|08-14-2012 09:51 PM|
|kalawai2000||I had cyano growing all over my 12 gal tank..it took months to get rid of it. I was using the correct antibiotics for it. I was so sick and tired of fighting it that I tore the whole tank down and started over, I only had a few fish in the tank. I transferred them to the pond/barrel and did the change to the tank. After about one week the cyano died off and now this tank is doing great. I did add new plants and replaced the lighting to LEDs. I'm not sure which change made the cyano go away.|
|08-14-2012 06:59 AM|
I had this blue green algea so bad I almost gave up on the tank. I was ready to just sell the whole tank I was so mad at it.
I was so fed up with it I took everything out of the tank. I had sand substrate I removed it all added a plant substrate. Re planted the tank but there were still bits of BG algea left in the tank. I raised the light up 4" From the water surface.
Cleaning the filter was and is key to getting rid of this stuff. It thrives in a dirty tank that has low o2 with high light.
I now keep the filter clean and my water flow is nice and strong. Allowing for good flow around the tank. I also have more surface agitation and added more plants. Since doing this I have never seen a spot of BGA. Or any other algea yet I added rams horn snails to the tank and they keep it spot less.
How often do you clean your filter?
|08-13-2012 10:06 PM|
for a simpler viewpoint
i'll point out that a test kit with 0 on phosphates can still support cyano bacteria growth because it can survive off of very low levels of po4
I've never had a tank or helped someone with a tank that had cyano as a result of proper biofiltration. THIS INCLUDED but is not limited to, decent flow, good oxygenation fo the water which is the most important, and a well established bacterial colony. Planted tank or not
low nitrates exacerbate the issue
low flow exacerbate the issue
cyano grows independent of kh and tds.. Ph hasn't seemed to matter either
these are just a kids opinions and viewpoints. but seen time and time again. and never seen in personal tanks that have above and beyond flow through the filtering system(10X turnover) which is comprised of 5% mechanical and 95% biological.
hope this helps
|08-13-2012 08:56 PM|
|mistergreen||I think it's more correct to ask, "What environment causes BGA to reproduce rapidly?"|
|08-13-2012 07:29 PM|
|BruceF||I think one can claim that high light, co2 injection, ei dosing, high flow sumps and 50% water changes once a week prevent cyanobacteria. I am just not sure you can claim that therefore cyanobacteria is not effected by phosphate levels or any other variable you would like to isolate.|
|08-12-2012 07:34 PM|
I've had a problem with cynobacteria in my dwarf hair grass (feels funny saying that). It is really difficult to remove from this plant. However, using the multi-pronged approach suggested earlier in this thread (origins point to Tom Barr) and very maticulous manual removal, I have had a severe decrease in cyno over the last week. I think purchasing another filter for added flow really stopped the spread of it while the other actions have decreased it. For manual removal I shake the plant which detaches the cyno and use my water syphon to suck it up. I originally was using hydrogen peroxide but it harmed the grass so now I'm just using excel. I dose using the EI method and have not decreased my ferts during this time period. I've attached a crummy picture of how the cynobacteria looks in the dwarf hair grass.
|05-09-2012 05:01 PM|
Cyanobacteria can enslave other algae to get phosphate.
|05-09-2012 04:55 PM|
(inorganic phosphate). Cyanobacteria can use organic phosphate.
Just when you type "Cyanobacteria organic" in Google.
The word "phosphorus" will follow automatically...
IME, I've found stopping adding KH2PO4 "helps". But I've to control also
organic matter to get rid of it. When I resumed KH2PO4, it came back again.
I think we're dealing with multifactorial problem. That's why adding
high load of PO4 doesn't create problem for some, including me in the past.
|05-09-2012 09:34 AM|
In research, you MUST HAVE aquatic plants present to suggest nutrients and algae blooms within planted aquariums. Not doing so.... skews the research and does not support your contention. Many studies suggest N and P induce algae blooms, but such systems lack submersed aquatic plants at 30-100% coverage. You need around 30% or more to have the plants define the system from the top down, not bottom up control like with nutrients.
I stated that higher concentrations of PO4(eg non limiting to both plants and any algae/BGA) do NOT induce BGA in aquariums, if they did, everyone that doses EI would have a lot of BGA, but that is not the observation or the case.
This is independent of any other factors.
So higher levels of PO4 do not induce BGA/algae. You cannot get around this specific planted tank observation. Where there are a high % surface coverage of plants, there is no correlation between nutrients and algae.
I suggest a good read: Bachmann 2002.
What is a limiting range for BGA?
What is the specific species that infest our tanks?
This is about the only genus we have issues with.
So the rest of those species are not particularly specific to aquarium.
The South Florida water management district has a periphyton group, they study BGA crust in the Everglades. Shallow well planted regions. To restore the Everglades back to it's functional state, they need roughly under 10 ppb BILLION, ideally around 3-10ppb or so as I recall. Submersed plants around 50ppb, so you will limit and hurt plants long before you limit BGA via dosing.
It's like trying starve the mice while also feeding elephants at the same time at the same troft.
I simply have siad that at higher concentrations, in the 1-10 ppm range for PO4, 2-3 orders of magnitude higher than the limiting range, that BGA is a non issue due independently from dosing KH2PO4 and KNO3.
You are suggesting that there is dependency.
Above 10-20 ppb, they are independent, it's only when you get well below the limiting values for plants, can you start to limit BGA with P. Few test kits even have decent accuracy and measurement this low, it can be done, but error values of 3ppb and a range of 10ppb or under are extremely tough for the periphyton group, I think aquarist will have a tough time.
If you have dependency on other factors, of which there may be many, then why even worry about N or P being at a higher level? Non limiting is non limiting regardless.
That's why they use non limiting nutrients to study other factors like light and CO2 for plant growth. It's no longer dependent when you dose that way.
Or if they want to study say just P, they provide all other factors at non limiting nutrient values, thus only P is the dependent variable. The experiment typically has an upper bound(eg non limiting) and a lower bound(DI water etc, no ferts) and then a range of concentrations in between.
Adding more will not induce BGA. If there was dependency independent of the other factors, we would HAVE to have a high % of aquarist who dose KH2PO4 and KNO3 at say 5ppm PO4 and 15-20ppm a week have BGA, that is simply not the case. This clearly demonstrates that adding "excess" PO4 or NO3 does not induce algae or BGA. It's repeatable and has been for about 15 years now in the hobby.
This is not a new thing.
Until you get insanely low values, you are not going to have any competitions and if you do, it'll be the plants that die/stop growing long before the BGA.
Mostly through growing plants, not trying to outwit algae.
Paul Sears and Kevin Conlin long ago proposed this:
It's just a hypothesis, so I dosed more and waited for algae, instead, I had awesome plant growth and no algae.
Conclusion, the hypothesis must be false(this next part is important)... independent of other factors. It does not say that removing all essential elements is not dependency
Paul even made the statement we need some PO4...and that 0.00ppm is bad and will limit plant growth as well. What I showed was that it need not be in this tight narrow range say +/- 0.1 ppm and a target of 0.2ppm.
I have had high PO4 for the last 15 years and I have many many examples of some nice planted scapes and plant growth, so have many others.
Research is a good place to start, but it does not imply that the same principles work in aquariums. There needs some corroboration in what we see in the field and aquarium. Bachmann's study does that. In a lake without much plant growth % cover, I agree adding ferts will likely increase algae total concentrations and diversity. The key is % plant coverage. Same in our tanks and even in the pond hobby. If you have say 30-50% or more coverage, you likely will have a plant defined system.
Why this is I can only speculate. I do not know much, but I do know that adding a specific non limiting range of nutrients does not induce any algae.
Final note, do not take things personally. This is a discussion about plants, stick to that.
|05-09-2012 06:17 AM|
|plantbrain||Most of those plants are lower light, so you can reduce the light and thus the nutrient demand and dose, but dose light, but not for the algae/BGA, rather, for the plants.|
|05-09-2012 03:16 AM|
Now... how to actually get rid of it in my tank. The problem is that I can't just load up on nutrients to make the plants happy because the TDS will shoot up higher than it needs to be in a PRL tank.
Anyone with any ideas?
|03-02-2012 06:45 PM|
I think this hobby and this site needs people like you to contribute your experience and not shy away when others may not agree with what you say. This hobby is far from being completely understood and is ever evolving. There is nothing wrong with questioning the majority. Tom of all people should know this as I'm sure what he was trying to prove with his EI dosing was going against the mainstream when it was first introduced. Everyone needs to contribute their experiences good and bad and make this a hobby that shares information which each other. I have had experiences with BGA and never quite figured out what the cause of it was as everyone always says the same thing about low N and not enough flow. Is the low N the cause of the BGA appearing or is the low N that is present in the system because the cynaobacteria has used up all the N thus resulting in low N?
|03-02-2012 07:51 AM|
Well, a little offended, Mr. Barr? Misapplied references do not offer support, eh? Well the reference you supplied isn't an aquarium either, and is just as misapplied then. My sources focused on the biology of cyanobacteria, which will be consistent in any environment.
http://www.thetropicaltank.co.uk/algae.htm#blue-read the section on BGA.
http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_...xcyanchap8.pdf - read the section about limiting cyanobacteria growth through phosphorous control, and the very first paragraph about competition with aquatic plants.
I'll quote this again:
"Phosphorous is the major nutrient controlling the occurence of water blooms of cyanobacteria in many regions of the world, although nitrogen compounds are sometimes relevant in determining the amount of cyanobacteria present. However, in contrast to planktonic algae, some cyanobacteria are able to escape nitrogen limitation by fixing atmospheric nitrogen.. The lack of nitrate or ammonia, therefore, favors the dominance of these species. Thus, the availability of nitrate or ammonia is an important factor in determining which species are present.”
Toxic Cyanobacteria in Water: A Guide to Their Public Health Consequences, Monitoring and Management; World Health Organization; edited by Chorus and Bartram, 1999. p. 6.
Bottom line is cyanobacteria are phosphorous dependent. Period. No one is yet to dispute that. This is not a hypothesis, nor a theory. This is clearly stated in the literature, in more than one source. Quote your source stating cyanobacteria aren't phosphorous dependent or drop it. Seriously.
The presence of excess phosphorous doesn't guarantee that a cyanobacteria bloom will occur, I never stated that. But cyanobacteria blooms do occur when there is excess phosphorous. Disprove that. That it hasn't happened in your tank does not prove that excess phosphates and excess nitrates are not the cause of cyanobacteria blooms. Thats like saying that I drive above the speed limit and haven't had an accident, so no one who drives above the speed limit can have an accident. Your references to overdosing do not falsify my "claim". And please quote your source that BGA does not compete with plants for nutrients. Anytime two species utilize the same resource, they compete (also see above link.)
The problem stated by the OP was continual cyanobacteria blooms. I didn't offer speculation that it could be low O2 or some other cause. I offered actual conditions that are conducive to cyanobacteria blooms and suggested remediation. What was your reply? Something along the lines of we can't be sure what causes that.
I'm done with this topic. I've obviously upset the apple cart and offended the "in-crowd" and it seems some people aren't willing to keep an open-mind or willing to accept somebody else may have something different to contribute.
|03-02-2012 06:45 AM|
You have mentioned PO4 a lot, and say high amounts, but you have not stated once what those amounts are curiously.
I've shown one aquarium(I got plenty more where this came from) where I've dose 5ppm 3x a week of PO4, this is far beyond limiting concentrations/dosing for any plant or algae or BGA.
Here's another one of my tanks:
This tank has had this same dosing routine going on 6th year.
No algae issues. I've had a tiny bit of BGA below the gravel on the glass every so often, but it's never been any issue.
So where is all my algae if what you state is true?
I'd like to know.
I think this hypothesis that limiting PO4 cures algae was lost in this hobby starting about 1995 and it was toast by 1997.
In other words, BGA/algae are not caused directly, independent of other factors, but say 1-5ppm of PO4 from KH2PO4 dosed 1-3x a week.
Healthy plants define the system where there's 30-50% coverage or more, not the nutrients. If there are no plants in the system, then these smaller algae and BGA will define the system.
This is not one or two tanks for a week or two, these are 50+ tanks, 1600 gallons down to 1 gallon, over decades time spans.
A good myth is hard to kill.
|03-02-2012 06:24 AM|
Not the algae.......
Algae can be annoying though.
|This thread has more than 15 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.|