What's new
By:
Filters

What Co2 Diffuser

My you are a quick reader. You read all those links in 3 minutes?

I am no scientist. I am an unemployed accountant to it is nice and easy for you to confuse me with chemical symbols :) I always need to ask what they mean on all the forums. however I am pointing you to educated discussions on the topic. For you to read. Then disagree with if you so wish. however the FACT is that these people openly discuss the subject, are pretty well clued up in advanced aspects of the subject and unlike me use scientific language to boot.

These guys are respected throughout the hobby (apart from by those who refuse to accept some things) and are most definitely more advanced than you or I on this subject as many others in this hobby.

Feel free to challenge them. They may well be able to enlighten you :) You will see in these threads they are making many different opints. Some countering each other. Some using reactors, some using misting, some both, however they talk to each other do not dismiss each others arguments. They debate not dictate!!!

Andy
 
Right I've read your article. Problem!!!

This guy is talking about aquatic plants. Not many of the plants we use are aquatic plants. They are amphibious if you like.

This statement from the following thread which you should read:
Some aquatic plants lack stomata and guard cells, eg Hydrilla. Only one plant species (terrestrial) has none, and many of the plants we keep are amphibous(and have them).They are generally on the abaxial side of the leaf, (the underside) but Water lilies have them on the top and a few other plants have exceptions.

Thread:
http://www.barrreport.com/showthread.php/1039-CO2-issues-Read-this

Andy
 
I glanced at the links you posted but they don't cover the precise topic we're discussing; whether CO2 in gaseous form can be absorbed by aquatic plants, and whether it's beneficial to have teeny bubbles in suspension in the tank that then rest on the leaves of plants which can then be absorbed.

I'm basically bring this down to a scientific level; these are scientific facts that I'm posting - I'm not making this up... Aquatic plants cannot absorb CO2 in gas form through their leaves - they physically cannot do it. The only exception is an aquatic plant which purposefully grows out of the water, such as a lillypad; a lillypad has stomata on the upper side of the leaf because it's in contact with gas, so that's how it absorbs gasses. The underside doesn't have Stomata because it's not in contact with gas. Instead the underside absorbs the nutrients it needs directly from the water it's in via osmosis.

Not many of the plants we use are aquatic plants. They are amphibious if you like.
Click to expand...

Oh my god. You are joking?!

Well done, you've won through a war of attrition. I can't be bother replying to this any more. The stuff you're posting is no longer just wrong and based on no actual facts, it now boarding on the ridiculous.
 
READ then you may understand. No good glancing. Read the last thread. Then choose to disagree or agree. Whichever choose to argue with them over what they have written.

The amphibious statement was not by me. It was by Tom Barr. Are you really ready to argue with him or dismiss his research? He will gladly enter any discussion with you on the subject. Post up on barrreport.com and discuss.

For me I am going to spend the afternoon getting a kaboodle of plants ready for sale because my mist grows them far too fast :)

Andy
 
Well done, you've won through a war of attrition. I can't be bother replying to this any more. The stuff you're posting is no longer just wrong and based on no actual facts, it now boarding on the ridiculous.
Click to expand...

This is a pity because:

I glanced at the links you posted but they don't cover the precise topic we're discussing; whether CO2 in gaseous form can be absorbed by aquatic plants, and whether it's beneficial to have teeny bubbles in suspension in the tank that then rest on the leaves of plants which can then be absorbed
Click to expand...

The link I provided and I will re-add it below clearly covers this subject. both the misting and the 'lack of stomata' you claim the plants have. Hence why you need to read not glance. The first post covers it. The next 7 pages then enlarge on the subject along with some questions and replies to queries. It is a pretty good read for those who are wanting a little more in depth discussion. Most of us just want the simple 'get good CO2 to plant' ethic.

http://www.barrreport.com/showthread.php/1039-CO2-issues-Read-this
 
SuperColey, any resource that says aquatic plants have Stomata are referring to aquatic plants that are rooted in water but grow out of the water - the amphibious plants you speak of. Fully submerged aquatic plants (like most of those found in aquaria) do not have Stomata.

I've read the latest link you posted and it does make interesting reading. But my initial response still stands; even if there is increased plant growth/pearling as a result of using a mister in place of a reactor then it's not due to the plants actually absorbing the gas in its gas state. What perhaps is happening is that the CO2, while still in a gas form, is transported better around the tank better than if it in introduced in a H[sub]2[/sub]CO[sub]3[/sub] state from an external reactor and already 'in' the water.

One of the other links you posted from his website was looking into the effects of improved flow around the tank, and he said he noted that CO2 concentrations varied quite a lot depending on where in the tank it was sampled, so good flow was essential. So putting these reports together might seem to indicate there's some merit in using a mister if it distributes the CO2 more evenly - I'll give ya that one. But I'm not conceding total defeat on this it; the plants are not absorbing that CO2 as a result of it resting on the leaves as a gas, I'm justing thinking maybe the CO2 is being better distributed around the tank as a gas, than as H2CO3.

Anyhow, it's been a good debate. I hope it's kept some people amussed! :-D
 
Fully submerged aquatic plants (like most of those found in aquaria) do not have Stomata.
Click to expand...

Out of interest do you have a list of these plants? As you're probably aware, most actual aquatic plants are grown out of water, it would be interesting to have a list of such plants.
 
are you being serious?

Greame Edwards @ Tropica...

4dc27d8c409b4.jpg


wheres all the water gone? Yes, Fred, i was talking about aquatic nurseries. So i want a list of purly grown aquatic plants. It's not enough to ask.
 
Ian, those are amphibious plants, not fully submersed plants. If you take a fully-submersed plant (the ones I've been referring to) out of water for any prolonged time, they'll die.


I'm tempted to try two things as a results of the debate:

1) As you say, I think the flow rate from my filter is lower as a results of installing the reactor. So I'm going to install a pump to get better circulation around the tank. The long grass at the far end barely moves which is an indication that flow is not up to what it should be.

2) After I've tried item 1), I'll try switching back to a mister and see if I notice any difference in growth / pearling.

I'll report back with my findings.
 
All i want is a list of plants that are cultivated under water, the ones that won't survive emersed. I'm not being un reasonable, i really want to know. You seem to know about the plants we are talking about.
 
To be honest, I've no idea what point you're trying to make here? But anyway...

Echinodorus Angustifoliu
Rotala Macrandra
Ludwigia Inclinata
Blyxa Japonica

Take any of those out of water for a prolonged period and they'll die - they are not grown "out of water"
 
I'm really not trying to make any point here, i'm just interested.


ps they can be grown emersed. :good:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

J
What is the optimal CO2 diffuser location for 46g bowfront tank?
Replies
0
Views
272
jonatheber
J
connorlindeman
Alright, here we go - 40g planted aquarium
Replies
3
Views
207
fishorama
F
MuddyWaters
New CO2 Diffuser - MUCH Better
Replies
0
Views
330
MuddyWaters
MuddyWaters
Mr_Harrys
My adventures into CO2 land (hope this is helpful)
Replies
4
Views
675
Mr_Harrys
Mr_Harrys
J
Need help figuring out how to split co2 output in tank
Replies
5
Views
482
TwoTankAmin
TwoTankAmin

Most reactions

Useful Links

Back
Top