Building a "Land Plant" Filtering System

[vince82]

I did this with my now biggest tank, I have a small monstera swiss cheese in there, a small spider plant and a quite large peace lily. The peace lily in particular seems to be during very well in water. There were also 2 ferns but one I had to take out and repot because after ~5 weeks it started to look stressed and lost a couple leafs.
The peace lily is growing, putting on new flowers, and despite me feeding and fertilizing quite heavily the nitrates are barely detectable. (tank is the one in my signature)

 

[10 Tanks]

Hello. The "Ag" plant will remove more ammonia than any other plant I've ever used. It reduces the nitrogen cycle from three steps to essentially just one. By removing the ammonia as soon as it's produced, you have less nitrite and almost no nitrate. By using the largest plants you can find, you can easily have nitrate readings as low as 20 ppm. Add more plants, and the reading could go even lower. This water chemistry was perfect for the hardy fish I kept. And the best part was, I never had to change the tank water. In the years I kept the tanks, I never performed a water change. But, since the tanks were open to allow the plants to grow, I did use quite a few gallons of distilled water. But, this was much less work than the water change. This was a very interesting project and I learned a lot about the nitrogen cycle, not to mention plant biology.

10 Tanks (Now 11)

 

[Byron]

I've been following the two or three threads on using house/terrestrial plants and avoiding water changes. I think we need to set the record straight on these issues.

First, water changes remove all "pollutants" in the water, something no filter and no plant can do. As just one example, pheromones and allomones have to be removed by removing water. So your fish are being sacrificed to save a once-a week water change? Something is wrong with that logic.

Second, this removal of ammonia occurs with aquatic plants and especially the fast growers. They take up ammonia faster than do the nitrifying bacteria (studies have proven this). And there is no nitrite and thus no nitrate resulting. A cover of surface plants are far easier to maintain that terrestrial plants growing out of the tank. I would not want to enter the fish room every morning to find more dead and dry fish on the floor because they jumped during the night. And all fish will jump, this occurs with Corydoras and loaches too. Keeping the tank covered, something that so far has seemed impossible in these informative threads, is key, not to mention the other significant issues they prevent, like evaporation into the building structure, dust (and whatever) entering the tank and clogging the surface exchange of gasses.

It seems far less involved to have some floating plants (what could be simpler?) with secure fish in the tank, considering there are no benefits to what is being suggested.

Other issue is nitrates...my tanks (all 8 of them in the fish room) for over 15 years had nitrates in the 0 to 5 ppm range. This was using the API liquid test kit which had ranges of 5 ppm each. For all I know the actual nitrate could have been 1, or 2, even 0, but it was certainly never over 5 ppm. That is a big difference (to the fish) from 20 ppm or 25 ppm which was mentioned in one of these threads. And no water changes with this? The poor fish.

 

[vince82]

I keep emersed plants in the tank because I like them. Nothing to do with avoiding water change.
I am actually set up for ridiculously easy water changes:
Water out:

Water in:

 

[vince82]

I also covered my tank

 

[10 Tanks]

I've been following the two or three threads on using house/terrestrial plants and avoiding water changes. I think we need to set the record straight on these issues.

First, water changes remove all "pollutants" in the water, something no filter and no plant can do. As just one example, pheromones and allomones have to be removed by removing water. So your fish are being sacrificed to save a once-a week water change? Something is wrong with that logic.

Second, this removal of ammonia occurs with aquatic plants and especially the fast growers. They take up ammonia faster than do the nitrifying bacteria (studies have proven this). And there is no nitrite and thus no nitrate resulting. A cover of surface plants are far easier to maintain that terrestrial plants growing out of the tank. I would not want to enter the fish room every morning to find more dead and dry fish on the floor because they jumped during the night. And all fish will jump, this occurs with Corydoras and loaches too. Keeping the tank covered, something that so far has seemed impossible in these informative threads, is key, not to mention the other significant issues they prevent, like evaporation into the building structure, dust (and whatever) entering the tank and clogging the surface exchange of gasses.

It seems far less involved to have some floating plants (what could be simpler?) with secure fish in the tank, considering there are no benefits to what is being suggested.

Other issue is nitrates...my tanks (all 8 of them in the fish room) for over 15 years had nitrates in the 0 to 5 ppm range. This was using the API liquid test kit which had ranges of 5 ppm each. For all I know the actual nitrate could have been 1, or 2, even 0, but it was certainly never over 5 ppm. That is a big difference (to the fish) from 20 ppm or 25 ppm which was mentioned in one of these threads. And no water changes with this? The poor fish.

Hello Byron. This land plant will remove the forms of nitrogen from the dissolving fish waste material. This is the bulk of the material that can make the fish sick. The rest of the material you're referring to will dissolve in the tank water and will be taken up by the plant roots. There were no fish sacrificed, the water was essentially free of toxins. As for fish jumping out of the tank, the plants were so thick, there was little or no room for an escape. Never lost a fish that I can recall. Didn't need an expensive tank canopy. If the plants weren't large enough in the beginning, a cheap piece of acrylic could easily be cut to fill a gap. There will simply be no room, if you plan ahead and use large plants with a comparable root system. As for dust, if there was such a thing, it wasn't significant. The plants did enjoy a nice mist from time to time. It kept the leaves shiny and clean.

As for using aquatic plants, none have a root system designed to filter that much water or to remove enough dissolved waste, so the water wouldn't need to be changed. The "Ag" plants grow in large forests in the northwest and are able to filter the water in the salmon runs to the extent that those rivers are the cleanest in the world. I'm just saying you can use these large plants to filter the water in a considerably smaller fish tank.

If you're just "hit or miss" on your water changes or think a small water change done every few days is enough, you may want to look into a system that with a little preparation, will take away the need for that water change. If you're bored with the same old fish tank, this could be an opportunity to "jazz" things up a little.

10 Tanks (Now 11)

 

[Byron]

Hello Byron. This land plant will remove the forms of nitrogen from the dissolving fish waste material. This is the bulk of the material that can make the fish sick. The rest of the material you're referring to will dissolve in the tank water and will be taken up by the plant roots. There were no fish sacrificed, the water was essentially free of toxins. As for fish jumping out of the tank, the plants were so thick, there was little or no room for an escape. Never lost a fish that I can recall. Didn't need an expensive tank canopy. If the plants weren't large enough in the beginning, a cheap piece of acrylic could easily be cut to fill a gap. There will simply be no room, if you plan ahead and use large plants with a comparable root system. As for dust, if there was such a thing, it wasn't significant. The plants did enjoy a nice mist from time to time. It kept the leaves shiny and clean.

As for using aquatic plants, none have a root system designed to filter that much water or to remove enough dissolved waste, so the water wouldn't need to be changed. The "Ag" plants grow in large forests in the northwest and are able to filter the water in the salmon runs to the extent that those rivers are the cleanest in the world. I'm just saying you can use these large plants to filter the water in a considerably smaller fish tank.

If you're just "hit or miss" on your water changes or think a small water change done every few days is enough, you may want to look into a system that with a little preparation, will take away the need for that water change. If you're bored with the same old fish tank, this could be an opportunity to "jazz" things up a little.

10 Tanks (Now 11)

I'm sorry, but this is not accurate. The nitrogen released by decomposing matter in an aquarium is ammonia/ammonium. Aquatic plants will remove this as fast as it accumulates, all else being equal. Aquatic plants are fast at this, to the point that you never see ammonia in tests. They take this up via the leaves, not the roots. There are scientific controlled tests proving all this.

Second, I assume by "rest of the material" you are referring to the pollution I said included pheromones and allomones. These remain in the water until the water is changed.

There is nothing wrong with using terrestrial plants as described, but it is a lot of bother for nothing beyond what can be achieved with aquatic plants in a normal aquarium.

 

[Endlersendlers]

Hello. I don't know about Florida, but distilled water here is cheap. About $.90 per gallon last time I checked.

10 Tanks (now 11)

It’s not the cost but going to get it and the carrying. It might be less trouble to do water changes. Getting out the Python versus remembering, driving, carrying.

 

[Endlersendlers]

I'm sorry, but this is not accurate. The nitrogen released by decomposing matter in an aquarium is ammonia/ammonium. Aquatic plants will remove this as fast as it accumulates, all else being equal. Aquatic plants are fast at this, to the point that you never see ammonia in tests. They take this up via the leaves, not the roots. There are scientific controlled tests proving all this.

Second, I assume by "rest of the material" you are referring to the pollution I said included pheromones and allomones. These remain in the water until the water is changed.

There is nothing wrong with using terrestrial plants as described, but it is a lot of bother for nothing beyond what can be achieved with aquatic plants in a normal aquarium.

I agree with the aquatic plants as I have no ammonia, nitrite or nitrates with a top heavy planting of mostly stem plants. Maybe not so beautiful but they’re functional. Based on those values I might think I could get away with skipping water changes but it’s a routine now.

 

[vince82]

Distilled water here was 130$ one time purchase for the cheapest RO on amazon, plus 10$ for a float valve. Depending on the size of your tank, you might want to spend more in plumbing, but if you are never gonna need more than 5 gallons of RO water at a time you can just clip the float valve on a 5G bucket

 

[10 Tanks]

Distilled water here was 130$ one time purchase for the cheapest RO on amazon, plus 10$ for a float valve. Depending on the size of your tank, you might want to spend more in plumbing, but if you are never gonna need more than 5 gallons of RO water at a time you can just clip the float valve on a 5G bucket

Hello. Good idea. Reverse Osmosis water will definitely work. Have another 55 gallon tank with the Chinese Evergreen filtering out the toxins. This tank had quite a few, small fish. Mostly Guppies and Platys. These species seem to do the best in the beginning. A lot of fry from both species. Can only be due to near nitrogen free water conditions. Followed a pretty aggressive water change routine at first, to make sure the plant was going to do its job. After a few weeks, no water changes. After the plant gets going, you can have whatever small fish you like. But, the fish have to be small. The plant just grows out of the containers within a few months. Doesn't leave much swimming room, except for small species.

10 Tanks (Now 11)

 

[Magnum Man]

Interesting... back when I was into the tanks 20 years ago, we had a large living room with full wall windows... I had 2 vines planted in a 10" X 10" plastic box with holes in it, in a 55 gallon... the vines did terrific & ended up 50-100ft long, when we moved... I just had a couple 10" air stones on the short sides of the tank ( one under the plastic box ) & I never did water changes... my Red Breasted Pacu, grew to 16-18" in that tank , before he outgrew it & got moved into a 220 gallon I built...

I'm experimenting with a 55 gallon right now, with an under gravel filter with no lift tubes, a power head in each back corner, & Java Moss sewn into 1/4" netting 1" thick mats covering the full bottom of the tank, so water is pulled through the Java moss, I still do my normal 15% weekly water changes... so far it seems to be working ok... I need more shrimp & crabs to work the moss pads though

 

[10 Tanks]

Hello. You know, I did forget one drawback about this "Ag" plant. If you decide the plants are getting too large for the tank, which they will, you have to move the plants to a larger tank. You can't return them to a soil environment. For some reason, they will acclimate from soil to water in the beginning. But, I've never had luck taking the plants out of a tank and putting them back into a flower pot with soil.

10 Tanks (Now 11)

 

[10 Tanks]

Hello again. Thought I could keep the Chinese Evergreen in my 100 gallon indoor pond tank. It's a Rubbermaid plastic type watering trough. I currently have about 10 or so five to seven inch Goldfish in there. I needed to do large weekly water changes on this one, because this plant wasn't large enough to handle the waste from so many, large fish. A plant this size in a standard tank would easily remove all the toxins a group of small aquarium fish might produce.

10 Tanks (Now 11)