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

Re: [APD] Aquatic-Plants Digest, Vol 28, Issue 8



I kinda remember how to get to your house... but would appreciate a refresher course LOL

aquatic-plants-request at actwin_com wrote: Send Aquatic-Plants mailing list submissions to
 aquatic-plants at actwin_com

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
 http://www.actwin.com/mailman/listinfo/aquatic-plants
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
 aquatic-plants-request at actwin_com

You can reach the person managing the list at
 aquatic-plants-owner at actwin_com

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Aquatic-Plants digest..."


Today's Topics:

   1. Re: 55w PC over a 30 XH (AZ Burns)
   2. Re: Ammonia and Nitrates (Liz Wilhite)
   3. Re: Ammonia and Nitrates (Jerry Baker)
   4. Re: 55w PC over a 30 XH (Liz Wilhite)
   5. Re: Aquatic-Plants Digest, Vol 28, Issue 7 (Thomas Barr)
   6. Re: Ammonia and Nitrates (J?rry Bak?r)
   7. Re: Aquatic-Plants Digest, Vol 28, Issue 7 (Keanu Reeves)
   8. Re: 55w PC over a 30 XH (S. Hieber)
   9. Re: Ammonia and Nitrates (S. Hieber)


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

Message: 1
Date: Sat, 03 Dec 2005 11:00:47 -0600
From: "AZ Burns" 
Subject: Re: [APD] 55w PC over a 30 XH
To: aquatic-plants at actwin_com

Oops!

Just read my second questions and it is a bit confusing. It should read...

Will I be better off getting a 20 or 25 gallon and sticking to NO T12 or T8 
bulbs?


>From: "AZ Burns" 
>Reply-To: aquatic plants digest 
>To: aquatic-plants at actwin_com
>Subject: [APD] 55w PC over a 30 XH
>Date: Sat, 03 Dec 2005 10:36:47 -0600
>
>Hello all,
>
>I want to set up a new no-CO2 low light setup using Tom Barrs method and I
>have a 24" stand that really needs a tank.  I was originally thinking of a
>20 or 25 gallon with some otocinclus, c. japonica, and I. werneri. Plants
>would be mostly crypts (sprialis and some shorter ones) and anubias and 
>some
>floating water sprite. But then I started thinking...
>
>I have a 55 watt PC retrofited to a 24" striplight from a high tech setup 
>of
>a few years ago  (aka my old algae factory) . What if I got a 30 extra high
>(24x12x24) from AGA or Perfecto. I kind of like the look of the tank,
>especially since I have a small and narrow room with a vaulted ceiling, so 
>a
>tall narrow tank would be fitting.
>
>I have the feeling that 1.8 watts/gallon of compact fluorscent will be too
>much for a low tech setup like this, but it also is a deep tank so maybe 
>the
>PC would be appropriate. I'd like to get an opinion here, please.
>
>Will this be just too much light? Will I be better off getting a 20 or 25
>watt and sticking to NO T12 or T8 bulbs?
>
>Thanks,
>AZ
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE!
>http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
>
>_______________________________________________
>Aquatic-Plants mailing list
>Aquatic-Plants at actwin_com
>http://www.actwin.com/mailman/listinfo/aquatic-plants

_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! 
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/



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

Message: 2
Date: Sat, 3 Dec 2005 09:05:16 -0800
From: Liz Wilhite 
Subject: Re: [APD] Ammonia and Nitrates
To: aquatic plants digest 

Plants do grow better when given sufficient fertilizer.

The question I asked months ago still remains:  why don't we see algae in
tanks with plants with excess levels of fertilizers.  If we set up a tank
and fertilize it with NO3, K, PO4, CO2, Fe and trace minerals, light it at
2.5 WPG for 12 hours a day, and don't put plants in we are probably going to
see results that look a lot like Bill's.  Algae should grow quite well.  The
plants seem to be key.

I know we've been told that allelopathy isn't at play but if the plants
themselves are not putting out chemicals that are suppressing algae, then
how can we account for the fact that the aquarium with plants doesn't grow
algae at the rate of the tank without plants with the same level of
nutritents?

Liz


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

Message: 3
Date: Sat, 03 Dec 2005 09:10:56 -0800
From: Jerry Baker 
Subject: Re: [APD] Ammonia and Nitrates
To: aquatic plants digest 

Liz Wilhite wrote:
> I know we've been told that allelopathy isn't at play but if the plants
> themselves are not putting out chemicals that are suppressing algae, then
> how can we account for the fact that the aquarium with plants doesn't grow
> algae at the rate of the tank without plants with the same level of
> nutritents?

I wonder if it's the O2 levels created by the plants? There has been a 
lot of speculation that algal cells are more susceptible to oxidation 
than other cells (the whole peroxide/algae thing).

-- 
Jerry Baker


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

Message: 4
Date: Sat, 3 Dec 2005 10:28:02 -0800
From: Liz Wilhite 
Subject: Re: [APD] 55w PC over a 30 XH
To: aquatic plants digest 

I have 26W CF over an 18H with Excel and could easily increase the light
quite a bit without problems.  I have 2.5 WPF over a 50G with Excel and
don't have major algae issues there, either.

The 18G did have algae issues before the use of Excel. YMMV.

Liz


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

Message: 5
Date: Sat, 3 Dec 2005 10:50:59 -0800 (PST)
From: Thomas Barr 
Subject: Re: [APD] Aquatic-Plants Digest, Vol 28, Issue 7
To: aquatic-plants at actwin_com

  
Scott said:

>I'm just not ready to tell folks that no matter how much
>NO3 you add, it won't prompt algae problems. Nor am I
>saying that you have or have not said that you can add as
>much as you want. 
  
  Well, I'm not telling anyone that _any_ level of NO3 is okay. But it's so high you kill fish and shrimp before you get algae.
  Both positions cannot be right.
  Either NO3 alone, (not with other combinations of nutrients/CO2 etc), cause algae or it does not.
  
  Isolate the NO3 dosing, not poor CO2 or poor plant biomass etc + high NO3 dosing.
  
  So if discuss specifically NO3, then we are only talking about NO3.
  We can easily rule that out by doing isolated experiements to figure out what is really causing the algae, like poor CO2.
  
  Some might not care.
  They just do their thing to avoid algae without wanting to really know why.
  
  But this approach tells you far more the real players in this game of algae and plants.
  
  Just like being able to isolate CO2 from the nutrients(make the nutrients non limiting).
  
  The same is true for Fe, PO4 and other nutrients.
  
  The results repeatable and experiement is rather simple.
  
  This way you can find the limits at the limitation end and the toxic maximum range.
  
  I'm not saying no matter hwo much, I have set a limit for killing Amano shrimps at around 100ppm for 3 day exposure. 
  
  If we have a working range for 2-3 days of 5-80ppm of NO3, that's a huge target to hit.
  
  I personally think plants do better at less than 40-50ppm, 20 seems might good IME.
  
  But high amounts have never produced algae. So we can say something about that.
  
  If excess NO3 causes algae, why am I unable to induce algae with high NO3?
  and if high NO3 do cause algae, under non limiting conditions, what is that level?
  
  Come the heck on, do you really think that the algae are "limited" at 20 ppm NO3?  2ppm of PO4? 1 ppm of Fe?
  What is the upper limit if the algae are not limited?
  Basically so much it impaires the plant and causes toxicity.
  That's a lot and we see this pattern for all the nutrients.
 Either fish die or the plant dies at high levels. But with exception to NH4, the rest of the nutrients do not appear to have higher levels that will induce algae. 
  
  Why is this not true for all the nutrients other than NH4(which is pretty toxic even at low levels)?
  
 I mean it is a simple thing, you add the nutrient dependent variable over a wide range till you get algae or add so much you get frustrated and realize it's way beyond the typical extreme case. Then you try the limiting ranges.
  
 From there you get a pretty good idea of the effective range for good plant growth. Algae inducement is relatively simple to see.
  
 Either is grows in response to the addition or not. But you must have control of the other variables to test this and see this.
  
 If not, and if you really believe the NO3 at higher levels causes algae, then you need to look __elsewhere for the problem__, not the NO3 or the excess PO4, excess Fe, most like a deficiency or lower than optimal CO2.
  
  Everyone get complacent, then they get CO2'ed and start thinking funny stuff about PO4/NO3/Fe etc.
  
  This has gone on way too long in the hobby.
 There might be multiple issues occurring, but we know how to solve that relatively easily from knowing the __individual components__ range's and ruling them out. 
  
 That is how we solved the PO4 issue with algae inducement. NO3 is no different except we have an upper range that kills shrimp.
  
  Regards, 
  Tom Barr 
  
  www.BarrReport.com
  
  
  
  
  
   
   
   
    
  
  
  
  
  


  
---------------------------------
 Yahoo! Personals
 Single? There's someone we'd like you to meet.
 Lots of someones, actually. Yahoo! Personals

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

Message: 6
Date: Sat, 03 Dec 2005 11:19:33 -0800
From: J?rry Bak?r 
Subject: Re: [APD] Ammonia and Nitrates
To: aquatic plants digest 

Jerry Baker wrote:
> I wonder if it's the O2 levels created by the plants? There has been a 
> lot of speculation that algal cells are more susceptible to oxidation 
> than other cells (the whole peroxide/algae thing).

Some light reading for those interested:

They discuss peroxide briefly
http://ag.utah.gov/animind/aq_barleystraw.pdf

This guy actually documented his efforts pictorially
http://www.malawicichlidhomepage.com/aquainfo/algae_peroxide.html

-- 
Jerry Baker


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

Message: 7
Date: Sat, 3 Dec 2005 14:48:12 -0500
From: "Keanu Reeves" 
Subject: Re: [APD] Aquatic-Plants Digest, Vol 28, Issue 7
To: "'aquatic plants digest'" 

Tom,

May I have your input in these hypothetical scenarios.  Assuming a
high light tank with adequate CO2 supplementation, which tank(s) will
algae occur?

TANK 1: High in nutrients and detectable NH4.
TANK 2: High in nutrients and undetectable NH4.

Once algae is in its active reproductive stage, which tank will algae
growth be the fastest?

TANK 1: High in nutrients.
TANK 2: Low in nutrients.

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

>We can easily rule [NO3] out by doing isolated experiements to figure
out what is really causing the algae, like poor CO2.

Assuming poor CO2 is also a cause for algae, does it cause algae
directly or does it do so by facilitating the accumulation of NH4?
Which of the following tank(s) will produce algae?

TANK 1: High light, high CO2, and detectable NH4.
TANK 2: High light, low CO2, and detectable NH4.
TANK 3: High light, low CO2, and undetectable NH4.

Derek
"The problem is choice."



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

Message: 8
Date: Sat, 3 Dec 2005 11:55:53 -0800 (PST)
From: "S. Hieber" 
Subject: Re: [APD] 55w PC over a 30 XH
To: aquatic plants digest 

I don't think it would be a problem on a 30H. I run a pair
of them on my 30H with added CO2. Without the CO2, a 55w PC
should work out okay.

If you should find that it is a bit much, which I doubt,
you can shorten the lights-on time an hour or two.

sh

--- AZ Burns  wrote:

> Hello all,
> 
> I want to set up a new no-CO2 low light setup using Tom
> Barrs method and I 
> have a 24" stand that really needs a tank.  I was
> originally thinking of a 
> 20 or 25 gallon with some otocinclus, c. japonica, and I.
> werneri. Plants 
> would be mostly crypts (sprialis and some shorter ones)
> and anubias and some 
> floating water sprite. But then I started thinking...
> 
> I have a 55 watt PC retrofited to a 24" striplight from a
> high tech setup of 
> a few years ago  (aka my old algae factory) . What if I
> got a 30 extra high 
> (24x12x24) from AGA or Perfecto. I kind of like the look
> of the tank, 
> especially since I have a small and narrow room with a
> vaulted ceiling, so a 
> tall narrow tank would be fitting.
> 
> I have the feeling that 1.8 watts/gallon of compact
> fluorscent will be too 
> much for a low tech setup like this, but it also is a
> deep tank so maybe the 
> PC would be appropriate. I'd like to get an opinion here,
> please.
> 
> Will this be just too much light? Will I be better off
> getting a 20 or 25 
> watt and sticking to NO T12 or T8 bulbs?
> 
> Thanks,
> AZ
> 
>
_________________________________________________________________
> Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download
> today - it's FREE! 
>
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Aquatic-Plants mailing list
> Aquatic-Plants at actwin_com
> http://www.actwin.com/mailman/listinfo/aquatic-plants
> 


* * * * * * * * * * *
All the other terrific entries in the 6th Annual AGA Aquascaping Contest are on display:

http://showcase.aquatic-gardeners.org


In service to the community, the AGA has opened forums:

http://forum.aquatic-gardeners.org/


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

Message: 9
Date: Sat, 3 Dec 2005 11:57:30 -0800 (PST)
From: "S. Hieber" 
Subject: Re: [APD] Ammonia and Nitrates
To: aquatic plants digest 

It has been proposed that it's the ammonia, which the
plants absorb quickly. So absence of plants. . .

sh

--- Liz Wilhite  wrote:

> Plants do grow better when given sufficient fertilizer.
> 
> The question I asked months ago still remains:  why don't
> we see algae in
> tanks with plants with excess levels of fertilizers.  If
> we set up a tank
> and fertilize it with NO3, K, PO4, CO2, Fe and trace
> minerals, light it at
> 2.5 WPG for 12 hours a day, and don't put plants in we
> are probably going to
> see results that look a lot like Bill's.  Algae should
> grow quite well.  The
> plants seem to be key.
> 
> I know we've been told that allelopathy isn't at play but
> if the plants
> themselves are not putting out chemicals that are
> suppressing algae, then
> how can we account for the fact that the aquarium with
> plants doesn't grow
> algae at the rate of the tank without plants with the
> same level of
> nutritents?
> 
> Liz
> _______________________________________________
> Aquatic-Plants mailing list
> Aquatic-Plants at actwin_com
> http://www.actwin.com/mailman/listinfo/aquatic-plants
> 


* * * * * * * * * * *
All the other terrific entries in the 6th Annual AGA Aquascaping Contest are on display:

http://showcase.aquatic-gardeners.org


In service to the community, the AGA has opened forums:

http://forum.aquatic-gardeners.org/


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

_______________________________________________
Aquatic-Plants mailing list
Aquatic-Plants at actwin_com
http://www.actwin.com/mailman/listinfo/aquatic-plants


End of Aquatic-Plants Digest, Vol 28, Issue 8
*********************************************



		
---------------------------------
 Yahoo! Personals
 Skip the bars and set-ups and start using Yahoo! Personals for free
_______________________________________________
Aquatic-Plants mailing list
Aquatic-Plants at actwin_com
http://www.actwin.com/mailman/listinfo/aquatic-plants