[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [APD] CO2 mist

I never had pearling like this until I used this Co2 method. of course 
if you hate bubbles all over the tank, which was a concern for some at 
APC, then I suggest against it. But I just cut one of the plastic bars 
on my powerhead intake out so as not to pinch the incoming line and let 
the powerhead do the chopping and aimed it down and diagonal across the 
tank. I'm at about 3 or 4 BPS, and there are literally bubbles 
everywhere. You do "waste" more co2 in that ialot goes up and escapes, 
but my canister flow helps that, and quite frankly I have no complaints 
as to growth.

If I choke the incoming co2 to a full stop and let the exsisitng bubbles 
peter out I can see a champagne action of pearling. I never did that for 
longer than maybe one minute, just in case. I dont like to make havoc 
for the fish more than needed. No ones died, and everything is putting 
out bubbles even the noctoriously slow growing java fern. The key IME is 
getting the bubbles everywhere flowing across the plants. I suppose if I 
wasnt lazy and tried harder the effect would be better, in my ten where 
the bublles really get circulated via an extra heavy current the 
pearling is literally out of control. So i can see how the circulation 
physiucally over the leaves in greater volume really makes a difference

 It makes sense (to me) if you consider a terrestrial plant, which some 
would say is a mistake to do so... But if you put heavily co2 saturated 
water on a terrestrial leaf your still never going to get the same 
growth if you put a canister on it blowing co2 on the plant in gas form. 
This is evident by reasearch the USDA is doing out here at the HPGRS 
RRRU right now. They use a tank like the giant White Propane tanks. 
Looks like a giant Amoxcillian. They hook it up to a metal matrix of gas 
line in square half foots and do monthly tests using different levels of 
co2 and measure growth.

Hope you find it as successful. I was relieved to be honest. I wanted 
heavy pearling so bad, and now I wonder how it was ever hard to get.

william ruyle wrote:

>Yours is one of several glowing testimonials of Tom's new CO2 method. 
>And you betcha, I'm
>going to try it and if I have the same results perhaps it should be: 
>"flies *on* the face of known
>scientific principles":-)   Bill
>urville wrote:
>>I heartily mean no offense to anyone personnally. this is just a fav pet 
>>peeve of mine on any level.
>>Ah and the world was flat and the sun revolved around the earth and the 
>>atom was the smallest.
>>Science, hah
>>alot of Science <AHEM not all... i dont think...>  is nothing more than 
>>a synonym for theory. and theroy is a guess just waiting to be disproved 
>>by some other theory and on and on.
>>you know guys theres alot of holier than thou or rather elitist 
>>attitudes. I dont think anyone is guilt free on that around here.
>>the fact is if it works, then i'm happy and thats gonna be most people. 
>>i dont know about you but i dont have a grant from a science foundation 
>>nor the time to write lengthy science journal articles, i think it's 
>>called a hobby? anyway, it works and if it comes to bitter rivalry 
>>rather than actual discussion (the difference being the national academy 
>>of annoyances level of annoyance rating), then frankly professor i dont 
>>care. does it work? check one yes, check two no..
>>these comments are not directed at mr. baker in paticular as i rather 
>>agree with him often. if thy shoe fit, thou must wear it.
>>just a nickel in a 2 cent war. hey, replying with passive aggressives 
>>tones always looks like fun to me and since i figure the truly self 
>>determined intelligent people partake who am i to question it?
>>>>>flies in the face of known scientific principles. 
>>Aquatic-Plants mailing list
>>Aquatic-Plants at actwin_com
>Aquatic-Plants mailing list
>Aquatic-Plants at actwin_com
Aquatic-Plants mailing list
Aquatic-Plants at actwin_com