[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE:Bacterial filter vs plant fliters
> Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 12:11:00 -0800
> From: "Thomas Barr" <tcbiii at earthlink_net>
> Subject: RE:Bacterial filter vs plant fliters
> >There are several people making the point right now that you don't _need_
> >bacterial filtration in a planted tank.
> >Last time I remember seeing this topic go around, though, there was a
> >amount of argument about how much of a _fish load_ should be kept in a
> >planted tank with just a powerhead for circulation.
> >I'm just speculating, but I would think those of us with a heavier fish
> >should think hard before getting rid of that canister filter. Especially
> >we're not sure that our fertilizing regimen is providing enough of
> >everything _else_.
> >Alysoun McLaughlin
> >Wheaton, Maryland
> Why not use a plant filter instead for that heavy fish load and/or those
> us that "like" to crash tanks from lack of CO2? You can scale back the
> amount of plants rather easily to meet your needs. There will be some
> bacterial action within any system but the plant will do most of the job
> the NH4+. It can be a good stepping stone to the next method or to keep
> Tom Barr
Ok... but in a tank with no added CO2 and no liquid fertilizer used, can
even a thick forest of plants necessarily take in all that ammonia/ammonium?
Isn't the plant's ability to use the N limited unless we're providing
enough, say, K?
Or do I completely misunderstand? (Which is quite possible.)