excel better than co2? - The Planted Tank Forum
 2Likes
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #1 of 24 (permalink) Old 11-10-2015, 10:35 PM Thread Starter
Planted Tank Obsessed
 
bsherwood's Avatar
 
PTrader: (0/0%)
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Grand Forks, ND
Posts: 424
excel better than co2?

more expensive for sure- but is it better or as good as real c02?

North Dakota
125 planted, angels, rummies, c02 tank
72 bow, mystery snails and angels
55 planted, yellow neon shrimp
55 shrimp tank, rcs
29 shrimp tank, blue- not sure what kind
40 long - winter koi home
40 breeder- planted
10- nursery
10- quarantine
5.5- cycling to be another shrimp tank...
bsherwood is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 24 (permalink) Old 11-10-2015, 10:40 PM
Wannabe Guru
 
lksdrinker's Avatar
 
PTrader: (8/100%)
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: NY; LETS GO METS
Posts: 1,881
My short answer would be "no". The fact that excel can essentially kill certain plant species (or at least that certain species are intolerant of it) sort of leads me to the belief that you cant really compare the two.
Aqua Hero and Aqua Hero like this.

Rich's Fishes
Curator of an ever growing fishroom that currently houses 30 different tanks. Most full of at least water....some even have fish!
lksdrinker is online now  
post #3 of 24 (permalink) Old 11-10-2015, 10:44 PM
Planted Tank Enthusiast
 
Argus's Avatar
 
PTrader: (0/0%)
Join Date: May 2013
Location: California
Posts: 584
Plants can acquire carbon more efficiently from CO2 than they can from Excel. As a result Excel is more limited in how much carbon it can provide to plants.
Argus is offline  
 
post #4 of 24 (permalink) Old 11-10-2015, 10:45 PM
Planted Tank Guru
 
PTrader: (73/100%)
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 5,942
Personally it's not even close in terms of growth. Plants utilize co2 much more effectively. Benefit of Excel is that its acts an algaecide in many cases weather you have plants or not. Real co2 does as well but it relys on the increased uptake of nutrients to work in this way.
houseofcards is offline  
post #5 of 24 (permalink) Old 11-10-2015, 10:46 PM
Planted Tank Obsessed
 
PTrader: (0/0%)
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Milpitas, CA
Posts: 373
The only one case where Excel is better is at spot treating BBA. Watching that black mass turn red never get old.
roostertech is offline  
post #6 of 24 (permalink) Old 11-10-2015, 10:46 PM
Planted Tank Enthusiast
 
bereninga's Avatar
 
PTrader: (11/100%)
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Queens, NY
Posts: 805
I think CO2 is better for the plants. Excel is good for managing algae.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
||
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
||
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
bereninga is offline  
post #7 of 24 (permalink) Old 11-10-2015, 10:49 PM
Planted Tank Guru
 
PTrader: (6/100%)
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: US
Posts: 2,863
From what I have heard is that it takes plants longer and more energy to breakdown and utilize Glute (Carbon source from Excel) than it does CO2 (Carbon Dioxide). Plants won't grow as well or as fast using excel compared to using injected co2.
I think sort of similar how plants can uptake ammonia and nitrite faster and more readily than nitrate since it doesn't need to convert the "food" into another easily absorbed form.

From the name co2, I assume it is easier to take up because it is already oxidized? Or maybe something to do with ions (I have no idea what I am talking about here haha just guesses)?
I am sure someone can come along and explain the process correctly. :P

But answer is, excel is not a better source of carbon than co2. It might be more convenient and initially cheaper than buying a pressurized system, so it is a nice alternative to have, but that's it. Also Excel acts as an algaecide so it is useful for killing off algae if used correctly, but some plants are also sensitive to it.
WaterLife is offline  
post #8 of 24 (permalink) Old 11-10-2015, 10:54 PM
Planted Tank Obsessed
 
end3r.P's Avatar
 
PTrader: (2/100%)
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 402
From Seachem's product description:

"The reason plants need CO2 is to produce longer chain carbon compounds also known as photosynthetic intermediates. Photosynthetic intermediates includes compounds such as ribulose 1,5-bisphosphate, and 2-carboxy-3-keto-D-arabinitol 1,5 bisphosphate. Although the names are complicated, the structures are quite simple (5 carbon chains). Flourish Excel™ does not contain these specific compounds per se, but one that is quite similar. By dosing with Flourish Excel™ you bypass the involvement of CO2 and introduce the already finished, structurally similar compounds. It is in its structural similarity that Flourish Excel™ is able to be utilized in the carbon chain building process of photosynthesis. Simple chemical or enzymatic steps can easily convert it to any one to any one of the above named compounds (or a variety of others)."

My guess is that plants can't use these "substitute" compounds as efficiently as those they produce by utilizing CO2, hence the generally superior growth with CO2 vs. Excel only. But I'm no scientist.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.



To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.



To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
end3r.P is offline  
post #9 of 24 (permalink) Old 02-01-2016, 05:46 PM
Algae Grower
 
PTrader: (0/0%)
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: San Diego
Posts: 22
Before I had CO2, I used Excel/Glute extensively. As I introduced pressurized CO2, I tapered off of the Exce/Glute dosing. Very happy to do so. My plants are doing extremely better on CO2, and I don't have to worry about side effects of Excel/Glute on the plants and fish.
psyflyjohn is offline  
post #10 of 24 (permalink) Old 02-01-2016, 06:23 PM
Planted Tank Guru
 
PTrader: (6/100%)
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: US
Posts: 2,863
Quote:
Originally Posted by psyflyjohn View Post
Before I had CO2, I used Excel/Glute extensively. As I introduced pressurized CO2, I tapered off of the Exce/Glute dosing. Very happy to do so. My plants are doing extremely better on CO2, and I don't have to worry about side effects of Excel/Glute on the plants and fish.
No doubt co2 the better carbon option for plants over Glute.

You still gotta be aware of the health impacts co2 can have on fish/inverts.

I am not very aware of the health concerns of Excel/Glute. Can you enlighten me? Have you witnessed any health effects first hand?
Since Glute/Metricide is used as a sterilizer, I guess there is merit for concern (not sure if an activator is necessary for the sterilizing effects though).
WaterLife is offline  
post #11 of 24 (permalink) Old 02-01-2016, 08:12 PM
Planted Tank Guru
 
PTrader: (84/100%)
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 21,015
Seachem has never claimed that Excel is as good as CO2, let alone better. And, as far as I can recall, no one here has claimed that Excel is as good as CO2. But, if you have a low to low medium light tank you can get a big benefit in plant growth rate from using Excel, especially if you don't follow Seachem's recommended dosing schedule, and instead dose 2 ml per 10 gallons of water every day. If you have high light, Excel is very unlikely to be an adequate source of carbon.

Hoppy
Hoppy is offline  
post #12 of 24 (permalink) Old 02-01-2016, 08:37 PM
Planted Member
 
Iwagumist's Avatar
 
PTrader: (0/0%)
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 184
All the previous posts are exactly right: CO2 is more effective, although, excel has many benefits as well. I am currently using both in different tanks and have had success with both. Although CO2 is better at delivering the carbon needed to plants, Excel does as well and also can serve as an algaecide, killing both BBA and staghorn algae (my personal least favorite ), turning them a beautiful orange/red color(hehehe ). Exel fed plants do grow a little slow compared to CO2 fed plants, although Excel still greatly increases growth. Although a little pricey, even small amounts of excel go along way, and I have even grown HC (dwarf baby tears) in an excel only tank! here is a pic of my Excel only 3 gal nano iwagumi:
Attached Images
 
Iwagumist is offline  
post #13 of 24 (permalink) Old 02-01-2016, 09:00 PM
Planted Member
 
ccar2000's Avatar
 
PTrader: (0/0%)
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Littlerock, CA
Posts: 267
I will give you my situation. The tap water has a pH of 7.2, in order to get to 30ppm of CO2 I would have to set my pH controller to 6.2 which, I believe is too low for my tank. So I set the controller to 7.0 and dose Excel at 1.5 to 2 times the recommended dosage. I use both because of the pH level of the incoming water. If there is a better way I would like to learn.

Everything will be all right in the end... if it's not all right then it's not yet the end. Sonny: The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel
ccar2000 is offline  
post #14 of 24 (permalink) Old 02-01-2016, 09:17 PM
Planted Tank Guru
 
PTrader: (84/100%)
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 21,015
Quote:
Originally Posted by ccar2000 View Post
I will give you my situation. The tap water has a pH of 7.2, in order to get to 30ppm of CO2 I would have to set my pH controller to 6.2 which, I believe is too low for my tank. So I set the controller to 7.0 and dose Excel at 1.5 to 2 times the recommended dosage. I use both because of the pH level of the incoming water. If there is a better way I would like to learn.
Why do you think a 6.2 pH is too low? CO2 always reduces the pH, but I have seen no reason to believe that the pH drop from CO2 has any effect on fish. There are some shrimp that CO2 is a problem for, but I don't know what fish it is a problem for.
lksdrinker and lksdrinker like this.

Hoppy
Hoppy is offline  
post #15 of 24 (permalink) Old 02-01-2016, 09:29 PM
Planted Member
 
ccar2000's Avatar
 
PTrader: (0/0%)
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Littlerock, CA
Posts: 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoppy View Post
Why do you think a 6.2 pH is too low? CO2 always reduces the pH, but I have seen no reason to believe that the pH drop from CO2 has any effect on fish. There are some shrimp that CO2 is a problem for, but I don't know what fish it is a problem for.
Thank you Hoppy, I do not want to hijack this thread however, the shells on my snails looked like they were dissolving right off their backs when I set the pH to 6.1 Maybe I do not understand, is the CO2 actually lowering the pH or giving a false reading on the controller and the degassed sample gives the actual pH value?
The recommended pH for the South American Biotope I am trying to replicate calls for a pH of 6.9-7.3.

Everything will be all right in the end... if it's not all right then it's not yet the end. Sonny: The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel
ccar2000 is offline  
Reply

Tags
None

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the The Planted Tank Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome