Andy Thurston
Member
- Joined
- 16 Apr 2013
- Messages
- 2,806
I use liquid carbon to spot treat bba in the tank . I use 2x recomended dose in a syringe and turn off filters while i do it
-
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
Take a deep breath...
- Thread starter Rob P
- Start date
Rob P
Member
- Joined
- 13 Oct 2013
- Messages
- 785
I think if i were to clean up everything in tank using lc I would need a humongous volume and kill everything in there! Bit at a time would take too long keeping dose sensible. Could I remove and dip plants in neat lc solution for a minute or two before replanting without harm? There's areas i'll probably need to spot dose, such as the stuff tied on the wood (depending on whether I decide to remove the whole shebang for a thorough clean or not) and can do these over a few days.
Ian Holdich
Member
Sorry, yes mine were the 500's, it would be interesting to get par readings. They claim to be brighter, and I agree the 600 are brighter, but this doesn't mean stronger light. Mine were about 6" from the water surface.
Reuben
Member
- Joined
- 17 Feb 2013
- Messages
- 179
@ Ceg 4048 Hi mate I don't doubt your expertise on the subject, but why do Tropica - whom I guess must also know a fair bit- advise that some plants in addition to Co2 do indeed need 'high light' to thrive? Have a look at this for instance Tropica UK ny
It must be in their interest for people to have success and get more 'into' the hobby, so I'd have thought they would only give advice that helped achieve this?
Well, you have to remember that the concept of high and low light is really quite poorly defined. Also, some plants stall under low light, i.e. they become "low light" plants that grow at a snail's pace. If you want to sell a plant that develops quickly and satisfies the customer then of course you will suggest high light to speed the growth. Again it should be clear in our minds that high light is OK if flow and CO2 are also high, but how often is this the case? People, especially newbies and those migrating from fish only tanks just can't wait to dump a bunch of fish in the tank and that limits what they are able to accomplish because they have zero skills at CO2 implementation and the fish suffer easily when the tank is incompetently dosed with CO2. They then always draw the conclusion that if the fish are suffering hypercapnia then it must be that there is plenty of CO2, so like lemmings, they add more and more light and the tank falls off the cliff. The situation is completely out of control because everyone thinks they are running the underwater equivalent of a cannabis farm.
The fact is that each plant has a property known as Light Compensation Point (LCP). This is the minimum amount of light that a plant can use to make carbohydrates. A plant operating at LCP intensity levels is only able to make exactly the same amount of carbohydrates as it's cells burn. If the light intensity falls below LCP the plant will starve to death. If the intensity is raised above LCP then the plant can manufacture excess carbohydrates and can therefore support a higher mass, so it grows.
A so-called "high light" or "medium light" plant does in fact have a higher LCP than a "low light" plant. This is indisputable.
What is in dispute however is how much higher is the LCP of a high light plant than the LCP of a low light plant?
Ferns, mosses and anubias can grow with as little light as 10 micro-moles or lower. They can practically grow in the dark.
On the other hand plants such as Glosso, Ludwigia or Hygrophila will have a high LCP, maybe 25 micro-moles or thereabouts. This is still pretty darn dim even if the LCP value is twice as high as for moss.
If you grow a high light plant under low lighting then it will automatically behave like a moss or anubias. It will grow painfully slowly - but the probability of melting and destruction is also proportionally low. If you apply high light to a low light plant then you need massive amounts of CO2, otherwise there is a high probability that it turns to mush.
But people don't want to hear about, or even look at a 25 micro-mole tank. It's too boring, so they pummel the tank with hundreds of micro-moles. That's when the trouble starts because plants also have a property known as CO2 Compensation Point.
You can probably guess that this parameter describes the minimum amount of CO2 required to make enough food to feed all the cells.
Naturally, it turns out that the plants which have a high LCP also have a high CO2 Compensation Point.
Unfortunately, as we well know by now, it's 10,000X easier to get lots of light to the plant than to get lots of CO2 to the plant.
Light has no trouble traveling through clear water. CO2 and ALL gasses have major difficulty moving through water.
So while the nurseries are correct in their labeling of the plants, in practice, it becomes a disaster.
Carbohydrates grows plants. Light allows the plant to make carbohydrates.
More light results in faster and more voluminous production of food.
So in a high light tank, everything happens faster, both the good things like growth rate, as well as the bad things like algae and nutrient deficiency.
Managing a planted tank and keeping it problem free requires understanding the relationship between these factors.
Cheers,
The fact is that each plant has a property known as Light Compensation Point (LCP). This is the minimum amount of light that a plant can use to make carbohydrates. A plant operating at LCP intensity levels is only able to make exactly the same amount of carbohydrates as it's cells burn. If the light intensity falls below LCP the plant will starve to death. If the intensity is raised above LCP then the plant can manufacture excess carbohydrates and can therefore support a higher mass, so it grows.
A so-called "high light" or "medium light" plant does in fact have a higher LCP than a "low light" plant. This is indisputable.
What is in dispute however is how much higher is the LCP of a high light plant than the LCP of a low light plant?
Ferns, mosses and anubias can grow with as little light as 10 micro-moles or lower. They can practically grow in the dark.
On the other hand plants such as Glosso, Ludwigia or Hygrophila will have a high LCP, maybe 25 micro-moles or thereabouts. This is still pretty darn dim even if the LCP value is twice as high as for moss.
If you grow a high light plant under low lighting then it will automatically behave like a moss or anubias. It will grow painfully slowly - but the probability of melting and destruction is also proportionally low. If you apply high light to a low light plant then you need massive amounts of CO2, otherwise there is a high probability that it turns to mush.
But people don't want to hear about, or even look at a 25 micro-mole tank. It's too boring, so they pummel the tank with hundreds of micro-moles. That's when the trouble starts because plants also have a property known as CO2 Compensation Point.
You can probably guess that this parameter describes the minimum amount of CO2 required to make enough food to feed all the cells.
Naturally, it turns out that the plants which have a high LCP also have a high CO2 Compensation Point.
Unfortunately, as we well know by now, it's 10,000X easier to get lots of light to the plant than to get lots of CO2 to the plant.
Light has no trouble traveling through clear water. CO2 and ALL gasses have major difficulty moving through water.
So while the nurseries are correct in their labeling of the plants, in practice, it becomes a disaster.
Carbohydrates grows plants. Light allows the plant to make carbohydrates.
More light results in faster and more voluminous production of food.
So in a high light tank, everything happens faster, both the good things like growth rate, as well as the bad things like algae and nutrient deficiency.
Managing a planted tank and keeping it problem free requires understanding the relationship between these factors.
Cheers,
Rob P
Member
- Joined
- 13 Oct 2013
- Messages
- 785
I've started a major clear out this evening. Basically I've pulled out all the marsilea and cut away the black bits. It hasn't left me with much i can tell you!! but what is left and replanted is at least clean of algae. I've done what i should probably have done from the start and planted as individual stems (reading Georges one pot scape inspired me here 😉 lol). Hopefully it will take and fill in if my corys don't uproot it all first. I've also taken some anubias off the wood, they weren't great. And given the HG a serious haircut. Still a few more issues to address and I'll probably have the wood out this weekend for a pressure wash.
So, someone please help. I've lowered the lights down to 20%, should i be doubling the ferts dose and keeping the co2 going strong with the low lights? The co2 rate hasn't been altered since lights were and the DC is still showing a nice green as of today and fish are ok. I've got a ph pen coming so i can take some accurate readings before during after lights.
Should i look to get some robust fast growing plants in to out compete the algae as I've removed quite a lot of plant mass this week which, to be frank, is making the tank look stark!
Thanks,
Rob
So, someone please help. I've lowered the lights down to 20%, should i be doubling the ferts dose and keeping the co2 going strong with the low lights? The co2 rate hasn't been altered since lights were and the DC is still showing a nice green as of today and fish are ok. I've got a ph pen coming so i can take some accurate readings before during after lights.
Should i look to get some robust fast growing plants in to out compete the algae as I've removed quite a lot of plant mass this week which, to be frank, is making the tank look stark!
Thanks,
Rob
You're asking the wrong question. Plants cannot possibly compete with algae. That's why algae is eating your plants. Algae rule the planet and you should be glad of it.
There should not be a need to double the dosing unless you were previously only dosing half of what you should. This is a CO2 problem, not a nutrient problem. CO2 should remain high. Flow and distribution should be correct. This could be, after all, a distribution issue.
We do not know for certain because we have not seen any images or schematics of the tank configuration.
Get more hardy plants like the notorious ammonia eating weed Elodea nuttallii, or Old School favorite Egeria densa. They should be super cheap at any garden center or LFS and will fill in for now. Then you can throw them in the tip later an replace them with more boutique species.
Cheers,
There should not be a need to double the dosing unless you were previously only dosing half of what you should. This is a CO2 problem, not a nutrient problem. CO2 should remain high. Flow and distribution should be correct. This could be, after all, a distribution issue.
We do not know for certain because we have not seen any images or schematics of the tank configuration.
Get more hardy plants like the notorious ammonia eating weed Elodea nuttallii, or Old School favorite Egeria densa. They should be super cheap at any garden center or LFS and will fill in for now. Then you can throw them in the tip later an replace them with more boutique species.
Cheers,
Rob P
Member
- Joined
- 13 Oct 2013
- Messages
- 785
Things seem much better now, notably the tank is looking lots cleaner.
Have manually removed most of the BBA and just a few bits here and there, new growth seems unaffected and diatoms are all but gone. Maybe i've turned a corner...
I'll be rescaping the tank soon anyway but happier to feel more in control leading up to that point.
I did as much PH testing as I could yesterday for the first time and looked like this:
9.15am 7.4
11.40am 7.3
1.40pm 6.9
2.55pm 6.7
3.30pm 6.6
4.30pm 6.5
5.30pm 6.6
6.30pm 6.5
7.30pm 6.5
9.30pm 6.6
10.45pm 6.7
Lights come on at 3pm and ramp up to full (20%) over 35 minutes.
Lights start going off at 9.20pm for 35 minutes.
CO2 was on a 12.45pm and off at 7.30pm. Due to PH holding low til 10.45pm (well after lights off i've knocked the CO2 off earlier by half hour).
I think with current diffusion method and circulation I can't increase injection rate further without stressing fish. The DC is a nice lime green throughout the light cycle.
Does this all look positive??
Regards,
Rob
Have manually removed most of the BBA and just a few bits here and there, new growth seems unaffected and diatoms are all but gone. Maybe i've turned a corner...
I'll be rescaping the tank soon anyway but happier to feel more in control leading up to that point.
I did as much PH testing as I could yesterday for the first time and looked like this:
9.15am 7.4
11.40am 7.3
1.40pm 6.9
2.55pm 6.7
3.30pm 6.6
4.30pm 6.5
5.30pm 6.6
6.30pm 6.5
7.30pm 6.5
9.30pm 6.6
10.45pm 6.7
Lights come on at 3pm and ramp up to full (20%) over 35 minutes.
Lights start going off at 9.20pm for 35 minutes.
CO2 was on a 12.45pm and off at 7.30pm. Due to PH holding low til 10.45pm (well after lights off i've knocked the CO2 off earlier by half hour).
I think with current diffusion method and circulation I can't increase injection rate further without stressing fish. The DC is a nice lime green throughout the light cycle.
Does this all look positive??
Regards,
Rob
Hi Rob,
That profile looks pretty good to me. It's still unclear how your distribution is, and that might explain why the fish become stressed with further injection rate. I'd continue the liquid carbon addition, and maybe even bump it up higher just before lights on to see if I could clear the remaining BBA. It should turn pink after a few days with 2X or 3X dosing. depends on what fish and plants you have in there though. If that's not feasible, then continued spot dosing as mentioned by Big Clown above will be the way to go. If you can drop the water level enough to expose the plant you can use the syringe or even a small paint brush to treat the tuft. Avoid getting the liquid on the leaf though.
Cheers,
That profile looks pretty good to me. It's still unclear how your distribution is, and that might explain why the fish become stressed with further injection rate. I'd continue the liquid carbon addition, and maybe even bump it up higher just before lights on to see if I could clear the remaining BBA. It should turn pink after a few days with 2X or 3X dosing. depends on what fish and plants you have in there though. If that's not feasible, then continued spot dosing as mentioned by Big Clown above will be the way to go. If you can drop the water level enough to expose the plant you can use the syringe or even a small paint brush to treat the tuft. Avoid getting the liquid on the leaf though.
Cheers,
Andy Thurston
Member
- Joined
- 16 Apr 2013
- Messages
- 2,806
A full blackout or just lights off for a "soft" blackout | UK Aquatic Plant Society
Heres a post i made about the amount i spot dose in my 35l.
Fauna
5 ottos
4 amanos
10 cherry shrimp
2 peppered corys
1 bronze cory
2x8w t5 for 8 hours
2.5ml (3.5x) liquid carbon (tnc carbon)
3.5ml tnc complete(which I'm told is equal to EI nutrient levels) 3x per week
10x turnover
50% weekly water change
I wouldn't recommend more than 2x dose if you have/are breeding shrimp/fish, from the reading i've done this seems to stop shrimp breeding.
I wish my 3.5x dose would totally clear my bba but at least it clears most of it and theres none on any of the plants
Heres a post i made about the amount i spot dose in my 35l.
Fauna
5 ottos
4 amanos
10 cherry shrimp
2 peppered corys
1 bronze cory
2x8w t5 for 8 hours
2.5ml (3.5x) liquid carbon (tnc carbon)
3.5ml tnc complete(which I'm told is equal to EI nutrient levels) 3x per week
10x turnover
50% weekly water change
I wouldn't recommend more than 2x dose if you have/are breeding shrimp/fish, from the reading i've done this seems to stop shrimp breeding.
I wish my 3.5x dose would totally clear my bba but at least it clears most of it and theres none on any of the plants
Rob P
Member
- Joined
- 13 Oct 2013
- Messages
- 785
Thanks for calling back Clive 🙂
I'm pleased with how the ph profile looks consistent throughout the light cycle.
I'm not convinced the fish are stressed, it's possibly my paranoia but I think my platy act a little bit lethargic and hover about the surface at times (not all the time). It could just be down to recently removing the large piece of wood and with it most of the cover. I also have a small shoal of Black Phantom Tetra, a shoal of P. Ivantsoffi Rainbowfish and half a dozen Sterbai corydorus, all of whom show no signs of distress and all fish feed happily.
This thread I posted here shows the layout of the tank:
REALLY need some inspiration 🙁 | UK Aquatic Plant Society
3rd pic down is the desolate state of things just now but as mentioned the tank will be undergoing a major rescape with the background coming out etc. The spraybar from the 800lph external runs along the top from the left hand side, about 2/3rds of the tank. The Koralia 900lph pump is on the left hand pane, aimed down and right (so pushing flow towards the front) with the diffuser 8 inches or so underneath so the Koralia sucks in the bubbles and distributes them. Weakest area of bubble distributon is therfore the right hand side of the tank (where the DC is) but my plants do sway a little in that area.
I went into LFS yesterday to order a spraybay extension and was advised against it on the grounds that it will kill the flow of the external. I'm also contemplating a larger Tunze 1800lph circ pump but would worry that's too fierce for my 80cm tank.
Again, when I rescape, if I can successfully get the background out I then have total freedom to move equipment around on the rear pane, which I don't currently have.
Thanks for the advice on the existing BBA. The worst of it is on the red rocks and should scrub easily (it's more visible under very low light so usually when I do maintenance with the lights on I miss quite a lot!), I thought it was BBA on the plants as well (I certainly did have some) but the dirty edging on some of the leaves does wipe off, again i'm working round these still 🙂
Regards,
Rob
John S
Member
Hi Rob, I've found that Rainbow fish are one of the first to get agitated in my tank with too much CO2. So if they look OK that's a good sign.
Oh wow, you have a textured 3D background. I implicate them in the disruption of flow/distribution in tanks, especially in large tanks. I have no definitive proof however.
Yes, when you extend the spraybar, unless the filter has enough cojones, there will always be loss of velocity because the water and pressure have to fill a larger space. Adding pumps on the empty side will hello flow, but CO2 distribution, if being fed through the filter or if mounted externally down stream of the filter output will be uneven. Still, that's a lesser evil.
The Tunze energy can best be used, if too strong to mount on the back wall, can be used on a side wall and the spraybar can be moved under it on the side wall. That way the strong flow has to travel along the length of the tank and will dissipate more easily. There are so many paths to flow distribution you just have to experiment.
Cheers,
Yes, when you extend the spraybar, unless the filter has enough cojones, there will always be loss of velocity because the water and pressure have to fill a larger space. Adding pumps on the empty side will hello flow, but CO2 distribution, if being fed through the filter or if mounted externally down stream of the filter output will be uneven. Still, that's a lesser evil.
The Tunze energy can best be used, if too strong to mount on the back wall, can be used on a side wall and the spraybar can be moved under it on the side wall. That way the strong flow has to travel along the length of the tank and will dissipate more easily. There are so many paths to flow distribution you just have to experiment.
Cheers,
Rob P
Member
- Joined
- 13 Oct 2013
- Messages
- 785
Ha ha, yes flow issues aside I've realised the internal background (albeit a thin one) is very limiting, thus it will be coming out. I also intend to upgrade external at some point and attempt the diffuser output into inlet of filter when i rescape. I concur it is trial and error with room for improvement.
