# Algae, CO2, and Lighting For Planted Tanks



## jones57742 (Sep 8, 2007)

Folks:

I am kinda ducking and running for cover as I prepare this post as it is contrary to virtually all posts by others concerning the referenced title.

My main tank is a 110G, 30" deep bowfront.

History:

I purchased this tank in what was, I hope, my days of even greater ignorance than now and the factory lighting was a fixture with 4 T5 bulbs.
For several reasons I trash canned this fixture after a brief period and purchased a PC with 2 65W bulbs, a 10000K bulb and a 7100K bulb, but no joy for plant health or growth.
I then tried two of the vaunted grow light bulbs, 6700K, but no joy and I did not enjoy the tank aesthetics with these bulbs.

I purchased a 2nd PC with 2 65W bulbs.
Subsequent to significant experimentation during the following months I determined, albeit very qualitatively, that the optimum configuration for plant health and growth was two 10000K bulbs and two 7100K bulbs.

Subsequent to the purchase of several very distinctive silver dollar fry when they attained approximately half dollar size my plants' leaves began going away.
By the time I figured out what was going on and rehomed the silver dollars very few of the plants' leaves were evident.

No problem: Right! The 2 PC's would bring them back to their full glory.
Wrong! After a couple of months the recovery nowhere near that which I had anticipated, more experimenting, and still no joy.

I got PO'ed, purchased a HQI-MH 300W fixture with two 150W 14000K bulbs and added the fixture to the existing PC lighting.

I used the algae density on the tank walls in order to determine the appropriate lighting duration (approximately 12 hours/day), the appropriate feeding protocol and the appropriate floating plant* density (covers approximately 25% of the surface of the tank).

I do not have CO2 and do not now have algae on the walls of the tank although only minor algae patches can be observed on the rocks and wood.
Also fish are happy and the plants are healthy and growing.

What am I missing here with the dire predictions of algae with this intensity of lighting without CO2?

TR

*I had always wanted floating plants in my community tank for show guppies and their fry.


----------



## TheOldSalt (Jan 28, 2005)

FLoating plants have direct access to atmospheric concentrations of O2 & CO2, and of course get better light, and as such they work in "overdrive" compared to submerged plants. A small portion of floaters can easily match the performance of a large quantity of submerged plants, and going on no other data whatsoever, I can guess that this is why you don't have an algae problem.


----------



## Manwithnofish (Jan 28, 2008)

*Hum?*

If I understand what you are saying, you're dumbfounded that everything that you have heard (on forums) or read, says that you should be producing a lot of Algae and your plants should be in serious decline...but that is not what you are observing? If that is correct, how long have you been running with the current configuration (because ain't this just interesting)?


----------



## jones57742 (Sep 8, 2007)

TheOldSalt said:


> FLoating plants have direct access to atmospheric concentrations of O2 & CO2, and of course get better light, and as such they work in "overdrive" compared to submerged plants. A small portion of floaters can easily match the performance of a large quantity of submerged plants, and *going on no other data whatsoever*, I can guess that this is why you don't have an algae problem.


TOS: 

What other data would help (and please note that I am not a plant guru but just got PO'ed with the growth rate of my plants)?

I believe your floating plant concept (which I had not thought of) is very valid but just to check it out I had some folks over this morning and removed the floating plants such that they cover approximately 10% of the water surface. (I did not want to remove more due to my adult guppies and their fry.)




Manwithnofish said:


> If I understand what you are saying, you're dumbfounded that everything that you have heard (on forums) or read, says that you should be producing a lot of Algae and your plants should be in serious decline...but that is not what you are observing? If that is correct, how long have you been running with the current configuration *(because ain't this just interesting)*?


mtnf:

*Yes it is.* I finally got smooth wore out with the assertive knee jerk reactions (although they may still be correct) and generated this thread.

I placed the order on 11/29/2007 and I received the fixture and installed it several days later (I obviously do not now remember if it was 3 or 7 days later).

TR


----------



## TheOldSalt (Jan 28, 2005)

I suppose that was an awkward thing for me to say, but what I meant was that it's such an obvious answer to your puzzle that I didn't even bother looking at anything else. Now that you've removed them you might start to see a change, _assuming_ that the alleleopathic effect* of your plants in total, rooted & floating, isn't already eliminating your algae. Less floaters means more light for your rooteds, so they'll start to be more effective at algae removal by competition as well.

*- plants don't just starve algae, they poison them. ( and each other! )

As for other data, I guess substrate is the only useful thing you haven't already mentioned, but I don't really think it's going to make much difference at this point.
Are you _trying_ to grow algae now just to see if you can?


----------



## trashion (Aug 24, 2007)

Another thing, if the tank you're talking about is the one I think I've seen you post, the tank is VERY tall...I've heard it's harder for light to penetrate deeper tanks. But see what I know.


----------



## jones57742 (Sep 8, 2007)

TOS: thanks very much for the response.



TheOldSalt said:


> Now that you've removed them you might start to see a change, ...


I will find out. Please note that I only went from 25% density to 10% density.



TheOldSalt said:


> _assuming_ that the alleleopathic effect* of your plants in total, rooted & floating, isn't already eliminating your algae. Less floaters means more light for your rooteds, so they'll start to be more effective at algae removal by competition as well.
> *- plants don't just starve algae, they poison them. ( and each other! )


I remember some of this from previous research although I did not believe that the effect was generic but subject to specific plant and algae species.
Thanks for the info as I will attempt to observe this effect.



TheOldSalt said:


> As for other data, I guess substrate is the only useful thing you haven't already mentioned, but I don't really think it's going to make much difference at this point.


In order for you to help me with my thinking my substrate was placed by a LFS (I know! I know! but that was when my ignorance was greater than it is now).

The bottom course is approximately 3/4" to 1" of uniformly graded aggregate, the middle course is approximately 2" of laterite, and the top course is approximately 1" to 1-1/2" of uniformly graded aggregate.



TheOldSalt said:


> Are you _trying_ to grow algae now just to see if you can?


:chair: :chair: :chair: My head hurts now.

I am not attempting to grow algae!!! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: 

I used the algae density on the walls of the tank in order to determine the appropriate feed, lighting duration and fertilization protocols.




jones57742 said:


> I do not have CO2 and do not now have algae on the walls of the tank although only minor algae patches can be observed on the rocks and wood.
> Also fish are happy and the plants are healthy and growing.
> 
> What am I missing here with the dire predictions of algae with this intensity of lighting without CO2?


TOS: I am not meaning to be confrontational but inquisitive as to why the other gurus have not responded to the question set forth above.




trashion said:


> Another thing, if the tank you're talking about is the one I think I've seen you post, the tank is VERY tall...I've heard it's harder for light to penetrate deeper tanks. But see what I know.


ts: it is 30" and to some extent I agree but mostly I disagree.

Have you seen films/photographs of the ocean when the bottom appeared be 2' below the water surface when the bottom depth was 20' but obviously at a depth of several hundred feet darkness is evident.

TR


----------



## TheOldSalt (Jan 28, 2005)

Well, it's a big board, and when we see something being handled, we tend to keep moving so as to cover the most ground we can. On the other hand, maybe they just didn't notice? Maybe they're chomping at the bit to correct something dumb I said but don't want to embarass me? 
Anyway, between the depth of your tank and the floating plants, it's no wonder your tank is not having algae problems. As I look around, I notice that I don't have a speck of algae in any of my tanks except _one_. THAT tank has no plants in it. The others all have floaters and two of them have ONLY floaters. The power of floaters is great indeed. Under those bright lights of yours, they'll grow like crazy.


----------



## jones57742 (Sep 8, 2007)

Thanks TOS:

Other folks seem to answer questions in other threads with the knee jerk reactions of including but not limited to: Too much lighting and/or need CO2.

I was hoping that they would enter the fray as the conditions set forth in my post is 180D out of phase with respect to these knee jerk responses.

I am not saying the above adversely. If anyone has additional input I would appreciate it.

If I am still here next year I anticipate fabricating a very, very large tank and setting it up at the office. My many experiments (and adventures in fish keeping associated therewith) have been in anticipation of the minimization of expenditure associated with this tank and aquarium as well as the establishment of a virtually manual maintenance free ecosystem.

TR


----------



## jones57742 (Sep 8, 2007)

Folks:

2nd installment to follow after the preamble responding to TOS.



TheOldSalt said:


> Well, it's a big board, and when we see something being handled, we tend to keep moving so as to cover the most ground we can.


TOS:

I understand but was hoping to get input from the knee jerk reaction folks. 



TheOldSalt said:


> Under those bright lights of yours, they'll grow like crazy.


NS: Daily harvesting is needed in order to keep the surface density at 10% in order check out the thoughts which you expressed in a previous post.


*2nd installment:*

I believe that everyone who wishes to post in this thread to date has done so and now for the 2nd installment (I did not post this in the inauguration of this thread as I wanted to get everyones input on the conditions which I set forth).

*Fresh Water Refugium*

Information Concerning Filtration
The wet/dry filtration process through the sump is coarse mechanical media, fine mechanical media, bioballs and parallel ceramic toroids and ceramic cylinders in the first chamber. 
At the underflow from the first chamber to the second chamber is sintered glass.
In addition I have 6" of filter floss in the hidden weir overflow sump

When I purchased the HQI-MH for the tank I also purchased 75W of HQI-MH in order to establish a FW refugium in the 2nd chamber of my sump.
I added floating plants and non rooted sinking plants.
I believed that any algae would generate in the sump instead of the tank.
When the algae on the tank walls went away the algae on the walls of the 2nd chamber of the sump also went away.
I do not understand this as I induce ferts to the aquarium via the 2nd chamber of the sump and the lighting is greater for the chamber than the tank.
Also please note that I have aeration with air diffusion disks in the first and second chambers of the sump.
Obviously I have not observed a concentration of nitrates greater than 5 since the ecosystem attained a uniform, steady state condition.

Does anyone have any ideas or suggestions here for improvements?

TR


----------



## Guest (Mar 6, 2008)

Jones, I haven't responded to this thread because I cannot tell you why you don't have algae. Something in your setup, whether it be alot of stem plants or the height of the tank is somehow keeping the algae away. You obviously have done something right, whether you know it or not, because you don't have algae. Or maybe it hasn't broken out yet or something and you'll have a huge outbreak in the future. I have no idea really. From the logistics of it, you should have some algae going on with all that light.

I honestly don't know why you don't have algae, but if it was me, I wouldn't worry about it. I'd be happy that I was doing something right!


----------



## jones57742 (Sep 8, 2007)

JOM:

Please excuse me as I must have overlooked your response in my CP listing.

I appreciate your post!

I hope what is evident based on my as well as other's posts is that commonly accepted knee jerk reactions are not necessarily valid.

During the partial overhaul of my plant/fish keeping concepts based on experimentation I have four observations for which I am generating another thread as these concepts are not directly applicable to this thread.

TR


----------



## CaysE (May 21, 2006)

I believe some clues are mentioned in your other thread. You said you planted some corkscrew val that all melted, except for a few shoots near an air stone. That doesn't make sense to me.

Also, you mentioned you have a large filtration setup. With a large enough bacteria colony, that could be throwing off the balance as well.


----------



## jones57742 (Sep 8, 2007)

CaysE said:


> I believe some clues are mentioned in your other thread. You said you planted some corkscrew val that all melted, except for a few shoots near an air stone. That doesn't make sense to me.


Does not to me either! Do you have any ideas?



CaysE said:


> Also, you mentioned you have a large filtration setup. With a large enough bacteria colony, that could be throwing off the balance as well.


This one (your statement) is beyond me. Please explain or eximplify.

TR


----------

