What exactly causes BBA?

[fablau]

The only algae I have in this whole tank is an area on the front glass, directly opposite the outflow Lily where there are a few tufts of BBA on a bit of driftwood and GSA on the anubia leaves in this section. No GSA on any other anubias in the rest of the tank, just this front right corner.

My guess is that a lot of detritus is forced into this corner because it is directly opposite the Lily and thus when the filter force hits that glass it is pushed down..

Me also, similarly to you, I get BBA mostly where flow is highest. Why!?

 

[parotet]

I have been playing with planted tanks since 1985.... Here is my tank, right now:

I can't complain, as I said, plants grow great, but BBA is always around...

That's exactly what I mean (wow, beautiful tank...). I mean, we all can see tanks in the forums, very poor tanks (let's say BBA tanks, not really planted tanks) in which a serious and very basic "technical" improvement is needed. But in some others BBA, despite not being a serious problem, is always around. I would not say that these people do not know what they are doing... Do other method users have BBA problems? Of course they have it. This is not really the point being discussed here... no method is perfect, but there may probably be several conditions in which some do better than others.

Assuming the risk of being shot down in flames (and TBH fearing to re-open a million posts more)
(please read: no scientific data, just observations in my tanks, in others, lots of reading, comments from experienced aquatic plant growers in this forum and others...)
I have noticed/lots of experienced people say that:

1) in soft water "things are easier" (don't want to mention names but the most of the "best ones" here have admitted it any time, however it is difficult most of the times to really get a clear explanation about it),
2) with high light, relying on a rich substrate and/or lean dosing (instead of dosing heavily in the water column) makes your life easier (again, lots of very experienced aquascapers here do not dose that much, but end up with leaner methods than EI such as reduced EI, PPS-Pro, Tropica, ADA, etc.)

Jordi

 

[roadmaster]

OCD comes to mind.
Wish my tanks were as problematic.

 

[parotet]

OCD comes to mind.

What about redox?... I may be completely wrong, just read about it these last weeks. It looks like soft waters tend to have higher redox and low amounts of organic compounds dissolved in the water column (lean dosing, moderate growth) can also make easier to be on the "suitable" redox parameters (oxidizing ambient).

Jordi

 

[fablau]

Yes, too many organics could be the curse then. This is a 6 years old tank, so... That can be easily the case. Does that mean that unless I tear down everything and start from scratch, there is no way for me to tackle the problem? Headache coming...

 

[sciencefiction]

Does that mean that unless I tear down everything and start from scratch, there is no way for me to tackle the problem? Headache coming...

Can you elaborate more on the problematic BBA covered areas? Is it all over the tank or just certain places? Is it happening on all species of plants or some are more succeptible?

What sort of fish do you have, what is the feeding schedule? What is your water change schedule although to be honest in a lightly stocked tank with or without water changes, with or without cleaning filters, etc... I haven't been able to cause BBA and I've tried although unintentionally...

In my case I think the BBA is caused because of overstocking(common pleco, 6 clown loaches and a bunch of small fish in that tank) but my plants only get covered in BBA when I slack on dosing. I have a problem that in my non dirted tanks I have a battle with iron deficiency. My water is very hard and the iron doesn't stay in solution in the water column. For an almost unplanted tank that has 5 large stalks of hydrophila and a couple of anubias , I need to dose iron 3-4 times a week to about 0.6-0.8 ppm of iron in total to get them properly growing. That's a non-co2 tank. When I slack on dosing iron, obviously my plants bleach out within a week or two and BBA loves finishing the business by destroying them. When I dose, they seem way more resistant and BBA doesn't over take them the slightest. All the healthy growth stays clear of BBA. I wish I was more consistent with dosing but one forgets.

So I think the cause is not necessarily the reason for the outcome but you can control the outcome if you can't remove the cause.

I mean, in other words you have BBA in that tank for a plant unrelated reason and you are not sure what's causing it. But the reason it is affecting the plants is something to do with the plants themselves. Whether it's a deficiency or toxicity or lack of CO2 or whatever, something is weakening them and they get susceptible to the BBA already present. Even lack of light in certain areas of the tank or too much light in certain areas.
That's why some contribute BBA to CO2, others to overstocking or bad plant health, or what not...etc....Because I think BBA is opportunistic and spreads where it gets more food. But the cause for it being present in the tank in the first place could be unrelated to the plants, as it's the case in so many non planted tanks.

 

[GreenNeedle]

I think I will say what I was going to say last night in answer to some of the questions I read.

How did TB come to the 30ppm figure? Simple really. Trying to get as close to unlimiting CO2 without causing distress to the livestock. I dare say Tom would suggest higher but then he would be made the hate figure of animal lovers when others don't quite control the CO2 very well so better safe with 30ppm with the caveat than say push it to 50 you'll be OK

So with that in mind he isn't saying you need all the ppms of anything in the tank. Not nutrients and not CO2. He is trying to give ample supply and negate defficiencies.

The more unlimited things are the less likely flow will cause a massive problem. i.e. if you dose 10pm with poor circulation you may have very low areass that are basically still @ equilibrium. Saying that is equilibrium 3? is it 8? If it is the latter which I think I read earlier by someone then why bother trying to add 2ppm more?

If you add 30ppm then you may well get 10ppm down at the substrate.

Ample CO2 also allows the plant to utilise the light supply better, therefore you don't need as much light over the tank. Something to do with Rubisco.

You have to read through Tom Barr's site to see his position on things. He suggests the non CO2 tank with low energy, low light is the best way to go. EI is just and adpated version of other methods. He always says he doesn't take credit for it.

His argument is not that you should dose more nutrients. It is that you shouldn't be scared to do so.

So I don't really get the antipathy towards Tom or EI. Maybe it is lost in translation a little? To me it is quite simply eradicate the problem of nutrient defficiency and then you know it isn't nutrients and then can focus on finding a problem elsewhere. It's more for beginners or those who aren't really interested in nailing down a leaner dosing regime. Tom purely dismisses the 'Nutrients cause algae' statements, he doesn't say you should overdose.

The above post really interested me because he also says that heavily stocked tanks have more problems. Now that isn't to say they all will but I remember many posts by him where he pushed the stocking and things got harder. Indeed I myself have had problems in tanks where I have pushed the stocking and I mean way more than any * inches per gallon rule. Those tanks would get all sorts of algae appearing in different places.

That comes back to the 'algae trigger' which is another of Tom's 'mantras'. Organic waste (Organic ammonia in essence) is the trigger for algae. When people start talking about using urea in their solutions he says that they are risking algae and fish deaths going that route.

So in our tanks especially if it is heavily stocked it makes sense that if it is heavily planted it will fare better than a more lightly planted tank as the plants will make a large dent in that organic waste. The heavy water changes of EI will also reduce organic wastes. The high dosing is irrellevant to the equation there. You are just adding inorganic nutrients whilst removing organic nutrients.

Sciencefiction - If you are struggling with iron on a 'weekly dosed' tank then get some DTPA iron chelate. It lasts much longer in harder water than standard EDTA chelate. Its pretty cheap. There is some on ebay at the moment in 50g pouches that should last for a good while.

 

[sciencefiction]

Sciencefiction - If you are struggling with iron on a 'weekly dosed' tank then get some DTPA iron chelate.

Thanks SC1. I definately will buy the DTPA type. I am not dosing iron weekly. I dose it every second day. Otherwise it's like I never dosed.

 

[Zak Rafik]

Hi guys,
There has so much useful and healthy discussion here and the odd thing is that I did not receive any email alerts at all.
I've missed out so much.

 

[karla]

Great thread Zak, I am enjoying it a lot.

I just wanted to say, maybe we could start a thread with just experimental tanks?
Say a fixed time period, arbitrary number of months, with set parameters maybe at extremes and post results. Not journals as such but just one off posts with before and after FTS and what was done.
Say pick, high light low co2 low light etc ferts in varying amounts.
My current tank is a bit of an experiment and its last incarnation was as well, lets just honestly post our own findings.
I don't think we need scientific data to make our own decisions after all successful hobbyists find a good set of parameters for the chosen plants and tend to stick within those to help ensure success on their next project.

Is this workable?

 

[Andy Thurston]

probably workable but not scientifically accurate. there's loads of things you can do to see what suits you and your tank best. low light, lots of plants, daily water changes, loads of co2 and nutrients is a good place to start, then when the tank is stable then you can experiment with higher light, lower co2 and lower ferts just to see what happens. i think its also g good idea to use plants that like the same conditions ie dont put anubias with Rotala macrandraunless its shaded by higher plants. why make things hard for yourself

 

[Zak Rafik]

Great thread Zak, I am enjoying it a lot.

Hi Karla
Thanks for your kind comment but I don't deserve any credit for starting this thread. I genuinely was and still am very frustrated with BBA. I have been able to keep under control algae like GSA, BGA and thread algae all due to the most valuable pointers from fellow members here in this forum. I just can't seem to understand BBA. There are lots of very wrong info out there, including doe very reputable forums. I just want an answer or at least some guidance. Hope we can have more open opinions so that we can all grow stronger.
Cheers

 

[dw1305]

Hi all,

Me also, similarly to you, I get BBA mostly where flow is highest. Why!?

I usually have a small amount right by the filter outlet (venturi), and on the filter intake sponges. I haven't got any on the plants. My suspicion is that, in my case, it is because these are areas where the Ramshorn snails can't graze.

The "best" tanks for BBA that I've seen are:
1. In our local pet shop, where it cover the gravel like gorilla fake fur. I don't the water parameters of their tanks, but I would assume the water is hard and the nutrients sky high.
2. The Piranha tank in the Princess of Wales pavilion at RBG Kew.

cheers Darrel

 

[Andy Thurston]

The "best" tanks for BBA that I've seen are:
1. In our local pet shop, where it cover the gravel like gorilla fake fur. I don't the water parameters of their tanks, but I would assume the water is hard and the nutrients sky high.

funny you should say that! the water round these parts is pretty soft and I've only seen bba in a couple of shop tanks, both shops were poorly maintained and I wouldn't dream of buying livestock from either. That said one of them has a new aquatics manager and he has improved things

 

[Jose]

Great thread Zak, I am enjoying it a lot.
I just wanted to say, maybe we could start a thread with just experimental tanks?
Say a fixed time period, arbitrary number of months, with set parameters maybe at extremes and post results. Not journals as such but just one off posts with before and after FTS and what was done.
Say pick, high light low co2 low light etc ferts in varying amounts.
My current tank is a bit of an experiment and its last incarnation was as well, lets just honestly post our own findings.
I don't think we need scientific data to make our own decisions after all successful hobbyists find a good set of parameters for the chosen plants and tend to stick within those to help ensure success on their next project.
Is this workable?

I really like this idea. Im currently running a tank in the way of a small experiment for my self. Im trying to grow plants well in very hard water (KH 18). Once I get those plants growing well I will switch to half RO so aprox 9 KH and see the effect. After this I might even go lower KH. Light will be quite low and co2 around 20 ppm. I am not willing to try the experiment that Karla says though for now. Because I tryed it before and just got stunted tips. Things take quite long to recover for me after this. I might make a thread but first plants have to grow perfectly in hard water so that you start off with a stable tank and can see the effects.
Maybe when I get tyred of having a stable tank I can try Karlas idea. So basically we need someone with a stable tank.

 

[tmiravent]

Very nice topic!
I had the same question about BBA, look where mine grows...
Not very big but is there! [sorry for the poor image]

(iIf you watch carefuly there are two different in the image)

 

[GreenNeedle]

I think its purely a detritus / dir thing. It probably grows on dirt that has got caught around the holes on spraybars or at the end of filter pipes. Looking in some of my other tanks although they are non CO2 and mosses / Fissidens which are detritus traps have some bits on them.

 

[karla]

I am, very sorry that I cant answer your question relating to bba zak. I have only had bba once in a very low light tank with no added co2. It grew very slowly on the leaves of crypts for a couple of weeks. I removed the infected leaves and it did not come back. I was doing water changes weekly at the time and I put it down to the fluctuating co2, so stopped doing changes and it never came back. I know some really struggle with this algae but I can not make it occur in my tanks and I am sure I have hard water. My terror algae has always been bga and diatoms, I do not need to try hard to make either appear.

Hi Jose,
I thought it was an Idea that we could use to maybe establish some standard parameters that are proven to work under certain conditions, I do not think it has to be overly scientific either. Just as much data about the parameters as possible and stick to one regime for a set period of time then post results. It could also be used to disprove other theories if enough people attempted the same experiment. These could be extreme experimental tanks or normal setups but the point is not to tweak when things start going wrong because then the data gets skewed. People can then make their own assumptions and try to emulate the method, if it does not work then there was insufficient data but these results could be added to the post. Unfortunately, I think we would end up with two identical seeming posts one of which succeeds and one which fails. But, maybe not.

 

[Andy Thurston]

I think its purely a detritus / dir thing. It probably grows on dirt that has got caught around the holes on spraybars or at the end of filter pipes. Looking in some of my other tanks although they are non CO2 and mosses / Fissidens which are detritus traps have some bits on them.

I'm starting to think that too. I think dirt triggers it and all the other factors, unstable co2, poor nutrient management etc., feed it.
cleaning seems the best way to get rid of it, just my opinion no scientific back up though

 

[sciencefiction]

I found an interesting article.

I took out just bits and pieces but there is way more in the link below if anyone is interested. I got tired of retyping it as one can't copy from there.

https://books.google.ie/books?id=IikPwCt1ioEC&pg=PA205&lpg=PA205&dq=audouinella food&source=bl&ots=hMY4BDZiSg&sig=Jk-1GqavCmwZ1-uIDeXsxFMzzco&hl=en&sa=X&ei=SrUpVY2SL47vasucgIAI&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=audouinella food&f=false

Here are some extracts word for word that somewhat describe different species of freshwater red algae.

In general, freshwater red algae are localized in reasonably unpolluted waters and are infrequent to absent in streams and rivers that are organically enriched, greatly silted, or very high in inorganic nutrients(Sheath and Hambrook, 1990)
Fresh water algae are found in a wide range of oxygen concentrations but there tends to be an increase in frequency of occurence with higher conentrations(Sheath and Hambrook 1990)
94% of fresh water red algae is found in rivers and streams.
The interaction between the Ph and the form of inorganic carbon can greatly influence the productivity and distribution of Rhodophyta(Sheath and Hambrook 1990)
Although wide spread species are found in a wide range of Ph values, the majority occur in mildly acidic waters between ph 6 and 7. However, there are exceptions to this pattern, including Bangia, Chroadactylon, Thoreales and Ceramiales which maybe considered alkalophilers(Sheath 1987)
The effect of Ph can be attributed to the form of inorganic carbon available, some taxa such as Lemanea mamillosa have been shown to use only free CO2 as a carbon source for photosynthesis which is the predominant form in mildly acidic ph values(e.g Raven et al., 199f)
Above ph 8, the proportion of free CO2 drops below 2-5% and species occuring in these waters would require flow replenishment or use of alternative sources of inorganic carbon(Sheath and Hambrook, 1990)
One species commonly distributed in high Ph waters is the crustose Hilden brandia rivularis, which also utilizes CO2 as a carbon source but may also use HCO3-, although this possibility has not been confirmed (Raven et al, 1994)

Freshwater rhodophytes occur in a broad range of nutrient values, but they are more typically found in low to moderate regimes(e.g., PO4*3- below detection to 100mg/l-1)
The common occurence of red algae at low nutrient levels is partually due to flow replenishment and reduction of the boundary layer of depletion riverine systems. In addition, many species form colorless hair cells that may be produced in response to nutrient deficiency, as is the case for some green algal filaments.
Some researches have employed rhodophytes for classification of streams. For example in Austria Hildenbrandia is typical of lowland rivers with relatively high nutrients, wheres Lemanea is regarded as indicative of high altitude streams with low nutrients.