad">.

What interests me about the bacterial supplement market is that RNA markers have shown that the ammonia oxidising bacteria that  Dr Tim Hovanec originally isolated, and patented, are only a minor component of the microbial flora.

Have a look at <"Aquarium Nitrification Revisited: Thaumarchaeota Are the Dominant Ammonia Oxidizers in Freshwater Aquarium Biofilters">.

cheers Darrel


----------



## IvanF (22 May 2015)

dw1305 said:


> Have a look at <"Aquarium Nitrification Revisited: Thaumarchaeota Are the Dominant Ammonia Oxidizers in Freshwater Aquarium Biofilters">.



Thanks for linking to this. This is the first time I've seen the full paper.

A few things that stand out to me are:

"Several" of the 27 aquaria were know to have received bacterial starters originally, yet ultimately showed higher AOA levels than AOB - i.e. similar to set-ups that didn't receive a bacteria starter
The paper does suggest  "a preference for high ammonia concentrations by AOB suggests a possible role for their involvement in first establishing an aquarium when ammonia concentrations may approach levels associated with fish toxicity"
This does give me some confidence that adding a suitable bacterial starter won't affect the longer term distribution of microbial flora in the filter and should be able to mitigate peaks of ammonia and nitrate as the tank continues to establish itself.

It would be interesting to apply their methodology to aquaria at various stages of maturity. Also interesting to note that across all 27 aquaria, pH varied from 7.6 - 9.2 - so not really representative of the full spectrum of our tanks.


----------



## dw1305 (22 May 2015)

Hi all, 





IvanF said:


> This does give me some confidence that adding a suitable bacterial starter won't affect the longer term distribution of microbial flora in the filter and should be able to mitigate peaks of ammonia and nitrate as the tank continues to establish itself.


 No, I definitely don't think it will do any harm.

I think the whole point really is that if you have a reasonable plant mass in active growth it doesn't really make a huge amount of difference what you do after that. Add in some water changes and  a wet and dry trickle filter, or even better a planted wet and dry trickle filter, and you can largely ignore biological filtration.

Plants offer a negative feedback loop with a visual indication of nutrient status, they provide extra sites for nitrification (especially in the substrate around the rhizosphere) and they are net producers of oxygen.

I'd always high-light that oxygen is the most important parameter, rather than ammonia. 

This is because the measure of pollution we are really interested in is the Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD), but unfortunately it isn't really something we can measure.

What we can do is have a system where we maximise the oxygen supply to the ammonia oxidising microbial biomass. This means that even a relatively small volume of biomass can deal with  a large bioload.

cheers Darrel


----------



## IvanF (22 May 2015)

dw1305 said:


> What we can do is have a system where we maximise the oxygen supply to the ammonia oxidising microbial biomass. This means that even a relatively small volume of biomass can deal with a large bioload.



If I may ask a question that I suspect I know the answer to - with regard to oxygenation of a low-tech aquarium, which is preferable (if we assume they are mutually exclusive)?

a) Surface agitation
b) High biomass of floating plants.

Thanks,

Ivan


----------



## sciencefiction (22 May 2015)

IvanF said:


> If I may ask a question that I suspect I know the answer to - with regard to oxygenation of a low-tech aquarium, which is preferable (if we assume they are mutually exclusive)?
> 
> a) Surface agitation
> b) High biomass of floating plants.
> ...



I'd like the answer to that. I've always gone with surface movement because I over-filter but it wasn't because I tried both and one prevailed.


----------



## dw1305 (23 May 2015)

Hi all,





IvanF said:


> (if we assume they are mutually exclusive)?
> 
> a) Surface agitation
> b) High biomass of floating plants.


 I have both, they aren't mutually exclusive. 

What you really want is linear flow, that turns over the water volume and continually brings new water to the surface.  This is a 60cm tank, it has an Eheim external (with a spray-bar) and an Aquaball internal with venturi. 



 

cheers Darrel


----------

