• You are viewing the forum as a Guest, please login (you can use your Facebook, Twitter, Google or Microsoft account to login) or register using this link: Log in or Sign Up

Is this normal for staurogyne repens

Many thanks,
I´m going to ready carefully the link you add.

The things you said now i do agree cause i also think that way.

best compliments

ceg4048 said:
These are the critical paths to investigate: dissolution, timing, flow rate + distribution method, injection rate.
Click to expand...
 
Hi Clive,

To add meat to the bones of my original post here goes...

Details of the tank set up is as follows,

-Gas on at 12.30pm.
-Lights on at 4.00pm.
-Lights off at 10.00pm.
-2 x 1400lph filters.
-Intakes in the bottom rear corner.
-Return through a spray bars to the opposite top back corner, spray bar is across 95% or the width of the tank.
-Gas is added through two inline diffusers on each return, 35% psi on each branch, individual bubble counters on each.... estimate 5-6 bubbles in each, too fast to count!
-Gas in tank is micro bubble and is visibly pushed all the way to the substrate.
-As an indicator the drop checker is 5cm from the substrate at the rear of the tank and shows yellow from lights on to lights off.
BP

Are you suggesting to move the CO2 injection to the filter intake rather than the outlet to get better dissolution?

Big thanks to all contributors on this..... feel free to add any other suggestions if the set up points to a problem...... 🙂
 
One other thing is the EI mix

Macro mix

42g KNO3
15g KH2PO4
92g MGSO4

Mixed to 600ml water, dosing 50ml on alternate day

Micro mix

1tsp trace elements

Mixed to 300ml dosing 25ml twice a week.
 
I think too many times that people confuse flow and circulation. Flow is what we associate with a number i.e. turnover - I have 10x turnover.

Circulation is an entirely different beast and a lot of the time independent of turnover. Just because you have 20x turnover doesn't mean you have great circulation. I see it like when you have calm spots next to wild spots on shorelines or even in rivers. The same water the same force but some areas are still.

The same in a tank. You can have 20x turnover yet have deadspots. On the reverse you can have 3x and have no deadspots.

The reason we talk about 10x minimum is because obviously the higher the turnover is the more likely that there will be no deadspots but it is not guaranteed.

I personally use as little as I need. Normally in the 5x area and only add circulation pumps (or another filter) if necessary.

So how is this linked to the CO2 problem? CO2 is distributed through the water by the circulation. You can see the bubbles, where they are going. I can see mine misting along the substrate level. I wouldn't be able to see this with 100% dissolved CO2 so I would have to guess and I would also not be able to see it gas off either (which it still would.)

So higher turnover should not assume good circulation just as a high injection rate should not assume good CO2 distribution. The turnover and injection are similar beasts. They are the 'input'. The circulation and distribution are linked.

Mick answered already but I would have guessed the answer to the 'why does Tropica use 6500K in every tank' would be pretty easy.............Because they look good when you look at them. Better than pink lit tanks (in my opinion)
 
Last edited:
papa_cee said:
-Gas on at 12.30pm.
-Lights on at 4.00pm.
Click to expand...
OK, thanks for the additional info. It's very strange because 4 hours is a very long time for the gas to be on.

How many and what type of bulbs are being used and how far are they from the substrate?

papa_cee said:
-2 x 1400lph filters.
Click to expand...
Are the filters stuffed with media? If so this can restrict flow. What is the inside diameter of the tubing being used and are there any restrictions or reducers such as in-line devices attached to the tubing which may restrict flow?


papa_cee said:
Return through a spray bars to the opposite top back corner, spray bar is across 95% or the width of the tank.
Click to expand...
Good, but what is the orientation of the the holes? Are they pointed straight ahead or are they pointing up/down?


papa_cee said:
Are you suggesting to move the CO2 injection to the filter intake rather than the outlet to get better dissolution?
Click to expand...
It's always a good idea to try this to check the integrity of the diffusion method as mentioned by Paulo. What kind of diffusers are these anyway?
Have you checked for leaks downstream of the diffusers?
Have you performed a pH profile? What are the results?

Cheers,
 
papa_cee said:
One other thing is the EI mix

Macro mix

42g KNO3
15g KH2PO4
92g MGSO4

Mixed to 600ml water, dosing 50ml on alternate day

Micro mix

1tsp trace elements

Mixed to 300ml dosing 25ml twice a week.
Click to expand...


Good Morning Papa_cee and all friends,
One more thing:
I don´t know if your tank is a high planted as mine but that receip of yours is very very similar to one i used before. And i find it short and i had it mixed in 500 ML. (you in 600 ML)
Measuring with 3 different kinds of tests (JBL - Amtra - Nutrafin) i never got more than 5 to 10 PPm nitrates concentration week after week. My plants didn´t dye but didn´t grow also at list as expected.

In the Barr Report they told me to double it. T. Barr himself agreed with that.
So i did it. And one week after i finally got 20 PPm of Nitrates in the tank and 2 PPm PO4..

And those Ammania of mine that were getting leaves out start recovered. At list they stoped loose any. Doesn´t grow as expected but at list are not loosing leaves. I trim and replant an d still they are in the tank with short grow..
But i think my issue is the co2 as it is being always... But i let you this note for you to check.

Big hug
 
Papa_Cee.
One more thing:

Clive was right about the flow/circulation issue In my case. Maybe is yours too.
Yesterday i did an experience meanwhile we were talking during the day. As My Eheim filter is about 750 liter hour, in the morning I put a pump in the tank of 400 liter hour.
Didn´t change anything in the co2 injection as it was before. I only introduce that pump right next to the outflow filter both pointing in the difuser direction.

When i got home the drop was almost transparent, a bright bright almost transparent yellow and the fish were all at the top. My "Helenas" hide inside the substratte, and the shrimp climbing the glass... luckily no deads. God was with me..
I did an imediate waterchange and all came to normal.

Now i can see that with this waterpump inside i dont´need so much injection and now i also see the losses of co2 i was having before and of course it wasn´t being well dissolved and transported to all areas of the tank.
And of course the need of a new filter to replace this.. a new one with at list 1000 liter / hour.

Of course now the plants that are on the oposite side of these outflows direction are dancing rock and roll and i didn´t want this to happen (i just don´t like it) but i think we have to live with this. But the other plants below the outflow in the other side are shaking just a bit more than they were before but now i see the bubbles getting to them or that part of the tank and of course the less need of the amount of co2 i was pumping in it..... i clearly see it.

I leave you also these notes.

As for you and all frineds many thanks
 
Clive, Paolo....

Bulbs, these are home built strips using cree xpg 6500k hi output 5w led 10 on each strip giving a total of 30 leds, dimmable and running at about 80%. they are 65cm from the substrate.

Filters they have 3 separate baskets in each, first has 1 x 2cm thick course sponge and 1 x 2cm thick medium sponge, second has 4cm or siporax, and the 3rd basket is empty. hoses are 16/22mm no reducers. Spray bar is 2cm under the surface, pointing a couple or degrees above horizontal to give some surface movement when changing water with pumps on the water hits the front glass dropping no more 10cmbelow the level of the spray bar gas bubbles are pushed all the way to the substrate and movement and the odd floating leaves can be seen swiftly flowing down the front glass and back to front along the substrate. E.tennulus is continuously waving in the flow

pH profile is generally of the following order. lights off, 7.1. gas on, drops to 6.4 at lights on. remains at this until lights off. I'll run a new profile tomorrow to confirm this.
 
Hello Clive and Papacee.

Guess what... i couldn´t believe it.. i got a drop of the Co2 from 7,6 to 6,6 in the hours before lights up and still running till now (18PM) and the fish doing fine ........... look at me: 😀😀😀😀😀😀

So Clive.. remember what i´ve written in the other post about the flow? Now i finally got the co2 just as you always said and the drop in a green lime.

Conclusion.. all my problems were coming from the waterflow cause since i introduce the pump all came to what you Clive always said.

I´m not in me.. i´m gonna have a couple of beers now!!!!!!!!!! celebrate!
Thanks Thanks thanks bro! YOu´re the guy. :thumbup:
 
Thrills24 said:
Today I purchased 2XT5 HO both 9000K my tank depth is 55cm. Am I ok with lighting with these bulbs
Click to expand...
Kelvin temperature is a completely overrated and irrelevant parameter.
The answer to this question therefore is as follows:
If you like the color of the tank with those lights then you are ok with these bulbs.
If you do NOT like the color of the tank with these bulbs then you are NOT ok with these bulbs.

Worry more about the fact that the bulbs are only 21 inches (or less) from the substrate. As shown on the chart in the thread http://ukaps.org/forum/threads/dymax-tropical-36-watt.25367/page-4#post-283055 two bulbs, each of which are producing approximately 70 micromoles at that depth places severe growth rate demand on the plants. It would be better to use only a single bulb for the first six weeks if this is a newly setup tank. Only when CO2 is excellent and when the plants have adapted to being submersed should the second bulb be added.

Cheers,
 
With all due respect... I followed the links from thread to thread and it goes back to a 2010 tpt thread. But on the same forum, Kelvin is constantly being discussed and more recently too. So I'm not so sure Kelvin is "a completely overrated and irrelevant parameter."

Perhaps not essential but I did want some advice on the matter which is why I asked @Paulo Soares.
 
Yes, Kelvin is constantly being discussed and people constantly waste time and energy discussing it. The truth is not democratic. Just because people constantly discuss something it does not automatically warrant importance. Has it occurred to you that the Paulo Soares has misdiagnosed his problems, has assumed that Kelvin was an issue when his problems were caused by poor CO2?

Instead of asking someone who has failed when using a certain Kelvin value you should instead ask someone who has succeeded using a Kelvin value.

Here are some essential data:

Plants grown using 10,000 Kelvin:
9641673078_dd60265a33_b.jpg

Plants grown with 8000 Kelvin:
9655626989_30e1eabf97_b.jpg


Plants grown with 6000 Kelvin:
9655594565_72443716a2_b.jpg


Plants grown with 4000 Kelvin:
8394106765_f55754689a_b.jpg

So at the end of the day, the hobbyist must be able to grow problem free plants, full stop. Only then can he/she even hope to investigate the root cause of problems. I can assure you that if you have problems in your tank using 9000K bulbs, the reasons CANNOT be attributed to 9000 Kelvin. Conversely, if the plants grow healthy and problem free, neither can the success be attributed to using 9000 Kelving because there are many more important factors in plant health than what color bulb you are using.

Cheers,
 
Like Ceg says, if you delve into what all those threads were saying (and many still state) then people suggest that pink lights are best for plants. Then they go onto 'full spectrum' lights which is a bit of artistic labelling in reality as virtually all lights could be described as full spectrum because no matter what the kelvin rating when the spectrum is analysed there will be some of everything there. If you carry on reading those old threads you will also find people saying you need much more light than we do these days for x plant. People still perpetuate these myths too. There is a lot of mis-information around and the internet helps it to stay there to be followed by more people and spread further just as updated information is.

The post in this thread we are on at the moment that should answer that question and finish it off is the one from Mick.dk where he states that - Tropica use T5 6.500 K tubes because they meet the needs of BOTH plants AND eyes of humans observing.......

The latter part is the reality of 'buy whatever looks best to your eyes' the former part can be said of most tubes unless you are on the outer extremes of lighting light black lights.
 
ceg4048 said:
Plants grown with 4000 Kelvin:

using 9000 Kelving because there are many more important factors in plant health than what color bulb you are using.
Click to expand...

I don't think that Kelvin is the only factor. If I have given the impression that it is then that's my mistake. However I do believe it is a factor hence why I asked. As you know Juwel tanks come with a fixed unit and for those unable to upgrade their light fitting, going with two day (9000K) bulbs is something they've had "better" success with.
 
Hey, thanks for all the valuable inputs, and apologies for my absence work has kept me away!

Update on this issue, rather than change different parameters I decided to reduce the light as suggested, it was reduced by 30%, CO2 injection and EI dosing regime have remand the same, and I have had a catastrophic result. I have lost my complete shoal of Cardinal tetras a few Otos and have had an outbreak of Diatoms (first time since the tank was started 6 months ago. S. Repents has now totally melted!

As discussed early here is my pH profile, measured after 24 hours of no CO2 to get a true reading of CO2 injection from an initially low CO2 concentration

Time. Ph
2.00 7.49 gas on
2.30 7.20
3.00. 7.01
3.30. 6.89
4.00. 6.81. Lights on
5.30. 6.77
6.00. 6.74 gas off
6.30. 6.68
7.00. 6.68
730. 6.81
8.00. 6.85
8.30. 6.89
9.00. 6.92
9.30. 6.95
10.00 6.93

At this level of inject the remaining 2 Otos become comatose and just lie on the substrate.

Given all the previous posts on Diatoms being linked to too much light, my experience is the opposite, or could the diatoms explosion have been triggered by a increase in ammonia from the dead fish, they could have been in the tank for a couple of days as I have been away.

Really reaching out to you all for some help!
 
cee,
Sorry about the losses mate, that's a real bummer. Sounds like a lot of things going on in the tank and it's difficult to unravel unless we can determine some facts. What killed the fish? Could it have been CO2? This is the most likely scenario. Leaving an injected tank unattended for days is not the best. Having a load of dead fish sitting in the tank can trigger all sorts of problems due to changes in the ammonia loading rate and hypoxia due to bacterial action. It's always a downhill spiral. Don't even think about comparing the conditions in this tank with other tanks as far as diatomic algal blooms go.

When you reduce the light the CO2 demand and uptake will also be reduced. That's OK for plants but this increases the toxicity for the fauna unless the injection rate is reduced because the plants will not be removing as much CO2 from the water. The same thing happens, for example when you do a massive trim. Less plant mass will uptake less CO2, so the fish struggle to adapt to the higher CO2 concentration.

Just reduce the injection rate so that it's comfortable for the fish - and I assume you did massive water changes to clean the tank.

Cheers,
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top