# Cyanobacteria problems



## All butter shortbread

Hello,

Got this stuff covering quite alot of my substrate now and could really use some advice on killing it.

Tank is 90x30x50cm (LxWxH), with two 39w T5s, Pressurized CO2. Dosing tropica + and liquid carbon daily, plus 50/60% water changes weekly (including thorough substrate cleaning).

Also I have an external filter rated at 100lph + a newave circulation pump going at 1600lph. Judging by the movement of the plants there seems to be pretty good circulation around the tank.

Nitrates are at 25ppm, didn't bother testing for ammonia.

I've been double dosing liquid carbon to kill off black brush / hair type algae however I assume it doesn't affect this stuff..

Could someone give me some advice on what could be going wrong that causing this?

Thanks!


----------



## Andy Thurston

If there is no livestock try a triple dose of liquid carbon


----------



## All butter shortbread

Unfortunately I do have live stock in there. Did some more reading and decided to bite the bullet and try a black out


----------



## squid102

I've just uncovered one of my tanks after a 3 day blackout and it really does work.


----------



## ceg4048

But if you do not change your behavior the BGA will return. Instead of testing for nitrates, you should be adding more of it. BGA almost ALWAYS occurs when the tank is LOW in nitrates. Algae never lie, but test kits do most of the time. If you are adding CO2 via gas or liquid you will always increase the demand for nitrate phosphate and everything else. You should check the contents of your fertilizer and make sure it contains NPK. If not then get NPK if it does contain NPK then it means you are not dosing enough so double or treble your dosage.

Cheers,


----------



## All butter shortbread

As far as i can tell the BGA occurred only in dead spots .I have since adjusted my inlet & outlets and my circulation pump and I'm pretty confident i've solved that particular problem. Concerning ferts the one I'm using does contain NPK so will up my dose

Thanks,


----------



## tomh

I had BGA on my substrate for months and hair algae on a few plants and just couldnt get rid of either. I used a syringe and put liquid carbon on the hair algae directly whilst in the tank for a couple of days and it was gone, but the BGA wouldnt go. One day I sat for a long time and considered things and it became obvious that the BGA was only at the front in the open spaces and not where the plants were nearer the back where the circulation is poorer and then it came to me....... i closed the curtains in the day for a few days and voila all the algae just disappeared just like that. I now douse 150% liquid carbon and Its been fine since. I am sure any experienced person would have thought about it from the start but sometimes you dont see the obvious


----------



## Henry

I've had a bout of BGA, for reasons I couldn't explain. Strong flow (not dead spots, I'm certain), consistent CO2, and EI dry dosing (aquariumplantfood) and still had problems. Turns out I had water flowing past bits of dead plant I had left on my tank braces. Maybe rotting plant matter is a contributing factor?


----------



## sciencefiction

High phosphates, or low CO2 I've heard(these two related), and of course low flow and low NO3.


----------



## DoubleDutch

Plants use nitrates and phosfates is a ratio 10 : 1. So check if your Phosfates are about 2,5 !!! Also (good) light is needed. Had Cyano for several years. Swapped bulbs for 4000 Kelvin ones. Plants started to grow again, ferts were needed and Cyano was gone.


----------



## ceg4048

The rate at which plants use any nutrient has no bearing whatsoever on the ratio of nutrients that you dose. Furthermore, BGA is not correlated at all to PO4. Thirdly, PO4 test kits are not accurate, so the worst thing the OP can do is to try and measure.
The OP needs to focus on NO3 and/or flow/distribution because BGA is highly correlated to low NO3.

Cheers,


----------



## DoubleDutch

I'm sorry, but i totally don't get you .  NO3 of 25 is low ??? I could be wrong but what i've been told / learned the last 40 years plants do use no3 and po4 in ratio 10 : 1. NO3 of 25 iis not low and shouldn't be added to my knowledge and believe. But hey I can be wrong.


----------



## sciencefiction

> BGA is not correlated at all to PO4


 
That's correct with unlimited CO2,or at least an amount that is more than enough for the current plant mass but high PO4 can cause indirectly higher CO2 demand, thus causing issues with algae and even cyanobacteria.
And on another hand,the more the PO4, the more the demand for NO3 as well. So I think it can be very much related depending on the type of tank one has.

I agree in unlimited tank that's not an issue  but theoretically if you take a different approach you can lower the PO4, which will indirectly lower demand for NO3 and CO2, thus balancing the tank, taking care not to cause PO4 related algae like greenspot at the same time.
And the alternative option is to follow the  EI method, and increase NO3 and sort out the flow and CO2 instead,


----------



## ceg4048

DoubleDutch said:


> I'm sorry, but i totally don't get you . NO3 of 25 is low ??? I could be wrong but what i've been told / learned the last 40 years plants do use no3 and po4 in ratio 10 : 1. NO3 of 25 iis not low and shouldn't be added to my knowledge and believe. But hey I can be wrong.


Well there is a simple explanation. Nitrate test kits are incapable of accurately measuring NO3. As I mentioned, algae are totally aware of what's happening in the tank and test kits are not, so the appearance of BGA, which is triggered ONLY ever by poor NO3 tells you immediately that the test kit is incorrect.

Plants use NO3 and PO4 at whatever rate they need, depending on the environmental conditions, depending on what species they are, depending on their state of health and depending on the light intensity as well as a host of other conditions, like CO2 concentration. The ratio is a rough guide based on the molar content of these compounds within the tissue, but it should never be used in a dosing program because you cannot control where, or at what rate the PO4 or NO3 enters the plant. There is uptake from leaves as well as from root, so there is no way your dosing can ever be controlled. The better strategy is to dose unlimited amounts relative to the plant's needs and to allow the plant to decide how much and how fast the uptake will occur. Managing nutrient ratios is a very poor way to dose. I ignore all ratios and yet do not suffer any deficiency issues...at all.

Here is an example of a tank dose at a NO3/PO4 ratio of 2:1
In nutrient dosing, one only ever needs to worry about avoiding falling BELOW the minimum nutrient concentration threshold.
One NEVER needs to worry about ratios.








sciencefiction said:


> That's correct with unlimited CO2,or at least an amount that is more than enough for the current plant mass but high PO4 can cause indirectly higher CO2 demand, thus causing issues with algae and even cyanobacteria.


There are many indirect contributing factors, but this is not a logical troubleshooting path at all. When you see BGA, fix your NO3, full stop. Analyze the reasons for the low NO3 and fix this direct causes FIRST. It makes no sense to address indirect contributing factors until you have assured yourself that the direct causes are fixed.

In this case, the OP has not really addressed the direct cause. He is using a low dosage fertilizer (one that is mostly water) and is relying on a proven false indicator, therefore the best course of action is to add more NO3 first. PO4 is far down the line and is tertiary indirect contributing factor at best.

Cheers,


----------



## DoubleDutch

Ok, but there has to be (any) PO4? Is there in this tank? Nice pic / tank by the way. Still understand the NO3 of 25 to be (too) low.


----------



## ceg4048

As I repeatedly mention, the test kit readings cannot be relied upon. The appearance of BGA indicates with much greater accuracy that the NO3 concentration is much closer to 2.5 than to 25. If you continue to trust test kit readings you will continually be chasing your tail.

The amount of PO4 added to this tank was 10- 20 ppm plus whatever was in the tap water.
Yes you absolutely need PO4. PO4 should be dosed at unlimited levels and NO3 should also be dosed at unlimited levels. Where your ratio comes in is the fact that plants do use a lot more NO3 than PO4. So the amount required for an unlimited quantity of these two is different. This is true due to the fact that PO4 is a recyclable product to some extent because it is used in cyclic energy transfer for many chemical reactions. Phosphorous is a high energy element and is in very short supply naturally, so plants and animals have discovered how to survive with much smaller amounts. By contrast, Nitrogen and it's compounds are ubiquitous, so the consumption and the way in which N is used causes the demand for this element to be much higher. Nitrogen is the second most important element to plants, while Phosphorous is a distant third.

Cheers,


----------



## DoubleDutch

Thanks for the explanation. I meand the PO4 in the tank of the OP. If testkits won't work, how can you test that. Or should OP simply add that as well?


----------



## ceg4048

Oh, sorry, I misunderstood your question. The answer is "yes absolutely" he should add as much of NO3/PO4/Trace elements as he can. That is one of the reasons people have difficulties in planted tanks. They take reading from useless test kits and of course, the test kit returns a high reading, so they trust the readings and assume they have plenty of whatever compound they are testing for - while all the time, the real nutrient level is actually low. Then they assume that it's because the nutrient concentrations are high that they have problems, never realizing that the tank is suffering  severe nutrient shortfalls.

Whenever you see an algal bloom, it usually tells you that some nutrient concentration level is acutely low.

Cheers,


----------



## DoubleDutch

Okay, thanks again.


----------



## All butter shortbread

Took your advice - increased fertliser dosage from 2ml to 5ml. All traces of Cyano (and some black brush algae) have dissapeared from the tank after the black out so hopefully it won't come back.



ceg4048 said:


> They take reading from useless test kits


 
You seem to be the expert around here so I'll take your word for it, so without test kits how do you keep track of nitrates with sensitive fish? I plan on getting some mikrogeophagus ramirezi when the scape fills in and apparently they don't like nitrates above 20 ppm?


----------



## dw1305

Hi all,


All butter shortbread said:


> You seem to be the expert around here so I'll take your word for it, so without test kits how do you keep track of nitrates with sensitive fish? I plan on getting some mikrogeophagus ramirezi when the scape fills in and apparently they don't like nitrates above 20 ppm?


 I'll nip in before Clive, but the real answer is that this is only really relevant to the fish when NO3 is the "smoking gun" from high  ammonia (and NO2-) levels. The main difference in planted tanks is that the level of NO3 falls over time, rather than increasing. Basically a large growing plant mass ensures good water quality.

The second problem is testing for anions such as PO4--- and NO3-, it just isn't possible to get accurate and repeatable values without some very expensive analytical kit. This doesn't particularly matter, you can use plant health as an indicator of nutrient status. This is how I came upon the technique I've called "Duckweed Index", it is ideal for more sensitive fish, because it combines some plant growth with maintaining very high quality water. Have a look at these posts: <Water Lettuce and it's impact on my tank | UK Aquatic Plant Society>, <Low maintainence, long term sustrate | UK Aquatic Plant Society>.

Lastly if you are new to Rams, I highly recommend them as fish, but I'd be wary of buying them from a commercial retailer, and I'd have a look at Bob Wiltshire's site before purchase: <Dwarf Cichlid Aquarium Care> & <Mikrogeophagusramirezi The Ram Cichlid>.

cheers Darrel


----------



## All butter shortbread

Cool, thanks for all the links

Seemed a bit strange that Dwarfcichlid.com suggested using straight RO water for water changes though. I've heard almost universally both that this is super unstable as it has no buffering capacity and that fish certain minerals (or something like that?) in the water and that even soft water fish can't thrive in pure RO. I've read on various other forums that the only way to prevent a huge PH swing in the tank when using straight RO is by doing big daily water changes?

Really just repeating what I've read elsewhere though as I've never tried using straight RO water.


----------



## dw1305

Hi all,


All butter shortbread said:


> I've heard almost universally both that this is super unstable as it has no buffering capacity and that fish certain minerals (or something like that?) in the water and that even soft water fish can't thrive in pure RO. I've read on various other forums that the only way to prevent a huge PH swing in the tank when using straight RO is by doing big daily water changes?


This is another case where a lot of the information given on the web isn't totally correct. The problem is really with the pH scale, it measure a ratio and this uses this as a proxy for the acidity or alkalinity of a solution, this means that 2 pH readings of the same pH6 value could be from solutions of very different nature. As we approach pure H2O (like RO) pH becomes a basically meaningless measurement as even small changes in the acid:base ration cause huge changes in pH. Where changes in pH aren't caused by large changes in water chemistry they don't effect the biota. People who inject CO2 will drop the pH of the tank water from ~pH7.8 to pH6 every day, without causing any problems to their fish.

I'm a scientist, and I though t I knew all about pH, but I didn't really understand this until a colleague explained in terms that I could understand.

I'll pass you over to "Apistogramma forums" & BCA forums, where there is quite a lot of discussion of maintaining fish in very soft water.
. <Keeping low pH | Apistogramma.com> & <British Cichlid Association • The place to talk about the Cichlids in our Aquaria>.

cheers Darrel


----------



## ceg4048

All butter shortbread said:


> You seem to be the expert around here so I'll take your word for it, so without test kits how do you keep track of nitrates with sensitive fish? I plan on getting some mikrogeophagus ramirezi when the scape fills in and apparently they don't like nitrates above 20 ppm?


 It's exactly as Darrel mentions. Ramirezi really do not care about nitrate levels. Nitrate is nature way of actually detoxifying the environment. The detoxification process begins with the oxidation of the extremely toxic ammonia, which is turned into the highly toxic nitrite (NO2). So NO3 is the "smoking gun", a relatively non-toxic compound  whose presence indicates that the fish have been exposed to ammonia and nitrite. By the time NO3 is in the water column, it's already too late. The damage has already been done. Also, the bacteria responsible for these conversions require huge amounts of Oxygen to complete the Oxidation process, therefore, Oxygen, which is already typically in short supply, is stolen from the fish and that is what kills M. ramirezi. You really don't need to worry about pH or RO or nitrate.

Plants are so effective at uptaking ammonia/ammonium and NO3 that often, under high lighting and CO2 enrichment such as you have, the level of NO3 actually falls below the minimum threshold resulting in starvation. That's when algae appears. So it's necessary to add NO3 or ammonium to the tank to feed the plants. If you check your fertilizer bottle's ingredient list, it should tell you how the Nitrogen is derived. Often, with commercial mixes it's via ammonium nitrate (NH4NO3) or Urea ((CO)NH2)2), which breaks down into ammonium and CO2. Because there are only very small amounts of these compounds in the bottle, it's necessary to add more than what the bottle suggests in order to satisfy the uptake demand of the plants.

I prefer to avoid using ammonium or urea for my dosing, even though these deliver much more Nitrogen per unit weight than a simple nitrate salt such as Potassium Nitrate (KNO3). When a nitrate salt is added to the water, there is no bacterial action against the NO3 compound. Therefore there is no Oxygen robbing and the abundance of NO3 allows the plant to produce much more Oxygen, whcih is fed to the water and sediment.

So there is every reason the add NO3 and to not worry about NO3 levels harming sensitive fish. These are all myths based on a fundamental misunderstanding of the chemistry occurring in the tank.

If you wish to learn more about unlimited dosing then check the Tutorial => EI DOSING USING DRY SALTS | UK Aquatic Plant Society

Cheers,


----------



## All butter shortbread

The fert I'm using does contains both NO3 and ammonium, but I think I'll have a crack
at EI. Your tutorial was very helpful on this, thanks.

btw the way, do you know of any sites that show the actual contents of tropical fertiliser? I Would be interested to know how much I'm actually dosing of everything

Thanks so much for taking the time to help me out with this, so glad I joined this forum!


----------



## ceg4048

Hello,
		 Glad you find the information useful. Before they changed the product name to be more in line with the multicolored perfume pump bottle mentality of their competition, the product was simply called TPN+. There is a possibility that the ingredients are almost exactly the same. Have a look at James' Planted Tank - All In One Solution and you'll see what it used to be and what it ought to be reasonably close to now.

Cheers,


----------



## All butter shortbread

Cool, thanks.

Unfortunately BGA seems to be making a slow comeback despite trebling my dose of fertiliser so I'm really confused about what is going on now.

Should I just keep increasing the dose?


----------



## ceg4048

Hi,
Increase the dose (presumably you are doing a daily dose or multiple doses per week?), but also look at your distribution. It could easily be that the flow at the bottom is poor. It would be helpful if we could see either an image of your setup or a diagram of how you pump outputs are arranged. Also, did you reduce the light intensity by disabling a bulb?

Also, when was the last time you cleaned your filter?

Cheers,


----------



## All butter shortbread

Currently Dosing daily. Will increase the dose.

I can see my eleocharis flowing fairly violently in the water around the area where thew cyano is appearing - strong enough to pull the odd it of eleocharis or bacopa out of the ground. I need to register on photo bucket or something first before I can post a picture, but currently I have the spray bar and supporting circulation pump at the top of the left wall of the tank, and the inlet at the bottom of the left wall

I haven't removed a bulb as it stands. I was thinking that as the cyano appears to be appearing mostly near the front glass It might be to do with the lighting in the room? There no direct sunlight on the tank but the room is brightly lit by sky lights most of the day.

I last cleaned my filter couple days ago


----------



## ceg4048

Hi,
	Too much flow or turbulent flow is not good either. If there is enough flow to uproot plants then that could be problematic. If it's at the front glass only then try using strips of black electrical tape across the front glass to block the ambient light from penetrating. Move the pump to different locations along the wall or try mounting the outlets along the back wall.

Cheers,


----------



## All butter shortbread

Changing the outlet position means having to drill a new hole in my stand and I don't like using power tools near my fish tank if I can
help It. My powerhead is adjustable so I'll try reducing the turnover slightly first and see if that helps.

Will try the electrical tape thing and if it works I might just move the tank to a darker room - Electrical Tape doesn't seem like a particularly attractive long term solution!

Thanks,


----------



## Andy Thurston

All butter shortbread said:


> Will try the electrical tape thing and if it works I might just move the tank to a darker room - Electrical Tape doesn't seem like a particularly attractive long term solution!



If you dont want to move the tank you could find some trim to match the stand


----------



## All butter shortbread

Big clown said:


> If you dont want to move the tank you could find some trim to match the stand


 
Great idea! Not sure what the best material would be to use though. I'll give it a google


----------



## niru

All butter shortbread said:


> Great idea! Not sure what the best material would be to use though. I'll give it a google



As Clive said, periodically clean filters. Next WC you do, hoover the substrate and physically remove the BGA by scrapping.. Apart from NO3 issues, BGA thrieves in dirtier substrates full of organic gunk. Lack of oxygen is also a reason for BGA.

In worst cases try blackout method. But basic husbandry always helps. 


Sent from my GT-N7000 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## All butter shortbread

I already Hoover the substrate very thoroughly once a week and currently I clean my filter once a month.

Would it be worth having a bubble counter running at night to increase oxygen levels? My fish aren't gasping at the surface or anything like that but I have very little surface agitation and my CO2 is about as high as it can safely be


----------



## dw1305

Hi all,


All butter shortbread said:


> Would it be worth having a bubble counter running at night to increase oxygen levels? My fish aren't gasping at the surface or anything like that but I have very little surface agitation and my CO2 is about as high as it can safely be


I'd always have some form of extra aeration at night if you have the CO2 running 24/7? It doesn't have to be an air stone, faster flow will increase aeration as well, so you could have power-head and venturi or an internal etc running on a time switch.


All butter shortbread said:


> I already Hoover the substrate very thoroughly once a week and currently I clean my filter once a month.


I always associate BGA with some form of organic pollutant as well. I know they aren't to every-ones taste, but a sponge pre-filter on the intake is a really good way of making filter maintenance easier: <Pre filter foam for intakes | UK Aquatic Plant Society>.

cheers Darrel


----------



## All butter shortbread

dw1305 said:


> a sponge pre-filter on the intake is a really good way of making filter maintenance easier


 
My intake is obscured by plants anyway so that should work well. 
My CO2 is on a solenoid and levels seem to stay safe throughout the night but as I already have a pump & air stone I might as well use it. Unfortunately I Am away from my tank for ten days so It'll to be interesting to see whether or not it's been destroyed by Cyano when I get back!


----------



## petr nehyba

Hi everyone. Thanks for this great forum. Im just finishing cycling my 60l tank and fighting Cyano. I`v red all stuff about it here. Started dosing NO3 and PO4 as never did that before and today applied some hydrogen peroxide on the Cyano itself. Just worring now about my bio filter which is almost done by now. Amonia 0, No2 0.1 after 24 hours dousing 5PPM amonia. Is there a big risk I killed my BB in the bio filter applying Hydrogen Peroxide?! I didnt switched off the filter actually  i put about 25Ml into 60l tank. thanks


----------



## dw1305

Hi all,


petr nehyba said:


> Amonia 0, No2 0.1 after 24 hours dousing 5PPM amonia.


 Stop adding the ammonia, it doesn't do any good at all. Have a look at this thread <Should I fishless cycle a new planted tank? | UK Aquatic Plant Society>. Also you can't measure levels of NH3(NH4+), NO2- or NO3- accurately with any of the kits available to us, it is difficult even with dedicated lab equipment.


petr nehyba said:


> Is there a big risk I killed my BB in the bio filter applying Hydrogen Peroxide?! I didnt switched off the filter actually  i put about 25Ml into 60l tank.


Probably not because of the dilution effect, but H2O2 is an oxidizing agent. This means that if a high enough concentration of H2O2 reached the filter bacteria they would be sterilized.

cheers Darrel


----------



## petr nehyba

Thanks Darrel.
Before I saw this post I decided to try if my BB survived. Added 2ppm ammonia and measured NO2 after 10Hours. Seems the first bacteria group turning ammonia to NO2 survived and do the work. Will see tomorr morning if the No2 drops as well. If not, my fault anyway but no fish gonna suffer  plants hopefully will manage this my stepping aside. The tank was almost cycled but just almost. the No2 was always detectable even very litlle and visible just from the top against the white paper. I got u concerning measuring and I red a lot from ceg4048 too but still it worries me if No2 still visible on the nutrafin test. Concerning the Algae, there was a small water flow (just recently fixed) there was low No3 and low PO4. Dosing those daily now. Also according what`s been said here, Im not to worried to overdose, especially No3. Using the expensive liquid Syntesis aquavitro (ammoniacal, nitrate, organic nitrogen). Planning to get dry fert but not sure where about in UK yet. More research again. Hope its gonna solve the Cyano issue. Concerning pure Ammonia, I dosed too much from the beginning. I mean I dosed over 7ppm daily for almost one and half month. That didnt help with Algae either  I hope Il manage to fix this tank and get fish in soon although I`m not big fun of fish-cycling. Will see how I will do my next big Discuss tank concerning cycling, will need to do more research about it. I like the idea of fish-less cycling and If the ammonia will be add like 2ppm, should  that not be ok?! 

my tank is 54l, CO2 from fermentation+liquid carbon, 30W (4000+18000K). Started dosing No3 round 30-50ppm daily, Po4 1ppm daily. Easylife 5mll 2x a week. As said will try to get dry fert. Flora: echinodorus barthii, hygrophila mini, eleocharis acicularis, ludwiga rubin, echinodorus magdalenensis, salicifolia rubra, new zelandia (this one is not doing great at the moment)...I think its rather moderate planting? 

Well I didnt put any question into the forum but rather left it open in case you would have any suggestions or advices.
Thanks a lot for all those great articles around here and for coming back to me, much appreciated!

will let you know how H2O2 worked out and how the Cyano problem looks like. thanks 

Petr


----------



## petr nehyba

Cyano seems to be sorted at the moment.
my NO2 doesnt move though. know u dont fancy measuring but what else i can do now? NO2=1.2 since. I stopped adding ammonia.

now please, how to continue? 
a big water change and add fish slowly? My plants have been in the tank for about 50 days now and 90% r established and fine (I forgot to mention Java fern&moss). Is No2 gonna get undetectable after a water change?

or adding ammonia about 2ppm and wait for the No2 to drop and finish the nitrogen cycle in a planted tank? Is that actually gonna happen if I sterilized bacteria using hydrogen peroxide? In case I did, is that process going to continue naturaly and the BB will develop again? I saw a post where ceg4048 said u kill the BB with house ammonia as its highly toxic. also mentioning this ammonia is not good for plants either? 

I really dont want to harm any fish but also dont want continue trying to achieve something not very appropriate for a planted tank?! 

I have read all what you recommended but still not sure what way to choose for this tank?! ur advice is much appreciated. Thank you in advance.

Petr


----------



## Henry

I'd throw in some floating plants and give it a week, dosing ferts at your normal rate (if any). This will help to stabilise the tank, but allow your other plants to keep up. I'd then start slowly adding fish, less sensitive ones first.


----------



## ceg4048

The course of action is to do nothing. You are responding and worrying about a test kit reading that means nothing. Stop adding ammonia and be patient. There is no reason to do anything. Throw the test kit away because the only thing you are doing is confusing yourself and making your life more inconvenient than it needs to be. Once you stop doing crazy things like adding ammonia to the tank, the tank will recover. It doesn't surprise me at all that you have these weird problems.

Do you recognize products like this?





They are really good at cleaning and killing bacteria on hard surfaces. The reason they work so well is because the active killing ingredient is ammonia salts like ammonium chloride. Ammonia kills bacteria, and is referred to as a disinfectant, even the bacteria that eats ammonia. So when you continue to add ammonia to your tank you are killing the very same bacteria you are trying to propagate, so stop doing it and allow the tank to recover naturally.  Avoid adding fauna for at least another few weeks and just let the tank be. Continue to do large frequent water changes, feed the plants, pay attention to CO2/flow/distribution, and that's all. You do not need to win a Nobel Prize in Chemistry.

The more you fiddle with the tank, the more extreme your problems will become. Get on with the technique of growing plants and forget about all that other rubbish.

Cheers,


----------



## dw1305

Hi all,





> I'd throw in some floating plants and give it a week, dosing ferts at your normal rate (if any). This will help to stabilise the tank, but allow your other plants to keep up. I'd then start slowly adding fish, less sensitive ones first.


 Sounds a good approach to me. 





petr nehyba said:


> my NO2 doesnt move though. know u dont fancy measuring but what else i can do now? NO2=1.2 since. I stopped adding ammonia.


 Realistically you can just ignore it, the reading may be NO2- ions, or it may be another anion. 





petr nehyba said:


> a big water change and add fish slowly? My plants have been in the tank for about 50 days now and 90% r established and fine (I forgot to mention Java fern&moss).


 They are slow growing plants so I'd still add the fish fairly slowly. 





petr nehyba said:


> Is No2 gonna get undetectable after a water change?


 You won't have any NO2, but you may still get some colour on the test kit, if it is measuring another anion. 





petr nehyba said:


> also mentioning this ammonia is not good for plants either?


 Ammonia (NH3) is toxic to all organisms, the ammonium ion NH4+ is less toxic, but still damaging at large concentrations. A lot of plants preferentially uptake ammonia/ammonium as their nitrogen source, but there is a huge difference between the traces of NH3/NH4+ that are constantly diffusing from aquatic organisms (aquatic organisms can excrete ammonia because of the dilution effect of the water, but terrestrial organisms can't, and excrete the much less toxic urea or uric acid) and adding a concentrated dose of ammonia in a single hit. 

In a planted tank we don't just rely on the filter bacteria to convert ammonia to nitrite and then nitrate, we have the plants themselves which take up all 3 nitrogenous compounds, and we also have a lot more surfaces where nitrification can occur. As a general rule plant/microbe systems are about x10 more efficient than microbe alone systems, partially because of the oxygen evolved from plants during photosynthesis.

cheers Darrel


----------



## petr nehyba

Im following ur advice which is greatly appreciated.

just one question yet. what u saying doesnt mean I (my fish) depend on my plants totally (even though we all depend on plants since the very beginning on earth actually). i mean the bio filter (i mean the Beneficial Bacteria, just in case not using the right expression) will still take place and develop in the tank and in case my plants suddenly die (the last think I would want) the bio filter will somehow exist in the tank anyway (even partly) without plants and manage to keep my fish happy?! In other words the cycling will proceed even without putting any source of ammonia into the tank?! Its having plants enough or do I need fish to arrive with their ammonia to start the cycle?! I just would like to know if the nitrogen cycle is done before adding fish or not?! sorry if i sound silly. dont want to be difficult and If I missed whats been already said I apology.

PS: its almost scary to think nutrafin is selling expensive NO2 test (im having second for No2, got NH3, NO3, PO4, PH, GH/KH) about £70 which r being useless?! Is it really possible u can see the results on No2 showing another anion?! well if there is just a 10% a chance of this, Id really love to go with plants rather than stick to measuring. for the money i spent for kits i could have some really nice lovely ones  I guess PH & Hardness is ok though?! do u folks measure anything?! 

many thanks
P


----------



## ceg4048

petr nehyba said:


> PS: its almost scary to think nutrafin is selling expensive NO2 test (im having second for No2, got NH3, NO3, PO4, PH, GH/KH) about £70 which r being useless?


Why is this scary? This is business as usual. How many products you see advertised actually do what they claim. These kits are useless for different reasons. The Nitrogen and Phosphorous kits are completely useless because they are easily fooled by other components in the water. The pH, GH and KH kits are more or less accurate, but they are useless because they measure things that don't really matter. So the best thing for you to do right now is to ignore them and to do the basic things that a planted tanks needs doing, those things that I mentioned above. Make your plants healthy by paying attention to those items and you will see that none of the readings in any of those kits will tell you more that you can see with your own eyes. You have already proven it to yourself if you added NO3 which resulted in an abatement of the BGA despite what the NO3 test kit readings were. Algae is more accurate than test kits, and unlike test kits, algae never lie.



petr nehyba said:


> In other words the cycling will proceed even without putting any source of ammonia into the tank?! Its having plants enough or do I need fish to arrive with their ammonia to start the cycle?! I just would like to know if the nitrogen cycle is done before adding fish or not?


Of course it will happen. It can't possibly not happen unless you continue to dump toxic waste products like ammonia into the tank. ANY water placed in ANY container automatically develops bacterial colonies over time. It's the law. Ordinarily, it takes 6-8 weeks to develop the variety and the population densities required to detoxify the tank. Plants and bacteria have a symbiotic relationship. They have an arrangement, so if you have healthy plants you automatically have healthy bacterial colonies, both in the filter and in the sediment. YOU DON'T NEED AMMONIA to accomplish this....EVER.

As I mentioned, just leave the tank to it's devices and carry on with the maintenance and feeding. They will take care of everything as they have done for billions of years.

Cheers,


----------



## dw1305

Hi all,


petr nehyba said:


> just one question yet. what u saying doesnt mean I (my fish) depend on my plants totally (even though we all depend on plants since the very beginning on earth actually). i mean the bio filter (i mean the Beneficial Bacteria, just in case not using the right expression) will still take place and develop in the tank and in case my plants suddenly die (the last think I would want) the bio filter will somehow exist in the tank anyway (even partly) without plants and manage to keep my fish happy?! In other words the cycling will proceed even without putting any source of ammonia into the tank?!


Your plants aren't all going to die suddenly, but yes it would, a lot of nitrification doesn't take place in the filter, it happens in the upper layer of the substrate for example. Microbial communities are much more fluid and diverse than the conventional description would have us believe. 





petr nehyba said:


> its almost scary to think nutrafin is selling expensive NO2 test (im having second for No2, got NH3, NO3, PO4, PH, GH/KH) about £70 which r being useless?


 In my opinion the manufacturers of many "aids" to fish-keeping are at best disingenuous at best about what their filter media, supplements, chemicals and test kits can do. Even using analytical equipment you often have to perform a series of chemical reactions to reduce, oxidise, precipitate or complex interfering ions before you can get an accurate reading. The same applies to ion selective electrodes, often you can only measure the level of the ion you are interested in when you've removed interference from another ion. About the only meter or test kit that really does give you an accurate and repeatable measurement is a conductivity meter, which isn't probably the parameter you'd choose. I'd advise every-one to think in "shades of grey", answers to questions are very rarely a clear cut "good or bad" or "black or white". As soon as you have a simple test, dip meter or any product that claims to be a "magic bullet" I'd be initially suspicious. 

I don't think it is any co-incidence that Diana Walstad had to publish <Ecology of the Planted Aquarium: A Practical Manual and Scientific Treatise for the Home Aquarist: Amazon.co.uk: Diana L. Walstad: Books> privately.

This is via the "Skeptical Aquarist", <Substrate | The Skeptical Aquarist> &<De-nitrification | The Skeptical Aquarist>, who I can't recommend strongly enough. 





dw1305 said:


> The third function of the substrate is to offer a vast range of colonizable surfaces for a diverse community of bacteria some of which are the agents of biofiltration, together with water-filled interstitial spaces of varying scale. The aerobic bacterial communities that metabolize ammonium to nitrite and then to nitrate have been a well-known feature of the substrate since the introduction of the undergravel filter in the 1960s. But sometimes people don't seem to realize that for every free-floating bacterium in the water column, there are hundreds of thousands settled in the biofilm, efficiently metabolizing one another's waste products. ............
> 
> Researchers have determined that the mature biofilm on stem and leaf surfaces of water plants, which are substrates for bacterial nitrification, are also locally coupled with de-nitrification. The nitrifying process is stimulated in daylight by the oxygen diffusing from photosynthesizing surfaces, in a gentle diurnal pulse that only lab experiments can detect. The uppermost surfaces of the substrate are also prime locations for these biofilm populations, as you know. The nitrification process demands a lot of oxygen, more even than familiar cellular respiration. Only a few millimeters below the substrate's surface, or in the interstitial water of a mature biofilm, the diffusion of oxygen can't keep up with demand. As localized oxygen levels drop in a gradient, facultative anaerobic bacteria find their niche. "Facultative" in this sense merely means "opportunistic." Many ordinary bacteria are facultative anaerobes: when oxygen is in short supply, these kinds of bacteria are able to switch to a metabolism that doesn't require oxygen. Instead, some use nitrate. The familiar nitrating bacteria provide the nitrate, and their high oxygen demands also tend to exhaust the limited supply. So besides providing the nitrate, a thriving microzone of aerobic nitrifiers provides low-oxygen conditions too. You can visualize a mutually beneficial exchange between the two types of bacteria across a fluctuating boundary lying not far beneath surfaces. If there were no other reason not to disturb the substrate in an aquarium, this would be enough for me. If plants are well-rooted in your substrate, their rootzone (rhizosphere) provides further edge microzones for de-nitrification. Oxygen transported through the vascular system of stems and roots diffuses into the spaces adjacent to each rootlet, supporting surrounding microzones of nitrification. Just beyond this aerobic network, in hypoxic porewater, bacterial de-nitrification occurs. .


 cheers Darrel


----------



## petr nehyba

doing as u said and its starting looking good ! thank you.

If you dont mind I would ask for ur kind advice with my second planted tank once more. I have done very similar things with it like with the previously mentioned one (adding ammonia). My second tank is just 35l, low light and on for four weeks. I got it used and didnt disinfect it with any bleach before use. Since the beginning all! stem plants are dying from the bottom. All starts in the substrate and goes up. Stems turn brown and get as soft that the plant looses its ground. If it somehow stays in the substrate the "illness" grows up and affects leaves. They turn brown and die. I did deep siphoning in the substrate, filter cleaning and replanted all tank with new fast growing stem plants and just after three days I can see the process repeating. I stopped adding ammonia obviously. Thought I may have damage the plant when planting but its seem not to be th ecase. Is this anything you may have seen before and know what to do about it?

oh forgot to say, there is one echinodorus barthii and its doing well.

many thanks
Petr


----------



## ceg4048

These are all symptoms of poor CO2. Neither illness nor disinfection have any relevance to those symptoms. So if you are using CO2 in that tank then your application of it is at fault. If this is a non CO2 enriched tank then it's likely that the lighting is not as low as you've imagined.

Cheers,


----------



## petr nehyba

Im dosing easycarbo daily. As there is no fish in the tank I rather tend to slightly overdose actually. Im very surprised that it may be CO2. Never thought of it here. There is a good water circulation in the tank too. Its T8 14W 18000K light. Il get some more CO2 and try that. Its happening in the substrate itself, stems get brown where the substrate touches it and the plant looses its ground. really thought I have poisoned my substrate somehow. 

Thanks.will try more CO2. 

P


----------



## ceg4048

Hi Petr,
			Any structural fault in an aquatic plant is caused by poor CO2. That makes it easy to diagnose.
Unfortunately, diagnosis is 100X easier than the cure. More info in the thread What causes leaves to melt, and what to do now? | UK Aquatic Plant Society

Cheers,


----------



## petr nehyba

read that trough. got one more CO2 system&ordering salts soon 

Thanks very much dangerous man !
P


----------



## petr nehyba




----------



## mark4785

ceg4048 said:


> The pH, GH and KH kits are more or less accurate, but they are useless because they measure things that don't really matter


 
Wouldn't agree with you on this. The KH needs to be at a given level, typically 4dH, to buffer the pH from large swings or crashes. All of the 3 parameters are equally important to consider before placing wild caught fish in to closed systems as their natural environment won't be one that allows them to experience the large GH/KH/pH fluctuations that water goes through when it is in short supply (i.e. in closed aquarium system).


----------



## ceg4048

Well, disagreeing won't change the truth. I've used just about every KH from 1 to 15, every GH from 3 to above 26, and every pH from 3.5 to 7.5  and I've rarely suffered any problems with softwater fish or plant health.  This includes Discus as well as African and South American dwarf chiclids. Whatever problems were encountered were not resolve by directly addressing any of these parameters.

On the other hand, you adhere to the policy of micromanaging pH/GH/KH and yet, you perennially suffer all kinds of problems.

There is no way you will ever reproduce a fishes natural habitat. It can't even be done in your dreams simply because we do not know all the things that have an effect. So we need to discover what are the most important priorities and execute those things that have a positive effect on fish and plant health. At the very top of the list is Oxygen availability, and that is accomplished by having a tank that is as clean as possible and is free of organic waste as much as possible.

A net benefit of increased plant health is additional Oxygen production, which benefits the fish, so doing things that maximizes plant health.

In CO2 injected tanks there is a strong correlation between the cleanliness of a tank and improved fish and plant health. And this can be achieved with any pH/GH/KH combination or any level of instability.

One can have any pH/KH/GH combination which is stable, and yet still have massive problems. So it appears that if there is any negative effect of instability or absolute value in these parameters, it is thoroughly mitigated by the availability of higher Oxygen availability.

Cheers,


----------



## mark4785

ceg4048 said:


> Well, disagreeing won't change the truth. I've used just about every KH from 1 to 15, every GH from 3 to above 26, and every pH from 3.5 to 7.5 and I've rarely suffered any problems with softwater fish or plant health. This includes Discus as well as African and South American dwarf chiclids. Whatever problems were encountered were not resolve by directly addressing any of these parameters.
> 
> On the other hand, you adhere to the policy of micromanaging pH/GH/KH and yet, you perennially suffer all kinds of problems.
> 
> There is no way you will ever reproduce a fishes natural habitat. It can't even be done in your dreams simply because we do not know all the things that have an effect. So we need to discover what are the most important priorities and execute those things that have a positive effect on fish and plant health. At the very top of the list is Oxygen availability, and that is accomplished by having a tank that is as clean as possible and is free of organic waste as much as possible.
> 
> A net benefit of increased plant health is additional Oxygen production, which benefits the fish, so doing things that maximizes plant health.
> 
> In CO2 injected tanks there is a strong correlation between the cleanliness of a tank and improved fish and plant health. And this can be achieved with any pH/GH/KH combination or any level of instability.
> 
> One can have any pH/KH/GH combination which is stable, and yet still have massive problems. So it appears that if there is any negative effect of instability or absolute value in these parameters, it is thoroughly mitigated by the availability of higher Oxygen availability.
> 
> Cheers,


 
Empirical scientific testing and reading about the results of such testing gets you to the truth not hobbyist experience. I will never profess that the experiences I have gone through have lead me to the truth. My arrogance might say otherwise but fortunately I'm not an arrogant person.

With regards to micro-managing, I indeed do do this with the parameter of nitrate and currently have 2 thriving aquariums with only minor algae issues but thank you, Ceg, anyway for trying to lower my confidence because having our own opinions is a big no-no when we are graced with your presence.


----------



## petr nehyba

i cant see any big No No anywhere here. especially not connected with Ceg presence.its in every way the opposite and the help here is much appreciated. not sure who is we and not sure why testing and experience shall be put against each other on the opposite sites either. its all about words like truth and oxygen  the same words that make every girl walk away from me when using them in a text message  texting is tricky. thanks to all for this great forum, ceg in particular for such a great knowledge, experience, testing results or true, for the oxigen which so far always worked for me. also for such a prompt reactions when helping others! even nietszche said that some people gonna stop liking you when you simply too good. even those things happened ages ago. more oxygen helps though! keep working hard,u doing great job here.cheers P


----------

