# Persistent BBA growth on FloraBase granules



## nry (20 Jun 2011)

Has anyone else had issues with what I can only determine is BBA growing on FloraBase granules?

For months now I've being trying to eradicate the stuff with no joy at all - it grows a little bit on a single granule, like a tiny mini beard really, like a little tuft of fine grass.

However many I pick out within a week they are back again, even daily picking out just keeps on top of them - if I leave it a few days they are back.

I'm dosing full EI for the size of tank, TPN for trace, 2x15w tubes over the 24x12x12 tank filtered by a TetraTec EX600 alongside a Koralia Nano.  Usual 50% weekly water change.  I tried dropping lights down - initially this appeared to help, but 2 months later things are no different than they were before I put the lighting times down.

Anyhow, I'm at a loss now - I'm close to stripping the substrate out and going for something else, it's driving me bonkers!


----------



## ceg4048 (20 Jun 2011)

Hi Mate,
            Stripping the tank will not solve this problem because BBA has little to do with the fact that the sediment is Florabase and more to do with an instability in the CO2 uptake. What you can do is to supplement liquid carbon to kill the BBA but you must then address the instability, otherwise, as soon as you stop the liquid carbon addition the BBA will return. The same can be said of stripping the tank. You can also spray/squirt the liquid carbon on the granules at water change. You need to look at the regulator performance, injection rates/timing  and your distribution. 

If it's not growing on the plants then you're ahead of the game. Some tanks get it on filter pipes, others on wood or other hardscape.

Cheers,


----------



## nry (21 Jun 2011)

Plants are 99% free of BBA, the older crypt leaves get a touch sometimes but nothing worth worrying about.

Excel/Liquid Carbon appears to have no effect at all - I went through a whole 250ml bottle and it stayed throughout.

Varying the position of the Koralia made no difference (a period of at least two weeks between each move).

CO2 starts at 9am and is on all day through to 10pm.  Lights currently go on at 3pm and off again at 10pm - they used to be on 8 hours and things were much worse at least in respect of growth on the rocks which is now slow to negligible.

The growth is all at the front of the tank too - I've got strong glosso cover now across the entire front substrate, after two weeks things are still not anything I can describe as 'better'...

I dose the full EI for this tank Tue/Thur/Sat, 50% water change on the Monday.  So far as I know this is 'correct' but I'm happy to be told I'm doing this wrong


----------



## ceg4048 (21 Jun 2011)

nry said:
			
		

> ...Plants are 99% free of BBA, the older crypt leaves get a touch sometimes but nothing worth worrying about...


Errr...Danger Will Robinson! That 1% is telling you something. That should never happen in an enriched tank. This does happen in low tech tanks and is acceptable but enriched tanks should never experience this. So that means something is marginal. This is definitely worth worrying about mate.

When you dosed the Excel, how much did you use? Did you do the 2X or 3X overdose, or just the bottle recommended value?

You shouldn't need to have the gas on 6 hours prior to lights on. Perhaps 2 hours prior with a higher injection rate might be worth a try.

Cheers,


----------



## plantbrain (21 Jun 2011)

If you allow the plants to carpet, or you can also vacuum up the top layer.
Some push each grain by hand deep to bury it.
I'd just vacuum it if I did not like the look.


----------



## nry (22 Jun 2011)

I originally made the CO2 start time earlier as I was querying the amount of sunlight the tank was getting but it hasn't made any difference so far as I can tell.

I'd not considered pushing the affected granules beneath the surface though...once the glosso has really covered things, I wonder if this may help or whether instead of the substrate, the glosso will become affected instead.

I doubled the AE Liquid Carbon dose.

I'm dosing the full EI rates for the tank so far as I am aware, so unsure what the issue could be in all honesty.


----------



## ceg4048 (23 Jun 2011)

Well BBA has nothing to do with nutrients. It's strictly a CO2 issue. So whether you're doing full EI or half EI or non-EI is not relevant.

When the plants cover the surface they block the light, which eliminates one of the triggers. As long as the plants are healthy and growing, and as long as their surfaces are moving, it discourages the BBA from taking hold. Static, non-growing surfaces are an easier target for the BBA.

Cheers,


----------



## nry (23 Jun 2011)

My bad on the 'nutrients' front, at least that rules out the need to play around with dosing.

If I can get the carpet sorted out then assuming flow is sufficient that may be the key - I'll see if I can find any other options for placing the Koralia.  I've tried it on the same side/direction of the lily pipe - when I moved it to the opposite side the other algae issues went completely - I used to get a build up of short hair algae on the glass but I've not had that in months since the Koralia move.  I wonder if it may be better lower down in the water column, at prsent it is close to the top opposite the lily pipe, pointing downwards a little and towards the front of the tank a touch which blasts the CO2 bubbles everywhere pretty well to my eyes.  Overall plant movement is noticeable in all areas.


----------



## ceg4048 (23 Jun 2011)

Hi mate,
            A general rule of thumb is to have all pump flows pointing in the same direction. When you have opposing effluent, this often causes interference of the two wave patterns which results in energy cancellation and stagnation. The movement you see in the leaves could easily be a result of unstable flow as a result of this flow collision between the pipe and pump. This is especially true when you have the flow traversing right-to-left instead of back-to-front.

Cheers,


----------



## nry (24 Jun 2011)

Both move the flow the same way around the tank, they're at opposite diagonals but I'll take a further look at this again to ensure it isn't giving any obvious dead spots or collisions.


----------



## nry (29 Jun 2011)

Ok, I've put the lighting and CO2 back to perhaps 'normal' settings:

Lighting 7hr stint
CO2 on 2hrs before lighting

Let's see how things go, cheers for the help


----------



## nry (4 Jul 2011)

I vacuumed up all affected areas of substrate, and will re-plant the carpet ASAP - I'm going to double-dose with liquid carbon as well, with luck I can knock this on the head once and for all!  Off shopping for some HC and stem plants now


----------



## AverageWhiteBloke (30 Jul 2011)

your tank problems sound very similar to mine. I regularly syphon up the gravel and clean the front glass with a credit card to prevent new growth right along the front edge which brings new clean gravel to the top. I have also read another recent post that was similar and the three all seem to have one thing in common. The tanks were near windows! 

This is a question that has baffled me with co2 that perhaps Clive could give his expertise on. I am aware that the BBA is mainly growing on the front gravel as this receives the most natural light. But where does the natural light fit into the photo period itself and do we need to make any adjustments to allow for this? Another post of Clives I have just been reading states that the tank needs a period of enriched co2 and with low Co2 unless I have misunderstood that. I find that in the morning I have a dark green DC which I manage to raise to a lime green one when the lights come on at 5.30pm. Because in the morning I get daylight directly on the tank even with the blinds closed for a couple of hours which has my plants bobbling nicely BTW I have started my injection off 4 hours before lights on or I struggle to get the correct levels by lights on.

So I guess the question is if light is going to hit the tank and it's out of control thus causing growth should we be injecting co2 to help it through this period or let the co2 have a dip and increase the rate but closer to the tube light photo period? Is this natural sun lit period without injection perceived as a fluctuation compounding the BBA issue further?


----------



## nry (1 Aug 2011)

I have no idea but this was the idea behind the CO2 being on for so much longer than the aquarium lighting.

All I know is that the BBA is growing as fast as it did before I vacuumed the substrate up, another few weeks and I will be stripping it I think...


----------



## clonitza (1 Aug 2011)

If the CO2 bubbles hit the bottom you'll have a nice BBA carpet. Try adjusting the flow, diffuser placement so the bubbles dissolve in the upper area of the tank. Before doing this syphon the affected areas. This is what I'm doing now after 2 years of studying this algae .

See how they place the CO2 diffusers in the tanks at ADA Gallery:


Best of luck,
Mike


----------



## nry (1 Aug 2011)

And here's me trying to get bubbles everywhere!

I can't see the video at work but I'll take a look tonight, cheers


----------



## nry (1 Aug 2011)

I do wonder if the BBA kicked off on the substrate after I moved the Koralia to give a more downward flow to get to the substrate now you make me think about it...


----------



## AverageWhiteBloke (1 Aug 2011)

Hmm interesting thoughts, those diffusers do seem quite high up in the tanks. It's sort of counter intuitive, the deeper down the tank it is surely will prolong the bubbles contact time with the water and surely you would want the the koralia pointing down to get co2 rich water to the carpet bottom plants  :? 

Perhaps the BBA is an issue in all the tank with fluctuating co2 but it grows more readily in your best enriched area ie the flow from the Koralia.

Would love to know how day light affects though. The way I see it most co2 set ups and rules are based from a tank getting a known amount of lighting at a certain time for a certain duration. In my case my tank is getting 2/3 hours sunlight in the morning the lights on 5.30pm to 11.30pm to suit my viewing times. Confusing for the plants I guess and a possible contender for differing co2 levels as I have no control over the intensity of the day light which in effect depends on the weather.

Edit* After thought. My koralia is high up in the tank and my atomiser at the bottom. Rising bubbles go up to the pump the blasted back down giving as much contact time to dissolve as possible. Looking at my tank BBA is not really prevalent where this flow is so I'm not sure that this would be the cause of it on the gravel.


----------



## ojustaboo (22 Nov 2011)

clonitza said:
			
		

> If the CO2 bubbles hit the bottom you'll have a nice BBA carpet. Try adjusting the flow, diffuser placement so the bubbles dissolve in the upper area of the tank. Before doing this syphon the affected areas. This is what I'm doing now after 2 years of studying this algae .
> 
> Best of luck,
> Mike


Well I'm now confused lol.
I have spent months trying to sort out my co2 circulation and I presumed my bba algae that keeps appearing on bogwood and a few plants was totally due to the co2 not getting to those areas due to the shape and depth of my corner tank. But you seem to be saying the co2 shouldn't be getting to the bottom?

As confused as ever

Joe


----------



## clonitza (22 Nov 2011)

There is another unknown variable in the BBA equation, the one that makes the BBA stick on the areas hit by the CO2 bubbles (wood, glass, stones etc.). Anyway I constantly dropped the lights and increased the water changes to keep the TDS, DOC, whatever, levels low. Tank seems to be fine now and I hope I can reach an equilibrium between ferts/co2/light soon 'cause I'm tired of moving buckets around the house 

Back to your question, CO2 gets dissolved in the water and the flow is transporting it to the plants, I hardly think it matters where it's dissolved, see the diagram below regarding water circulation, if the flow isn't blocked by hardware, wood, stones or the filter/pump isn't too weak the CO2 always reaches the bottom.






There's a nice thread here:
http://www.aquaticplantcentral.com/foru ... tanks.html

Cheers,
Mike


----------



## nry (22 Nov 2011)

Still going 

The BBA is now confined to a 3"x3" patch of florabase which is the last bit to cover with HC.  It is in a darker corner at the front of the tank.  Everywhere else I have 100% plant cover now, this is the last area that the HC is taking to most likely as it is a bit darker.

In general the tank is doing superbly, however I have some long hair algae which is also gradually going as I keep on top of thinning the plants etc. - I'll try to get some pics up soon, it is AGES since I had any on here and I'm surprisingly happy with the layout now, exclusively vallis mini twister along the back, a big mound of crypt. wendtii brown across the middle (higher in the centre) and HC along the front.


----------



## ojustaboo (22 Nov 2011)

clonitza said:
			
		

> There is another unknown variable in the BBA equation, the one that makes the BBA stick on the areas hit by the CO2 bubbles (wood, glass, stones etc.). Anyway I constantly dropped the lights and increased the water changes to keep the TDS, DOC, whatever, levels low. Tank seems to be fine now and I hope I can reach an equilibrium between ferts/co2/light soon 'cause I'm tired of moving buckets around the house
> 
> Back to your question, CO2 gets dissolved in the water and the flow is transporting it to the plants, I hardly think it matters where it's dissolved, see the diagram below regarding water circulation, if the flow isn't blocked by hardware, wood, stones or the filter/pump isn't too weak the CO2 always reaches the bottom.
> 
> ...





Many thanks  Interesting link

Part of me is thinking about getting rid of my corner tank in the hope that getting a rectangle one will help me. But then I read of many people with rectangle tanks having exactly the same problems.

Another part of me thinks about the 15 odd years I had of algae free years with plastic plants, with monthly water changes and bi/tri monthly filter cleans where the water was crystal clear all the time, is it worth the hassle to have real plants.

I have spent a small fortune on having real plants, CO2 system, up atomizer etc. Each time it looks great for the first few weeks then gradually algae starts to come back. Then 3 months later the tank looks 100 times worse than my tank with plastic plants did.   I'm dosing EI, I've tried to get flow all around the tank, I've tried almost every suggestion in this and other forums and still I seem to be fighting a  loosing battle.

Have tried 50 - 75% water changes every 4 days etc, still it returns.  Drop checker shows a nice lime green. Yet it seems it's simply on a 3 month timer from zero algae to having to replace my plants and start over again.  Getting very frustrating.

Just this week I have spent another £40 on new plants to give it yet another go to get all this right.

Beginning to get demoralised to be honest

Best

Joe


----------



## clonitza (24 Nov 2011)

Hardware & hardscape placement not the tank design messes the flow, you might have decent flow in some areas and dead spots or too much in others.

Try and reduce the light intensity first by removing bulbs or adding floating plants, then slowly adjust the others (ferts, CO2, flow). It might take you a while, I had trial and errors for almost two years and every time I've found that too much light messes everything if the other parameters are not in check. If you ask me, how much is too much light, well I've got a case in one of my low techs when I had to completely turn the lights off and only use the room light. 

Cheers,
Mike


----------

