The Planted Tank Forum banner
1 - 11 of 11 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
370 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I read that algae can't use extremely high light any more than it can use medium to moderate light. Its usually the lack of or excess of certain nutrients. So reducing the photo period or using less WPG would do more to the plants than it would the algae. The reason I ask or bring this up is I just got a reef light that is 442w to put over my 45g tall. I am currently using a 192w on this tank. I plan on hanging it about 6-8 inches above the tank. In your opinion will I be exposing myself to problems? What if any suggestions do you have for keeping this tank algae free?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,609 Posts
Algae most certainly can use high light and does.
More light= more issues/more growth.

Plants need/require more nutrients than algae, so you are never going to limit things enough to limit algae when you have either macro algae or plants in sizable amounts in a system.

More light is the last thing you want.


Regards,
Tom Barr
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
370 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
Now my information comes from "the Ecology of the Planted aquarium" by Diana Walstad.
"Most algae cannot use strong light. While they may survive at higher light levels they aren't growing any faster"
I intend on experiment to find the correct amount of co2/fert/light combination.
Any advice along these lines would be greatly appreciated.
I will continue this thread in the photo album.
Look for a thread called "Extremely bright 45"
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,609 Posts
Now my information comes from "the Ecology of the Planted aquarium" by Diana Walstad.
"Most algae cannot use strong light. While they may survive at higher light levels they aren't growing any faster"
I have the book.
She claims allelopathy as cause for algae suppression, there's never been anything in a lake that have shown that. Further, I've actively falsified it and so has Ole Peterson who in a professor in Denmark who spoke at the AGa meeting last year among others. I can also detail how to set up a falsification test for the other issues.

The table is useless for support in a tank, those are mashed up extracts added to test wells. Cells have all sorts of toxic chemicals inside them. She also suggest Fe limitation, yet used a marine alga reference for support. You give them enough nutrients, they will use the light pretty well. They can grow under the plant leaves and under other algae.
The species for the table X-1, those are unicellular algae, not epiphytic or attached algae.

Sorry, I do not buy that type of support.
You are welcomed to.

Algae somehow mange to live and grow like crazy in natural environments with 10X the typical well lit tank. I get algae in the grow bins out at the lab at full sun, the plants do better and the algae dies way back when I add shade cloth to about 1/10th full sun.

No surprise there.

I intend on experiment to find the correct amount of co2/fert/light combination.
Any advice along these lines would be greatly appreciated.
I will continue this thread in the photo album.
Look for a thread called "Extremely bright 45"
You do that :tongue:
But do not say I did not warn you.

Do not take such speculation so seriously.
If so, see what their supporting argument is referenced from.
Are they specific for the higher light algae that we see?
What impacts does high light have on plants also?
She states the same rational that plants cannot use the higher light either.

So why would you add more light if you read that?
Plants do great with less light, so why not do that?

As you amplify things, you will need much more CO2 and nutrients.
Bio systems can only go so fast. If the plants crash due to low CO2/nutrients etc, then algae will grow.

Other things besides what she claims limits algae in our tanks.
These hypothesis may be easily tested by a hobbyists and falsified to be a cause.

Use a reference tank, one that is stable and healthy.

PO4: add lots and see: result=> no algae(we agree here).
Fe: add lots and see : result: no algae.
Allelopathy: add activated carbon which removes Allelopathic chemicals: no effect/no algae.
Add NH4 to a high light tank: green water bloom.

Generally, things that occur fast in aquariums are bad.

I've dropped 175w MH's on 20 gal tanks etc, I had some specific questions, but I'd not suggest to add much more than 3 w/gal.

I do agree that plants are better competitors for light than algae.
That is their main advantage, however, her support uses unicellular phytoplankton, not the larger attached noxious species that we typically have issues with.

You need to be specific for each species of algae.
Fig X-1 also is a marine system marine diatom, you have any marine diatroms growing if your tank? I add lots of Fe to a marine tank with macro algae, yet no diatoms also.

I can go on........but I think the point has been made on several levels.


Regards,
Tom Barr
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
370 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
Well I do appreciate the explanation. I would like to explain that the light was free so I'm not out any money and some day I will probably set up a reef tank so for that I'm good. Do you suggest that it would be a bad Idea to set up a timer system like this.
CF1 on 1hr, CF1 + CF2 on 2hr, MH + CF1 + CF2 on 3hr, MH off 2hr, CF1 off 1hr, CF2 off.
Thats 7hr photoperiod. Right now with 192w its on a 12hr photo period. I figure thats a good start and I'll adjust from there.
How about some advice for a dosing schedule.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,609 Posts
I'd just use 1 light and leave it at that for 10 hours a day.
Dose EI.
Watch the CO2, you'll need a lot.

Put the light on ebay, then with the $ get a T5 set up with about 1.5-2 w/gal and then be happy.

Regards,
Tom Barr
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
370 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
I already have 4.2 watts per gallon on my 45g I have 6.5wpg on my 20g and 5wpg on my 38g. I know this will be quite a bit more wpg but after the algae problems I get in the early stages of the set up they are all algae free for the most part.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,609 Posts
A lot of/most folks have better growth with 1/2 these amounts. There is not a single plant species that you cannot grow well with 1/2 these amounts.

It cost more for the electric bill.
It generates more heat.
Takes up more room of the top of the tank.
Cost more for bulbs/initial set up.

If you had a choice, which you do, to make life easier, and more manageable for keeping plants, and also cost less in the short and long run, would you do it?

You can avoid most of the algae issues in the start by doing more water changes, adding more plants from the first initial stage, add mulm to the filter, sediment etc. I and you both know how to do it, but what do you really gain from it?

I really have a hard time weighing that trade off.

I'm personally not trying to dissuade you from this, you know what's in store, just make sure the trade offs are addressed and also pointing out to other folks, you just do not need this much to grow any plant.

I get tired of telling folks that their advice is rotten when they claim that Gloss, HC or all these other plants are so called high light and that they need 4-5w/gal.

Folks read something on the net and think it means they should do it and they lack the experience, never considered the trade offs and then come back 2 weeks later with nasty algae. Others claim the initial algae issue they might have is to blame the nutrients, rarely do they blame CO2 or excess lighting.

So this is not for you, it's for them:help:

Try the above suggestions for the higher light set ups in the start up phase for much higher success rates. Any issues, more water changes, cleaning ferts/CO2, pruning etc.

Regards,
Tom Barr
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
370 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
What do you mean by add mulm or sediment to the filter? When I set up I added media from other filters but I'm not sure what mulm is and why you would add that to the filter. When I think of mulm I think of the sludge that builds up in the inflow and outflow tubes. Yes or No?
By the way I do appreciate and value your opinions.
I agree about the electric bill but for the next 6mon my electric is free. So that would be a good time to experiment.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,609 Posts
Mulm= filter sponge squeezingas, deep gravel vacuum sludge etc.

That's mainly organic matter and bacteria.

You add precisely what is missing from a old tank's sediment/filter etc and add it to the new tank.

Regards,
Tom Barr
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top