Algae Going Crazy On Me

Arabballin,

If I were you I would look for a mix of plant specific and daylight tubes from any of the mainstream manufacturers eg. Arcadia and Interpet.

Your photoperiod is too long for my liking. I would cut it down to a max of ten hours straight through. This more or less in line with what they experience naturally.

To combat the algae, you could try removing as much as you can by hand and carry out regular 50% water changes. What you need is stability in the tank for your plants to start benefitting.

Do you fertilise them in any way? Are they there for effect or would you like them to thrive?

Dave.
 
I don't necessarily agree with that. Removing PO4 is not necessary. It does not on its own cause algae. I've run tanks with PO4 well over 5ppm but no algae.

Sam

with those buffers phosphates can reach well over 35-40 ppm i had a tank that got daily water changes of 15% and every water parameter was very good.. except PO4 was off the chart... diluted the sample.. still over the chart... so at 35-40 ppm defenately can cause problems by itself... i say this because i started not using the product and tested everything that goes into the tank for phosphates and lowerd the concentration to 2.0 ppm and ALL of the visible algae dissapeared..... these phosphate based buffers are even more vicious when comined with multiple tube PC lighting

also go get yourself a timer and try 6 hours on 2 hours off and 6 hours on again or 5 2 5 you get the idea... the 2 hour off period will not adversely affect the plants or fish
this is not a quick fix but it will help keep your tank's algae under control... this uses the fact that algae needs long periods of light to thrive

Now now..............why might these algae issues become more problematic when adding more lighting?

The issue with not using PO4 based acidifiers, they are not technically buffers........., is that it lowers pH without adding CO2...............if you use CO2, you think you have a lot more CO2 than you really do..............as most use the KH/pH chart.

It has nothing to do with algae liking or somehow being "limited" by a lower level, say 5ppm of pure inorganic phase PO4.............clearly that's outright silly to suggest that 30ppm of PO4 is different than 5ppm as far as excess, they are both very high and far from non limiting to every species and spore of algae as well as plant.

It must be some other factor than limiting PO4...............
Water changes are a good idea (if the PO4 acidifiers are used) to remove them.

But it's not to limit PO4 for the algae............
We add plenty all the time without any algae issues and rapid healthy plant growth, year after year, decade after decade.

It's(WC) to bring the KH back in line to get a better CO2 level.
If you use a drop Checker KH reference, then you can still use PO4 acidifiers and measure the CO2 as well, but in general, folks using pH down chemicals tend to believe they have a lot more CO2 than is really there.

So they get algae not due to high PO4, rather, from having low CO2.
If we take this and look at how problems get solved in the plant hobby, CO2 accounts for about 95% of all algae related issues.

This is classic example of how correlation does NOT imply causation.
The effect was on CO2, not excess PO4.

Are you still so sure of yourself about this?
I hope not.........

It's no fact that algae need long light periods to thrive, I want you to show me any evidence that statement is in anyway true relative to plants.

This too can also be explained easily using CO2 levels.
If you do not add enough during the entire light period,, the CO2 drops, then if you turnoff the lights for 1-3 hours, the CO2 builds back up again(plants do not use CO2 at night) and then the lights come on. Since you cannot add enough CO2, you thottle the lights on/off to make up for it.

You could also simply turn the lights down some, say use 2w/gal instead of 4w/gal.
This has a much better effect than any siesta.

You even suggest that higher PC lighting incurred the wrath of algae more, what does adding more light do to a CO2 ppm level in as well planted tank?

It increases uptake of CO2 dramatically.
If you added enough CO2, then using high light is not an issue.

If you did not effectively rule that out, then you do not know.

Folks add too much light and not enough CO2...........these are very common themes on boards with respect to algae issues. Have been for at least 10 years.

Folks specifically told folks not to use other buffers/acidifiers, myself included going back at least 10 years..............to0 lower pH to get more CO2.

If you want more CO2, just add more well.....CO2.
Folks monkey with the pH/KH chart and think they can twist some CO2 out of pH and KH somehows............

But we add CO2 to fertilize the plants...............not to control pH.
Plants want CO2, not some pH.........

Go back and read some old Krib post on this topic.
This stuff has long been discussed..........

Regards,
Tom Barr
 
Ok well im not worried about C02 or anything like that, all i know is im getting rid of my algae by:
Scrubbing all i can off
Giving less light time
buying more plants

Also, Dave Spencer i want my plants to thrive for the affect and just to make my tank a better place for my fish.

Today i took out an ornament and a piece of bogwood and boiled them as they had a lot of algae on them. I scrubbed the glass all i could too get any algae off. I also cut off any leaves that were really bad with algae. I look at my tank and it looks so hectic, its stressing me out but i figure when this is all done my tank will have stability and look more attractive. More plants will be coming by tommorow i think.
 
Tom, again, a really interesting post as it helps me understand why when I changed from a 5-2-5 schedule to 10hrs straight I noticed more algae

So the siesta only gives an opportunity for CO2 levels to rise in the reverse photo period, the by-product being PH and CO2 fluctuations giving algae a potential foothold over time. Do you know of a ratio between lighting period per hour and CO2 consumption, I presume this is not a linear scale...?

Sorry to hijack but Tom's post is getting at something I noticed with my aquarium
 
Tom, again, a really interesting post as it helps me understand why when I changed from a 5-2-5 schedule to 10hrs straight I noticed more algae

So the siesta only gives an opportunity for CO2 levels to rise in the reverse photo period, the by-product being PH and CO2 fluctuations giving algae a potential foothold over time. Do you know of a ratio between lighting period per hour and CO2 consumption, I presume this is not a linear scale...?

Sorry to hijack but Tom's post is getting at something I noticed with my aquarium

Well, CO2 demand is driven by light and the species of plants.
More light= more CO2 demand.
So that's one variable and another is the plant biomass/species type.

"It depends" is the short answer in other words.


Regards,
Tom Barr
 

Most reactions

Back
Top