Low tech, no co2, sump...

[LondonDragon]

Just wondering what you guys think of this.

150 litre tank with 2x39w T8, sump, no CO2, peat with gravel on top, no ferts, no water changes. Recipe for disaster?
Off course very low tech planting, anubias, mosses, ferts, crypts, etc....

Recommendations welcomed, cheers.

 

[Brenmuk]

I would be tempted to add a bit off clay to the peat and also some crushed lime/snail shells to avoid the the peat making the planting medium too acidic.
You may need to add ferts if the peat you are using is low in nutrients.

 

[a1Matt]

It sounds really good!

I'd do just a sprinkling of peat, and then as long as the gravel is capping it you can go mad with compost instead.

I have been considering swapping out my external for a sump on my low tech 160l (journal in sig).

 

[LondonDragon]

Thanks for the replies, this is for a mate of mine that wants a complete low tech setup!

 

[dw1305]

Hi all,
I think it will work, but if you just use peat in your substrate you are not adding many nutrients, (because in sphagnum peat bogs the major input of water is from the rain (they are "ombrotrophic mires"), and the moss itself very efficiently scavenges any bases (and exchanges them for a H+ hydrogen ion) which creates the acid conditions allowing the peat to build up). You also won't get much CO2 production from the substrate, for the same reason.

If you have a trickle filter in the sump the biological filtration capacity of the filter is huge (partially because of the large surface for gas exchange), this also means that the CO2 levels will remain in equilibrium with the atmosphere (it is the differential between the levels in the water and atmosphere that cause the out-gassing when you add CO2, but in this case if your CO2 is depleted by photosynthesis it will quickly re-equilibrate with the atmosphere due to the high solubility of CO2). Because of this I wouldn't worry about water changes causing fluctuating CO2 levels. I change a small volume of water every day, but I've always done this so I can't offer any advice whether this is really necessary or advantageous. I also have a small amount of green fuzz, BBA and Stags-horn algae in the tanks with fish, and my suspicion is that this is inevitable with very slow plant growth, personally I like to have some biofilm, as it helps with the survivor-ship of very small fry (Dwarf Sparkling Gourami, Dario spp. etc.). From personal experience this approach is effective and I've had Dwarf cichlids, Pencil fish, Killis, Tetras, Otocinclus etc. successfully breed using it.

I'd add some nutrients to the peat layer, probably in the form of one of the slower release formulations of "osmocote", or alternatively add a low dosage of "James all in one" to the water column (possibly better if you have mainly have epiphytes), you could do this regularly or just when plant growth slows to an unacceptable level. I'd also add some floating plants, you can keep them or lose them once the tank has stabilised, the advantage at the start is they have the aerial advantage allowing them to utilise atmospheric CO2, and they are much easier to harvest than stem plants until the planting fills out, you can also use them to control light intensity.

cheers Darrel

 

[LondonDragon]

Many thanks Darrel

 

[George Farmer]

How about garden soil? It's what many El Natural followers use. Jeff Walmsley has run a successful 11 foot tank using rainwater, garden soil, minimal turnover and minimal water column nutrients.

Different types of garden soil are more suitable than others.

Maybe Diana Walstad herself will help out here; she is a UKAPS member!

 

[LondonDragon]

Thanks George, just been chatting to my mate and looks like he purchased garden soil now after reading a Diana Walstad book hehe shame she is not around any longer!

I am going to make a JamesC all in one solution so that he can dose once in a while to give the plants a little boost.

 

[dw1305]

Hi all,
I think the garden soil might be better, for the reasons Brenmuk posted (sorry I should have read your post before I answered) and also because the peat would have stained the tank very heavily with tannins. I also think the soil will improve the growth of Nymphaea or Echindorus as it will contain a few more nutrients and probably raise the KH a little (dependent upon the soil). Keep us posted.
cheers Darrel

 

[Colinlp]

Apparently Diana Walstead recommends John Innes No3 as a source of UK purchased soil, that's what I have gone for for my new tank which is very similar to this set up (if it ever arrives!).

 

[Kosh42-EFG]

I used Westland topsoil in my El Natural... I had a huge green water issue that my dad didn't get when he used a different soil...

But this style works well for me... I neglect the tank for a month and the only thing that happens it the plants need hacking back... But I'm not sure on slow growth... I was throwing away a bucket of red ludwigia a week until I got bored or it and binned the lot...

I have found that having some sort of plant with leaves above the surface (either floaters or tall stem plants) are a must... The fact they are not CO2 limited mean they can mop up excess water column nutrients before the algae...

For my next low tech I'm also planning a sump, but will not have a trickle filter and will deliberately be trying to keep splashing to a minimum and having a cover on the sump for the very reason of keeping CO2 loss to a minimum...

 

[dw1305]

Hi all,

John Innes No3

I'd be a bit wary of JI No.3, as despite the fact that it is meant to be a "formula mix" (loam, sand, peat in a 7:3:2 ratio and "hoof and horn", superphosphate, potassium sulphate and lime as additions, and x3 as much for JI N0.3 as JI No 1.) it is of very variable quality and is usually mainly the soil riddled from potatoes, and a large amount of whatever nitrogen source is cheapest. It quite often contains traces of herbicides from the potato crop.

Any "loam" or "top soil" source bought commercially is likely to be the soil riddled from potatoes or sugar beet washings unless it states otherwise. The soil collected from "mole hills" would be my choice, although there may be a higher quality source of "loam" for potting cacti succulents in or top dressing cricket pitches etc.

cheers Darrel

 

[GreenNeedle]

and a large amount of whatever nitrogen source is cheapest.

Any "loam" or "top soil" source bought commercially is likely to be the soil riddled from potatoes or sugar beet washings unless it states otherwise. The soil collected from "mole hills" would be my choice, although there may be a higher quality source of "loam" for potting cacti succulents in or top dressing cricket pitches etc.

I don't know where these 'impressions' spring from!!! Having worked in the industry and sourced the 'products' I can tell you that the nitrogen source is not whatever is the cheapest at the time. These products (at least from the major manufacturers) have fixed ingredients and are only changed if something rises in price ridiculously or supplies start to become scarce. One example was when Molybdenum started to get to £20,000/ton manufacturers switched to Molybdate.

As for the loam, yes it comes straight out of farmer's fields. However if you buy the major manufacturers product it will be sterilised. It is run through a big gas fuelled drum where it is basically incinerated and at the same time 'contaminants' like stone, glass etc. any debris is 'sieved' out. If you buy the cheaper products or 'home brand' it is the same stuff but to keep the price down most of these 'outlets' will have chosen not to have the soil sterilised, just sieved. Therefore buy something with a 'home brand' label then you will get the same product as the 'name brand' just not sterilised in the majority of cases.

As for the John Innes question. John Innes is a trademark and as such the manufacturers have to keep within a certain parameter otherwise they would not be able to call the product JI3. A bit like buying a banana and finding out that there was an orange in the bag. All the majors buy each others product, lab test it hoping to find something to 'whisper' in trading standards ear. Again the loam content will be subject to the buyers request so buy a name brand it will more than likely be sterilised and buy a home brand or 'budget' then it will more than likely not be sterilised.

AC

 

[dw1305]

Hi all,
Thanks for the reply, in Lincolnshire you are in the right part of the world for sourcing top soil. The comments were probably a little unfair, but I wasn't suggesting that the fertiliser was bought off Ebay, purely that it was unlikely to be "JI base" with "hoof and horn" as the N source, but a cheaper product, in the same way the soil riddled from potatoes doesn't have much connection with the original "loam". I've got no problem with loam based potting composts, or clay based aquarium substrates, they offer a lot of advantages in terms of both nutrient retention and CEC. We do use some JI for potted plants, usually after adding a coarse aggregate (bark, perlite or "cornish grit") mainly to improve "air filled porosity" (AFP).

Here is the list of approved JI manufacturers and retailers.
<http://www.johninnes.info/retailers.htm> and technical details <http://www.johninnes.info/technical.htm> and from the technical details:

As manufacturers have to formulate their JI composts with locally available raw materials, it is not possible for JIMA to give details of the precise ingredients and all the various physical parameters.

But I'll stick by my comments, it is always going to be a bit of an unknown quantity and it isn't something that I would recommend for putting into a fish tank.

cheers Darrel

 

[GreenNeedle]

no problem. I am the the worst offender when it comes to generalisations

I would suggest (although I can't be sure) that none contain hoof and horn!!! Hoof and horn is used in other products but when an 80ltr bag is being sold for <£5 then costs are a major issue Virtually all the big bag products which require a nitrogen source in them will have urea of some kind in them. The more expensive products like powdered product may use a mix of PotNit and urea and the powdered products will just have PotNit.

I would say something like top soil from a good 'named' brand' (the company I sourced for was on that list and produced many of the 'home brand' products too) would be much safer to put into a fish tank than any play sands. The soil is sterilised and then into a bag in one process whereas the playsand will sit in a large bay for days/weeks exposed to wind/rain/rodents etc. then be picked up by shovel truck and dumped into a hopper then into the bag.

However I am not overly concerned with that and do indeed use playsand in my aquarium.

AC

 

[dw1305]

Hi all,
I can see your point. I use "play sand" too, because it has no CEC you can give it a good wash and it will be pretty clean. I would have concerns about the urea in the loam based mixes (and also the solubility of the KNO3), although as I like to leave the tank set up for good while before adding any livestock all the ammonia should have gone by then.

I do have a question about the loam, are all the herbicide residues removed by heat treatment? if they are I'd see no problem with sterilized loam, otherwise I would probably stick to calcined clays (Akadama, Hydroleca, Seramis, some cat litter etc.) as a safer option.

I wouldn't have worried too much about sterilization either until recently when we had a load of cow manure on the allotment which caused growth distortion probably caused by the "aminopyralid" residue in the manure.

Details here: <http://apps.rhs.org.uk/advicesearch/Profile.aspx?pid=477>

cheers Darrel

 

[a1Matt]

Having read the compost posts with much interest, lets wander back to the other aspects of this thread, as I think some really good points have come up.

I also have a small amount of green fuzz, BBA and Stags-horn algae in the tanks with fish, and my suspicion is that this is inevitable with very slow plant growth, personally I like to have some biofilm, as it helps with the survivor-ship of very small fry (Dwarf Sparkling Gourami, Dario spp. etc.). From personal experience this approach is effective and I've had Dwarf cichlids, Pencil fish, Killis, Tetras, Otocinclus etc. successfully breed using it.

Over a year after switching off my pressurised CO2 and I think I am finally getting into the low tech mindset ... I no longer mind seeing the odd little tuft of BBA, and am now even enjoying watching the CRS shrimplets picking at the invisible goodies on it. No sign of green fuzz or staghorn for me. Just a little GSA, which is a nice sign to put some phosphates powders in - probably every 4-6 weeks or so, how is that for infrequent dosing

I'd add some nutrients to the peat layer, probably in the form of one of the slower release formulations of "osmocote", or alternatively add a low dosage of "James all in one" to the water column (possibly better if you have mainly have epiphytes), you could do this regularly or just when plant growth slows to an unacceptable level. I'd also add some floating plants, you can keep them or lose them once the tank has stabilised, the advantage at the start is they have the aerial advantage allowing them to utilise atmospheric CO2, and they are much easier to harvest than stem plants until the planting fills out, you can also use them to control light intensity.

These are the exact approaches that I have tried over the last year. It was fascinating for me to observe how with no ferts the plants, on the whole, do remain healthy; but barely grow. Then you can add a little ferts and the growth kicks in again. Just need to be patient and observe over longer time frames than a high tech tank.

I would check the tank waters ph before making up jamesallinone solution though. If the tanks ph is above 7 then the solution will precipitate upon hitting the water, causing cloudy water. Without the ph drop induced by pressurised co2 and with alkali tap water this can easily happen. With london tap water it is almost a certainty! Growth is so slow though that dry fert dosing is much less of a chore. eg. You could dose once a week, micros one week, then macros the following. There are many options.

But this style works well for me... I neglect the tank for a month and the only thing that happens it the plants need hacking back... But I'm not sure on slow growth... I was throwing away a bucket of red ludwigia a week until I got bored or it and binned the lot...

I have found that having some sort of plant with leaves above the surface (either floaters or tall stem plants) are a must... The fact they are not CO2 limited mean they can mop up excess water column nutrients before the algae...

Yes! Ditto.

If you have a trickle filter in the sump the biological filtration capacity of the filter is huge (partially because of the large surface for gas exchange), this also means that the CO2 levels will remain in equilibrium with the atmosphere (it is the differential between the levels in the water and atmosphere that cause the out-gassing when you add CO2, but in this case if your CO2 is depleted by photosynthesis it will quickly re-equilibrate with the atmosphere due to the high solubility of CO2). Because of this I wouldn't worry about water changes causing fluctuating CO2 levels. I change a small volume of water every day, but I've always done this so I can't offer any advice whether this is really necessary or advantageous.

For my next low tech I'm also planning a sump, but will not have a trickle filter and will deliberately be trying to keep splashing to a minimum and having a cover on the sump for the very reason of keeping CO2 loss to a minimum...

To trickle or not to trickle that is a good question!

If I go ahead with DIY'ing a sump (a few months off probably) then my focus for the 'mk1' build will be on; it not leaking, having a safe cutoff if the pump fails, and being as quiet as possible.

Has anyone on here ran a sump on a planted tank before?
There is plenty of info out there on sump design, but they are aimed at marine/very large setups.

 

[dw1305]

Hi all,

Just a little GSA.

Yes I have GSA as well, I must admit I don't really think of it as algae, but as just part of the natural tank establishment process. I couldn't find any Stags-horn algae when I looked yesterday and even the BBA was restricted to a few tufts on the glass and filter body, possibly because I had done a little light pruning and removed the really old leaves.

It was fascinating for me to observe how with no ferts the plants, on the whole, do remain healthy; but barely grow. Then you can add a little ferts and the growth kicks in again. Just need to be patient and observe over longer time frames than a high tech tank.

that is definitely my philosophy, good things (and algae) come to those who wait.

jamesallinone solution though. If the tanks pH is above 7 then the solution will precipitate upon hitting the water, causing cloudy water. Without the ph drop induced by pressurised co2 and with alkali tap water this can easily happen. With london tap water it is almost a certainty!

yes this is largely the phosphorus combining with calcium in solution and precipitating out as insoluble calcium phosphates, this is how "phosphate strippers" work at sewage works. In the case of the dry powders you can't see it but the same is happening, the PO4 ions are being mopped up by the Ca ions as soon as they go into solution.

To trickle or not to trickle that is a good question!

I've used a trickle filter extensively, I've usually used (those with any interest in aesthetics might like to stop reading) a modified length of guttering above the tank, with "hydroleca" and rock-wool blocks, one advantage of this is that you can have a "planted trickle filter", potentially giving you an immense amount of biofiltration, the down side is they are very noisy. I liked the water fall effect and above tank jungle, but my wife didn't.

I got the idea for these from the "DeBruyn planted filter" used for Killis, "Plantbrain" may remember these from the discussion on "the Krib" etc.

cheers Darrel

 

[OllieNZ]

Has anyone on here ran a sump on a planted tank before?
There is plenty of info out there on sump design, but they are aimed at marine/very large setups.

Im quite intersted in this too. I have been considering DIYing a sump for mine but due to my cabinet layout it is going to have to be quite small 20"l x 11"w x 14"h, one thing I have been considering was making the trickle unit taller than the rest of the sump say 20" to maximise biofilter volume.

Regards

Ollie

 

[JanOve]

Just good experiences using a sump on a planted 200 liter, sure there is a little more co2 outgassing compared to a regular setup but co2 is cheap so its no problem.
Very handy to just drop equipment into the sump and waterchanges is also easier.
Added benefits are constant waterlevel and superclean surface in the display.
Go for it