The Importance of Biomass in a Planted Tank

More plants= less algae

Less plants= more algae

More plants= more O2
More plants= less NH4
More plants= better conditions for bacteria
Happy bacteria= better cycling of all waste
High plant biomass= dynamic surface= hard for algae to gain foothold
High plant biomass= less light for algae
More plant biomass= better root formation= better substrate cycling


Disadvantages:
Higher nutrient demand
Higher CO2 demand
More work/labor
Cost more initially
Less water movement

*If needs are not met(CO2/light/nutrients) potential die of all the plant waste can result in rotting plant materials, less O2 and release of bound NH4
* If proper pruning is not preformed and water currents are not in place, dead spots, low O2, progressively poorer growth will result.

Case study:

Obviously, at least to me, although few pay much credence to this issue: a tank with say 100% plant biomass by weight grows(say 100 grams dry weight) and becomes 2x as much(say 200 grams dry weight), the owner neglects pruning the tank, adds the same fertilizer routine as before, later, at week 3, he sees algae and poor plant growth.

Most realize they need to prune.
But few realize they need to add more CO2/nutrients.

Either that or prune.
Lighting becomes an issue as plants begin to compete heavily for light.
Biomass growth slows down for that as well.

So pruning maintains a stable uptake of nutrients, it's not just aesthetics like most will suggest, there is a basic physiology at work there as well.

Regards,
Tom Barr

 

You are now a plant farmer, grow more plants if you want more plants, that's what a farmer's spouse would say.
"After you do all the chores on my list"

That's why I'm still an old maid myself. Never found a good boss truthfully.

Yes, I'll address the impact on algae and plant biomass.
There is a lot of research based support for these observations is tropical and subtropical shallow lakes, as well as some northern lakes as well.

30-50% surface area aquatic vegetation = no algae, gin clear water.
Regardless of nutrient levels(except at very extremely low or very high).
That's based on hundreds of lakes over a wide range of environmental conditions.

So the theories I suggest on line here, also apply well to natural systems and states. Few aquarist do this type of approach/thinking.
I do not know really, maybe I am the only one making much fuss about it?

Given the paucity of knowledge in the aquatic plant hobby, seems a bit odd to me.

Greg and I are likely going to do some rework on the web site.
I'll add a few things, remove some others.

I'll be adding a nice newbie section.
Basic articles etc.
Then where to go next.

This site is not really a newbie site, although many end up here and I turn no newbie away. Many folks avoid using brain cells and work, I am no different in many other matters.

Regards,
Tom Barr

 

Not repeating work that's already been done is smart.


I like that myself, then it means great, I do not have to test that and can move on to something else. But that assumes what's been done is correct, it also assumes that test already done might not have any/much learning value, which I feel they do, you get new insight when you try out old test in a new light years later very often.
But no sense in repeating most of the work involved.

Do not make hypothesis you are not willing to test yourself
That says you are volunteering to do the test

While many have made the comments that they wished they'd come here or tried this out many years ago etc, I've helped folks and saved them money for well over a decade now(generally 100$'s and is many cases 1000$'s), finding the place/person that's good is generally a word of mouth type of thing.

So simply referring friends etc will help.
A book is in the works, likely summer of 2008 or so, maybe a little farther.
That will help.

Nagging the newbie sites or the outdated ones to update their information can help, many balk at the idea though.

I am quite patient with folks that are "on the path" to solving issues.
So no issue here asking, I am very willing to point folks to the right direction if more information/homework is required, but generally just give folks what they need to answer their question.

So never be scared to ever ask a question about plants.
Often times you can have a frustrating path indeed, I know that.

Regards,
Tom Barr

 

No, they do a lot of water changes.
2x a week generally and at leats that much for the first 2 months or so on any new tank set up. They reduce the lighting also. Generally only high light for a 2-3 hour block, the rest of the time, about 1-2w/gal at most.

See some of my tanks, they are rather sparse, the flying fickle finger of fate is a very low biomass tank, yet is spotless clean, well fertilized and low bioloading.

ADA tanks are often similar, lots of tending, lots of large water changes(what do you think that exports? generally sources of NH4/NH4 waste in the feces in the upper gravel layers)

Such tanks are more sensitive to changes, but.......they are not that hard once the roots grow in well and the bacteria are cycling better, the roots amplify the cycling rates by adding O2 deep into the substrate and enhance bacterial growth significantly.

Too many folks add a few sprigs of HC and expect a carpeting and do not do many water changes/crank the light etc.

Regards,
Tom Barr

 

Well, the NH4 is removed from the substrate via the roots, even if the material is inert, the fish waste is not.

Bacteria can do the same but are less stable than roots that weave the gravel grains together and provide long distance transports as well as O2.

Bacteria do not add O2.
O2 gas tanks are not that pricey, nor are O2 regulators.
Use a DO meter though.

You can kill fish with too much O2 also.

If you want some O2/NH4 support for algae blooms:
SpringerLink - Journal Article

Regards,
Tom Barr

 

SpringerLink - Journal Article

A stressed out plant leaks and rots:

SpringerLink - Journal Article

Regards,
Tom Barr

 

No,
But it's not that clear in the EI article to be honest.
50% of the surface area and generally lots of faster growing plants, or else less lighting etc, can be used as you get closer to less biomass.

It's not going to be a distinct % or biomass I think due to lighting, plant species and user issues.

But more is generally better.
Dense as you can go.

To some degree.
But.......consider this:

A tank with 3x as much plant biomass vs the same tank, light etc, with the regular biomass.

Now if you added say 40ppm per week of NO3, you might predict something like 2-3x as much uptake, thus the range would be between say 20-30ppm of NO3 with high biomass, with less? Maybe 50-70ppm.

These are not critical though.
What are critical issues?

How do you think this same issues applies to NH4?
More or less?
Assume light/CO2 are the same.

Now try this same issue with a set stable CO2 input(note this means that CO2 bubble mrate coming into the tank is the same throughout).
What do you think would occur if you have say 35ppm of CO2 with regular biomass then increased it 3x?

It would no longer be 35ppm would it?
It would likely be less, much less, about 10-15ppm or so.

Now how would NH4 uptake also be influenced knowing what you know about how carbon and nitrogen uptake regulate eachother as one becomes limiting?

Would you expect less NH4 with 3x the biomass under a CO2 limitation at 10pppm of CO2? Most would say yes.

I would not actually.
With high CO2 with less biomass, you have intense uptake for those plants.
With low and unstable CO2, the plant goes into shock and reduces, or "downregulates" NH4 uptake to match the carbon supply.


So it depends on the various other confounding issues like CO2 and it's control over NH4 uptake etc as well.

Cool huh?

Regards,
Tom Barr

 

Yes!!
All points that are very meaningful.
I also suggest good amounts of filtration.
I've never been one of those filterless plant tank folks.

Never bought into that, the tanks have always been less stable and many report over time, that the tank goes sour. Many got GW algae.

Read the prior post of mine for more about other factors.

Sparse plantings are not that hard but many seem to have issues.

Zeolite is very effective in place of AC.
It makes good biomedia later.

Regards,
Tom Barr