-
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
Long term effects of co2 exposure
- Thread starter Soilwork
- Start date
Soilwork
Member
- Joined
- 22 Nov 2015
- Messages
- 559
Thank you, what levels are they exposed to in nature? Are there any examples?
Up to around 70ppm if i remember correctly when looking up co2 information in Kasselmann's book last year.
John q
Member
From memory the C02 chart in Christels book obtained some of the readings by using the kh/ph chart, doesn't mean they aren't correct, but worth keeping in mind.
The scientific chaps generally agree levels above 15ppm cause long term health issues in certain fish.
www.sciencedirect.com
Other studies suggest rainbow trout exposed to 8mg/l or 24 mg/l showed no significant differences in growth or mortality over a six month period.
www.sciencedirect.com
The above was the findings of a two minute search, higher or lower level suggestions are likely available.
On a personal note I suspect our aquarium fish would prefer, and likely live longer without prolonged levels of 30 ppm CO2, how much longer is unknown.
The scientific chaps generally agree levels above 15ppm cause long term health issues in certain fish.
Molecular and physiological responses to long-term carbon dioxide exposure in Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar)
Optimal water quality is vital for the growth of Atlantic salmon aquaculture production. Recent data showed that Atlantic salmon feed intake and growt…
www.sciencedirect.com
Other studies suggest rainbow trout exposed to 8mg/l or 24 mg/l showed no significant differences in growth or mortality over a six month period.
The effects of carbon dioxide on performance and histopathology of rainbow trout Oncorhynchus mykiss in water recirculation aquaculture systems
Chronic exposure to elevated levels of dissolved carbon dioxide (CO2) has been linked to reduced growth, physiological disturbances and negative healt…
www.sciencedirect.com
The above was the findings of a two minute search, higher or lower level suggestions are likely available.
On a personal note I suspect our aquarium fish would prefer, and likely live longer without prolonged levels of 30 ppm CO2, how much longer is unknown.
John q
Member
The way I convince myself is by thinking there are many ways we can harm our livestock, given the choice they'd probably prefer not be kept in a glass box, in a closed water system, swimming in their own excrement, often excessively fed inappropriate food.
So we try to manage the above to the best of our ability.
We meticulously keep the tank clean, do large water changes, try to feed a variety of healthy foods, and feed it in moderation. We fill the tanks with healthy plants, almost seems idyllic. And then we inject co2.
In nature co2 levels swing about, that's a fact, to what levels they reach can be debated but I suspect levels of 25 ~ 30 ppm aren't unheard-of in some water ways. In our tanks we usually only target these elevated levels for maybe 6hrs, then they quickly fall, again this happens in nature.
We often see healthy fish gracing these high tech tanks and having them breed in these conditions isn't unusual.
From that I can only conclude that whilst we often walk a tight rope targeting this elusive number, it would appear that it is possible to reach it and keep healthy, long lived fish.
hypnogogia
Member
Hmmm…no mention of such a value in my copy.
On page 602 theres a 91.7 also a 61.5, and a 61.2, on page 600 a 60.8 value, page 604 a value of 109, page 606 values of 125, 100, 95 and 84.4, and others elsewhere there's values in the 40's and 50's, yes lower values are the norm but there not exclusive.
I think the idea is that plants under safe conc. of CO2, up to 30ppm, optimise photosynthesis and therefore evolution of O2.
PARAGUAY
Member
Think @Tim Harrison proves that CO2 done correctly is safe,otherwise we would have multiple reports of fish fatalities but it's the opposite fish living longer and healthier than ever
copperband
Member
Just out of curiosity, what would the levels peak at during the hours of darkness in a heavily planted aquarium, I.e. when it’s the plants adding the Co2, not the bottle underneath?
The peak would depend on multiple factors but definitely not as much as artificially injecting CO2 at higher levels like we do.
hypnogogia
Member
Ah, thank you. I was looking at the information on page 70. Hadn‘t seen that info at the back.
Did he mentioned where on the Earth such a high concentrations of CO2 occur naturally in surface waters? And what plants and other organisms do grow there? Statistically it's less than 10ppm (including when waters are mixed etc.), concentrations of CO2 may be higher in underground waters but I'm afraid no photosynthetic organisms can grow underground so these values may be completely irrelevant to water plant growing etc - and I mean underwater plants, floaters and emersed ones are actually specialised in higher CO2 concentrations and uptake, same with animals which can live both underwater and above the water level (various frogs, crustaceans etc.).
Last edited:
copperband
Member
Thanks, i suppose it depends on the planting density, types of plant, etc, but it makes sense that it would be less than artificially injected.
I wonder if there is a further question, and that is regarding how the CO2 is contained in the water, i.e. are the fish bothered more by microbubbles as that would presumably travel less smoothly across their gills than better dissolved CO2, i.e. using a reactor?
I ask this because I recently had a fish jump out of my aquarium and spend 5 - 10 mins on the carpet. I was talking to a friend who said that a fish can basically survive for as long as the gills stay wet.
Hi all,
You can't really talk about CO2 levels without <"talking about dissolved oxygen"> as well, because <"haemoglobin transports both gases">. Planted tanks, with added CO2, are likely to have pretty much complete oxygen saturation, because of enhanced photosynthesis and the high volume turn over that people use. These factors are going to mitigate for high CO2 levels.
Fish from still vegetated water (or from "black water") have physiological adaptations to survive low oxygen / high CO2 events. These are the <"Bohr"> and <"Root"> effects.
There are also morphological changes with Betta spp. etc having labyrinth organs and <"Corydoras spp. gulping air"> and obtaining atmospheric oxygen via the gut.
cheers Darrel
I think a lot of it depends on the fish. I'm going to guess that 30 ppm CO2 would quickly kill off most <"rheophilic fish"> and <"Tanganyikan cichlids">. This is an Arctic Charr reference <"https://www.grocentre.is/static/gro/publication/261/document/safina13prf.pdf"> and this a General Aquaculture paper <"talking about hypercapnia">. <"Acute CO2 tolerance in fishes is associated with air breathing but not the Root effect, red cell βNHE, or habitat">
You can't really talk about CO2 levels without <"talking about dissolved oxygen"> as well, because <"haemoglobin transports both gases">. Planted tanks, with added CO2, are likely to have pretty much complete oxygen saturation, because of enhanced photosynthesis and the high volume turn over that people use. These factors are going to mitigate for high CO2 levels.
Fish from still vegetated water (or from "black water") have physiological adaptations to survive low oxygen / high CO2 events. These are the <"Bohr"> and <"Root"> effects.
There are also morphological changes with Betta spp. etc having labyrinth organs and <"Corydoras spp. gulping air"> and obtaining atmospheric oxygen via the gut.
cheers Darrel
Last edited:
Wookii
Member
@Happi posted this table some time ago which shows CO2 levels in various South American biotopes. I don't have a link to the original study, perhaps @Happi has it, but it is a useful table non-the-less. Without getting into absolutes, it does show that CO2 levels found in natural habitats are generally a fair bit higher than typical low energy tanks, but perhaps not as high as most CO2 injected tanks:
That table is not showing the whole picture. I checked this morning on Kasselman's book and there is a footnote stating that CO2 was calculated, not measured. Something to keep in mind.@Happi posted this table some time ago which shows CO2 levels in various South American biotopes. I don't have a link to the original study, perhaps @Happi has it, but it is a useful table non-the-less. Without getting into absolutes, it does show that CO2 levels found in natural habitats are generally a fair bit higher than typical low energy tanks, but perhaps not as high as most CO2 injected tanks: