No Subject

Received: from ActWin.com by zeus.argo.net; Tue, 27 Feb 96 11:55 EST
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by looney.actwin.com (8.6.12/8.6.9) id DAA07581 for Aquatic-Plants-Digest-Outgoing at ActWin_com; Tue, 27 Feb 1996 03:39:02 -0500
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 1996 03:39:02 -0500
Content-Length: 19106
Content-Type: text
Message-Id: <199602270839.DAA07581@looney.actwin.com>
From: Aquatic-Plants-Owner at ActWin_com
To: Aquatic-Plants at ActWin_com
Subject: Aquatic Plants Digest V1 #285
Reply-To: Aquatic-Plants at ActWin_com
Errors-To: Aquatic-Plants-Owner at ActWin_com

Aquatic Plants Digest     Tuesday, 27 February 1996     Volume 01 : Number 285

In this issue:

	re: New planted tank...; Time to plant!
	Re: Lumens per watt-a non-scientific observation
	Re: MH and Fluorescent efficiencies
	Re: Aquatic Plants Digest V1 #284
	Re: Aquatic Plants Digest V1 #283
	Re: Fluorescent vs. Metal Halides

See the end of the digest for information on subscribing to the
Aquatic Plants mailing list and on how to retrieve back issues.


From: Bruce Hansen <bhansen at oznet02_ozemail.com.au>
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 1996 08:17:38 +-1100
Subject: Glossostigma

Glossostigma elatinoides occurs naturally here in Australia in a variety =
of habitats, especially in perennial swamps in the high country. It =
tends to be marginal and extending well into submersed areas of the =
location. Although it seems to prefer a muddy substrate it is often =
found spreading around and between rocks in shallow running water. In my =
experience it requires a high light intensity and limited temperature. I =
grow it best outside in shallow trays (1-2" of worm castings covered =
with 1/2" of sand) with only an inch of water over it and full sun for a =
couple of hours each day.

I have a friend who grows it quite successfully in the aquarium =
situation  and it was very slow to spread until he added CO2 and it has =
done well since. I suspect this species is sensitive to prolonged =
temperatures above 26C  so it would not do for a Discus tank.=20

There seems to be another species that I have seen in nature growing in =
shallow flowing water in the Koolatong River in Arnhem Land. This form =
has much broader leaves and is a deeper green in colour.

Bruce Hansen.


From: "David W. Webb" <dwebb at ti_com>
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 1996 16:34:56 -0800
Subject: re: New planted tank...; Time to plant!

>  From: BreedOFish at aol_com
>       I recently tested my local water supply for nitrates (after having
>  nitrate problems) and found that it contained at least 10ppm nitrates.
>   Trying to lower nitrates below 10ppm is therefore illogical, right?  Having
>  just broken down my 55 gallon, to put in a substrate and plant more heavily,
>  I am wondering about having algae problems.  I have planted rather heavily 
>  (I
>  think so, always a personal thing) so that only about 25% of the tank 
>  doesn't
>   have something green within 1/2-inch of it (I assume this is heavy?)  Used
>  Green Hygro,  Anachris, Rotala, Anachris, Sag(?), Corkscrew Val, and a 
>  Amazon
>  Sword (in order of abundence).  I'm am using 3 Black Mollies for algae
>  control, but have access to Flying Fox barbs (sorry, no SAEs) if necessary.
>   Should I use a nitrate absorbing resin (Nitra-Zorb, which also absorbs
>  supposedly only toxic ammonia and not ammonium?) or assume that the plants
>  will use the nitrate as nutrients.  I am doing daily tests on Ammonia,
>  Nitrites, Nitrates, pH, KH and GH, to track results, but I was hoping some
>  one could help me out with a preview of what to expect.
>       - Keith
>  P.S.  100watts of FL, lighting about total of 40 gallons of water (figured 
>  it
>  out after subtraction for gravel and substrate) with yeast CO2 injections
>  (still working out formula to stablize pH at 6.8-7.0 with KH of 3.5)

In your situation I would probably try the following:  

1.  Try to reduce evaporation to minimal levels so you can build up
allelochemicals and not have to top off frequently with nitrate-ridden water.

2.  I'd bump my lighting up to 120 or 160 watts to help the plants out.

3.  I'd definitely stick with fish that can survive entirely on algae.  Platies
are good if your water is too soft for mollies.  Ottos are also good in this
case.  I think ramshorn and apple snails are a plus, and although I haven't
seen them locally, I understand that trumpet snails are a good thing too.

4.  Having made sure that #3 is in place, I'd let the tank feed the fish.

The end result of this setup is the need to occasionally scrape algae off of
the glass, at least at first.  Hopefully, the plants will outpace the algae, so
when the fish consume the algae and produce nutrients, the plant uptake will
compete favorably with the algae uptake.  This will be evidenced by reduced
algae levels in the tank.

When (if) the tank balances out and the fish start to get hungry, feed them
sparingly, since the nutrients in the food may be recycled several times in the
fish and algae before they get locked up by the plants.

- -------------------------

Subject: Time to plant!

I finally have my 55g set up and running again(water and substrate only so
I had a problem with the two 10g tanks I planned to use for the settling tanks,
so I pulled them Saturday and dropped in my spare 29g (with a 5.5g tank for a
baffle) behind/below the 55 for a settling tank.  

My setup uses all of my designs, although I'm going to have to add one more
water pump to feed the substrate circulation system.  I couldn't just scavenge
a few drops per minute off of the tube from the pump because there wasn't
enough water pressure where I tapped the hole and I was drawing air.  I'll
probably use the tap for a CO2 injector.

The substrate is plumbed with:  

1. A swirl-flow system equipped with 5 heads to direct the current around the
tank in a counter-clockwise direction (my 20g has the current going clockwise).
I use an out-of-loop check valve for anti back-siphon in the event of pump
failure.  The check valve is on a tube that tees off from the line from the
pump (outside the tank).  The spring is drilled out of the valve and the valve
is installed upside-down.  When the pump is on, the resultant water pressure
closes the check valve, preventing water from escaping through a separate loop
(in this case, it prevents air from bleeding through the check valve into my
swirl manifold).  When the pump is off, the valve opens and dumps air into the
tubing that goes over the wall of the tank, preventing a siphon.  I have this
system on my 20g tank also and it is wonderful.
2. A surface skimmer loopback siphon that maintains the water level in the tank
at about 11" deep.

3. A substrate-level drain system with 4 drains having four 1/4" drain holes
drilled in each.  The drains feed into a loopback siphon over the wall of the
tank.  The Eheim pump raises the water level by about 7" between the lowest
possible drain level (when the tank/sump balances out at gravity equilibrium)
and the highest level (about 4" above the level of the surface skimmer in the
event that its siphon fails).  The substrate drains keep detrius accumulation
on my substrate to a minimum.  I will siphon the mulm from my settling tank
occasionally to remove it from the environment.

4. Gravity-fed substrate circulation plumbing for direct substrate
fertilization and anaerobicity reduction.

All of my tubing is 1/2" PVC.  If I want to switch to a higher water level, all
I have to do is add an extension to my surface skimmer and close a valve in my
substrate drain tubing outside the tank.

The substrate consists of 1" of vermiculite with 2" of TexBlast quartz blasting
sand (2mm) on top.

Lighting is 160w on top of 2 glass canopies to keep evaporation down.  I may
light the settling tank with up to 80w.

I'm still working on ideas for the layout, but the plants will initially

lillaeopsis sp.
val. spiralis
apon. crispus
a. nana
crypt. wendtii
mic. pteroptus
nymph. stellata
rot. indica
hyg. difformis
hyg. polysperma
eg. densa

I'm considering some hydrocotyle that I saw, in addition to maybe a sword or
two and some alternathera if I see something that I like.  The Java fern may
require adding a rock or two, but I'm going to try to get it to stick in the
substrate the way it has in my micro plant tank at work (12" long tendrils).

Animals to start out with will be:

ghost shrimp
apple snails
red ramshorn snails

I'm tossing around the idea of hanging some of my bog wood inside the tank and
growing orchids.  Not really sure about their light/humidity needs.  If I do
this, I'll need to work out a portion of the tank that can house low-light
plants underneath the bog wood (maybe more Java Fern).  Another possibility is
a wood stand towards one end of the tank with Java fern growing both emersed
and submersed on it (I wish I had more surface area).

I'll take pictures tonight and after it's planted.

David W. Webb in warm, humid (finally!) Dallas, TX.  


From: buddy wiese <buddyw at umich_edu>
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 96 19:32:16 +0800
Subject: Shrimp

>   Snip....
>   > > 3.  Does anyone know where in the U.S. I can get the
>   Japanese shrimp, 
>   > > Caridina japonica?  Many European and Asian list
>   subscribers have access to 
>   > > these and find they are very good algae eaters.
>   > 
>   > Hey, you many subscribers from Asia and Europe!  Is
>   that true?  Yes yes,
>   > I know what Amano says about them, but I also know
>   what Neil Frank says
>   > about them and although Neil hasn't yet written such
>   impressive picture
>   > books, I think I'll believe him.  (Yo, Neil!  Any of
>   them still alive?)
>   If I am not mistaken Neil Frank was in Japan a year ago
>   and brought  back with him a few freshwater
>   shrimps(Caridina Japonica). I would like to hear (how
>   about it Neil!!) what are his experiences what are  his
>   experiences with this animal. It seems to me that Liisa
>   is saying that they are not all that good!!? I'd also
>   like to hear if anybody  has had some experience with
>   Bee shrimps. Sorry, don't know their  Latin name.
>   > Well, if anybody knows where I could get those shrimps
>   in Finland, Sweden
>   > or Estonia, I would try them asap.

I am also a big fan of Shrimp.  I read Amano's book and would love to
get my hands on some shripm he refers to in the book.

I recently purchased some shrimp at a local store.  The shrimp were
called 'Wood Shrimp'  I am not familiar with the scientific name, but
the shrimp are quite remarkable and hopefully someone will be able help
with an identification.  The shrimp are small, about 2 to 3 inches long.
They have two sets of 'arms' that they apparently use to filter the
water for algae. In fact each arm open up into a set of four feathered
fans that filter the water.

If anyone knows the name of the shrimp and has other info on them I
would greatly apprecite it.

buddy wiese
Ann Arbor, MI


From: gtong at sirius_com (G.Tong)
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 1996 18:31:39 -0800
Subject: Re: Lumens per watt-a non-scientific observation

>So, it looks like the T-8s have it!

In terms of efficacy (lumens per watt), HOs and VHOs are as bad as
incandescents, which include metal halides.

>It also shows that watts per gallon or any other
>reference that uses watts can be misleading, and is probably bordering on
>useless (like the much misused and utterly useless 'candlepower'). Lumens
>should be a more accurate measurement, and obviously the depth of the tank
>is more significant than the capacity.

Yes, watts per gallon is only good as a general indicator.

Candlepower or lux is the best measure because it accounts for the amount
of light that falls on a particular surface. Measured at a leaf, it tells
you how much light is actually reaching the leaf.

The lumen rating is for ALL the light that a lamp generates, but not all of
it is aimed where you want or reaches the water (T12 tubes being thicker
can block more light than T8 tubes--another reason T8s are more
energy-efficient). In a tube or bulb, only the lumens shining unobstructed
into your tank get to the plants. Reflectors can help re-direct the other
rays but not all lumens will go where you want. So lumens are a kind of
gross measure compared to candlepower or lux.

Greg. Tong
San Francisco, CA, USA
gtong at sirius_com

"Every infinity is composed of only two halves."


From: Stephen.Pushak at saudan_HAC.COM
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 96 18:46:14 PST
Subject: Re: MH and Fluorescent efficiencies

> Re: MH and Fluorescent efficiencies
> For the MH175/U/5K (5200K) that Venture makes the mean lumens/watt
> is 51 when burned vertically and 43 when burned horizontally in a
> typical hood. The 3700K to 4300K lamps are a bit more efficient, as
> are the 250 and 400 watt versions of the 5200K lamp.
> Some horizontal high output metal halides have mean outputs of
> 80. These require a special socket. There are also regulated lag
> ballasts that deliver 90 plus lumens/watt from those bulbs designed
> to run on them. In addition there are vertically oriented lamps
> that operate on the regular CWA ballasts that get as much as 90
> lumens mean output. All of the above are 4000K lamps and have much
> higher life expectancies. Is this what you are running Steve?

No, I'm using a 5500K bulb. The largest aquarium market for these
kits is for reefs so UV radiation is very important to them. I'm
not real certain that 5500K is the ideal trade off for efficiency
versus spectrum but Rob figured I'm kind of in between a reef
customer and a pot cultivator. ;-)

> The SPX50 T-8s provide what, maybe 90 to 100 lumens/watt? Compare
> that to 43 or 65 from the MH. A MH ballast uses about 35 watts and
> a electronic ballast less than 17 (actually I think its a lot less)
> for the same wattage.
> Cost comparisons will depend upon the size and shape of each tank,
> as well one's ingenuity at sourcing the components. If it is a
> choice between 16 T-8s and 2 MHs I guess that I'd go with the
> latter.

Here are some more numbers on MH to throw in:

watts black-body initial mean   life mean        initial
      temp       lumens  lumens      lumens/watt lumens/watt
175   5200K               9000       51
250   5500K      20000   15800  2yr  63          80

The life expectancy is based on a 12hr duty cycle.


I talked to Rob at Always Lighting here in Vancouver to get these
figures and also inquired whether they were willing to entertain
out of town orders. The answer is yes but the prices and availability
can vary somewhat. The price for a 175watt system and a 250watt
system are within a few dollars. Shipping by the method of your
choice is extra. A price today for 175 watt kit including a 
parabolic reflector is about $100 Cdn because he has lots of
175watt surplus ballasts. He also has 3 250 watt ballasts. First
come first served.

The phone number is (604)520-1023 talk to Rob or Dennis.
Lighting Liquidators
811 1st Street
New Westminster BC


Ok, Karen, I guess I'll concede :-) that VHO FL is more efficient
than MH in converting electricity to light energy. I'd suggest
folks who are interested in MH to shop around locally. I would
imagine most big cities must have surplus outlets and liquidators
for this kind of stuff and for those interested in building their
own kits and capable of wiring it together, I'm sure you could
save a few bucks. MH needn't be the most expensive item in your



From: MMMORRIS at smith_smith.edu
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 1996 22:08:26 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: Aquatic Plants Digest V1 #284

I have a question for those who have an answer about a problem I am having 
with a dual light fixture I bought for my 20 long.  I took the fixture apart, 
connected the endcaps to the inside of my custom made hood, added about 18" of 
wire to all leads in order to mount the Advance Magnetic ballast under the 
stand.  I was sure to wire it just like it was originally in the fixture, 
grounded the ballast, soldered the wires together to assure a good connection
and when I put it all together . . . . it did not work. All I can assume is thatthe additional length in the wire from ballast to light creates enough 
resistance that there isn't enough juice to form the arc necessary to start the bulbs.  This is a rapid start setup.  What am I doing wrong?!?!??

				Thanks in advance,

					Miles Morrissey


From: User645273 at aol_com
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 1996 22:11:35 -0500
Subject: Re: Aquatic Plants Digest V1 #283

In a message dated 96-02-26 03:51:26 EST, you write:

>>Scott Corbeil asked about the heat of Metal Halide lights.
>1) the heat thrown by X watts of MH light is the same as the heat
>from X watts of FL lights. But you can easily have more watts of MH :)<
>Pete Datcuk replied,
><<I would have to disagree with that statement.  I have never seen someone
>burned on a flourecent tube or an electronic ballast, but I assume that they
>don't put fans on those MH enclosures for nothing!
>    Just my two bits.>>
>Don't confuse temperature with heat output.
>Except the energy that is utilized by photysynthesis or goes out the window
>as light, all the watts in are turned into heat.
>The question is, what is the effiency of MH vs FL, how much light out per
>watt in do you get?

   OK I goofed.  Of course a given amount of heat will feel hotter if its
produced in a smaller area.  Sorry about that.  But let me run this by
    If we assume that all of the wattage of electricity is converted to some
form of radiation by the light bulb, the bulb that puts out more light will
put out less heat and vice versa. This is neglecting ultraviolet and higher
wavelengths.  I don't know the effiencies of MH and flourecents offhand, but
its stuck in my mine that MH are less efficent.  If they are then they should
produce more heat.  If I'm wrong, then they should produce less heat.
    Anyone care to correct me this time ;)?

Pete Datcuk


From: Andrew Hamilton <andrewha at tafe_sa.edu.au>
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 1996 14:38:15 +1030
Subject: tubifex

I realise that this is probably not appropriate for this list but has
anybody had experience breeding black worms/tubifex? Please e-mail me
directly so as not to hold up the list.



From: PacNeil at aol_com
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 1996 02:40:22 -0500
Subject: Re: Fluorescent vs. Metal Halides

In a message dated Mon, 26 Feb 1996 , Larry West writes:

>4: 40W DAylight (6500K) FL T-12
>Initial Lumens: 2600
>Lumens per watt: 65

>3: 160W Daylight (6500K) VHO FL T-12 72" (the smallest Daylight VHO in the
>Initial Lumens: 11300
>Lumens per watt: 70.625

Compact fluorescents fall in between these two:
13W Daylight (5000K) 
Initial Lumens: 900
Lumens per watt: 69.231

Just thought I'd through in my $.02 worth.

PacNeil at aol_com[Neil Schneider]


End of Aquatic Plants Digest V1 #285

To unsubscribe to aquatic-plants, send the command:
    unsubscribe aquatic-plants
in the body of a message to "Majordomo at ActWin_com".  Archives are
available on the web at http://www.actwin.com/fish/aquatic-plants
or via FTP to ftp.actwin.com in /pub/aquaria/aquatic-plants.