# Let's get to the bottom of BBA.



## Minsc (Jul 9, 2006)

Instead of dosing the water column with excel, turn off the filtration and squirt the same amount directly on the algae using a syringe or similar.
I guarantee death! There is a possibility of killing any plants in the line of fire though, so be warned.


----------



## bsmith (Jan 8, 2007)

I guess I should have elaborated better, That is what I did. I can dose ~2 ml of Excel in my tank and that is roughly 2 full u-100 syringes. I tried it a couple of time to no avail.



Minsc said:


> Instead of dosing the water column with excel, turn off the filtration and squirt the same amount directly on the algae using a syringe or similar.
> I guarantee death! There is a possibility of killing any plants in the line of fire though, so be warned.


----------



## rich815 (May 21, 2008)

It is frustrating. I still seem to get a small "bloom" every once and a while though no where near the FOREST I had at one time when I was non-CO2. I just diligently squirt with Excel or H202 and make sure my CO2 is not fluctuating and my flow is good. I'd recommend you drop to 8 hours and maybe see about dropping the light wattage ust a little more and make sure you have a good, GOOD amount of plants to out-compete it the best you can. Problem is those smaller tanks are so much more prone to flucuations vs. larger tanks that it may just return from time to time....


----------



## MrJG (Feb 21, 2007)

Yep even if you fix the root causes of it the stuff thats there already will never go away on its own. As minsc said above squirt the tufts directly with a syringe, death will ensue. 
Definitely be careful though with how much you use, in a 5.5 you can dump 10-15 ml of excel pretty easy spot treating. 
Just read your last post... maybe you just aren't using enough. When killing the remnants in my 40 breeder I must have went through 5-6 5ml syringes full. Of course after letting it sit for a few minutes I did a large water change to clear out any excess.


----------



## plantbrain (Dec 15, 2003)

CO2 stability is the key. That is a lot of light also for such a small tank, try reducing it. Also, do not be fooled by CO2 drop checkers, they are not the most accurate devices. 

This tank is small, you have very BBA prone species as well and a good amount there.

If you can raise the light, do so by 6" or more.
Excel should kill the BBA if you keep doing it, spot dosing or otherwise.

CO2 can degas in minutes and you can add it back in minutes, so there is a lot more variation there than anything to do with nutrients............hence the root of most of the algae is CO2...........not limiting nutrients.

But what drives CO2 uptake?
Light.

So light and CO2 are linked, as are the down stream nutrients........

Nanos are tough if you also do not keep the water level stable, this can change the degassing by blowing off more CO2 as water levels drop, leading to low CO2 part of the week etc. This is less of an issue with larger tanks. It also takes a few weeks for many species to adapt and bounce back after poor CO2.

Stable CO2. When the lights are on, good CO2 availability for plants etc.
Cleaning filters often alos maintains the same current/CO2, pruning routinely etc.

Still, you have 4-5w/gal of light on a 5 gal tank and you have slow growing species................so my question is really why are doing that? Then saying you have algae and BBA issues? There's the irony/contradiction.

Try 1/2 this light.
Full dose of Excel daily for 2-3 weeks at least.
Water changes 2x a week, 50% etc.


Regards, 
Tom Barr


----------



## Naja002 (Oct 12, 2005)

plantbrain said:


> It also takes a few weeks for many species to adapt and bounce back after poor CO2.



Also, if I am understanding things correctly, it takes a week or so for the BBA to start showing up after the C02 flux......is this correct?


----------



## bsmith (Jan 8, 2007)

My problem is I like to keep some higher light species too. The Marselia and anubis are the only slow growers in the tank. I will try getting a 15w light but it is hard to find them in a k that is pleasing to the eye... Sounds like I have been here before.



plantbrain said:


> CO2 stability is the key. That is a lot of light also for such a small tank, try reducing it. Also, do not be fooled by CO2 drop checkers, they are not the most accurate devices.
> 
> This tank is small, you have very BBA prone species as well and a good amount there.
> 
> ...


----------



## abcemorse (Jul 24, 2008)

plantbrain said:


> Also, do not be fooled by CO2 drop checkers, they are not the most accurate devices.


What do you suggest as an accurate device, aside from the expensive testing equipment? Do you think degas testing is accurate? (given that results are 24hrs old). Is accurate to say one has 30 ppm if, for example, pH is 7.2 just before CO2 comes on and 6.2-ish right before it shuts off? Just curious, thanks!


----------



## Hoppy (Dec 24, 2005)

abcemorse said:


> What do you suggest as an accurate device, aside from the expensive testing equipment? Do you think degas testing is accurate? (given that results are 24hrs old). Is accurate to say one has 30 ppm if, for example, pH is 7.2 just before CO2 comes on and 6.2-ish right before it shuts off? Just curious, thanks!


If you can establish accurately how much CO2 will consistently be in the degassed water the degas testing method works well. But, I wasn't able to do that. The longer I waited the less CO2 I had in the degassing sample, at least up to 2+ days. I know of at least one other person who tried the same thing with the same result. The reason the degas method can work is that the equation relating ppm of CO2 to pH and KH contains a factor of 10 raised to the pH power. A pH change of 1.0 therefore means a 10X change in ppm of CO2. And, people assume a degassed sample will have 3 ppm of CO2. But, it doesn't, in any consistent way. It could be .5 ppm or 4 ppm or anything in between, which would give you a in-tank CO2 amount of 5 to 40 ppm.


----------



## plantbrain (Dec 15, 2003)

Naja002 said:


> Also, if I am understanding things correctly, it takes a week or so for the BBA to start showing up after the C02 flux......is this correct?


Yes, about 2-3 in most higher light cases.
If you run out of CO2 for 2-3 days, that will not do it, might for some greens, but not for BBA. Plants will also stunt, they ran out of Carbon......... 

Regards, 
Tom Barr


----------



## plantbrain (Dec 15, 2003)

abcemorse said:


> What do you suggest as an accurate device, aside from the expensive testing equipment? Do you think degas testing is accurate? (given that results are 24hrs old). Is accurate to say one has 30 ppm if, for example, pH is 7.2 just before CO2 comes on and 6.2-ish right before it shuts off? Just curious, thanks!


Eye balls and the plants/fish.
I know what good growth looks like and I know when it's CO2, I can and do easily rule out ferts.........they are easy to standardize and to be consistent with.

CO2 is the only variable that moves around a lot.

I laugh when folks claim their CO2 is stable/high/drop checkers are yellow etc, even with the 3000$ CO2 dissolve meter, it varied huge within a 180 gal tank with 18X turnovers, open spacing, low biomass etc, but 5-10X.
CO2 changes much faster and is a larger component of plants, and algae related issues than any other nutrient.

Eye balling the plants is the best method, Riccia in particular is good, it pearls 1/2 the day or more, then you got it generally. Good Bolbitus growth, moss growth etc........ I have high light plants mixed as well, but they are over shadowed by the high light plants or where there's not as much light.

All aquatic plants are low light though.
So I'd not fall for that high light plant business. They do quite well at lower light also. In nano tanks, the cheapo bulbs vary widely, and the spread often is poor, so you have high light(maybe) and low light in different places.

Generally, 2w/gal is fine.

So a 13 W ought to do it.
You can run 1 bulb and then another later also.
Basically, you need more flex with the lights.
That gives more flex with the CO2 and rate of growth

Regards, 
Tom Barr


----------



## Hoppy (Dec 24, 2005)

CO2 is unique among the nutrients the plants need. First, it won't stay where you put it. We bubble it into the water, but most of it leaves the water by way of the air-water interface - that sets up a gradient between the lower water and the top water. Then, the plants are consuming it rapidly if they are growing well. When plants are pearling you can see with your eyes about how much CO2 the plants are consuming - it is comparable to the amount of O2 you see in the pearling. With lots of in between steps the plant take in CO2 and emit O2, keeping the carbon to build plant tissue. This plant consumption sets up another concentration gradient, from the plants to open water.

Then add in the fact that as hard as it is to get good CO2 levels in the water, CO2 is by far the most important nutrient. Plants are basically carbon structures with other elements helping out.

Knowing about the CO2 concentration gradients that theoretically have to exist, plus seeing the actual variations in concentration around Tom's 180 gallon tank, makes me feel naive to think that a single CO2 measurement anywhere in the tank is really typical of anything.

However, many of us (most of us) lack the experience to be able to judge whether or not we have enough CO2 in the water just by watching the plants and fish. So, at least a drop checker can keep you from maintaining levels near to 5 ppm, while thinking you have 80 ppm. That gives you a place to start adjusting things.


----------



## Naja002 (Oct 12, 2005)

plantbrain said:


> Yes, about 2-3 in most higher light cases.
> If you run out of CO2 for 2-3 days, that will not do it, might for some greens, but not for BBA. Plants will also stunt, they ran out of Carbon.........
> 
> Regards,
> Tom Barr


Thanx, Tom....that actually puts it together for me better than I was thinking/understanding.

I realize that this doesn't apply to the nano, but considering the Title of the thread: Can You offer any explanation for BBA + High Circulation?

I understand the low C02 and/or low circulation, but I don't understand the High circulation....unless there's just low C02 generally. I can't seem to put that one together....


----------



## bsmith (Jan 8, 2007)

I notice in my nana that there is ALWAYS more BBA where the current is stronger. No exceptions.



Naja002 said:


> Thanx, Tom....that actually puts it together for me better than I was thinking/understanding.
> 
> I realize that this doesn't apply to the nano, but considering the Title of the thread: Can You offer any explanation for BBA + High Circulation?
> 
> I understand the low C02 and/or low circulation, but I don't understand the High circulation....unless there's just low C02 generally. I can't seem to put that one together....


----------



## Naja002 (Oct 12, 2005)

Apologies, but I either missed it or forgot about it in your OP.

But now that I'm thinking about it...most, if not all, of the BBA issues that I've dealt with in the past were _technically_ in high flow areas--meaning that even if flow was just adequate generally....the BBA or bulk of it anyway was on leaves up toward the spraybar flow and not down further or in some back corner somewhere. Given the choice...the BBA chose a higher flow over lower flow.....Hmmmm. Curious.....:thumbsup:


EDIT: But now that I'm thinking about it a bit more. It may have been because of the gradient that Hoppy referred to.....up toward the spraybar may have offered the highest 02 intake and lowest C02 levels from degassing during the exchange....

EDIT2: But then that isn't making sense: when on DIY I used the xP3 as a reactor and on pressurized I used a Rex type reactor. Either way the C02 entered the tank via the spraybar. Those plants (nanas and minimas) were getting a lot of the light (~2.25 wpg CF), but other anubias were getting just as much light and less direct flow....yet no BBA.


----------



## plantbrain (Dec 15, 2003)

BBA wil selectivly persist and colonize different substrates, it some cases it will grow everywhere and on plants aggressively(generaly at the start of a bloom, then taper off attacking plants).

Glass, gravel, plant leaves are all cleaned, and trimmed/excel etc.
Spray bars less so, and wood/rock and equipment get colonied as well.
Not picky about light either, only CO2.

Current is going to be highest near the spray bar, and away from the plants.
Adding CO2 mist helps visualize your flow patterns.

You can _see_ where most of the gas goes. This is also true for the dissolved form. I think it might be more common, but the cure and reason for initial bloom seem to be the same near as I can tell.

If you are algae, a moderate high flow rate means a good spot for nutrients, mixing of gas, shallow water with light availability etc. Low flow will not be as good. BBA is a well adapted stream alga, likes about 5-10ppm of CO2.

If the drop in CO2 is strong enough, then the plants stunt and do not grow/much, so they are now like the rocks and wood.
If they grow well, then there's less of a BBA issue and you also have better plant growth. Add a bit more CO2 and now you have little new growth and can trim the rest away.

Regards, 
Tom Barr


----------



## Wö£fëñxXx (Dec 2, 2003)

C02 is tricky, definitely not plug and play unless you are low light.
More light you have the more C02 it will take, using a reactor or
your filter as a reactor will work in a lower light situation.
Do you still use the filter as a reactor?
If using a lot of light you need better diffusion with either an
adequate size diffuser or venturi, so use less light.


Take coffee for instance, I like it strong, it takes more cream to get
the creamy coffee in a strong cup than in a regular cup, so use
less light until you can get the C02 where you need it.
C02 to light ratio.

As Tom stated using a mist will give you a better feel for how the C02
works, I have never used a drop checker or felt the need for another
gadget in the tank, when the plants and algae will tell you everything
you need to know, accurately & fast.

BBA is a hoss to get rid of if you have an infestation, so don't expect it
to just disappear, BBA is always a C02 issue.

Take a low light tank no ferts or C02 that grows plants well, slow but well,
then add C02, talk about lush, then add a lot of light that tank will quickly
turn south unless you understand the mechanics of what else is needed
and how to balance things out.

More light = fast turnaround for better or worse, the math is simple, more
light equals faster growth or fast disaster.

Better diffusion and less light work very well together, slower healthier
growth can be achieved making the tank/system harder to foul up.

Look at any of Amano's tanks, they all have glass diffusion and use less
light than you think with mostly simple to grow plants and plenty of them.

Once you get it, you've got it, but getting there can be frustrating. :biggrin:


----------



## plantbrain (Dec 15, 2003)

Wö£fëñxXx said:


> C02 is tricky, definitely not plug and play unless you are low light.Once you get it, you've got it, but getting there can be frustrating. :biggrin:


Very true and if you have not got it, or start thinking it's something else, then you do not believe what folks tell you.

I've doubted that it was CO2 many times, thought it was NO3, PO4 being too low, current etc.

But everytime it was CO2.
Without fail...............

There are still folks out there that will not address CO2 and always have BBA issues, some folks you just cannot not reach/or they cannot adjust things right for whatever reason. There's always a few of those and they will question things forever.

Another group might limit say their PO4, reducing CO2 demand, then claim low PO4 is the reason and method to cure BBA, well, secondarily it limits growth(limiting PO4).............which defeats the purpose of higher light, CO2 enrichment.........

But they will think there's something to limiting nutrients no matter what especially if they have not done well with CO2:icon_roll

Nothing wrong with reducing growth, however, do not get lost there........how might be the best method to reduce growth and cure most issues? Less light, makes both CO2 and PO4 easier to manage. This contradiction with having high/er light and low nutrients is not wise, adding to it is very poor wide ranging testing methods and care with CO2.

Unfortunately, there's no simple CO2 solution for all lighting types, you can hedge your bets better by using less light, not falling for the HLD(high light disease). For nutrients, adding them in both locations(water column and sediment), and good low, routine cleaning of filters, routine pruning to maintain stable plant biomass (stable uptake of both CO2 and nutrients)etc.
Lots of water changes(you cannot over do these) also can provide stable conditions.

These all provide more wiggle room for dosing. This is not inherent for any one method, this is true for all methods, less light = more wiggle room.

Raise the light up, add a white filter paper(these can be stacked to get progressively less and less light) in the way to block some light(make sure they do not burn from the heat!).

Add some Riccia also, a good "do I have enough CO2? test kit".

Also, many folks have had BBA, everyone of the folks helping out. It's been known since about the mid 1990's on the web and perhaps a little before this in some circles that CO2 is the issue. I know it's hard to trust folks many times, but there are many variables and we make lots of assumptions and care for our tanks very differently.

So do not place so much faith into test kits. The plants and algae are the real test kits and getting experience there will truly help. CO2 has dogged everyone at some point and if not, give yourself another year or so

It gets me, Amano and it can/will get anyone.
Being aware of it and taking steps to provid ethe most wiggle room and to reduce BBA is standard fair. I see BBA, I do the same old routine for the most part, I no longer have a cow anytime I see algae. 

Most every forum gets folks coming in like a revolving door every few months asking the same algae issues and folks generally tell them the same stuff over and over again. Every tank I've "cured of BBA" went through the same stuff.
Friends, clients, my own tanks, folks I've help on line etc.

You go through step by step and rule things out until you are left with CO2.


Regards, 
Tom Barr


----------



## Hoppy (Dec 24, 2005)

Naja002 said:


> Thanx, Tom....that actually puts it together for me better than I was thinking/understanding.
> 
> I realize that this doesn't apply to the nano, but considering the Title of the thread: Can You offer any explanation for BBA + High Circulation?
> 
> I understand the low C02 and/or low circulation, but I don't understand the High circulation....unless there's just low C02 generally. I can't seem to put that one together....


I have noticed that BBA loves to grow in areas of high circulation too. Could that be because BBA need nutrients just as plants do, so high circulation areas have a continuous supply of all of the nutrients, making them good growth areas for BBA? I think BBA also likes CO2 - CO2 is not an algaecide, it stops BBA from starting to grow, but doesn't kill it. Isn't the effect of CO2 to give optimum healthy growth of the plants, and that is what prevents the BBA from starting to grow?


----------



## Complexity (Jan 30, 2008)

bsmith, I _think_ my BBA came from the anubias I bought from you (no hard feelings, you made it clear the plants had BBA). And I also experienced the problem with direct dosing of Excel and H2O2 not killing the BBA on one of my plants. What was interesting is that at its worst, the BBA was beginning to grow on my substrate itself, and the dosing I did turned the BBA on the substrate bright red, killing it, while the BBA on the crypts wasn't budged. This is with the same dosing on the same night! I have no idea why.

But I am now a true believer that BBA is all about CO2. I tried many things, but when I got the CO2 raised high enough, that was when I won the battle. After moving my tank and doing everything I could think of in a feeble attempt to kill any and all BBA spores in every way I could think of (including killing my good bacteria by running bleach throughout my tank and filters AND replacing the substrate), what happened? While I was trying to get the CO2 level stable, a tiny bit of BBA began to show up. I'm talking about such a small amount that I could only see it on the crypts while using a jeweler's loupe, but tiny bits or not, it was definitely BBA. I now use those crypts as my early detection warning plants.

I've finally managed to get the CO2 stable at a high level, and the BBA that wanted to reemerge lost again. As long as I keep that CO2 up, the BBA cannot get ahold of my tank. It's there. It's ready to pounce. And all the Excel and H2O2 treatments in the world cannot stop it. But as long as I keep the CO2 at a high, stable level, the BBA cannot grow.

As far as how high, I do use a drop checker, but I don't rely on it. It's just something to help me as a beginner. However, now I find that the most telling sign of high CO2 is the blizzard of bubbles from pearling that I see in my plants. I now expect my plants to give off so much oxygen that it truly reminds me of a snow storm. If a fish bumps a plant, lots of bubbles suddenly rush to the surface. And there are several plants that hold the oxygen until it creates a large bubble (nickel sized?) that burps up to the surface all at once. This is going on constantly when the lights are on.

When the CO2 is too low, that entire snow storm of oxygen tells me. If it's lower or missing, then there's a problem with the CO2.

I also used to only get the snow storm on the days I dosed my macro ferts, but now I get it every day, regardless of what ferts I dose (macros or micros). I _think_ that's because of the CO2, not the ferts.

I have come to the point now that I am absolutely addicted and mesmerized by all the oxygen bubbles in the tank. They also help me determine flow patterns as the smaller bubbles are blown around by the current.

Back to the BBA that just would not die on my crypt... I have learned to accept that that particular plant is somehow more prone to BBA than the others in my tank (including other crypts). I removed all anubias, java ferns and other slow growing plants in favor of faster growing stems. I think it's just easier to remove plants that are most prone to BBA while trying to get rid of BBA. I can probably put those plants back in the tank now and they won't get BBA again since I've fixed the CO2 problem, but I don't have room for them now.

I think many of the other elements, such as lighting and flow, may be contributing factors, but they are not the root cause of BBA nor will changing them be the root remedy for pushing the BBA back. There is one and only one thing that I found to be the key: CO2. If you have high, stable CO2, then you will not have BBA no matter what the other elements (within reason, of course). The other elements only come into play after the BBA is already there.


----------



## Naja002 (Oct 12, 2005)

This is my take on it:



Hoppy said:


> I have noticed that BBA loves to grow in areas of high circulation too. Could that be because BBA need nutrients just as plants do, so high circulation areas have a continuous supply of all of the nutrients, making them good growth areas for BBA?


Yes, absolutely, but see below.....



Hoppy said:


> I think BBA also likes CO2 - CO2 is not an algaecide, it stops BBA from starting to grow, but doesn't kill it. Isn't the effect of CO2 to give optimum healthy growth of the plants, and that is what prevents the BBA from starting to grow?


C02 will kill it in the sense of stopping it's growth. I may be wrong, but I would imagine that if we just waited long enough--it would slowly disintegrate. Definitely not sure on that though....:thumbsup:

Healthy growing plants make a lousy substrate for any algae. As far as BBA goes:




plantbrain said:


> *BBA* is a well adapted stream alga, *likes about 5-10ppm of CO2*.


The BBA spores are going to germinate in roughly the 5-10ppm C02 range. By increasing the C02 level we destroy the proper germination trigger (5-10ppm C02), so no new spores germinate--new growth stops. Eliminate the existing BBA (cut, excel, etc)....problem sloved.

Because of inconsistant flow and C02 levels in a tank....BBA is inclined to grow in any area, on any substrate (plant, wood, rock, etc) where C02 is low enough--for a _sufficient period of time_:



plantbrain said:


> Yes, about 2-3 [wks] in most higher light cases.
> If you run out of CO2 for 2-3 days, that will not do it, might for some greens, but not for BBA.



So, C02 above roughly the 5-10ppm range prevents BBA from growing by removing the germination trigger and healthier plants is really just a side benefit that will help out a lot with other types of algae. The spores are still there....just waiting....keep up the C02 and they will just stay dormant.


Did I get that right? :tongue:


----------



## plantbrain (Dec 15, 2003)

This is a good run down and view , pragmatic and realistic.

Regards, 
Tom Barr



Complexity said:


> bsmith, I _think_ my BBA came from the anubias I bought from you (no hard feelings, you made it clear the plants had BBA). And I also experienced the problem with direct dosing of Excel and H2O2 not killing the BBA on one of my plants. What was interesting is that at its worst, the BBA was beginning to grow on my substrate itself, and the dosing I did turned the BBA on the substrate bright red, killing it, while the BBA on the crypts wasn't budged. This is with the same dosing on the same night! I have no idea why.
> 
> But I am now a true believer that BBA is all about CO2. I tried many things, but when I got the CO2 raised high enough, that was when I won the battle. After moving my tank and doing everything I could think of in a feeble attempt to kill any and all BBA spores in every way I could think of (including killing my good bacteria by running bleach throughout my tank and filters AND replacing the substrate), what happened? While I was trying to get the CO2 level stable, a tiny bit of BBA began to show up. I'm talking about such a small amount that I could only see it on the crypts while using a jeweler's loupe, but tiny bits or not, it was definitely BBA. I now use those crypts as my early detection warning plants.
> 
> ...


----------



## bsmith (Jan 8, 2007)

I will say that while all of the BBA in my nano has not cleared up (only had pressurized co2 for 4 weeks) it does look much better. 

It sounds like the best cure for BBA is prevention. I really dont think that building a baby reactor for my nano would be a bad idea. It would just be a pain hiding it. 

I have a 2213 on my tank so I cant think of anyway to circulate co2 rich water any better. A powerhead would be horrible in it and honestly it would probly cause more off gassing then anything.


----------



## Naja002 (Oct 12, 2005)

As long as it's not growing/spreading you should be fine. Just need to get rid of what's there with cutting, excel, bleach, H202....

If it is still growing/spreading...then, yes, you will need to further improve your C02....


----------



## bsmith (Jan 8, 2007)

I just plucked out a few nodes of Marselia that had the BBA on them.


----------



## Wö£fëñxXx (Dec 2, 2003)

Good, keep pruning and removing the BBA as time ticks, if you see
new growth, re-evaluate light and C02 immediately. that's better
than a drop checker, you can't get more accurate than that!

Complexity? that is a lot of words... hehe


----------



## CmLaracy (Jan 7, 2007)

maybe this can help http://www.plantedtank.net/forums/algae/68793-algaes-causes-treatments-guide.html


----------



## bsmith (Jan 8, 2007)

I have red that and all the other algea guide on the net. The reason I posted this was becaus most of the gudes have contradicting info about BBA and I just wanted to get to the bottem of BBA. I think that it is a problem allot of people who have higher lighted tanks deal with.



CmLaracy said:


> maybe this can help http://www.plantedtank.net/forums/algae/68793-algaes-causes-treatments-guide.html


----------



## plantbrain (Dec 15, 2003)

Some info is quite dated and the "Parrot" still lives and keeps the old myths alive.

If it was so terrible and no one knew, we'd all have BBA, but it's not that hard or some techy thing to beat it and never deal with much ever again. 

You might try making a DIY Cal aqua labs in line diffuser or buy theirs. 
This would give you good CO2 using the Ehiem.

Regards, 
Tom Barr


----------



## bsmith (Jan 8, 2007)

I have been seriously thinking about the cal aqua diffusor for some time now. I will say though I get a small stram of tiny bubbles from the spraybar and very rarely get any kind of "burping" action from the filter.



plantbrain said:


> Some info is quite dated and the "Parrot" still lives and keeps the old myths alive.
> 
> If it was so terrible and no one knew, we'd all have BBA, but it's not that hard or some techy thing to beat it and never deal with much ever again.
> 
> ...


----------



## Complexity (Jan 30, 2008)

plantbrain said:


> This is a good run down and view , pragmatic and realistic.


Thanks, Tom. And I thank you not only for the comment, but for your work. While I'm not one to blindly follow anyone's advice, while I was fighting algae, something you said remained in my head. Paraphrasing: "Concentrate on growing the plants and that will take care of the algae." When all of my other attempts failed, I changed my tactics. And sure enough, it worked.

When I first realized that BBA was spreading in my tank, I would not put any new plants in the tank for fear that they'll "catch" BBA too. This kept my plant mass low (not to mention harming the plants that I refused to plant). Fortunately, I didn't have other algae issues (other than GDA which I don't mind). I also refused to offer the plants I did have the amount of light they required for fear that the light would increase the BBA problem. That meant the plants I did have in the tank weren't able to grow to their potential. In general, I was afraid to give the plants what they needed because I was so focused on the BBA.

But when my tank suffered a week long power outage from hurricane Ike, I really needed to add plants to the tank to help it recover. At that point, BBA returned with such a vengeance that I could no longer care whether it "infected" any new plants I planted. I simply needed to raise the plant mass, BBA be damned.

Magically, the plants I added began growing. They grew like mad! And as I fiddled with the Excel and H2O2 ideas to no avail, I started learning how to push the CO2 up higher and higher. I also became very religious in my fert dosing. In other words, I concentrated on the plants, not the BBA.

And by magic, the BBA stopped growing while the plants flourished! While I was watching all this going on in my tank, I kept hearing the words in the back of my head "grow the plants instead of killing the algae". The more I focused on the plants, the less algae issues I had.

So I thank you for your work and for all the words you've offered on the subject of algae in general. Of all those words, that one phrase stuck in my head while I watched the "proof" unfold right before my eyes. It's a very simple concept, but yet so true.



Naja002 said:


> C02 will kill it in the sense of stopping it's growth. I may be wrong, but I would imagine that if we just waited long enough--it would slowly disintegrate. Definitely not sure on that though....:thumbsup:


I've wondered about that myself. But you bring up another good point that may play into this:



> The BBA spores are going to germinate in roughly the 5-10ppm C02 range.


I differ in the ppm range that it takes to prevent BBA spores from germinating (I think it's more in the 30ppm range), but you bring up an interesting thought. That is that the raised CO2 prevents BBA spores from germinating which is why it stops it from spreading.

If that's what is happening, then I'm not sure whether existing BBA would die off if given enough time. The CO2 may be acting like a pre-emergent of sorts, but not a post-emergent. This would explain why the high levels of CO2 can prevent BBA from spreading, but not kill what's already there.

This also brings up questions regarding why the CO2 levels needs to not only be high, but stable. Perhaps when the CO2 is not maintained at a stable level, the moments when the CO2 dips down, BBA spores can then germinate. I don't know, but this would fit the behavior I've seen with BBA.



Naja002 said:


> As long as it's not growing/spreading you should be fine. Just need to get rid of what's there with cutting, excel, bleach, H202....
> 
> If it is still growing/spreading...then, yes, you will need to further improve your C02....


Exactly. That's the answer in a nutshell. Well said.


----------



## bsmith (Jan 8, 2007)

Last night as I was mulling over all of the great info in this thread I started thinking about H2o2 dips and that most ppl said Excel was a better treatment for BBA then H2o2. So what did I do? I dipped my plants in an Excel dip mixture. I got out a shallow tupperware container and filled it with water, then I added 3ml of excel. I put my plants in there for a hour. Well see what happens.


----------



## Complexity (Jan 30, 2008)

I've also heard the suggestion of putting Excel in a spray bottle and spraying the plants while they're out of the tank, and then putting them back into the tank without rinsing or anything. The Excel in the spray bottle is full strength, not diluted with water. It kind of worked for me, but not really. Cutting off the leaves with BBA or simply removing the plants worked best for me while I was having to actively fight it.

BTW, the reason I mentioned earlier that I think my BBA came from the anubias I got from you is because we both had the BBA not die when Excel is squirted directly on it while in the tank. It makes me wonder if there are different strains of BBA with some less susceptible to Excel and H2O2 than others. If so, I believe we both have the same strain of BBA which is why we both experienced the same problem with squirting Excel not killing it.

Is the BBA on all of your plants or only on certain plants? Any chance you can house those plants elsewhere while trying to get the BBA under control?


----------



## bsmith (Jan 8, 2007)

The BBA was only from my mini-m. The plants that are effected are my marselia and some purple bamboo that was in my M. The plants I did the Excel bath on was the burple bamboo. I stripped all the leaves that had the BBA on them and dipped the rest for a hour.

Maybe we have some tough BBA in the Midwest!  



Complexity said:


> I've also heard the suggestion of putting Excel in a spray bottle and spraying the plants while they're out of the tank, and then putting them back into the tank without rinsing or anything. The Excel in the spray bottle is full strength, not diluted with water. It kind of worked for me, but not really. Cutting off the leaves with BBA or simply removing the plants worked best for me while I was having to actively fight it.
> 
> BTW, the reason I mentioned earlier that I think my BBA came from the anubias I got from you is because we both had the BBA not die when Excel is squirted directly on it while in the tank. It makes me wonder if there are different strains of BBA with some less susceptible to Excel and H2O2 than others. If so, I believe we both have the same strain of BBA which is why we both experienced the same problem with squirting Excel not killing it.
> 
> Is the BBA on all of your plants or only on certain plants? Any chance you can house those plants elsewhere while trying to get the BBA under control?


----------



## plantbrain (Dec 15, 2003)

Excel should be diluted like bleach, it will kill the leaves if you put it in for a few minutes full strength or as a spray, dilute it and do several long sprays instead.

Still, focus on plants, not algae.
That is the key and the goal.

Who got into the hobby to learn the many 1001 ways to kill algae?

Name one person.........:icon_ques

Regards, 
Tom Barr


----------



## Complexity (Jan 30, 2008)

bsmith782 said:


> The BBA was only from my mini-m. The plants that are effected are my marselia and some purple bamboo that was in my M. The plants I did the Excel bath on was the burple bamboo. I stripped all the leaves that had the BBA on them and dipped the rest for a hour.
> 
> Maybe we have some tough BBA in the Midwest!


An hour? I hope it survives. The spraying suggestion I had received was to pull up the plant, spray it, and put it right back into the water. No soaking.

Just remember as your fighting the BBA, there are two parts to the battle. (1) Fixing the environment that allows it to spread and (2) removing what has already grown. Once you do #1, doing #2 isn't so hard. It's easy to get rid of what's there when the BBA is no longer spreading.

The antidote to BBA is: CO2, CO2, CO2. :smile:


----------



## bsmith (Jan 8, 2007)

All of the residual BBA that was on the PB is dead.

Here is a rough estimation on the amouns of what was used.

~750ml of water
3ml of excel

Bamboo was submersed in the solution for about an hour then put directly into the tank. The next day it was a pikish color. After that I dont know where it went maybe it just fell off or my Oto's ate it.



Complexity said:


> An hour? I hope it survives. The spraying suggestion I had received was to pull up the plant, spray it, and put it right back into the water. No soaking.
> 
> Just remember as your fighting the BBA, there are two parts to the battle. (1) Fixing the environment that allows it to spread and (2) removing what has already grown. Once you do #1, doing #2 isn't so hard. It's easy to get rid of what's there when the BBA is no longer spreading.
> 
> The antidote to BBA is: CO2, CO2, CO2. :smile:


----------



## prototyp3 (Dec 5, 2007)

I'm a little stumped as to why I've got BBA in one of my tanks. 

I've got good flow in my 18g tank with an XP1, all the plants sway in the current. No real surface agitation, just an addon surface skimmer with water falling less than 2 inches - no splashing. CO2 is at about 5bps fed into my canister. All plants pearl a few hours into the day. (marsilea, needle leaf java, bolbitis, crypts and anubias) But I still have BBA on some rocks and plant leaves, mainly in the direct path of the outflows. I'm a bit confused.

Lighting is 2x24w T5HO bulbs suspended 6-7 inches off the tank, only a 8 hour photoperiod.


----------



## bsmith (Jan 8, 2007)

When I had BBA in my Mini-M it was in the direct fpath of the outflow too. That occurence is probly the single most important reason I started this thread.

In order to get good cot circulation we need decent flow. In order to kill BBA we need good co2 circulation/levels. THERE IS BBA IN THE DIRECT PATH OF OF OUR OUTFLOWS WHICH SHOULD HAVE THE HIGHEST CONCENTRATION OF ALL!!!

Since I have bombed the BBA patches directly with Excel properly allowing the tank to remain undisterbed for an hour in some cases and have gotten pressurized co2 the BBA in my tanks has been abated.

Can you give any more info in your 18?



prototyp3 said:


> I'm a little stumped as to why I've got BBA in one of my tanks.
> 
> I've got good flow in my 18g tank with an XP1, all the plants sway in the current. No real surface agitation, just an addon surface skimmer with water falling less than 2 inches - no splashing. CO2 is at about 5bps fed into my canister. All plants pearl a few hours into the day. (marsilea, needle leaf java, bolbitis, crypts and anubias) But I still have BBA on some rocks and plant leaves, mainly in the direct path of the outflows. I'm a bit confused.
> 
> Lighting is 2x24w T5HO bulbs suspended 6-7 inches off the tank, only a 8 hour photoperiod.


----------



## Wö£fëñxXx (Dec 2, 2003)

Feeding your Co2 into the canister is a good way too diffuser Co2, it really is.
But it is why you have BBA because you have no biological bacteria, you kill
all of it with gas, and you need the bacteria.

So, you need another way too diffuse Co2.

Plus you have a lot of light, which adds more stress on the system.


----------



## prototyp3 (Dec 5, 2007)

bsmith782 said:


> When I had BBA in my Mini-M it was in the direct fpath of the outflow too. That occurence is probly the single most important reason I started this thread.
> 
> In order to get good cot circulation we need decent flow. In order to kill BBA we need good co2 circulation/levels. THERE IS BBA IN THE DIRECT PATH OF OF OUR OUTFLOWS WHICH SHOULD HAVE THE HIGHEST CONCENTRATION OF ALL!!!
> 
> ...


I'm going to have to try nuking the BBA with the excel and removing as much as possible. It doesn't seem to be spreading much, the worse area is a rock.

More info on the 18g:
pool filter sand
daily dosing of Barr's PMDD style EI, and 2ml of Tropica Miracle Grow
78 degrees
weekly 5g water change



Wö£fëñxXx said:


> Feeding your Co2 into the canister is a good way too diffuser Co2, it really is.
> But it is why you have BBA because you have no biological bacteria, you kill
> all of it with gas, and you need the bacteria.
> 
> ...


Never thought of the CO2 destroying the filter's inhabitants.. Wouldn't there be enough biological filtration in the tank itself with all the surface area plants provide? I guess it wouldn't hurt to try changing that. I used a mini internal filter to diffuse CO2 in my 40g. Worked great. It's just with limited space in an 18g that I preferred to keep things to a minimum. I started with a glass diffuser but wasn't convinced it was providing enough CO2 throughout the tank..

Thanks for the suggestions guys. I guess I'll try to manually remove as much BBA as possible, dose some excel, do a large water change, and diffuse CO2 in another way leaving my main filter alone. I guess I could always adjust my light bar to raise the light a bit if all else fails. Kind of funny how much light the suspended 2x24w provides, and the fixtures are 4x24w... Who would really need that much light outside of reefers? :icon_eek:


----------



## prototyp3 (Dec 5, 2007)

One other thing about feeding CO2 through the canister. Would it really kill the bacteria because of the higher concentration levels? Just wondering because even when feeding it 4-5bps I've never seen or heard any gas pockets forming in the canister. It has never shot out bubbles either. It operates and sounds the same as when CO2 is turned off. I'm just wondering if the bubbles dissolve quite a bit before reaching the impeller, as there is a lot of up-down and s-curves for the bubbles to traverse before entering the canister.

I'm open to change and finding better ways to do things, but I seemed to recall quite a few members here using and liking canister diffusion methods. That's one of the reasons I gave it a try after using both inline reactors, power heads, and ceramic diffusers. Seemed to provide a great amount of CO2 without any upkeep, which is right up my alley!


----------



## Wö£fëñxXx (Dec 2, 2003)

prototyp3 said:


> Kind of funny how much light the suspended 2x24w provides, and the fixtures are 4x24w... Who would really need that much light outside of reefers? :icon_eek:


Absolutely, and it seems to be an epidemic around here.


----------



## ColeMan (Mar 9, 2008)

I was thinking about that same thing and it didn't quite fly (logically) for me either. N-fixing bacteria are, after all, obligate chemolithotrophs that use inorganic compounds as an energy source. They _oxidize_ ammonia and nitrites for their energy needs and fix inorganic carbon dioxide (CO2) to fulfill their carbon requirements. So N-fixing bacteria need CO2...Since not very much energy is produced from the oxidation reactions, N-bacteria are extremely efficient at converting ammonia and nitrite, so much so that a single cell can convert ammonia at a rate that would require up to one million heterotrophs to accomplish. Most of their energy production (80%) is devoted to fixing CO2 via the Calvin cycle, leaving little energy for growth and reproduction (hence slow tank maturation times). 

As for oxygen requirements: 
Maximum nitrification rates will exist if dissolved oxygen (DO) levels exceed 80% saturation. Nitrification will not occur if DO concentrations drop to 2.0 mg/l (ppm) or less. Nitrobacter is more strongly affected by low DO than NITROSOMONAS.

I could see how CO2 could inhibit N-fixing bacteria growth by lowering the pH to a level that inhibits N-bacteria growth, but I find it difficult to believe that one would introduce CO2 to the point where it would starve the bacteria of oxygen. 


http://www.bioconlabs.com/nitribactfacts.html
http://www.jstor.org/pss/3543703


----------



## Hilde (May 19, 2008)

I know the idea that low nitrates will cause BBA is out dated but I have been adding KNO3 to my tank and it is almost gone now. Dosed 1/2 tsp dry to the tank, 29 gallon, 1x per week 2xs. I have no injected Co2. Did loose 2 fish, though.

I think it worked for it helped the plants to grow thus starving the algae of nutrients.


----------



## plantbrain (Dec 15, 2003)

I'll say it 1001 times, and say again, algae are not being starved for nutrients in aquariums.

You are simply providing good conditions for the plants.
Gardening, growing plants well etc. Submersed plants are CO2 limited very strongly under higher lighting, much more than any thing else.

Bacteria and algae are not CO2 limited.
They have very little need, no plant cell wall or other tissues to make that have high CO2 demand. They also have very high surface to area ratios. So uptake is easy.

You skew the system to algae when you limit CO2.
You skew to poor plant growth when you stop adding enough CO2 relative to the light intensity.

That's it.

Regards, 
Tom Barr


----------



## Hilde (May 19, 2008)

I dosed with H2O2 4mm and Florish 2mm daily for a week. Also dosed with KNO3 1/2 tsp and increased the circulation with powerhead. This got rid of the hair algae and BBA. Didn't use any other ferts for have CaSO4 and K2SO4 in the substrate. Also didn't increase the Co2 for don't have injected Co2. 

Thus I assume that correcting the imbalance killed the algae or algae doesn't grow well when KNO3 added. For in the yard KNO3 is used as stump remover.

I am beginning to think that algae is like weeds in the yard. When the plants aren't growing well it takes over.

Correct me if I am wrong. I learn from my errors, while my fish and plants die from them.


----------



## Hilde (May 19, 2008)

Complexity said:


> Magically, the plants I added began growing. They grew like mad! And as I fiddled with the Excel and H2O2 ideas to no avail, I started learning how to push the CO2 up higher and higher. I also became very religious in my fert dosing. In other words, I concentrated on the plants, not the BBA.


What ferts were you dosing with?


----------



## plantbrain (Dec 15, 2003)

Hilde said:


> I dosed with H2O2 4mm and Florish 2mm daily for a week. Also dosed with KNO3 1/2 tsp and increased the circulation with powerhead. This got rid of the hair algae and BBA. Didn't use any other ferts for have CaSO4 and K2SO4 in the substrate. Also didn't increase the Co2 for don't have injected Co2.
> 
> Thus I assume that correcting the imbalance killed the algae or algae doesn't grow well when KNO3 added. For in the yard KNO3 is used as stump remover.
> 
> ...


Increased the mixing of CO2 will do it in milder cases, what yours likely was, you had left over tuffs, so a little ferts and killing what was there was likely all you needed to do. You might add a tad bit more CO2 for now. Aklso, between the time you kill what is there and when it comes back again can be a few weeks. 

But overall, the general idea about weeds and the plants is good.
Stick with that, the hobby is about growing plants, not killing weeds.

Weeds are much easier to control when the crop or grass is growing well and not 1/2 dead, stunted or slow growth under high light.

Regards, 
Tom Barr


----------



## Jag1980 (Sep 19, 2008)

I got 3.3wpg in a 29 gallon tank
If I have a good amount of Co2 one day and Higher Co2 level the next, would that cause a problem with fluctuating Co2 levels?
Or as long as Co2 levels are in the correct minimum levels, I will be OK?

If I have been maintaining a good fert, Co2 schedule with a very stable tank, how many days can I miss before I would have a problem with a high light setup?


I use a Koralia power head. 
To keep the Co2 concentration flowing threw all areas of the tank, is there a better position to direct the flow of water? 
Pointed downward, across or upward angles?

How soon should I see pearling of my plants after the lights come on?
or should I say, how soon can my plants start to pearl after I turn on my light? 
My Lights don't come on until my drop checker shows me a lighter shade of green, about 2 hours after regulator comes on since I have a EMP-400 in my tank.

Once my Co2 regulator shuts off, how do I know when my Co2 level have dropped too low to have the lights on?
This is to help determine a on off cycle of my equipment which best fits me and my tank.


I have asked many question in the past that never got answered and that stunted my learning process. I'm getting very close to getting alot of this stuff figured out to where I can start answering some of my own questions.

What are some of the best plants to monitor pearling?
Riccia I hear is good, but can be messy if not managed properly.


----------



## Complexity (Jan 30, 2008)

Hilde said:


> What ferts were you dosing with?


The normal dry macros and micros.

Macros: Nitrate (KNO3), Potassium Sulfate (K2SO4) and Mono Potassium Phosphate (KH2PO4).

Micros: Plantex CSM+B (premixed with water)

I also had some root tabs that I think helped. I can't remember which worked best, API root tabs or the Flourish tabs. I'm trying a new root tab right now, Wonder-Gro ROOT+, but I'm not sure I like it as much as the others. I think they're formulated to add more macros than micros.

But the main thing is to keep up with dosing macros and micros. I got busy and didn't dose my ferts for awhile, and the plants really showed it. Then I started dosing again, the plants quickly responded. I stopped dosing, and the plants went back downhill. So the ferts definitely make a difference.


----------



## jargonchipmunk (Dec 8, 2008)

jag, don't base any major decisions off of plant pearling. The "pearl" is simply O2 that is being forced into the water column by the plant faster than the water column can absorb it. You'll see more pearling if your water column is naturally rich in O2 (after water changes, if you use a bubbler at night, etc). If the water column isn't as O2 rich, the oxygen is absorbed into the water column faster and you don't see as much pearling. This isn't to say you shouldn't see ANY pearling, but in one of my tanks the plants grow inches a day, and I have to look close to see evidence of pearling. (I'm thinking I might need to run a bubbler at night myself, but I think the plants are keeping the O2 levels right themselves and I don't particularly LIKE the looks of a sprite bottle tank, so I'm okay with it) It IS a good sign things are going right, but not the be all end all of it.


----------



## Jag1980 (Sep 19, 2008)

Thanks for the info.

But I wasn't basing major decisions off of plant pearling, it was just a question.


----------

