magpie
Member
Dear all,
So.... It's been 5 weeks since I set up the massive DSM project (it feels massive to me) - which is in the 'Learning Curve' journal thread. My step daughter's gone on holiday with the camera, so no recent pictures, but I have a carpet of Hc with roots 2-3 cm down into the substrate, some very happy Staurogyne, P.helferi, 4 delightful anubias nana and a small forest of moss - all in the tank with cling film on top and spraying 2 or 3 times daily with TPN+ in the water...
I'm thinking it might be time to flood it, tho' I'm in no particular hurry - which might be as well - because I've decided to go non-CO2, low-tech and it may well be that my plant choice is useless.
I"m motivated by this from the Barr Report:
It's the addiction bit. I'm addicted to being addicted. I'm the only middle aged woman in the world, as far as I know, to have got a character to the top of World of Warcraft... I can get addicted to eating, or not eating, or running, or climbing, or... easily to CO2 and all the fiddling. I've got the Fire extinguishers and the solenoid regulator and the inline reactors all ready. I can feel the urge to start playing.
But...
But, I'm also away a lot and will be leaving the tank with people who are, at best, neutral in the pro/anti tank wars that we had before I set it up. They might feed the fish, particularly if I manage to link it in with feeding the chickens, but they won't be doing anything else. And actually, I've got enough else on not to create another source of stress.
So... I think it's time for peace, quite and minimal fiddling.
But - while I"ve read things from Tom Barr about DSM - non-CO2, I'm not entirely sure of the practicalities. I'm also not sure if my plant choice is frankly stupid. Barr says somewhere (can't currently find the quote) that Hc is fine DSM-> low tech, but everyone else says it'll die from lack of light.
SO: early quesitons:
- Do I need to go jungly if I'm not using high pressure CO2?
- If so, what plants are best?
- Is it better to use some glutaraldehyde, at least at the start?
- Do I need to have some serious floating plants to reduce light to the rest?
The layout, for those who don't want to go to the journal thread, is below:
lights: currently 4 x 39W T5 w reflector on a luminaire. I can cut that to 2 x 39 W
The tank is 90 x 5 x 45 cm, which comes out as roughly 328litres/84 US gallons but after taking into account the substrate and the volume of the rock/wood, I think it'll come out closer to 154litres/65 US gallons - so if I cut to 2 x 39W lights, that's just over 1W per gallon
BUT - the tank is wide, front to back and quite low, so given the inverse square law, the plants most distant from the light unit are getting significantly less than those just underneath.
Filter - Eheim 2078. I have 2 koralia nano 2s I can use to improve flow
In line heater
substrate is Columbo Flora Base
Image below:

Uploaded with ImageShack.us[/img]
I'm contemplating ditching the sand - which frankly looks horrible now - and replacing it with a hemianthus carpet running up into the 'cave' under the wood, and then having more stem plants/crypts/java ferns in the bits around the rock - that'd give a lot more plant nutrient uptake aka plant biological filtration...
all comments welcome
mx
So.... It's been 5 weeks since I set up the massive DSM project (it feels massive to me) - which is in the 'Learning Curve' journal thread. My step daughter's gone on holiday with the camera, so no recent pictures, but I have a carpet of Hc with roots 2-3 cm down into the substrate, some very happy Staurogyne, P.helferi, 4 delightful anubias nana and a small forest of moss - all in the tank with cling film on top and spraying 2 or 3 times daily with TPN+ in the water...
I'm thinking it might be time to flood it, tho' I'm in no particular hurry - which might be as well - because I've decided to go non-CO2, low-tech and it may well be that my plant choice is useless.
I"m motivated by this from the Barr Report:
CO2 is a bit like a drug addiction that hobbyists get hooked on. That's fine, but this non CO2 approach will give an excuse to have another tank that needs less attention and is cheap.
I suggest folks coming from either the non CO2 or the CO2 enrichment approaches to give the other method a try and see what benefits it has.
CO2 and non CO2 tanks work for all the same reasons, but........
They grow at different rates.
It's the addiction bit. I'm addicted to being addicted. I'm the only middle aged woman in the world, as far as I know, to have got a character to the top of World of Warcraft... I can get addicted to eating, or not eating, or running, or climbing, or... easily to CO2 and all the fiddling. I've got the Fire extinguishers and the solenoid regulator and the inline reactors all ready. I can feel the urge to start playing.
But...
But, I'm also away a lot and will be leaving the tank with people who are, at best, neutral in the pro/anti tank wars that we had before I set it up. They might feed the fish, particularly if I manage to link it in with feeding the chickens, but they won't be doing anything else. And actually, I've got enough else on not to create another source of stress.
So... I think it's time for peace, quite and minimal fiddling.
But - while I"ve read things from Tom Barr about DSM - non-CO2, I'm not entirely sure of the practicalities. I'm also not sure if my plant choice is frankly stupid. Barr says somewhere (can't currently find the quote) that Hc is fine DSM-> low tech, but everyone else says it'll die from lack of light.
SO: early quesitons:
- Do I need to go jungly if I'm not using high pressure CO2?
- If so, what plants are best?
- Is it better to use some glutaraldehyde, at least at the start?
- Do I need to have some serious floating plants to reduce light to the rest?
The layout, for those who don't want to go to the journal thread, is below:
lights: currently 4 x 39W T5 w reflector on a luminaire. I can cut that to 2 x 39 W
The tank is 90 x 5 x 45 cm, which comes out as roughly 328litres/84 US gallons but after taking into account the substrate and the volume of the rock/wood, I think it'll come out closer to 154litres/65 US gallons - so if I cut to 2 x 39W lights, that's just over 1W per gallon
BUT - the tank is wide, front to back and quite low, so given the inverse square law, the plants most distant from the light unit are getting significantly less than those just underneath.
Filter - Eheim 2078. I have 2 koralia nano 2s I can use to improve flow
In line heater
substrate is Columbo Flora Base
Image below:

Uploaded with ImageShack.us[/img]
I'm contemplating ditching the sand - which frankly looks horrible now - and replacing it with a hemianthus carpet running up into the 'cave' under the wood, and then having more stem plants/crypts/java ferns in the bits around the rock - that'd give a lot more plant nutrient uptake aka plant biological filtration...
all comments welcome
mx