• You are viewing the forum as a Guest, please login (you can use your Facebook, Twitter, Google or Microsoft account to login) or register using this link: Log in or Sign Up

Is it just random luck?

Sacha

Sacha

Member
Joined
3 Jan 2014
Messages
992
Location
London
I paid a visit to Aquatic Design Centre yesterday because I wanted to take photos of an ADA tank there that I've had my eye on for a while.

15n3dy1.jpg


346qlp0.jpg


2u59pq0.jpg


2w6sa6f.jpg


It is the best plant growth I have ever seen in a tank, online or otherwise. As you can see from the last picture, Co2 is fed from a single glass diffuser on the side of the tank, and there is minimal flow being provided by the filter, from a single small outflow. Most of the water in the tank is not moving at all, basically stagnant.

This tank used to be maintained by Greg, but now by a different woman called Roxana(?). I had a chat with her about the tank maintenance.

25% of the water is changed weekly (mixture of tap and RO)
Sera Florena fertilisers are dosed daily (micro only)

She had no idea what the Co2 concentration in the tank is, or what wattage the lights provide. I can tell you that the lights above the tank are a photon H-bomb. They are the brightest lights I have ever seen on a tank. I counted approximately 2 bubbles per second through the diffuser.

The KH is kept at 4 and the pH is kept at "a good level".

Phosphates are limited to 1PPM "to prevent algae".

So here it is. Massive light. Low Co2. Low nutrients (no macro ferts). Low flow. Poor water change schedule. Incredible growth. Healthy plants. No algae.

Are we all barking up the wrong tree? What's the secret to the success of this tank?
 
I suspect the amount of emersed growth is a factor in its success - though I was in ADC a couple of months ago and while I remember that tank, I don't remember any emersed foliage. So it has clearly developed...
 
I go in there regularly and can tell you that it's looked like that for nearly a year now.
 
Lighting appears fairly high above the tank as well.
Plant's below the surface prolly aren't being bombarded with too much light, PAR
Plant's above the surface have near unlimited CO2 drawn from atmosphere.
 
Sacha said:
I paid a visit to Aquatic Design Centre yesterday because I wanted to take photos of an ADA tank there that I've had my eye on for a while.

15n3dy1.jpg


346qlp0.jpg


2u59pq0.jpg


2w6sa6f.jpg


It is the best plant growth I have ever seen in a tank, online or otherwise. As you can see from the last picture, Co2 is fed from a single glass diffuser on the side of the tank, and there is minimal flow being provided by the filter, from a single small outflow. Most of the water in the tank is not moving at all, basically stagnant.

This tank used to be maintained by Greg, but now by a different woman called Roxana(?). I had a chat with her about the tank maintenance.

25% of the water is changed weekly (mixture of tap and RO)
Sera Florena fertilisers are dosed daily (micro only)

She had no idea what the Co2 concentration in the tank is, or what wattage the lights provide. I can tell you that the lights above the tank are a photon H-bomb. They are the brightest lights I have ever seen on a tank. I counted approximately 2 bubbles per second through the diffuser.

The KH is kept at 4 and the pH is kept at "a good level".

Phosphates are limited to 1PPM "to prevent algae".

So here it is. Massive light. Low Co2. Low nutrients (no macro ferts). Low flow. Poor water change schedule. Incredible growth. Healthy plants. No algae.

Are we all barking up the wrong tree? What's the secret to the success of this tank?
Click to expand...

Sacha said:
Poor water change schedule
Click to expand...
 
25% is plenty ..its all i do and have very good plant growth.....also i have high light and just use liquid carbon daily....i have no algae :]
 
This is just the way people kept planted tanks before EI came around. Low phosphates limits co2 demand from plants so co2 doesnt need to be ideal. There are other methods based on the same principle like pps pro and basicaLly everything thats not ei(¿?).
 
Jose said:
Low phosphates limits co2 demand from plants.
Click to expand...

How exactly does low phosphate limit the Co2 demand from plants? In particular, what are the molecular processes involved in this?
 
Because you just made a stipulative generalisation with no evidence to support it.
 
So you choose to believe its just random luck instead of believeing a theory based on empirical observations by Tom Barr? Its a theory that comes from watching how plants behave during quite a number of years.
 
Please can you show me the 'empirical observations' that lead to the conclusion that limiting phosphates reduces the plant's demand for Co2?
 
Last edited:
I dont need to proof anything to a person that doesnt want to learn. ITS all at thebarrreport.com

Empirical; based on, concerned with, or verifiable by observation or experience rather than theory or pure logic.
Do you know that 100% of the natural sciences starts off with empirical observations. The theory and numbers and fancy stuff comes afterwards.

The info is out there.
 
Jose, frankly your comments on this forum have become laughable. You choose to repeat the same conclusions over and over, with no scientific evidence to support any of it, and when people question the science behind it, your answer is 'I don't need to prove anything to a person that doesn't want to learn'.

I am questioning your conclusions because I do want to learn. I have spent the last 3 years of my life engaged in full-time academic research. Studying science is what I do every single day. This is why I am questioning the empirical basis of your assumptions.

I have much respect for Tom Barr. However, thebarrreport.com is not a scientific journal. And 'watching how plants behave during quite a number of years' is not a scientific study. It is not an example of empirical research.

I don't think I'm going to engage into discussions with you on this forum anymore, we have seen from the other thread that it leads to a cyclical argument which never reaches any conclusions.

Thanks for your input anyway.
 
Last edited:
Perfect!

Just one last thing. If you really want to learn you can try a limitting phosphate approach. Its the only way there is for you to learn.

There is no scientific evidence for any method you apply in a planted tank, but you still apply them.
 
Maybe by limiting phosphates, plant's perform poorly,and finally die and less CO2 is needed to grow dead plant's:lol:
Seriously, limit the phosphates from what % was being used originally?we do not know.
Could be they limit the phosphates for they are seeing that the plant's are getting enough from fish foods /fish waste.
 
Jose said:
Perfect!

Just one last thing. If you really want to learn you can try a limitting phosphate approach. Its the only way there is for you to learn.

There is no scientific evidence for any method you apply in a planted tank, but you still apply them.
Click to expand...

I truly believe there is a science involved with growing aquatic weed's or so many would not struggle .
Me thinks it comes down to whose science you choose to accept while trying your hand at it.
I find I am never as surprised by that which I do not know,as I am by that which I thought I DID know.
 
Play nice children :) :) :) haha

Good to have a debate but it is always good to refer your beliefs back to the original source and I have not been into the barrreort ever...(that I recall) so don't know how strict the testing is on the idea of limiting particular nutrients with a positive outcome and less co2 intake.

I have too seen the tank in question and a number of tanks in there and I call witchcraft!!! They are beautiful. Extremely healthy plants and very well executed . I haven't been in some time, how is the tank stocked?

Lastly...is Gregg still there? I start a new job in the city and am looking forward to showing my face in there again very soon :)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
The tank is the ADA tank downstairs, it's moderately stocked with cardinal tetras.

Here is another example of an ADA tank they have upstairs.

29nayci.jpg


6p3k1j.jpg


16by8aa.jpg


Beautiful carpet, very healthy plants, and loads of pearling.

An in-tank glass diffuser with Co2 bubbles going straight to the surface of the water and then disappearing. A single outflow at the opposite end of the tank.

Tank is right next to a window, getting loads of sunlight in addition to the strong lights on the tank itself, and no algae to be seen anywhere.

What I find most ridiculous is how the Co2 bubbles go straight to the surface of the water.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top