Starting new tank - codename Frankenstein - critique wanted

Florin Ilia · Jul 12, 2012

Hi Bio,

I kept up the H[SUB]2[/SUB]O[SUB]2[/SUB] treatment for a week now. That + the AC seem to have stopped the crash. The destruction of KH has practically stopped.

That's the good news.

The critical values don't seem to advance significantly in the good direction, except ammonium which decreased. Today's measurements:

t=26°C
KH=66 ppm=3.7 dKH
pH=6.55
CO[SUB]2[/SUB]=44 ppm
TDS=259 ppm
ORP=213 mV
DO=7.61 ppm
NH[SUB]3/4[/SUB]=0.03 ppm
NO[SUB]2[/SUB]=0.016 ppm

These were taken about 5 hours after the last 25 ml 3% H[SUB]2[/SUB]O[SUB]2[/SUB] dose.

Now a quick test: what has been missing from this tank's sorry state?

If you quickly answered "algae infestation on the plants", you are awarded 1 point. I have what looks like Staghorn.

I also have some new deficiencies in the floating plants - new leaves are yellowish with some brown spots. I have pictures of these and the algae but I am too tired now to process them - I'll do that tomorrow.

Florin

Biollante · Jul 12, 2012

Oh Poop...

Hi Florin,

Frankly, I have been holding my breath on the algae.

Oddly enough, the staghorn is probably an indication the treatment may be effective.

Unfortunately, it may be a bit like the old joke,
- the doctor tells the family the treatment was successful, but the patient died.

I should have foreseen this one, adding the activated charcoal reduced the nutrients available to the plants a viscous cycle ensues…

Big water change remove as much as you can, toothbrush of death, so on, if inanimate objects can be removed, soak them in 4-parts tap water, 1 part 5% bleach for 30-minutes or more, rinse well, use dechlorinator before returning to the aquarium.

Sturdy plants soak in 10-ppm PP bath for 20-minutes to an hour; remove as much Compsogon spp., as possible, rinse and return to the aquarium.

Go back to normal fertilizer dosing, get phosphate over 5-ppm that is 4-ml of Fleet Enemas in your case.

Reduce lighting intensity (not time) by say 10-20%, raising the fixture or use of a screen or shade cloth.

CO[SUB]2[/SUB] is good keep it as steady as possible.

Oddly enough this may also be an indication of the biological filter stepping up.

Biollante

client · Jul 13, 2012

With what he had at hand.

I don't see the NO[sub]3[/sub] readings, but I am still wondering what stopped you from trying purigen, hypersorb and cuprisorb. I thought you want to get some organic out of the system and I want to believe that, as you said, the combined work, only, of those two methods, you used as treatment, did neutralize the effects of this life that tends to go acidic, but I am keeping my opinion in that you need an activated carbon with positive sites for a selective removal of contaminants.

It would leach the nitrate and phosphate back into the water column, also because it was activated in places of Asia, where the strictness about the environment isn't having a home quite yet and it should stay away from messing with the uptake of the macrophyta during the photoperiod. The one you have now would do wonders if it would be about filtering the tap water. You have a sump. And you live in Romania. Very close, in Ruse, Bulgaria, where Aquadream lives, is a kaolinite mine.

A few centimeters on the bottom, using this clay, could provide an envelope for some organic waste, negatively charged molecules in excess and a nice place for bacteria. But that could also be just the fact that I have never liked your beautiful white quartz sand, which was useful in the end - less, for the plants and the overall aesthetics, more for the setting altogether. Kaolinite is a quite common clay and it is useful, not as a main substrate, also because its properties are not at all similar to those of cat litter, but more as an additional sink.

Biollante · Jul 13, 2012

And your Point Is... What?

Hi Client,

I am not sure what significant difference you see in using Purigen or high quality activated carbon.

All of these products perform essentially the same function, by adsorption; all will remove certain metals, most notably Cu, remove organic material, leaving the salts.

Any of them left long enough are subject to bacterial and/or enzymatic activity that eventually may leach back some of the materials adsorbed.

As far as I know Purigen, a product I use makes no claim to remove phosphates, as far as I know it claims to remove nitrogenous organic waste as does activated charcoal.

As to the libel of folks that make the activated charcoal Florin uses I think you should take that issue up with them.

To remove phosphates GFO (granular ferric oxide hydroxide) adsorbs phosphates.

Though expensive mixes of activated carbon, laced with lanthanum oxide are available,
GFO is cheap and effective though for our planted tanks
- we generally like the phosphate in the water.

I will leave the nationalistic parts alone.:calm:

The choice of white quartz sand as opposed to other substrates seems one of aesthetics. Personally, I like the white quartz sand. Also at depths greater than 5 or 7 centimeters is quite capable of high quality filtration and overtime being highly enriched.

Biollante

Florin Ilia · Jul 15, 2012

Hi Bio, client,

Bio, I cleaned up the algae as well as I could and I did a water change. I can't raise the lights more (they are already as high as I could put them) but I added a bunch of new floating plants that, together with the old ones, shade the tank quite well. (the new floating plant is Aeschynomene fluitans, quite a character). I added 5 ml of Fleet Enema and I re-started the old fertilization regime.

I am having some trouble with the CO2 (of course) - the bottle is doing and end-of-tank-dump but very very slowly (about a week ago I noticed pressure started to decrease and CO2 concentration starting to increase; the trend is still going). With all the CO2 variations, my OxyGuard has become a permanent fixture in the tank. I have no idea how people who don't have one can keep their CO2 stable.....

I started all this 3 days ago. Today I plan to do a set of measurements and post the results, but if I can't make it, please just bear with me (very hectic time at work + kid returns from summer camp = me busy

).

Client, I sense there is knowledge behind your comments, but to be honest I find your advice difficult to understand. Thank you for trying to help but please try to be more clear (straightforward and algorithmic works best

).

To be continued.

Florin

Florin Ilia · Jul 15, 2012

ORP slightly up in today's measurements, although the difference is too small to celebrate yet:

t=25.5°C
KH=76 ppm=4.3 dKH
pH=6.7
CO[SUB]2[/SUB]=39 ppm
TDS=251 ppm
ORP=221 mV
DO=7.51 ppm
NH[SUB]3/4[/SUB]=0.05 ppm
NO[SUB]2[/SUB]=0.020 ppm
NO[SUB]3[/SUB]=12.5 ppm
Fe=0.75 ppm
PO[SUB]4[/SUB]=3.2 ppm

This was about 7 hours after the H[SUB]2[/SUB]O[SUB]2[/SUB] dose.

Florin

client · Jul 18, 2012

A small point. At least someone will teach me a thing or two.

Biollante said:
I am not sure what significant difference you see in using Purigen or high quality activated carbon.
All of these products perform essentially the same function, by adsorption; all will remove certain metals, most notably Cu, remove organic material, leaving the salts.

The main idea is that I was against nutrient removal. There is no significant difference between them. Electrostatic attractions and pores. Some similar london forces are experienced with the substrates and the cat litter, though in some weaker extent, due to the lack of activation and/or strong oxidation.

Biollante said:
Any of them left long enough are subject to bacterial and/or enzymatic activity that eventually may leach back some of the materials adsorbed.

I was trying to say something about bioregeneration in this thread.

Biollante said:
As far as I know Purigen, a product I use makes no claim to remove phosphates, as far as I know it claims to remove nitrogenous organic waste as does activated charcoal. As to the libel of folks that make the activated charcoal Florin uses I think you should take that issue up with them.

The activated carbon used by Florin does as advertised.

Biollante said:
I will leave the nationalistic parts alone.

All I tried to say was that these are some of our opportunities and that the world is quite small.

Biollante said:
The choice of white quartz sand as opposed to other substrates seems one of aesthetics. Personally, I like the white quartz sand. Also at depths greater than 5 or 7 centimeters is quite capable of high quality filtration and overtime being highly enriched.

I guess it is quite enriched already. If it was about aesthetics, it was at start. Now, it is mainly the main part of the filtration. I believe some of the reductive processes are happening in there and that is the motive of thinking that the filter isn't quite established. It is mature, but it is feeding itself back, nitrite-nitrate, nitrate-nitrite. etc.

client said:
I am still trying to figure when will someone actually want to do something about that organic material. It has a mystery source but it has its place in there?

Anion Exchange Resin

KOH, ZnCl2 or ZnSO4 Activated Carbon

Sochting Oxydator

Even more siphoning and titanic care, it reads as maintenance

It's just hydrogen peroxide and some catalysts. Osmocote -like cheap. I like the beaker, it's useful as an overtime fertilizer dispenser that gets the things into the water column also depending on temperature. I asked Petex about products like these, not on this one specifically though, I am kinda oriented toward obscure manufacturers, so they (the products) are not so popular, to be heard, but Dennerle, for example, makes a very useful anion exchange resin based product. You like Dennerle. Any organic material would stick to it under your conditions.. Well, maybe. Organic acids like tannins, humus, etc are clogging it canceling its attractive power with ease. It's that effective. Uhm, usually, anion exchange resins are usually organic binders. What do you have to lose?

That is kinda what I was trying to say. I am still believing that these activated carbons are of two kinds, at least, and that the positive charged ones are available mainly from Asia, China and Japan.

The ones activated in Scotland, United States, France through steam, stream of carbon dioxide and washed with acids and sometimes also with water tend to have a higher pH, a somewhat hydrophobic surface with negative sites and some cation exchange capacity and they tend to have many small pores. I liked, for example, that Bio actually posted around here that these activated carbons tend to adsorb ammonia which is not far from truth, even though the adsorption of ammonia is not documented as well as the adsorption of nitrates and nitrites by the carbons with positive sites. These carbons should work better in environments where the cation exchange capacity can take place. Water with pH units ranging from 7.2-7.3 to 7.8-7.9 and up. They should be a great investment as filters on the tap water. It is a type of carbon one should use briefly as in for small periods of time, over night or simply when there are serious problems and not much if not at all during the photoperiod.

The ones produced in Asia, mainly China and Japan, probably in some other places too, but I can provide links mainly from these two countries; I wasn't interested in doing a characterization of the world market of these activated carbons. They have somewhat hydrophilic surface with positive sites and a pH around 6-6.4 with the small pores being greater than the ones of the steam activated carbons, their medium sized pores are also larger than the medium sized pores of the carbons activated through phosphoric acid and their physisorption of organics tends to be more efficient. Their nitrate adsorption is happening around pH 6.1 and in an environment similar to the one Florin maintains is helping the effectiveness of this type of carbon. Organic matter competes strongly with the nitrate and their adsorption should be halted until the organics are already on the surface and then influenced negatively. It is a type of carbon one should leave in the tank. The bacterial colonization will do wonders overtime in this type of carbon. If the pH is maintained above 6.3-6.4 or the like, the problems with the positives sites should be under control. The Japanese extremely purified versions are used mostly in food and pharmaceutical stuff.

I know there is a dichotomous classification about these materials already, into H-type and L-type carbon, but it is kinda messed up or it simply doesn't make sense to me. I just thought that everyone knows who produces the carbon used by Florin, that it is clear what purigen goes, that someone was searching to see what I was babbling about in the previous posts and that I could cut from the obvious. I guess I did cut a lot.

scotwilson · Jul 18, 2012

cool..! its awesome...,

Tom Barr · Jul 18, 2012

Client, do you honestly think that these 2 different traits in activated carbon offer any REAL benefits to the planted aquarium though?

I've used carbon off and on from many sources. Purigen and zeolite and many others. They seem good for getting some haze and some color out of the water, but offer little else IME.
I would be more interested to hear more, but I've just not seen enough evidence that it's really the key issue.

pH is also a problem since we use CO2 to adjust the pH but do not use KH to adjust the pH.
So I think we are not comparing bacterial pH optima(which certainly does exist) correctly in a planted tank vs the research.
Same with plants and pH preferences.

For Florin's tank, I think it gets back to CO2.
I did a fairly aggressive H2O2 approach recently against algae and found little benefit. Good for BBA on wood etc, spot treating some species, but it was light lowering and then adding more CO2.....that fixed and prevented the return. H2O2 had little effect.

In the past I left the carbon in the tank as a rule, it becomes biomedia, but your biomdeia is controlled rate wise by O2, so a wet/dry filter/overflow system will have a higher more sustained cycling. If the loadign rate in the tank is low, then a canister is okay, but the wet/dry should help the aquarium more on every level.
the big issue seems to be the CO2 degassing, but a few tricks and that is taken care and well worth the effort over the long run.

Older stable tanks that are rarely uprooted also are far more stable. Why? Perhaps the soil acts like the old carbon media and the good growth and O2 pumped in from the roots helps.
My 180 Gal tank is similar to that, whereas my 120 gets moved around often.

Still, either tank can be destabilized with poor CO2.

The plants still define the system. The bacteria help the plants to do the recycling of the organic fractions.
Sediment or filter media matters, but they still need ample O2 to function well/at a fast enough rate to keep up with loading.

If the O2 drops and the bacterial biomass cannot keep up with the loading rates of organic materials..........then algae might appear etc.
We tried adding old plant compost and dead leaves from aquatic plants and got algae. It was not controlled for and the O2 was not measured.

So the results are suspect.

Biollante · Jul 18, 2012

I Am Not Sure You Are Serious...

Hi Client,

Activated charcoal and most chemical filtration media used in our aquariums remove nitrogenous waste, dissolved organics that has the effect of reducing ammonia, along with various metals.

If I were overly concerned about ammonia in Florin’s aquarium, I would as I have many times before, recommend Zeolite.

I know it is fun to pick answers apart without considering the context
Since I believe there is excess organic material in Florins tank and
- his plants are handling the ammonium quite well
The object is to remove nitrogenous waste and dissolved organic materials
I believe this will also reduce the ammonium,
- since I do not believe ammonium is being separately added.

If you were replying to another thread, reply to that thread.

The chemical filtration media used in our aquariums remove things principally by adsorption, the sub-class of adsorption is physisorption (physical adsorption), and the electronic structure of the atom or molecule is barely disturbed by adsorption.

Physisorption, the van der Waals force (or interaction) is the primary forces involved that include
- Debye force
- Keesom force
- and London dispersion force.
As opposed to chemisorption where a chemical reaction occurs on the exposed surface, creating a new chemical species at the adsorbent surface, corrosion, for example, the strong interaction creates new kinds of electronic bonds, ionic or covalent.

Indeed the laws of physics apply everywhere,:highly_amused: the fact that a law can be applied in more than one place does not negate the effect.:eek-new:

The chemical filtration media in the aquarium hobby fall into three categories

Carbon-based compounds, materials such as activated carbon and graphite are non-polar and typically hydrophobic.
Polymer-based compounds are polar or non-polar functional groups in a porous polymer matrix in the case of Purigen mimics activated charcoal.
Oxygen-containing compounds –zeolites, typically hydrophilic and polar.

Generally, the industrial knock on activated carbon is that it reacts with oxygen, but that is at 300°C, temperatures that are “moderate” in the industrial context, but activated carbon leaching back organic material would be the least of Florin’s problems if the activated charcoal in his aquarium exceeded 300°C.:eek-new:

The simple truth is that the sorption isotherm, or equilibrium point, for activated charcoal is simply not going to release (leach back) significant adsorbate.

I believe, intentionally

or not, you are confusing concepts.

Cation-exchange capacity (CEC) and for that matter Anion Exchange Capacity (AEC) are not really applicable.:highly_amused:

Biollante

client · Jul 18, 2012

Misunderstanding, again and again.

Hi Bio,

Could you at least quote me? It would be easier for both.

Biollante said:
Hi Client,

Activated charcoal and most chemical filtration media used in our aquariums remove nitrogenous waste, dissolved organics that has the effect of reducing ammonia, along with various metals.

If I were overly concerned about ammonia in Florin’s aquarium, I would as I have many times before, recommend Zeolite.

I know it is fun to pick answers apart without considering the context

Since I believe there is excess organic material in Florins tank and

his plants are handling the ammonium quite well

The object is to remove nitrogenous waste and dissolved organic materials

I believe this will also reduce the ammonium,

since I do not believe ammonium is being separately added.

The main objective was organic waste, but some nutrients were removed and there were deficiencies on the floating plants. That's why I questioned the addition of that activated carbon. I even asked rhetorically about purigen, because the results were like there was purigen in that mesh, so, who says you were overly concerned about the ammonia? The ammonia went out with the organic material that was lowering the kh. Okay. But I wasn't counting the ammonium ions as nutrients anyway, there were some nitrates already present. The deficiencies came from where? I just blamed that activated carbon.

Biollante said:
Generally, the industrial knock on activated carbon is that it reacts with oxygen, but that is at 300°C, temperatures that are “moderate” in the industrial context, but activated carbon leaching back organic material would be the least of Florin’s problems if the activated charcoal in his aquarium exceeded 300°C.

The simple truth is that the sorption isotherm, or equilibrium point, for activated charcoal is simply not going to release (leach back) significant adsorbate.

And I am stating somewhere that the steam activated carbon, that was used, will release it back? The rest is the theory everyone should know and obey and I am not posting around saying that I can bend that. It is weird to read something, to have the same view of things, but to realize that someone is actually telling that you are against it. The material was huge and it was obviously squeezed more that it should be allowed. I will just respond, but I have the feeling that it would involve slicing it and digest it in really small pieces.

I came to suggest more oxygen even though Florin has a wet/dry so I proposed some device, I came to propose an activated carbon that isn't taking a thing, so to speak, from the water and to leave nutrients alone, thinking that there is a lot of carbon dioxide and a bunch of nice people always advising about more and I don't even know if I should touch your responses because there is a pot of healthy information already, even if this subject about client's devices would not go on. Now to think that, at some point, Tom Barr will say that, well, there was a hot summer once, and some other folk came in and proposed yet another activated carbon that makes wonders in a planted tank, isn't actually right.

Biollante · Jul 18, 2012

I Do Not Think So...

Hi Client,

>

Could you at least quote me?

I will try.

>

It would be easier for both.

I am not so sure, since I prefer coherent thoughts. I suspect part of the problem is this broken up method of communications.

>

The main idea is that I was against nutrient removal.

Fine you have a different opinion; my reasoning and advice is what it is and has been. Your advice may be fine, it is your reasoning I am addressing.

>

There is no significant difference between them. Electrostatic attractions and pores.

I disagree there is a significant difference… I will now have to wait until I get to further comments before I can explain.

>

Some similar london forces are experienced with the substrates and the cat litter,

Definition: London dispersion force is a weak intermolecular force between two atoms or molecules in close proximity of each other. The force is a quantum force generated by electron repulsion between the electron clouds of two atoms or molecules as they approach each other.

The London dispersion force is the weakest of the van der Waals forces and is the force that causes nonpolar atoms or molecules to condense into liquids or solids as temperature is lowered.
London Dispersion Force Definition, by Anne Marie Helmenstine, Ph.D., About.com Guide.

The London dispersion forces are no more or less important than Debye force or Keesom force, just weaker and I think you are being misled by the term “dispersion.”

>t

hough in some weaker extent, due to the lack of activation and/or strong oxidation.

Neither oxidation nor “activation” plays much of role since it is a discussion of adsorbents. Charcoal is “activated” in a two-step process, carbonization and activation. The whole “carbonization” thing may help explain why I do not think kitty litter has much of a future as activated carbon, kitty poop maybe, but not kitty litter.

Carbonization is simply, drying, heating to remove tars, hydrocarbons from carbonaceous material.
- Then heating the material in an oxygen free environment.
Carbonized material is often “activated” is by steam (your apparent favorite) or CO[SUB]2[/SUB] (at very high temperature.
- This creates the pores, by manipulating this process various pore sizes and shapes can be created.

I do not think I can do this in this manner if a straightforward discussion is not possible I will have to withdraw.

Simply stated steam activated or not, activated charcoal at its sorption isotherm is not going to easily give up its adsorbates.

As to the nutrients, it was a change in strategy. You do not like it that is your privilege.

I gather you did not notice I also recommended more oxygen as well, an amount that I can calculate, and I can calculate material oxidized.

Biollante

Biollante · Jul 18, 2012

Junk Science... No Wonder Tom Barr Just Tells Everyone to Crank up the CO2

Hi Florin,

Look, I apologize for bringing up activated carbon;

my primary reason was simply to try to determine the source or nature of the mystery DOC by reducing the amount of dissolved organic material floating around. Really it is a small part, just an attempt in the larger circumstance. I will continue working on the problem and catch up with you later.

To have every statement turned into nonsense pseudo-science is beyond me, just throwing words about like a drunken parrot. :disillusionment:

Since you are so competent in measuring various factors, I thought it a good bet is all.

In Romania, apparently there are a different set of natural laws in place.

To be clear I do not in any way shape or form, think dissolved organic material (DOC) are the same as nitrates. Nitrates are a desired outcome, had the biological filtration worked as I hoped, the DOC would have drop to a range where 2-ppm of PP would oxidize the dissolved organic material with a little left over.

We tried quite a few things to get here, Tom Barr says it is nothing but bad CO[SUB]2[/SUB]; I give up, how wonky CO[SUB]2[/SUB] produces these results I do not know, better, crank up the CO[SUB]2[/SUB].

I have asked you to add a specific amount of Hydrogen peroxide, so that we can monitor it.

Since it isn’t Client’s little magic machine that adds, well how about that Hydrogen peroxide, there is no Hydrogen peroxide, because it doesn’t come from the magic machine.
Part of the problem with Client’s magic machine is I do not know how to calculate or control the amount of Hydrogen peroxide added
It may well be a fine magic machine, I just have not been able to find specific information that allows me to calculate things, so for the moment I think adding specific amounts, of specific concentration Hydrogen peroxide is a better idea.:calm:

The ammonia is not a concern per se, since you keep the pH under 7, since I think it is likely the ammonium you are measuring will reduce as you remove DOC. If reduced DOC does not translate to reduce ammonium, it will help me understand the source, by process of elimination, this is all I have to go on.

I wish I had Client's certainty of a world ruled by nonsense, I believe ultimately in a universe governed by natural law, physics, mathematics, chemistry, I have never done well in the face of willful ignorance.

For the record and as I have mentioned before the levels of total ammonia you are measuring are generally below the threshold of most hobbyist testing.

You do not have to use activated charcoal or Purigen or anything else, I was hoping to learn something about the nature (source) of these nutrients that is all.

Again for the record I expected a small immediate decrease in total ammonia, because high end activated charcoal will pick up a little and your testing procedures are good enough we would probably see the change. Activated charcoal will not, does not; pick up significant amounts of ammonia, nitrates or nitrites. DOC are however precursors to both, had there been a significant spike in Nitrates, good news all around that was a desired outcome.

I do not understand or comprehend the steam being released because of the way the charcoal was activated. I do not understand how the London dispersion force causes the release. I do not understand the whole activated charcoal leaches stuff back bit. I even saw in another thread someone with experience and I had thought reasonably bright repeating that nonsense.:disillusionment:

There are as with most things better grades of activated charcoal and lessor grades. There are activated charcoals engineered to latch on to specific things, based on pour size or doping.

I do not understand Client’s assault on this particular item after all the stuff till now why this bizarre nonsensical attack is beyond me.

Oh well, I am finished with the public part.

Biollante

Biollante · Jul 24, 2012

Meu cel mai umil scuze ...

Hi Florin, Client,

My most humble apologies to both of you.

Tom Barr suggested something I really had not given enough thought too, translations in general and translation software in particular.

I spent some time working back and forth with a couple versions of translation software and my rudimentary understanding of Romanian (I spoke it poorly years ago and have been studying it recently). I consulted a translation service (real human being) to help with the technical end and I think I understand what Client was trying o say. I even get the CEC, activated charcoal comparison.

While I disagree with some of Client’s suggestions, I understand the basis of those suggestions and it is not nonsense.

I apologize to Florin for blowing up the thread and failing to figure out what is going on.

Biollante

Florin Ilia · Jul 29, 2012

Hi Bio, Client,

My apologies to you both for apparently abandoning my own thread in the middle of a heated discussion. Not that I can add anything when you guys go that in-depth. It was an extremely crazy period at work.

Let me update you on what happened meanwhile with the aquarium:
- activated charcoal + fertilization seemed to work wonders to stop the crash from two weeks ago. The algae are also gone. The general impression I get of the tank is healthy plant growth, happy fish, somehow happy snails (less than 100% though; the couple Planorbella duryi that survived don't die, but don't breed either). The KH consumption has stopped.

Here is a pic of my floating plants taken July 12th (when I reported the deficiencies):

And the same floating plants on July 22nd:

They look about the same today.

A short while after adding the AC to the filter I realized that it was designed to remove DOC - leaving the H[SUB]2[/SUB]O[SUB]2[/SUB] treatment potentially harmful to the fauna. Normally I would have posted a question here but being under stress from work I just stopped it (not being home a lot helped with stopping

).

Also, I am not sure if I reported already, the fauna of the tank now consists of 7 fish: 3 x P nicholsi and 4 Congo tetra.

I took some measurements today. This is a week after the last water change.

t=25.5°C
KH=84 ppm=4.7 dKH (I measured tap water KH, it is identical at 84 ppm, so the last week the KH consumption was minimal, equivalent in % with the water evaporation)
pH=6.79
CO[SUB]2[/SUB]=33 ppm (about 2 weeks ago I changed my regulator AND my diffuser, and still I can't stabilize it at my target value of 40, it either goes to 60-70 or to 10-20. And yes I make very small changes and give them 6-to-12 hours to stabilize)
TDS=288 ppm
ORP=212 mV
DO=7.65 ppm
NH[SUB]3/4[/SUB]=0.03 ppm
NO[SUB]2[/SUB]=0.032 ppm
NO[SUB]3[/SUB]=36.7 ppm
PO[SUB]4[/SUB]=7.40 ppm (did I overdo it?)
Fe=1.54 ppm

I have a 2 week long vacation coming in a week. Anything I should do before I leave - besides a good cleaning?

Thanks,

Florin

PS Here's a bonus pic with Aeschynomene fluitans, right after I added it to the tank. I love the way this plant looks, and it's African, but unfortunately it creates dams which quickly lead to biofilm and a swamp-like look. Also, it sheds a lot of those tiny leaves, and twigs, and makes a mess. Too bad!

Biollante · Jul 30, 2012

AC Wins & No Leech back...

Hi Florin,

The activated charcoal, which really was not a big deal, since you had it, I thought it might help stabilize things and it has confirmed what we thought was happening.

It may give your biological filter time to kick in. Change it regularly, or if you are around enough whenever KH consumption takes an uptick.

Not to be controversial but it will not leach anything back, but it will stop removing stuff.:highly_amused:

The phosphates are a bit high but not dreadful, I think something just over 5-ppm is the target, but I think high is better than low.

Interesting the iron stays up.

Should you decide to run off to some tropical paradise and leave the tank pack in as much fresh AC as you can, a mesh bag in the sump can do wonders. Be careful not to over clean, particularly filters and sump.

The Hydrogen peroxide would not have hurt, but as long as things are stable, this will work until we determine the source of the excess DOC.

I would feel more confident if that ORP value were 80-100-mV higher, but all things considered, I think it will work.

For now, CO[SUB]2[/SUB] is your biggest problem… If you have to choose, an unstable 60-70-ppm is better than an unstable 10-20-ppm. Stable anything that keeps your pH under 6.9 or so is best.

I like Aeschynomene fluitans, makes a wonderful bog or marginal plant, it will turn your aquarium into a bog and when happy, grows alarmingly quickly, as in shrubbery size.:highly_amused:

Biollante

Florin Ilia · Aug 4, 2012

Hi,

There is at least one P nicholsi juvenile in the tank. It is about 2 cm long and does a wonderful job of hiding - yesterday was the first time I saw it. Both females are holding again, so I think it's fair to say these fish are OK.

Today I am leaving for a 2 week vacation.

Yesterday I gave the tank a good cleaning. I gave away Aeschynomene fluitans

. I put two new sponge pads in the sump. one of them AC treated, and also sandwiched some of my ROX AC between them.

Bio, your observation about the Fe not being removed by this AC is indeed intriguing. I can only speculate that it's a matter of AC-to-water ratio - in the old tank I had 4-5 times more AC to 5 times less water. I will test when I get back.

See you in 2 weeks!

Florin

Florin Ilia · Aug 26, 2012

Works best with an Austrian accent

I'M BACK!

Hello, dear fans

The 2 weeks turned to 3, but the good news is that I'm now a certified diver. My wife hopes this will help with my aquarium maintenance

Here are some pics from the holiday: https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.4260879396447.2173472.1119807061&type=1&l=bb54b8b511
END OFFTOPIC

My tank looked overgrown, with floating plants and the lotuses all over each other. But no major algae problems, no dead critters. I did a full set of analyses and (besides the predictable accumulation of ferts), everything looks as I left it:

t=26°C
KH=60 ppm=3.4 dKH
pH=6.60
TDS=377 ppm
ORP=222 mV
DO=7.55 ppm
NH[SUB]3/4[/SUB]=0.01 ppm
NO[SUB]2[/SUB]=0.026 ppm
NO[SUB]3[/SUB]=55.8 ppm
PO[SUB]4[/SUB]>2.5 ppm (I forgot to dilute, went above my test's limit and then ran out of time)
Fe=1.17 ppm

I also ran a 4-beaker KMnO[SUB]4[/SUB] test (6, 6, 12, 18 ppm):

I still have DOC > 2 ppm (and this is with AC in the filter).

I removed half bucket of plants, cleaned the occasional algae, changed about 60% of the water.

Tomorrow I go to work. Ugh.....

Florin

Biollante · Aug 31, 2012

Back to Work to Rest Up For Your Next Vacation

Hi Florin,

I’ll pm you some thoughts later…

No way I can answer publicly under the new rules.

Biollante

Biollante · Sep 1, 2012

I Doubt It

Hi Florin,

Pm on the way.:calm:

Biollante

Starting new tank - codename Frankenstein - critique wanted

Lifetime Charter Member

Lifetime Charter Member

Junior Poster

Lifetime Charter Member

Lifetime Charter Member

Lifetime Charter Member

Junior Poster

Junior Poster

Founder

Lifetime Charter Member

Junior Poster

Lifetime Charter Member

Lifetime Charter Member

Lifetime Charter Member

Lifetime Charter Member

Lifetime Charter Member

Lifetime Charter Member

Lifetime Charter Member

Lifetime Charter Member

Lifetime Charter Member