DSM and CO2

[Philosophos]

While it's well known that the earths atmosphere holds 360ppm CO2, which is far higher than in our tanks and presumed to be nonlimiting, it appears that even an increase from atmospheric levels of CO2 can cause an increase in greenhouse crop yield:

http://crop.scijournals.org/cgi/reprint/42/3/746.pdf


http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6TC3-49S82YR-90&_user=10&_coverDate=07%2F31%2F1976&_rdoc=6&_fmt=high&_orig=browse&_srch=doc-info%28%23toc%235159%231976%23999949998%23464480%23FLP%23display%23Volume%29&_cdi=5159&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_ct=16&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=d79e160e790ea695638263f9487e0a8f

http://www.omafra.gov.on.ca/english/crops/facts/00-077.htm

It seems to find frequent use in horticulture, so why not in a dry start method tank?

Controlling levels of CO2 and its distribution would be far easier than in an aquarium. A drop checker with a 2370ppm alkalinity solution and bromothymol blue would allow for a 1000ppm average with deviation from the color card maxing out around 700-1500ppm.

Any thoughts? I'm mostly wondering if our typical level of light is high enough to cause a CO2 limiting environment, or whether the atmospheric 360ppm is enough under our typical ranges.

-Philosophos

 

[LoudCreature]

I am not sure the level but I know Biollante uses, enriches, Biollante calls it, the co2 in our hydrponics and in with what I think would be called dry start.

it seems even in room light co2 is limiting.

LC

 

[Tom Barr]

1500ppm or so would help, if you could measure it cheaply, for the DSM, however, no one is going t plop down 300-800 to measure that for a little while to help the growth, if they are growing weed/Hooch/Cannabis for medicinal use, then it's a very wise investment.

For the cost however of the crop, some/many aquatic plants can have a higher return than even illegal controlled crops. The market for aquatic plants is far far smaller however.

The issue with increasing some things in fertilization and not others, is that the other nutrients/resources end up limiting the production, so instead of 30% more yield, you end up with 5% for the 1st year and then only 2-5% thereafter at best.
In agriculture, we can provide the other non limiting nutrients easily, if we have a valuable cash crop. Then it's worthwhile.

But in natural systems, this often does not occur, N and P are typically limiting, or water, or or or..........more CO2 in the desert offers little, there's not enough water etc.

So it depends on the system.
Agriculture is a much more controlled and manipulated system. Like our tanks which are even more controlled(but subjected to user errors ...as such)


Regards,
Tom Barr

 

[Philosophos]

1500ppm or so would help, if you could measure it cheaply, for the DSM, however, no one is going t plop down 300-800 to measure that for a little while to help the growth, if they are growing weed/Hooch/Cannabis for medicinal use, then it's a very wise investment.

I'll put the idea away for later then; maybe it'll work out under different circumstances. It'd probably be way too easy to gas the plants with purely pumping in CO2 and eyeballing from a drop checker. The air would simply be displaced and the tank would fill up with CO2, then I'd be left worrying about circulation etc. Definitely a job for a CO2 meter.

Still, I may tinker once my HC mat expands; these emersed growth trays are stupidly cheap to set up.

Biollante, if you're stalking around this thread at any point I wouldn't mind hearing what you're doing.

For the cost however of the crop, some/many aquatic plants can have a higher return than even illegal controlled crops. The market for aquatic plants is far far smaller however.

Ya, I think I worked out HC netting around $50-$100 per square foot per year after operating expenses, with the potential for about 6 square feet vertically for every 1 sq. foot of floor space on an 8 or 9 foot ceiling. A few other ground covers seem relatively similar.


-Philosophos