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

Re: Nutrients and Critters

> From: "Tom Wood" <tomwood2 at flash_net>
> Subject: Algae, Algae Eaters, Algae
> I guess I have to question the wisdom of adding more critters
> to a tank to
> combat an algae (read: nutrient) problem. The implied strategy
> of the
> Sears-Conlin PMDD paper is to increase everything EXCEPT
> phosphorous (and
> maybe nitrogen) in order to drive the tank into a P (and maybe
> N) limited
> condition. I seems to me that adding more fish/shrimp/snails
> can only
> increase P and N since they must eat, and therefore must add
> to the P and N
> equation.

But _how_ does it add to the equation? Does it add like
inorganic constituants? Or does in repackage things and slowly
dose it out?
Perhaps this poop is better than the algae? Or better than
adding KNO3 etc? As the algae attempts to grow, the shrimps etc
attack it and reprocess it. This gets put into a pool of
nutrients which also has plants gobbling up these same nutrients
from the pool. 
After a few rounds of this(some time), the algae doesn't stand
much chance and the plants are not being eaten so the algae
can't do much even if it has access to more nutrients. It's
being selected against by a herbivore wereas the plants are not.
It just turns into more plant food rather than algae food. You
can crash/mess this up by adding too many critters or not
enough. Like most things, balance is the key.
The poop may have far more NH3/NH4+ and less NO3 than KNO3 so 
it may appear to have low NO3 but not have a N limited tank.
Some Anubias stems to chew on...

Tom Barr
> Tom

Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.