Tall 250l - Y llechen ogof

[a1Matt]

I'd of replied sooner, but I missed that the journal had been updated.

The plants aren't dying because they didn't have enough Co2, it was because they didn't have the right humidity/water. Cryps and Swords should be able to grow happily in a low tech setup.

Wise words. Always remember why things did not go right.

Damaged leaves...
Unless it is just a little bit of damage on the edge of the leaf, I'd cut the damaged leaves off of the swords, as the plant will not be getting much use from a heavily damaged leaf.

Flooding...
Now it is wet it is best to flood it completely now, get the filtration going, dose ferts. Get into a routine.
Tweaking the water levels here and there will mess the plants around as they will try to readjust to each change of conditions and will not thrive. Stability is key. (You'd be amazed what you can grow low tech with a stable tank and a lot of patience.)


Co2 or not....
Personally I would not bother and stick with low tech.
But all the options are valid, so it is your choice.

If you are not fussed about the health risks of using it (I know I am), then I think liquid carbon is a good choice.

DIY is also an option, but like people say it can be tricky to get right, and 250l (larger tank) makes the task tougher still.
It worked for me well in a 160l with a DIY reactor (google: barr internal venturi reactor).

Hope that all helps 😀

 

[idris]

A big big thanks to everyone for their input.

...IMO There is simply no substitute for good CO2!...

Tom Barr would disagree.
http://www.barrreport.com/showthread.php/433-Non-CO2-methods?highlight=co2+free

...What sort of flow do you have in the tank? ... It needs proper filtering, proper flow, proper CO2, proper ferts and proper lighting. Not doing it properly to save yourself some effort is counterproductive and will only cause problems like the ones you are seeing now.

Flow = aprox 8x tank per hour, delivered with flow across the full width of the tank at the opposite end to the filter intake.
Light = aprox 4 W/gal (UK)
Ferts = http://www.aquariumplantfood.co.uk/aquarium-plant-nutrition/82-aquarium-plant-nutrition.html - dose as per instructions
As you will see from the journal, there is nothing in this setup that's about cutting corners to save effort. Not using pressurised CO2 is about saving cash. (That said, if anyone wants to give me the gear for free, I'll be happy to use it. 😉 )

Chill pal.

If you cant justify then its time to get a couple of yeast bottles set up 😉
Yourll have to be really ontop of the change overs and get your mix on point. When I used it I had it diffusing via a standard ceramic disc glassware and the bubbles rising into the filter outlet....

Feeling a little more chilled now thanks. Just a moment of frustration at my own failure to use a large enough font when I originally typed "I can't justify the cost of a pressurised system".

As stated, yeast bottle(s) and airstone is one current contemplation, if it will be of benefit in the circumstances. (Liquid carbon is the other but I'll come to that in a minute.) I was also hoping to have the outlet near the filter intake as you suggest, assuming the bubbles are fine enough to not worry me from a pump engineering POV. If not, a ceramic diffuser might be an expense I can swallow comfortably.

I'd say as long as you keep on top of switching the bottle of yeast mix over when one begins to drop bubble rate...also make sure the one you swap it for has been set up and giving of co2 at a close ratio to the one you swap it for...

I was thinking about disconnecting the CO2 overnight (corresponding to the photoperiod +/- dissolving time) and use this as an opportunity to keep an eye on the CO2 output. How long does a 2l yeast bottle last at eg 2bps?

...Now you've flooded the tank you're gonna have to change the water regularly, this will help with any algae problems.

But algae occurring within 3 days of the initial flood? Surely that's gotta be excessive?

Fair enough Ryan, don't forget the check valves!...

Thanks Bob, I'd forgotten about those! 😳

I personally think it's a little soon to be jumping on the "Co2 will fix it!" bandwagon. The plants aren't dying because they didn't have enough Co2, it was because they didn't have the right humidity/water. Cryps and Swords should be able to grow happily in a low tech setup.

I was hoping someone would chime in with that perspective

What about liquid CO2?...
I started dosing 1ml easycarbo per day & all algae issues were solved ...
So with a 250ltr tank, I'm guessing around 200-220ltrs water due to your decor displacement. You could start by adding 5-6ml & see what happens.
So a 500ml bottle (say £15?) would last you approx 3 months - £60 per year...

Thanks Chris. Very useful information.

...you'd be better off with liquid carbon...
Lower the lighting level ... Reduce the photoperiod to about 5 hours. Add some floating plants ...
... remove any browning leaves that are still attached to your submerged plants. Only keep the healthy looking leaves. It could also help if you keep some Egeria densa i suppose just as a temporary nutrient absorbing plant...

Thanks Faizal. Some things there I had not considered.
Removing all leaves that have any brown wouldn't leave very much 🙄
Adding nutrient absorbing plants seems at odds with keeping fert levels up. Can you clarify please?

...Wise words. Always remember why things did not go right...
Unless it is just a little bit of damage on the edge of the leaf, I'd cut the damaged leaves off of the swords, as the plant will not be getting much use from a heavily damaged leaf...
Now it is wet it is best to flood it completely now, get the filtration going, dose ferts. Get into a routine.
Tweaking the water levels here and there will mess the plants around as they will try to readjust to each change of conditions and will not thrive. Stability is key...
If you are not fussed about the health risks of using it (I know I am), then I think liquid carbon is a good choice.
DIY is also an option ...(google: barr internal venturi reactor)...

Thanks for confirmation of Bob's observation on cause and effect.
Re Damaged leaves. I'm currently working on the principal that some partially damaged leaves is better than none at all. 😳
Re Flooding and stability. What are the mechanisms relating to adjusting to the amount of water in the tank? (I think that question makes sense.) I'd like to keep the water level lower for practical reasons, but if that's counter productive I have no issue with fully flooding. But I would be interested to understand the reasons first.
Re Health risks of liquid carbon I doubt this will trouble me but health risks are news to me. What are the concerns?
And I'm way ahead of you on reading up on Tom Barr's reactor, but thanks anyway.

 

[a1Matt]

Re Flooding and stability. What are the mechanisms relating to adjusting to the amount of water in the tank? (I think that question makes sense.) I'd like to keep the water level lower for practical reasons, but if that's counter productive I have no issue with fully flooding. But I would be interested to understand the reasons first.

I was thinking that with the water level as low as it is you probably do not have the filter turned on.
So that would be the biggest reason, as the plants will do better with the flow and biological filtration provided by the filter.

Sorry, I just read my post and what I wrote did not properly reflect what I was thinking (rushing to type while at my day job). I meant to get across that I was also thinking in general terms of picking a strategy and sticking to it overall, not just with regards to water level. For instance if you dosed liquid carbon for only 1 week, it would probably be less helpful to the plants than if you just stuck low tech throughout (because of the time it would take them to adjust to the changes).

To put it another way around, what would be your motivations for not flooding fully?
(At the end of the day it has to work for you and how you want to run the tank 🙂 )

Re Health risks of liquid carbon I doubt this will trouble me but health risks are news to me. What are the concerns?
And I'm way ahead of you on reading up on Tom Barr's reactor, but thanks anyway.

Scarred hands short term and breathing issues long term. I chatted about it in one of my journals recently: viewtopic.php?f=49&t=15567&p=163759&hilit=vivarium+nano+liquid+carbon#p163725 (which in turn links to another more comprehensive thread)

Good to see you on the case with the Tom Barr reactor. I made mine from an old gravel vac and a £2 Hailea pump. Worked a treat

 

[faizal]

Adding nutrient absorbing plants seems at odds with keeping fert levels up. Can you clarify please?

Hi Idris,...
I am truly sorry if I had confused you with my very limited & premature (newly gained) knowledge 😳 but the rationale behind my advice was this.

1. Keeping the nutrient levels up should aid the plants in getting all their nutrients during their most difficult phase (i.e. transition into the new submersed environment) along with lower light levels among other things.

2. Adding nutrient absorbing plants should decrease the chances of any NH4 spikes while your tank is settling in to prevent any algal attacks. Yes those plants might take a big share of some of the nutrients that you are trying to provide your primary plants but I think if you are dosing Modified EI ( should you choose to take the liquid carbon route) or Tom Barr's non co2 fertilization regime or even full Ei ( if you decide to go pressurized),....then there should still be,...in theory a lot of nutrients left in the tank for your primary plants to take advantage of.

I hope that helped. 🙂
Faizal

 

[idris]

I was thinking that with the water level as low as it is you probably do not have the filter turned on ... I was also thinking in general terms of picking a strategy and sticking to it ... what would be your motivations for not flooding fully?
...
Scarred hands short term and breathing issues long term ...

Yeah, the filter is on and has been maturing with 2nd hand mulm for a couple of weeks, independant of the tank. So hopefully that is helping. (I've not got round to testing the water yet. 😳 )

In terms of adding CO2, be it liquid of yeast based, my thought was that it might be worth getting the plants up and running with it and then reducing it slowly. Though I have no sense of apropriate time scales for application or weaning.
The CO2 fluids' "hazchem" doesn't fill me with enthusiasm, though I am interested that the active ingredients seem to vary between the different brands.

Thanks for the clarification Faizal.

Just for some further context, I've removed yet more leaves from the Swords and the Crypts are looking pretty poor. This is how bad they have got ...

... though the fact that there is a small green shoot and the roots are white gives me some hope, even if they are a shaddow of what hey were when they arrived in the post.

 

[a1Matt]

There is hope in that plant 🙂
It is only when the rhizome goes mushy that it is game over with crypts.

 

[faizal]

Thanks for the clarification Faizal.

You are most welcome. But I didn't come up with those ideas by myself. I only sort of repeated what I learned from clive, a1matt , mark & brenmuk among others here @ UKAPS.

I wish you all the luck with your amazing new tank. I could never come up with such interesting ideas for a scape like you have,....very exotic.

 

[Bobtastic]

There is hope in that plant 🙂
It is only when the rhizome goes mushy that it is game over with crypts.

Yep. I'm always amazed at how the cryps can melt/die back to the substrate at one point and then happily grow back as healthy as ever!

 

[Dan Crawford]

Hiya, I was under the same impression as Matt, since I could see the spray bar which was not running then I presumed that the tank wasn't filtered/has no flow. So you do have a filter running on this tank right?

As you will see from the journal, there is nothing in this setup that's about cutting corners to save effort.

I never mentioned you were cutting corners, just saving yourself some effort....

Not doing it properly to save yourself some effort is counterproductive and will only cause problems like the ones you are seeing now.

It was these comments that made me come to this conclusion....

To make life “easier” I have only put about 8” of water in the tank so far. (About 60 litres.)

]1 – I figure the first few weeks are going to involve the most maintenance and less water means less getting wet for me.

One thing that has just sprung to mind is the relatively small amount of water in comparison to the amount of lighting. Forgive me if this has been mentioned but just at the minute I don't have time to read through everything.
I'm sure I don't need to tell you this but it may be helpful to others....The more light you throw at the plants = the harder they are driven - the harder they are driven = the higher the demand for nutrients and CO2.

If I was in your situation, which of corse I'm not, I'd fill the tank up and treat it the same as any other tank. When we buy plants from the shop they are grown in very similar conditions to yours so I see no reason to treat the tank any differently.

 

[idris]

Dan - Sorry, wasn't trying to pick a fight. Your input is genuinly appreciated. Sometime's I'm a little blunter than I intend 😳

I confess I thought it implicit that the pump was running but I do understand the confusion. My mistake.

Just to clarify why I say "make life easier". The tank is deeper than my arms are long, and the top of the tank is higher than my shoulder. So I have to stand on a chair just to get access to it, and if I flood it fully, even with scissors and tweesers a foot long, each time I need to tend to most of the plants will mean arms in water above the elbow and probably a change of clothes, if not a shower. Add to that it is nigh on impossible to get two hands in the tank such that I could use the tweasers and scissors on lower plants at the same time. And it is pretty difficult to see what you're doing even as it is.
The tallest plants at the moment are the swords, and there is at least 18" between the tips of any of the leaves and the top of the tank, never mind any healthy leaves.
If I flood the tank fully, my misguided choice of tank dimensions will quickly become even more of an irritation than they already are, I will get wet, there will not be the oportunity to keep an eye on any movement in the floor as it is porgessively loaded (a small concern I alluded to in an earlier post), and I would expect the ferts and CO2 to be in a significabtly lower concentration than if I maintain the current level.
So I see no benefit to adding over 150l more water.

I take your point on light levels and it would be easy for me to half the wattage and/or reduce the photoperiod.
Suggestions on prefference?
I'm currently working on recommendations to use a 12hr photoperiod (sorry, can't remember where from) and from most of what I have read, I was under the impression that 4W/gal is not a bad level of lighting for a planted tank. So I'm a little confussed. My best guess is that this may be too high for a low tech tank, which this obviously is.

I'm also a little uneasy about the way the maths for the W/gal rules are generally interpreted, as to me they seem to assume a constant ratio of biomass to volume of water: in my case, even if I increase the water to about 400% of it's current level, by depth alone, the same number of plants will not need any diffeent amount of light (other than the fact that slightly more light will be absorbed and or disipated by the increased amount of water above them). I'm no botanist (hands up who hadn't spotted that ) but I don't see how it can be a simple linear relationship.

Equally would not increasing the volume increase the potential for dead spots in terms of circulation of CO2 and ferts?

Your thoughts?

 

[spyder]

Someone can explain this better than me but the WPG rule is not linear. As the tank size scales up the amount of light needed doesn't scale up as much. Maybe half wattage and around 6hrs would be a good place to start.

Sorry I can't be of any more help.

 

[faizal]

Dear Lord,....I know that I am well over my league here but I will try to give the best I can. So if anyone here thinks I am talking gibberish please do interupt & I will take a rear corner seat. :silent:

Okay so the tank is 107 cm by 75cm by 35cm = 75 US Gallons . Unless I am missing something I don't see how you have 4 WPG worth of lighting because if I remember it correctly,...you said you had a pair of T8s worth 38 watts each. So that puts us at about 1 wpg. Which is not too much light unless you have changed it & I am talking gibberish.

If you did change the lights then I should think that the pair of T8s that you had started with there should do well under the current circumstance. The only way we can be sure of the lighting levels is with a PAR meter. The rest is simply guess work.Our aim is to get your light levels down.

You can think about this one or you can dump the idea but just for what it is worth,.... here we go:

1. Fill up the tank 3/4 th way up (i.e. height from the tank bottom to water surface should be about 22 cm). Don't ask me why just seems like a nice number. Also I remember Clive saying tanks deeper than 2 feet will have trouble co2 getting to the substrate level unless you have a Honda Boat engine for a filter.This should get us the middle ground that you seek in terms of tank management (working around the tank with the plants) & more water volume that we definetely need in that tank. I don't think there should be any MAJOR issues with respect to increasing the water volume & arisal of dead spots as long as you :

a) Mount the spray bar horizontally across the whole rear wall of the tank just below the water surface & make sure that the water jet sprays that come out of that bar are travelling as horizontally as possible & hit the front glass.

b) You adhere with the 10 times flow rate with respect to your filter's GPH rating.


**Minor tweakings can always be done as the tank progresses & as and when any co2 deficient symptoms should arise.


2. Maintain the current height & position of your lights but change the tubes to T8s. There might be some distance between the lights & the water surface. This should be okay. Maintain with the 2 T8 lights that you began with.

3. Dose Liquid carbon atleast for another 3-4 weeks. From there ,...you can either wean down to a non co2 set up or step up to pressurized co2.

4. Keep the tank & filters clean.

5. Dose accordingly ( Full EI if u choose to use co2 pressurized ; Modified EI for the liquid carbon route)

6. Add some excess nutrient absorbing plants like Egeria,etc I think You would be needing more plants in there to help the tank settle in. Strip big leaves off the future new plantlets and just plant them in with a few new shoots. Somebody correct me if I am wrong but I think we do this to reduce the risk of co2 stress on that particular plant because that new plant could have been previously grown in a co2 enriched environment.
7. Be persistent with the above routine in order to provide the plants with a stable environment to help them settle in.

If I have missed out on anything I am very sorry because I can't think of anything else to add . If I AM WRONG ,....PLEASE DO CORRECT ME.

All grand advises like a pro,...and to think that I actually bombed my attempt at a planted tank 😳 .

Faizal

 

[idris]

Someone can explain this better than me but the WPG rule is not linear. As the tank size scales up the amount of light needed doesn't scale up as much. Maybe half wattage and around 6hrs would be a good place to start.
Sorry I can't be of any more help.

Thanks Spyder, good to know. Any idea where I can find more detail, as nothing I've seen to date has talked explicitly about variable ratios?

...the tank is 107 cm by 75cm by 35cm = 75 US Gallons ... I don't see how you have 4 WPG worth of lighting because ... you had a pair of T8s worth 38 watts each. So that puts us at about 1 wpg.

I've currently only got 60l of water in the tank and have had 2x 38W T8s running. So roughly 4W/gal at present, but not when full

...Fill up the tank 3/4 th way up (i.e. height from the tank bottom to water surface should be about 22 cm)...

22com is roughly what I've got in the tank at the moment, but that's a long way soouth of 3/4 full. Which are you recommending?

...tanks deeper than 2 feet will have trouble co2 getting to the substrate ...

I'm aware of this is a potential issue, but I wasn't planning a "planted tank" when I spec'd it and didn't know this.

...Maintain the current height & position of your lights ...

For various reasons, changing this is not an realistc option anyway.

...I think You would be needing more plants in there to help the tank settle in...

That's on the cards. I left out taller plants to start with due to the abortive attempt as DSM: tall plants will go at the back, but they wouldn't have worked that way.

 

[Bobtastic]

I take your point on light levels and it would be easy for me to half the wattage and/or reduce the photoperiod.
Suggestions on prefference?
I'm currently working on recommendations to use a 12hr photoperiod (sorry, can't remember where from) and from most of what I have read, I was under the impression that 4W/gal is not a bad level of lighting for a planted tank. So I'm a little confussed. My best guess is that this may be too high for a low tech tank, which this obviously is.
?

I would definitely reduce your photoperiod as 12hrs is very high, certainly when first starting out. Cut it in half at lease and then you can turn it up (if you like) once the plants are more established.

I personally see Watt per gallon as voodoo! As I understand it's based on T8s so become useless with any other types of tube. But also with currently thinking lighting doesn't need to be that strong anyway. As well, I assume it's based on a "standard" tank size/ratio, which yours isn't.

I think our experts seem to be advocating constancy so what ever you do make sure you stick with that plan for a while at least. If you change something, just change one thing, that way you'll know if it causes a problem that that one thing is the cause.

I would say that if you filled your tank to the top and set up everything to how you intend it to be then at least you'll know and get used to how you'll have to be working with your tank. If you get dead spots you're going to get them regardless and then you can identify them and over come them. That being said, I can understand why you don't want to! I wouldn't want to be my nipples wet every time I reach for the bottom of the tank! 😉

 

[faizal]

22com is roughly what I've got in the tank at the moment, but that's a long way soouth of 3/4 full. Which are you recommending?

😳 I am so sorry Idris!!! 3/4th full was what I meant. 😀 Err,...that would be 56 cm then. 🙄 Like I said,...I'm a bit over my league here. This is like just completing my swimming lessons then deciding to take a toss into the ocean I think I should go & sit in that rear corner now. :silent:

 

[a1Matt]

All good comments from others I think 🙂
Here is another angle to think of (as I just can not get my head past the tank not being filled completely!)...

How are you doing your water changes?
If you rig up a DIY water changer you could easily drain the tank down to a convenient level when you need to work on it.
Then fill up again after.
Only takes a few minutes* to do and it would remove the maintenance issue of it being a PITA having the tank fully filled 🙂


*This is assuming you include a pump in your system. If you use gravity\siphon, maybe 30min all in on a tank your size.
Paulo did a great thread on his DIY water changing system here: viewtopic.php?f=20&t=1729

 

[Alastair]

That being said, I can understand why you don't want to! I wouldn't want to be my nipples wet every time I reach for the bottom of the tank! 😉

 

[Bobtastic]

If you rig up a DIY water changer you could easily drain the tank down to a convenient level when you need to work on it.
Then fill up again after.
Only takes a few minutes* to do and it would remove the maintenance issue of it being a PITA having the tank fully filled 🙂


*This is assuming you include a pump in your system. If you use gravity\siphon, maybe 30min all in on a tank your size.
Paulo did a great thread on his DIY water changing system here: viewtopic.php?f=20&t=1729

I have one of these DIY python syphons and they are a life saver on larger tanks! I have mine connected to a Maxi-Jet pump and it sends it down the kitchen sink with very little fuss. In fact I have more trouble getting the water temp right on the mixer tap than anything else! 😉

 

[idris]

I hope my apparent reluctance to flood fully does not come across as disagreement with those far more experienced than myself.

I'm using one of these for water changes.



I guess my reservation about filling it completely is that I don't see how it helps. (That does not translate as I think it won't!) I understand what has been said about stability, but what specific advantage would there be to having an additional 20" / 150l of empty water above the plants?

(Also I have been fishing out more dead leaves on a pretty much daily basis, and changing 100l of water a day seems a little excessive / wasteful to me. That said, the number of dead leaves to remove is reducing, so I am increasingly open to persuasion.)

 

[a1Matt]

I take no offense at your posts, I quite like my views being challenged. I should add I take no umbrage if you do not fill it 🙂

Stability really was my main reason.

In terms of optimum water level one may have better flow, better light levels, plant waste more diluted (therefore less likely to get algae), etc - but I doubt there is much in it either way.

Another thing to think of is, not just for the plants, but for all aquariums, a larger water column equals a more, um, stable (sorry can not stop myself saying that word ) tank.