# Airstones Good or Bad??



## Thanks (Oct 9, 2004)

no! an airstone will drive away any CO2 you might have in your water, leaving you with almost no CO2 at all. I would strongly reccomend CO2, if only DIY... 
You will have massive algae problems without it.


----------



## EricSilver (Feb 23, 2004)

Thanks said:


> no! an airstone will drive away any CO2 you might have in your water, leaving you with almost no CO2 at all. I would strongly reccomend CO2, if only DIY...
> You will have massive algae problems without it.


Not really. It will maintain in-tank CO2 (and O2) levels that basically match that of the atmosphere. 

I have always used the wooden Coralife air stones that produce ultra fine bubbles. I stopped for about 4 months because I didn't see any apparent benefit. During that no-stone period, my algae problems began, and my plant growth seemed sluggish. After resuming airstone use, I saw an improvement in plant growth and health, and the algae growth has been arrested -- because the extra oxygen the airstone adds to the tank is lethal to algae (and fish pathogens). 

Also, a stream of small to tiny bubbles rising behind a large piece of driftwood or other object being bent, by a powerhead current, to conform to the shape of that object, is a very attractive, natural looking sight.


----------



## malkore (Nov 3, 2003)

Yeah, there's lots of natural bubble walls in amazon lakes and rivers :icon_roll 

Personally I see no reason to run an airstone in a planted tank, UNLESS you are injecting CO2 with a very low Kh, and you run the airstone at night to prevent CO2 from building up too much.

CO2 isn't 100% necessary at 2wpg, but it will definitely have a positive effect on the plants, and will push back algae growth.


----------



## Hypancistrus (Oct 28, 2004)

Thanks said:


> no! an airstone will drive away any CO2 you might have in your water, leaving you with almost no CO2 at all. I would strongly reccomend CO2, if only DIY...
> You will have massive algae problems without it.


Completely totally 100% wrong.

If you have a covered tank, you need to maintain a dissolved oxygen level greater than 5 ppm at all times.




> Adequate dissolved oxygen is necessary for good water quality. Oxygen is a necessary element to all forms of life. Natural stream purification processes require adequate oxygen levels in order to provide for aerobic life forms. As dissolved oxygen levels in water drop below 5.0 mg/l, aquatic life is put under stress. The lower the concentration, the greater the stress. Oxygen levels that remain below 1-2 mg/l for a few hours can result in large fish kills.


I have a DO meter and I have found that running fully stocked tanks covered (even with HOB filters) results in DO levels below 5.0. In some cases even below 2.0.

I run a 42 gallon covered hex tank with two airstones pumped by a Tetratec Deep Water DW96-2 air pump, probably one of the most powerful consumer grade air pumps there is. I inject CO2 at three bubbles per second. My CO2 levels are 15-20 ppm, and my DO level is 7.5. I also have no algae problems.



From another thread:




KevinC said:


> 1. Fish load: If you have a reasonable stocking level, the fish will not over-consume the O2.


It totally depends on the fish. A tank with a few small minnows is different than a tank with a few ancistrus.





KevinC said:


> 2. Water movement: If there is adequate movement (not necessarily turbulence), water will capture dissolved oxygen from the air at the surface, and near-saturation of dissolved O2 will be achieved as it is mixed into the tank.


In order for this to happen, the tank cannot be covered. Most people keep their tanks covered. I have found that even with an opening on the back for the HOB filter, it isn't enough in a covered tank. If the tank is not covered and there is surface turbulance, the same principles of dissolved CO2 dissipation apply as they do for airstones.





KevinC said:


> 3. Temperature: At higher temperatures, less O2 can dissolve. If you are running at discus-keeping temps with a high stocking level, this may be an issue. Otherwise, the saturation level is above 10ppm.


Wrong. It is much harder to dissolve and retain oxygen in tanks heated in the lower to mid 70's as it is in a coldwater tank with no heater and temperatures in the upper 50's / lower 60's. A covered tank heated at 72°F will _very_ likely have a DO reading below 5 mg/L if not running airstones.





Rolo said:


> This should be observed WAY more practically since not EVERY aquarium is like yours. You may have lower the 5 mg/L O2 without running an airstone, but certainly others do not.


If their tanks are covered, I'm betting they do. They can't be sure unless they measure.





Rolo said:


> Almost everyday my plants pearl and I don't use airstones. Pearling means the water has reached 100% saturation of O2. Adding an airstone in my case would do nothing but remove CO2 from the water.


O2 saturation is dependent on temperature and salinity. Just because you see some bubbles on your plant leaves does not indicate with 100% certainty that your DO is at maximum saturation. You can't be sure unless you measure using a meter or test kit. If your tank is uncovered its certainly possible.





Rolo said:


> O2 certainly is imporant, something I believe that doesn't recieve enough attention. O2 is for everyone, but not airstones.


If their tanks are covered and they have fish in them, I would say they are. Just my opinion.





Laith said:


> I have never had a problem with low O2 and have very rarely lost any fish except to perhaps old age. With correct CO2 (more than 20mg/l) & fert levels the plants will *saturate* the water with O2.


How do you know you don't have low O2 unless you measure it with a test kit or meter?





BlueRam said:


> If you are worried about O2 levels, run the air stone on the reverse schedule as the lights.


If you have low O2 levels and a covered tank, running airstones only at night isn't enough.





BlueRam said:


> The reason I do not like bubbles is that it reminds me of a UGF system meant for filtration and current.


I agree the UGF's aren't the best, but I think it's silly not to use an airstone simply because it connotes something else. 





BlueRam said:


> Once you plug in the CO2, the plants will give you more bubbles that you could ever want.


The point of airstones is not to produce bubbles, but to create surface turbulance, "turn" the water, and establish a cushion of air above the surface of a covered tank.


----------



## Hypancistrus (Oct 28, 2004)

malkore said:


> Yeah, there's lots of natural bubble walls in amazon lakes and rivers :icon_roll


Yes, in fact there are. Fast moving rivers and rapids produce DO in water more effectively than an air pump and bubble wall ever could. Many amazon species come from river rapids where the temperature regularly gets over 100°F and the water temperature comes close to matching it. It is only the natural water movement and surface agitation that keeps the DO up in these areas.





malkore said:


> Personally I see no reason to run an airstone in a planted tank, UNLESS you are injecting CO2 with a very low Kh, and you run the airstone at night to prevent CO2 from building up too much.


If you run a covered tank with a full fish load, running an air stone at night isn't enough.


----------



## EricSilver (Feb 23, 2004)

malkore said:


> Yeah, there's lots of natural bubble walls in amazon lakes and rivers :icon_roll


Small airstones do not produce bubble walls. 

Underwater out-gassings are a common enough occurence, and I personally like the effect. And I know from experience that my plants do better with the stone than without. 

(BTW: You forgot to mention there are not a lot of crypts, Wisteria, annubias, etc. in Amazon lakes and rivers either.)


----------



## Not Mister Green (Feb 15, 2005)

*earth's atmosphere contains .033% CO2*

that's about 350 PPM of C02 in regular air. 

does that mean that a tank with ample airstones, or other sufficient aeration, will have 350 ppm of CO2?


----------



## EricSilver (Feb 23, 2004)

Mister Green said:


> that's about 350 PPM of C02 in regular air.
> 
> does that mean that a tank with ample airstones, or other sufficient aeration, will have 350 ppm of CO2?


No. My remark about levels matching that of the atmosphere was misleading because I meant it more in proportion to the atmospheric level of each gas, and the water's ability to absorb them. 

At 70-80 degrees, dissolved oxygen in water would be in the range of 9ppm. I am not sure what the range is for CO2 in an aerated tank. I just know it is less than CO2 injected tanks, and more than what you would have in a non-CO2 injected tank with no airstone.


----------



## Laith (Jul 7, 2004)

If you're running CO2, aerating the water with an airstone will mean that you will use a lot more CO2 to keep the CO2 concentration where you want it.

If you're not running CO2, the only issue in my mind is an esthetic one. Aside from a situation where your tank is jam packed with fish, I've never heard of air bubbles being beneficial. If your tank is jam packed with fish, then you've got more problems than esthetics anyway!

Some people love bubbles. Others hate them (and the noise), me included. Whenever I see air bubbles from an airstone in a tank I start looking for the plastic diver or the opening pearl chest, expecting them to be there as well.

But hey, if you enjoy it, great! Enjoy! 

roud:


----------



## Dr J (Feb 22, 2005)

*WOW! Ask and ye shall receive info*

So, trying to soak in all this info..... Airstones, if any benefit, is probably one of my lesser worries?

Secondly, I probably won't overstock the tank as it is unfair to the Cichlids.

Also, does it matter if I have eggcrate on top of my tank? Should I go back to using the glass covers that came with it?

And just to clarify....keeping at ~2WPG and no CO2 unit, the proper lighting should be fine given the proper kelvin and plant selection??

Thanks to all of you, you guys definitelty have some great info for us newbies to the planted tank.
Dr. J


----------



## Hypancistrus (Oct 28, 2004)

Laith said:


> If you're running CO2, aerating the water with an airstone will mean that you will use a lot more CO2 to keep the CO2 concentration where you want it.


I can't argue you will use more, but if the tank is covered, I would argue agaist a "lot" more. It costs me $15 to fill my 20 lb tank, and I run it at 3 bubbles per second, at 6 bubbles per second it would still last well over a year. One important issue is to make sure the water return is at the _top opposite_ end of the intake, which should be at or near the tank bottom.





Laith said:


> I've never heard of air bubbles being beneficial


Now you have.  I invite you to purchase a DO test kit or DO meter and take readings in a covered tank with fish, with and without airstone/s running.





Laith said:


> If your tank is jam packed with fish, then you've got more problems than esthetics anyway!


I am not talking about an overstocked tank in my comments, I am talking about a _fully_ stocked tank.





Laith said:


> Some people love bubbles. Others hate them (and the noise), me included. Whenever I see air bubbles from an airstone in a tank I start looking for the plastic diver or the opening pearl chest, expecting them to be there as well.


That isn't the point of an airstone, the point is to increase dissolved oxygen for the tank inhabitants.





EricSilver said:


> At 70-80 degrees, dissolved oxygen in water would be in the range of 9ppm.


8 ppm actually, and that's if there's 0 salt.


----------



## BlueRam (Sep 21, 2004)

Dr J said:


> I'm looking to light-to-moderately plant a 90 Gal soon to be Cichlid tank. I am going to keep the light ~2WPG. No CO2 unit.
> I will be using plants that thrive in the level of lighting I will have.
> My question is:
> Keeping the return spray bar from the canister filter below water level, is there any benefit to my plants by adding an airstone for a bubble stream to break the surface of the water?
> Thanks.


Dr J:

Which cichlids in particular do you wish to keep? There are some that might not be able to be kept with plants at all.


----------



## Hypancistrus (Oct 28, 2004)

BlueRam said:


> Dr J:
> 
> Which cichlids in particular do you wish to keep? There are some that might not be able to be kept with plants at all.


Most cichlids aquascape the substrate themselves, and tear out the plants when doing it.  I've seen people keep them with anacharis and hornwort however.


----------



## Dr J (Feb 22, 2005)

*More than likely malawi's*

I understand that plant selection with them is limited too. I know there are posts which have said there are some the fish don't like to eat, whether because of taste or whatever. I'm not 100% sure on whether it will be Malawi's or some other type. The more info I gather, the better to help me make my decision. Thanks and keep it coming.
Dr. J


----------



## Overfloater (Jan 12, 2004)

Dr J. I saw your same post over at cichlid-forum.com. Hopefully we can help you out here.



> Keeping the return spray bar from the canister filter below water level, is there any benefit to my plants by adding an airstone for a bubble stream to break the surface of the water?


To answer your question, no. Plants will never benefit from an airstone. Even at night when they consume oxygen instead of CO2.

You will probably have some surface agitation from your filters in order to break up the protein layer that forms, and that should provide enough oxygen for the fish. And the plants will help provide more oxygen for the fish as well.


----------



## Hypancistrus (Oct 28, 2004)

Overfloater said:


> You will probably have some surface agitation from your filters in order to break up the protein layer that forms, and that should provide enough oxygen for the fish.


Not if the tank is covered.


----------



## Overfloater (Jan 12, 2004)

I think unless he has about 99.9% of the tank covered, there would be plenty of airflow to promote oxygen exchange. IMO.


----------



## wantplantsnotwork (Nov 28, 2004)

I have twice now lost fish in the middle of the night due to NOT having an airstone.
I have a covered 90 gallon, using the glass covers that aga supplied, and an oak canopy on top of that if it matters.
I did just dose coppersafe the other night, and this may have been a mitigating factor in the loss.
But, if I do not run the pump, the fish are GASPING for air in the morning. 

It is a very dense tank, but it DOES run out of O2.

Everytank is different, you may not need it. Your fish will tell you.

Yet, you may need it.


----------



## Hypancistrus (Oct 28, 2004)

Overfloater said:


> I think unless he has about 99.9% of the tank covered, there would be plenty of airflow to promote oxygen exchange. IMO.


My testing indicates otherwise. In tanks with an Aquaclear on the back and a glass cover that leaves enough space on the back for it, running with no airstones results in DO levels that are well below 5. In my hex tank which is 24" deep, they got as low as 1.1.

I invite you to do your own testing and draw your own conclusions.


----------



## Hypancistrus (Oct 28, 2004)

wantplantsnotwork said:


> Your fish will tell you.


Or better yet a DO test kit or DO meter if you can afford it and save the fishie's suffering.


----------



## Kris (Feb 27, 2004)

i have a question to add to this...
tom barr (aka plantbrain) suggests that it is better to watch fish/plannts than to test and test...so, in the O2 question, is the best indicator that the fish are hanging about at the top of the tank? or is that the point of no return and there are other indicators that we should watch for?
will the plants show signs as they uptake O2 with no lights?
i am simply curious...


----------



## wantplantsnotwork (Nov 28, 2004)

I'd dearly love to have that meter. $300 is a little out of most peoples budget. Certainly mine. In a different thread, someone started adding up how much they spent. 2G on my 90. Gotta stop somewhere.
I do feel bad about my loachs however. 
So now, I run the pump at night, 1/2 hour on, 1/2 off, for the entire lights off period.


----------



## wantplantsnotwork (Nov 28, 2004)

Kriss, the problem with letting it get as bad as the fish up top gasping is the stress.
I now have a serious case of Ick, which I have not had in many years.
Two of my favorite clowns decided to take it into their own fins (hands) and make a jump for it. They only had an inch gap at the back of the tank, and they made it. They died side by side, pointed the same direction, on my carpet. Thelma and louise came to mind.


----------



## Kris (Feb 27, 2004)

i agree with you, peter. we all no that fish stress is bad..but how can you know, without testing, what the DO level is (in the same sense that without testing, we know other levels are too high/too low) ?


----------



## Ultramouse (Feb 24, 2005)

Dr J said:


> So, trying to soak in all this info..... Airstones, if any benefit, is probably one of my lesser worries?
> 
> Secondly, I probably won't overstock the tank as it is unfair to the Cichlids.
> 
> ...


 hmmm, have you seen the density's these fish live in their natural habitat. Even the most overstocked community tank is a far cry from natural population numbers. Your not being mean, honest.


----------



## Ultramouse (Feb 24, 2005)

Hypancistrus said:


> My testing indicates otherwise. In tanks with an Aquaclear on the back and a glass cover that leaves enough space on the back for it, running with no airstones results in DO levels that are well below 5. In my hex tank which is 24" deep, they got as low as 1.1.
> 
> I invite you to do your own testing and draw your own conclusions.


Your 24" Hex, hmmmm. So your surface area is probably the worst ratio for any given aquarium. No wonder you have Oxygen issues. Is your entire hypothesys for airstones in aquariums based arround your observations of the 24" deep hex?


----------



## Hypancistrus (Oct 28, 2004)

Ultramouse said:


> Your 24" Hex, hmmmm. So your surface area is probably the worst ratio for any given aquarium. No wonder you have Oxygen issues. Is your entire hypothesys for airstones in aquariums based arround your observations of the 24" deep hex?


37 gallon and 55 gallon 21" deep rectangulars as well. I don't normally run these tanks (too much work for me) but I have them in storage and use them for experimenting and emergencies. I used four medium sized fancy goldfish, 5 in the 55 gallon (one goldfish per 10 gallons). I made sure they were fully cycled with Bio Spira (no rise in ammonia and nitrite, nitrate readings after a day or two).

As I said, DO readings were below 5 in the rectangulars and got as low as 1.1 in the hex with the glass covers in place, HOB filter running on back, and no airstones. I stopped the experiment in the hex when one of the goldfish started swimming upside down.

42 gallon hexagon water surface = 389.86 inches
37 gallon water surface = 453.25 inches
55 gallon water surface = 654.75 inches


----------



## jsenske (Dec 20, 2004)

I would only add that Amano/ADA method calls for nighttime aeration. All ADA layout receive aeration by either a raised Lily Pipe (ADA filter return- excellent also for ANNIHILATING surface film in one night) or by air pump through a special diffuser (which would really be same as airstone). All data on ADA tanks always indicate "AIR: 14 Hours after lights-off". I aerate all tanks at night as well, as does Luis Navarro- for what it's worth.


----------



## Hypancistrus (Oct 28, 2004)

The tanks in the ADA Gallery are uncovered.


----------



## Dr J (Feb 22, 2005)

Does my having eggcrate on top have an effect on anything? Should I be going back to using the glass covers??


----------



## Pharo (Jan 30, 2005)

Hypancistrus said:


> . I made sure they were fully cycled with Bio Spira (no rise in ammonia and nitrite, nitrate readings after a day or two).


Which test did you use? Kit or meter? 

TIA

Pharo


----------



## BSS (Sep 24, 2004)

Hmmm. Interesting. So does this postulate that if your fish are at the top of the tank gasping in the morning is has more to do with very low O2 levels, and little to do with excessive CO2 levels? I was just commenting on another thread that the high CO2 levels and fish gasping seemed to be a misunderstood area, at least in my mind.


----------



## Overfloater (Jan 12, 2004)

I have been running a TON of CO2 for awhile without issue. IT runs 24/7 and I haven't had any fish gasping. It had to be upwards of 50ppm or more for months on end. 

For you guys that aerate at night, how do you think the fish deal with the pH shift?


----------



## Ultramouse (Feb 24, 2005)

Ok, not wanting to let a discussion pass without experimentation, i have set up the following.

Co2 system running 24/7, therefore a constant PH 0f 6.8 (Ph controller)
Air pump running at night to remove surface scum and add O2.

So basically, allthought the bubble count is quite high, i can keep enough C02 in the water to keep a constant Ph of 6.8. But were talking about 2 bubbles a second (too much). Allthought the unit does turn off when the required level is reached, it did spend most of the night in the ON position.

The Air was supplied by a large air pump, with no diffuser except for a piece of foam Zip tied to the end of the air line (can u tell im a hobbyest at heart, or just cheap, he he he).

I have noticed that my fish aren't exactly zipping arround like they used to, i dont want to have to wait untill their gasping at the surface, as i feel this is stress to far.

The experiment will continue untill i can find the perfect balance between nightly 02 supply rate / C02 bubble count. And i will be using the accumulation of surface scum as a guide for sufficient aggitation.

Essentially, i think you have a much better gass exchange from a surface that is clean. Im allready using the tip of the spray bar to break the surface, but in my 80G tank, its not up to removing the scum.

So im going to use the minimum ammount of air neccessary to keep the surface free of film, hopefully this will allow for a reduction in the ammount of C02 to keep the Ph stable whilst aggitating the surface.

Waffle over.


----------



## Dr J (Feb 22, 2005)

Dr J said:


> Does my having eggcrate on top have an effect on anything? Should I be going back to using the glass covers??


Anybody want to offer an opinion on this question??

I am reading about Co2 and DO, and covered tanks and it is all a bit fascinating. Does the eggcrate on top play a role in this since it will make the tank "uncovered"?


----------



## BSS (Sep 24, 2004)

I too use eggcrate. I went to it because the heat exchange with my glass cover and my lights was causing that tank to get too hot.

In regards to this thread, I understand that the primary problems with low DO are caused when you have a glass cover where the tank water and outside air are restricted from contact. Since you have the eggcrate, I would think you would be closer to an open tank than a glass cover.

As your question is pretty general, I'm not really sure what you are asking. Does the above hit the mark?


----------



## Hypancistrus (Oct 28, 2004)

Pharo said:


> Which test did you use? Kit or meter?


Meter.





Ultramouse said:


> Ok, not wanting to let a discussion pass without experimentation, i have set up the following.


Just my opinion, but you really need to use a test kit or meter. The DO level could be for example 4.6, but your fish may appear just fine, in reality it's a stressful environment.





Overfloater said:


> I have been running a TON of CO2 for awhile without issue. IT runs 24/7 and I haven't had any fish gasping.


See previous comment.


----------



## Laith (Jul 7, 2004)

Why would they appear just fine?  They seem to react quite quickly to other environmental problems, why not to a lack of O2?

If my body wasn't able to offgas CO2 and take in sufficient O2 for me to function normally, I would be behaving abnormally and not walking around as if everything is ok. I would be breathing rapidly (if not actually gasping).

Why would it be different for fish? I know the physiology is different but the prinicipal of cells requiring O2 is the same. The path for O2 transport in fish is through the gills so it would be the gills that would be moving very rapidly, trying to take in more O2.

I'm trying to understand the reasoning behind this conviction that fish in a tank without aeration are being severely deprived of Oxygen... :icon_conf


----------



## shalu (Jan 16, 2003)

Laith said:


> Why would they appear just fine?  They seem to react quite quickly to other environmental problems, why not to a lack of O2?


I agree. In my experience, lack of O2 translates to rapid breathing/gill movement before the phase of gasping for air at the surface. I can detect it without the help of any testing.


----------



## Hypancistrus (Oct 28, 2004)

Laith said:


> Why would they appear just fine?  They seem to react quite quickly to other environmental problems, why not to a lack of O2?
> 
> If my body wasn't able to offgas CO2 and take in sufficient O2 for me to function normally, I would be behaving abnormally and not walking around as if everything is ok. I would be breathing rapidly (if not actually gasping).


I admit I'm no expert and I'm just guessing, but I'm talking about "barely enough," not enough to notice but enough to be stressful. My main point is a test kit or meter is the best way to actually know what your DO levels are.


----------



## 75sausage (May 19, 2004)

BSS said:


> In regards to this thread, I understand that the primary problems with low DO are caused when you have a glass cover where the tank water and outside air are restricted from contact.


I have been following this thread and it couldn't have been a better time. This mornng I woke up to find all of my fish at the surface gasping for air, 1 dead emerald plecko, 1 dead green tiger barb, 1 dead SAE. This is the first time this has happened to me in about 7 years of keeping fish. I have been running DIY CO2 setup for over a year and just switched to pressurized and upgraded lighting about 3 weeks ago. The CO2 only runs during the day. I have a hood on the tank with large oppening in the back of it and about 5" of clearance between the water surface and the bulbs, no cover. After reading this thread I asumed that there is anough gas exchange with my setup to omit an air stone, which was reinforced by observing my fish in the mornings and never seeing them gasping or swimming at the surface.
The only change that I can think of is repositioning the outflow nozzle of my filter slightly downwards on 2 days ago after a WC. I noticed a layer of water scum on the surface this morning which might have caused the O2 depletion??? I do have a surface skeemer which was not running at night. I am going to set it to run constantly and observe the fish tomorrow morning.


----------



## BSS (Sep 24, 2004)

Raf - sorry to hear about the fish loss. When I redirected my spray bar a while back, my CO2 levels really shot up, BUT I never did get the film at the top of my tank, and I never saw any fish at the top of the tank. So, maybe I still had some turbulence to cause the gas exchange?!?

I'm also starting to wonder, what really is the high-range for safe CO2 levels for fish in a tank. Still a bit of a mystery in my mind.

Please keep us posted of your findings.
Brian.


----------



## 75sausage (May 19, 2004)

The previous position of the nozzle (submerged) caused and tinny wirlpool on the water surface just above it. Now the surface is perfectly still at night if surface skimmer is off.
I believe the fish gills exchange CO2 in water based on concentration of the gas in both the water and the fishes gills. As long as the concentration in the gills is higher than the water, fish will exchange the gas. I do not know what the minimum concentration in fish gills is nor am I sure if the above description is accurate.


----------



## freeflyer (Feb 3, 2005)

Laith said:


> Why would they appear just fine?  They seem to react quite quickly to other environmental problems, why not to a lack of O2?
> If my body wasn't able to offgas CO2 and take in sufficient O2 for me to function normally, I would be behaving abnormally and not walking around as if everything is ok. I would be breathing rapidly (if not actually gasping).


Talk to any vet and they will tell you animals often do not show signs of distress even when they are very sick. People walk around with all types of cancer, diabetes and other dis-eases without showing signs of disease or stress. Waiting to see fish dying "gasping" is like waiting for a tooth ache to tell you you have a cavity. Caring for animals should be proactive not reactive considering its our job to take care of them.
Dan


----------



## Kris (Feb 27, 2004)

i think that is a bit overstated. yes, people do walk around with diseases for years that are undiagnosed, but many times they do know "something" is wrong and have compensated by ignoring the pain or adjusting thier lifestyle to accomadate it. many, many pet owners also practice denial fiercly when their pets are in pain or ill, but they too "know" something is wrong...that they are not as active or as interested in chasing rabbits or whatever. 
i think what laith (and others) are getting at is that we, the planted tank obsessed, are very observant and very interested in not denying something lest it lead to a tank die-off or algae or something else. 
implying that those of us who rely first on plant/fish behavior and second on test kits or meters are neglegent and reactive is a bit harsh. everyone here has been asking questions about the impact of different tank stats and environmental situations, not denying that the fish need care.


----------



## freeflyer (Feb 3, 2005)

Kris said:


> implying that those of us who rely first on plant/fish behavior and second on test kits or meters are neglegent and reactive is a bit harsh.


I did not imply or state neglegence, and I think reactive is fitting wether you think its harsh or not. Waiting to see gasping fish is reactive. I dont care who does or doesnt add air or allow surface turbulance, but I have read posts on this board that were pretty reckless/neglegent IMO. I dont have to quote the person but they stated, "Keep turning up the co2 slowly untill the fish show signs of stress, then back it down a notch":eek5: I dont mean to lead this thread even more off topic but I really think some people should stick to plants and leave the poor fish alone.


----------



## Whiskey (Feb 15, 2005)

Well, this is a very intresting discussion, I have a tank (30 tall) that uses NO co2 and NO ferts. I have noticed the PH would climb over 8.2 toward the end of the day (PH testing pen meater) this would indacate a near total lack of CO2. (the normal PH of our water is 7.8-7.9 with a KH of 120 if left sitting for a day or two in a bucket) I have just added a air stone with a small air pump, and I will see if the ph stayes lower then before. I can't test DO as of this point but this type of tank, with a covered surface would be the tank that might be low on DO, I also have a submerged outlet (3 inches) on my canister filter.

I see no problems that I could cause by adding a air stone to this tank, plus it will be a good test, and I may improve my tank/fish health.

Thanks for the idea, and backing it up with good, relevent, and usefull information (espically Hypancistrus), and the testing that has been done.

Whiskey


----------



## 75sausage (May 19, 2004)

*continued...*

Observation:
I left the surface skimmer running over night to make sure there was no surface film to stop the gas exchange. This morning the fish were not swimming at the surface, however, they seemed to breathe heavily.
Action plan:
I will get an air stone running at night and observe fish in the morning.
Other:
It seems to me that my Anacharis grew at night??? DO some species of plants do this? Consequently, do some species of plants tak up more O2 at night than others?


----------



## Hypancistrus (Oct 28, 2004)

My three main points overall:

- It's an outright myth that running an airstone will cause you to lose your CO2. As long as your intake is at tank bottom and output is at tank top at opposite ends, you will lose _some_ CO2 but you can simply turn up your bubble rate a bit to compensate. You don't have to use _that_ much more.

- It's also a myth that "bubble walls" are a "sillyscape" gimmick like the plastic bobbing treasure chest. Airstones effectively raise dissolved oxygen, which allows for greater BOD and is good for the overall health of the tank and fish.

- If your tank is covered, more than lightly stocked, and you're not running an airstone, there's a good chance your dissolved oxygen is low. Test using a kit or meter to be certain.

I use Rena Micro Bubblers.


----------



## freeflyer (Feb 3, 2005)

Hypancistrus how fine of a mist do those Rena micro bubblers make? equal to a glass and ceramic co2 diffuser?


----------



## Hypancistrus (Oct 28, 2004)

When pumping air into a tank, the size of the bubbles are pretty much dependant on salinity. Put the Rena Micro Bubbler in a protein skimmer in a marine tank, and you get super fine bubbles. Put it in a freshwater tank, and it's not that much finer than any other airstone. I just like their design - they're durable and they never clog. If you want courser bubbles you can bury it in the substrate (which I don't recommend).


----------



## Whiskey (Feb 15, 2005)

Well, I have put a air stone in my 30G as I stated I would, and my PH seems to be holding at 7.78-7.89 (for the first day of testing), where the norm with out the air stone is around 8.06-8.27, this is no conclusion, but at least at first it seems to have increaced the CO2. I don't see a big diffrence in fish actions, but like I said this is the first day.

I am also testing a high light "walsted" tank, and I have added a air stone to that to see if I can't duplicate the results on a non co2 injected tank, with no ferts and 6 W/G. I set this tank up to test if plants can stop algae without all the fuss, if you have high light, it is early in this experiment, but I thought I could take a side track to test something else too.

I don't like the look of bubbles in my tank either, is there any reason I can't make a "normal air" reactor?? I would make it just like a co2 reactor and just pump 3 bubbles per second into it from a air pump, I may try this to see if it would work.

Thanks,
Whiskey


----------



## Laith (Jul 7, 2004)

That may work but I don't think it will work as well as injecting CO2. I've heard that O2 is a lot less soluble than CO2 so you'll probably end up with airbubbles in your tank anyway!

6wpg, no CO2, no ferts?  Let us know how it goes but I think that sounds like algae heaven.

Isn't Diana Walsted's natural method meant for *low* light tanks?


----------



## 75sausage (May 19, 2004)

*continued...*

Observation:
I set up an air stone(bar) to run twice during the night in 2 hour intervals. Fish seemed to breathe normally this morning. I didn't get a chance to test PH drop but since I shut off CO2 for the night it drops with or without surface agitation.
Action plan:
Will leave it this way.


----------



## wantplantsnotwork (Nov 28, 2004)

I now have the airstone on oppisite the lights. The CO2 controller is on maybe a little more, but with out data tracking, it's tough to put a number on it.
One real benefit: (besides fish that can breath!) It definitly got rid of the surface scum.


----------



## Whiskey (Feb 15, 2005)

Laith, the method is ment for lower light tanks, (2-3W/G I think) but she mentioned that she alowed some of her tanks to get sunlight. I am trying to see how far I can push this before I set up a larger tank this way. I have a couple of tanks set up for tests of diffrent soil, and diffrent lighting.

I really like the idea of this, and the book is very good, I would like to transfer my 50G, or maybe get a 125 gallon for this type of tank.

I will keep you updated.

Whiskey


----------



## Not Mister Green (Feb 15, 2005)

hey Whisky,

they're not airstones, they're DIFFUSERS :icon_bigg (joke)

The Rena Ceramic diffuser is the highest quality diffuser on the market. Baked at 1850 degrees the ceramic material in the air stone bonds to produce a pore size that is perfect for maximum diffusion of air. Their performance is far superior to sand, wood, plastic and glass duffsers and they are difficult to clog

I use the 6 inch model installed parrallel to the end of my 29 gallon with the external power filter on the other end. It creates lots of water current and surface agitation for maximim of O2 and CO2 absorption with air roud: 

The test will be the perfomance of my Red Lobelia under these condtions with only 1.9 WPG of 9325K PC light


----------

