# Conversion of a high-tech to low-tec.  Advice needed!



## Jporter (14 May 2012)

Hi everyone!

Just a quick post to share my thoughts on an upcoming project of mine. It'd be great to get everyone's opinion / test the feasibility of my idea.

Basically I've a 180L high-tech planted set up at the moment with a couple of discus and cardinals etc. Unfortunately I simply don't have the time required to look after it anymore.
I'm thinking of converting it to a low-tech setup, possibly with a soil / compost base capped by gravel / sand. 

I'm not really sure about the feasibility of this and was thinking of simply scooping the fish up into several buckets, re-do the tank and plopping them back in. I'll lose a lot of the bacteria established in the gravel obviously but I've an external & internal filter running which should pick up the slack. 

I was also looking at (what I really want to do eventually) possibly going down the Walstad route, but I'm not sure if you can put fish straight back in - I assume I would need to leave the filters running (at least initially) before the soil was ''cycled'' and to pick up anything harmful the soil excreted (perhaps I could simply soak the soil for a bit first?) but would having the filters running prevent the Walstad filtration theory ever kicking in? 

I realise this is a bit of a ramble and I'm really just writing as it's coming to me!

If anyone's any suggestions / alternatives for converting a high-tech to low-tech without any 'down-time' I'd love to hear it. I may upload periodic photos once I've decided on a method!

Thanks in advance!


----------



## Alastair (14 May 2012)

if your worried about ammonia spikes from the soil, leave it out to air and give it a stir every so often to release ammonia. diana states its ok to put fish straight in.
although, with discus im not sure as they are quite sensitive water wise. just do it and do regular water changes for the first few weeks.
Saying that, ive just set up a au natural tank with soil capped with florabase, only did one water change to clear the muddy water that i caused and thats it and its currently full of cory fry so cant be that bad or theyd have all perished


----------



## roadmaster (15 May 2012)

I am wondering if plant's from high tech,suddenly thrust into NON CO2 enriched tank might not take a big hit if these plant's are going to be used.
I might consider backing off the CO2 slowly over a week or two before I made the change for the sake of plant's and fishes as well. IMHO
Would be interested in other's views .


----------



## ceg4048 (15 May 2012)

Yeah, I'm in total agreement with roadmaster. High/Low tech is all about CO2 enrichment and has not much to do with sediment. It's easy to go from low to high but very difficult to go from high to low.

Cheers,


----------



## dw1305 (15 May 2012)

Hi all,
I think the others are right, and that high to low CO2 is going to be a leap to far. 

I'd leave the sediment as it is, and just reduce the CO2 and fertilisers over a couple of weeks. Personally I'm a great fan of Diana Walstad's book, but I'm a not a great fan of no water changes, so I would keep changing the water. I like a lot of aeration, biological filtration and small regular water changes, they may not be strictly necessary, but have the advantage of maintaining high water quality.

I'd also add some floating plants to diffuse the light, and after that I'd use the "Duckweed index" to add fertiliser to the water column. <http://www.ukaps.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=18073>.

cheers Darrel


----------



## Tim Harrison (15 May 2012)

Hi guys I am greatly puzzled, as you know I took a high-energy tank off George and it became low-energy overnight (no CO2, no bioavailable carbon until yesterday) and yet it is thriving after nearly 4 weeks, when you would have expected the melt to have well and truly set in...Why do you think this is? 

Could it be that for some reason we have a dogmatic devotion to outmoded paradigms?


----------



## sWozzAres (15 May 2012)

Troi said:
			
		

> Could it be that for some reason we have a dogmatic devotion to outmoded paradigms?





Could be! Perhaps you just have the magic touch


----------



## ceg4048 (16 May 2012)

Type of plants, amount of light, amount of CO2, blah, blah, blah? Others do the same thing and their plants turn to mush. So does that happen due to lack of devotion?

Cheers,


----------



## dw1305 (16 May 2012)

Hi all,


> Hi guys I am greatly puzzled, as you know I took a high-energy tank off George and it became low-energy overnight (no CO2, no bioavailable carbon until yesterday) and yet it is thriving after nearly 4 weeks, when you would have expected the melt to have well and truly set in...Why do you think this is?


 My suspicion would be that it is dependent upon growth rate, fertiliser regime and how truly aquatic the plants are. 

I would expect that a naturally emergent plant, with a fast growth rate and grown in a high nutrient environment would show much more melt when CO2 levels fell abruptly. Conversely plants with a lower maximum growth rate or  that are true submerged aquatics or with more persistent leaves etc. would show a less marked response.

I've never added carbon in any form to my tanks, so I'll have to use a terrestrial plant analogy.

If you think of buying a cosmetically perfect house plant (says a flowering _Gardenia_) from a supermarket, and placing it in the inevitably less suitable conditions of your average home, it will show some instant response (bud drop typically, but also possibly leaf margin necrosis), followed by a variety of longer term effects - chlorosis of new leaves, smaller new leaves and the rate of old leaf abscission exceeding new leaf production.

If the new environment is within the tolerances of the plant (high humidity, cool conditions, lime-free water supply, careful watering, good light but not long periods of direct sun-light etc) it will stabilise in a new steady state, probably not flowering and definitely with smaller leaves and a smaller leaf surface area than it had before. 

More normally at least one of the essential requirements for life will be missing and it will carry on declining to an early death.

cheers Darrel


----------



## Brenmuk (16 May 2012)

Hi Jporter
               If I were going from Hi tech (high light/high CO2) to low tech I would thin out and prune the plants during the transition. This should avoid a lot of the potential melting issues that you may face. I would also lower the light levels to those more suited to low tech and add floating plant as has already been suggested. 

However the big logistical problem is if you want to add a soil layer. The soil layer will release a lot more CO2 than just gravel only (and may explain Troi's results). But adding a soil layer means having to rehouse the livestock/plants and preserving your filter for a few days while you re do your tank.
I did something similar when I first tried the Walstad method although I had very few fish at the time - see my journal link below - it took me about 3 days in total.


----------



## Tim Harrison (16 May 2012)

Hi the tank is as it was when I first picked it up complete with Georges Gucci substrate (no soil). Maybe George's short back and sides had something to do with it. Or maybe...just maybe,I am special after all!  ...not special needs though!



> Type of plants, amount of light, amount of CO2, blah, blah, blah? Others do the same thing and their plants turn to mush. So does that happen due to lack of devotion?
> 
> Cheers,



Care to elucidate Clive? I'm not sure I get your meaning. I am genuinely interested in your opinion.


----------



## Jporter (17 May 2012)

Thanks for the replies everyone!

I'm having a read of your journal now brenmuk - it's great! 

I wouldn't worry about the plants melting etc as most of the species wouldn't be suitable anyway so I'd change almost all the flora. 
I'm still not sure what I'll end up doing, I'll most likely post back in a week or so with what I've decided upon! Hopefully with some pics


----------



## Big G (23 Dec 2020)

Reviving this thread as I’m in the process of doing something similar but for a particular reason. My newly acquired Bloody Marys have been exhibiting behaviour that may suggest an aversion to, or inability to fully adjust to co2 injection and possibly any commensurate ph drop. Could be the shift in TDS or something else too.  I don't know the incoming parameters for these guys and I didn’t take samples of their transport water before initiating acclimation (another fail on my behalf) but I might try and find out for clues. I’m rolling with co2 as it’s something I can change more readily first and as they were commercially acquired I’m going to take a fair punt and say they weren’t raised in a high energy setup.

I’ve made one single co2 adjustment so far - dialled back the bpm a tad from maybe 55 which produced mid green in the 28ltr (empty) two hours into the photoperiod (2.5 hr pre-photoperiod co2 switch-on) to 25-30 bpm which yields a blue green at lights on rising to dark green two hours into lights on. I didn’t get much of a ph drop anyway partly as the injection wasn’t optimised but I’ve also got a Kh of 11 and v.hard water which I believe buffers the drop somewhat. Never was my aim to push for extreme growth co2 in this tank, just curiosity about what a moderate increase in cyclical co2 availability might yield in the way of plant growth and algae development..

 I’m hoping that because I never really had the gas time or peak-optimised, I can get away with a dial-back without inducing too many side- effects (the most critical being ones that impact the critters of course- I can mediate for algae if I have to).

I think I might have been a bit blind-sided thinking that Cherry shrimp are ’hardy’ and having seen many vids of success in co2. Maybe not blind sided but just, well, not cautious enough? (Maybe a protracted acclimation over say, 24 hrs might have been better than the six I gave) 

The only other action I’ve taken is a couple of precautionary , fairly big water changes off the back of this theory based on the thinking that-  better a large water change and risk a faster thinning out of the co2 in the shrimps systems than further co2 poisoning. I’ll probably run 15% water changes bi-daily for a while. My Blues Dreams are fine in the same water source minus gas as a reference point.

Tank is cycled to the point of zero Ammonia & Nitrites but is in the very tail end of it’s Diatom phase.

Symptoms are skittishness/defensive back-darting then immobility and , regrettably in (at least) two instances that I know of, death.

Of course, there may be other reasons and I’ve run all the parameters I can with the tools available. Some of the skittishness may diminish with familiarity to new surroundings and I see some of this already with the few BM’s I occasionally glimpse. I can’t honestly say how many of the original ten are still lurking out of sight. Two casualties I’m aware of as said. Others I’ve seen (mercifully including at least one male and one female) seem remarkably unfazed beyond shyness....so far. It sorta doesn’t quite add up?

I’m missing something and pointing at co2 as cause but not sure I’m seeing the wood for the trees on this.

Any pointers or thoughts appreciated

all the best

Bg


----------



## AverageWhiteBloke (30 Dec 2020)

All you can do is do what you're doing mate. Dial it back gradually and see which plants come out the other end. If co2 has led to the demise of your shrimp, there's nothing to say it was so far and they are your priority just turn off the co2 altogether and reduce the lighting. 
I recently watched a video on MD where a similar thing happened but with no co2, sometimes it just happens. It could like you 've pointed out other tank parameters were vastly different, transport stress or a bacterial infection of some kind. 
Possibly because you were unsure of  co2 to begin with you've put the two together but may be unrelated.


----------



## Big G (30 Dec 2020)

Cheers AWB. 👍

The Girls are all scampering around well. Keeping a good eye on the plants. I’ll  report fully on the journal how that process goes. It’s possible it’s a combination of all those things you mention. The truth is in amongst them for sure. I‘m sure the supplier gave really good stock and they were all well and healthy when they arrived. In fact, were it not for the fact that they might think I’ve got some weird taste for extremely expensive, red, shrimp paste sandwiches I would probably order the replacement colony builders from them again. As it happens I’ll take serendipity as a cue to diversify the bloodlines early in the game and look for another reputable supplier of full-blood BMs. Their almost eggshell, car-body, opacity is just so stunning. Reckon it’s about as close to Caradina as I can get without investing in RO related kit (maybe a project for further down the line).

If I could have that time back (and I was compelled to continue including co2 in the mix, for the sake of argument), say, a week before the BMs arrived I would probably have dialled back the trim to about 1 bubble per six- ten seconds over that week, done a 90% water change and run either the oxydator or an airline during non-photoperiod or all the time. That might have maintained a favourable osmotic direction of gases and given the plants a bit of ‘sugar’ so they didn’t go into full-on adaption mode.I’m sure my issues with the BMs was compounded by the size of the tank.
Many newbies like me are drawn to the scalability of a planted tank and shrimp. Cost, space, accessibility all seem to draw in new people and born-agains like me who don’t fancy the faff (and perhaps tedium) of the old-school idea of that poor old full sized Oscar or Tilapia spitting Hikari pellets round his bare tank in anaemic light . 

From what I’ve experienced in my short time in this hobby already and with growing chilli plants last season, plants are incredibly resilient and will do their best to at least survive, if not always thrive, up to the very margins of their functioning thresholds if they can. All I can do is give them the best shot at re-gearing and hope that process outstrips chlorosis/necrosis. A couple of the S.Repens that were well- rooted are putting on new tips. Others are beginning to shed bigger leaves.That’s hopeful. The other rooters appear to have, as expected, gone into stasis. The H.Tripartita, which seems to be a real bell weather plant, is non-rooted in this tank and seems similarly dormant. I’m keeping a close eye on the non-rooted Pinitifida which was previously going great guns. It does well in the right spot in my other non-co2 tank after initially melting so fingers crossed.

As GF mentioned in his last vid, he’s finding he may have to compromise his flora somewhat to accommodate his fauna. 

The worst comes to the very worst I’ve got plenty of cuttings to repopulate that tank from scratch and take the opportunity to add a couple of new varieties. Maybe a slightly bigger rescape than otherwise.

One thing for sure. This hobby has kept me focussed, engaged , challenged and busy in unprecedented times and hopefully well beyond.
All because of a few random vids that Youtube threw up once and GF’s patient, open and inclusive disposition in those early randoms.

All the best

Bg


----------



## AverageWhiteBloke (30 Dec 2020)

No worries pal, I hope it all works out. That's the problem with the "high tech" game especially when it comes to co2. To get the maximum growth and fancy plants people allude to you often find yourself walking a thin line when it comes to fauna especially when there's no exact way of measuring it. Touch wood I have never lost any critters due to co2 (I don't think anyway) I suppose it is like any other parameter, I've had fish from setup as I was building up co2 that didn't appear to be phased by the levels I was pumping but then some corys I introduced at a later date seemed to just sit lifeless at the bottom when co2 peaked. Who knows mate!

I don't bother with co2 at the moment and haven't for some time not to say I wouldn't in the future. I get more satisfaction achieving as much balance as possible without the use of extra equipment. A lot of that comes down to time I have available plus I found I was stressing too much about dosing and getting co2 right that it was taking a lot of the fun out the hobby.

As for shrimp, I have red ones  no idea what grade. I started out with six and now have god knows how many, they've been through numerous setsup both high and low and just seem to do fine. I feel your pain though, once set up a species only tank for Crystal Reds, started it in spring ready for getting some posted in summer, if I remember right I got 15 which was a major investment for me as I tend not to spend a lot on my hobby, within 2 weeks they were all gone. 

I introduced a Siamese fighter to the tank lately with mixed reviews about how they got on with shrimp, same again within a week you would be lucky if I can find two out of possibly 50! The fighter appeared to show no interest in them even though they were right under his nose, now they are all back again, seems like he's more frightened of them now. No idea where they were all hiding, probably just didn't like the look of him until they realised he didn't pose a threat.

It's a funny old game.


----------

