# coral guy lost in a world of plants



## ian_grise_psp (Apr 1, 2008)

Hello and thank you for taking a sec. to read my thread. First off i want to let you know that i'm a life time fish keeper and consider myself vary knowable about fish keeping. But here i find myself somewhat confused and to be blunt ticked off. I know a great deal about lighting which comes from years of growing coral. Here however a great deal of you keep talking about watts and gallons. Which seems like, with my reef background, you dont know what your talking about. (please dont be a fended) what im use to and know is all about spectrum. i really want to know if i should just throw all my reef skills out the window and just use the biggest watt lighting system i can. OR is there spectrums that do best of plants? I see some people write t5 65k are good and thy burn in the redish range but then that same person might say that thy also like the t5 10K because its "brighter". I feel like i might just not understand because when i first started reefing i felt vary overwhelmed with info. here i feel well i guess underwhelmed. Please someone help me out a little bit and i am truly sorry for anything i wrote that may have upset anyone.


----------



## mgamer20o0 (Mar 8, 2007)

well your right on the part of really wpg doesnt mean much. you want the right spectrum and the amount of light it puts out. i am not 100% up on the latest greatest the plant people are using. i see one common mistake people make is starting out with too much light. i find it best to start with low light and work your way up to get a handle on it. again you can have a wonderful low light planted tank with no co2 or ferts. it really depends on what you want. more light isnt always a answer its a real balance too much light can lead to algae problems. most people seem to be using t5 with individual reflectors. these are just my thought on the subject.


----------



## ian_grise_psp (Apr 1, 2008)

thank you for the input but that still really has not help much:icon_cry:


----------



## Digital (Apr 4, 2008)

I've found that 5400k-6700k is a good spectrum to use. I only have a 40 watt nutrigrow bulb on my 90g and the plants do fine. Not BOOMING with growth, but they are thriving, but slowly.

It really comes down to substrate. Flourite black is preferred by many.


----------



## Gar (Mar 3, 2008)

From my experience, watts per gallon works on anything bigger than a 10g. If I'm wrong, correct me, but this is what I've had best luck with. When you start going smaller than 10, then you get into confusing territory.

But lighting is not the only factor; substrate, natural light, and how "high tech" or "low tech" you want your tank to be.

"High Tech" generally means high lighting in terms of watts per gallon, generally pressurized or Do-It-Yourself CO2 system, nice substrate, fertilizer, etc. The works, essentially. 

"Low Tech" is pretty much the opposite - keeping it as cheap as humanly possible.

For example: I have a 20g high with 2 15w 6000k bulbs. This puts me at 1.5 watts per gallon, which would put me in low to low-mid range. I also use eco-complete, a rather decent substrate in my opinion. My plants are growing quite well. Hell, my Ludwigia Repens has outgrown the tank now, and it's a "mid light" plant. My tank has no CO2 or fertilizers. It's considered a "low tech" tank.

So it depends what you want to start out with. Do you want to go high tech or low tech, or somewhere in between? 

As for bulb spectrum, as stated above, you want 5400k-6700k. The higher spectrum of coral growing bulbs does nothing for plants.

Uh, yeah, jumbled mess of info but I hope you got *something* from it at least.


----------



## Craigthor (Sep 9, 2007)

I use WPG and spectrum. Any spectrum fomr 5000k to 10000k will work great for growing. The spectrum also helps with the human visulization. I use a mix of 8000k and 10000k bulbs as I like the colors as 6500k is usually more yellowish in hue and fish tend to get washed out. I usually run run ~3 wpg on my tank but your lighting will make all the difference. Reflector play a HUGE difference as well for strikeback

Power Compact needs more wpg as its less efficient
T5HO needs a close to the same as PC but much more efficient and it will penetrate deeper into the tank
Metal Halide I run ~ 2 wpg at the most and it will penetrate really good. I'm starting to experiment with this on my 20g planted.

Craig


----------



## Digital (Apr 4, 2008)

On my 20L I use a 40watt nutrigrow light from corellife with a upgraded reflector (DIY tinfoil!) helps out a lot from what it was before. But with the light being closer to the plants it does better. If the tank is high, you'll need a higher powered light for the light for the plants to really benefit.


----------



## ian_grise_psp (Apr 1, 2008)

thank you every one for for your input but umm, im not sure if you guys really know what im talking about. but thank you all vary much anyways.


----------



## RAGEo2 (Apr 4, 2007)

I personally love the look of 50/50 lights but it will do nothing for my tank. 

As a reef person you probably have never ventured into the 5000K range. It is not very appealing to the eye or on your fish. So many compensate this by including a higher K bulb. That gives the fish shimmer and makes the plant and water look vivid. No benefit to the plant but much for the viewer.

The WPG rule is used as a reference by many. But in nano tanks and Hex or even High/ Long tanks the rules are a bit bent.

I would personal aim at high light just in case you ever decide to use it but as MG2 said it may be a good idea to start with low light and work your way up.

Also, remember that not every plant fall in to the same light requirements. 

Craig has cover the PC to T5HO and spectrum range in planted tanks and all I can add is that this is the forum for planted tanks.


----------



## RAGEo2 (Apr 4, 2007)

If you are still unclear go here. http://www.rexgrigg.com/

Many members can tell you what works for them but you will find that just because we have and do the exact same thing the smallest of difference in dosing, lights, substrate, reflectors, etc...... will make a small or sometimes a BIG difference. The issue with this hobby of planted tanks is that their is no real guaranteed way to get the same results as anyone else. Everything from the smallest to the most expensive will make a difference, then add fish and type and what you have is an experiment. That is why you get a lot of , This is what I have or this is what I did threads.

The closest thing to a guide is the link to Rex's guides. But other then that you will find yourself hitting your head against the wall many times over.


----------



## jaidexl (Sep 18, 2006)

I'm not sure what you're unable to understand here, but in short, yes, throw everything you know about reef lighting out the window.

The run down-

Plants don't need a lot of light, about as much as anthelia needs and that aint squat. But they do respond differently to varying levels of wattage, WPG is a generalized method of guessing light output in a planted tank, since lumens etc is too difficult for many to decipher once you start throwing arbitrary numbers around. There is a low threshold that they require to grow which is usually around 1-1.5wpg on an average size tank, when you get past 2.5wpg you're treading in territory that may require CO2 injection since you are throwing the plants' nutrient uptake into overdrive. You want full spectrum, anywhere from 5000k to 10000k, they all grow plants, just pick the hue you want to see. Most people hang around 6700k. That's it, nothing more to explain, really. 

Everything else you read is personal opinions and a lot of them don't even know what they're saying. The brightness of a bulb can have absolutely noting to do with K rating, two bulbs of the same K and wattage from different manufacturers can have varying brightness, their reflector can have something to do w/ that if it's separate fixtures. Obviously, two different ballasts can have an effect. There are way too many variables associated with light output from a fixture that it renders most people clueless as to what's actually happening before their eyes until they get their hands on a light meter. Thus, WPG was conjured up to make it easier on folks. If you use full spectrum that is somewhere within the realm of 2 to 3wpg, you'll be good for growing most species.

That said... WPG doesn't apply to lesser or greater than average tank volumes, say less than 30gl, more than 75gl give or take. I'll avoid too much typing on that for now as I'm not the best at putting it into words without writing 2000 characters, you'll probably run across that explanation here soon enough. All I can say is that 3wpg from 15w over 5gl is NOT equal to the 3wpg from 300w over 100gl... obviously no comparison, 15w is a low level of light capable of starving plants regardless of how small a container you put it over, same concept as the next paragraph. vv

What gets me is when reef shops start talking about WPG, are they serious?? They actually want me to believe that I can grow SPS in my 2.5gl because it has "10.2 wpg" made up by 2 x 13w pc bulbs??? Get real! They think I'm nuts for wanting HQI over my 8gl nano reef.

Just remember that most of the plant info you'll find that states "high/very high light required" is usually hogwash, CO2 is much more important that light. Just ask mrkookm what he thinks about high light and he'll squash some myths real fast. he's one of a few folks here who are growing Toninas and Erios w/ only 2wpg (always listed as very high light requirement, >3wpg).


----------



## ColeMan (Mar 9, 2008)

To further dispel a strict wpg rule, here is an interesting article published that compares Takashi Amano's lighting intensity to tank size - taken directly from the article: 
"For the smallest sizes, 8 watts per gallon is too little! For the larger tanks above 100 gallons, 2 watts per gallon is too much. Perhaps a better 'formula'...is obtained by calculating watts per 'estimated surface area' (calculated by taking volume to the 2/3 power). This might seem a strange calculation at first, but when you stop to think of it, it does make sense, as the light falls on an area, not a volume." 


the whole article can be found here -
http://www.fitchfamily.com/lighting.html


----------



## jaidexl (Sep 18, 2006)

Exactly, you could put a 3w bulb over a 1gl tank, that's 3wpg (supposedly very high light) that is going to kill a plant with the quickness, so you can see where WPG stops making sense, real fast. 400w over a 150gl is equal to only 2.6wpg, theoretically a nice rounded out amount for growing plants, but I assure you if you put that much light over a 150gl planted tank, you may be wasting your money and will probably be an excellent algae farmer. :icon_eek:


----------



## salth20 (Mar 6, 2008)

Well, don't throw all your lighting knowledge away. But you are going to have to get out of the comfort zone you have. Typical reef lighting emphasizes the blue spectrum - actinics easily supply close to correct color for corals. The reason is because the reds of the spectrum cannot penetrate the water column to the depths corals normally live. Plants are a whole nuther ballgame. FW plants, from what I can see and read, are much closer to the surface of the water. Red spectrum is easily available. Plant processes are way different than the algae processes in the coral tissues, and plants can utilize the red (warmer) in the spectrum for photosynthesis. You can successfully grow plants with much less light. WPG doesn't mean much, just as it didn't with your coral growing. My reef had a blazing 630 watts of light over a 125, located a scant 4" from the waters surface. My living room literally had a glow that could be seen coming down the street. There was more than once the local police stopped by based on complaints from the neighbors that I was growing dope. They would come in, scope out the reef for a bit, and move on. After a bit, they would just tell the neighbors to come with them, and see for themselves. 
Currently I am dabbling in a few small plants in my discus tank, using 2 65 watt 6500k CFL's from Catalina Aquarium. Things are going OK, and I'm gathering parts for a C02 reactor to be placed in the closed loop line on the tank. I'll try the sugar/yeast trick first, and them move to a tank and controller later if I get bitten by the plant bug hard. If you search here, I think you will find many people using a combination of 10000k and 6500k for both plant growth and fish color viewing. If you have halides, they could be used as well.... search for Kahuna and check out scolley's tank.
Good luck.


----------



## mistergreen (Dec 9, 2006)

the WPG thing is a guide not a rule... An appropriate instrument to measure is a light meter. The brighter (higher wattage) the light, the faster plants will process CO2 and nutrients... If the there isn't enough CO2 & nutrients around, your plants will have problems and start dying. Algae will then take over.

Spectrum wise, plants utilize the blues and reds... Any bulb with blues and reds are fine.


----------



## jaidexl (Sep 18, 2006)

You have to remember when buying lights for plants, is that the K rating may or may not have anything to do with the actual spectrum produced by the bulb, rather just a example from the company for the hue of the bulb, seen by the human eye. I don't think many of them are taking planted aquariums into consideration when they do that.

Luckily, plants will usually grow under pretty much any full spectrum bulb of adequate wattage>reflector etc, although I've read plenty of bad stories w/ certain bulbs/Ks, but it's not like they were controlled experiments that proved nothing else was the culprit..

Stick with 5000 to 10000K (I always have at least one 65-6700) and you're safe. You can experiment with a combo for color effect. I'm using all 65 and 6700K PCs right now on my FW. In one fixture there is a combo of a coralife 67 and a current USA 67, same wattage/length, the current is significantly brighter and whiter, the coralife 6700K bulbs are usually very yellow.

My next lights will be T5, simply for the fact that it takes more bulbs in a given length to equal the desired wattage, so I have more bulbs> more options to play with color combos, timed switches etc. I'll also have a much better spread over the tank with more bulbs as well as individual parabolics, which is a BIG deal IMHO. Better to go more efficient than more power, I think.


----------



## jaidexl (Sep 18, 2006)

mistergreen said:


> the WPG thing is a guide not a rule... An appropriate instrument to measure is a light meter. The brighter (higher wattage) the light, the faster plants will process CO2 and nutrients... If the there isn't enough CO2 & nutrients around, your plants will have problems and start dying. Algae will then take over.
> 
> Spectrum wise, plants utilize the blues and reds... Any bulb with blues and reds are fine.


Nice an simple, totally accurate :thumbsup:


----------



## kornphlake (Dec 4, 2007)

ian_grise_psp said:


> thank you every one for for your input but umm, im not sure if you guys really know what im talking about. but thank you all vary much anyways.


We don't know what you're talking about...

What specifically are you asking, you mention spectrum and you mention T5 but don't really ask any question.

As others have mentioned spectrum isn't as important with FW plants, 5000k-10000k is a good range, there isn't a specific spectrum that is necessary. Watts per gallon is an arbitrary measure but most of us don't have access to a lumen meter to measure actual lumens, watts are easier to conjure so they are used as a general guideline even though the general guideline is pretty bogus.

You could sink a ton of money into lighting and never get good results, with FW plants what makes the most difference is a good substrate, CO2 and appropriate fertilizers. Lighting doesn't have as much weight as other factors.

For an example I have a 10g tank with 2x16w spiral compact fluorescent bulbs, everybody told me that the spiral compact bulbs are garbage because of "restrike" and I'd never get good results with those bulbs. I've found that the bulbs actually are too bright, I'm growing algae because I've got inert sand substrate and inconsistant DIY CO2, if I had the money to upgrade to pressurized CO2 and change the substrate to a nutrient rich substrate then the inefficent spiral lights may become a weak link. On a 29g tank I've got 2x30w from T12 bulbs in a shop light fixture, again the parrots here said it would never work because T12 bulbs aren't bright enough and shop lights don't have efficent reflectors. I've got the timer set to about 4 hours, if I go higher than that I get algae, this tank doesn't have any CO2 and uses a plain gravel substrate. If I were to upgrade the substrate and add CO2 I think I'd be fine with the lighting I've got running 8hrs per day.

A final point I'd like to make is that some people tend to be a little immature, although not necessarily unintelligent or inexperianced when it comes to equipment. Across the internet there's a tendancy to try and one up everyone else with some expensive piece of technology. On computer forums it's the cutting edge hardware, on cycling forums it's the lightests and strongst parts, on automotive forums it's all about who has the most horsepower... People let their ego run away with their wallet and purchase equipment that is unnecessary but it looks so cool when they can put that piece of expensive equipment in thier signature. 

The classic argument on automotive forums is that the $1000 spent on an exhaust system that may add 10 HP would have been better spent on a professional driving course that would make you drive faster than you ever could even with unlimited horsepower. When it comes to equipement reccomendations take it with a grain of salt, you have to distinguish the difference between necessary equipment and ego massaging equipment.


----------



## ColeMan (Mar 9, 2008)

Ego - massaging equipment? I suppose that would be any piece of equipment that a) isn't absolutely necessary and b) costs a lot of $$? So...is CO2 ego massaging equipment? What about a pH controller? a solenoid? a temperature controller? Just curious...I want to know what I need to buy to boost my ego a bit! Ha!


----------



## kornphlake (Dec 4, 2007)

It depends on how much your ego needs massaging. Pressurized CO2 is kind of borderline, it's going to be easier to keep an algae free tank with pressurized CO2 some could consider it a necessity, adding a solenoid is approaching ego massage, in most cases the solenoid comes with the regulator. I'd let the solenoid, bubble counter, check valves etc pass just because it's part of the system. 

Ego massage starts when you are spending extra for chrome plated parts that are going to be hidden under the tank, when you are automating what doesn't need to be automation or when you're getting something that is marginally better just because it's marginally better. If you are mislead by sales people and purchase something expensive and unnecessary that's not ego massage, it's when you intentionally (conciously or subconsiously) purchase a piece of equipment then smear the internet with pictures of the equipment, make a point of dropping name brands of the equipment you own in every post and sway thread topics just so you can wave around something you have that other people don't have. 

I'm sure I'm not immune to internet ego issues, I'm just saying the newbie needs to be aware of it before assuming that whatever is popular is really necessary.


----------



## jaidexl (Sep 18, 2006)

Most of what goes into a good CO2 rig is for efficiency, the solenoid for example, or expensive needle valves. I don't agree that anything to do w/ pressurized CO2 is egocentric. Same reason I don't believe a Sunlight supply 6 bulb T5HO is egocentric, it's more efficient/smarter. Do my plants grow well w/ a skinny linear PC, sure, but I'm sure they can do better, the tank can look better, and it would be nice to not have to shift the fixture back and forth all the time.

PH controllers are for folks who believe a CO2 induced pH change can kill fish. I don't have one. Scratch that, many are using them to avoid CO2 overdose, fair enough, I still won't buy one until I can no longer monitor my CO2 first hand and adjust the NV accordingly. If that happens, I'll probably go low tech.

The parameter monitoring with software and a wireless network is for commercial applications, IMO. What's the point of me having a planted tank if I'm gonna go that far?


----------



## ColeMan (Mar 9, 2008)

the bottom line is simple, really. People are attracted to the hobby for various reasons, obviously. Some tech guys who get into the hobby find that it is that much more enjoyable when they can carry over some of that high-tech attitude into fishkeeping, and some people just want to have toys. Some people like fish, some like plants, others like bright pink gravel...I think you get my point. Let people have their toys...

But, you are most certainly correct in stating that many people offer opinions that are really not based on much. People are mislead by salespeople all the time -that's their job, it seems like! At least in this setting there are enough contrary opinions to keep things relatively balanced and grounded in reality and good, solid research. The best solution here: buyer, be informed. 

you can have your thread back now, sorry...


----------



## fishscale (May 29, 2007)

ian_grise_psp said:


> Hello and thank you for taking a sec. to read my thread. First off i want to let you know that i'm a life time fish keeper and consider myself *vary knowable* about fish keeping. But here i find myself somewhat confused and to be blunt ticked off. I know a great deal about lighting which comes from years of growing coral. Here however a great deal of you keep talking about watts and gallons. Which seems like, with my reef background, you dont know what *your* talking about. (please dont be *a fended*) what im use to and know is all about spectrum. i really want to know *if i should just throw all my reef skills out the window and just use the biggest watt lighting system i can*. OR *is there spectrums that do best of plants*? I see some people write t5 65k are good and thy burn in the redish range but then that same person might say that thy also like the t5 10K because its "brighter". I feel like i might just not understand because when i first started reefing i felt vary overwhelmed with info. here i feel well i guess underwhelmed. Please someone help me out a little bit and i am truly sorry for anything i wrote that may have upset anyone.


Ok, well, you have stated twice now that we don't know what we're talking about. As far as I can see, you asked just 3 questions.

1. If you should just throw all your reef skills out the window

That depends, I have no idea what you know about reefs, and what could be applied to planted tanks. I will say that lighting for reefs and lighting for planted tanks are very different. You may be able to apply concepts, but the actual equipment will be different, most likely.

2. If you should go with the highest watt system you can find

No. Most plants do not need the ridiculous amount of light that some people advocate. The watts per gallon rule breaks down in small and very large tanks. In addition, if you have a very high amount of light over your tank and are not equipped to provide CO2 along with macro and micro fertilizers, you will run into algae problems in about a day. That being said, it is entirely possible to have a tank with a very small amount of light and grow lots of plants. The amount of light you need is related to what other equipment you have or want to have, and the plants you want to grow.

3. If there is a spectrum that is best for plants

6700K bulbs are usually considered the ideal for plants, but plants are not picky enough to discriminate. Some people use 10000K bulbs because it makes the colors on the fish look better. The plants will not mind. As long as you don't go too high or too low, it won't make a big difference. 

Planted tanks are about balance, and require a lot more than just light. Please take the time to do some reading, as I am sure you did for your reef tank. I understand that you may not have found what you were looking for by doing a quick search, but please try again. The above info can be found probably less than a page of threads away. Please don't go blasting this forum for not giving you all the info you need in the time it took to make 3 posts. 

All advice is not equal. Please refer to the following sites for good, accurate information:

http://www.rexgrigg.com
http://www.barrreport.com/you-new-aquatic-plants-start-here/

If you don't like reading, perhaps this hobby is not for you. Or, if you have a lot of time and money, you could still try it.


----------



## fishscale (May 29, 2007)

IC3D said:


> I've found that 5400k-6700k is a good spectrum to use. I only have a 40 watt nutrigrow bulb on my 90g and the plants do fine. Not BOOMING with growth, but they are thriving, but slowly.
> 
> It really comes down to substrate. Flourite black is preferred by many.


I disagree with this statement. Substrate is not what makes or breaks a tank. I have seen many successful tanks using inert gravel, regular topsoil, as well as those with Flourite, Eco-Complete, SMS, Turface, or the Benz of soils, ADA Aquasoil. For one thing, out of all the substrates mentioned, Aquasoil is the only one with macronutrients. It still does not make or break a tank. 



IC3D said:


> On my 20L I use a 40watt nutrigrow light from corellife with a upgraded reflector (DIY tinfoil!) helps out a lot from what it was before. But with the light being closer to the plants it does better. If the tank is high, you'll need a higher powered light for the light for the plants to really benefit.


Tin foil diffuses light. In planted tanks, you want specular reflection, not diffuse reflection.


----------



## RAGEo2 (Apr 4, 2007)

See I told you this is the place to be!!!!

planted tank = project = discussion = different views

What other hobby can you argue about dirt,lights and tin foil?

OPINION PEOPLE, it's just that OPINION!!!!
:hihi: 

I love this place.roud:


----------



## Craigthor (Sep 9, 2007)

And everyone has their own!


----------



## Blue Ridge Reef (Feb 10, 2008)

Well, I was going to reply, but 'Scale knocked it out of the park in post #23. Jiad and Mr. Green as well. Rep given, bros!


----------



## ColeMan (Mar 9, 2008)

agreed, and well spoken...


----------



## mpodolan (Mar 27, 2007)

fishscale said:


> Ok, well, you have stated twice now that we don't know what we're talking about. As far as I can see, you asked just 3 questions.
> 
> 1. If you should just throw all your reef skills out the window
> 
> ...


I knew I could count on a fellow Michigan man to set this straight. Well done!


----------



## BiscuitSlayer (Apr 1, 2005)

I find some of the points made in this thread afensive... JK

As far as the high tech gadgets go, I love them and I wish I could afford them. I am one of the techies that loves planted tanks. I don't want to show anything off, and I don't consider myself to be an ego maniac. I just like bells and wistles. Having my tank wired into my LAN at my house would be fantastic! Who wouldn't want to make changes and view parameters through a webpage? Thats just too cool! Gdominay's "Robo Tank" journal or Scolley's "Son of Big Kahuna" are perfect examples of the high tech aspects.

As far as the lighting questions go with respect to reef tanks vs. planted tanks, I think several members gave perfect information regarding what is needed for planted tanks. It really isn't as technical as reef tanks. You guys have summed up just about everything that is relevant to help someone start making informed decisions to get into this side of the hobby.

As far as the substrate goes, I got a chuckle out of reading that the most important part of the tank is the substrate. Please don't discourage people from posting stuff like this! That one made my day.


----------



## Ozymandias (Jan 17, 2008)

personally i think the mos important part of a the tank is the tank with out it you got a big pudle of water on your flow


----------



## cdub1955 (Jan 25, 2008)

I also have been a reef aquarist for many years. I was setting up fully functional reef systems as far back as 1988. This is my first venture into planted aquariums and while there are many things similar, there are many things that are quite different. Just as an example, you would 'never' think about adding Nitrates to a reef system, and you would do anything possible to get phosphates out of the water. Iron would be unthinkable, CO2 injection unheard of, but Oxygen saturation, a great gain. low flow, never, flow that knocks the rocks and corals around is desirable. 1000 watts of light, High spectrun 10000K, with actinitcs desirable...

So planted tanks are different.

*post EDITED by Buck as per your request Chris...*  

Enjoy,
chris


----------



## Blue Ridge Reef (Feb 10, 2008)

Why remove this thread? There has been more information in two pages than I can remember seeing in quite some time! And I hope you're joking about the deep sand bed.


----------



## MarkMc (Apr 27, 2007)

jaidexl said:


> PH controllers are for folks who believe a CO2 induced pH change can kill fish. I don't have one. Scratch that, many are using them to avoid CO2 overdose, fair enough, I still won't buy one until I can no longer monitor my CO2 first hand and adjust the NV accordingly. If that happens, I'll probably go low tech.


I have a controller (for about a year so far). For several years I used a timer. I recently went to using a timer with the controller to shut it off at night-I know now that a large ph swing will not affect my fish. Having a controller lets me run much higher CO2 levels than before with confidence that it won't run away on me. Since running higher co2 levels a have no problems with algae at all. My system is a high light/high demand tank with a trickle filter/sump/co2 reactor. I could turn off my 2 175MH and put back in the fluorescent tubes and run less lighting but I like the looks of the tank under the metal halides. Yes it's more work but under the present configuration it's the most successful setup I've had in many years.


----------



## lauraleellbp (Feb 3, 2008)

RAGEo2 said:


> See I told you this is the place to be!!!!
> 
> planted tank = project = discussion = different views
> 
> ...


ROFL - I was SOOO thinking the same thing reading through this thread!

Welcome to TPT, Ian; things aren't always quite like this... as you can see there are lots of different philosophies, but I personally think Fishscale did a pretty good job outlining the basics in post #23 (I'd give ya more rep Fish if I could ATM... LOL)


----------



## MarkMc (Apr 27, 2007)

BiscuitSlayer said:


> I find some of the points made in this thread afensive... JK
> 
> As far as the high tech gadgets go, I love them and I wish I could afford them. I am one of the techies that loves planted tanks. I don't want to show anything off, and I don't consider myself to be an ego maniac. I just like bells and wistles. Having my tank wired into my LAN at my house would be fantastic! Who wouldn't want to make changes and view parameters through a webpage? Thats just too cool! Gdominay's "Robo Tank" journal or Scolley's "Son of Big Kahuna" are perfect examples of the high tech aspects.


Hey! I agree with you. How cool would it be to call your tank on your cell phone from work to get a temp,ph, lights on, pump running ect run down!


----------



## Buck (Oct 13, 2002)

Blue Ridge Reef said:


> Why remove this thread? There has been more information in two pages than I can remember seeing in quite some time! And I hope you're joking about the deep sand bed.


I agree with you totally... thats why I fixed Chris's "deep sand" remarks and others he made Blue ! Hey he wanted it removed right? :icon_mrgr


----------



## ColeMan (Mar 9, 2008)

First, let me just say that this has been one of the more enjoyable threads I've come across lately. 



cdub1955 said:


> I also have been a reef aquarist for many years. I was setting up fully functional reef systems as far back as 1988. This is my first venture into planted aquariums and while there are many things similar, there are many things that are quite different. Just as an example, you would 'never' think about adding Nitrates to a reef system, and you would do anything possible to get phosphates out of the water. Iron would be unthinkable, CO2 injection unheard of...
> 
> Enjoy,
> chris


Second - I don't mean to second guess your reef-keeping skills, and I'm sure that you know much more than I (I've only had 2 reef tanks previously - I was 6 when you started keeping them back in '88), but I was just reading about CO2 injection in reef aquariums in the instruction manual for the aquacontroller jr. (after reading this thread a few times I decided I needed my ego massaged a bit so went ahead and bought the damn thing). It notes that CO2 injection is often necessary in reef tanks with large numbers of stony corals which require constant addition of kalkwasser, which raises pH. This is combatted by additions of CO2, which, obviously, have to be done very precisely. Regardless, just thought I might point out that CO2 additions to saltwater aquariums are not "unheard of."

all of my posts come across as being so dry...like a lumpy pillow. wait, lumpy pillows aren't dry...like a...like an overcooked chicken breast with no salt or pepper? yeah...


----------



## cdub1955 (Jan 25, 2008)

ah, Shucks......


----------



## ColeMan (Mar 9, 2008)

if it makes you feel better, it seemed counter-intuitive to me at first as well...oh well


----------



## RoseHawke (Mar 10, 2004)

ColeMan said:


> ". . . all of my posts come across as being so dry...like a lumpy pillow. wait, lumpy pillows aren't dry...like a...like an overcooked chicken breast with no salt or pepper? yeah...


Man, that's dry . . .


----------



## ian_grise_psp (Apr 1, 2008)

thank a lot guys i think i got all i can out of this thread. you all are way more responsive then reef guys.


----------



## ian_grise_psp (Apr 1, 2008)

well i take that back 

filters? i have a fulval 405 and 2 emperor 400 not in use at this time. will any of those work or is there something better to use for a 40br ?


----------



## BiscuitSlayer (Apr 1, 2005)

MarkMc said:


> Hey! I agree with you. How cool would it be to call your tank on your cell phone from work to get a temp,ph, lights on, pump running ect run down!


LOL...

Text your tank!

DTTDT77D=

Drop tank temperature down to 77 degrees.

SPHA6P6=

Set PH at 6.6

FF=

Feed fish!


----------



## ian_grise_psp (Apr 1, 2008)

most likely will be doing CO2 so i was thinking the fluval as well


----------



## jaidexl (Sep 18, 2006)

BiscuitSlayer said:


> LOL...
> 
> Text your tank!
> 
> ...



"text NV3 to bump your CO2 to 3 bubbles per second" - Seacrest out :biggrin: 


Honestly, I don't need anymore reasons to stick in front of the computer. :redface:


----------



## GreenThumbing (Feb 23, 2008)

This is why I love this hobby, we can all try different things and all have successes, I too was a long time reefkeeper, My heavily planted 75 gallon tank consists of 2 - 250 watt MH bulbs in the 20k range, my fish look fine and my plants grow so fast that I'm trimming 2x a week for some of them!! Now I went high tech, like most reefkeepers I like high tech gadgets, So I used automated Co2 injection, as well as EcoComplete substrate. Most people here claim I over light my tank, yet after 7 months with this set-up my plants are thriving, and I'm pretth happy with the results, plus no need for a new light fixture as I just recycled the old one from my reef set-up :smile:


----------



## lauraleellbp (Feb 3, 2008)

Boys and their toys... :flick: 

ROFL at texting the tanks!!!! I'm sure there will be a new DIY thread now on this coming soon, so stay posted... :icon_roll


----------



## jaidexl (Sep 18, 2006)

GreenThumbing said:


> This is why I love this hobby, we can all try different things and all have successes, I too was a long time reefkeeper, My heavily planted 75 gallon tank consists of 2 - 250 watt MH bulbs in the 20k range, my fish look fine and my plants grow so fast that I'm trimming 2x a week for some of them!! Now I went high tech, like most reefkeepers I like high tech gadgets, So I used automated Co2 injection, as well as EcoComplete substrate. Most people here claim I over light my tank, yet after 7 months with this set-up my plants are thriving, and I'm pretth happy with the results, plus no need for a new light fixture as I just recycled the old one from my reef set-up :smile:


MH can work on even small tanks. Every tank is different along with the husbandry of each owner. But the fact remains that plants don't really need that much light. Still, no reason it has to mark failure. For some it may turn out that way, but low light can cause problems as well.

Still, I would personally tremble in fear of a 75gl planted tank with 2x250 MH over it. :icon_eek:


----------



## jaidexl (Sep 18, 2006)

Ozymandias said:


> personally i think the mos important part of a the tank is the tank with out it you got a big pudle of water on your flow


Bwahahaa, I was going to say "water" :hihi:


----------



## GreenThumbing (Feb 23, 2008)

jaidexl said:


> MH can work on even small tanks. Every tank is different along with the husbandry of each owner. But the fact remains that plants don't really need that much light. Still, no reason it has to mark failure. For some it may turn out that way, but low light can cause problems as well.
> 
> Still, I would personally tremble in fear of a 75gl planted tank with 2x250 MH over it. :icon_eek:


Tremble not my friend as I'm algae free, and my plants are happy! I was a little scared as well when I started to use the fixture but it cost me a fortune, and I didn't want to let it just collect dust! Turns out that is works just fine. But as we can all attest to, what might work for some, can be a huge failure for others. And yes I'm pretty fanatical about taking care of my tanks, I keep logs of all maintenance, and actually schedule time each day to do what needs to be done. i could probably use less light and do less work, but I actually enjoy that part of the hobby


----------

