If you have shrimp then I'm surprised you have hair algae? what sort of shrimp do you have? three amanos decimated my hair algae infestation in only three days, a week later there wasn't a single 'hair' of it left. Apparently Rainbow / Malayan shrimp are the best hair algae consumers though.
I've got a better idea. Why don't you try adding more CO2 and/or flow and then just not have hair algae? Hair alge is CO2 related and it is a direct indication of poor CO2 uptake for the given lighting conditions. Adding shrimp isn't really the best way of addressing a fundamental plant malnutrition issue.
I have 2 bps co2 input with plenty of circulation in the tank. Lighting is an Arcadia Luminair with 4 39w plantgro T5 tubes. Still I have hair algae growing on my Fissidens. Should I increase my co2? Need to get a co2 constant check bulb and check the ph. Test strip indicates ph of 7.2
Well, 160watts of T5 lighting is an awful lot of energy but you have not specified how large your tank is. If it's an 80-100 gallon tank then that's an appropriate amount of light, but if that's the case then your bubble rate is unquestionably low.
You probably also need to define your circulation in less subjective terms. "plenty" doesn't really tell the story. Is it 10X the tank volume per hour or more? If not then it's "wimpy".
There is a 99.999% probability that your lighting is too high for the level of injection or flow. You should consider lowering the lighting by 50% or increasing your bubble rate by 200% or both. Without specific data regarding dimensions and filtration configuration, analysis is difficult, but one thing is for sure; the hair algae have already performed their own analysis and they have determined that your CO2 is extremely poor.
Your cherries and amanos will definitely eat it in vast quantities just make sure the suckers are hungry as they will eat other tastier stuff first, it's probably comparable to the decision between brussel sprouts or something that doesn't taste like crap for us. I agree that you should try to address the underlying issue that's causing it to be there in the first place but in the meantime there's no reason not to use your shrimps seeing as how you already have them.
Yes I think it's great if you have fauna that eats algae, but my opinion is that we have a tendency to use fauna as a crutch. This then diverts our attention away from finding fundamental causes and of understanding the systemic changes necessary to control algae. I mean, what about the people who don't like shrimp for example? Unilaterally suggesting shrimp to control hair algae may not be the best approach. It should be understood primarily, especially for the lees experienced hobbyists, that one never necessarily needs to have algae eating fauna in order to have an algae free tank.
you are right. I just can't shut up about shrimps because I was literally blown away by the impact they had on my tank, all the algae in it grew over the period of about a week, I reduced lighting and increased CO2 and gave the filter a clean and it stopped growing completely for several weeks and receded but just wouldn't completely die off so I bought the shrimps and it was literally all gone within a few days and hasn't come back.
Thanks for the replies people.
I have a Hagen 160l tank. a Fluval 305 with spraybar and a 400l/h internal pump which I use as a reactor for my co2.I had no idea that 2bps would not be enough for my set up. I have mainly mosses, ferns and some gloso but not heavily planted. I am also dosing 10ml of API Leafzone twice a week and replace 25l of tank water with ro water weekly.
Hope this helps
Well, yeah that's 4WPG which, as suspected, is very much over the top. I'd suggest that you shut down at least 50% of the tubes. Light energy causes a demand for CO2 and nutrients and when you do not supply sufficient quantities of these the plants start dying of malnutrition. Algae then attack the weakened plants. By reducing the lighting you lower the demand for CO2, however I would still increase the bubble rate substantially. I'd also suggest you use a dropchecker to give you a rough idea of the CO2 levels. Read this article for more tips: CO2 MEASUREMENT USING A DROP CHECKER
Thanks for the advice, I will be getting a drop checker next. I have turned two tubes off and will see how I get on. Tested for phosphates today and results are 0.25 or below.
It will be impractical for me to do a 50% weekly water change as I buy my ro water and lugging 3 25L barrels around every Saturday is going to take the joy out of the hobby. My nitrate, nitrite, ammonia and phosphate levels are well within safe limits with my 25L weekly water change so is 50% necessary?
Just wondering but why are you using RO? Do you have any sensitive fish in there that need the soft water or is there a problem with your tap water? If not then you really don't need to use it and can use tap water with a dechlorinator added.
If you do have sensitive fish (as I do) then I'd really suggest getting your own RO unit. Ro man do excellent ones that are well priced and excellent quality. They are also dead easy to plumb in to your water supply too.
It was suggested to me by my lfs that I might want to start using ro water as then I would be starting off with pure water instead of trying to remove substances. The only sensitive inhabitants are the cherry shrimp. Think I should just go ahead and use tapwater?
Is this the same LFS that sells you the RO water....?
Persoanlly I like RO. I use RO water for all my tanks and keep soft water fish in them. However it's also fairly convenient for me as I have my own RO unit set up and plumbed into a barrel. I also keep wild fish and sensitve species such as killies and dwarf cichlids that require it.
In your case as long as there are no nasties in there (which there shouldn't be but you can request a water report from your supplier) I would use tap water and a good dechlorinator. It will save you money and you won't have to add back minerals into the RO water.
I used to work in a LFS that sold RO. I got told off for telling people they could use half and half tap/RO... even though most of the fish in the shop were living in pure tap water, with only the more sensitive fish getting RO.
They're just trying to sell their water. If you really want to do it, get your own unit, it's much cheaper in the long run.
I keep my fish in half/half RO and tap, but it's no bother to me as I have my own unit.
Mine is outside, connected to the outside tap, and running into a water butt.
Sounds to me like your LFS is a marine specialist and doesn't understand freshwater planted tanks!!!
Ask him what 'nasties' he means. My money will be phosphates, nitrates etc. Then he may go on about hard water and high Ph!!!
Oh and we tend to ignore (within reason) all of the above in the planted scene as they don't apply like they do in marine setups.
I put 100% tap water into my tank. 50% change weekly. High in nitrate and phosphate (lincolnshire agricultural area) Ph 7.4 (adjusted as far as I know.) and very hard according to the water board reports.
Then I add lots of nitrate and phosphate via EI. Push CO2 as high as I can without killing my fish. Sit back and curse the out of control breeding cherries and smile at the Cory spawn.
I agree with Ceg and Ed 100%. Unless your water has huge problems then you can use 100% tap and 4WPG T5HO would impress the American planted scene which would be saying something considering their light obsession!!!