Fish, Plants And Co2

[blue acara]

Hi all.

Im hoping this thread will be a discussion about peoples experiances and thoughts about the balance between co2 plants and fish.

There is an ongoing argument in PFK and on other websites about the use of nitrate and phosphate, imo co2 is much more dangerious to fish health than either of these things.
I want a tank where the plants are happy the algae is not and above all the fish are thriving, is this possible?

One of the arguments against E.I is that the waters where our plants come from do not contain the high levels of no3 and po4, but do they have the levels of co2 that we use in them?

In my short time of keeping planted tanks ive noticed that my fish dont like 30ppm of co2, instead of swimming around normally they bunch up and generally dont look happy. When the co2 level comes down they perk up, but so does the algea... In particular my plecs are very distressed by the high carbon levels, and ive had to move them to another tank. I think fish are more susceptible to parasites/general ill health in the high levels of co2.

Ok so you might be thinking that my co2 levels are too high- im using the 4dkh solution and bromo blue so I dont think this is the problem.

I know lots of you that have beautiful planted tanks and fish together- so is it just me that has these fish problems? Rant over.

 

[xxBarneyxx]

Well I'm not using EI but I know Tom Barr in particular has written a lot on this subject.

I can only speak from my own experience but in my planted tank my drop checker is a very light green (about as close to yellow as I can get) and my fish are doing fine. In fact they have actually been spawning (both the flame tetras and silver tips). In no other community (non planted) tank I have had did I get fish spawning so quickly.

Of course some fish are more senstive then others but as long as you have good oxygen levels as well I dont think high CO2 levels (around 30ppm) are a problem for most fish. If you pump 30ppm into a tank that is barely planted with poor oxygen content then of course the fish will react badly (which is what happens with most fish CO2 releated deaths).

Just to say again though this is purely based on my own experience.

 

[RadaR]

I'm sure Tom Barr will be on at some point and give you a huge explanation.
My personal experience is that I've had no problems with EI and fish health. Apart from when my CO2 kit dumped a load in and nearly killed my plec ( i rescued her though). One point though, when I get new fish for my tanks, there are a few days where the fish have to get used to the CO2. I turn it down a bit so they get used to it, then i turn it back up.
If alot of fish are sensetive to Nitrate and Phosphate then alot of us should surely not be doing water changes because our tap water is loaded with it. The levels of Nitrate(20ppm) and Phosphate (1-2ppm) stated in EI won't be alot higher than the levels in tap water.

 

[Themuleous]

I'll second this, lots of CO2, NO3 and PO4 and no fish problems in my tanks. I did have suicidal fish due to using aerosol deodorant in the a room with an open top tank, but thats a different story.

Sam

 

[JamesC]

Oxygen levels are the answer. You can actually suffocate your fish with relatively low CO2 levels if your O2 levels are low. With 30ppm CO2 you need high O2 levels as well. Is your water surface scum free? Scum tends to hinder gaseous exchange. Have you got good water surface movement? This helps gaseous exchange but does also mean a slightly higher CO2 loss rate.

James

 

[George Farmer]

Oxygen levels are the answer. You can actually suffocate your fish with relatively low CO2 levels if your O2 levels are low. With 30ppm CO2 you need high O2 levels as well. Is your water surface scum free? Scum tends to hinder gaseous exchange. Have you got good water surface movement? This helps gaseous exchange but does also mean a slightly higher CO2 loss rate.

James

What he said.

I run CO2 24/7 with no issues but I have lots of surface agitation. I go through more CO2 but it's a trade off I'm happy with. CO2 is cheap enough.

This thread explains the NO3 and PO4 issues well -

http/www.fishforums.net/index.php?showtopic=204993

 

[blue acara]

Just to be clear-im not having a go at E.I. My tap water has over double the no3 and po4 recommended by E.I and my fish in non co2 tanks are ok.
Maby Im just worrying too much... I havnt has a fish loss in this tank yet after 6 months. I just feel that the fish would prefere to be in water with lower co2 content.
Do the rivers and lakes where our fish come from have much co2 in them? really im asking...

Oxygen levels are the answer. You can actually suffocate your fish with relatively low CO2 levels if your O2 levels are low. With 30ppm CO2 you need high O2 levels as well. Is your water surface scum free? Scum tends to hinder gaseous exchange. Have you got good water surface movement? This helps gaseous exchange but does also mean a slightly higher CO2 loss rate.

James

So oxygen level could be the problem? The fish arent at the surface gasping so I didnt think or this.
There isnt much surface movement on the tank, I thought that surface movement wasnt good in planted tanks, I will raise the filter outlet to remedy this. Dont the plants produce enough oxygen for fish? I put an air pump on at night to increase oxygen.

Heres a pic of tank to show the amount of plants, low number of fish. There are 50 small fish in there but strangly I can only see one.

 

[plantbrain]

Hi all. Im hoping this thread will be a discussion about peoples experiances and thoughts about the balance between co2 plants and fish.There is an ongoing argument in PFK and on other websites about the use of nitrate and phosphate, imo co2 is much more dangerious to fish health than either of these things. I want a tank where the plants are happy the algae is not and above all the fish are thriving, is this possible?

First, I AGREE WITH YOU.If you go with a line of logic, eg less is better, and what is toixic and what is not, what kills more fish in the planted hobby vs any one single thing we add, it's CO2.So why don't people fight and get all crazed over this?You cannot suggest that a relatively non toxic nutrient such as NO3 is terrible and horrid etc, and not support that with a single shred of research evidence nor test that an aquarist might do by adding KNO3 to get a so called "toxic level", then turn around and claim that high CO2 is okay, a gas that's killed more fish than any other single thing we might add in the plant tank hobby.For the record, I've used CO2 for about 20 years but have never killed any fish, few can say that however.Still, the web is littered with reports of gassing their fish, this has little to do with EI.CO2 gassing is a two part thing, it's CO2 and it's O2, not just CO2 alone.You need to measure both to see hpow fish respiration is influenced. Any critter that respires CO2 and breathes in O2, needs to have a concentration O2:CO2 that works well for their metabolism. Low O2 and moderate ambient CO2 easily can kill fish.Low O2 and high CO2 just makes it worse.Many reduce their flow in effort to conserve CO2, which is foolish...........They add a bit more CO2 and gas their fish.When I add the same amount of CO2, my fish are fine................but I have good current, excellent mixing, high O2 levels, and I test the O2..............they do not.Big difference and the CO2 ppm's are the same.So it's not just CO2........but some claim otherwise...........still, respiration is about getting rid of CO2 and taking in O2, yet they chose to ignore basic physiology.How can I argue with that?

One of the arguments against E.I is that the waters where our plants come from do not contain the high levels of no3 and po4, but do they have the levels of co2 that we use in them?

They have both, and they have plants in both.Nature does not imply better, it's just where that plantr exists ands can at that point in time.We would never do agriculture/horticulture otherwise, everything would be nature/natural, we'd never see any benefit from fertilization etc.Why they conflute that, is not my doing nor any biologist's, that's their own assumption that got them in that pickle.

In my short time of keeping planted tanks ive noticed that my fish dont like 30ppm of co2, instead of swimming around normally they bunch up and generally dont look happy. When the co2 level comes down they perk up, but so does the algea... In particular my plecs are very distressed by the high carbon levels, and ive had to move them to another tank. I think fish are more susceptible to parasites/general ill health in the high levels of co2.

So have you tested the CO2 carefully and have you measured the O2 as well?do you have high or low current?Surface movement?It's not just a function of CO2, it's overall plant health(it produces O2), and O2.

Ok so you might be thinking that my co2 levels are too high- im using the 4dkh solution and bromo blue so I dont think this is the problem. I know lots of you that have beautiful planted tanks and fish together- so is it just me that has these fish problems? Rant over.

No, I did not suggest the CO2 was the issue, only 1/2 of it.You never thought to consider O2............which is you are trying to exchange one gas for the other, clearly plays a huge role.Folks have stressed fish without CO2 and kill them routinely as well.Showing cause or sick/disease due to CO2 enrichment is extremely unlikely.I've seen, as have many aquarists, over many decades, a large reduction in illness and diseases in planted tanks with CO2 gas.I've not had to use medication for over 15 years. I have many sensitive species, no stress, many years of healthy casre and appearances, breeding, if they are like that, is it the method or your usage of the method?It's not the methods fault, it's actually yours.We blame the method when we fail, but clearly it does work well for other folks, perhaps not you personally, but you obviously have not considered other issues....................Still, we should not suggest a method is bad, etc, toxic , bad for fish etc merely because we personally fail. That's our fault the fish die, get sick, are poorly cared for, there are no bad dogs, only bad dog owners, same deal here.It's not always easy for folks, we make assumptions, I'm no different, I've just taken a more in depth look and considered other factors that better explain what we see.Why do you have issues at 30ppm of CO2, and why I do not.I've offered a simple explanation and one we, you , I can test and show is a factor.I'd suggest you try the same test with good current this time, not enough to break the surface, but near that.Then see. Buy an O2 test kit etc.Quantify the behavior, repeat the test several times, make sure it's only due to CO2.Drop checkers have a 2 hour lag time, during which the CO2 can creep up higher, they are also only accurate to 5ppm at best if you are good with the colors.I use a modified gas membrane and a pH ref probe using KH ref soloution that;'s got a lag of about 10-30 seconds or so, I give it 1-2 minutes and warm up of 5 min prior.This is accurate to about 0.1ppm or less of CO2.Not bad, but a lot of fiddling and DIY.Regards, Tom Barr

I'll second this, lots of CO2, NO3 and PO4 and no fish problems in my tanks. I did have suicidal fish due to using aerosol deodorant in the a room with an open top tank, but thats a different story.Sam

I think an interesting question is why do other folks see or observe this yet others do not?Why might there be a difference?Current and O2 seem likely to be large differences, max growth will yield higher O2 levels.Good current= more O2.More O2= more tolerance to higher CO2 levels.Do these folks, or you measure O2?No huge explanation needed, just a glaring oversight heheRegards, Tom Barr

 

[plantbrain]

Just to be clear-im not having a go at E.I. My tap water has over double the no3 and po4 recommended by E.I and my fish in non co2 tanks are ok.

I'd not suggest you change either. Non CO2 is a great method.
Perhaps on eof the best IMO, but folks are not patient.

Maby Im just worrying too much... I havnt has a fish loss in this tank yet after 6 months. I just feel that the fish would prefere to be in water with lower co2 content.
Do the rivers and lakes where our fish come from have much co2 in them? really im asking...

In the river I did my master's it was 28ppm of CO2, and the water came out of an old PO4 mine.
spring water is loaded with CO2(ask yourself where this comes from and how are caves formed in limestone).

There are examples of lush plant growth with lots of teaming fish at this site in Florida, some sites in Brazil, Texas, Thailand and other locations.

After you have not lost any fish for say a 2-5years or a decade etc, then you can compare notes
6 months without death is just starting out.

So oxygen level could be the problem? The fish arent at the surface gasping so I didnt think or this.

It's when you add both, high CO2+ low O2, you have an issue, low O2(within reason, say 5ppm) and low CO2, say 1ppm might not pose an issue, but if you have 5ppm O2 and 35ppm of CO2, then yes.

How about 9ppm of O2 and 30ppm?
No.........

How do I know what ppm's to use?
Why don't the other folks make mention of this?

I mean if you have hard data, tell folks!



Regards,
Tom Barr

 

[blue acara]

Ok I will take your advice and test for o2. My filters are rated for a tank three times the size of mine. Circulation of the water is not the problem. I will raise the filter outlets to break the surface of the water to increase the oxygen.

Tom I read that you are injecting o2 in the the monster tank u planted/maintain I cannot afford to do this. Why do you need to do this?
I cannot argue against your knowledge or experiance in planted tanks but my bet is that my o2 levels are ok. The co2 is turned off at night and an air pump comes on- so youre saying that all that oxygen gained at night escapes/is used in 4 hours?
Of course I am not testing for o2 so my argument is based on assumptions. I will post my o2 results when I get them.
When I test the o2 I will put the filter outlet back to the same position the previous night.

"Still, we should not suggest a method is bad, etc, toxic , bad for fish etc merely because we personally fail. That's our fault the fish die, get sick, are poorly cared for, there are no bad dogs, only bad dog owners, same deal here.It's not always easy for folks, we make assumptions, I'm no different, I've just taken a more in depth look and considered other factors that better explain what we see.Why do you have issues at 30ppm of CO2, and why I do not."

I didnt suggest adding co2 or E.I was bad-I said my fish were having problems and asked for other peoples experiances-I shoudnt have said that fish would be more suseptable to disease/ill health.
I dont think I have completly failed yet as I havnt lost a fish, for folks sake give me a chance

I will buy the o2 test kit today- I know that many others have said it to be a waste of money but I will take your advice.

 

[plantbrain]

Ok I will take your advice and test for o2. My filters are rated for a tank three times the size of mine. Circulation of the water is not the problem. I will raise the filter outlets to break the surface of the water to increase the oxygen.

Yes, it's a good idea to test that when ever you see fish gasping at the surface, not just CO2.

I think we all think it's all CO2 at times, but........"do not believe everything you think"
We all are guilty of it at times and that leads up to over looking things and making mistakes in our approach/assumptions etc. Just be aware it's a 2 part thing, not just CO2 alone.

Tom I read that you are injecting o2 in the the monster tank u planted/maintain I cannot afford to do this. Why do you need to do this?

Mixing gas in such large tanks becomes problematic, the owner is also somewhat on/off about the tank, but does not want to give up some things such as high light. So that's a trade off. He also wants 30K$ worth of fish in there and I'm not interested in him killing them.
So we add redundacy and back up systems, O2 is one such item.

I cannot argue against your knowledge or experiance in planted tanks but my bet is that my o2 levels are ok. The co2 is turned off at night and an air pump comes on- so youre saying that all that oxygen gained at night escapes/is used in 4 hours?
Of course I am not testing for o2 so my argument is based on assumptions. I will post my o2 results when I get them.
When I test the o2 I will put the filter outlet back to the same position the previous night.

You will want to measure the O2/CO2 when you have an issue and the fish are gasping.
CO2 and O2 both dissipate very fast, a few minutes can RAPIDLY CHANGE THEM.
Got to be quick.

I use a logging O2 meter and pH meter, this tells me what occurs over time.
So the client can see the fish gasping when he adds too much and we can look at the log, and what do you know?
50ppm of CO2, or low O2 pretty much every time.

Larger fish will have more issues generally than small fish as well.
Testing just one time is really not telling you the dynamics in many cases, few are willing to do all that work, but the logging data units make that nice, they ain't cheap though........

I didnt suggest adding co2 or E.I was bad-I said my fish were having problems and asked for other peoples experiances-I shoudnt have said that fish would be more suseptable to disease/ill health.
I dont think I have completly failed yet as I havnt lost a fish, for folks sake give me a chance

I will buy the o2 test kit today- I know that many others have said it to be a waste of money but I will take your advice.

No, we all make mistakes, I'm not going after you here
I'm just acknowledging our human failings and assumptions.
I got em just like you and Amano and every and anyone.

I've never lost a fish either, I think I've been very lucky personally.
But others have had high CO2 and no issues, that got me wondering.

I actually came at things from a very observational approach many years ago, I just added more until I no longer saw any benefit and assumed: better plant health/growth= better fish health/growth.

I've not seen evidence that healthy plants does not = healthy fish to date.
That has been true since I started keeping fully planted tanks.

Later, I went back and tested. I tested even more.
I questioned what I saw and tried to figure out why some had issues, while others did not.
What hypothesis could I test that could explain both situations and get at the root cause perhaps?

Do not suggest my experience of knowledge is a reason not to debate.
My goal is not bully or show what credentials I have or years in the hobby, those are pee contest and they have no place on forums, etc, it's to discuss and open the mind to possible issues in our own thinking, assumptions, things we might have forgotten to consider. I did, we have, not considered O2 properly in the past when addressing CO2 toxicity.
I have less experience and far less knowledge when went questioned the top folks in the hobby 10-15 years ago, no degree etc, but I knew I was right. Tenacity wins over brains, over money over, over power, well...over everything.

But, I still like the non CO2 tanks a lot.
I still agree with the premise you posed earlier.

My advice is to test over a day well. Measure both O2 and CO2 as best you can.
Vary the CO2 and see how much it takes to gas the fish.

Also, the higher the plant biomass, the higher light, the higher the O2 levels should go.
I recorded 13ppm of O2 at 28 C in my tank.
I pruned about 2/3 of the tank.
I recorded about 9ppm a week later after some regrowth at the same time, CO2 was the same.

So pruning does have some effects.
Pulling up muck from uprooting etc does a lot and it's fast.
I uprooted a tank (50%) and had 9ppm and it dropped to 3 ppm inside 20 minutes.
Came back up to 7ppm after a large water change.

Just some thoughts, think about how water mixes and exchanges when you have 3x more plant biomass.
I keep current along the top going well on all my tanks. Not enough to break the surface, but the entire surface does move.


Regards,
Tom Barr

 

[nry]

What tends to be the case in these 'discussions' is this: many people make sweeping statements (e.g. natural waters do not contain the 'high' levels of CO2,nitrAte, pottasium, phosphate etc) but do not actually have the test or experiment results to back these statements up. The current PFK (Sep 2007) has a number of such statements (some relating to nitrAte, others to the use of carbon in filters for example) - unless these statements are put into relation with their suggested use (e.g. low or no nitrAte can be good to reduce algae providing you instead let ammonia levels be less reduced by the filter and more taken up by the plants).

If I recall correctly, this is pretty much what Tom mentions all the time - people pass negative comment about things, suggest why they think they are actually bad, but are unable to provide anywhere close to the scientific research that some have performed in order to ensure that what they do works and also understand why it works.

Note aswell that some people who pass these negative comments often appear to believe there is only one way, and that is their way - a small number of people (Tom included) never say 'EI is the only way, other ways are wrong', they say that EI is one way, there are others, and many can work well providing you actually understand how and why the different ways work.

Personally, I have been running EI on two tanks for ~4-5 months now. Plants and fish have never been healthier, and there is only a teeny amount of algae which my oto's and shrimps rather enjoy

 

[blue acara]

Ok im going to say here that my assumptions on my tank were probably wrong... Since my last post I have added a 400 gph water pump in my tank which is improving the flow of water in the tank and the surface flow of the tank- since then I have not seen the poorly behaviour from the fish. It has made me increased the bubble rate by mabie 30% but this is a small price to pay for good fish health. I have not recieved the o2 test kit yet so I cannot give the results.

I did, we have, not considered O2 properly in the past when addressing CO2 toxicity.
I have less experience and far less knowledge when went questioned the top folks in the hobby 10-15 years ago, no degree etc, but I knew I was right. Tenacity wins over brains, over money over, over power, well...over everything.

I totally agree with you here Tom, with enough tenacity you will succeed. This thread has tought me that with high co2 levels you also need (looking for a good word) very decent o2 levels. I did not know or consider this before, thinking that plants would produce enough 02. Surface movement in co2 tanks is important-mabie someone reading this has also learned this?

What tends to be the case in these 'discussions' is this: many people make sweeping statements (e.g. natural waters do not contain the 'high' levels of CO2,nitrAte, pottasium, phosphate etc) but do not actually have the test or experiment results to back these statements up. The current PFK (Sep 2007) has a number of such statements (some relating to nitrAte, others to the use of carbon in filters for example) - unless these statements are put into relation with their suggested use (e.g. low or no nitrAte can be good to reduce algae providing you instead let ammonia levels be less reduced by the filter and more taken up by the plants).

Nry I didn't mean to make any 'sweeping statements'. I doubt my words/knowledge could have such an effect. When I asked about the levels of co2 in rivers I was actually asking... Yes ive read PFK and I disagree with alot of Geff Walmseys statements- he suggests very little water movement and co2, well I can tell you from experiance that this is not good! You can see from the pics of his and Georges tanks what method is working better(also Georges tank is very small and harder to controll algea) I would reccommend E.I to anyone.

So basically guys if you want 30 ppm of co2 make sure you have enough surface movement. FIN

 

[nry]

I didn't mean to imply that you were making such statements