• 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

Liquid Carbon vs No CO2

D

DaveWatkin

Member
Joined
26 Oct 2020
Messages
223
Location
Aberdeen, UK
I know liquid carbon is a well debated subject but I was just wondering out of interest if anyone knows of any experiments of tanks with liquid carbon vs tanks without any CO2 addition?

I see lots of CO2 vs no Co2 and liquid carbon vs pressurised but none on just the effects of adding liquid carbon vs no CO2 which to me would be the best experiment to see if it actually has any effect.

Maybe I just suck a googling, have any of you seen anything?
 
I had the same problem and couldn't find anything. So in my personal experience I found that P.helferi (the only medium plant I had) adding liquid CO² made the difference between surviving and not. However, I wouldn't say that it was particularly healthy and growth was slow.
The other factor is lighting. You could probably get away with a bit more light with liquid CO² than you could without but you're still not going to be able to have the same intensity as you would with pressurised CO². So some of the more demanding plants may still struggle in lower light conditions.
For me I think biggest improvement in growth/health was achieved by using a soil based substrate and soft water. Adding liquid CO² did very little and I stopped several months ago.
I can't find the thread on here that discussed in detail the reaction believed to happen in the plant, in response to liquid carbon. If I find it I'll add it. From memory though it said it wouldn't make a night and day difference to a plant in no CO² compared to dosing liquid carbon.
 
That sounds about right. My impression of it is that the ‘CO2’ aspect of it is fooie but I was wondering if the algaecide values ensure cleaner surface areas on plants which allow for more absorption of nutrients and natural gas exchange generated CO2 within the water column.

Whether this would actually make a difference I don’t know. I just happened to stumble across a liquid carbon vs pressurised experiment on YouTube and made me think about whether it has any effect at all really.

If I had the time, equipment and room I would run the experiment but can’t right now.
 
From my own experience I think the difference between its use and not, low-energy, is minimal.
It might give you a bit more wriggle room when it comes to a slightly off balanced system.
But generally speaking I think the consensus is that it's main use is as an algicide.

There are other factors that are far more important when it comes to maintaining a successful low-energy tank.
Take a look at Tom Barr's "Non CO2 Methods"
barrreport.com

Non Co2 Methods

Non co2 methods for planted tanks
barrreport.com barrreport.com
 
Hi @DaveWatkin. I am not quite sure about liquid carbon as a growth enhancer or algaecide - I can only speak from experience as I dont know or understand the chemical properties of Excel as it relates to aquatic plants. I used Excel at some point long time ago, but stopped dosing it as my Vallisneria and mosses started to die off - other plants didn't suffer, but I also didn't see any signs of enhancement. I know others have success with it combined with CO2 injection. It might possibly work as an algaecide, but to me adding these chemicals to combat algae in a low-tech tank is not a good way forward, as algae are usually a sign of some combination of improper (too much) light vs CO2, poor maintenance (WC/waste removal), poor filtration/flow, low nutrients levels (NPK). What I have seen working and tried, with some success on Anubias, is to take out the plant and gently apply (using a brush) Excel onto leaves infected with BBA/GSA and let it sit for a minute or so before putting it back in the tank. Of course, this will not work with badly infected leaves as they generally won't recover anyway.

Cheers,
Michael
 
Hi Dave, maybe something like this helps ? Full article here: IntuitiveAqua.net | Mysterious Liquid Carbon
liquid_carbon-11.jpg

The tank without injected CO2 and without 'liquid carbon' is the tank in the middle (negative control).

As mentioned in the discussion part, the main difference with liquid carbon is the limited growth of algae, still get some but not that bad. With less algae, the plants get to grow a little bit better (less competition). Still if we plan for no CO2 injection we would probably not put 70umols m-2 s-1 for 8h a day and clean the algae as soon as possible not after 3 weeks :oops:. Better algae management means that it is likely we would see even less of a difference in actual plant growth between a tank with and without 'liquid carbon'. Given the low growth rates in both tanks without injected CO2 I can imagine a more clear difference would easily take a year+, even with the light dialed in.

To add to that as mentioned by Michael many true aquatic plants ( vals, egeria ...) are quite sensitive to liquid CO2 but are quite common, easy and fun to have in aquariums without injected CO2.

Overall I agree with Tim, use it if you feel like you need more buffer till you control the light input. It's not a long term approach.
 
In term of enhancing growth, it is speculative by comparing the similarity of Excel generic glutaraldehyde molecule to intermediate photosynthetic compounds. Quantitatively, with the dosage rate of about 2 ppm Excel, the equivalent carbon conversion is no more than 2 ppm CO2, about the same equilibrium atmospheric CO2 can provide. In term of algaecidal effect, it is highly effective. In low tech where growth is already slow, any algae blockage of light penetration will further slow down growth, and dosing of excel will apparently help enhance growth. If management of low tech is already balanced without algae, then excel dosing will not make a difference in growth rate.

I run high tech tanks and dose 2 ppm glut after weekly water change. I do it not to enhance growth as CO2 can do a better job, but to prevent algae attachment to hardscape even though my plants are healthy enough to repel algae. This is how I can maintain algae free tanks from hardscape to plants with high bio load keeping large cichlid.
 
So the best approach is to use excel initially to set up a low tech tank. Once it is balanced out and free of algae, excel dosing can be withdrawn. Since growth rate is slow in low tech, it takes time to build up plant mass and balance out and excel is helpful in the interim.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top