Bio wheel vs CO2

[physicsdude]

Hi- I have had some thoughts about purchasing a CO2 system to help stimulate some growth out of my plants. Yet, I got 2 Penguin bio-wheels runnin on there. They do a remarkable job, but I am just a little concerned that the water is losing CO2 due to the bio-wheel. I think this may be happening cause I am battling green-blue alage that coversin little sopts my anubias. Plus, the amazons I have and propagated lack the lush growth towards the top of the tank that they are supposed to develop. As I think I am doing the basic thinsg, I thought the CO2 may be the culprit.

Some specs of my system:
Ammonia and Nitrite: 0
Nitrate: >.25
PH: 7.6
Do weekly 25-40% pwc
20 gallon aquarium
Weekly supplements of Tetra Flora or SeaChem Flourish
About 1.5 watts/gallon of 10000k light (Tropic Sun)

So, it seems like all is in order, but yet the algae persists and lack of growth continues. I have heard some rumblings hear and there on this forum and othes that the bio-wheel's interaction with the water causing some of this beneficial gas to be lost. In that light, I thought I would start a thread discussing this issue.

 

[rich311k]

I moved this to planted.

I think your BGA problem is coming from your almost non existent Nitrate reading. Without injecting CO2 your biowheels are actually keeping your CO2 levels as high as possible since they are promoting gas exchange and helping to keep the CO2 levels at the ambient levels.

 

[Purrbox]

Rich is spot on. Since you aren't injecting CO2 the biowheels help keep CO2 in the water by bringing the levels back up to ambient more quickly as it's used. It's only when your injecting CO2 that the biowheels would cause CO2 loss, as they would gas off the excess CO2 again returning the water to ambient levels.

BGA is often caused by low Nitrates (as Rich mentioned) and poor circulation.

 

[vthokie]

Darn! I had attached some sponges to the outflows of the 2 HOBs on my non-CO2 tank, thinking that I was doing the right thing in minimizing agitation.

That's good, though... I liked the tank better with more movement.

 

[Lonewolfblue]

BGA is most likely due to nitrates dropping out, or poor circulation.

Now for the main topic. I don't think having a biowheel really hinders CO2 levels too much. As Tom Barr has stated a few times, he said to crank the CO2 and add surface aggitation to keep the O2 levels up for the fish. Well, I have more aggitation in my CO2 tanks than what a biowheel would provide (pointing 2 powerheads that are located at the surface of the water in an upward direction, causing massive aggitation), and I'm doing just fine. Now, if I was injecting CO2, maybe it would be different, but with CO2 mist, it doesn't matter if you have a bio-wheel or not. The mist stays in the tank, and gets circulated via powerheads, and hits the plant leaves and the rest is history, lol. Awsome plant growth, and minimal algae. Much more so than when I was trying to diffuse it completely. I personally wouldn't have any problems running a CO2 system on a tank with bio-wheels. But that's what I've experienced.

What were you planning for a CO2 system, DIY or Pressurized?

 

[physicsdude]

Well, I have no doubts the ones mentioned by lonewolf are the best. Yet, I am in college and don't really have that kind of extra cash to use on that set-up. A friend of mine did- he had only 2 Dutch aquariums set-up with a fancy CO2 system, with gauges, solenoid valves and a pressurized tank- cost him like 250. The results were marvelous- a lush underwater jungle full of plants and color!

I, on the other hand, was planning on a simple set-up. Maybe a DIY system or maybe just buying the jungle fizz factory. I took a test using a Red Sea kit of the CO2 content of the aquarium, and it says it was close to 0. Now that was strange, to say the least. So, as all else seems to check out, I am left with the same questions over the bio-wheel. As the wheel turns, some say, it causes interaction with the water that causes the oxygen to pass into the aquarium while passing the CO2 gasses out. That is like the common summary of the opposing side. So, I dunno. I could get an aquaclear if I wanted and sell the two bio-wheels on ebay, but they perform well, and I would hate to let them go. Albeit, that's the last option, but not one totally discounted.

The algae I can purge and keep in check by hand. The stunted growth of the plants is what troubles me. The ones I have now all came from one plant- I have divided the same amazon sword 4 times over the past 2 years and all amazons in the tank are "homegrown".

 

[Lonewolfblue]

DIY on how big of tank? With a bio-wheel, I highly recommend mist rather than dissolving via reactor. Just a simple airstone under a powerhead is all that is required, and will probably do better on a DIY than trying to use a reactor. Yes, the biowheel will gas off some of the CO2, but in a mist, the fine CO2 bubbles are throughout the tank, hitting the plants, which is where most of the growth comes from.

 

[kaz]

good day, sorry for intruding into this post but this is interesting lonewolf. I some plants look into my sig. lucky bamboo is whats the most of them. would I need to add co2 and DIY would be the lowest cost for now?

 

[Lonewolfblue]

DIY on a 75G wouldn't work that well, tank is too large. You would need a lot of bottles, and overall, Pressurized would be cheaper in the long run. Up front it can be spendy, but over time, it's cheaper. Also, with DIY, its another thing you would have to maintain.

 

[physicsdude]

Right. The DIY is a little tricky to maintain. But now I have no CO2 supplementation at all- no DIY or kit from Jungle.

I repeated the CO2 tests today and found the content was near 0. So, I am led to the conclusion that the bio-wheel is causing the problems with the CO2. In light of this information, would it be possible for depletion of CO2 from the water by the 3 medium sized swords, 2 anubias, 1 bamboo, and 1 brazil fern? Or is it something else?

 

[rich311k]

The most CO2 you are going to get is 3ppm, without any injection. Those biowheels chopping up the surface will help keep it at 3ppm. I imagine at that low a level the CO2 test is next to useless.

 

[Lonewolfblue]

I agree with Rich. A biowheel is excellent for non-CO2 tanks, because it helps maintain levels with the atmosphere. If no aggitation, then CO2 levels will drop below this and fluctuate, which will help BBA.

 

[Purrbox]

Don't bother with the Fizz Factory. Those things are generally either dangerous if they work at all or useless. In either case they're a waste of money. The best solutions for carbon are DIY CO2, Pressurized CO2, and Flourish Excel. They're the ones that actually work in a controlled manner. The situation with each tank will determine which is the best solution.

 

[7Enigma]

DIY on how big of tank? With a bio-wheel, I highly recommend mist rather than dissolving via reactor. Just a simple airstone under a powerhead is all that is required, and will probably do better on a DIY than trying to use a reactor. Yes, the biowheel will gas off some of the CO2, but in a mist, the fine CO2 bubbles are throughout the tank, hitting the plants, which is where most of the growth comes from.

LWB I just don't buy this reasoning. On Barr's site, there was a huge discussion regarding the mist method and there was no explanation for why a mist setup would provide superior growth over a well-made reactor. The small bubbles from a PH equilibrate with the water very quickly. On the order of a couple seconds at most for the finely chopped ones. What you see floating around the tank and attached to leaves is NOT predominantly CO2, but rather other gases that are leaving the tank water. Oxygen is a predominant one in higher light well fertilized tanks. The only possible benefit that has not yet to my knowledge been proven is the bubbles on the leaves allow for faster transfer of CO2 from the water to the bubble and then to the plant (the bubble basically working like an enzyme). If that is true, then there is an advantage to the mist method, otherwise its personal preference.

I personally use the mist method, but its purely for ease of use and for aesthetics. I only have a 20gallon tank, and the thought of having a reactor in there was just not practical.

good day, sorry for intruding into this post but this is interesting lonewolf. I some plants look into my sig. lucky bamboo is whats the most of them. would I need to add co2 and DIY would be the lowest cost for now?

Kaz, lucky bamboo is from the lily family and an extremely slow grower. It will not benefit from CO2 IMO, and prefers very low levels of ferts for proper growth.

 

[Lonewolfblue]

LWB I just don't buy this reasoning. On Barr's site, there was a huge discussion regarding the mist method and there was no explanation for why a mist setup would provide superior growth over a well-made reactor.

I haven't actually gone to his site much, but with what he's posted here on AA, I believe he has posted that there is a noticable difference. Here's the post:
http://www.aquariumadvice.com/viewtopic.php?t=86922&highlight=mist

Also, when I was using a Powered Reactor, and had my CO2 levels running near 100ppm, I still wasn't getting the growth I am getting right now. I use no reactor now, and just an airstone and powerhead. My major algae problem (which I'm sure you seen my posts and pics) is completely gone, and my tank went from bare to a forest in under 2 weeks, and my E. Tiandra ground cover went from being planted as single plants spread out on the foreground, to a thick foreground that's not only covered, but over an inch thick in just over 1 week. I could never accomplish any of that when I was using the powered reactor.

With mist, my sword also went from a 5 inch plant with 4 or 5 leaves to a 24+ inch plant with 35+ leaves now in under 3 months. Also, I'm clipping off 8 inch stems off the Asian Ambulia every week. And sunset hygro? Can't keep is down, lol. Have to play with it almost daily. And it's like in one of Tom's posts, if I remember correctly, he asked if anyone could tell him how fast the fastest growth rate of a plant is. Well, in another post, I said it's actually faster than any of us thinks, lol. If I can see my growth explode like it is now in my tank, I still do not think it's at it's max growth rate. And I really cannot tell anyone how fast it really is.

 

[Purrbox]

There have very consistant results with hobbiest switching from powered diffusion to the mist method. All have reported vastely improved growth, while inject the same amount or less of CO2.

Of course not everyone actually wants to have their plants growing quite that fast. It involves a lot more trimming. I think it's most beneficial when used with plants that are considered to be more difficult to keep and grow.

I've read lots of conflicting theories on how the CO2 mist works and why it's so much more efficient than powered diffusion. At this time it's too new and there hasn't been any scientific testing to back up the theories, although there has been some scientif research that has disproven some of them.

For most people it's enough that it works, and the why can be figured out later.

 

[7Enigma]

There have very consistant results with hobbiest switching from powered diffusion to the mist method. All have reported vastly improved growth, while inject the same amount or less of CO2.

Of course not everyone actually wants to have their plants growing quite that fast. It involves a lot more trimming. I think it's most beneficial when used with plants that are considered to be more difficult to keep and grow.

I've read lots of conflicting theories on how the CO2 mist works and why it's so much more efficient than powered diffusion. At this time it's too new and there hasn't been any scientific testing to back up the theories, although there has been some scientif research that has disproven some of them.

For most people it's enough that it works, and the why can be figured out later.

Not for me, I want to know WHY! If indeed the same amount of CO2 equals better growth for plants this is a boon for pressurized users. You can now have a tank last longer using less CO2 and getting the same growth. For those of us with DIY, it doesn't really matter unless we're struggling to keep the levels up. For theory, I'm now leaning towards the idea that the barrier from water to leaf tissue is somehow positively effected by the bubble (better gas transfer throughout the bubble). That is one of the few explanations I can come up with in why this is superior to the powered reactor.

 

[physicsdude]

Ah well....To switch gears a little, I looked into the whole thing thoroughly. I even called Marineland about the amtter and they said that by design, there is a gaseous exchange when the bio-wheel churns the water. Therefore, I took some initiative and bought an aquaclear filter and took down the two bio-wheels. Indeed, the whole matter was interesting, as this discussion has shown. Many thanks for all the sound advice from all who contributed!

 

[7Enigma]

You'll certainly be happy with the AC!

 

[physicsdude]

Yes, I am so far! It is absolutely wonderful! Plus, the best part is that the algae seems to have stopped its growth for today, which is good since I started the whole thing over yeserday! The filter itself was an OUTSTANDING price- only 30 bucks brand new at petsmart. I brought in the online sheet stating its 28 bucks there vs the store price of 40. So, they gave it to me for 28! Great price- it even beat big als by 3 dollars!

I plan on dosing some Seachem carbon soon to beat off the algae and promote plant growth!