What exactly causes BBA?

[chandler]

Probably this one <"Low maintenance long term substrate...">., although a search for <"Duckweed Index"> should bring up plenty more.

Hi Darrel, in the first link above you stated that the floaters had at least one deficiency. Maybe the knowledge level has advanced since, but I remember Zapins over at the APC saying that a plant can have only one deficiency at a time. Found that interesting so I made a mental note to myself.... Any thoughts on that?

I have not made any efforts finding the thread yet, but I will try to find a link.

Cheers, Chandler

 

[dw1305]

Hi all,

in the first link above you stated that the floaters had at least one deficiency. Maybe the knowledge level has advanced since, but I remember Zapins over at the APC saying that a plant can have only one deficiency at a time. Found that interesting so I made a mental note to myself.... Any thoughts on that?

Yes, there is a difference between which element is limiting, and which elements are stopping optimal growth.

Liebig's law of the minimum
At any one point only one element is limiting plant growth, this is described in <"Liebig's law of the minimum">.

It states that growth is controlled not by the total amount of resources available, but by the scarcest resource (limiting factor).

You can think of it like an assembly line, the speed of the whole assembly line can't go quicker than the slowest process, if you speed up all the other parts of the assembly line you don't get any more production. However if you speed up the slowest process, more units will be assembled, but another process (the new slowest) will then govern the the productivity of the whole assembly line.

It is just the same with plant growth, it is an assembly line. What governs the potential productivity is the amount of light (PAR -
Photosynthetically Active Radiation), because light drives photosynthesis.

For that full potential to be utilised all other nutrients need to be non-limiting. If you have low levels of plant nutrients one will be limiting (usually one of carbon (C), nitrogen (N) or potassium (K), because they are the nutrients that plants need most of). If you add more CO2, the plants can only utilise it if they have access to non-limiting levels of N, P, K etc.

If you add more nitrogen, but potassium levels are limiting growth, you don't get any more growth. To get more growth you need to add more potassium etc.

Because my tanks have low levels of all nutrients, one nutrient will be the limiting factor, but nearly all the others will be deficient as well.

cheers Darrel

 

[chandler]

What a great answer Darrel, thank you -- it is crystal clear now

 

[fablau]

Ardjuna, I have read most of your articles, and I found them fascinating. I have 4 questions for you:

1. How do you measure precisely Co2 concentration? In your Co2 article you mentioned the KH/ph correlation, but how you calculate that?

2. What about flow? What's your opinion on water flow and how that can affect plants as well as Co2 distribution and stability? What's your recommended water flow compared to tank size?

3. Always in your Co2 article, you found out that to have stable Co2, we need aeration via surface rippling or other similar way, but what if the surface rippling is to much? Can that cause a disruption of Co2 stability and create a negative effect?

4. Back to BBA, do you think Co2 fluctuations could really contribute to BBA, and maybe flow, degassing and rippling could play a role in that?

Thanks.

Fab.

 

[Sacha]

Although I still dont get it, some pieces are missing for me. How come with such a bad CO2 diffusion method as a diffuser they have such great tanks while we need a 1 ph drop with a light in the same region, and inline atomizers? How do they not get algae if co2 comes on at the same time as the lights? Most people here recommend turning on co2 some hours before lights on so that co2 levels build up. They have no surface ripple during the day either?

I think high maintenance and soft water make up for some of these. But it doesnt explain it completely.

I don't understand it at all. My dream tank (at Aquatic Design Centre) is set up like this:

High light
Single glass diffuser (bubbles floating straight up to the surface)
Single Eheim outflow at opposite side of tank to the diffuser
Low flow, no surface agitation
Loads of beautiful healthy plants
No algae

How does this work?

 

[Sacha]

Just to add my experience.

The first year of owning my tank, I had no idea what I was doing. Basic plants (swords and crypts), 14 hours of light every day, no Co2, no ferts, low flow, 20% weekly water changes.

No BBA.

Now:
Loads of plants, 7 hours of light, high Co2, massive flow, 50% weekly water changes.

BBA all over both of my spray bars (nowhere else).

 

[Jose]

Hi Sacha, the tank you describe sounds like and ADA style tank. Maybe its maintained in the same way. I really recommend having a read ove at the barrreport.com. You might not like the theories but he explains most cases. The rest is really just myth and religion.

I believe softwater, high maintenance at the beginning and maybe phosphate limitation of plant growth is making all the difference in the tank you mention. Basically if you can ask the owner if he doses phosphates and how much, it would break down the magic he is doing. ALso is he keeping really hard plants?

 

[Jose]

You could argue.......why should we believe him? Well.....why should we use EI then? You dont need to believe, you can of course run your own experiments but they have to be done in the right way and not intended to just disprove him but intended to find the truth for yourself. And 99.99% of cases wont have enough knowledge/resources/time/experience to get to a good answer. So you can just look at your tank and see the evidence and be critical. If it didnt work why could it be etc.

 

[Jose]

To be honest i never recall getting BBA, at least not in important ammounts, never. I always use very low light though. I do get brown dust algae when I play around with co2. Thats the only algae I get. I think in my case its all about fluctuating co2.

 

[BruceF]

Good read there. One thing.
under the right conditions high levels of co2 cause high levels of o2 we call this pearling.
Make that two things.
I never see bba in my low tech tanks.

 

[Jose]

So all this points to Tom Barr being right. High light +not being able to meet co2 demmands seems to be calling for algae. This looks sensible to me and no one else has given an alternative theory that I know of. They only argue this or that tank doesnt fall into the theory without showing real data on the tank. Or it normally 4urns out they were limitting phosphates and indirectly co2 demmand.

 

[fablau]

Just to add my experience.

The first year of owning my tank, I had no idea what I was doing. Basic plants (swords and crypts), 14 hours of light every day, no Co2, no ferts, low flow, 20% weekly water changes.

No BBA.

Now:
Loads of plants, 7 hours of light, high Co2, massive flow, 50% weekly water changes.

BBA all over both of my spray bars (nowhere else).

I had a similar experience, when I set up my 75gl tank 5 years ago, for the first 2 years I used to add just 3bps of co2/sec, 8 Hours light a day (about 50PAR at substrate), the only fertilization was Seachem Comprehensive once a week, wet/dry filter and slow flow (200gl/hr), substrate just Eco Complete (virtually without nutrients), water change every 2 weeks: plants used to grow great, I used to trash buckets of trimmings every 2 weeks, and no algae at all. Then, after 2 years, I begun getting GDA and some green algae around, then I begun playing with ferts, without better results... Then 1 year ago started using EI, increased Co2 a big deal as well as flow (900gl/hr)l plants now look great and grow like crazy, but BBA appeared 6 month ago and it is a continual battle that seems to never end. BBA is the only algae I have now, but it is very annoying and looks like there is now way to get rid of it. So... I'd really like to get back to my tank first 2 years!!

What then is causing this damn BBA in my tank? I have "unlimited" ferts, strong flow, strong surface agitation, wet/dry filter, tons of Co2 (drop checker yellow all the time!!)... I am beginning to think Ardjuna is correct in his concepts, and I'd like to know from him if too strong flow and surface agitation can play a role in BBA besides possible to many nutrients in the water column. I am willing to test!

 

[Jose]

A dropchecker doesnt really tell you anything. Measure ph and there should be at least a 1 unit ph drop.

One option besides upping co2/flow is lowring your light.

Another option is to try pps pro or alike to limit co2 demand. That was probably the case in the first stage of your tank.

What do you believe from Ardjuna? That plants only need 10 ppm of co2 when nutrients are non limitting? If so then your tank should be doing fine. Dont you think?

limitting ferts is nothing new, its actually the oldest there is.

 

[Jose]

People think that Tom Barrs philosophy is all about EI, but it is actually the only theory that explains all methods. He recommends EI but he explains why/how the rest works. This is true because he understands how plants work and isnt just trying to find a method that works for him.

 

[Sacha]

Jose, all joking aside, are you actually in love with this man?

I'd be interested to hear if anybody has any ideas as to why I get BBA on my spray bars, but nowhere else in the tank.

 

[Jose]

Have you got something against him/me ? Because you always end up saying something personal man. Are you jealous of something? Why dont you open your mind to new ideas? Have you got better source for this type of knowledge?

last time you were wrong, you ended up with the same sort of crap. I dont to speak with people like you because they dont make any useful contributions.

Ardjunas thoughts are very different to mine but Im happy to debate with him whatever necessary because hes got arguments. You are all about personal ignorance which I dont really vare about.

its funny how the most ignorant are the ones who get personal.

 

[Andy Thurston]

Jose, all joking aside, are you actually in love with this man?

I'd be interested to hear if anybody has any ideas as to why I get BBA on my spray bars, but nowhere else in the tank.

there's more people in love with amano
who cares if that's the only place you get it just clean them and keep them clean. I personally think dirt has big part to play where bba is concerned. I only see bba when I get sloppy with maintenance
I wonder how many people lie about what maintenance they do/don't do

 

[Jose]

Exactly and Amano doesnt explain nothing. But this is really about Sacha. I dont know what he has against Tom Barr and I dont really care, because it obviously isnt about science.

 

[Sacha]

Looks like I hit a nerve there.

I didn't realise that you have such strong feelings for the man, I won't make any comments about it in future.

 

[Marcel G]

So all this points to Tom Barr being right ... no one else has given an alternative theory ... showing real data on the tank. Or it normally 4urns out they were limitting phosphates and indirectly co2 demmand.

Sorry to say that, but it seems to me, Jose, that you do exactly what you criticise. I did not see any serious data by you or T.Barr ... ever! Barr says that he did a lot of testing and come to the conclusion that most aquatic plants need XY amount of nutrients to be not limited by nutrients. But he never ever showed any solid data to support his strange theories. Nor did you. But despite this you still defend him and his theories like you know for sure they're the only true. This is a clear sign of sectarianism. I told you already that according to scientists there are (at least) some plants that need 9 ppm of PO4 to experience non-limiting growth. So why the hell are you still saying that EI is non-limiting?! Open your eyes and see that 3 ppm of PO4 (= EI) is not non-limiting!!! So when you're saying that all people except T.Barr use probably limiting amount of phosphates, then be sure that T.Barr's IE method uses limiting amount of phosphates as well ... all the time since it was invented!!! So what does it mean? That probably all the aquarists uses limiting amount of phosphates in their tanks ... there's probably no such tank which is trully non-limiting. So your theory of non-limiting nutrients in our tank has some serious faults. Also, please, read the article by Gerloff and Krombholz about the growth of aquatic plants. Maybe you'll get to know (finally) that for some plants even 90 ppm of NO3 may not be non-limiting!!! So if you want to show me that T.Barr's theory is correct, then what about to show me some data first? Why do you believe T.Barr is true? What do you base your faith upon? I can give you several cases where T.Barr misinterpreted scientific data, which is why I don't trust him. But that's my personal view. But if you show me some results of your/his experiments (together with the methodology), then I can think of it. Until this happens your arguments will be mostly just speculations for me (without any solid ground).