Tom Barr;64324 said:You mention your pH is 6.4, but you did not mention what the KH was measured at.
What good is that with the other?[/B]
My KH is always between 4.8 and 5.1. According to calculations (tables) that would give me between 45.98 and 51.16 ppm CO2. But that is not how I set my CO2, so that is why I didn't mentioned my KH. I set my CO2 by raising my CO2 (lowering the pH) till my shrimp jumped out. Turned it 0.1 pH back and kept that pH while checking my KH stays stable. This way I have the maximum amount of CO2 my shrimp allow me. It turned out to be at pH 6.4.
Tom Barr;64324 said:I do not rely on a specific ppm for CO2 myself.
I work at it backwards.
I get a system that is stable, then go about looking for possible reasons why.
Then I measure the CO2, and then question how much I can honestly say and know about it.
I do the same for lighting, for nutrients, water column or sediment or both.
I didn't set on a specific CO2 amount either, it just turned out to be this as shown before.
I also use 2 DC's as a double check. One with 4 KH and one with 9 KH. If both are the same color green, that would give me about 45 ppm. So my CO2 would be about 45 by both methods. As I said before, I can't test it any more specific.
Tom Barr;64324 said:Still, should not activated carbon and large water changes fix that as well for a control test?? [/B]
WC fits in perfectly if algae would be induced instead of inhibited by a signal chemical. This explains why WC's have a good effect on reducing algae. You take away the chemical, and the algae would no longer be induced.
jonny_ftm;64313 said:Also, there's a universally admitted fact: Plant growth will stunt when a given nutrient is deficient.
When plant growth stunts, algae emerges.
Just want to find out why that is. And why does reducing/limiting PO4 lead to a more controllable environment and reducing CO2/NO3 etc. lead to algae. So I suggested sugars, these are used as energy by the plant but without CO2, sugars are not (well) formed because carbon is the backbone of a sugar. Misformed sugars, can be excreted and lead to algae growth. Maybe PO4 is not that important for forming sugars (I believe it's main function is as ATP) and for example magnesium (key atom in chlorofyll) is, so this will lead sooner to algae than PO4 does.
The algae that shows up can sometimes be identified by the nutrient that is missing because is will lead to a certain sugar that favours one kind of algae. For example GSA with very low PO4, and GDA with very low Mg. CO2 because carbon is a keyelement in sugars itself and in plant growth will lead to major problems, so the focus on more CO2 = less algae, fits in perfectly as well!
DISCLAIMER: This is all based on theoretics I didn't checked, but makes sense to me