I am getting ready to fill my 315G tank and plant it. I have a sump under the tank for filtration but part of the sump is a wet/dry area containing Poret foam. I just recently read that this is bad for a planted tank! I really don't want to have to rebuild the sump but if I need to submerge the foam for the sake of the plants I guess I will!
Wet/Dry good or bad for plants?
- Thread starter BadOleRoss
- Start date
I think they say that bc the "trickle" action will release co2 from the water. Which is bad because the plants need that to grow/thrive properly. I dont really know how you could sump a planted aquarium though because there is so much falling water ect...maybe just use flourish excell?
What i never could understand is why people would say you can't plant a tank filtered by a wet/dry, it's a load of bull feces IMO. People on here always say if you agitate water oxygen will go in and CO2 will come out... yes but only to a certain point, the water will eventualy reach equilibrium with the air (mind you water has a different saturation point for CO2 and the like than air so less will dissolve but i digress). The water will reach a certain point where CO2 will no longer gas off (i've heard from someone on here that this happens at about 3-4 ppm but im not sure).
So let's say the tank stays at a steady level of 4ppm (for the sake of arguement), it dosen't matter if the CO2 level is 4 PPM or 40 PPM your plants will use CO2 at the same rate regardless. The wet/dry will be putting CO2 into the water much faster than the plants will be using it (in heavily planted aquriums you may need faster flow to put CO2 in fast enough so your plants don't use more CO2 than the wet/dry can provide.)
If you think this is wrong then explain to me how plants grow in fast flowing streams with very agitated waters? by typical "plant keeping logic" these waters would have no CO2 and plants wouldn't grow.
So let's say the tank stays at a steady level of 4ppm (for the sake of arguement), it dosen't matter if the CO2 level is 4 PPM or 40 PPM your plants will use CO2 at the same rate regardless. The wet/dry will be putting CO2 into the water much faster than the plants will be using it (in heavily planted aquriums you may need faster flow to put CO2 in fast enough so your plants don't use more CO2 than the wet/dry can provide.)
If you think this is wrong then explain to me how plants grow in fast flowing streams with very agitated waters? by typical "plant keeping logic" these waters would have no CO2 and plants wouldn't grow.
You are broadly correct. Agitation encourages gas exchange with the atmosphere, and since densities of both O2 and CO2 in the water are usually much lower than their atmospheric densities, O2 and CO2 will usually show net movement into the water. Now, there's no such thing as a saturation point in air, but the relative proportions of the gases that make up air are fairly consistent.
Here's the exception: CO2-injected systems keep CO2 levels in the water at or above the saturation level, and agitation causes these levels to drop. It may not be practical to have enough agitation to replenish CO2 as quickly as the plants in these systems use it. You may ask how these plants survive in the wild; in many cases these plants are not true submersed species but submersion-tolerant emergent or marginal plants, which are not adapted to low-CO2 aquatic conditions.
Here's the exception: CO2-injected systems keep CO2 levels in the water at or above the saturation level, and agitation causes these levels to drop. It may not be practical to have enough agitation to replenish CO2 as quickly as the plants in these systems use it. You may ask how these plants survive in the wild; in many cases these plants are not true submersed species but submersion-tolerant emergent or marginal plants, which are not adapted to low-CO2 aquatic conditions.
The speed and amount of growth on any plant is dependent on the levels of availiable nutrients.
More co2,light and other nutrients to match equals faster growth. Even non aquatic plant growers are now realizing the benefits of higher co2 amounts in there grow rooms.
If you were injecting co2 on this tank to a higher than atmosphereic range then agiatation would not be wise. But it can be done.
Or if it will be a Low tech planted tank then there are no worries.
More co2,light and other nutrients to match equals faster growth. Even non aquatic plant growers are now realizing the benefits of higher co2 amounts in there grow rooms.
If you were injecting co2 on this tank to a higher than atmosphereic range then agiatation would not be wise. But it can be done.
Or if it will be a Low tech planted tank then there are no worries.
like what they are getting at.... its not too good if you are adding co2. you will dump a lot of co2 or would need to seal the sump up. if you are not adding co2 it doesnt matter.
This will be a low tech tank with low-med light levels and no CO2, so it looks like I should be OK. Thanks for the input!
The sump is fine. Lots of turbulence and surface agitation will result in the CO2 level reaching equilibrium with the surrounding air faster (more surface area to diffuse out of, I think). If you're adding CO2, then the dissolved CO2 level is not at equilibrium, so the gas with diffuse out of the water much quicker. Since you aren't adding CO2, the sump might actually help keep the CO2 level at equilibrium, replacing what the plants use.
Everyone is correct. While it may not hurt the plants to run a W/D, it counter-productive to inject CO2 and then use energy to gas it out.
There is plenty of surface area in a planted tank for bacteria to adhere to if you count the surfaces of the plants themselves. And plants can and will use the same nutrients that bacteria do for growth, so you will not need such high bacteria counts as a non-planted tank.
Also, if your injecting CO2 and the plants are using it a high rate, then the water will also be loaded with O2 past air density levels. This means that running a W/D will gas out more O2 than it brings in, canceling out the reason for running one in the first place; to supply bacteria with more O2.
The best filtration for planted tanks is either a plain powerhead or a canister filter, both of which should have a sponge prefilter over the intake.
There is plenty of surface area in a planted tank for bacteria to adhere to if you count the surfaces of the plants themselves. And plants can and will use the same nutrients that bacteria do for growth, so you will not need such high bacteria counts as a non-planted tank.
Also, if your injecting CO2 and the plants are using it a high rate, then the water will also be loaded with O2 past air density levels. This means that running a W/D will gas out more O2 than it brings in, canceling out the reason for running one in the first place; to supply bacteria with more O2.
The best filtration for planted tanks is either a plain powerhead or a canister filter, both of which should have a sponge prefilter over the intake.