zozo
Member
I think if you were a hobbyist but worked away from home a lot, a fishless planted tank would be a good compromise
The only compromise..
-
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
Walstad revises
- Thread starter Soilwork
- Start date
The only compromise..
PARAGUAY
Member
Water changes a doddle compared to tiring this fella out
Soilwork
Member
- Joined
- 22 Nov 2015
- Messages
- 559
I think the main thing to consider is that nobody in the hobby goes out to purposely kill fish and although the methods of our forefathers were less than ideal, at the time we thought what we were doing was for the best interest of this fish and plants. Sadly, that wasn't the case.
As for water changes. I agree that even in a Walstad they are necessary but the volume and frequency is variable depending on the system in question.
But is a tank that has a soil underlayer, good water movement and frequent partial water changes a Walstad tank anymore?
I believe that soil is the best substrate for the plants. It just became a hassle moving plants that eventually had had enough. I've gone with Eco complete just for its CEC.
As for water changes. I agree that even in a Walstad they are necessary but the volume and frequency is variable depending on the system in question.
But is a tank that has a soil underlayer, good water movement and frequent partial water changes a Walstad tank anymore?
I believe that soil is the best substrate for the plants. It just became a hassle moving plants that eventually had had enough. I've gone with Eco complete just for its CEC.
Hi all,
Her underlying concept is very much that dense planting, with some plants having the "aerial advantage", is the thing that makes tank management easier, she calls them <"Natural Planted Tanks" NPT>.
The soil substrate provides nutrients (and a source of carbonate hardness) and also a healthy microbiological environment. This is spoken about by Stephan Tanner in <"Biofiltration">.
cheers Darrel
I think it probably is.
Her underlying concept is very much that dense planting, with some plants having the "aerial advantage", is the thing that makes tank management easier, she calls them <"Natural Planted Tanks" NPT>.
The soil substrate provides nutrients (and a source of carbonate hardness) and also a healthy microbiological environment. This is spoken about by Stephan Tanner in <"Biofiltration">.
cheers Darrel
sciencefiction
Member
- Joined
- 26 Feb 2013
- Messages
- 3,412
I understand that sometimes we do things without meaning any bad outcome but ignorance doesn't equate innocence. We must have an open mind.
She did popularize low tech tanks using soil as substrate so I'll keep calling it "Walstad". Any idea is open to modification. There is always a better way.
zozo
Member
I think that the term Walstad tank will eventualy apply to all low tech tanks no matter what kind of substrate you use.. If you give it time enough they all end up with the same propperties.. One can go for garden or pond soil to speed up some processes where an inert substrate will take some more time to eventualy do the same thing. Inert substarte wont be inert forever it's only an inert start..
If you break down the composition of a bag of soil what do you end up with? Sand, Clay, peat, worm castings maybe some other composted vegitation with you could kinda also put into the peat category..
Then i'm not so very different with using crushed lava and small gravel instead of sand, akadama instead of mineralized clay, some peat pellets and laterite clay balls at places i planted. Now after almost a year into the process, there is a load of organics like fish and shrimp castings added too and is the substrate pretty mineralized i guess.
Only thing i did, i didn't took it premixed from a bag, mixed my own and let the tank do the job.
How do you say that in English in the end it is all tared with the same brush..
If you break down the composition of a bag of soil what do you end up with? Sand, Clay, peat, worm castings maybe some other composted vegitation with you could kinda also put into the peat category..
Then i'm not so very different with using crushed lava and small gravel instead of sand, akadama instead of mineralized clay, some peat pellets and laterite clay balls at places i planted. Now after almost a year into the process, there is a load of organics like fish and shrimp castings added too and is the substrate pretty mineralized i guess.
Only thing i did, i didn't took it premixed from a bag, mixed my own and let the tank do the job.
How do you say that in English in the end it is all tared with the same brush..
Soilwork
Member
- Joined
- 22 Nov 2015
- Messages
- 559
How do you suppose Eco complete compares to a soil substrate in terms of microbial development in biofilms.
I chose Eco complete for its high porosity and CEC and the fact that it doesn't need replacing. Other than lacking the benefits of Humic substances do you think Eco complete provides a good substrate/root interface for plants and microbes?
I chose Eco complete for its high porosity and CEC and the fact that it doesn't need replacing. Other than lacking the benefits of Humic substances do you think Eco complete provides a good substrate/root interface for plants and microbes?
Hi all,
I don't think it really matters what your original substrate is, if you wait long enough, and <"leave it relatively undisturbed">, over time it will become more soil like.
cheers Darrel
I'm with Marcel ("Zozo") on this one.
I don't think it really matters what your original substrate is, if you wait long enough, and <"leave it relatively undisturbed">, over time it will become more soil like.
cheers Darrel
zozo
Member
How does it compare, i realy do not know if there is a definitive answer to that.. If i look back at my early beginnings in the 1970's it all was very simple.. As stated above water changes where considered a sin, aquarium plant fertilization was a nonsense and nowhere mentioned.. Walking into the LFS there where only bags of washed river sand and different sizes of gravel to be found and a pile of pumice and driftwood.. There were not so many plants, we had valis, sword, shoelase, cabomba, elodea, sag, and maybe a few other easy plants.. Mosses, never heard of it, we had algae for that and it comes for free..
And still i managed to grow a huge carpets of sag and have nice large swords and shoelases etc. It worked to a sertain extend for a periode of time usauly a year for the lucky ones maybe 2 years and then you started over again..
So we all kinda used a rather coarse river sand only and let the tank to it's own devices providing everything it needed by itself.. It took some time and eventualy it does, then it booms till it crashed into old tank sydrome.. And the cycle restarts, clean the tank and start over.. That was common practice.. Much later the importancy of water changes where acknowledged and resulted in much longer fun and have a health tank for numbers of years..
And now when you walk into the LFS there are 20 bags of different types of soil all driving you completely mad, all telling their own beautiful story. And in the end only overcomplicate things.
To be honnest, i do not read those commercial stories i only look at the easthetic value it has for me and the price.. It's always the price making me deside to look for alternatives in other places than LFS.. Then rather an inert alternative,so i can deside myself what more i put in and see how the plants grow and antisipate to that during the process of development..
And even in the todays high tech era, you can do as good on sand only as on any other available substrate..
And still i managed to grow a huge carpets of sag and have nice large swords and shoelases etc. It worked to a sertain extend for a periode of time usauly a year for the lucky ones maybe 2 years and then you started over again..
So we all kinda used a rather coarse river sand only and let the tank to it's own devices providing everything it needed by itself.. It took some time and eventualy it does, then it booms till it crashed into old tank sydrome..
And the cycle restarts, clean the tank and start over.. That was common practice.. Much later the importancy of water changes where acknowledged and resulted in much longer fun and have a health tank for numbers of years..And now when you walk into the LFS there are 20 bags of different types of soil all driving you completely mad, all telling their own beautiful story. And in the end only overcomplicate things.
To be honnest, i do not read those commercial stories i only look at the easthetic value it has for me and the price.. It's always the price making me deside to look for alternatives in other places than LFS.. Then rather an inert alternative,so i can deside myself what more i put in and see how the plants grow and antisipate to that during the process of development..
And even in the todays high tech era, you can do as good on sand only as on any other available substrate..
sciencefiction
Member
- Joined
- 26 Feb 2013
- Messages
- 3,412
I think in inert sand, low tech tank, my plants suffered for a year or two. Then they took off. The soil gives you an immediate effect and has much higher CEC
Hi all,
cheers Darrel
I think those would definitely be the advantages of using soil.
cheers Darrel
zozo
Member
Yes that is true, that's why people using sand also add clay root tabs to rooting plants.. Then you create little pockets of high CEC clay into the sand bed.. Circle is round again... And there are so many different expriences going around that it is actualy a never ending discussion of yes versus no.. And all have a certain truth to the story but also is it a "what if" concept.. This because very aquarium is totaly different ecosystem..
Lately i ran into a discussion about deep sand bed substrates and the danger of anoxic/toxic anaerobe pockets.. Where one stated he had an aquarium for years with 20 cm of sand and never a problem.. While other aquariums he had with coarse gravel always developed gass pockets.. Explaination, gravel is more coarse debri sinks in much more easily and can develop a dense layer and anaerobe pockets, sand is less coarse so debri can't sink in so easily.. It's a valid point.. It's the same point why another one says that's the reason why i do not use porous lava based substrates, the debri sinks in creates anaerobe pockets and turns into a nitrogen bomb. Also a valid point, it can indeed happen..
The question remains, why does it happen and where are the mistakes made? It all depends how you set things up and maintain it afterwards.. For example do you have a lot of wood, what kind of wood, how old was it, what condition was it in when you did put it in the tank? Tanks with a lot of wood have much more debri (bioload) than tanks with only rock.... I see it in my current low tech, it has 5 kilo's of Mopani and the first 6 months it was a complete mess, never have seen so much debri accumulate on the substrate in such a short periode..
Look for example at a cup off tea which stands for an hour, it has brown tannin stains on it left by the tea.. Wood does the same in a tank, it not only stains the glass it also staines the substrate.. This are tiny particles, they accumulate and sink into the substrate over time and clog it.. Then you could say in certain scenarios, is it wise to put a lot of wood into a tank with a rather high elevated porous substrate? How is your flow? Where does it accumulate the most according to that..
Only time will tell.. Cause and effect..
These are all combinations of setups you could and should take into consideration, and think twice before one yells sand is better than gravel..
Not even to speak of, what lives in the substrate? How often is it turned over by the critters crawling around in it, some have them, some don't..
Do you have digging fish, they can completely distroy a sand bed substrate and make sink everything in.
So many things to take into consideration making comparisons even more difficult if not near impossible..
Lately i ran into a discussion about deep sand bed substrates and the danger of anoxic/toxic anaerobe pockets.. Where one stated he had an aquarium for years with 20 cm of sand and never a problem.. While other aquariums he had with coarse gravel always developed gass pockets.. Explaination, gravel is more coarse debri sinks in much more easily and can develop a dense layer and anaerobe pockets, sand is less coarse so debri can't sink in so easily.. It's a valid point.. It's the same point why another one says that's the reason why i do not use porous lava based substrates, the debri sinks in creates anaerobe pockets and turns into a nitrogen bomb. Also a valid point, it can indeed happen..
The question remains, why does it happen and where are the mistakes made? It all depends how you set things up and maintain it afterwards.. For example do you have a lot of wood, what kind of wood, how old was it, what condition was it in when you did put it in the tank? Tanks with a lot of wood have much more debri (bioload) than tanks with only rock.... I see it in my current low tech, it has 5 kilo's of Mopani and the first 6 months it was a complete mess, never have seen so much debri accumulate on the substrate in such a short periode..
Look for example at a cup off tea which stands for an hour, it has brown tannin stains on it left by the tea.. Wood does the same in a tank, it not only stains the glass it also staines the substrate.. This are tiny particles, they accumulate and sink into the substrate over time and clog it.. Then you could say in certain scenarios, is it wise to put a lot of wood into a tank with a rather high elevated porous substrate? How is your flow? Where does it accumulate the most according to that..
Only time will tell.. Cause and effect..
These are all combinations of setups you could and should take into consideration, and think twice before one yells sand is better than gravel..
Not even to speak of, what lives in the substrate? How often is it turned over by the critters crawling around in it, some have them, some don't..
Do you have digging fish, they can completely distroy a sand bed substrate and make sink everything in.
So many things to take into consideration making comparisons even more difficult if not near impossible..
Last edited:
Soilwork
Member
- Joined
- 22 Nov 2015
- Messages
- 559
These are all good points. I think one the best things about using a lava based gravel is that if you really wanted to you could gravel vac it from time to time whereas with sand or soil you can't (I'm trying to justify my purchase here to make me feel better)
Does the same kind of thing happen in a filter. The much that comes out when I clean is much like a soil. Should we be leaving canister filter alone for longer periods before a clean or do they become inefficient and danger of low o2 levels.
Plant aside, We should be able to rely on the bacteria/archeae in the filter for biofiltration?
Does the same kind of thing happen in a filter. The much that comes out when I clean is much like a soil. Should we be leaving canister filter alone for longer periods before a clean or do they become inefficient and danger of low o2 levels.
Plant aside, We should be able to rely on the bacteria/archeae in the filter for biofiltration?
Hi all,
Most of a living tree is actually dead and comprised of a structural carbohydrate skeleton, the <"lignocellulosic"> material we call "wood". It has evolved to resist decomposition and is extremely low in nitrogen and sugars. The carbon will burn, but only a very <"specialised suite of micro-organisms"> can degrade it.
There is a more complete explanation here: <"PlanetCatfish: Wood for tanks?">.
cheers Darrel
I think there are two different issues, the tannins and debris might clog the substrate and filters, but they actually add very little to the bioload.
Most of a living tree is actually dead and comprised of a structural carbohydrate skeleton, the <"lignocellulosic"> material we call "wood". It has evolved to resist decomposition and is extremely low in nitrogen and sugars. The carbon will burn, but only a very <"specialised suite of micro-organisms"> can degrade it.
There is a more complete explanation here: <"PlanetCatfish: Wood for tanks?">.
cheers Darrel
zozo
Member
That's why i did put bioload in brackets, i wasn't sure if bioload was the right word for, actualy also do not know if putting it in brackets means the same in english grammar, shouldn't have used the word at all in this case.. But as a very tiny dust like particle of biological origine it can indeed clog a substrate sooner then one might think.. And some wood can release quite a lot of it for a long time..
Thanks for correcting and the links..
Hi all,
People kept <"Panaque"> and <"Panaqolus"> spp., (which are wood eating) and, <"then used the filter as syphon"> for the saw-dust and faeces with disastrous consequences.
cheers Darrel
That is sort of how a lot of the conversations on "PlanetCatfish" started.
People kept <"Panaque"> and <"Panaqolus"> spp., (which are wood eating) and, <"then used the filter as syphon"> for the saw-dust and faeces with disastrous consequences.
cheers Darrel
Had a walstad tank now for over 3 years without any filtration on it. I dont do water changes, I do top it up when it evaporates but that is dependent on the time of year. I only have snails and cherry shrimp but they seem happy enough. My thread is here although the tank is a lot more overgrown than the last picture I added! http://www.ukaps.org/forum/threads/mini-s-walstad.28426/
PARAGUAY
Member
A good look in for low tech is"Natural Aquarium" which the founder mentions no mechanical filtration,basic t8 lights,but plenty of water changes .As often said by Darrel the plants are the filters
dan4x4
Member
- Joined
- 11 Nov 2013
- Messages
- 433
just for info, I have John innes number 3 substrate. I reduced the flow as some of the old leaves on the plants had started dying. I assumed that this was a lack of co2 - as reading "Ecology of the planted aquarium" co2 is always the limiting factor. No improvement was observed over approx 2 weeks. I then reduced it further and I'm now observing an increase in algae.
People on here recommended me not to reduce flow haha I should of listened. Anyways, I also put leaves in. Beech leaves, Oak Leaves & Alder cones. No changes based on the leaves. But the cones made the water shaded, day by day. However after 2 weeks and no water changes, the tannins where gone and its crystal clear again.
I pruned back heavy also at the time of reducing flow.
Im just going to see what happens now I've increased flow. Plants arent dying anymore, Im assuming the alder cones provided a boost in co2 with the humid substances.
People on here recommended me not to reduce flow haha I should of listened. Anyways, I also put leaves in. Beech leaves, Oak Leaves & Alder cones. No changes based on the leaves. But the cones made the water shaded, day by day. However after 2 weeks and no water changes, the tannins where gone and its crystal clear again.
I pruned back heavy also at the time of reducing flow.
Im just going to see what happens now I've increased flow. Plants arent dying anymore, Im assuming the alder cones provided a boost in co2 with the humid substances.
