• 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

Hair algae - I'm now at a loss!

LancsRick

Member
Joined
18 Apr 2012
Messages
683
Ok, well a few weeks ago I stripped down my Fluval Ebi because I'd lost a battle with hair algae and brown algae on the glass. Despite dropping my lighting I was still not winning (and dosing glut for a short time), so I decided that starting afresh was the best option.

When I put the tank back up, I dropped to a 3 hour photoperiod, and given that the supplied light on the Ebi is really bright, I've put 4 layers of frosted film + a sheet of A4 paper over the top of the tank to knock down the lighting levels.

Despite this, about a month after I redid the tank, I'm getting hair algae reappearing on the ele. acic. sp mini.

I'm really stumped at this point, as my usual approach of "drop the light intensity and photoperiod" can't really go any further from 3 hours, that level of "obscuring" surely? I'm dosing all-in-one weekly, and running an e700 at half throttle.

I really don't want to go back to dosing glut as I want this to be a low tech tank.

Any and all help appreciated at this point, since I'm clearly doing something wrong, but don't have the foggiest idea what!
 
It's not true low tech Paulo I realise, I'll call it "low-ish" tech from now on :p. Joking aside, the balance I've struck on all my other tanks to avoid high maintenance but preserve plant health has been to dose AIO weekly, keep the lighting low, and avoid CO2.

@Tim - Not of note no. Again, they're something I try to avoid, partly from a maintenance point of view, but also to dodge BBA.
 
Any thoughts? I'm at a loss here, since I thought light was the primary reason for hair algae, and I've got so little lighting at the moment I can't help but wonder if there's something else!
 
I'm not sure what the protocol is for linking to other forums but this is my first port of call when dealing with algae: The Tropical Tank • View topic - Algae Types & Cures

It's not definitive but I've found it a useful place to start :) It doesn't mention light as a cause for hair algae so may give you something else to consider?

Viv
 
I may stand to be corrected but hair algae is usually associated with low levels of CO2. Have you tried using liquid carbon? Also, do you have any 'bio-removal-systems' in place (like shrimps, snails or algae eating fish)?
 
This goes against a lot of the usual advice but I can almost guarantee this will work IF you follow these instructions, it's worked for a lot of others I've helped in the past and for myself!

First thing is to remove as much as possible by hand from the tank and then do a filter clean as well. Only when you have done these two jobs and most importantly DON''T turn the newly cleaned filter on yet - do a large gravel clean and water change, at least 50% but 70% is even better. Once it's been refilled with de chlorinated water of course you can switch the filters back on again. So far, you have removed lots of the algae and by cleaning the filters and doing a large water change you will have got rif of most of the free floating algae spores.

Now the bit you might find contradictory - increase your lighting period to at least 10 hours a day, straight through.( It's your reduced lighting period thats triggered brown algae). You are trying to get your plants to photosynthesise and reducing the lighting times stops them from doing so which means they can't take up the natural nutrients in the tank, phosphate and nitrate - this is what is fuelling your hair algae, adding ferts is only making the situation worse by increasing the nutrients to keep the algae happy.

Next, you need to use a liquid carbon, without a carbon source your plants are unable to 'breath' properly and take up the nutrients. Carbon can be provided by either Co2 or in liquid form. Better still you can use both if you have Co2 available! You can buy liquid carbon in many forms, Easycarbo, Neutro Co2, it's all the same. The thing is its poison to many algae types and if you dose higher than the recommended daily dosage most types of algae will reduce and start dying off within days providing your lighting is good - the algae should start to turn yellow and come away after about 7 - 10 days. When you look closely at it, the active ingredient is 'Glutaraldehyde', which is a cleaning agent, used for sterilising equipment in the NHS. The biocidal effect of Glutaraldehyde kills most algae at concentrations of double the recommended dosage and is not harmful to most aquatic plants and fish, while at the same time it increases the plants resistibility against algae.

So, start double dosing immediately, it's safe to do so and the best time is in the morning before the lights come on so the plants have it available immediately after the lights come on to help them photosynthesise.

As mentioned above, you will notice it starting to pull back after about a week and in 2 weeks it should all be virtually gone. keep double dosing for at least a week after it's cleared up completely and then you can drop back to the normal recommended dosage, and continue dosing and ensure you keep your lights on for a minimum of 10 hours. Mine are on for 11 hours, I do use pressurised Co2 and I also dose Easycarbo - but I don't use ferts which, many will find surprising. I use a completely natural method by ensuring my phosphate / nitrate keep a 1 to 10 ratio, so if I has 2ppm phosphate I would expect to have 20ppm nitrate, it takes a while to get thee 'balance' right but it's worth it when you do.

The above instructions will clear your algae up by encouraging your plants to wake up and start taking up all those nutrients - happy plants = no algae, see the photo below of my tank....

Xpnpepn.jpg
 
Martin is it fine to use Easycarbo on its own?, I dont use any liquid fertizilers ect.

Also the instructions say to dose 1ml per 100 litres a day for tanks with very few plants,my tank is 54 litres so what would be the best thing to do?

Appreciate it, cheers.
 
Hi Dan,
Yes, you really need to be using a liquid carbon, EasyCarbo is a good one but there are others. If you are having algae problems you can double dose EC to clear it up and you should use a double dose in a heavily planted tank anyway.

I would suggest dosing 1ml daily, which is more or less a double dose, and I've found it's best to do it in the morning before the lights come on so it's in the water ready for when the plants start to photosynthesise.

Hope that helps.
 
and running an e700 at half throttle.

Why are you running the flow on half throttle? Even a low tech tank can do with good flow. It's the surface movement that decides how much CO2 you preserve from fish respiration and decomposition in a low tech, but flow around the tank is a good thing. I'd also suggest using floating plants to reduce the intensity of light and go back up to 7-8hrs. You don't want to bring your plants to a stall and not growing as that's not helping outcompeting the algae. Try reducing the surface movement instead a bit to preserve CO2(observe the fish), and increase the plant mass, fast growers of some sort if you can, floaters is best as they are easier to control and use aerial CO2.

I think you've got issues with trace ammonia level and low flow if you are having diatoms and hair algae. Possibly fine debris collecting over the leaves too, attracting algae and the water is too stagnant not spreading the ferts and the little naturally produced CO2 around. I'd put that filter back on full power. I am not sure what your stock level is and the filter may not be coping at the moment cycling it properly, and unhealthy plants not taking care of that trace ammonia complicate it even further.
In my low tech tanks, I almost don't dose anything at all. I dose only when I see defficiencies of some sort and that's rare, although it happens. They are fairly overfiltered though, 10x flow, and I still have to trim the plants bi-weekly.
 
Hi all,
Why are you running the flow on half throttle? Even a low tech tank can do with good flow. It's the surface movement that decides how much CO2 you preserve from fish respiration and decomposition in a low tech, but flow around the tank is a good thing.
I like lots of flow, or lots of water turn over at least, as well. Low tech you actually usually get more CO2 (and O2) in the water with a large gas exchange surface, this is because the water is nearer to equilibrium with atmospheric gas levels. This is largely the reason for "wet and dry" trickle filters being so effective for biological filtration, they have a huge gas exchange surface where the thin film of water is flowing over the filter media.

cheers Darrel
 
Hi all,

I like lots of flow, or lots of water turn over at least, as well. Low tech you actually usually get more CO2 (and O2) in the water with a large gas exchange surface, this is because the water is nearer to equilibrium with atmospheric gas levels. This is largely the reason for "wet and dry" trickle filters being so effective for biological filtration, they have a huge gas exchange surface where the thin film of water is flowing over the filter media.

cheers Darrel

This is what ill be doing also, having the co2 produced from the decomposing soil but also the co2 introduced into the water column via gas exchange on the surface too. Think I read it on one of your posts on another forum darrel

Sent from my GT-I9305 using Tapatalk 2
 
Hi all,
What would the levels of CO2 be if the water is nearer to equilibrium Darrel?
The back-ground atmospheric CO2 level is now 400ppm (reported this week from Mauna Loa <Climate Milestone: Earth's CO2 Level Nears 400 ppm>), but in houses it will usually be a bit higher, 600ppm'ish. This compares to about 20% oxygen, but because of their differential solubilities you end up with about 8ppm (mg/l) for oxygen and 0.4 ppm CO2 (in pure H2O at standard temperature and pressure).
I meant in a scenario where a tank has some sort of decomposition in the soil, like a Diana Walstad tank. She does not recommend surface movement at all because the levels of CO2 from that are higher than when the water is at equilbrium.

This is going to depend upon the stocking and level of decomposition, but for most scenarios you actually do better with more water turn over, as these low levels of CO2 are continually replenished. If you have water with a huge BOD, like landfill leachate, out-gassing the CO2 becomes a real problem. In a still, deep tank the aerobic decomposition of organic matter could be an important factor in adding CO2, but the lower levels of the tank are likely to become de-oxygenated.

Aquatic plants are CO2 limited in growth, and as you can see the 20-30ppm of CO2 added in high tech is many times the natural level.
This is what ill be doing also, having the co2 produced from the decomposing soil but also the co2 introduced into the water column via gas exchange on the surface too. Think I read it on one of your posts on another forum darrel
Probably in here: <plecoplanet: Aeration and dissolved oxygen in the aquarium>

cheers Darrel
 
Thanks Darrel. It's hard to get it right as I read totally different stuff each time and have no way of measuring it, plus it depends on the tank. I've been experimenting with all my tanks with the surface movement to see if it makes much difference to the plants and fish.
According to Diana Walstad, the levels of CO2 from decomposition in the soil, if you get the stock/feeding right, is higher than from surface agitation. Hence she stresses out the importance of not having surface movement because you are wasting it.
Also, the lower levels of the tank won't be affected as you can have flow around the tank, but not much surface movement, plus most of the CO2 comes from the soil.
I've seen Big Tom's bucket of mud journal and his tank seems to be following a similar principle, there's little to none surface movement.
 
Thanks Darrel. It's hard to get it right as I read totally different stuff each time and have no way of measuring it, plus it depends on the tank. I've been experimenting with all my tanks with the surface movement to see if it makes much difference to the plants and fish.
According to Diana Walstad, the levels of CO2 from decomposition in the soil, if you get the stock/feeding right, is higher than from surface agitation. Hence she stresses out the importance of not having surface movement because you are wasting it.
Also, the lower levels of the tank won't be affected as you can have flow around the tank, but not much surface movement, plus most of the CO2 comes from the soil.
I've seen Big Tom's bucket of mud journal and his tank seems to be following a similar principle, there's little to none surface movement.

I also followed in toms foot steps with my journal but had a fair bit of surface movement and my plants flourished :)

Sent from my GT-I9305 using Tapatalk 2
 
Back
Top