Joined
·
47 Posts
This question popped into my head the other day, and thought I'd ask you guys your thoughts. If this question might be better in the general section feel free to move it, but my main concern is in regards to PAR.
So I've had a high tech tank now for a few months, and I'm trying to get a layout that I like. To help try and grow my plants as fast as possible to fill in my tank (as well as help my more needy plants, like Ludwigia glandulosa), I upped my light and CO2 (1pH drop, so should be 30ppm) and started monitoring my ferts. However, I'm 100% certain I overdid it with the photoperiod, and perhaps light intensity too, leading to a hair & staghorn algae outbreak. After cleaning the tank and filter, checking nutrients and attempting to kill it off with H2O2, it still is here. This leads me to believe my lighting is on too long, too intense, or my plant mass is not enough yet. For the record my lights should be somewhere between 100 & 120 PAR, with a photoperiod of 12 hrs (don't laugh, I learned my lesson! It would be more like 9 hrs of full light with a 1.5 hr sunrise/set, but I understand now its lots if light, and I'm slowly reducing the photoperiod first.) Doing some research, I've learned that as your lighting increases, so too does there nutrient and CO2 demand. Easy enough concept to grasp, but then I realized for most of us, CO2 can only go so high due to fish, shrimp, snails and whatnot in the aquarium.
So if our plants can only have 30 or so ppm of CO2, at what PAR level is CO2 a limiting factor again? For example, would it be 100 PAR, and beyond that the plants need more CO2 to not be under stress? I'm curious because I know some tanks run 200-300 PAR with no issues, but I feel they have no tank inhabitants and thus the CO2 can be cranked to 11.
Edit: For the ease of argument too, lets assume a tank that is heavily planted with stems, and has moderate amounts of nutrients (10 ppm Nitrates, 1-2 ppm Phosphates, 10 ppm Potassium, 0.5 ppm Iron)
So I've had a high tech tank now for a few months, and I'm trying to get a layout that I like. To help try and grow my plants as fast as possible to fill in my tank (as well as help my more needy plants, like Ludwigia glandulosa), I upped my light and CO2 (1pH drop, so should be 30ppm) and started monitoring my ferts. However, I'm 100% certain I overdid it with the photoperiod, and perhaps light intensity too, leading to a hair & staghorn algae outbreak. After cleaning the tank and filter, checking nutrients and attempting to kill it off with H2O2, it still is here. This leads me to believe my lighting is on too long, too intense, or my plant mass is not enough yet. For the record my lights should be somewhere between 100 & 120 PAR, with a photoperiod of 12 hrs (don't laugh, I learned my lesson! It would be more like 9 hrs of full light with a 1.5 hr sunrise/set, but I understand now its lots if light, and I'm slowly reducing the photoperiod first.) Doing some research, I've learned that as your lighting increases, so too does there nutrient and CO2 demand. Easy enough concept to grasp, but then I realized for most of us, CO2 can only go so high due to fish, shrimp, snails and whatnot in the aquarium.
So if our plants can only have 30 or so ppm of CO2, at what PAR level is CO2 a limiting factor again? For example, would it be 100 PAR, and beyond that the plants need more CO2 to not be under stress? I'm curious because I know some tanks run 200-300 PAR with no issues, but I feel they have no tank inhabitants and thus the CO2 can be cranked to 11.
Edit: For the ease of argument too, lets assume a tank that is heavily planted with stems, and has moderate amounts of nutrients (10 ppm Nitrates, 1-2 ppm Phosphates, 10 ppm Potassium, 0.5 ppm Iron)