# BBA took a hit. Its all white and lime green.



## spypet (Sep 15, 2006)

it's simple. with all that light and Co2 your plants took whatever nutrients were available from your tank water and substrate, and your algae simply starved to death. you should ignore your tank more often :hihi: just curious if you notice any new brown spots on your plants which is usually associate with a lack of nutrients. if you don't, then it's probably because they managed just fine with whatever was down in your substrate where your algae can't feed. your dead white algae should dissolve and flake off over the next few weeks, just keep the water flow going to help it along.


----------



## Ryzilla (Oct 29, 2005)

spypet said:


> just curious if you notice any new brown spots on your plants which is usually associate with a lack of nutrients.



Interestingly enough there is no spots. I have been looking at my alternanthera reineckii for signs of deficiency since it seems to be the first to react. All seems well. as soon as all the BBA dies now I can work on the hair algae.


----------



## Betowess (Dec 9, 2004)

Ryzilla said:


> Interestingly enough there is no spots. I have been looking at my alternanthera reineckii for signs of deficiency since it seems to be the first to react. All seems well. as soon as all the BBA dies now I can work on the hair algae.


I would say the gas killed it as its suppose to and the tank found its balance. Its funny how the tanks we mess with the least sometimes find their balance sooner. Congrats on the wedding Ry!


----------



## plantbrain (Dec 15, 2003)

Water changes etc can influence CO2 if it's low in the tank.
I hear folks say their CO2 is this or that, but I know full well few test it critically.

What occurs, and this happens in non CO2 tanks as well: adaptation to a stable CO2 level, whatever it is.

So if you where on the lower end of CO2 ppm for this light level, then it's likely.

If you where on the higher end of CO2 ppm then it's not as likely.
But you had BBA to start with.............

So what happens when you add NO3/K/PO4/Traces to a tank in terms of CO2 demand from the plants?

Does adding these increase or decrease the CO2 demand of plants?

Think about that.

Now add some of these limiting nutrient sback and the BBA will grow back again......for the same reason.........the CO2 uptake is increased till the plants suck it all out and then the BBA bounces right back.

The reason is nothing to do with limiting nutrients for the BBA.
The nutrient limitation to the plants reduces their ability to use and acquire more CO2.

If I'm N limited, I no longer need all this CO2.
So I stop using it and taking it up.

You still think you have the same CO2 ppm as before, but I'm very confident that it's not.

I had BBA for 2-3 years. We tried many things to kill it.
I've not ever had it since but I've focused on CO2 everytime for clients and for folks on the web, and if they took the advice, not just part of it, they resolved their BBA.

It has never involved limiting nutrients, but I've seen this occur and slows 
CO2 uptake by the plants.

You may also do this by limiting PO4, that will slow both CO2 uptake and NO3 uptake.

But there are trade offs for each method.

None of which get at the real underlying issue, low CO2 when the plants need it: during the day.

The limiting nutrients cause the plant to downregulate the CO2 and what you see is secondary, it is a cascade effect, not a simple system.


Do your self a favor: test the CO2 very carefully, see Hoppy's KH reference method, use a pH probe etc. Measure the CO2 every 1-2 hours during the lighting phase. I bet you do not have enough for part or most of the day.

Regards, 
Tom Barr


----------



## JenThePlantGeek (Mar 27, 2006)

That's very insightful Tom, and it makes a lot of sense when you think about it. I bet the same would be true if you limited light and kept your CO2 constant - the demand for CO2 would go down and the CO2 ppm would go up, killing and/or restricting the algae.


----------



## Ryzilla (Oct 29, 2005)

Tom,

I will measure my CO2 3 times a day for the next week. In the morning with lights off, midday when the lights have been on for four or 5 hours, and right when the aromatica closes up around 9 hours of light. If I have a lower CO2 count then what I thought, then the EI method of dosing would have caused BBA in my tank because of the excess of nutrients that the plants couldnt take up because of the limiting amount CO2. 

Would it be possible that the +50 endlers I have in my tank could support the NO3 requirments of my plant mass? One of my indicators has been my Limnophila Aromatica. I have noticed no yellowing of any leaves. The crowns are not bright red, but they are not bright green. So my assumption has been that my NO3 has been around 15-20ppm but no more then 40ppm when crpwns stay bright green. I will test the NO3 as well in the mornign and when the crowns close up. 

What signs should I be looking for to see when I should be adding PO4? How about K? What macro do you suggest I add first for the first week after testing, then followed by what other nutrient for the following week? I want to try to do this methodically.


----------



## Ryzilla (Oct 29, 2005)

JenThePlantGeek said:


> That's very insightful Tom, and it makes a lot of sense when you think about it. I bet the same would be true if you limited light and kept your CO2 constant - the demand for CO2 would go down and the CO2 ppm would go up, killing and/or restricting the algae.


But if I did this I could potentially stop the growth of my Japonica. I would have to take 39w out of the 154w that I have. I have a forest of jungle val that the 154w penetrate through.


----------



## plantbrain (Dec 15, 2003)

JenThePlantGeek said:


> That's very insightful Tom, and it makes a lot of sense when you think about it. I bet the same would be true if you limited light and kept your CO2 constant - the demand for CO2 would go down and the CO2 ppm would go up, killing and/or restricting the algae.


It also explains why some folks see algae when they add ferts leading them to the incorrect assumption based on correlation rather than causation.

when the rest of the folks with good CO2 add ferts, we do not see the same things, thus one could conclude that the added ferts to the tanks that do not produce algae blooms must be doing some thing other than adding excess ferts to induce the bloom.

That falsification method to show excesses do not cause algae is a simple method I've used for well over a decade.

But when you disprove and falsify one hypothesis, thus reject it...... you need a new alternative one and try to falsify it as well.

Some give up and say oh, "it's too complicated to understand nature, many things happen which we do not understand"

Well, duh...........

That's why folks try to understand and test things, so we do have a better understanding. How's that going to help anyone by making such statements?
Why bother even testing anything if there is no hope of understanding things in natural (or rather in our case, horticultural) systems?

Regards, 
Tom Barr






Regards, 
Tom Barr


----------



## plantbrain (Dec 15, 2003)

Ryzilla said:


> But if I did this I could potentially stop the growth of my Japonica. I would have to take 39w out of the 154w that I have. I have a forest of jungle val that the 154w penetrate through.


You realize that you have 154 w of HO FL light on this tank right?
what happens when you add lots of light ot the CO2 demand?

Does is go up? Or down?

I've grown more Vals and japonica at less than 1/4 of the intensity of light you have. Healthy thickets.

Heck, you have well over 5 w/gal of the most efficient lighting on this tank. Then you have DIY CO2!!!!
And you wonder why you have BBA?

You have about 550 umols of light.
That's a lot.

I can easy grow Japonica at 50-80 umols and have some right now at this range.


You have way too much light to start with and you have a CO2 system that's extremely suspect.

Should have spent the $$ on the CO2 gas tank, not the lighting.

You need 39x2 on that tank, not 4x39.

You will have much better long term success and yes, the plants will start to suffer a littler later as their growth rates will be limited as well.

Also, getting a Gas tank CO2 system will make life much easier and these are worth every penny.

Regards, 
Tom Barr


----------



## Ryzilla (Oct 29, 2005)

plantbrain said:


> You realize that you have 154 w of HO FL light on this tank right?
> what happens when you add lots of light ot the CO2 demand?
> 
> Does is go up? Or down?
> ...


With less light the CO2 demand goes down. Fortunatley I got th 2x36w fixture for free and purchased the 2x39w retro myself. I will take off the 2x36 and only run the the 2x39. I hope 79w over my 30g will be enough for the downoi I have in there. If push comes to shove Ill purchase a WH 7 ballast and run 3x39.


----------



## plantbrain (Dec 15, 2003)

I've grown plenty of dowoni at 10X less light than you have.
More light means more upkeep, not "better" growth or as better system, set up for you.


Regards, 
Tom Barr


----------



## Ryzilla (Oct 29, 2005)

plantbrain said:


> I've grown plenty of dowoni at 10X less light than you have.
> More light means more upkeep, not "better" growth or as better system, set up for you.
> 
> 
> ...


Thanks Tom, I will make the adjustments.


----------



## Betowess (Dec 9, 2004)

This is a very interesting discussion on how limiting nutrients can lower the CO2 uptake of plants and thus kill BBA(or vice versa). 

My biggest challenge is with ADA soil and fairly soft water, I cannot seem to get the CO2 up consistently without stressing the fish. I am adding a bit more crushed coral to the canister to keep the pH etc. up more so I can add more CO2. I have contemplated adding some Seachem Onx Sand to do the same, but am holding off from that as yet. Sorry for going a bit off topic. 

My BBA is fairly insubstantial, but it does come back. A quick squirt of Excell cures it topically, but I would prefer a 100% success. I imagine changing CO2 levels is part of the blame, correct? This is only in my 90 G with the Aqua Soil. My 65 gallon with flourite is totally balanced and trouble free.

I am also battling a bit of a nasty red algae (which loves soft conditions I believe, and a diatom type dust) in the 90 gallon. Overall plants are looking pretty great, but these three things are nagging me. I'm trying to up the nutrients ala EI with some success.


----------



## pbohart (Jan 9, 2005)

I live in the same watershed taht Betowess lives in (I live in Portland Oregon).

The water is almost KH=0 out of the tap, and I too have problems keeping the Co2 running because my PH plummets and I worry about the fish.

Let me throw out a plan based on this discussion to see if I really get what you are saying:

I think I might want to slow down on my ferts. This will slow CO2 uptake by the plants and result in higher CO2 in the water? Maybe the other thing I could do is to trim my lighting cycle to reduce the lenght of CO2 consumption?

I get breakouts of BBA and am now battling GDA likely caused from a massive uprooting of plants.

Am I interpreting this correctly?

Thanks!

Patrick


----------



## plantbrain (Dec 15, 2003)

Umm why do you need KH etc?
I mean relative to CO2?

When you add X amount of CO2, the KH is not going influence the actual amount of CO2 ppm.

If you have a KH of 1 and pH of 6, you still have 30ppm and when you have a KH of 10 and a pH of say 7.0, you still have a CO2 level of 30ppm etc.

pH drop etc is something I think is without merit (think about doing an 80% water change when using CO2 and the pH change that happens in a few minutes time etc), gassing your fish is another matter.
As long as the shift is not increasing ions say like adding a bunch of baking soda all of a sudden etc, fish are fairly good/resistent to such changes.

pH change due to CO2 is not in the same realm as pH changes due to increases in KH etc.

One is a salt(baking soda), the other is weak acid gas.

No KH is not that large of an issue, if you use a KH reference solution, either a drop checker or a CO2 permeable membrane and a rubber band to add some KH ref solution into the "sock membrane" covering the tip of a pH probe.

Then it does not matter what is in the tap/tank water since the CO2 is the only gas able to affect the pH inside the membrane or drop checker.

CO2 needs to be stable throughout the day, you need to have good current running through the CO2 system/method, and some surface moevement as well to drive some gas off least it build up and gas your fish, do not add cO2 at night, the fish sure do not need it, and it allows you to add more when it's most needed.


Regards, 
Tom Barr


----------



## Betowess (Dec 9, 2004)

On my situation, I notice my Rainbows get real sluggish when the CO2 gets too high, which happens when the pH starts dropping to 5.7 or so. One Rainbow even started surfacing the other night. So maybe I'm mistaking the cause, which is probably too much CO2. But it happens about the same time. I keep tweaking the CO2 up and down and can't seem to find a set point. I assume some of the instability is due to such a low KH buffer (2-3 dKH), so I am hoping I can get a more consistent and higher CO2 ppm with a bit higher KH/pH. Am I wrong to assume this?

I have plenty of current and set the gas about an hour before lights on and off at end of lights. I even added a airstone for nighttime as a precaution, though I doubt I need it. Most of these problems seem to be associated with Aqua Soil and quite soft water. My Flourite tank is very stable and algae free at pH 6.3. I even contemplate going back to flourite or trying the new Aquarium Plant.com new black substrate. I personally have had it with Eco.


----------



## esarkipato (Jul 19, 2005)

Wow, this thread is off topic. BUT....

Tom, it seems that your argument is for a stable excess of co2. Does this translate to an argument for the use of pH controllers?

Personally I've dealt with BBA ever since I've gone high light, with pressurized on 29g. I've tried 13 million ways of dissolving the co2, and still it grows. Maybe I don't have that excess consistently enough.


----------



## Wö£fëñxXx (Dec 2, 2003)

Tom is dead nut here with this information people, C02 is the hardest nutrient to get nailed down, lots of folks are running a ton of light on thier tank and when you do that the demand for nutrients really increases, macros and micros are very easy to take care of, just dose those according to the sticky, then what is left? you got it, light and C02..

esarkipato, one does need to be above that minimum "threashold" for the amount of light he/she is pushing over said tank on a constant basis for the duration of that photoperiod, however much that may be, the plants and algae are the perfect test kit, and the perfect "dropchecker"
But if you can not tell a sick plant from a healthy plant, then a dropchecker may be just what you need 
You say when you installed highlight, you have had BBA since? instantly know your C02 in inadequate, reduce the light and work on the C02.

Glass diffusers will give you better control than any PVC reactor in a highlight tank. The difference between the two are night and day, for instance a Milwaukee needle valve compaired to a clippard NV the difference between them are the same, night and day, one is a POS and the other is not  with the clippard you have much better precision and control.
Don't get me wrong, reactors can and do work, once you reach an intense light level, the reactor is not able to keep up with the demand of C02 needed.
By increasing the bubble rate up up with a reactor, you reach a point where you simply start to just poison the water, you need better diffusion with intense light.

Many of you are pushing to much light, and you simply are not ready for that yet, that is why I keep telling people to reduce your lighting and learn the plants, they are much easier to manage with moderate light anyway, highlight is cool, but you have to be a graduate of the moderate light school first 

Dose the tank according to the sticky, thats easy enough, 

then you put say this much light over the tank: the problem is people can not seem to get the C02 level to atleast match the light level. 


------------------------------light level
-----------------------------========

------------------------------------------C02 level- below light level
-----------------------------------------========= equals poor plant growth, BBA, and open to all sorts of undesirables.


What you want is:


------------------------------C02 level
----------------------------========= 
------------------------------C02 level----------light level
----------------------------=========--------===========

If you can't get your C02 up to meet the demand of light, then bring the light down to a managable level by either raising it higher off the tank, which is what I prefere because it gives you flexability and control, or cutting some bulbs.



Betowess, in a low kh tank surface movement is the vital key, you can choke fish alot faster in this environment than one with harder water, when you see fish stress? relax and lift the spraybar or lily pipe to break the surface then just watch what happens, then adjust/balance the light and C02 accordingly, balance.

Part of my daily routine is using the lily pipes, up and down, before or after my light turn off the pipes come to the surface, for a few hours or all night, by morning I lower them, you get a feel for it by observing the tank and its population.


----------



## pbohart (Jan 9, 2005)

Sorry that we have gone so far off topic. But I am really struggling here.

I now get it that KH does not control CO2. The amount of CO2 you have in your tank is just that....regardless of what your KH is. That all makes sense to me.

I do worry, however, that I have inadequate CO2 for my lighting (3.5WGP). I have a powerhead powered reactor to mix the CO2 and I have been running the CO2 day and night to try to get the CO2 "up".

Sounds like the better plan would be to either:
A) Cut the light by raising the light off the tankl. I assume simply shortening the length of the photocycle is insufficient?, or
B) Get better Co2 diffusion with a glass diffusor.

Of A) and B), which would you recommend. I am not worried about the expense of a new glass diffusor.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR HELP!

Patrick


----------



## plantbrain (Dec 15, 2003)

You can have high CO2 and then have it bob around due to high plant uptake, and if you have an under rated CO2 reactor/diffusion method, then the CO2 will go up and then gas the fish and then later play catch up as it's unable to add enough CO2.

If the CO2 set up cannot handle semi automation, eg, cannot response fast/stable to the CO2 uptake by the plants, then you will get algae.

The same case is true with an under powered set up using a pH controller.
The control function is only as good as the capacity of the reactor/diffuser.

If your CO2 demand by the plants outstrips the ability of the diffuser/reactor, then a pH controller is unable to preform it's duty that it was designed to do.

Many folks errornously assume that a pH controller is the solution to everything. It's not. I've redone several folks pH controller set ups for this very reason.

A good needle valve and good surface movement(not excessive) will go a long way to helping the stability.

I think some of the cheaper CO2 regulators+needle valves.........well........suck.

I use clippards at the cheap end, and nice Swagelok at the upper end.
I prefer Victor Regulators and making my own CO2 manifolds.

There are cheaper regs that work, but the cheap needle valve is a bad apple.

*Betowess*

As long as you have some buffer, it does not matter, 1 degree or 10. It'll never offer you any differences and maintain a better ppm rate.

You are adding CO2.
That's what changes.

All using a different KH is shift the KH and pH upwards from a lower value, it does not add more/less CO2.

Thus the rate of CO2 being delivered is the issue at hand.
You get more wiggle room with that at lower light.

At higher light, more consistency is required and more/better CO2 diffusion/reactor "power" is required. Especially on larger tanks where there tends to be less current.

Rhinox diffusers(see ebay) are very good for the $$.
I use several and am very pleased with them.


Regards, 
Tom Barr


----------



## BSS (Sep 24, 2004)

Interesting thread here, folks.

Just a few of my data points. I'm around 3.3 WPG, so I consider it moderate light (others may disagree ). My KH=8-9. I've had my pH set around 6.3 with an SMS122 for many months now, and still the BBA continues. I was running the CO2 7x24, but went to just during the photo period (offset by 2 hours). I've recently dropped it down around 6.0, and the jury is still out. But, per any reasonable charts, my CO2 PPM should be 'off the charts'. But, per the BBA, it ain't :icon_twis !

I've had gasping fish. But as Craig points out, that seems to be a cause for lack of O2, and not CO2. So long as I point my spraybar at around a 45 degree angle upwards, the gasping goes away. I've recently ordered some lilly-like outlet...so we'll see what that does.

Not really a lot of new info. But, what I'm seeing does seem to tie in with what others have said/observed.

BBA...what a PITA ,
Brian.


----------



## Betowess (Dec 9, 2004)

Thanks Craig and Tom. I am noting everything you guys have suggested. I checked out the Rhinox. It does look nice. I've had problems getting the bubble rates right with two different diffusion methods off of a two way manifold w/ clippard NVs. Its involved to explain in full - but Rex and I figured it must be the different pressures. 

I was trying to use a little Duplex diffuser on one side of the tank and a PVC reactor on the other and one or the other kept getting the gas first and most of the gas! - it was a mess - so I went back to just using the reactor by itself, for now.

Since I have two canister filters, I am planning on making a second reactor and plumb that into my reactorless Eheim, and see if that fixes the problem since the pressures will be fairly equal. Anyhow, been dosing more PO4 and KNO3 and pretty decent pearling, so maybe things are turning a corner. Thanks again!


----------



## plantbrain (Dec 15, 2003)

Good CO2 for some folks is a long hard path.
You need to monkey with it and tweak it for each tank.

If you are aroudn alot and can mess with it often through the day, then you can really keep things runnign well.

also, good quality needle valves have not been sold much recently.

Using those cheap things they have on those all in one reg/valve bubble counter might very well be a source of issues for many.

I use a Victor Reg, Nupro/swagelok(or clippards on the cheaper end) valves etc.

Regards, 
Tom Barr


----------



## epicfish (Sep 11, 2006)

plantbrain said:


> Good CO2 for some folks is a long hard path.
> You need to monkey with it and tweak it for each tank.
> 
> If you are aroudn alot and can mess with it often through the day, then you can really keep things runnign well.
> ...


Is it because the cheaper ones aren't as stable after you set the bubble count? I have a "cheap" JBJ regulator w/ manifold and two separate needle valves for my two tanks. The bubble rate seems pretty constant since I've set it since the first day.

I'm getting algae, but I know that's because of my lack of CO2. I don't run it 24/7, and have recently set it to turn on about 1 hour before my lights come on.

Sorry for the thread hijack. I think this is a great thread for everybody!


----------



## Hoppy (Dec 24, 2005)

To repeat epicfish's question: what does a cheap needle valve do or not do that makes it unacceptable? Mine, which is the Milwaukee standard needle valve holds a constant bubble rate, which is about all that I can see wanting one to do. Adjusting it is frustrating, but once done it seems to work fine.


----------



## PeterGwee (Sep 25, 2005)

Not having the CO2 well mixed in the tank could be the another side of the problem. Most never really look into that and assume that the CO2 is always evenly mixed which in fact can have areas of high and low CO2.

Regards,
Peter Gwee


----------



## epicfish (Sep 11, 2006)

PeterGwee said:


> Not having the CO2 well mixed in the tank could be the another side of the problem. Most never really look into that and assume that the CO2 is always evenly mixed which in fact can have areas of high and low CO2.
> 
> Regards,
> Peter Gwee


Unfortunately for me (outgassing problems), I have HOB filters on my 10 gallon which has an impressive flow. Back when I used to have a pH controller, I would check the pH all around my tank at the beginning of, during, and near the end of CO2 injection. The difference within the first 30 of CO2 injection between areas closest to my glass diffuser and farthest away from the diffuser was 0.4 units. After an hour, the difference is 0.1...or at least, it flickers between differences of less than 0.1 unit.

However, with larger tanks, I agree that without enough water movement, it would be insufficient to test one area of the tank and say whether you have enough CO2 or not.


----------



## Wö£fëñxXx (Dec 2, 2003)

I use my needle valves all the time, I don't set them and walk away, that and burning to much light, could be a problem... 

Ever had a good wrench or a nice saw over a cheap one? if you use a good NV over a cheap one, you will know. 

That is another reason I like a diffuser over a reactor, I can see what I am doing with the gas.

3wpg is alot of light, 4wpg is actually to much, you can burn it some, not all day everyday, then folks wonder why they have algae and or withered plants.

I have 3 highlight tanks sitting right here

- 46g, tap only, ADA soil, kh4 gh8
-29g RO/DI only Flora Base kh 0 to 1 maybe/ish
-60cm half RO half tap ADA soil kh2-ish

All three are dosed just as in the sticky, have been since setup, some for a few years, I never miss a dose or a water change, and each tank runs equally well. Good dosing with "light management"

If you want to check your C02? turn your light down! 
keep dosing, keep running C02 during photoperiod, 8 hrs is plenty of light, prune, clean your plants and tank, make sure filter is maintained with proper media along with good flow and surface agitation periodically, anyone should have a smooth running tank in a month or less.


----------



## Betowess (Dec 9, 2004)

Wö£fëñxXx said:


> - 46g, tap only, ADA soil, kh4 gh8
> -29g RO/DI only Flora Base kh 0 to 1 maybe/ish
> -60cm half RO half tap ADA soil kh2-ish
> 
> ...


Bit of a thread Hijack, but I wonder if those with harder water do much better with the Aqua Soil. I've had a lot a problems since introducing it in my 90 gallon and my fairly soft water. Too low of pH to inject enough CO2 without hurting the fish. I do monitor their behaviour and when the pH drops because of high CO2 they really settle down and act too quiet. 

I may yet revert to a more inert substrate like good old flourite. I'm going to give some heavier EI dosing another couple of months, and see where it goes. If things don't improve, I may do a semi restart, keeping most of the plants but changing back to flourite with a darker top dressing river gravel. 

The plants look pretty good overall, but there's latent BBA popping up and some thread algae which just won't go away. Also a weird diatom dust like condition and some rusty red algaes. I do think its because I can't get the CO2 up high enough. And as I have mentioned before, my 65 gallon with flourite is pretty much no maintenance algae free.


----------



## Wö£fëñxXx (Dec 2, 2003)

Betowess said:


> The plants look pretty good overall, but there's latent BBA popping up and some thread algae which just won't go away. Also a weird diatom dust like condition and some rusty red algaes. I do think its because I can't get the CO2 up high enough. And as I have mentioned before, my 65 gallon with flourite is pretty much no maintenance algae free.


That instantly tells me you are burning to much light. The BBA says so. if you have fish in the tank you are choking, then adjust the C02 where they are comphy, then bring the light down to that level. The plants will be healthier too.
Example:

http://www.plantedtank.net/forums/general-planted-tank-discussion/37092-algae-id-help-pics.html


About a month apart, see dates on threads.


http://www.plantedtank.net/forums/photo-album/38883-added-nice-manzanita-burl-finally-scape.html


----------



## Betowess (Dec 9, 2004)

Thanks for sharing that Craig! I'll try bringing the lights down a lot. I have used this much before without a problem - 216 watts Tek T5 - but will try this out. I also picked up some PVC fittings for a second 5/8 inline reactor so hopefully CO2 from both sides will help. I've kept it low enough to keep the fish happy, BTW. Appreciate your time. bob


----------

