Starting to not like the look of the bubbles...

[itsgracia]

Ok I have a wall bubble bar in the back of my tank and im starting to think twice about it. I do want to keep it while im medicating for Ich because I did raise the temp to 82F and want to make sure that there is enough oxygen in the tank...Once im done medicating though, im thinking of taking it out. What do you guys think? You can see the bubble bar in my avatar, but my tank looks a little different from that now though. Suggestions? Opinions?

Thanks in advance.

 

[Tim Wheatley]

I have mine in the side of the tank. I don't even notice it. It also helps to have a good flow in the tank as the bubbles make the top level of water flow away and I have my filter outlet on the same side so my whole tank flows in the same direction. The fish seem to always seek out the strongest area of flow to swim in.

 

[mfdrookie516]

I've said it many times. I hate bubble wands, air stones, whatever. IMHO, a tank should look as natural as possible. (insert whatever bubbler mechanism you have) make tanks look fake. You don't see bubblers in lakes, oceans, or rivers, so IMO you shouldn't see them in tanks. I do, however, think they have their place. In situations like you've got now where you've had to raise the temperature, and it's only a temporary thing, I think they're great. In breeding tanks, i think sponge filters are great. I just don't like bubblers in a display tank though. Of course, all of that is JMHO

 

[itsgracia]

Thanks for your opinions. As always I have to run this by my 3 year old. It is technically his tank LOL.

 

[WendiDell]

I agree that you don't have bubble wands in nature. But you do have a constant flow of new oxygenated water flowing by continuously. Nature isn't a closed system. Tank water has only so much air in it. It does need to be replenished. Yes the bubbles look fake but rivers have rocks to crash into to make bubbles.
I have bubble bars across the entire back of all my tanks (4) But to change the size of the bubbles or to remove them altogether in a few places, I just put a little substrate over the bar. A little makes for fewer but larger bubbles and a lot will send the air to another part of the air bar. Making 0 bubble when and where you don't want any and a lot of bubbles where you want them.
Plus you can change it around any time you want by moving your gravel/sand to a different spot on the bar. There by giving you options to play around with and still get the air to the fish.

 

[Tim Wheatley]

Another benefit I thought of: I use the airbubbles and how they rise and affect the water surface to direct the floating plants I have. They stay perfectly under the light with those bubbles. Without them they are all in one corner forced ontop of each other. Like I said, I have flow that all goes one way, but the flow bouncing back off the opposite side of the tank is enough to keep them away from that other side.

 

[mfdrookie516]

I agree that you don't have bubble wands in nature. But you do have a constant flow of new oxygenated water flowing by continuously.

That oxygen gets in the water the same way in nature as it does in tanks. That's one of the reasons we use filters, other than the obvious (ie filtering the water). The filter constantly turns the water over, and surface agitation allows the gas exchange. Bubblers don't actually put oxygen in the water. They break the surface the same way filters or powerheads do, allowing the co2 and oxygen to reach equilibrium with the air surrounding the tank.

 

[Tim Wheatley]

Sorry but the fluid dynamics worshipper in me would argue that the outer edge of every bubble is a water surface and therefore the agitation as it moves through the water would do the same as you're suggesting it does on the surface. Unless you can provide absolute evidence of why the same effect would not happen underneath the waterline, I can't really believe that is correct...

 

[Coleallensmom]

Thanks for your opinions. As always I have to run this by my 3 year old. It is technically his tank LOL.

I too can not stand the look of bubble wands but my 8 year old has a lighted one in his tank that he LOVES. Keep if you like it (or your 3 year old insists on it!) or take it out once your done medicating if you're ready to take it out. It's really a matter of personal preference IMO.

 

[mfdrookie516]

Sorry but the fluid dynamics worshipper in me would argue that the outer edge of every bubble is a water surface and therefore the agitation as it moves through the water would do the same as you're suggesting it does on the surface. Unless you can provide absolute evidence of why the same effect would not happen underneath the waterline, I can't really believe that is correct...

Whether it does or not, it doesn't matter. You're basically agreeing with what I said, just in a slightly different manner (even if you don't realize you are). I honestly couldn't tell you whether what you're saying is the case, but whether it does or not, it doesn't do anything that a filter or a power head that breaks the surface isn't doing.

What I'm saying is that it is impossible to add more oxygen to the tank than what is in the air outside the tank, unless you're injecting pure O2. That is a common misconception.

 

[Tim Wheatley]

I'm not saying it gives the same as the filter output.

it doesn't do anything that a filter or a power head that breaks the surface isn't doing.

I bet it does. As I said in my post above, each bubble creates additional surface area and agitation as it rises to the surface. The more agitation and available surface oxygen, the more oxygen in the water, right?

You're saying oxygenation comes from agitation of the surface. Yes, that's right. I'm saying that I have a filter, I also have a bubble wand in a location where it doesn't even get seen (which isn't the point, but it shows why it doesn't matter to me), and this also agitates the surface and creates additional water surfaces (the outside of bubbles) and agitation. It would be nice to do a scientific test, but I honestly believe that if you have a fish from a river with high oxygen, you should have as much oxygen in your simulated river as possible. I think I have more oxygen with filter + bubbles than I would have with just the filter.

As I said above, I also use it to create a flow in my tank. We cannot lose sight of the fact that we are creating a simulated river (unless you have lake fish, obviously) and we can in no way replicate their natural environment, it is simply not possible - ever - no matter how big your tank, no matter how much you might dislike one of the things you put in the tank.

The basic point I want to make is, I'm doing what I think is best for the fish, not the aesthetics of my tank. Your point about never having seen bubbles in a river actually made me laugh because I'm pretty sure I haven't seen a heater, either. That's all I'm saying...

 

[WendiDell]

That oxygen gets in the water the same way in nature as it does in tanks. That's one of the reasons we use filters, other than the obvious (ie filtering the water). The filter constantly turns the water over, and surface agitation allows the gas exchange. Bubblers don't actually put oxygen in the water. They break the surface the same way filters or powerheads do, allowing the co2 and oxygen to reach equilibrium with the air surrounding the tank.

Sorry I misspoke. I meant extra air in the water, not O2. I know it's all the same 21% O2 in any air.
All I know is that my fish are more active with the bubble bar than they are with just the filters. All my Cichlids from time to time play in the bubbles along the back. They've never tried to play in the filters.

 

[mfdrookie516]

I bet it does. As I said in my post above, each bubble creates additional surface area and agitation as it rises to the surface. The more agitation and available surface oxygen, the more oxygen in the water, right?

I think this is where you're getting stuck at trying to prove something impossible. While this is true to a certain extent, it is doing nothing more than *ADEQUATE* surface agitation. You cannot put more oxygen in the tank than what is in the air (without using pure O2, or some other kind of device in which you are adding additional O2 aside from what's in the atmosphere). I'm sure you're aware that we do not live in an atmosphere where we have 100% oxygen, right? I mean, we can't even breath in pure oxygen exclusively or it'll kill us (funny how that works). I don't want to start an argument, but you can't justify something that is scientifically impossible.


As far as your remark about the heater... I sorta agree... but at the same time, heaters are easily hidden. Cant see one in any of my tanks. We could argue this all day, but as I stated in my original reply, the remarks I made were JMHO (Just My Honest Opinion)... we're all entitled to our own.

 

[WendiDell]

I'm not saying it gives the same as the filter output.



I bet it does. As I said in my post above, each bubble creates additional surface area and agitation as it rises to the surface. The more agitation and available surface oxygen, the more oxygen in the water, right?

You're saying oxygenation comes from agitation of the surface. Yes, that's right. I'm saying that I have a filter, I also have a bubble wand in a location where it doesn't even get seen (which isn't the point, but it shows why it doesn't matter to me), and this also agitates the surface and creates additional water surfaces (the outside of bubbles) and agitation. It would be nice to do a scientific test, but I honestly believe that if you have a fish from a river with high oxygen, you should have as much oxygen in your simulated river as possible. I think I have more oxygen with filter + bubbles than I would have with just the filter.

As I said above, I also use it to create a flow in my tank. We cannot lose sight of the fact that we are creating a simulated river (unless you have lake fish, obviously) and we can in no way replicate their natural environment, it is simply not possible - ever - no matter how big your tank, no matter how much you might dislike one of the things you put in the tank.

The basic point I want to make is, I'm doing what I think is best for the fish, not the aesthetics of my tank. Your point about never having seen bubbles in a river actually made me laugh because I'm pretty sure I haven't seen a heater, either. That's all I'm saying...

As a retired Respiratory Therapist, I agree with all that except put air where you said oxegen. No matter how many air bubbles you have, that air contains 21% oxegen. So yes the water is more aerated which is good.

 

[Tim Wheatley]

I think this is where you're getting stuck at trying to prove something impossible. While this is true to a certain extent, it is doing nothing more than *ADEQUATE* surface agitation. You cannot put more oxygen in the tank than what is in the air (without using pure O2, or some other kind of device in which you are adding additional O2 aside from what's in the atmosphere). I'm sure you're aware that we do not live in an atmosphere where we have 100% oxygen, right? I mean, we can't even breath in pure oxygen exclusively or it'll kill us (funny how that works). I don't want to start an argument, but you can't justify something that is scientifically impossible.

Unless you have done scientifically controlled experiments to prove that surface agitation from your methods is as effective at introducing surface oxygen into the water as a bubble stream which both causes surface agitation and agitation with oxygen below the waterline then your point is moot. It is NOT about how much oxygen is the maximum (which is for some reason what you keep bringing up) - because the maximum is known (depending on altitude), it is about how much oxygen the organisms within the tank need of that available oxygen and how you can make sure it is replaced as soon as it is used most effectively. The more surface agitation there is, the more chance you can get every bit that there is.

Air passes from water to air, air to water all the time. If I can ensure that my tanks have an open door where all that dissolved oxygen can waltz through whenever it pleases, then that's what I'll be doing. I simply believe a column of air moving through the water and agitating the water line to be extremely effective.

I don't think I can explain this any better. If you would like to choose to bring up the maximum amount of oxygenation possible again for some reason, feel free, but I won't be replying to that.

 

[Tim Wheatley]

As a retired Respiratory Therapist, I agree with all that except put air where you said oxegen. No matter how many air bubbles you have, that air contains 21% oxegen. So yes the water is more aerated which is good.

Again, I'm not referring to the maximum available oxygen in the air. I'm talking about the methods to make sure my tank has access to that available oxygen. I firmly believe a column of air moving through the water and agitating it's surface to be more effective at giving access to that 21% than anything else mentioned. If a fish comes from a fast flow, swirly, churning river with high oxygen, it is in the best interest of the fish to do everything you can to simulate that environment. I am yet to hear scientific evidence bubble column versus powerhead, etc. Would love to see it so I can either be proved wrong that they're not more effective or that they are.

 

[WendiDell]

Unless you have done scientifically controlled experiments to prove that surface agitation from your methods is as effective at introducing surface oxygen into the water as a bubble stream which both causes surface agitation and agitation with oxygen below the waterline then your point is moot. It is NOT about how much oxygen is the maximum (which is for some reason what you keep bringing up) - because the maximum is known (depending on altitude), it is about how much oxygen the organisms within the tank need of that available oxygen and how you can make sure it is replaced as soon as it is used most effectively. The more surface agitation there is, the more chance you can get every bit that there is.

Air passes from water to air, air to water all the time. If I can ensure that my tanks have an open door where all that dissolved oxygen can waltz through whenever it pleases, then that's what I'll be doing. I simply believe a column of air moving through the water and agitating the water line to be extremely effective.

I don't think I can explain this any better. If you would like to choose to bring up the maximum amount of oxygenation possible again for some reason, feel free, but I won't be replying to that.

Not to be a pain, this confuses a lot of people. But even in Denver Co. where the air is very thin. The percentage of oxygen is still 21%. There is less air up there but that thin air still has 21% oxygen.
All air has 21% oxygen. It just feel different because there is less air altogether not less oxygen.
So lets just forget if someone says air or oxygen for this post. We are talking air bubbles. And a wand or stone or what ever adds more air (containing 21% Oxygen) to the water than filters alone. It's the difference between the air at sea level and the air in Denver. With more air you get more oxygen by volume not percentage.

 

[Jason7894561230]

I think that if you would like bubbles in the tank than thats fine. I personally really like bubbles in my fish tank and would only take it out well i would never take it out actaully. So really it is a preference and what you want not what we want.

 

[McLumpy]

I can honestly say that I've never seen a heated discussion involving oxygen before. LOL

I don't want to get involved, but I have a bubble wand, an air stone, and a powerhead. I use the powerhead as a mid-tank aerator. While yes, they do look tacky to some, I find that they are extremely beneficial, especially when using meds.

Recently I had to use Melafix and within a minute after the first application, all of my Mollies and my Dwarf Gourami were at the surface gasping for air. At that time, I only had my bubble wand and air stone going, but I acted fast and turned the powerhead on at full blast. Within another minute or so, they were fine. Just sayin'...

 

[Tim Wheatley]

Not to be a pain, this confuses a lot of people. But even in Denver Co. where the air is very thin. The percentage of oxygen is still 21%. There is less air up there but that thin air still has 21% oxygen.
All air has 21% oxygen. It just feel different because there is less air altogether not less oxygen.
So lets just forget if someone says air or oxygen for this post. We are talking air bubbles. And a wand or stone or what ever adds more air (containing 21% Oxygen) to the water than filters alone. It's the difference between the air at sea level and the air in Denver. With more air you get more oxygen by volume not percentage.

Sorry, I actually confused two things I had studied. Atmospheric pressures can alter how much oxygen water can hold, rather than altitude. I wasn't really talking about the air holding more/less. But yep, I screwed up on that point.