Safer and more effective alternatives to excel + reduces nitrates - Page 3

  • Thread Starter

uncclewis

Member
But like I said, that plant did not have it, I am sitting here refuting something I shouldn't be. I do not have any algae really whatsoever. However, that stuff I do have and that plant was deep within the other wisteria and was dying for lack of light. That came to the front when two weeks ago I removed 3/4 of my plant matter. I even had a nitrite spike of 2PPM, That is how much I removed and that is how fast it has grew, but that has not gotten fixed. And also my fish munch on those top leaves and I cannot stop it, but that plant is for them to eat, so I don't really care, I just want them to stop on the slower ones. which they are eating too, since I have lots of fish that like plants too

And, further, do you see my aerator? I have strong aeration because my type of fish are accustomed to that, and my CO2 is probably on the lower end of the continuum...and my tank is deep. I would rather the plants died than the fish.
 

abrooks12376

Member
Aeration really has no premise in a planted tank let alone any tank aside than aesthetics. Bubbles are.just bubbles, they go to the top and pop.. no real reason introduction of oxygen (not discounting surface exchange)
 
  • Thread Starter

uncclewis

Member
They do, I wish I had time to debate this... But, they do. Especially in deep tanks and certain fish. There are many fish that grow up in areas with lakes of higher O2 and they have higher metabolisms, my fish are that way... Clown loaches, this is why they eat so much and grow so little.

You haven't seen a microbubbler eh?
 

abrooks12376

Member
See you think you know what you're talking about, you may actually know what "you're" talking about. Doesn't really matter. As far as I can tell you are amateur at best in aquaria, seemingly intelligent with a great search engine. Perhaps try Dialing in the basics before reaching for Stephen hawking status?? Long way to reach young padiwan..
Ps- take this theory to the planted tank forum if you really want to test it.. many many brains over there. I'm an idiot (if you haven't noticed)
 
  • Thread Starter

uncclewis

Member
Not trying to be rude, I just feel like we are on the phone and I am getting behind on work, but I don't know why you are getting rude. I have had plants for at least 10 years, house plants primarily and I know a lot about plants because it is an interest, but I know more about biology in general, and I know that if the fish don't get enough oxygen they will die, same with all of the other organisms making CO2, including the plants themselves. You can measure your O2 levels, which I have, and I have made sure that they are around 8PPM, I have not measured CO2.
 

abrooks12376

Member
Yah.. exactly. Everything basically dies in our lives without oxygen. Why mess with it?? Clearly above ground 02 production is booming all on its own. Trees and stuff... under water it gets a little more complicated. At night bad things can happen in a planted tank. Do your due diligence to prevent this bad stuff from happening in your planted tank. Luckily for us many have failed and documented said failures. Just a point and click away. I'm not being rude, I'm simply poo poo'ing your thread basis because it's far to over complicated and I don't like it. It's the Internet man.. take it too the planted tank and I'll be the first to applaud..
Ps- emergent and submersed growth are 2 entirely different beasts (not technically but anyone who's tried knows.)
 
  • Thread Starter

uncclewis

Member
that is where I got the bad advice, I tried to see who gave it to me, I thought it was from fishlore, but no, that website has one goal and that is plants. But the tank is not just plants- it is an ecosystem, they are too centered on one goal and give ill advice.
 

abrooks12376

Member
Nah... they are allergic to glut over there. Def not fish based but overly complicated science is the main dish.. throw it out there. You know how to keep fish alive! (over stocking is not the best way but hey..)
 

abrooks12376

Member
This stuff is all very very easy, very very simple, people have been doing it for years and years. Talk to some old timers that were raising and selling wc discus with an under gravel filter?!?!?!?! What?!?!? They had some amazing strains going 20 years ago.. plants are a bit more new and exciting as is the Internet and retail sites. Snake oil products and potions will gain continuous momentum in a world that gets lazier and more reliant on technology. Making up words... 2 u's??? Nahh..
 
  • Thread Starter

uncclewis

Member
Well, I will tell you the stuff is not snake oil. This I know because it contains a processed non-toxic sugar that every single plant and animal has to use to breakdown energy + it provides hormones to increase the intake of this sugar (only plants are responsive to this hormone), and they would gladly take it in and grow. I will update you all on it more tomorrow and less complicated, just straight forward. Sorry for technical stuff. It just gets to the core of every biological organism, it is really a more basic product, but in this respect it is extremely strong.

well that is pretty much it, except it will be more like animals and then use that sugar and actually create extra CO2 and then use that CO2 to grow more.
 

Aquaphobia

Member
uncclewis said:
This is the most true process, because nature uses it! If we introduced seachem excel into the environment, better plant growth is not what we would expect. We would expect massive extinctions. Actually, you can read about the issues with the substance reaching waters and ruining ecosystems, even in smaller concentrations.

Stick with nature, you will always do better. The continuum and sugar is how nature does it. Through conversion to CO2 from oxygen. If you are at all concerned about the safety, go with the continuum because the processing of the product will be extremely safe. Not all organisms can convert it, it will be more commonly plants and animals converting it to CO2. This equals growth for you, and far more than any other product with glut., and not a measly +2PPM CO2 from 13PPM. That is so little!

This is the only way continuum was able to get away with selling "sugar," at a profit, because it is the second processed sugar, after glycolysis version and is not available to fermenting bacteria to use. Otherwise, developing a sugar mix, would make no money. It also has intermediate enzymes that are required by the plants and animals, and some bacteria to process it. It was not previously done because they realized if they made this, people would make their own. These people were smart and made a form and combination that cannot be easily replicated.
Not that I want to get into this with you because you clearly still have no real grasp of science, but that study does not claI'm to show any harm from glutaraldehyde. What it is examining is what happens when you mix glutaraldehyde with surfactants! Something that shouldn't be within a million miles of your tank anyway.
 
  • Thread Starter

uncclewis

Member
Ugh, I am still here. I do grasp that concept. My point was that there are other factors likely affecting its toxicity. This is common among strong toxins.

I know I am terrible at explaining things, but I am extremely smart and know what I am talking about for the most part. I am working on the terrible part (in my writing for papers)

The maximum that any fishery would use to kill parasites is about 5 PPM but most are .1-2PPM, I would stick with them because trust me they don't want to kill fish right away... and they also want a cheap product that doesn't kill them within a year
 

Random Great Thread

Latest threads

Top Bottom