Noticed when backing off of CO 2 some plants actually got better

reef12

Member
Apr 29, 2013
534
0
16
Tulsa
Strange after a round of some just melting away, a bunch have came back strong and clean.

Strange indeed.

Jeff
 
Mar 20, 2013
1,007
44
48
US
I'm skeptical that it's the cause. More likely just a correlation. If you can induce plant melting by returning the CO2 back to previous levels, and then stop it by dropping, then there may be causality.
 

Tom Barr

Founder
Staff member
Administrator
Jan 23, 2005
18,695
736
113
I've never once seen this is any of my tanks and the number of tanks and plant species are staggering after 20+ years.........
I suppose some folks can really be over gassing their tanks, and they were larding it on, in such cases, I suppose it could be possible.

Every time I've ever tried it, poor plant growth, algae etc. With some species, they might be adapting fast, better than others. But some species may not.
With more light, you will also find this much less likely I would suggest.
 

reef12

Member
Apr 29, 2013
534
0
16
Tulsa
Tom Barr;128106 said:
I've never once seen this is any of my tanks and the number of tanks and plant species are staggering after 20+ years.........
I suppose some folks can really be over gassing their tanks, and they were larding it on, in such cases, I suppose it could be possible.

Every time I've ever tried it, poor plant growth, algae etc. With some species, they might be adapting fast, better than others. But some species may not.
With more light, you will also find this much less likely I would suggest.

Yes Tom maybe the water , maybe the filter, maybe the gravel as all different from your stuff and water.

No BS had the Rotala Wallichii about go away, the Pogostemon erectus, change it's leaves and boy does that plant smell bad, the Ludwigia Cuba change about 4 times, the Limnophila Aromatica change also.

So maybe as my tank way different then yours could be.

What do you think Tom?

What would be your routine on say ferts and light for a 125 and a 75?

I run the ferts this way Macros' every other day 25 Ml of a solution of 1/8 cup to 16 ounces Distilled water, which is used on all of my solutions and kept in the fridge.

On the Micros' 25 Ml from a solution of 3 tablespoons in 10 ounces water.

On the other one 1 tablespoon and half , of potassium sulfate, mag sulfate, and mono potassium phosphate in 10 ounces of water.

Iron 1 and half teaspoons in 4 ounces water dosed everyday.

Any help?

Seems I can't find the balance between all for both tanks , but can grow Ambulia like crazy and a few others, really fast

I will fight this battle until I win all the way, sort of like a Reef tank back in the 90s early 2000's

Jeff
 

fablau

rotalabutterfly.com
Staff member
Moderator
Sep 13, 2008
2,934
633
113
50
Laguna Niguel, CA
www.fablauplants.com
It is funny thank Ambulias is one of the few plants are still struggling in my tank, whereas they used to grow like crazy when My tank was low-tech... Eager to know Tom's thoughts.
 

Tom Barr

Founder
Staff member
Administrator
Jan 23, 2005
18,695
736
113
reef12;128115 said:
Yes Tom maybe the water , maybe the filter, maybe the gravel as all different from your stuff and water.

After 100+ tanks with plants, I think I'd see some correlation if there was much to this claim.
Sure, 1% or less, heck, that's possible for many things that you'd never associate together.

Those are just my stats, but after helping folks for decades, you sort get a good idea.
I've yet to see such a case in person, I hear folks doing this every so often.

But only on the web.

Locals I've looked, but the CO2 was way over dosed in the 2 cases.
They had like, 4 fish in 75 gallon tank.........
They reduced and were okay.

Some though they had more CO2 than they did, but removed a light that changed their pH meter probe , I assume from stray current.
Many other things go on.

But if I do this on purpose on a well run tank, it have never once been good.
Now I've also done this inadvertently as well..the CO2 tank runs out of gas, the CO2 line popped off...........etc.
The results are not better growth in every case.

Now a CO2 reactor might be better at dissolving the CO2 at a lower rate say, than at a higher one.........and less mist and haze might help.
There's might other stuff going on, hard to say with little information except just one change mentioned.

No BS had the Rotala Wallichii about go away, the Pogostemon erectus, change it's leaves and boy does that plant smell bad, the Ludwigia Cuba change about 4 times, the Limnophila Aromatica change also.

When you say "changed", you mean better, worse, stinky dead plants, death? This does not sound better to me.

So maybe as my tank way different then yours could be. What do you think Tom?
What would be your routine on say ferts and light for a 125 and a 75?

Similar to my own 70 gal and 120 gallon, they are only off by 5 gallons:)


I run the ferts this way Macros' every other day 25 Ml of a solution of 1/8 cup to 16 ounces Distilled water, which is used on all of my solutions and kept in the fridge.
On the Micros' 25 Ml from a solution of 3 tablespoons in 10 ounces water.
On the other one 1 tablespoon and half , of potassium sulfate, mag sulfate, and mono potassium phosphate in 10 ounces of water.
Iron 1 and half teaspoons in 4 ounces water dosed everyday.
Any help? Seems I can't find the balance between all for both tanks , but can grow Ambulia like crazy and a few others, really fast

I will fight this battle until I win all the way, sort of like a Reef tank back in the 90s early 2000's

Jeff

Those real fast growing plants, try taking them out and seeing.
I bet they are just beating up on the others for CO2. Ferts are not likely the issue here.
One or a few aggressive weeds often show signs of a CO2 issue, they compete better than other plants for limited CO2 and lighting.

This occurs naturally in nature.
 

reef12

Member
Apr 29, 2013
534
0
16
Tulsa
Thanks Tom ,and now I am beginning to understand , the slow ones have no chance at the CO 2 as the fast ones taking all of it.

I think right there, now if the wife would let me set up another 75.

Jeff
 

Tom Barr

Founder
Staff member
Administrator
Jan 23, 2005
18,695
736
113
reef12;128358 said:
Thanks Tom ,and now I am beginning to understand , the slow ones have no chance at the CO 2 as the fast ones taking all of it.

I think right there, now if the wife would let me set up another 75.

Jeff

This is true in natural systems, and likely even more true to in a dense confined space like a planted tank.
I think when folks are having a nagging semi minor issue, and they see some plants doing very well, but others, not so much...............
This is a clear sign or CO2 being off a bit for those wimpier plants, but not the aggressive weeds.

Maybe it's KH for some plant species, or some other cause, or a mix of several causes.
But CO2 is just a huge massive factor in submersed weed growth. It cannot be overstated.

I've never seen a case personally where backing off the CO2 helped the plants, fish? Yes, plants? Never in any of my tanks, not even once.
I've done this many times, on purpose and inadvertent. Algae, poor growth etc.

Never have the plants just suddenly gotten better/more growth etc.

Some combination of factors might cause folks to think this is the case, but if you isolate the CO2, and then do this with a well run tank, I'm highly skeptical, I'll want to know the details on your methods, because I've never been able to demonstrate or show this.
Algae fear and threats?

Come on, I can fix those easily.
The naysayers? They still fear and have algae and growth issues.
So methods and the lack of control in their test really cause me to think they have overlooked and not done good methods to support their results.

If you have the controls, you have consistency, you can produce several nice well run tanks without any issues for a wide range of plants, then you have a reference, now you have good methods and can vary the CO2 and see if the claim has merit.
The claim very well might have merit, but I've never seen it in 20+ years, so I'm going to be very interested in how the test was set up. I should be able to duplicate it.

So should others.
 

Matt F.

Lifetime Charter Member
Lifetime Member
May 30, 2009
2,319
4
38
California
I think the only plausible explanation (assuming there is a correlation between less gas and better plant health) is that your diffusion method is more efficient at getting the CO2 to the plants when your injection rate is less.

I have an ADA ceramic disk diffuser, and I noticed an improvement in plant health and the disappearance of GDA from my tank when I went from 5-6 bps (approx.) down to 1 bubble per second about the same rate Aqua Forest Aquarium uses in their 60P (I have a 60P).

More gas does not mean it's getting to your plants. Off-gassing could play a role here, which would also explain the GDA problem (remember, Tom was able to control GDA with simple CO2 tweaks after his last vacation).
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Tom Barr

Founder
Staff member
Administrator
Jan 23, 2005
18,695
736
113
I buy that rational, the diffuser can be more efficient since it produces finer mist and current is better able to mix that versus a higher rate with large bubbles that rise up too fast to become dissolved.
But if you use a method that is not dependent on a diffuser, but rather a reactor or a high mix rate and long return lines etc for longer contact times, then you will never see this.

I've long said that diffuser disc have issues.
The good part: you can see if the rates of CO2 drop and if the gas is stopped for any reason easily.

The bads:

1. They clog, this changes the diffusion rates
2. They need cleaned
3. It's something else inside the aquarium.
4. They suck on larger tanks
5. They required high out put pressure
6. The bubble sizes change over time.
7. Like CO2 mist from venturis, they add mist all over the place.
8. They break easily
9. Good diffusers cost a fair amount of $$$(ADA were by far, the best ones I used)

I've used them on various tanks over maybe 10 years. I'll never use them personally again.
 

Matt F.

Lifetime Charter Member
Lifetime Member
May 30, 2009
2,319
4
38
California
I think this really makes sense. Haven't had a problem with GDA or plant health since I made the tweak.
I also religiously soak my ADA diffuser in bleach once a week to ensure that the pores don't clog. Towards the end of the week I can visually see a difference. I sometimes crank the CO2 up as to blow the clogging gunk out. This helps in between cleanings.

Tom Barr;128511 said:
I buy that rational, the diffuser can be more efficient since it produces finer mist and current is better able to mix that versus a higher rate with large bubbles that rise up too fast to become dissolved.
But if you use a method that is not dependent on a diffuser, but rather a reactor or a high mix rate and long return lines etc for longer contact times, then you will never see this.

I've long said that diffuser disc have issues.
The good part: you can see if the rates of CO2 drop and if the gas is stopped for any reason easily.

The bads:

1. They clog, this changes the diffusion rates
2. They need cleaned
3. It's something else inside the aquarium.
4. They suck on larger tanks
5. They required high out put pressure
6. The bubble sizes change over time.
7. Like CO2 mist from venturis, they add mist all over the place.
8. They break easily
9. Good diffusers cost a fair amount of $$$(ADA were by far, the best ones I used)

I've used them on various tanks over maybe 10 years. I'll never use them personally again.
 

Tom Barr

Founder
Staff member
Administrator
Jan 23, 2005
18,695
736
113
Well, let's frame it a different way; if you use say an ADA beetle 50, vs a small ADA knock off off ebay for a 60p tank, which is going to provide a more consistent CO2 concentration?

Bubble rates do not automatically translate into stable CO2 ppm inside the aquarium.

They should, but that assumes the METHOD of diffusion is also stable, that's not the case with disc diffusers.
It IS the case with reactors however.

Smaller nano tanks also have a similar problem due to degassing from evaporation and HOB filters current patterns.
My tanks have reactors, and wet/dry with large sumps, surface skimming etc.

All these things lead to more stable degassing rates as well as more stable CO2.

Matt, a very simple routine is to keep a Lee's specimen fish catching container near by. Take the diffuser out with the CO2 running and soak in some bleach water/or spray with tilex and allow the gas to run through for 10-15 minutes.

Dump the bleach /tilex water out. Rinse the diffuser a couple fo time, fill the container with some water and add dechlorinator, wait another 10 minutes, then return. Since the container hangs on the tank, this is a very easy routine to clean it.
As easy as humanly possible.

And no spills and rough next to the tank so you do not have to remove the CO2 line etc.
The pressure from the CO2 also blows out the bacteria and the crud while bleaching it.

H2O2 also works and is milder.