does going into plants increase chance of fish death?

Bravofleet4

AC Members
Dec 27, 2006
153
0
0
Hi,

I have a 30 gallon planted tank that's been pretty stable for over a year now. I mention this to say that I'm not completely noob.

However, I have a question. Does making the transition from plastic plants to live plants introduce more risks? I remember when I had a 10 gallon tank and started throwing in anubias nana, java moss, and java fern. The plants were growing so slowly that algae stared taking over the tank and the water quality deteriorated. Similarly, I just started a 2.5 gallon tank that had a betta and dwarf otto in it. I changed the water quite frequently but the betta never looked healthy and in fact it died after I went away for 6 days (it should've been able to go without it). I had a 10 gallon filter in it btw.

I never did water tests on the 2.5 gallon tank but I'm starting to think that if you can't make sure the plants are growing, the conditions you try to keep them in (high light, fertilizers, and etc) lead to algae blooms. Furthermore, dying or stilted plants could also pollute the water column. What do you think? These concerns were never a problem with plastic plants when I just had 18 watt bulb for seeing the fish and just plain gravel.
 
I consider planted and unplanted tanks equally as healthy, just healthy in different ways because there are many different things you do to each tank. Your previous problems with plants could have stemmed from millions of different problems.

Proper tank cycling, dosing(if any), weekly maintenance will ensure a happy tank - either planted or unplanted.

-chris
 
i will totally and whole heartedly scream YEESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS

I switched over one of my unplanted 180g tanks which previously had sand, wood and rocks no fake plants (as I hate them). The tank looked good at the start but as the plants began to not make it I noticed that my water quality began to slide. I knew this by the way the fish were acting. Also the water got a hazy tinge to it and a slight off smell.

I bumped up the water change regime to minimum 2/week at a volume of 50% /. I also cleaned off the plant matter that would stick to the filter intake on a regular basis. The area which took longer to take care of was the dissolved decaying plant material that actually made it into my filter sponges. For the most part I would say for me I will not do real plants unless they are low light need almost nothing for extra care. I also wanted to add that almost immediately after I started with dosing this tank with the liquid stuff for plant care and growth I started to notice that algae tried to gain a foothold.

While all my other tanks that remained plantless were continued with the normal regime and went along as they do with happy fish, the planted tank did have a few fish that up and died they were fine one day and the next half devoured on the tank floor.

I just feel that unless the proper lighting is brought in and the proper nutrient levels are there for the plants they will indeed mess up the water and make it a difficult matter to fix!! After about 1 mth of this experiment I pulled all of the plants out and basically left them out to dry into dried arrangements THATS RIGHT I AM A PLANT KILLER muahahahha
 
Plants do provide an extra fall back when it comes to nitrogenous waste, and I suppose one could argue that certain species feel more comfortable with live plants. But I don't see an overwhelming benefit to fish health on a daily basis. I just don't like having that much plastic in my tanks.

There should be no direct correlation between algae blooms and fish death (in an aquarium mind you). Something else went wrong.
 
Well initially when you buy plants you can pick up diseases off of them. If the plants came from a tank that had sick fish the plants can carry the parasites on the leaves and infect your tank. But you can dip the plants in stuff to kill the parasites. So as long as you do that I think it would only benefit. Plants aren't just for appearance. Live plants are soft and will break quicker then a fish. Plastic plants don't break so if a fish can actually get scratched on them. But fish can also get scratched on rocks and stuff too so that is more likely then a plastic plant, but still something to note. I think the biggest difference is plants take in Nutrients, some nutrients that are bad for fish. For instance Nitrates go up as waste collects. Plants feed off of them thus making the water chemically cleaner. Ammonia and Nitrite also get soaked up to a small degree. Also with the lights on plants give off oxygen providing a better environment for the fish.

All these advantages are still very small and not really a need, it's just a nice little perk of a planted tank. Still plants are harder to maintain then plastic, but it's still better for the fish.

Plus they look so much better and the fish love them.

Think of a fish tank as our environment. A overstocked plastic plant tank is like Los Angeles, smog, polution, will it kill you no not really but it's not good for your health.

Then think of a planted tank as living in cabin in the woods. The air quality is better. Plants do the same for fish as trees do for us.
 
Last edited:
don't get me wrong. i'm sure plants provide benefits including waste absorption and definitely in providing a sense of security for many fish since it offers them hiding places and allows them to practice their wild behavior. However, I'm just especially worried about situations where plant growth seems to have halted or reversed. When plants start dying I think they make things tremendously worse. Therefore, perhaps it's only worth doing with the right equipment and setup (i.e. heavily planted, good balance of fast and slow growers, lighting, fertilizers, and CO2). Otherwise, it seems dangerous to fish health to try unless you're using the least demanding plants like java fern and anubias nana that don't require any additional requirements. An imbalance in either these things leads to an ecosystem that is constantly trying to find balance. I think algae blooms are helpful in this regard especially cyanobacteria since they take up the excess nutrients and provide O2. Unfortunately, cyanobacteria is unsightly and we try to clean it up. It's my theory that getting rid of the cyanobacteria at that point disrupts things further allowing nitrogenous levels to rise dramatically. I.E. doing maintenance makes things worse.
 
Last edited:
The fish that were in my 30 gallon when it was a low-tech tank would beg to differ. .67 wpg, no Co2 (occasional excel) and rare doses of flourish comp.

If plants were rotting, I took them out. Simple as that. But otherwise my anubias, crypts, java fern, vals and pennywort all did extremely well. Barely grew but stayed alive.

I haven't gone full-on high tech yet but have made the transition from no plants to low to "medium" without fish deaths. And I'm sure others have done the same. If the decaying plants were in fact the problem then your experience was certainly not the "norm" from what I have seen.
 
Just like with fish, you have to research the plants you buy to be sure they are suitable for your tank.

Yes, dead plants decompose and may make things worse, you have to remove them just like dead fish.

IMHO, plants provide a 'buffer' to help maintain the equilibrium of a tank...and some even give warnings of water problems by wilting etc (i.e. crypt melt or anacharis shedding).

FWIW, All 8 of my tanks have some kind of plant in them.
 
Last edited:
don't get me wrong. i'm sure plants provide benefits including waste absorption and definitely in providing a sense of security for many fish since it offers them hiding places and allows them to practice their wild behavior. However, I'm just especially worried about situations where plant growth seems to have halted or reversed. When plants start dying I think they make things tremendously worse. Anything that is dead and/or dying in a fish tank should always be removed immediatly Therefore, perhaps it's only worth doing with the right equipment and setup placing high light plants in a low light setup is setting a user up for disaster, everything should always be put into consideration before making choices like lights or plants or co2 (i would never put althernica reinekii(sp) in my low light tank because it will die) (i.e. heavily planted, good balance of fast and slow growers, lighting, fertilizers, and CO2). Otherwise, it seems dangerous to fish health to try unless you're using the least demanding plants like java fern and anubias nana that don't require any additional requirements. like i already stated the things you put in a fish tank should be considered highly and then compatibility checked to make sure it will work...a saltwater clownfish will last for a few days if simply dumped in fresh water, but it will die at its first opportunity to do so. An imbalance in either these things leads to an ecosystem that is constantly trying to find balance. I think algae blooms are helpful in this regard especially cyanobacteria since they take up the excess nutrients and provide O2. Unfortunately, cyanobacteria is unsightly and we try to clean it up. It's my theory that getting rid of the cyanobacteria at that point disrupts things further allowing nitrogenous levels to rise dramatically. I.E. doing maintenance makes things worse.

summary of my christmas colors of text above: all things must be considered before you place something in a tank. do not place high light plants in a low light tank and expect them to flourish...they will die and rot and then the rotten pieces must be removed from the tank in order to not kill your fish from excessive amonia or nitrate.
 
i'm afraid there is some confusion. I do do research on what plants I choose to put in my tanks. Most of them are low-medium light tanks with appropriate plants such as vals, anubias, crypts, and java ferns. I'm not surprised that some people are able to keep them alive at very low lighting levels. I've sort of discovered that myself when I stopped doing maintenance on one of my tanks and let it sit there for several months without any additional fertilizers, water changes, and light. I mean anubias nana is practically indestructable. Plants like the ones I keep don't really every die. They just stop growing and they have a buildup of grime and slime on them, so I wouldn't toss them out.

I suppose my next question would be if there is two extremes? Namely that on the 10 gallon tank I had a 15 watt bulb for 1.5 wpg and this was too low to induce good growth but at the same time too high for algae? If I was keeping only 0.67 wpg I don't think I would worry much about any algae problems either since that's practically no light. It's just that it's not always convenient to find a light fixture to produce the exact wpg you want at the smaller tank size. Does any of this seem to have any validity?

In the end, the take home message seems to be just more careful monitoring with tests in the beginning and ensuring plant growth.

P.S. My 29 gallon tank has 65 watt with no Co2, so I don't know have any experience with a high-tech setup either.
 
Last edited:
AquariaCentral.com