BBA help.

Hi,

Can you provide some info on how you diffuse c02 into the water and how you guage the amount of c02 as well as your lighting levels/duration? Do you use a drop checker at all? Are your lights adjustable (up and down) at all?

Many times BBA is caused by poor c02 and this may be caused by too high lighting for the c02 rate. Or inefficient diffusion method....

Telling us more will result in better advice!

 

Just In Case...

Frankly, it is usually a CO2 and/or circulation problem. The drop checker gives an indication at that point. Focusing on the area(s) where you see the BGA, is there any obstruction that might cause a calm area? Any places where mulm or debris fall out and pile up?

Just in case though…

I am not a botanist, expert or otherwise, in addition to my disclaimer.

It does seem like a lot of light. Light drives the nutrient demand system. It strikes me as possible you are getting behind the fertilizer uptake power curve. I am not personally familiar with Tropica AquaCare liquid fertilizers, assuming it is a balanced mix, I would add maybe two or three milliliters on the third and fifth day after the weekly water change.

I don’t mean to state the obvious, but I would also remove all the BGA I could on sight.

This is just me.

Biollante

 

I think I would dose the tank.

Since it does not appear to be CO2; that takes us to the "just in case..."

I am not good at calculating non EI/PMDD but rather than withholding nutrients I think if anything I would increase the nutrients.

Biollante

 

I am not familiar with Tropica Aquacare I know someone on this site looked it up, but I can't locate the whats in it part.

Yes, though for 125 gallon tank 10 ml seems low.

Assuming this is 125 gallon tank we are talking about I recommend these amounts as a starting point that is a lot of light you are supporting.

Yes, I would add potassium, I don't know what form you have.

If K2SO4 1 7/8 teaspoon.

I would add Phosphate as well if KH2PO4 3/8 teaspoon. If no KH2PO4, 14 ml Fleet Enema.

I would also urge you to add MgSO4 (Epsom Salt) 4 ½ teaspoon.

Biollante

 

Hi,
BBA is ALWAYS due to a CO2 issue. The problem is that many assume that when we say "a CO2 issue" that this automatically means a poor injection rate.

AS mentioned by Biollante, CO2 uptake can be stifled by having insufficient flow or inadequate flow distribution at the affected location. So that even though the injection rate seems adequate, it may not be reaching the plant in question. It could be that your filter flow rating is inadequate or the manner in which you arrange the outlet(s) is problematic.

Another issue is unstable CO2 delivery to the plant. It could be, for example, that at lights ON, the CO2 level is poor but that a few hours later the concentration level is elevated, giving the illusion that CO2 is OK. It may be a simple fix to simply turn the gas on earlier that you are doing now in order to ensure that the concentration levels are adequate at the beginning of the photoperiod, which happens to be the most crucial time of day for CO2. This can be compensated for by turning the gas OFF earlier since this is a less critical time. This can also be addressed by having a much lower intensity at lights ON so that the CO2 demand is lowered at this time.

So step number one is to know the truth, that BBA is absolutely caused by poor CO2 for that given lighting level and to never waver from that truth. Step two is to understand that light causes a CO2 uptake demand. High light causes a high CO2 demand, low light causes a low CO2 demand. In order to meet the demand, then either the light must be lowered or the CO2 increased or a combination of both. Thinking that there is any other cause is self delusional.

Depending on the plant species in your tank liquid carbon products such as Excel may be used regularly to supplement the CO2 levels in the tank.

I guess we have also assumed that your dropchecker is filled with 4dkh water as well? An oblivious question but one that always has to be asked. Using anything other water can give you false high readings.

Cheers,

 

Hi Gbark,
If you are checking your CO2 level by measuring the tank water's pH and KH, then using those values in the tables then I can guarantee you that your calculations are incorrect and that you are calculating a higher CO2 level that you actually have.

The reason is simple: The KH/pH/CO2 table is predicated on the assumption that the only acid in the water to affect the pH of that water is Carbonic acid due directly to and uniquely to the dissolved CO2. Unfortunately for this calculation, an aquarium has lots of different acids dissolved in the water. There a re organic acids as a result of the products of metabolism and there are other acids as a result of the nutrients that we ourselves add, such as phosphoric acid and even nitric acid. Therefore the pH reading is corrupted, is lower than that due to the carbonic acid content and when you look this value up on the chart it returns a high CO2 level than is actually there. I can assure you therefore that you almost certainly do NOT have 40ppm CO2. This is undoubtedly part of your problem.

The conventional method of determining the CO2 level is to use a drop checker, which is a simple vessel filled with distilled water which has then been adjusted to a known kH value, typically 4 dKH plus a pH test reagent. The vessel is placed in the tank and it's water sample is isolated from the tank water. The CO2 in the tank dissolves into this isolated sample and the pH is then read visually. With this sample, free of any other acid the pH/KH/CO2 relationship is validated and it gives a more accurate picture of the actual dissolved levels.

An illustrated article about the use of dropcheckers can be found here: Welcome To UKaps - CO2 Measurement Using A Drop Checker

I cannot say exactly how much you are off by but you can do with increasing the injection rate even more than you have so far. You did not have 30ppm before and you don't have 40ppm now. We can be fairly certain of that. Obviously care should be taken to avoid injuring the fish so be careful with any rate increase. Monitor the fish's behaviour for signs of stress.

Additionally, I strongly suggest that you simply stop testing. It's almost a certainty that your numbers are totally incorrect because the test kits have a miserable track record for accuracy. Just dose the standard EI values and forget about testing.

Cheers,

 

I am in almost total agreement with ceg4048, all things being equal it is most likely CO2, circulation, distribution.

I also agree that test kits are miserably inaccurate, observation is your best tool.

Trust and stick to your dosing schedule, make sure all of your practices are good practices.

Gently adjust your CO2, if you have not been using a drop checker with a known (uncontaminated) KH value there is little likelihood that you have a clue as to the CO2 level beyond the fact that the cyanobacteria are a pretty good indication that the CO2 is low.

Should it happen your CO2 has been correct and this is where the ever-decisive ceg4048 and I part company, the cyanobacteria indicate that something is unbalanced, granted anyone or I can as Tom Barr demonstrated produce cyanobacteria by simply reducing the CO2, though the variables may be a little more complex. Without going into too much detail the relationship N2 + 8H+ + 8e- + 16 (C10H15N5O10P2) = 2NH3 + H2 + 16(C10H16N5O13P3) + 16 Pi, leaves room for other possible explanation for the imbalance.

Biollante

 

Hmm, I've reviewed the thread carefully and I can't find any mention of the OP having issues with cyanobacteria (BGA). Unless BGA was mentioned in another related thread, this is all about Black Brush Algae (BBA). If so this is undoubtedly a CO2 issue.

Cyanobacteria (BGA) is related to inadequate NO3, not necessarily inadequate CO2, and I'm fairly certain that the demonstrations have shown this correlation.

ATP synthesis and consumption occurs in every plant cell, to a lesser or greater degree, the balance of the two being dependent on many things including nutrient and CO2 availability. Specific deficiencies (as well as their acuteness) affect a specific combination of processes which are expressed in certain ways, so I'm not really sure the equation shown clarifies any deficiency expression (at least not in a plant). In fact the equation appears to show basic atmospheric nitrogen fixation, which could easily describe a bacterial metabolic pathway - and a very expensive pathway at that, since it appears to require a massive 16 ATP molecules to complete.

The result of ATP consumption is typically liberated inorganic Phosphate (Pi) via ATP (Adinosine Triphosphate) conversion to ADP (Adinosine Diphosphate). Not only that, but the result appears to produce ammonia, which is highly toxic and if this is some sort of diazotrophic process, would then have to be somehow assimilated, maybe by protein action into glutamate.

I guess I'm not sure what imbalance or possible explanation is implied by this equation. The equation itself is out of context because it does not, for example, explain where the 8 electrons are coming from. There would be a related equation to show the reaction of ferredoxin (iron-sulphur protein which mediates electron transfer) with some enzyme which executes the electron transfer, perhaps something like nitrogenase reductase. The 8 protons would be generated by some other equation possibly describing a hydrogenase enzyme acting on Hydrogen and separating the 8 electrons. So really, these are fundamental reactions that don't really imply anything other than basic life processes. I can't detect any imbalance there. Tom would have a better grip on it though.

Cheers,

 

Oops!

Oops got my letters wrong how embarrassing!

So-called Black Beard Algae or Black Brush Algae, BBA, more generally known as Red Algae, is still a cyanobacterium.

I am still with you most of the way, yet this is a messy world in which multiple possibilities exist. Granted some more likely than others.

What would the fun be if things were absolute!

Biollante