CO2, KH, PH and dying plants

I have to agree djlen on the watt question, and I use MH lights with 5500k bulbs, my tank is about 400g which is about 1600L and use 4*400w lamps which gives me about 1w per L. I have used CF lamps and and the only benifit that I could see was that light was spreed out evenly over the tank, but that being said if you buy lots of lower wattage MH lamps you can get a pretty good light spreed. As for deep tanks MH lamps are the light choice, but in your case your tank will not be deep enough to worry about, I would say you could go with either MH or CF Imo.
I also think djlen has given you all should know on testing your ph and kh. goodluck
 
WPG / WPL is actually not a good measurement because it has no bearing on the spectrum of the light. If you stick for example a blue light on the tank at 300 watts and then put a regular spectrum "daylight" style bulb at 300 watts then the daylight one will yield better results in the tank. This is an extreme example but the point being the color of the light that makes up your final output of the bulb due to the coatings of the bulb and/or the gas inside the tubes and the electric charge etc all impact the quality of growth you can get from one bulb over another. True "scientists" have very expensive meters that measure what is called Photo Active Radiation (PAR) or something like that. This is a measure of what registers with the plant for photosynthesis. Some spectrums are not good for plants while others are better. Best growth is with a variety. The Kelvin is a measure of the overal output of the spectrum of the light where normal incadescent bulbs are in the lower end of 3000-5000. Most aquarium lights are in the 6500 range. Many swear by 9600 for a whiter appearance. 10,000 + begins blueish

So actually the answer to your question really is no that just any bulb at a particular wattage the formula may not be accurate. When you deal with fluroescent technology bulbs the light formula works best. Things like MH bulbs will work similarly but due to some differences I feel that a MH bulb at 175 watts COULD in some circumstances work just as good as a CF bulb at 250 watts or even more depending on the height of the tank etc. The MH yields more ultra violet as well "raw" and is many times may have a UV filtering glass plate in many setups. The MH on the otherhand is a "point" light source instead of a spread source like the CF tube. As a result the MH will penetrate into narrow deep tanks very strongly. A CF tube has the light spread over a wide area.

So thus if you have a 6 foot wide tank that is 20 inches tall 2-4 CF tubes will work better then 1 175 watt MH bulb.
 
Hi everybody,

I kept running the system with CO2 injection for about 3 weeks, but I still can't get PH to level 7-7.2. If the charts are OK, that I still haven't enough CO2 in my tank. I increased bubble rate from 30 to 50, but I still didn’t get a desired PH and CO2 concentration.
Does anybody have an idea what else could be wrong? Or should I just increase even more bubble rate? I was afraid to do it without I consulting it with you.
Thank you for any comment, thought or suggestion.
 
I agree with you that lighting is your main issue right now. Lighting is the number one most important factor for growing healthy plants. You don't even need co2 below 2.5, 3 watts per gallon.
 
I agree with you, but currently I'm in the process of moving from Ireland to Canada. I don't see any point to spent huge money on lighting, when it will not work in Canada.
On the other hand, it still doesn't explain why PH doesn't go down to level 7-7.2, or does it?
 
The crude "rules of thumb" on W/gal. assume the use of triphospher broad-spectrum tubes. If you go for alternate spectra, the "rules" no longer apply.

Reflectors control both light spread and penetration.

To dissolve CO2 effectively, use a reactor. They are easily and simply DIY'd. To retain CO2 in the tank, control surface breaks/agitation/aeration - but keep some current going below the water sirface.
 
Isn't that glass thing on the page 1 of this thread reactor? Excuse me this silly question, but I'm really confused. If it's not, could somebody point me to the website telling how to make one DIY?

If it is reactor what could be the problem? There is no flow on the surface. I even tried to turn off filter for one day, but still no improvement. I'm getting desperate.

I understand, that everybody is trying to point me out to the fact, that I don't have enough light and therefore my plants wouldn't grove, as I want. My point is, that it seems to be simple for me to add some light at later stage, but I'm afraid that there will be enough light, but there will not be enough CO2 in the water and plants will not grow properly again. I'm trying to sort out the problem with CO2 first, because it's not affected anyhow by my relocation to Canada, and then I will just add proper lighting and everything should be all right.
 
Last edited:
I believe you have a tank of approx. 80 gals.
The reactor you're using is probably not going to be effective in a tank of that capacity. It's what is known as a passive reactor. You need either another one like it or an active reactor.
Please forgive me if this has been asked and answered before, but what kind of filtration are you using? This info. would help to decide if you can, in some way add on to your present way of injecting to increase absorption via filtration or if you'll need to pursue other options. There are many inexpensive DIY options.
I think you reported a kH of 130(7.3) and with a pH of 7.0 you would be holding 22ppm/CO2 which is a nice measurement for the lighting you are currently supplying. You really don't need much more concentration than that at your wattage. You will when you increase the lighting, but not presently.

Len
 
My tank is 80 galons.

I'm using internal filter supplied with this Juwel 300L tank and as a filtration media it's using sponges.

At the moment I have KH 130ppm and PH at the moment is about 7.6 which is giving me something like 8ppm/CO2
 
I am not familiar with the filter you are using. Does it have an intake tube on the bottom? If so, you can direct the CO2 tubing into the bottom(or intake) of the filter and it can be actively dispersed into the water table by the filter.
If you can do this, I think you will find an immediate increase in CO2/ppm and in fact if you can do this with the filter, pay close attention to your pH so as not to over inject the tank.
I use an AC 402 power head to disperse gas into one of my tanks, similar to the method I'm suggesting you try with your filter, and this method is very effective.

Len
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
AquariaCentral.com
Top Bottom