# Algae bloom in fishless cycling tank



## Phil63 (14 May 2017)

Hi guys, I need help!! I have recently set up a new tank and I thought all was going well. I planted it all how I wanted it, added my co2 and everything looked great. Then I found out that was the easy part. After around a week of leaving it to cycle,  have had an infestation of green algae on the plants and mainly the glass. My plants seem to be ok but as a whole it looks awful and I'm not sure what to do. Is this just part of the cycle? 
I have not done any water changes yet as I thought this would slow things down.

My tank is 150 litre tall tank ( around 70 cm tall)

I have 2 x fluval 32 watt fresh and plant led lights ( on from 1030 - 2030)
Co2 from a fire extinguisher dropping approx 1bubble per sec.
Ehiem 130 external canister filter
Caribsea substrate x 3

Ph 6.4
Amonia 0.5
Nitrite and nitrate 0

And as I mentioned, no fish or shrimp.

Can a time please advise as I'm worried I may have to start again.

Thanks in advance,

Phil


----------



## PARAGUAY (15 May 2017)

Think I would do some daily WC and reduce them later ,looking at your plants they don't require increased light ,give the glass a good cleaning.Is it in the position of daylight catching it?It might be worth reading some members journals or the experts tutorials,a step by step by approach ,your nitrate reading looks a bit odd ,with no WC.s


----------



## Tim Harrison (15 May 2017)

As Paraguay mentions, daily water changes are definitely needed. Change at least 50%, more if you can. It also looks like your light intensity is too high. I'd also consider floating some fast growing stems in there to until the plants establish and the tank becomes biologically stable.


----------



## kadoxu (15 May 2017)

Phil63 said:


> I have not done any water changes yet as I thought this would slow things down.


It is advised to do something like 50% water changes daily on week 1-2, every other day on week 2-3, twice a week on week 3-4, and then weekly from then on.
No fertz on the first week, then start with half dose and increase slowly when needed.

Also, some floating plants would help.


----------



## Phil63 (15 May 2017)

Thanks guys! So the advice is to give it a good scrub and set a daily water change routine. I will also reduce the light intensity, maybe turn 1 off for a while and see what happens?
Floating some stem plants? Could you recommend some?

Well it sounds like all is not lost then so that's a relief!!
Thanks again!


----------



## Tim Harrison (15 May 2017)

In addition to reducing the intensity, a photoperiod of just 6 hours is recommended at least until the tank matures.
Stems, Hygrophila, Elodea, Ludwigia, Limnophila, Rotala.


----------



## ian_m (15 May 2017)

Reduce light intensity and time.

Put foil strips across half your light to halve the intensity and run with say only 4 hours until it has settled in and cycled, say 8 weeks ?

You are vaporising the plants with such high light, whilst they are settling in, and as they die they are releasing organics into the water, which is feeding the algae. Remove the organic waste by frequent water changes.


----------



## Phil63 (15 May 2017)

Ok we'll all of what you guys have said seems to make sense. I've turned 1 light off and reduced it to a 4 hour exposure per day. I'll now do daily water changes untill all this levels out. I guess I should also be dosing flourish excel or is it too early to be adding ferts? 

Thanks a lot chaps.


----------



## xim (15 May 2017)

What is your Caribsea substrate? If it's Eco-complete, that's an inert substrate in my book. You need to dose ferts right away. Liquid carbon is more like an anti-algae agent and supplies some CO2, there is no other nutrients for plants. If the substrate is soil based, there are nutrients in it and can buy you sometime before needing to dose ferts.


----------



## Phil63 (15 May 2017)

Well I used 20l of eco complete and 20l of tropica aquarium soil. I didn't intend to mix them but I had a bit of bad planning, I was told it should be fine. So it looks like I need to add something like pro fito at this early stage to?


----------



## xim (15 May 2017)

OK, that should be fine for now then. You don't "need" to add ferts at this stage. But you "can" add some.

The ferts you will need will be NPK and trace elements. The Profito contains only K and trace elements.


----------



## Phil63 (21 May 2017)

Just a quick update...I have lowered the lights and performed daily 50% water changes, each time adding flourish excel and provito. The algae has pretty much gone and it looks like a new tank again (at least for now). I'm going to do some more research on ferts as it looks like I haven't got that nailed yet. 
Is there a set time I should wait until I can turn up the lighting? I'm currently running half my lights for 4 hours a day, it's just not fun


----------



## roadmaster (22 May 2017)

Would not deviate from 4 hour light period for six to eight week's.
Have you sourced some floating plant's yet to help shield the newish plant's from too much light for too long?
With no fishes or shrimp,You could increase the CO2 bpm/bps.
Have you a plan yet for fertilization to ensure plant's are receiving all nutrient's they might need? 
I would look into these before I considered increasing light intensity/duration.
Would increase lighting period /intensity only then, and maybe slowly by one hour increment's over a few week's. IMHO
Could very well be that you never need full capability of the lighting (ie) number of bulb's.
Would want lighting period to coincide with the hour's I could receive the most pleasure.
If it only took uber lighting to grow the weed's,everybody would be blasting away with it, more so than many are already doing.
Just sayin.


----------



## Phil63 (22 May 2017)

Thanks for the feedback Roadmaster. I didn't go for any floating plants as I am only running 32watts of light now approx 1watt per. Gallon. I do have adopted.ming function but all seems well at the moment. Co2 I still haven't got my head around. I'm working with 1bps and the drop checker spears the right colour, but off I double the bubble count it doesn't seem to change anyway.
Fertilization ... I have a dry ferts kit in the post so I'll be dosing that in a couple of weeks once I have reduced my water changes to 1 per week. 
Yeah I knew all these things needed to be balanced, I just didn't realise that the lighting needed to be gradually increased over such a long time. Seems obvious now . The learning is all part of the fun though


----------



## roadmaster (23 May 2017)

PAR values from the two? Fluval Fresh and Plant 2.0  are significant for the plant's in photo,many other's which do not require much.
I use the 48'' inch model.after researching PAR values which is all plants really know/care about, me thinks.
When you say the tank has been fishless cycling, do you mean by adding ammonia/ or silent cycling with plant's sans (no) fauna?
Ammonia plus more than low to moderate light, or too long of lighting period,is said to encourage algae.
My own experience's tend to lend some credence to the theory.
My Fluval fresh and plant 2.0,same as your 's but longer, put's about 60 PAR at 18 " or close to that.


----------



## zozo (23 May 2017)

I recently did put an aquarium in the garden, used organic lily soil as base caped with gravel, so it has quite some load. Planted it and as usual same story, as long as the plants are yet do not fully started their metabolizing engine, algae are in favor and having a party. In my case it is outdoor, i do not have the possiblity to do something about the light. It actualy only encreases in periode and intensity everyday towars the summer with sunlight.

Doing 2 water changes a day while manualy cleaning off the algae and syphon it out.. It's frustrating, but you need to persevere, till you see the plants grow, from that point on you'll notice you're at the winning hand. I notice i am winning it, plants are growing now and algae is decreasing in numbers.

Perseverance is the key, if it is possible under the sun it shouldn't in comparison be a problem under a flimsy LED or Tube lights.

Personaly i do not advocate reducing light periode, because it doesn't make sense to me, its illogical.  Depriving them from what they need to most. But it seems to work for many or else it wasn't adviced, simple as that. So with all respect, maybe it's still a remnant from days where dimming lights wasn't as easy as is today. 

Plants need light to grow as long as they grow they get more mass and only stronger and more efficient battling algae. Reducing the intensity makes them already grow slower and reducing the periode on top of that also makes them  grow slower and shorter. So in my logical humble opinion, make them grow slower for a longer periode can only have a more possitive effect in the long run.

But these are things you have to experience with a dimming option.. Go with what feels best for you. Keep cleaning and make your plants grow and you'll eventualy will win..


----------



## Phil63 (23 May 2017)

PAR values??? Oh dear, looks like I need to do some more reading!! I looked into lighting and saw that it was recommended that I just needed 2watts per gallon and so that's why I ended up with my current light set up. It was quite expensive and as I have already said, I'm now just running just the one light for now. I'll do some reading tonight and get up to scratch with PAR.
As for fishless cycling , I've been adding fish food but I'm not having much luck. Amonia levels are low with no nitrate or nitrites coming up to 3 weeks. I'm going to go and but some tetra safe start tomorrow and do it that way.......unless this is ill-advised!?
Zozo I understand what you are saying and it did cross my mind to simply lower the light intensity and keep the period longer. What made me chose not to do this was that I had read that insufficient light intensity can cause plants to stretch as they reach for the light and I presumed this wouldn't happen if I kept the light short but intense. I'm keeping the water changes going at once every 2 days now but there has been algae growth in that time. I would say more brown algae and I have noticed yellowing on some of the leaves. I'm hoping the next two weeks will enable me to get on top of it.


----------



## zozo (24 May 2017)

Phil63 said:


> Zozo I understand what you are saying and it did cross my mind to simply lower the light intensity and keep the period longer. What made me chose not to do this was that I had read that insufficient light intensity can cause plants to stretch as they reach for the light and I presumed this wouldn't happen if I kept the light short but intense.



Yes you are correct, this leggy growth occurs on stemplants in need of high light.. Not saying it doesn't work, it just aint the stratigy i would follow for a startup. Battling algae at startup has all to do with plantgrowth which is not realy happening or just at a minimum. Especialy for the non aquatic nursed plants in emersed form. For a start to get over the hill, is to get the plants growing as fast as possible, lower intensity makes stemplants even grow faster towards the light. So personaly i wouldn't care for a bit leggy growth to begin with it always can be grown back as dense as you want after the battle is won. With going back in periode and up in intensity after all is transitioned to submersed, trimming and replanting submersed forms. Imho getting plants to this transition easier and sooner is giving them a longer light periode in lower intensity.  

But what ever strategy you follow algae at startup is something rather inevitable, something you have to wait out and work with. Specialy the brown diatoms.. Can take weeks and can take months for them to decrease in numbers. It took me 6 months in my last low tech low light setup for all filamentous diatoms to dissappear, with cleaning and water changing everyday. Pulled some hairs out off my head, but won the batlle eventualy..


----------



## ceg4048 (19 Aug 2017)

zozo said:


> Yes you are correct, this leggy growth occurs on stemplants in need of high light.


Hi,
    Sorry, this is not true. Leggy growth has nothing to do with plants seeking more light. What this indicates is that flow/distribution is a problem.
More details in the post https://www.ukaps.org/forum/threads/old-skool-returnee-london-tap-water.24040/#post-246834

Cheers,


----------



## zozo (19 Aug 2017)

ceg4048 said:


> Hi,
> Sorry, this is not true. Leggy growth has nothing to do with plants seeking more light. What this indicates is that flow/distribution is a problem.
> More details in the post https://www.ukaps.org/forum/threads/old-skool-returnee-london-tap-water.24040/#post-246834
> 
> Cheers,


Interesting!  Thank you. Some things to think about and try in the future. A lot makes sense it also explaines how those fairytales spread, gas exchange. 
Leggy growth and low ligh was one of the things i (seemingly erroneously) learned very long time ago with experimenting growing terrestrial plants under artificial lights.
By this i maen to say, experiencing leggy growth, ask a farmer and get the answer "More light".  Obviously after installing more experience possitive effects, why else would one believe it otherwise. I remember it also happens with seedlings, leggy weak long stem growth and falling over. There is an English botanical term for this syndrome, i learned from @Tim Harrison but i forgot what it was. The word used in my native language wouldn't make sense to you. But ok, planting seedlings to early in the year on the window sil and experience weak leggy growth, your statement about shade and wavelenght and the red spectrum makes sense. We humans even can get a sun tan in the shade..

Tho what about artificial light? The same happens if it aint strong enough.


----------



## Zeus. (19 Aug 2017)

zozo said:


> ask a farmer and get the answer "More light"



Terrestrial farming ? If it is that makes sense for the farmers as diffusion in air is 1000 times faster than water. Think the constant battle we have in our planted High tech tanks is adequate flow in all areas. Give them the CO2 supply they need for amount of  photons being aimed at them then they can use the photons and one less photon for the aglea to use,  complex carbs output increases and growth takes place assuming not nutrient deficient OFC. Well thats my present take on it.



zozo said:


> We humans even can get a sun tan in the shade..



Living proof is me and wife, she sits in she roasting like a pig on a stick, I sit in shade, I get better tan, little more complex than that OFC



ceg4048 said:


> Cheers,



Good to see you posting again , We thought the Matrix had you for a while


----------



## Zeus. (19 Aug 2017)

Zeus. said:


> diffusion in air is 1000 times faster than water



Opps meant 10,000 times faster - For CO2


----------



## zozo (19 Aug 2017)

Zeus. said:


> Terrestrial farming ?



Yes and sorry for the confusement, i was asking regarding a statement Ceg made in the reply in an other topic he linked to about leggy growth.
*



			Terrestrial plants that elongate in deep shade is a completely different set of conditions, and the elongation does occur based on the higher proportion of Far Red wavelength (near 700 nm) that are prevalent in shade.
		
Click to expand...

*


> This is a completely different set of environmental conditions and has nothing to do with flooded plants. So in that article the author talks about how an aquatic Rumex species responds according to the gases that are supplied whereas the non-aquatic Rumex species does not respond in the same way. The response of the aquatic Rumex to these conditions is how most all the aquatic plants behave under similar conditions. When your aquatic plants elongate therefore, it means that you should conclude that CO2 and flow is poor and the plant is responding to poor gas exchange. The Matrix does not teach you about this. It tells you to add more light but that is just another illusion.



Also found that word back i was looking for, its Etiolation..  which can also be experienced with to little (also artificial ) light without having any shade. Asking a farmer, pointed to that process, with the answer give your plant more light, a stronger bulb or move it closer. I can understand the shade part.. But when it occurs under artificial grow lights it brings up ??? Because it looks like simmular results but oppisite conditions, because i don't think the spectrum changes with a less stronger bulb providing the same color.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etiolation

No idea what i'm mixing or missing here at the moment..


----------



## Zeus. (19 Aug 2017)

Just read the thread 'ceg' linked. Great post , what I like about 'ceg' posts is they explain what's happening so you can understand which either confirms your present knowledge or destroys the theroy you was following. 

'ceg' - 'your empty' 

Sent from Mountolympus via neural interface


----------



## zozo (19 Aug 2017)

Zeus. said:


> what I like about 'ceg' posts is they explain what's happening so you can understand



Absolutely..


----------



## ceg4048 (7 Sep 2017)

Zeus. said:


> 'ceg' - 'your empty'


So are you! 



zozo said:


> No idea what i'm mixing or missing here at the moment..


What I meant by this statement is that "far red" wavelengths are used by special receptors to measure the degree to which the leaf is in shade. I shade, the proportion of these wavelengths compared to, say, the amount of blue is higher. The deeper the shade, the less blue and therefore the ratio of red to blue increases. So the plant uses these calculation to determine degree of shade. Of course this is under typical natural conditions.

If you are growing plants in a terrarium under artificial lights the plants will calibrate their sensors to the the existing spectrum so the calculation will be different depending on which sensors are produced based on the available colors.

Again, this has little relevance to an aquatic experience of elongation due to gas concentration.

Not sure if I clarified your question.

Cheers,


----------



## zozo (7 Sep 2017)

ceg4048 said:


> Not sure if I clarified your question.



Partially  and thank you, still very happy.. Partially, because my current understanding is pure basics from a hobbyist perspective. I can understand that a submersed bog plant lives in a completely different or alien invironment. Not only atmospheric but also regarding light spectrum it has to deal with complete different influences. Obviously misconceptions in thinking it follows the same rules in both invironments is at hand... But..

Happy, because i got somthing to boggle about again.


----------

