# The Pearling Myth



## senoufo (Nov 14, 2008)

+1 on post above

"If your plants are growing well, your fish are healthy, and you're not being over run with algae... DON'T FIX IT! You're already doing better than most tanks out there. The bubbles on the plant leaves will not help you"


----------



## plantbrain (Dec 15, 2003)

I get lots of pearling with low light also:thumbsup:
Also depends on flow, species in question etc.

It's not a universal sign, but it's not a bad indication either.
Good healthy growth is a general sign.


regards, 
Tom Barr


----------



## Nue (Dec 27, 2009)

My plants don't pearl, and they seem fine.


----------



## sanoshin (May 19, 2010)

Actually, I was just trying to get mine to pearl... When I first started my tank, I had pearling every day for a month. Now the plants are grown in thicker, and still everything is growing well - no algae, healthy fish. I still want to get my plants to pearl again, does anyone have constantly pearling plants, or is something to do with the gas concentrations? Makes me wonder if now that the plants are bigger, i'm not dosing enough ferts or possible the light isn't reaching all the plants properly now that it is grown in.


----------



## Hoppy (Dec 24, 2005)

Low or no CO2 is more likely to be a cause of no pearling than other nutrients. Rapidly growing plants normally pearl, from what I have seen, and that takes good light, good CO2 and adequate fertilizing. I think Tom uses CO2 even in low light tanks, so that would suggest that CO2 is a big requirement if you want to see pearling.


----------



## Minsc (Jul 9, 2006)

Great post:thumbsup:

My current set ups have less light than ever before, more CO2, more water movement, more surface rippling. I have very little pearling, great looking healthy plants and also very little algae! 

The lack of bubbles suits me just fine, I find pearling to be distracting anyway.


----------



## jargonchipmunk (Dec 8, 2008)

sanoshin said:


> Actually, I was just trying to get mine to pearl... When I first started my tank, I had pearling every day for a month. Now the plants are grown in thicker, and still everything is growing well - no algae, healthy fish. I still want to get my plants to pearl again, does anyone have constantly pearling plants, or is something to do with the gas concentrations? Makes me wonder if now that the plants are bigger, i'm not dosing enough ferts or possible the light isn't reaching all the plants properly now that it is grown in.


Something strikes me odd here. Do you simply like the looks of pearling plants? I know some people do, and I did always like having one or more plants in the tank that would pearl more than the others even if just to assure myself of the tanks health at a glance. That said... if your plants are good with no algae, then I think you're doing well. More Co2 won't hurt... your plants at least, I'm not sure the concentration you have to begin with. I certainly wouldn't up the light now that you have a nice healthy tank. The light has already proven itself, yeah? Don't be like my ex and expect more each time I conform to your slave-driving expectations! :hihi:


----------



## comatoast (Mar 11, 2009)

jargonchipmunk said:


> Don't be like my ex and expect more each time I conform to your slave-driving expectations! :hihi:










ROFL -I knew there had to be another one.


----------



## hbosman (Oct 5, 2006)

Minsc said:


> Great post:thumbsup:
> 
> My current set ups have less light than ever before, more CO2, more water movement, more surface rippling. I have very little pearling, great looking healthy plants and also very little algae!
> 
> The lack of bubbles suits me just fine, I find pearling to be distracting anyway.


I'm not fond of the bubbles either. I have CO2 mist blowing everywhere from my canister output(inline diffuser) and, when my second bank of lights kick in, I get pearling everywhere. It just doesn't look natural when the Rotalas are covered in bubbles, just hanging there like Christmas balls. When I get the plant density back to where I want it, I will reduce my noon burst back to 1 hour again. When I get a stand with more room, I might go back to an inline reactor to minimize the mist look as well.

Yeah, if you don't have pearling but sufficient growth and health, that's a plus in my book.


----------



## sanoshin (May 19, 2010)

jargonchipmunk said:


> Something strikes me odd here. Do you simply like the looks of pearling plants? I know some people do, and I did always like having one or more plants in the tank that would pearl more than the others even if just to assure myself of the tanks health at a glance. That said... if your plants are good with no algae, then I think you're doing well. More Co2 won't hurt... your plants at least, I'm not sure the concentration you have to begin with. I certainly wouldn't up the light now that you have a nice healthy tank. The light has already proven itself, yeah? Don't be like my ex and expect more each time I conform to your slave-driving expectations! :hihi:


Yeah I like the looks :biggrin:. To me... I spent a lot of money for good equipment and nice plants, I just want that fast growing satisfaction. I like, as you said, a quick glance and knowing the tank is healthy and far from an algae problem. Without the pearling, it makes me think that it could slip at any time, the plants are not at "optimum". Even though I had the pearling for a month, now that it is not, I seem to have a brown diatom problem on my myrio and java moss, and red rotala's dying on me... so it makes me think the lights are not strong enough... or something is wrong, because it USED to pearl :icon_frow. My first tank was a 30gallon corner aquarium, but when I bought it used from some guy on ebay, he told me it was a 60 gallon tank! That was my first planted aquarium, and boy did it grow, because I effectively doubled every requirement not knowing it was a 30g.... I miss the pearling and the insane grown, like 2 inches a night :biggrin:


----------



## barbarossa4122 (Jan 16, 2010)

jargonchipmunk said:


> Don't be like my ex and expect more each time I conform to your slave-driving expectations! :hihi:


Lol!!!!!! Outstanding!


----------



## timwag2001 (Jul 3, 2009)

barbarossa4122 said:


> Lol!!!!!! Outstanding!


 
lmao. completely agree!


----------



## feral13 (Jan 17, 2006)

Not saying I dont like the pearling effect, but I don't put much emphasis on it.

This is how I look at it...

Some non-aquatic plants will pearl for a while if placed in the tank. Does this mean they are doing great?


----------



## bsmith (Jan 8, 2007)

Pearling is a result of the o2 that the plants are producing not being absorbed by the water in the tank. It has no where to go so it forms a bubble. You will get more pronounced pearling with high light and lots of co2. 

I have found that in my tanks that use co2 I make as much water turbulence at the surface as possible. This lets more o2 into the water and there for allow more co2 to be injected without suffocating the animals inside. I push my co2 levels past the yellowest drop checker you have sen with a 4dkh solution and my fish are all still acting like nothing is going on. Why? because there is a ton of o2 in the water too. This makes pearling happen quicker/easier IME since the o2 is already there. Since I also am a believer in lots of low the pearling just doesn't steam off the plants usually, it gets mixed around with the flow and makes the tank look like its filled with sprite.


----------



## rwong2k (Dec 24, 2004)

I've had pearling in my high light, high co2, fertilization tanks, a while ago, but now i've switched over to a medium light and low co2 level, plants are doing great, no algae issues, but also no pearling


----------



## mordalphus (Jun 23, 2010)

Turning heat up can help pearl too, because higher temperature water can hold less dissolved oxygen


----------



## bsmith (Jan 8, 2007)

rwong2k said:


> I've had pearling in my high light, high co2, fertilization tanks, a while ago, but now i've switched over to a medium light and low co2 level, plants are doing great, no algae issues, but also no pearling


Just a fyi. There is nothing wrong with having a low-med light tank with high co2. You can never add too much co2 as far as plants are concerned.


----------



## rwong2k (Dec 24, 2004)

thanks bsmith,
that's true, not too sure how much co2 i can add, so ordered a drop checker recently off the net, and i'll get a more accurate reading shortly
I'll try to push around the 25-30ppm mark, hopefully my rcs will be alright


----------



## bsmith (Jan 8, 2007)

rwong2k said:


> thanks bsmith,
> that's true, not too sure how much co2 i can add, so ordered a drop checker recently off the net, and i'll get a more accurate reading shortly
> I'll try to push around the 25-30ppm mark, hopefully my rcs will be alright


No problem friend. Some of the best planted tank I have ever seen were low light high co2 tanks.


----------



## Rockhoe14er (Jan 19, 2011)

bsmith said:


> Pearling is a result of the o2 that the plants are producing not being absorbed by the water in the tank. It has no where to go so it forms a bubble. You will get more pronounced pearling with high light and lots of co2.
> 
> I have found that in my tanks that use co2 I make as much water turbulence at the surface as possible. This lets more o2 into the water and there for allow more co2 to be injected without suffocating the animals inside. I push my co2 levels past the yellowest drop checker you have sen with a 4dkh solution and my fish are all still acting like nothing is going on. Why? because there is a ton of o2 in the water too. This makes pearling happen quicker/easier IME since the o2 is already there. Since I also am a believer in lots of low the pearling just doesn't steam off the plants usually, it gets mixed around with the flow and makes the tank look like its filled with sprite.



bsmith. Do your plants grow better with the high surface agitation and higher co2 levels in the tank? or does it grow about the same as some surface agitation and lime drop checker?


----------



## timwag2001 (Jul 3, 2009)

i thought that co2 doesnt displace o2. so the amount of oxygen shouldnt have any effect on co2 poisoning


----------



## Rockhoe14er (Jan 19, 2011)

yes that's true but from what i have read if you have higher surface agitation you have more oxygen in your water and because of that you can actually keep your co2 levels higher and it's not as stressful on your tank inhabitants because then you have high co2 levels and high o2 levels. And not high co2 levels and low 02 levels which can be stressful to fish.


----------



## timwag2001 (Jul 3, 2009)

its not o2 that levels are high or low. its the effect of co2 poisoning in the body. doesnt matter how much o2 is in there

here's a quote from thekrib.com

re: Low oxygen vs. high CO2 
by Mark Fisher <Mark.Fisher/tpwd.state.tx.us> 
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1998
>I think 2.8ppm is pretty low and it showed in _very_ rapid breathing
of
>the SAEs ... but they still lived. So I pose the question: is it
areduction
>in the ABSOLUTE level of oxygen which bothers the fish or is it a
reduction
>RELATIVE to the level their accustomed level?

It's a reduction in the absolute level of oxygen. For fish, the %
saturation curve of oxygen with hemoglobin is dependent upon the amount
of oxygen dissolved in the water. This graph, if it makes it through,
shows the % saturation of oxygen with hemoglobin as a function of the
amount of oxygen dissolved in water:

100| * * * * * * X ppm CO2 
| * 
| * * * * * * * 2X ppm CO2 
| * * 
% 50 | * * 
| * * 
| * * 
| * * 
0 |__*_*_____________________
0 5 10
ppm O2

CO2 can reduce the oxygen affinity of hemoglobin, which is why I drew
two curves. The top curve shows the percent oxygen saturation at an
arbitray level of CO2, X. Note 100% saturation occurs at about 6 ppm
oxygen, and drops off sharply below 6ppm. Death would be expected to
occur below about 3 ppm oxygen. At twice the level of CO2 (lower
curve), 100% saturation is never reached because of the reduced affinity
for oxygen. Instead, about 75% saturation is the maximum at about 6
ppm, and drops off sharply below that. This phenomenon is known as the
root effect. Death would be expected to occur at a slightly higher
level of oxygen than the upper curve. Also, if the peak activity of a
fish requires 80% or higher oxygen saturation, then they could go
anaerobic pretty quickly, and crash.

Note that different species of fish have different saturation curves.
Some fish have relatively flat curves, and need high levels of oxygen to
achieve maximum saturation (e.g., rainbow trout), while others have a
fairly steep curve and can achieve maximum saturation at much lower
oxygen levels (e.g., catfish). The presence of CO2 affects them all,
and shifts their curves to the right, requiring higher levels of oxygen
to achieve the same % saturation. *At high CO2, 100% saturation never
occurs, and very high levels of CO2 can block the uptake of oxygen
altogether, regardless of how much is in the water. Fish can suffocate,
even in oxygen-saturated water, if CO2 is high enough.*Any blood chemistry or animal physiology reference covers this is much
greater detail. 15 ppm CO2 is a safe level for our finny friends, but
definitely exacerbates low oxygen problems. I suspect SAE's have a
fairly flat saturation curve, and require relatively high levels of
dissolved oxygen to achieve maximum saturation, and/or they may be more
sensitive to CO2 than most fish.

Regards,

Mark


----------



## barbarossa4122 (Jan 16, 2010)

bsmith said:


> I have found that in my tanks that use co2 I make as much water turbulence at the surface as possible. This lets more o2 into the water and there for allow more co2 to be injected without suffocating the animals inside.


I tried that with by using my air stones with the co2 on and my DCs stayed blue after 5 hrs instead of turning yellow green.


----------



## bsmith (Jan 8, 2007)

Crank up the joooze barbarossa. 

Mark I'll read your response but I'm sure it lines up with what I'm saying.


----------



## barbarossa4122 (Jan 16, 2010)

bsmith said:


> Crank up the joooze barbarossa.
> 
> Chad I'll read your response but I'm sure it lines up with what I'm saying.


Lol, that makes sense. I'll try it tomorrow.


----------



## bsmith (Jan 8, 2007)

Rockhoe14er said:


> bsmith. Do your plants grow better with the high surface agitation and higher co2 levels in the tank? or does it grow about the same as some surface agitation and lime drop checker?


No only do they grow much better but my fish also survive! I really cant tell you exactly how many ppm of Co2 are in my tanks but what I can tell you is that it is quite a bit beyond the "moutian dew in the DC" and my fish (discus and other tetras) all behave as if there is nothing going on. 



timwag2001 said:


> i thought that co2 doesnt displace o2. so the amount of oxygen shouldnt have any effect on co2 poisoning


100% correct. The long post from the KRIB elaborates on what I say all the time. 

You have to look at co2 and o2 independently with respect to their saturation levels in water. Its not the extra o2 in the water from surface turbulence that drives out co2 is the turbulence its self. 

All you need to do to get it right is watch your drop checker and have your surface movement going on. Try to keep water levels as even as possible because if the level drops that increases turbulence and will off gas more co2. This can lead to BBA pretty quick in a High light scenario. Just keep cranking up the gas until your fish start to gasp then back it back down a bit. Just the same as any other setup IMO just with the surface movement.


----------



## janftica (Jan 11, 2010)

OK I am total dummy on this...so bear with me. I am trying an experiment. I bought some glossostigma in a large square, and decided I wanted to see if it would grow this way. I read about this on a Taiwan? site. I took my 20 gallon long and put pond soil by Mars in the bottom about 3 inch deep. I then cut up the glosso into tiny squares and planted them all over the tank...pushed them down till only the tips were showing. I added some star grass and another nice plant that I want to try to grow too. I put an airstone in the tank and filled it only enough to cover the plants. I have 2 60 watt bulbs in my light fixture over the top and I have had it run for 48 hours now.

I have lots of pearling going on....is this good or bad? No co2 or heat just the light on and air stone. Don't know if anything will grow but it was fun to try out.

any suggestions?


----------



## bsmith (Jan 8, 2007)

janftica said:


> OK I am total dummy on this...so bear with me. I am trying an experiment. I bought some glossostigma in a large square, and decided I wanted to see if it would grow this way. I read about this on a Taiwan? site. I took my 20 gallon long and put pond soil by Mars in the bottom about 3 inch deep. I then cut up the glosso into tiny squares and planted them all over the tank...pushed them down till only the tips were showing. I added some star grass and another nice plant that I want to try to grow too. I put an airstone in the tank and filled it only enough to cover the plants. I have 2 60 watt bulbs in my light fixture over the top and I have had it run for 48 hours now.
> 
> I have lots of pearling going on....is this good or bad? No co2 or heat just the light on and air stone. Don't know if anything will grow but it was fun to try out.
> 
> any suggestions?


If your not injecting co2 then your not getting pearling, period (there is a thing with water changes with colder water but still its false pearling) . You are probably just confusing the air bubbles from the stone that are being moved around by the current the stone itself makes with air.


----------

