[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re:straw& He Haw
>I am not suggesting that Dupla, Amano, Dennerle and Florida State U are
>either wrong or leading people down the garden path. I am suggesting that
>the earlier part of this thread had the potential to do so. Your earlier
>posts are full of the word "perhaps",
This is one of my favorite words<g>. Was I being too passive? The word
"perhaps" gives you a backdoor out if you forgot something - which I often
do and indicates some pondering before acting. I know you and I are on the
same wavelength. I have the up most respect for you and value your and
everyone's opinion on this list. Personally, I *like* attacks on theories
and notions, mine the most of all.
indicating that you are thinking about
>the problem, at least (which is of course, good).
Not always<g>.
But to go from a thought
>experiment to actually pouring a potentially toxic chemical into a show tank
>without someone first performing some objective, scientifically valid tests
>(and reporting those tests so that they can be reviewed and commented upon)
>is, in my mind, skating on thin ice.
I disagree.
My notions and thoughts were asking and suggestion to see if there might be
issues and problems *before* I did anything. I also needed to crash a tank
to see the algae issue also. That takes some time to do that. I did not want
to repeat things already done by this list or some lurker out there. Auggie
seemed to have the most experience with it so I tried 1/2 of Auggie's most
dilute dose. Seems to really help. I need a better test and closer looks at
it. Leave no stone unturned. Drip dosing may be even better *perhaps*<g>.
But at 1/2 or less doses, the kind likely the straw produced, *perhaps* more
or less, I personally think is a NOT skating on thin ice, nor is using an O2
adding tablets according to use by the directions. In this case I would
disagree. It's safety at low doses is well established. Companies, FL State,
APD archives etc were used for references before proceeding.
I have a saying: It's good to learn from experience as long as it's not
your own.
Well, I did induce a thick pea soup GW by mass infusion of Jobes and a
good disturbance of the gravel. After two days, I added 1/2 oz to a 20
gallon with otto cats (my canary....and a thanks to Auggie) and the GW has
almost been removed completely within 12 hrs. The tank has had nothing else
done to it and the CO2/light etc has been quite consistent.
I need to find some hair algae doing well next in someone's tank. It takes
longer to get going.
>
>This whole theses IS very interesting, and worthy of both discussion and
>experimentation.
I certainly agree. Any ideas for a good experiment BTW? Comments?
I have a few good ones but need to do it now. I did a quickie to see and I
think more test are needed.
The companies you mention are not prone to sharing their
>research data with the rest of the world except as massaged by their
>advertising copy writers.
True<g>. But I have come up with my own CO2 systems spray bar designs and
flows, SeaChem came in with Flourite/flourish et al, Tropica/Karl's
Schoeder's Liquid Gold came in to bat with a great Trace mixes, my own
RFUG's, and many other products that I have tried over many
years(dupla/tunze/ADA/recently Dernelle/ many home made test duplicating
them).
If they can grow it...........so can I. This is why I have sought so many
species. If I can grow algae free tanks full of the hard to grow rare plants
like them, my systems will be the same on some level, do think? I have grown
well over 200 species of plants very well including raising crypts from
seeds and attempting to do hybrid crosses of crypts(no luck yet, news at
11). i have also been doing well at growing algae types also. Different
methods and systems have always fascinated me and I've done most of
them..............simple no tech's to the most expensive tanks that money
can buy. Soil, sand, cat litter, flourite yada yada yada.
You get the picture. I also do this for a living(aquarium maintenance-
planted tanks mainly) and am majoring in Aquatic Botany/Biology at UCSB. I
have done independent aquatic plant research in an academic/US National
Parks arena. I got all A's. Lots more work ahead.
If you trust them implicitly, fine, good luck. I
>would rather see some objectivity here, it is as simple as that.
I trust them because I have done their methods and my own. I have doubted
Amano for YEARS.
The next week I find that I can do this or that that he did and that he's
right - it can be done in the long term etc. After doubting for years, I
have finally "listened" and looked beyond that attitude. Trust takes time to
build, I have spent that "time".
An objective attitude requires both the unyeilding devil's advocate and the
impressionable but trained waiting observational mind to find middle ground
IMO. These folks have spent lots of time also at this hobby BUT they are
businesses out to make money. Everything has it's pluses and minuses, ying
and yang, good and bad etc.
>
>This actually sounds like something that the AGA might be interested in
>publishing in TAG - if anyone is interested in designing and performing some
>controlled tests and monitoring the results. Unless I'm wrong, the
>organization will usually help finance the costs associated with applied
>research, if it is likely to help further our understanding of how to grow
>aquatic plants.
Sign me up fer this one din.
Before UC gets it.
>
>You are careful in your posts to stress the importance of both "balance" and
>"good management". People considering trying this technique should re-read
>those words carefully several times.
And then 5 more times.
One of the things which always strikes
>me as I read the APD is the inventiveness of people. If a "recipe" calls for
>A+B+C and they can't find one of the components they usually substitute
>something they think (or assume) is "close enough". Sometimes the
>substitution works, sometimes it doesn't. But rarely, when it doesn't, do
>they blame their substitution - usually they discredit the original recipe.
I've done this too and many, many mistakes. But after each I get better. So
will others on the list. I did this with Amano's set ups. Now, I think &
know otherwise.
>My reasoning for interjecting into this thread is not to stop
>discussion/invention/theorizing about what we can do to limit algae.
My notion is why algae exist in tanks were high nutrient load would suggest
otherwise based on theory but plants dominate and prevail? They have the
same access to the nutrients after all. This goes back to Steve Dixon's
query on Liebig's law of minimums and also the straw. A little straw to chew
on. Higher Redox levels= better plant growth/less algae. Maybe higher DO
levels is it or part of it.
Comments?
Regards,
Tom Barr