|Topic Review (Newest First)|
|01-20-2013 02:38 PM|
Originally Posted by james1542 View Post
I would keep the plant species to one so that interactions among plants aren't an issue (for example, one taking up more nutrients than the other).
I like the idea of guppies/population size for measuring the fish, but that could get tricky if you happen to throw in, say, 3 females that are on the verge of having babies in one tank versus 3 that just had babies. Instead of total population size I guess you could instead count how many fry are born, how many survive, etc., although from experience it's kinda hard counting all those little things!
What about fish behavior? What would be a less-subjective way to describe that? I'm curious to know if the split photo period stresses the fish, so I'm wondering if there are specific behaviors to observe.
|01-19-2013 05:24 PM|
That's a great idea. if you had 6 tanks and just 2 treatments you could do a t-test. Just do a 6+6 siesta vs a 12 hour photoperiod. For the sake of the experiment I would start with no co2, you could run a second experiment afterwards with co2 in all the tanks, or maybe excel. If you have a small scale that would help.
For response variables-You could measure plant weight, or plant height. Riccia is a good one for plant weight, or some java moss. Have a single crypt of the same species in each tank, weigh or measure them before and after. Also a stem plant would be good to include. Something easy and fast growing to get clear results. You could also count leaves on the crypts or swords. Fish would be much more difficult. If the tanks were large enough, guppy colonies would be hard to beat. Their population size after a few months would be a good indicator, as would their weight if you had a fine scale to weigh them. Algae would also be very hard to quantify. You might be able to quantify the % coverage on the glass or something like that, but I think it would end up being more like a subjective thing. Maybe for BBA you could count the number of threads on all your plant leaves? That would be pretty solid.
|01-19-2013 11:25 AM|
This thread has me thinking about doing a small experiment. Not really an "experiment", since I can't set up very many tanks, but I was thinking about the possibility of setting up 3 identical 5 or 10-gallon tanks -- same substrate, same plant species, one type of fish, same dosing regime (if any), same feeding schedule, etc.) -- but have 3 different lighting schemes. The control tank would run a standard 12-hour photo period from 7 to 7. The other 2 tanks would run split photo periods (4 on, 4 off, 4 on, starting at 7 am), but one would be in a dimly lit room, and one would be in a brightly lit room.
The purpose would be to observe the rate of plant growth, algae growth, and fish behavior. Anyone have any thoughts on how to measure/describe these things? Especially "fish behavior". And if you have any thoughts about the design of the experiment I'd be interested to hear them. Might need to do a separate thread....
|01-17-2013 10:54 PM|
Prior to running my tanks with a 3 hour siesta - lights on at 7:30, and off for the night at 20:00 - I had green spot algae growth giving me spots of about 3 to 4 mm in diameter every week. Thus, scraping spots on Saturday, in between other regular maintenance tasks, only to have the 3 to 4 mm spots growing back by the next weekend.
Then, reading that a break in lighting regime could interfere with the algal cell cycle - which requires 6 to 8 hours to complete - I decided to implement a siesta. So I set it at: lights on at 7:30, off at 12:00, on at 15:00 and off for the night at 20:30.
Since then the number of spots decreased noticeably, and their diameters never exceed 2 mm. This reduced maintenance significantly. Also the growth of other algal species - hair alga, black beard and the common green furry algae - decreased. This then also reduced the requirement for chemical control - spot treatments with either hydrogen peroxide or excel.
And I had no ill effects on fish or inverts yet.
|01-17-2013 09:32 PM|
|01-17-2013 08:56 PM|
I run my CO2 24/7; CO2 is cheap and that way I don't worry about solenoid failure.
|01-17-2013 03:40 PM|
|TexasCichlid||Thanks. I will give this method a shot and see if I notice anything different. My only concern is gassing my tank during the siesta. How long do you give the CO2 time to build up before lights on initially, and when do you turn the CO2 off prior to final lights out?|
|01-17-2013 03:21 PM|
On the tanks that have CO2 I keep the CO2 running.
|01-17-2013 03:09 PM|
Originally Posted by gordonrichards View Post
|01-17-2013 02:00 PM|
Originally Posted by bikinibottom View Post
|01-17-2013 10:46 AM|
Originally Posted by Steve001 View Post
Steve001, I do agree with you that some of the posters in the forum can be revolting the way they talk about their tanks as if fish loss is just a financial loss or a hassle. But I really didn't see that in these posts. And the quotes you quoted in your last post were quotes made in response to your comment, which seemed misplaced in this thread. TexasCiclid pointed out that there are all kinds in this hobby, all entering the hobby for different reasons, with different goals in mind. Like it or not, that is what we've got. And none of us are "innocent", because there's nothing "natural" about what we're doing, let's face it. A plant from Indonesia, a fish from South America, substrate from a bag, all thrown into a glass tank filled with municipal water and illuminated by fixtures powered by coal-fired electricity.
|01-17-2013 02:17 AM|
Originally Posted by Tenor1 View Post
My post wasn't directed at the op certainly or anyone in particular though one poster did prompt this response that I've been thinking about on and off recently. Maybe this is a topic worth discussing. I could start a new thread.
|01-17-2013 01:18 AM|
Originally Posted by Seattle_Aquarist View Post
|01-17-2013 01:06 AM|
My tanks are in a my lower level office with one 1/2 height window.
|01-17-2013 12:47 AM|
|bikinibottom||Thanks for all the replies -- I'm pleased to hear so many people seem to have success using the split photo period. Getting back to my original question, I'm wondering about whether there is such a thing as "too dark" for the siesta. It seems like many of the people employing the method have their tanks next to windows and are therefore getting a fairly good amount of natural light in the middle of the day. My tank is in a finished, partially-underground basement room where the windows are at the ceiling, above the tank, so the room gets *some* natural light, but it's a pretty dimly lit room when the lights are off. On a dark, cloudy day I can barely even see what's going on inside the tank when the light is off. Does anyone think this is "too dark" for a siesta?|
|This thread has more than 15 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.|