Since the conversation appears to have died down and I don't seem to be interrupting anything ongoing:
Re the brown algae: I know nothing myself, of course, but, personally, I've only ever had it from low (a cruddy 'plant light') light, and it's cleared up promptly, never to return, with a better light, so that certainly is one factor - and apparently it often stems from a lack of photosynthesis which creates the ammonia problem which enables the brown algae problem in turn.
So better lights alone may fix it - along with the ammonia problem - in some cases, as in mine.
Algae's actually pretty interesting - when it's not in your tanks.
http
/www.freshwateraquariumplants.com/aquariumalgae.html
... Diatoms (substrate or gravel algae)
Diatoms grow in a thin brown layer on rocks, driftwood and plants. The culprit is lack of adequate lighting, and also lack of adequate oxygen and again, excess nitrogen. Cure? Up your lighting so that photosynthesis begins again and oxygen is produced and nitrogen products are consumed. ...
... Green Thread Algae
Unfortunately, this algae actually occurs only when all conditions are RIGHT with an aquarium, namely clean, well fertilized water! So their presence is a good sign? Cure? Remove by hand being careful not to pull up the plants with them in the process. Florida Flag Fish love this algae and will keep your aquarium clear of it. (Florida Flag Fish get to be good size and are territorial and semi aggressive so do your research on them first before adding to a community tank) ...
http/faq.thekrib.com/algae.html
... Brown algae
Forms in soft brown clumpy patches. In the freshwater aquarium, these are usually diatoms. Usually indicates a lack of light or an excess of silicates. Increased light levels will usually make it disappear. Easily removed by wiping the glass or siphon vacuuming the affected area. ...
http/freshaquarium.about.com/cs/maintena.../algaebrown.htm
... Brown algae begins as brown patches on the gravel and/or glass, then rapidly coats most surfaces of the aquarium with a thin, dark brown coating that is easily removed. Unlike blue-green/slime algae, it does not come off in large slimy sheets.
Cause:
Excess silicates & nitrates
Inadequate light
Low oxygen levels
Brown algae is a common occurrence in a newly set up aquarium. It is generally caused by too little light, an excess of silicates, an abundance of nutrients, and too little oxygen. Silicates can build up through tap water that is high in silicic acid, and silicates that leech from some types of substrates. ...
... Prevention:
Use of RO water
Regular water changes
Regular aquarium cleaning
Good lighting
As with any algae, keeping the tank clean and performing regular water changes is one of the best preventative measures. Unfortunately it is still possible to get algae in spite of regular maintenance, especially in a newly established aquarium. Prompt attention to sudden algae growth will prevent more serious problems. ...
My comment - only one more recent problem involving waterchanges involves:
http/www.aquariumpros.com/articles/algae.shtml
... Our Wonderful Tap water (or Things You Don’t Want to Know)
Almost all municipal water treatment facilities treat our tap water to kill algae, bacteria and protozoa before it is filtered and delivered to our faucets. Not all of the chemicals that are used get filtered out. On any given day, our tap water may contain fluoride, iodine, chlorine, chloramine, and traces of: potassium permanganate, magnesium sulfate, nickel sulfate, copper sulfate, various heavy metal-nitrate complexes, as well as pollutants such as lead, PCB, mercury, and silver nitrate. Yummy! More of these chemicals are used during the fall and spring when temperature changes cause a phenomenon called "Biannual Turnover". Temperature fluctuations cause the water at the bottom of lakes to rise, carrying silt and anaerobic material up into the water collected for our use. All of the chemicals used in tap water can be toxic to fish.
Although a good portion of our municipal plumbing systems have been modernized, nearly all of them still have old lead pipes in-line which can create deadly high-lead levels in our drinking water. The cost of replacing these pipes is astronomical, so another solution was found. Several years ago, water treatment plants started introducing a phosphorus compound into our tap water which binds to the lead in the pipes and coats them so that lead does not get into our water. Unfortunately, this has had the bad side-effect of creating rather high levels of phosphates in tap water. We have tested levels of over 0.50 parts per million in our tap water. Our test kits only measure up to 0.10 ppm, and we have had to dilute our samples by as much as ten times to achieve accurate readings! This high level of phosphates in the tap water has been a major cause of rapid algae growth in aquaria for the last few years. We lower these levels considerably by using phosphate-removal filter media in your external filter. However, every time you change the water, you actually add more phosphates to the aquarium. If the city uses more phosphorus from time to time, the algae can grow back almost immediately after your aquarium is cleaned. ...
Darned if you do, darned if you don't...
Hi, electric yellow,
while I expect you managed to sort out what I meant in the previous comment and would certainly have researched any suggestions that you'd seriously considered, I have been up all night and do have health issues which affect my memory and, evidently, ability to express myself, as one commenter has indicated, so, in case you're interested, I'll attempt to elucidate the points listed by that commenter more clearly, and if not, oh, well.
Regarding the peroxide treatment for algae - it's a possibility I'm mentioning, not recommending.
At high levels it can damage/kill live plants (which you currently don't have) but it could help reduce current levels of hair algae if the fish were removed to a Q tank and treatment done prior to the addition of any live plants you might consider adding, as existing hair algae will almost certainly grow on these as well, besides having a head start over the plants.
As hydrogen peroxide in water rapidly breaks down into oxygen and water, toxins are not introduced as there would be with a chemical algaecide.
It depends on what you want to do.
As stated, I don't think I'd like to risk it with fish in, but people have used it.
I've quoted sections below to make it easy to find/read the pertinent areas if desired, or they can, of course, simply be skipped over.
But since you do have a plantless tank and this would be a one-shot effort, for your perusal:
http/www.aquarticles.com/articles/plants...n_Peroxide.html
Eliminating Algae with Hydrogen Peroxide
... More recently I neglected one of my planted fry tanks, due to no water changes for months, no fertilizers and too much lighting this tank became very unhealthy plant wise and full of thread algae. My initial thought was to tear it down and start again, but first I wanted to see what effect a stronger solution of H2O2 than I had tried before would do. I therefore removed some of the thread algae with a tooth brush and left what was attached to the plants. Here is the tank as it looked prior to adding H2O2:
I left all inhabitants in the tank and did not turn the filter off this time. Inhabitants are snails, guppies, platties, a coridoras and many fry. Plants were in horrible shape to start with but include Hygrophilla Polisperma, Anubias, Java Ferns, Watersprite, Hornwart, Duckweed, Frogbit and Dwarf Sagg. I added 20ml of H2O2 (2ml per gallon) and waited around 30 minutes before doing a water change. I didn't notice much pearling at all this time, probably because the oxygen levels in this tank were not as high as the other tank to start with. I didn't notice any strange reactions from the fish or snails during treatment. I performed a 50% water change and left it at that.
The following day the algae looked a little softer and waving around a lot easier in the current generated from the filter, wasn't sure at this stage if this was successful or not. Another couple days passed and finally the thread algae just melted away, as did my Hornwart! ...
You can see the bare stem of Hornwart in the picture above, luckily it did start to grow back new shoots within a week. You can also see a couple of the last threads of algae waving and suffering in the current there. The other plants were not effected in any way. Some of the thicker patches of thread algae on the dwarf sagg were not effected as much as the ones present in the stronger current, but none the less, were certainly struggling. A second treatment would certainly be the final blow for them. In the weeks that followed I tested the water for ammonia and nitrite and was unable to detect any suggesting that the bacteria in the filter was not effected to a great extent. I don't feel safe saying that it wasn't effected at all because this is a well established tank which has otherwise been running healthy for over a year so there is a chance that the impact in a newer tank may be worse.
Conclusion
H2O2 is a great help in killing unwanted algae. It's not something you would want to use on a regular basis as I'm sure the plants will suffer but as a method of cleaning up a tank it allows you to do it without all the work involved in using bleach or side effects of most copper based algaecides and similar products. Plus it's dirt-cheap. Since, I have used H2O2 to clean out my hoses and just about any equipment that needs cleaning. Out of the tank, pure H2O2 is very effective. If you are considering using it to clean your fake plants, make sure you test it on a small section first as it may discolor.
Warning
I am aware of one incident where fish were lost in a cichlid tank using the above concentrations. It would seem that H2O2 is more dangerous at higher PH levels. Please always start off with a smaller dose before attempting any larger ones. Smaller, more frequent doses in my opinion are to be preferred over single larger doses. For spot treatments as indicated above there is no reason to try to reach a certain concentration in the tank itself, you are only increasing the risks by doing so.
My comment: the following is an older example, where hydrogen peroxide was used successfully on cyanobacteria, as well as hair algae, so I thought I'd include it as a trigger to further investigation for anyone interested.
http/www.thekrib.com/Plants/Algae/hydrogen-peroxide.html
... Augie's report is a very interesting development in the continuous battle with algae! I hope that H2O2 might be that silver bullet everybody has been looking for. Eventually the mechanism of its action will be found -- a plant physiologist, or an algologist, would be an invaluable resource!
Some thoughts based on my slight acquaintance with H2O2 action on animal tissues: All animal cells produce one or another form of *catalase* for protection against effects of free radicals. In practice, dilute H2O2 is rapidly decomposed by catalase into oxygen and water, before it can do damage to the cell. That is the reason H2O2 will bubble when applied to a cut.
Most aerobic and facultative bacterial cells also produce catalases and thus can neutralize *low* concentrations of H2O2. At higher concentrations the decomposition is too slow and the bacteria are killed.
I know nothing in that respect about plant cells, particularly *algal* cells. If I were to speculate, I would assume, that algae do not have an efficient catalase or, perhaps, do not produce a catalase at all, because in an aquatic environment they might have little need for it.
This would explain the dramatic effect of rather low concentration of H2O2 -- 2 oz of 3% H2O2 in 10 gal. = 0.005% H2O2.
The question is, do algae produce a catalase? If they do, why is it *not* protecting them?
Best, George S ...
... On Mon, 21 Sep 1998, George Slusarczuk wrote:
> The question is, do algae produce a catalase? If they do, why is it *not* protecting them?
Algae and plants both produce low levels of peroxide and superoxide as a aside to normal photosynthesis, and they have the enzymes necessary to protect themselves from its effects. The enzymes are internal. I don't believe that they express the enzymes externally and so don't use them to protect the outer cell membrane. In fact, I wonder if the enzyme may be protective only within the chloroplasts where the peroxide and superoxide are produced..
Roger Miller
... >This would explain the dramatic effect of rather low concentration of H2O2 -- 2 oz of 3% H2O2 in 10 gal. = 0.005% H2O2.
Because the syringe is used for spot treatment.... the localized concentration is a lot closer to 3%...at least for the first few seconds.
This also restricts the damaging effects to a portion of the tank. By the time the H2O2 disperses to the full aquarium, it may no longer be "H2O2."
Perhaps only the localized populations of organism X would be killed ... because the tank should be full of them, their relatives would survive.
Maybe a microbiologist (with the aid of a microscope) can help determine if the diluted concentration of H2O2 after reaction is still high enough to hurt the needed population of specific desireable organisms.
Neil
... - Hydrogen peroxide is an effective treatment for cynobacteria with little affect on plants.
> - - As for the amount used, 4 oz per 35 gallon (minus substrate) spot treatment is already effective. That's roughly 2 oz per 15 gallon.
> - - There doesn't seem to be an effective and safe dosage level for snails and shrimps, and possiblely for fish.
My "Introduction to Fish Health Management" (US Fish & Wildlife Service, 2nd ed., 1995) recommends the use of hydrogen peroxide "at 250-500 ppm (100% active ingredient) for 15 minutes as an effective fungicide for incubating eggs and 250-500 ppm (30-60 minutes) for treating fish with external parasites" (page 108).
I interpret this as meaning one probably shouldn't expose fish to more than 250 ppm for time periods over one hour. Note that H2O2 is typically sold in pharmacies as (I think) a 2% solution or so. Assuming the density of a 2% solution of H2O2 is 1 g/ml, then one ml would contain 20 mg of H2O2, or 20,000 ppm. Using 4 oz per 35 gallons would result in about 140 ppm H2O2, which might be pushing the "upper end" for long-term exposure. I certainly wouldn't go any higher.
Regards, Mark
( My comment: if I were to use it, I'd pull any fish out into a q tank for the duration - but since the hydrogen peroxide rapidly breaks down into oxygen and water, it at least wouldn't leave destructive chemicals as would a commercial algaecide.
A sensible warning is given on the thread
... I posted guidelines for dosing, and the consequences of over dosing three days ago (check the archives).
You weren't very specific, so I'm going to make some assumptions.
1) Hope this was standard 3%, drug store stuff.
2) If this was a small (16 oz.), bottle, you dumped in approximately 8 oz. If it was the large, 32 oz. bottle, forget it, everything in your tank is dead.
3) If the tank was fishless, the maximum you'd want to use is 6 oz. (1 oz/5 gallons). Even with that, you'll kill snails, and set the plants back quite a bit.
4) If the tank contained fish, but no Otto's, you can use 2.5 oz. (1 oz/12 gallons). If it contained Otto's, 1.5 oz (1 oz/20 gallons).
People, please don't arbitrarily dump this stuff in your tank. Hydrogen peroxide is a very strong oxidizer, it can, and will, kill everything in your tank if not used properly. Read! Read! Read! Check the archives.
Check the Krib. If all else fails, post a question before, not after the fact.
Augie Eppler Green Cove Springs, Fl
( My comment: however, Tom Barr follows this with a critical comment on observational science, finishing with the point that balance is the key.
So, for what it's worth, there it is.)
Sometimes increased water changes and reduced light will help an algae problem, which is why I made the point about possibly only using lights when strictly necessary - it was obviously unclear, according to comments made, that this was not suggested as a permanent state of affairs, especially if you were considering live plants.
A complete 3-day blackout would be more typical and work better, but you already had that on your 'potential' list - I was basically making top-of-my-head suggestions as to alternatives I didn't think you'd yet considered.
As stated by the aforementioned commenter, test kits are not that that accurate - in fact the less expensive ones, or those a little older, have sometimes been found to be wildly inaccurate.
This could mean that ammonia and/or nitrite readings could be present and not registering, as well as nitrates.
But I'm sure you made that connection.
And as you know, silk is porous: hair algae 'roots into' anything porous, even if not obviously so: algae can survive even prolonged dry periods and promptly sprout again as soon as conditions are suitable, as occurred within a few hours of the return of one silk plant to your tank.
So, the strongest probability seems to be that the silk plants have been infected by the algae, which would hardly be hardly surprising..
Apart from the previously mentioned phosphorus addition to tap water, I'm sure you realize that 'nutrient' run-off, (most noticeably in spring in countries/areas where snow/freezing occurs in winter and typically melts around springtime, and/or when spring rains begin) from chemical/factory farmland affects many if not most bodies of water, and - together with numerous artificial farm and other chemicals - enter drinking reservoirs, i.e. tap water.
Not only the accumulated artificial chemicals but the fertilizers can have an effect on life - and resultant algal blooms are a major problem in many tap water supplies.
Since this is what typically enters fish tanks in these areas, an increase in algae could reasonably be expected in these as well.
As you currently have no plants in your tank, algae has a free hand and is evidently growing more of them, lol.
I don't know if any of this is useful, but for what it's worth, that's what I could think of that I offered as ideas.
Re the latter issue - in case you're not aware and are interested in what you're likely drinking and your fish are soaking in:
http/www.sierraclub.org/cleanwater/exces...-byproducts.pdf
Excess Nutrients in Sources of Drinking Water …
More Cancer-Causing Disinfection By-products in Our Tap Water
The quality of the lakes and streams which supply our drinking water has a lot to do with the safety of the water that comes from our drinking water taps. Excessive nutrients such as nitrogen and phosphorus contribute high levels of organic matter in our raw water supplies. When disinfectants, such as chlorine, are added to drinking water supplies to kill pathogens, they combine with organic matter to form disinfection by-products.
Trihalomethanes and other disinfection by-products, found in the tap water of more than half of all Americans, have been linked to cancer and birth defects.
Excess nutrients frequently rank as one of the top causes of water pollution in the United States. In 1996, the Environmental Protection Agency reported to Congress that nutrients were the main cause of pollution of 40 percent of rivers, 51 percent of lakes, and 57 percent of estuaries that had been surveyed and found to be impaired. Nutrient pollution comes from many sources, including runoff of fertilizer from farms and lawns, livestock waste and inadequately treated sewage.
The greater the level of nutrients in the lake or stream, the more food exists for algae and other vegetation to grow. According to technical guidance that the U.S. EPA issued to states, “The density of algae and the level of eutrophication in the raw water supply has been correlated with the production of THMs [trihalomethanes].” (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Nutrient Criteria, Technical Guidance Manual, Rivers and Streams, EPA -822-B-00-002 (July 2000)
http/www.epa.gov/waterscience/criteria/n.../chapter_1.pdf) In other words, the more algae in the raw water supply, the greater the formation of trihalomethanes.
Contamination of tap water with trihalomethanes and other disinfection by-products is a nationwide problem. According to the Environmental Working Group’s National Tap Water Quality Database, more than 116 million Americans in 6,975 communities were exposed to trihalomethanes at levels that exceeded health-based limits. Trihalomethanes and other disinfection by products are among the most common drinking water contaminants, according to this database. To find out about disinfection by-products and other contaminants in your community’s drinking water, search the Environmental Working Group's Tap Water Quality database at
http/www.ewg.org/sites/tapwater/findings.php
Excess Nutrients Increase Community Drinking Water Treatment Costs
The State of Oklahoma’s Water Resources Board has linked excess nutrients in raw water supplies to increased disinfection by-products and increased drinking water treatment costs. According to the Board: “Communities can experience substantial hardship and costs to treat water adversely affected by excess algae. Excessive nutrient loading to a reservoir typically results in algae blooms and associated algal byproducts that can greatly increase the costs of treatment…Of the 137 surface waterbodies used as public water supplies [in Oklahoma], 82 of these waterbodies have systems with disinfection byproduct violations. Many of those violations may be attributed to excessive algae.”
(Oklahoma Water Resources Board. 2005. Justification for Chlorophyll-A Criteria to Protect the Public and Private Water Supply Beneficial Use of Beneficial Water Supplies.
http/www.owrb.state.ok.us/util/rules/ pdf_rul/nutrient_criteria_sws_jd.pdf )
States Must Develop Good Numeric Water Quality Standards for Nutrients
Decreasing nutrient pollution in lakes and streams will reduce trihalomethanes and other harmful disinfection by-products in our drinking water. In 1998, the EPA instructed states to develop water quality standards for nutrients by 2004. Having numeric standards for nitrogen and phosphorus would force reductions in sources of nutrient pollution – livestock waste, fertilizer from agricultural lands, urban runoff and sewage pollution. The standards also would provide incentives for modernizing aging sewage treatment plants and protecting wetlands and headwater streams, which filter nutrients from water.
The EPA has allowed the deadline to slip and, as a result, most states are behind schedule in developing nutrient standards. If states fail to develop standards for nutrients by 2008, the EPA should develop standards for them.
Because states are under pressure from agricultural and other special interests, it is critical for people to encourage their state to develop numeric water quality standards that will protect our lakes, rivers, coastal water – and our drinking water. For more information on how you can influence your state’s process to develop these standards, see Sierra Club’s factsheet, entitled, Too Much Algae and Too Many Dead Fish? What Activists Can Do to Ensure that Their States Adopt Good Numeric Nutrient Standards, located at www.sierraclub.org.
http/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_pollution
... Water pollution is a major problem in the global context. It has been suggested that it is the leading worldwide cause of deaths and diseases,[1][2] and that it accounts for the deaths of more than 14,000 people daily.[2] In addition to the acute problems of water pollution in developing countries, industrialized countries continue to struggle with pollution problems as well. In the most recent national report on water quality in the United States, 45 percent of assessed stream miles, 47 percent of assessed lake acres, and 32 percent of assessed bay and estuarine square miles were classified as polluted.[3]
Water is typically referred to as polluted when it is impaired by anthropogenic contaminants and either does not support a human use, like serving as drinking water, and/or undergoes a marked shift in its ability to support its constituent biotic communities, such as fish. Natural phenomena such as volcanoes, algae blooms, storms, and earthquakes also cause major changes in water quality and the ecological status of water. Water pollution has many causes and characteristics. ...
http/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eutrophication
... Eutrophication is an increase in chemical nutrients — compounds containing nitrogen or phosphorus — in an ecosystem, and may occur on land or in water. However, the term is often used to mean the resultant increase in the ecosystem's primary productivity (excessive plant growth and decay), and further effects including lack of oxygen and severe reductions in water quality, fish, and other animal populations. ...
... Human activities can accelerate the rate at which nutrients enter ecosystems. Runoff from agriculture and development, pollution from septic systems and sewers, and other human-related activities increase the flux of both inorganic nutrients and organic substances into terrestrial, and aquatic ecosystems. Elevated atmospheric compounds of nitrogen can increase nitrogen availability.
Phosphorus is often regarded as the main culprit in cases of eutrophication in lakes subjected to point source pollution from sewage. The concentration of algae and the trophic state of lakes correspond well to phosphorus levels in water. Studies conducted in the Experimental Lakes Area in Ontario have shown a relationship between the addition of phosphorus and the rate of eutrophication. Humankind has increased the rate of phosphorus cycling on Earth by four times, mainly due to agricultural fertilizer production and application. Between 1950 and 1995, 600,000,000 tonnes of phosphorus were applied to Earth's surface, primarily on croplands.[7] Control of point sources of phosphorus have resulted in rapid control of eutrophication, mainly due to policy changes. ...
My comment: so it can be seen why people suddenly developing algae in their tanks in springtime could be found suggestive.
You don't run the tank light excessively: you do regular waterchanges: you don't add ferts: your tank is not neglected.
One previously (and typically) unmentioned suspect has been listed - excess 'nutrients' in tap water from 'nutrient' runoff worsening in spring where melting/spring rains occur - and often through the summer in temperate zones/
I hope that's easier to understand than the original post, and that some part of this may be useful to you, or to some other reader.
Hair algae really sucks.
