Low tech, low light, low plant volume... who has success?

[DaveB]

I see a ton of very nice low-tech tanks and I agree with the idea behind it and the lack of a definite need for pressurized CO2. For my needs, I'm certain I don't need it... I don't actually want to be trimming fast-growing plants back all the time. At least not in the tanks upstairs (I may still do a high tech experiment downstairs).

The problem I run into is that without many plants, I haven't ever found balance, and as such I end up getting algae all over and eventually ruining the plants. I see plenty of documentation of how to achieve the balance of light and nutrients in the beautiful densely planted tanks, but not a whole lot that applies to me with a fish-first lightly planted tank. Has anyone managed to keep a lightly planted tank algae-free long-term?

All I want are some basic plants - some swords & Anubias, maybe ferns - to compliment the fish and provide a bit of shade.

I don't need fast growth, and I don't need a ton of them. I just want them to be healthy and algae-free. I have the patience to experiment with nutrient levels, though of course I don't want to screw it up and have to dump the plants and start over.

Starting with light...

I have almost every kind of light fixture other than MH, so I am pretty open to suggestion. With these fish, I prefer the look of the 40w AquaGlo fluorescent by far over any other option. A single 40w tube makes the fish pop all by itself. Regardless of what other fixtures/bulbs I use, I'd absolutely prefer to have this one over the front of the tank for the fish.

I also have a 48" T5HO (54w x2) fixture, several dual 40w fluor (T8?) fixtures, and several dual 65w CF fixtures with old 10000k bulbs. I have a whole bunch of 6700 and 4400k 40w bulbs. I don't like the way they make the fish look but in combo with the AquaGlo I bet it could be the best of both worlds. If that kind of bulb is what I should use, that is. I'm also not averse to buying new light fixtures. The inside of the canopy is silver. Not super reflective, but certainly better than black.

In a 4x2x2 120 with very little substrate, what should I use?

 

[DaveB]

Other notes: This tank will (eventually) be on a drip system for constant water changing. Probably at a pretty high turnover like 100%ish per week. And it's 84 degree water, if that matters.

I wonder if my water change habits (typically 50% at a time and 2x a week, but not on a rigid schedule) were a bit counterproductive with my plants in previous tanks. I would hope that being on a drip would smooth that issue out.


Previous tanks pretty much all followed the same pattern for me, regardless of what I did or didn't add to the tank or how much light I used. The plants would eventually just end up with a ton of algae on them, and I'd eventually trim off the largest prettiest leaves. I'd have nice fresh new shorter leaves at the bottom, but they would never reach anywhere near the same height. And then after about a year they'd lose some color and I'd end up giving up.

I want to just get it right this time and have a simple but awesome tank like this or this at a maximum of busy-ness. At least to start out... Or like the nice example of my previous tank below.

pics in order...

1)what it ended up like in my old 55
2-3) Oct 08, starting out the 110
4)8 months later
5) 4 months after that

 

[DaveB]

I have a hunch that because I don't want much light or much growth that I might be able to get away with just limiting phosphates... am I understanding this wrong? That doing it that way at first can sort of eliminate the usual method of using a lot of fast-growing plants at first during the establishment?

Then get the drip system going, monitor the levels of everything (I'd assume nitrate would be in the 5 range pretty consistently), and then start easing in some nutrient doses, with the amounts dependent on the intensity of the light... and I could pretty much use any light I want...

Or am I way off? (I admit to not processing this information well.)

 

[jcardona1]

Limiting nutrients in a planted tank is a bad idea. And when I say nutrients I mean co2 and ferts. In that last pic, it looks like the plants had some serious nutrient deficiencies.

Now, it is possible to do a low tech tank w/o co2 and ferts, but it's all dependent on your lighting. For a non-co2 and non-fert tank, I'd stick with T8/T12, PC, or T5NO lights. I would stay away from T5HO. You'll be surprised how little light freshwater plants actually need to thrive.

Nearly all the algae problems in a planted tank are due to too much light, and/or not enough co2. In a non-co2 tank, you need to keep the light at a low enough level so that the plants don't need as much co2 and ferts. Because lighting drives a plant's need for co2/ferts. The more light you have, the more they need co2/ferts. When you don't/can't provide co2 and ferts, the plants suffers and algae takes over. By lowering the amount of light, you decrease the plant's demand for co2/ferts. You're basically slowing down their rate of photosynthesis. Adding a lot of light sends the plant into overdrive. "Lighting is your gas pedal."

That's why a lot of guys use hanging light fixtures. Not only does it look good, it's the easiest way to control the ligthing. Need less light? Just raise the fixture. Want faster growth? Lower it back down a bit.

In a high tech tank, there's 3 things you need to balance: light, co2, and ferts. CO2 is the hardest to fine tune, and the one that can lead to the most problems if you don't have enough. Ferts are easy. Just follow the EI methodology where you dose everything in excess, then do a 50% water change at the end of the week and start over (With EI, the idea is to ensure that all nutrients are always available to the plants, and to avoid having anything as a limiting nutrient. Because limiting nutrients will lead to algae problems. Excess nutrients doesn't cause algae, this is a myth). Light is also easy to adjust. Raise or lower the fixture as necessary.

Ok, enough tangents. Let me know if you have more questions.

 

[jcardona1]

Also, are you 100% opposed to using co2? You can get amazing results with low light and co2; things are much easier to manage and the plants will thrive. But with low levels of light, you won't get the crazy growth where you need to trim every 3 days. The co2 will serve as a tool to keep the plants healthy and algae in check, not to create weeds on steriods. Remember, lighting is your gas pedal.

Just somethign to think about.

 

[DaveB]

Limiting nutrients in a planted tank is a bad idea. And when I say nutrients I mean co2 and ferts. In that last pic, it looks like the plants had some serious nutrient deficiencies.

Yeah. By then they had gotten algae'd and I think I may have given up on it.

I would also bet I still had too much light in there. Could explain why I got easy and good clean sword growth down low but only til about 6".

Now, it is possible to do a low tech tank w/o co2 and ferts, but it's all dependent on your lighting. For a non-co2 and non-fert tank, I'd stick with T8/T12, PC, or T5NO lights. I would stay away from T5HO. You'll be surprised how little light freshwater plants actually need to thrive.

Right. And I should note that I am not opposed to dosing ferts. In fact I expect to have to, especially since I won't be using nutrient rich soil. I don't mind doing something like that, as I can dose it all out in pill boxes ahead of time and it takes two seconds. That's not the kind of maintenance I am trying to avoid.

That said, because I don't want to be putting crazy light over the fish and prefer the T8 bulbs for their color, I prefer low light.

Nearly all the algae problems in a planted tank are due to too much light, and/or not enough co2. In a non-co2 tank, you need to keep the light at a low enough level so that the plants don't need as much co2 and ferts.

Right. Though even right now with just 80w T8 the tank has some basic brown algae (less than it did when it was 2x55w CF though). This is why I'm optimistic. I can just sell these CF fixtures and use the bulbs that I like for the fish and hopefully still have some nice looking plants. I just also want to be sure they're healthy long term.

In a high tech tank, there's 3 things you need to balance: light, co2, and ferts. CO2 is the hardest to fine tune, and the one that can lead to the most problems if you don't have enough. Ferts are easy. Just follow the EI methodology where you dose everything in excess, then do a 50% water change at the end of the week and start over (With EI, the idea is to ensure that all nutrients are always available to the plants, and to avoid having anything as a limiting nutrient. Because limiting nutrients will lead to algae problems. Excess nutrients doesn't cause algae, this is a myth). Light is also easy to adjust. Raise or lower the fixture as necessary.

See, that all makes perfect sense to me. That's the good advice I see here and at PlantedTank etc. But I don't want high tech or tons of plants or growth... I just want some nice plants that I don't kill.

Also, are you 100% opposed to using co2? You can get amazing results with low light and co2; things are much easier to manage and the plants will thrive. But with low levels of light, you won't get the crazy growth where you need to trim every 3 days. The co2 will serve as a tool to keep the plants healthy and algae in check, not to create weeds on steriods. Remember, lighting is your gas pedal.

Just somethign to think about.

I know I don't need it, so I don't want to go through the process of setting it up. I have all the equipment, but I'd rather use it downstairs on another tank.

Playing around with high tech will probably teach me a lot about low tech too, I imagine.

Also, up here the stand would get really crowded, since there'll also be a sump, a canister, chloramine filters etc, plumbing for the drip, and everything else all crammed under 48" of space.