# Do you have any algae in your tank?



## sewingalot (Oct 12, 2008)

I am curious as to who has algae of any kind (GSA, BBA, thread, GDA) and to what extent (100%, .5%, 10%, etc). Also, if you have algae what are your fertilizer, co2, and lighting parameters. I'm asking for fun after seeing an Amano tank with GSA.

I'll start with a couple of my tanks:

10 gallons
20 watts PC lighting for 9 hours a day
no water changes, top off only
no fertilizing or co2
2%
I have a small bit of clado growing on a piece of driftwood. I like it, so I only thin it out occasionally.

3 gallons
9 watts T5 on 12 hours a day
no water changes or co2
no fertilizing
I get a tiny bit of GSA that shows up after four or so weeks on the glass.
<1%


----------



## msnikkistar (Mar 23, 2010)

I have the following, and it's a small amount of each.

Staghorn, GSA, Clado, and thread. The GSA, I have a few spots that appear on my glass as well, but it takes like 2-3 weeks for it to appear to a point where I get OCD. Then again, I get OCD about it when I see like 10 spots.

The only thing I seem to have a slight issue with is the staghorn. I hate the stuff, and it seems to be the algae that grows the most in my tank (on the top of some of my sub in the tree). Although "a lot" in my opinion may be little to others. Again, its my OCD about algae at work.


----------



## Lycosa (Oct 16, 2006)

I have 1 tank at the moment. A ten gallon that I'm growing out now. I've been a couple years out of the hobby and my tank is close to a month old now. So far, I'm only battling thread algae, but I suppose that had more to do with the yeast that got into my tank. Nothing like waking up to cloudy water. After the gas separator I built, and the 2nd of 3 50% water changes, it's starting to recede already.

I know I have more in store as my tank matures, but I will be ready.. Algae has been the bane of my tank keeping since the beginning. I've invested many hours into reading how to rid myself of it in both salt and fresh tanks. I really think that learning how to rid yourself of algae by keeping your tank parameters in balance is one of the most important things a person can learn for keeping an aquarium. It has to be the #1 reason people leave this hobby without ever really getting to enjoy it.


----------



## Sharkfood (May 2, 2010)

I get little bits of staghorn and on old leaves. Some GSA on my Anubias (Thats been there since set up, just havent removed the old leaves as they dont seem to be affected much by it.) and a light coating on the back glass, which I have never cleaned. My tank is still only a few months old though, and I just started co2 and cut my photo period below the 14 hours I started out at to about 8 hours a day a few weeks ago. 

I used to get alot of fuzzy green algae on the substrate and and thread algae on leaves, but either it died, or the shrimp are eating it. I don't stress out too much over a small amount of algae, as long as it isn't on the front glass, or choking out leaves.


----------



## DarkCobra (Jun 22, 2004)

46g bowfront
49W T8, 10hrs/day
33% tapwater change weekly
CO2 ~30ppm
heavy fish load
potassium & CSM+B, root tab for sword

GSA, small amount shows up on acrylic close to lights, takes a month or two to become noticeable.
GSA, on plants if I let them grow too high and near the lights.
BBA?, small amount on glosso edges, which is growing very slowly, not really suited to this light level.

All in all, quite acceptable levels of algae; though my low-tech tanks are completely algae-free.


----------



## stingraysrule (Apr 4, 2010)

I am growing some algae on my moss in my 55G. 
I have decided to just grow the algae instead of the moss. 
It is not effecting any other plants in the tank and it is great food for my SAEs. 
I have done everything I can to get rid of it, but I can't so I am just going to go with it. 
Its PRETTY! 
No other algae cept a bit of gsa on my swords in my 80G. 
I do lots of water changes in both tanks... dose ferts in both but no NPK in the 55G. 
80G 150W x2 HQI
55G 54W GLO 
DIY CO2. with 7 2L bottles per tank. 
4hrs light/ break 4hrs light = 8hrs. 
Heavy bio load in both tanks. 
18G water change per each tank every other day.


----------



## Surferrosa (May 3, 2010)

Ive been running a fluval edge for a few months now, and the algae im getting is killing me. Im sure its because my bio-load is too heavy, and im going to adjust that, hopefully i can solve the problem. It is only coming in on my driftwood and in the flame moss, right where the current hits from the filter

Is this fuzz algae? And is reducing the bio-load the answer to getting rid of it?


----------



## stingraysrule (Apr 4, 2010)

Surferrosa said:


> Ive been running a fluval edge for a few months now, and the algae im getting is killing me. Im sure its because my bio-load is too heavy, and im going to adjust that, hopefully i can solve the problem. It is only coming in on my driftwood and in the flame moss, right where the current hits from the filter
> 
> Is this fuzz algae? And is reducing the bio-load the answer to getting rid of it?


http://aquariumalgae.blogspot.com/
Try looking here for it.


----------



## Minsc (Jul 9, 2006)

I don't think I've ever been free of BBA in a high tech tank, I just try to minimize it.
Is it even possible to have equipment free of BBA?

One of my tanks has a decent affliction of GSA, but it is a pretty new tank, so I think it is just growing pains.

My low tech has some clado, but I think it is waning.

If I never have to deal with Spyrogyra again, I'll be very happy.


----------



## Surferrosa (May 3, 2010)

Thanks for the link stingray. It kind of looks like green beard algae, except its not green. If thats possible.

Anyway, im gonna still work on getting rid of it. I do a water change every couple days and clean off the algae. Im going to reduce by a few fish and add one more oto cat and some amano shrimp. If anyone has any other suggestions, they would be greatly appreciated.


----------



## plantbrain (Dec 15, 2003)

100% of tanks have algae, what you can see vs what you cannot is much different, Diatoms are all over the plants at any moment.

GSA algae in an ADA tank is not surprising.
Without good CO2+ PO4, this will continue.

Some tap is 100% absent with PO4, ADA's tap is not, it's got PO4 and they do large weekly water changes. much as I did way back when.

Relative % coverage is tough to quantify for many.

Regards, 
Tom Barr


----------



## sewingalot (Oct 12, 2008)

Great response on this! I am glad to see I am not the only one that has some form of algae in all my tanks. I've been sweating a minuscule amount on rocks, glass, some plants and equipment. So a healthy tank can have algae, the goal is for it to not take hold. Am I correct?

Anyone else with algae?


----------



## tanknewbie (Apr 27, 2010)

20gallon new tank
65w CFL 4" high
no ferts
leaky DIY co2
30% weekly water change


5% green beard algae on my driftwood which I think looks absolutely gorgeous!
2 spots of GSA on a plant leaf
30% GDA on my glass which is a pain in my hind haunches


----------



## hbosman (Oct 5, 2006)

46 gallon Bowfront
4x39 watt T5HO light for 3 hours, 2x39 for 6 hours
pressurized CO2 for 9 hours
13.16 ppm KNO3 at water change
3.23 ppm KH2PO4 at water change
12.86 ppm K2SO4 at water change
.12 ppm Fe from CSM+B and DTPA per day

Small amounts of BBA on silicone and Korallia
BBA used to be the bane of my existence until I increased circulation and went from 24/7 CO2 to 9 hours. Since the CO2 is shut off at night, I can crank up the CO2 higher with no worries. By the way, I have never found anything to kill my BBA. I had to manually remove affected gravel and leaves, scrape, scrape scrape until I had the circulation and CO2 levels improved. Once CO2 and circulation improved, BBA didn't return. Thanks to Tom Barr for insisting on the value of using a solenoid and cutting back on the light. 

Finally Green Dust Algae on Glass has reduced to a minimum. I think it finally reduced because of scraping front and sides only, before water change, not touching it otherwise. The back glass is hardly ever cleaned, I like GDA as a background. The Ottos like it too.


----------



## EntoCraig (Jun 7, 2010)

Aye, but only a wee bit  I dont have anything scary, just the soft green stuf that grows on well lit wood and rocks. My shrimp and Ottos have at it.


----------



## anastasisariel (Oct 4, 2009)

*29 Gallon 95% Hair Algea*

29 gallons
72 watts NOT5 Lighting (8 hour timer)
Weekly to Bi-weekly 40% Water changes
Pressurized C02
Excel, Flourish and Leafzone (for Iron and Potassium) I don't add nitrates because I'm pretty sure my tap water has about 5ppm ,as that's what two different test kits confirmed.

Most of my algea is hair algea on my Java Moss which I believe is mostly because the java is in direct bright light and probably needs to be shaded a bit. I'm currently going to recruit a couple of female molly's to help control the hair algae. Using excel frequently tends to cut down the hair algae's growth.

I have green spot algea but it is healthy as it is only on my driftwood and on the glass when I dont clean it. I like it on the driftwood personally.


----------



## stingraysrule (Apr 4, 2010)

anastasisariel said:


> 29 gallons
> 72 watts NOT5 Lighting (8 hour timer)
> Weekly to Bi-weekly 40% Water changes
> Pressurized C02
> ...


You and I have the same problem. 
I have Mollys in my tank and they do not do as well as the SAEs.


----------



## lauraleellbp (Feb 3, 2008)

I've got algae in all my tanks. All have varying percentages of Clado, BBA, GSA, brown, staghorn, probably some others...

If it starts growing to where it bothers me/is killing plants I lower the lighting/photoperiod or dose a little Excel.


----------



## anastasisariel (Oct 4, 2009)

stingraysrule said:


> You and I have the same problem.
> I have Mollys in my tank and they do not do as well as the SAEs.


Yeah, I'm just going to get a couple to help out. I won't completely pass the baton to them or anything. Honestly, as bright as the light is that directly hits the moss I'd be suprised to not have some kind of issue. I used to have the moss shaded with hygro but got sick of how aggressive it was.. now I need somthing new..hmm


----------



## MarkMc (Apr 27, 2007)

I've had a succession of differing algae species since I've made some major changes in how I run my tank. Much of it was started when I had ballast/fixtures/bulb problems with the two MH pendants and a CO2 tank running out ect. I switched lights and did different things to control loss of CO2 and went to the python/tap water 50% routine instead of 10 to 20% RO wc. I had BBA, GSA, GDA and BGA and lastly a two -three week infestation of a brown hair algae which is now gone as are most all species. Reducing lighting and optimizing CO2 (extra tank circulation) has really turned it around.


----------



## stingraysrule (Apr 4, 2010)

anastasisariel said:


> Yeah, I'm just going to get a couple to help out. I won't completely pass the baton to them or anything. Honestly, as bright as the light is that directly hits the moss I'd be suprised to not have some kind of issue. I used to have the moss shaded with hygro but got sick of how aggressive it was.. now I need somthing new..hmm


Did you see my 55G? 
LOL. The light is like 4 inches away from baking on the top of the moss on the driftwood. 
I have pretty much all low light plants in that tank so what I did was wrap a piece if tinfoil over the light bar of my GLO that was directly hitting the moss. 
That way, that part of the moss would not be in direct lighting. 
Cut the algae way down and the blocked light did not effect the exsisting plants. So far, so good.


----------



## sewingalot (Oct 12, 2008)

lauraleellbp said:


> I've got algae in all my tanks. All have varying percentages of Clado, BBA, GSA, brown, staghorn, probably some others...
> 
> If it starts growing to where it bothers me/is killing plants I lower the lighting/photoperiod or dose a little Excel.


You.....have......algae?!?! Okay, it is time for me to relax. If some of my favorite tanks have algae, I can have some too.


----------



## justinq (Dec 6, 2006)

My old 30 gallon high light, high tech, EI dosed tank had many different kinds of algae all the time. When the tank started, it was moderate light with DIY CO2, and had very little algae issue. Once I upped the tech and started EI, I has GSA, thread algae, clado (on driftwood only), and most annoyingly, BBA. The BBA would grow on older plant leaves, even on stem plants, not just slow growing rosette plants. I tried every single trick mentioned on this forum, on websites, all the stuff that all the plant guru's said. It wasn't enough algae to make the tank look bad, as long as I was willing to scrape and prune every week, and overdose excel and use the H2O2 treatment semi-frequently. None of this got rid of the algae, it would just temporarily make it look like it was going to go away. I should mention that the lighting period was only 8 hours (any less and I wouldn't of even been able to enjoy the tank!), did 50% weekly water changes religiously, and I blasted the CO2 and had a consistently yellow-green drop checker. 

Now I have a low light, high tech tank (1.5 WPG and pressurized CO2), I use mineralized soil and no EI, the only thing I dose into the tank is a weekly dose of Flourish. And guess what? No algae noticable algae. The only algae that began to appear was clado, again only on the driftwood, which I was able to kill with a single H2O2 treatment and hasn't been a problem since. The tank's been set up 8 months, and I haven't even had to clean the glass a single time. Photoperiod and water changes are the same as with the old tank.

When I struggled with algae problems in my 30 gallon, I was told by a lot of people on this forum that my high light (which some didn't even consider high) and EI had _nothing _to do with my algae problems. Yet I've read a lot of frustration from people on this forum that have had the same algae experiences as me, while appearing to do everything "right." I know it's a sacred cow, but of COURSE lighting especially has to do with having a lot of algae problems. Yes, even when overdosing nutrients with EI. I'm not saying that high light and high nutrients are bad or that people shouldn't do them, I just think that there's a tiny window of balance that's almost impossible to get completely right. Meanwhile, Amano and a lot of European planted tanks use a lot less light, and we admire these tanks and try to emulate them. I think that MORE is not always better. I'm not a guru, but it just seems like common sense to me. I'm a lot more sane now that I went lower light, lower nutrients in the water column. Your plants won't grow an inch a day, but unless you're trying to farm them, who cares? 

Just my opinion, I'm sure someone's going to jump on me for questioning the perfection of EI or the need to blast tanks with 800 WPG of T5HO light to grow HC (slight exaggeration, hopefully), but whatever.


----------



## hbosman (Oct 5, 2006)

justinq said:


> My old 30 gallon high light, high tech, EI dosed tank had many different kinds of algae all the time. When the tank started, it was moderate light with DIY CO2, and had very little algae issue. Once I upped the tech and started EI, I has GSA, thread algae, clado (on driftwood only), and most annoyingly, BBA. The BBA would grow on older plant leaves, even on stem plants, not just slow growing rosette plants. I tried every single trick mentioned on this forum, on websites, all the stuff that all the plant guru's said. It wasn't enough algae to make the tank look bad, as long as I was willing to scrape and prune every week, and overdose excel and use the H2O2 treatment semi-frequently. None of this got rid of the algae, it would just temporarily make it look like it was going to go away. I should mention that the lighting period was only 8 hours (any less and I wouldn't of even been able to enjoy the tank!), did 50% weekly water changes religiously, and I blasted the CO2 and had a consistently yellow-green drop checker.
> 
> Now I have a low light, high tech tank (1.5 WPG and pressurized CO2), I use mineralized soil and no EI, the only thing I dose into the tank is a weekly dose of Flourish. And guess what? No algae noticable algae. The only algae that began to appear was clado, again only on the driftwood, which I was able to kill with a single H2O2 treatment and hasn't been a problem since. The tank's been set up 8 months, and I haven't even had to clean the glass a single time. Photoperiod and water changes are the same as with the old tank.
> 
> ...


Yep, the first thing to do is reduce the light intensity by cutting back on the number of bulbs running at one time or raising the light fixture. Light reduction is really the only way to minimize algae. Whether you dump a teaspoon of KNO3 and KH2PO4 into the tank or feed your fish normally, there will always be enough nutrients to feed algae. That finally sunk in with me and I finally had success when I cut back on the lighting intensity by using two timers. Increasing my water changes from 30 % per week to 50 % per week helped a great deal too. I still use EI and pressurized CO2 though. I now run CO2 9 hours instead of 24/7 so I can blast it without it costing more and it does seem to give the fish a break. Yeah it was Tom Barr who drove these issues home. If you want to fight algae, read his stuff. It works.


----------



## plantbrain (Dec 15, 2003)

justinq said:


> Now I have a low light, high tech tank (1.5 WPG and pressurized CO2)
> 
> When I struggled with algae problems in my 30 gallon, I was told by a lot of people on this forum that my high light (which some didn't even consider high) and EI had _nothing _to do with my algae problems.


And they would be correct, you failed, not the method. hehe, I know, I know......
You blame EI, but everyone here knows that's not the problem. CO2, too much light, these are far larger players you simply did not measure or rule out correctly.
Do not take this personally, I am not that way. Try adn convince yourself of the logic to get a good safe answer about a specific issue. 

Correlation does not imply cause, which is what you are arguing here.
I have EI dosed tanks (obviously) and no algae you/I/anyone can see.

So is it you? Or the method? I test it and have no issues, so do other folks.
This falsifies your claim that EI was the sole source problem, whether you like it or not. The demonstrated evidence is clear. There is no way around that. 
Hard to argue with the results, they are what they are, whether you where able to do it, does not invalidate the method.
Plenty of folks get bad algae and have ratty tanks using ADA, but we know the method also works.

Other folks use non CO2, some use soil as well, they have algae, so did the method fail in their case as well? Based on your logic, it would be the soil's fault.
But we know that is not true either. It is not all about the nutrients, it never was.:icon_idea



> Yet I've read a lot of frustration from people on this forum that have had the same algae experiences as me, while appearing to do everything "right." I know it's a sacred cow,


Faith has nothing to do with it, testing and experimental falsification, demonstrated results do. You had no "control" in the test you did. Without any reference or way to show the light/CO2 weas in fact correct, you cannot test nutrients, the test is not independent of light/CO2.

What? You think because folks have issues, that the method fails even though many seem to have no issues for years??? A few folks messing up light/CO2, cannot take good care of the tank etc, for many potential reasons, does not invalidate the method or even suggest it is difficult.

Your own assumption can lead you to make poor conclusions however.
Without questioning them and testing those assumptions, you have no way to seeing or knowing this. So you end up leaving yourself wide open to error and have a high chance of making an incorrect conclusion. 



> but of COURSE lighting especially has to do with having a lot of algae problems. Yes, even when overdosing nutrients with EI. I'm not saying that high light and high nutrients are bad or that people shouldn't do them, I just think that there's a tiny window of balance that's almost impossible to get completely right.


I use EI with low light, where'd the high light stuff into all this?
I've not been nagging people for the last 15 years to use low light????
What the heck?

HLD is a huge issues and has been since I started posting and helping folks on the APD. I almost always tell folks to use less light, more CO2 and non limiting nutrients.

So does Tropica:

http://www.tropica.com/advising/technical-articles/biology-of-aquatic-plants/co2-and-light.aspx

So does anything that adds enriched macro nutrient soil(well, it last for awhile, then declines, mostly in N after a few months).

The location does not matter, only the total amount and only that there's enough for a given light/CO2 combo, which is what Tropica is saying as well.



> Meanwhile, Amano and a lot of European planted tanks use a lot less light,


So, you know this how? Have you measured the lighting systems on ADA tank's? European tanks? How did you do this??:icon_idea



> and we admire these tanks and try to emulate them. I think that MORE is not always better.


So why use CO2? Why pack a tank full of plants?
I agree more light leads to more management efforts.

Which is why you see me here and any other board suggesting to limit light, then CO2/nutrients(water column or sediment or best yet: both locations) makes management much easier.

Nag nag nag, but some listen.:tongue:



> I'm not a guru, but it just seems like common sense to me. I'm a lot more sane now that I went lower light, lower nutrients in the water column. Your plants won't grow an inch a day, but unless you're trying to farm them, who cares?


I think here you are suggesting that the nutrients, not so much the light was the easier way to manage, I agree that adding sediment ferts is easier, it offers a back up in case you forget to dose the water column. Or light dosing of the water column and more % from the sediment etc. But if you use both together, then you get the most of each location, another point I've argued for for some years now.

This is NOT about algae however, it's about growing plants.
When the plants grow well, the algae does not.



> Just my opinion, I'm sure someone's going to jump on me for questioning the perfection of EI or the need to blast tanks with 800 WPG of T5HO light to grow HC (slight exaggeration, hopefully), but whatever.


No jumping on any one personally, rather, going through and see where the conclusions are poorly considered. You suggest EI was the issue, but you also mention since you went to lower light/sediment based ferts, things where easier, I suggest the same management myself, but you can still add full EI without any issues now, if not more/better growth. Not rampant growth, because you are mostly light limited.

Since light drives all growth and uptake/demand=> less light = less CO2 demand, so dosing that is much easier...........and CO2 uptake drives all nutrient uptake and demand directly or indirectly. So both CO2 and nutrients, regardless of their location is easier.

You have far more wiggle room using light limitation.
More light can still be done without issues, but it requires more work.
Also, you can dose a lot to the water column, even more than a high light tank without issues using low light.

Here's the example sitting in my house right now:









I just trimmed 300$ worth of plants to sell.
I sold 100$ of RCS.

There's very very little algae, by most standards, algae "free" at the eye ball scale.

This tank has about 40-50 micromols of light(pretty low light as far as the W/gal range), a large bioload, ADA aqua soil same type of thing as any other DIY soil as far as nutrients...........but I also dose EI modified.
CO2 is good because, well, there is no algae and the plant growth is awesome, but not so fast I have trouble.

I dose 15ppm NO3, 20ppm K+, 5ppm PO4, 0.8ppm of Fe .........3x a week. So, whre is my algae if what you claim about the water column and ferts is really the problem?

Maybe it's the CO2 and maybe it is the light?
You sort of start down the path of less light is better, and I think you believe that is true, but you still wish to blame nutrients, but the evidence and logic clearly states that cannot be true. Algae are not limited by nutrients, however, plants are/can be...........even if you have sediment ferts, algae still have plenty.

I do not fiddle faddle over this tank, it's easy to care for, I trim once every 2 weeks and sell the Starou, nab as many RCS as I feel like it, sell them. Do my easy water change once a week, clean filters once every 2 months etc. I lift no buckets or work more than 1 hour a week which includes the waiting for the water to drain and fill mostly. Actual time in the tank is maybe 20 minutes a month. 

I have many tanks like this.

Please, do not take this personally, just see if you can convince yourself and isolate the individual parts to test. If someone says high PO4 causes algae, you add it and see. If you think light is high, you measure it and see. You confirm and leave nothing to chance. If you are not willing to test and do, then you cannot say much.

You know EI does not induce algae, so what does? You also know that sediment ferts do not induce algae either, so why do aquarist have algae with sediment enriched methods also?

This observation suggest it must be *some other cause*.
(Light? CO2? Plant biomass, health??? How do we measure and track changes between tanks, algae infested and clean etc etc? DC's/pH/Kh charts stink..........PAR meters are useful etc......)

These can be tested and folks can look at the holistic approach to management(light(what is a good range for the easiest management goals most hobbyists have??? What are the typical winning aqua scape light values??? Note: this is not w/gal!!!). CO2 is really tough to measure and calibrate. This is the Achilles Heel, but we can measure nutrients/light easy enough. So we have 2 of the big 3.
I have a way, but it's 2000-4000$, not something hobbyist will ever bother to use. I have one and so does a client. Using the CO2 meter device taught me a lot and I made a lot of bad assumptions about CO2.
I am wary of any CO2 confidence unless I confirm it. 


Regards, 
Toim Barr


----------



## sewingalot (Oct 12, 2008)

plantbrain said:


> And they would be correct, you failed, not the method. hehe, I know, I know......


How do you know if a person "fails" and it is not EI? What if I set up a tank just like yours, same lighting, same method of fertilizers, same fish, same everything except the tap water comes from different sources in the states?

If the tank doesn't grow as well, does this mean I've done something wrong? Or is it possible, the water quality of my tap water maybe different than yours and this is leading to an issue. Therefore, it is not EI, but because no one bothered to check that the Nitrates coming out of the tap is at say 300 pm?



plantbrain said:


> _You blame EI, but everyone here knows that's not the problem._


I have noticed something about the EI dosing schedule. When someone does say they have an issue with EI, there are a lot of others that say 'you failed' I have great results and your just doing everything else wrong.

So does this make it a supportive environment to others to admit the EI method may not be working for them? Would more people admit the method isn't working if they didn't have to fear being called a failure, not like everyone else, or ignorant?


plantbrain said:


> _So is it you? Or the method? I test it and have no issues, so do other folks._


But what about the folks that do have issues? Why are they so quickly dismissed?



plantbrain said:


> _Hard to argue with the results, they are what they are, whether you where able to do it, does not invalidate the method._


So, is there a clear step-by-step process that I can do over and over again and get perfect results every time? For instance, I set my lighting schedule at X hours and at Y par and then hook up X amount of co2. Once this is done, add EI dosing.

Now I can grow any and every species of plant and they will be brilliant, healthy, red without special bulbs.

Is there such an guide for simpletons like myself so I don't become a failure yet again?



plantbrain said:


> _No jumping on any one personally, rather, going through and see where the conclusions are poorly considered._


How do you know his conclusions are poorly considered? Conjectures have been made for thousands of years that have since led to amazing discovers in math, science and everyday situations.


If I get a tank today, turn on the high powered lights, find a way to optimally use co2 and discover a type of fertilization schedule that will grow a beautiful, healthy and algae free tank every time, does that mean I shouldn't share my results with others? Including methods that didn't work for me?

I think Justin is trying to say for his particular case, the EI method didn't work and maybe another method could have. Nothing wrong with that. Especially if he can tell us exactly what he did to his particular tank. To me, it sounds like he'd be making a lot of people happy. After all, we could avoid his scenario in our own tanks. :wink:


----------



## lauraleellbp (Feb 3, 2008)

To me, it's simple- the higher light a tank is, the more challenging it is to find and maintain that balance. Imbalance = algae issues.

Some people relish that challenge.

To me, it sounds like work, and I like my hobby to be a hobby, not work, therefore my bias towards low light/low tech setups.

It's all about setting up a tank that meets your own personal goals, and there are no goals that are inherently "right" or "wrong" (outside of legal and ethical considerations, that is) when it comes to a personal hobby! :smile:

My understanding of EI is as _*A*_ starting point for a person to develop a fert regimen that works for THEIR tank, and will usually have to be tweaked some, as every individual tank is always going to be different. Even tanks set up identically in different parts of the same house may need slightly different fert regimens in practice, due in part to uncontrolled factors like indirect lighting, windows, etc.. (There's truly no such thing as "identical" when it comes to setting up complex biological systems such as exist in a home aquarium.) One of my favorite sayings is, "There's always more than one way to skin a cat," so of course there's other fertilization methods that a person can put together that works for them!

There's always the "I don't want to bother with extra ferts at all, my plants will make it or they won't!" method, too- which IMO works just fine for me! :hihi:

And Sara- these pics are just for you! I've got algae in all of my tanks so I just went around and took some pics of it as it exists right at this moment LOL

Only real algal problem for me is the foreground on my 90gal, I keep having BBA choke back my chain swords there so can't get the foreground to fill in like I'd like. I know the issue is too much light w/out supporting nutrients, so maybe some day I'll get around to doing something about it... in the meantime I'm still happy with the tank overall. I clean GSA off the front glass every 2-3 weeks.

























I haven't cleaned off the back wall in my 46gal in years... and I mean 5+ years? LOL









There's also assorted GSA and brown algae. I just noticed how much brown algae is on a few leaves of my Hygro kompakt, but it's just of the older leaves that get the most direct light, overall the plant is pretty healthy

































I just noticed some algae in my 10gal too. A big wad of Clado is growing on my sponge prefilter as well as some brown and GSA on the front glass and some staghorn on the Lilaeopsis

















The 29gal is at my hubby's office but I noticed the Clado on the driftwood and the Lilaopsis there is making a bit of a comeback when I was there a few weeks ago, I'll need to clean some of that out next time I go by.


----------



## sewingalot (Oct 12, 2008)

That is one of the main things I like about you, Laura! You are able to focus on the positive, big picture and not sweat the algae here and there. Combine this with your ability to explain difficult things like fertilization to a think-headed girl like myself. 

You're algae pictures blow my mind, especially the 5 year old back wall.  When I visit your journals, I look at your pictures and think how lovely the tanks are and wish I had such an algae free tank. Looking at my own tanks right now, I love them. The fish are picking on various leaves looking for food, playing in the blyxa or hanging out by the water cooler shooting the breeze. (That's what I call the drop checker, lol.) 

It's only when I press my eyes up to the glass and see the algae here and there that I want to pull my hair out. Then I start messing with something that really doesn't need worked on. After all, if most aquarist have a bit of algae in the tank, maybe it's not such a big deal. Perhaps I need to look at it as part of the life of my tank. Kind of like the freckles on my face - gives it character.

It must be my personality, since when I look at this quilt I made, I see the crooked lines, the skipped stitches, and imperfect points. Everyone else I know looks at the quilt and likes it. (Off topic, but amuse me)










Maybe I need to stop sitting so close to the tank. :hihi:

Thanks for putting things in perspective. I am going back to enjoying my tank, algae and plants alike. After all, if Lauraleellp has algae, it's not such a big deal after all!


----------



## msnikkistar (Mar 23, 2010)

It's okay Sara, you can be OCD with me. lol


----------



## sewingalot (Oct 12, 2008)

LMBO (pg rated, hehehehe)!


----------



## msnikkistar (Mar 23, 2010)

You should see me at my tank, I swear everyday I'm staring at these TINY GSA spots and scrapping them like a madman. My husband thinks I am insane.


----------



## lauraleellbp (Feb 3, 2008)

sewingalot said:


> _*Looking at my own tanks right now, I love them.*_ The fish are picking on various leaves looking for food, playing in the blyxa or hanging out by the water cooler shooting the breeze. (That's what I call the drop checker, lol.)


*THAT* is my definition of the Perfect Tank! :icon_smil

And ROFL @ "the water cooler"

And your quilt is gorgeous!


----------



## lauraleellbp (Feb 3, 2008)

And Nikki- I find scrubbing algae off my front glass very stress-relieving! I wonder if my tanks would be as good a source of stress relief if they were completely algae-free? :smile: :flick:


----------



## sewingalot (Oct 12, 2008)

Maybe Nikki and I should look for an algae support group.


----------



## msnikkistar (Mar 23, 2010)

lauraleellbp said:


> And Nikki- I find scrubbing algae off my front glass very stress-relieving! I wonder if my tanks would be as good a source of stress relief if they were completely algae-free? :smile: :flick:


That's exactly what I use it for. But my husband just can't understand how I can sit and stare at my tank for 1+ hours a night. LOL



sewingalot said:


> Maybe Nikki and I should look for an algae support group.


ACD, algae compulsive disorder.


----------



## plantbrain (Dec 15, 2003)

sewingalot said:


> How do you know if a person "fails" and it is not EI?


Easy, because I have a reference point to compare to, this is how research and science, heck basic logic is done. Without a reference point, eg, a tank that uses EI, and yet has healthly plant growth with no observable algae over the long term and on many replications that falsifies the claim that EI was the cause of the algae to begin with.

It does not state what causes algae, only what it does not.
There are plenty of ways to mess a tank up and have algae that entirely unrelated to dosing.

This person did not demonstrate that they had this level of control.
Others are able to do it fairly easily and routinely, so..is it the person and their assumptions/abilities or the method itself? Clearly if it was the method, we would all fail, but the test and results do not demonstrate that, we fail, not the method/s. 

The question becomes why did we fail? Was it something other than the EI(or any method of dosing etc). If it was EI, then would not most everyone fail?

This is not a personal question(Like oh my , you are such a "failure"), it's an experimental method. We make mistakes and learn from them. That is how we learn. If they failed with it, then they have more to yet learn.

Maybe it was the CO2(as is often the case), maybe it was the high light, maybe they did not dose consistently, maybe they have more experience now and take better care after the 1-2nd etc planted tank.......who knows?
Those issues where not accounted for. I and many others have accounted for specifically EI dosing for well over a decade +.



> What if I set up a tank just like yours, same lighting, same method of fertilizers, same fish, same everything except the tap water comes from different sources in the states?


Could be, but what in the tap would cause algae vs say another tap?
I've had all sorts of tap over the travels and time I've kept aquariums.
So have many others. Some tap might fool you into believing the CO2 if higher than it really is, maybe that is it? This occurred a few times, but it was not really the tap, it was the assumption about CO2. The lighting was not measured in this case, but I have tested light enough to get a good feel based on the brands, type and distances.

Could be that, or many things, but I do know it's not EI.
That is the way the Science works, you do not know everything, only what it is not, and if you are lucky, you can say what causes something.

Each test rules out something, or perhaps the result is inconclusive and you cannot say. After a few rounds of test, you narrow the choices down to the likely culprits.



> If the tank doesn't grow as well, does this mean I've done something wrong?


"Grow well" is not really a good description is it?
You need something to compare it to. Experience can work there, or measurements, O2 levels, dry weight, nutrient removal/content in the tissues etc.

Maybe it was copper in the tap water? I know one case where that was a big issue, they ended up with RO. Maybe it was CO2, and had nothing to do with the EI?

Was that addressed here?
I have addressed that issue many times, and things like copper and in each and every case, it's not been EI. No one has been able to induce algae where the other parameters are in good shape(thus your experiment is independent of other potentially confounding factors) using excess nutrients even at nearly 10X suggested amounts.

Confounding factors lead to poor conclusions and assumptions.
The test was poorly designed and must be discarded.



> Or is it possible, the water quality of my tap water maybe different than yours and this is leading to an issue. Therefore, it is not EI, but because no one bothered to check that the Nitrates coming out of the tap is at say 300 pm?


Hehe, yes, but then it's not EI then, the method did not fail, the person's assumptions did. They did not consider the other potential issues, heck we are human and make big assumptions. Not many places have 300 ppm NO3, well, the nutrient solution ponds at nurseries do........but not well water, maybe some get up to 50ppm, but that's not going to cause algae either, plenty of folks in the EU use EI and have high NO3 in their tap. They did not test, so that would be an assumption on their part. Still, many had no issues, I've gone to 160ppm NO3 and never been able to induce algae using KNO3.
Others have made similar dosing errors in those ranges and no one has reported algae blooms etc.

Still, 300ppm is a bit high, I think I'd suggest more human health related issues and if they do own a well, I hope they do have it tested regularly for their own personal benefit, regardless of aquarium needs. More than 44ppm NO3 or 10ppm as N-NO3 is above the Standards set by the Fed in the USA.



> I have noticed something about the EI dosing schedule. When someone does say they have an issue with EI, there are a lot of others that say 'you failed' I have great results and your just doing everything else wrong.


They have a reference where nutrients do not impose a confounding factor.
It might not be "everything else" is wrong.

Let's not fall to hyperbole here.
It might be the light is tad strong and the CO2 is tad weak, but they still get growth and a little algae nuisance. It's not on/off, it's a continuous type of gradation.



> So does this make it a supportive environment to others to admit the EI method may not be working for them?


It may not have anything to do with EI, as I stated to the poster, correlation does not imply cause. They changed/reduced the lighting, that alone can cause the change seen.

Can you show that was not the real issue independent of EI?
All the person would have to do is add EI back and see:icon_idea
Was that done?

Nope.

Maybe they did not dose routinely(EI is pretty flexible, but all methods are tougher with progressively higher and higher light intensity).
Sediment methods are much more forgiving there, and something I frequently suggest to most everyone as well as lower light intensity.

This leads to fewer failures aad a more manageable method for most folks and wider group. More wiggle room. :icon_excl



> Would more people admit the method isn't working if they didn't have to fear being called a failure, not like everyone else, or ignorant?


This is weak argument. We already have long established EI works well and we already know that if folks are having issues that CO2 and light play a larger significant role in the success of the planted tank. EI merely rules out any confounding limiting nutrient issues, so we can focus more on CO2 and/or light PAR etc.

This is not unsupported speculation. 
See Tropica's example where nutrients where non limiting and the effects of light and CO2 together influence the growth of plants:

http://www.tropica.com/advising/technical-articles/biology-of-aquatic-plants/co2-and-light.aspx 

Nutrients have been based on fear historically. Many still subscribe to this in the planted hobby. The evidence clearly shows otherwise. Many are ignorant, that is the 1st step in honesty and being humble. The wise person knows they are, and does not try and hide the fact. The wise person takes step to confirm and make sure they did not make a mistake and bad assumption. I'm ignorant and feeble minded, so I have to do things that way. I'm not smart enough to simply think and come up with grand solution. I have to work and muddle through it. This takes/took time, plenty of pain.
This is why I help others:icon_idea
I remember. 

This way I can go back and know rather than simply messing around guessing what went wrong. Then I can master the method, then move on to another method, and master that. This allows me to help more people with more methods and goals.



> But what about the folks that do have issues? Why are they so quickly dismissed?


They respond back and we work together as group to resolve the issues they have to help them best manage their tank. Maybe they assumed the CO2 was good when in fact it was not? Maybe when they dose EI now, since the light is lower and they have a another nutrient source as back up, there's no issue and the plants do even better?

We can tweak things and rule some out and help get them to spend the time and focus on the areas that do give the results they are looking for rather than tail chasing.

I do not give up of those folks, I ask them to ask the questions of themselves........"...why did I fail when I see many other folks have these awesome aquariums full of alage free plants? I know I added the nutrients, did the water changes etc.........maybe it's the light? Too much? Not enough CO2? Not enough current?"

"Are all these folks lying to me? That does not seem likely."

I already have asked these questions and know myself.
They may have not, so they are unsure. They just want something to work and do not care about how or why. I know, I've been there myself.

Rather than just getting lucky and hoping, stepwise approaches yield a higher % of newbies. Knowing more about how light, CO2, nutrients all interrelate can help manage most any newbie's goal. 

If you advise a sediment rich method, and water column method+ low light+ rich CO2+ good current+ well packed tank, plus a person who is a good aquarist, maintains and watches the tank often.........then you will have far better results.

I spoke with Diana Walstad at length about the stats with success rate with non CO2 vs CO2 methods, and the wondered why more did not do the non CO2 methods, which seem to have a much higher rate of success.

Slower rate of growth, lower light= less nutrient demand, less CO2 demand => less algae.

But this is also true for low light => rich CO2 and non limiting nutrients, which was the same conclusion reached by the folks from Tropica. ADA has much lower light PAR than many assumed, myself included, so that works well since there's less demand for CO2 and nutrients, and the newbies need not dose much since there's a ton of long term ferts in the sediment, but adding ferts to the water column with lower light/CO2 etc does not harm anything nor induce algae either. 

Maybe we are all wrong and we should suggest methods based on failure, and not getting at the root issue?? Just keep trying till you get lucky?
I do not think you are suggesting that, least I hope not.



> So, is there a clear step-by-step process that I can do over and over again and get perfect results every time? For instance, I set my lighting schedule at X hours and at Y par and then hook up X amount of co2. Once this is done, add EI dosing.


Cook book stuff?
I'm leary of any of that.
I'd rather help them as they go along.
Folks run into all sorts of issues, some get lucky, most of us do not.

I've listed some attributes that help already above, low light, sediment ferts, water changes, good observations, good tweaking of the CO2, etc.

From there, we can help and they can ask and learn as they go, no one is going to have no issues with any method. That's a pipe dream.



> Now I can grow any and every species of plant and they will be brilliant, healthy, red without special bulbs. Is there such an guide for simpletons like myself so I don't become a failure yet again?


State your goal first. 
I cannot rule out every possible issue(no one can) you might have, I can narrow them down and make things much easier and less complicated.
We do know what makes management easier.



> How do you know his conclusions are poorly considered? Conjectures have been made for thousands of years that have since led to amazing discovers in math, science and everyday situations.


This is not conjecture however, we already know EI does not induce algae, and we know that reducing light intensity has significant impacts on CO2 and and algae.

These issues were not considered well.

"Amazing discoveries" are not based on conjecture, they are tested and realized through logic and hypothesis testing. Only then are they accepted:icon_idea
They follow good logic and look at the other possible confounding factors, that was not done above, whereas it was in the fields you are suggesting. Big difference.

The poster also wondered about light and CO2, but still suggested it was EI.
So they had the idea there might be some issues with the logic.
So give them credit for that.



> If I get a tank today, turn on the high powered lights, find a way to optimally use co2 and discover a type of fertilization schedule that will grow a beautiful, healthy and algae free tank every time, does that mean I shouldn't share my results with others? Including methods that didn't work for me?


Sure.
Then when someone has an issue, they can use the every argument you suggested above not to use it:icon_idea This is a two way street.



> I think Justin is trying to say for his particular case, the EI method didn't work and maybe another method could have. Nothing wrong with that. Especially if he can tell us exactly what he did to his particular tank. To me, it sounds like he'd be making a lot of people happy. After all, we could avoid his scenario in our own tanks. :wink:


I prefer to attack the root of the problems rather than the revolving door of different methods till one sticks.

This helps them more to have better management no matter which method they chose, they all add ferts for a given rate of growth. Plants all grow for the same reasons after all.

A simple set of factors independent of nutrients:
Low light(30-50micromol)
Good rich CO2(30-40ppm)
Good current.
Good filter cleaning.

All these lead to easier care and *none* have anything to do with EI.
Maybe folks should focus more on those and less on dosing and nutrients?:wink: Nutrients are rather easy and perhaps the easiest things we can rule out in a test. CO2 is the most difficult and is central to all processes in plant growth.



Regards, 
Tom Barr


----------



## sewingalot (Oct 12, 2008)

Thanks, Tom. That was the most eloquent post I've ever read from you. It really cleared up a lot of the befuddled thinking I have when it comes to dosing in general. I've been too afraid to ask before, but I am glad I did. Sometimes you intimidate me with your posting.

So basically, your saying by ruling out lighting (by using lower light levels), dialing in my co2 correctly and using the EI dosing schedule will help rule out these factors altogether. So then, if something is still amiss with my tank - say a LOT of algae, it could be something as simple as dirty filters, and overfeeding. Right? So pretty much, it's my fault for problems in my tank and I should just be happy with the algae because it's never going away because I don't understand, LOL. Can do.


----------



## sewingalot (Oct 12, 2008)

Does anyone else have 'visible' algae they wish to share with others? I am trying to show both myself and newer members that some algae in a planted tank is inevitable and our trying to destroy it completely just makes for a miserable experience.

Basically, I need help curing my ACD.


----------



## TheVisionary78 (Mar 6, 2010)

I struggle to get algae to grow period. I need it to feed my black jap traps. I think my tank is so heavily planted there is no nutrients left for algae.


----------



## Chrisinator (Jun 5, 2008)

I have a 38G tank with 4x 21 watt (one is actinic), DIY CO2 (1 bottle, but will have another one hooked up soon) with a a little bit of BBA on the edges of my plant leaves. The past two weeks I started EI and dosed CSM+B and Nitrate and Phosphate, which I think sparked up the whole BBA. I'm gonna cut back on it and see if it helps at all. 

I'm really wanting to get a CO2 system. But, that will probably have to wait for a long time.


----------



## sewingalot (Oct 12, 2008)

TheVisionary78 said:


> I struggle to get algae to grow period. I need it to feed my black jap traps. I think my tank is so heavily planted there is no nutrients left for algae.


Proof is in the pudding. Show closeup pictures of your tank with specs defending this claim. :wink:


----------



## mistergreen (Dec 9, 2006)

TheVisionary78 said:


> I struggle to get algae to grow period. I need it to feed my black jap traps. I think my tank is so heavily planted there is no nutrients left for algae.


you probably have a low tech tank like me... I have a 5G tank with zero algae.









You can see why there's no algae.

I can also show you my algae-fide high tech tank but I have no pictures of it right now.


----------



## sewingalot (Oct 12, 2008)

No fair, Mistergreen! You're making me feel incompetent again. :hihi: You're supposed to share the algae fide high tech tanks, lol.

By the way, beautiful low tech tank! I love these types of tanks, low to no algae and little work.


----------



## mistergreen (Dec 9, 2006)

Honestly I have no idea what my 5g is running on. I haven't touched it in 3-4 months. It's a simple shrimp & snail tank. I have a sneaky suspicion CERTAIN algae is linked to light intensity & poop matter. I'm heavily stocked in my high tech tank. And I might be dosing too much micros. I always see more algae at the end of the week cycle.


----------



## sewingalot (Oct 12, 2008)

I was just thinking of something. I wonder if since our water supply is mainly from the Ohio River, could there be enough pollutants to sustain our tanks?  I think you have something with micros. I started slowly subtracting micros and found the algae has improved. Maybe it's a limiting thing. To be honest, I am tweaking a lot right now on the ferts, co2 and lighting, so it may be a combination of things.


----------



## Kathyy (Feb 22, 2010)

I have small amounts of algae. There is fuzzy stuff on recently purchased plants, red diatoms on the wood where otos cannot quite get it, traces of green and black spot on the anubias that waxes and wanes with phosphate levels, green stuff on the glass that blooms when the water is changed and wanes as the fish and snails feed. Just Excelled BBA on a taller anubias and it is now gone. Definitely have some green water going right now, try increasing the nitrate for next week. Old wisteria leaves look horrible with black gunk, that grouping will be pulled and trimmed this week.

From a distance nothing can be seen, well maybe the glass looks sort of foggy but that is it.


----------



## justinq (Dec 6, 2006)

I don't check this forum frequently, but I wanted to comment on my earlier statements. I knew in saying what I did, that I would be taken to task, specifically by Tom Barr. I respect a lot of your work, Tom, but why do you appear on every thread where someone even thinks a negative thought about EI? Because you invented it and it's worked for you. If you go and reread my post, you will see that I said this (sorry, I'm not sure how to direct quote out of multiple posts):

"I'm not saying that high light and high nutrients are bad or that people shouldn't do them, I just think that there's a tiny window of balance that's almost impossible to get completely right."

So why was it necessary to write two epic-length posts defending EI, when all I was saying was that there was a larger margin of error with high light/high nutrients?

Also not sure why you (Tom Barr) are asking me this when I said what I said about Amano style tanks:

"So why use CO2? Why pack a tank full of plants?"

Um, because many plants look good? Because Amano, Dutch style aquariums, etc use CO2 and pack the tank with plants? I think that those are good ideas for any situation, because they have been used with success in pretty much any approach to a planted tank. But do I think you always NEED to use CO2? No, I've seen good examples of non-CO2 tanks. CO2 just makes things a lot easier. High light does not. I said more is not always better. Not always. Not that it's never better. And more would not always be better with CO2, unless you want dead fish!

Tom said:
"I use EI with low light, where'd the high light stuff into all this?
I've not been nagging people for the last 15 years to use low light????
What the heck?"

*sigh* Well for one, there are many other people on this forum, and I've seen a lot of people who are NOT you who are doing crazy levels of light that would really only be necessary for reefs. But, I do take issue that you've never said to use high light, because of a reply you actually made to me several years ago. And ironically enough, my mistaken beliefs were based on an even earlier post you had made. I was trying to figure out how to get my red plants to color up, and I had what was definitely high light. I could tell through the behavior of the plants (pearling almost all day long, extremely fast growth, able to grow anything I wanted), so I didn't think light would be the culprit. I searched these forums and found a long post from you about how red plants had nothing to do with lighting, but with having low nitrate levels. You demonstrated this with pictures of ludwigia from the bottom of a lake that you said was low lighting conditions, but immesurable nitrate. You demonstrated with pics from your own plants.

I had been dosing EI, and I tried tweaking the dose in multiple ways, INCLUDING completely removing the nitrate dose and upping the phosphate. This was based on tests of the nutrients in the water, trying to do things the way you and others said to figure out how to tweak the EI, because I _understood _this was just a starting point. No matter what I did, I couldn't get my tank to go down to less than 20 PPM of nitrate. I thought there could be other causes (tested my tap water, that wasn't it), maybe the nutrients in the Aquasoil, I fed my fish sparingly and wasn't overstocked. So I posted a question about this, and guess what? I get a reply from you where you asked me where the heck I'd get a silly idea like red plants stemming from low nitrate, and that it was all about having higher light, that I needed more light. Where did I get that silly idea? You.

Here's the thing. I love reading about your experiments and all the innovative ways you've come up with to perfect planted tanks. A lot of things you've said have been very helpful. But sometimes I think you don't realize that we don't all have the time and money and scientific equipment to perfectly calibrate everything, to perform the experiments you do and so on. I understand that new realizations happen with new research. Maybe at one point you thought low nitrate was a good way to get red plants, and later on you disproved that. Maybe you just have a magic green thumb that allows you to grow plants perfectly however you feel like doing it. Who knows?

What I do know is that I tried to implement everything that you and others suggested when I had issues with my EI tank, and whether you believe it or not I had a fantastic maintenance schedule. I tested the nutrients, I cut back on lighting, I adjusted the dosing of the nutrients, I upped the CO2, I added Excel, I did everything that the gurus said to do, and _I still had a lot of algae_. 

Was I doing something "wrong"? Probably, but my point was, as I stated earlier, that the higher the light the smaller the window for perfection is, and that for MANY people who are not plant gods (or plantbrains), it's not inconcievable that they might have a really hard time getting it right. I didn't feel that EI helped, and I'll tell you why. It wasn't just the fact that I had algae. I was actually afraid to even dare mention the competitive method of dosing, because I did once on this forum and was taken to task (by you again, actually), but in the last six months of running my 30 gallon high light tank, I switched from EI to PPS-Pro. And guess what? My algae didn't completely go away, but it was greatly reduced, and the BBA _did _completely go away. Coincidence? I don't have the scientific tools to measure whether it was or not without any margin of error, but common sense says no, it probably wasn't a coincidence.

This is all I'm saying: There are many ways of doing things, many ways of dosing, many lighting options. There isn't one holy grail of aquatic plant keeping, whether it's EI or anything else. People need to find what works for them, and should be able to explore or ask questions without being told that regardless of their experiences, EI is always the way to go. Was there an error on my part? Probably, but for the hassel I found it much easier to simply adopt a completely different dosing system rather than pull my hair out trying to get EI "just right." Other people might have a lot easier time getting it just right, who knows?


----------

