With proper water, genetics, and care the cull rate should be more like 5% in my experience.
-john
Luke, watching with interest!
Adding CO2 to the mix caught my eye, for a few reasons. I'll list them out, but please take it all with a grain of salt.
If Water Hyacinth grew so successfully for you in the past, why abandon it? Seems like periodic pruning is simpler than CO2, right?
If the CO2 isn't impacting pH much, I wonder if it doing much at all.
If the method requires CO2, it is less approachable. In the end, it seems like a method that works without CO2 would have a marketing advantage.
My tap is KH=2, and it doesn't take much for plants to consume that down to zero. Water Lettuce solves the CO2 problem, but you mentioned that you had issues growing it in the past. I've been able to grow it, but from my experience it grows so fast (due to not being CO2 limited) that it quickly becomes limited by some other nutrient (and the limiting nutrient need not be Nitrates). I've had water lettuce explode in my tanks, then slow down, with new leaves showing deformed growth, all while Nitrates were not near zero. So some other nutrient was limited -- most likely P or K or some trace element...sure enough when I dosed the whole gamut of standard aquarium plant fertilizers the water lettuce would take off again.
With proper water, genetics, and care the cull rate should be more like 5% in my experience.
-john
UV Bulb (Watts) / gph to Control Bacteria / gph to Control Parasites
4 ......... .........................60 ............................. N/A
8 ...................................120............ ................ N/A
15................................. 230............................. 75
18................................. 300............................. 100
25................................. 475............................. 150
30................................. 525............................. 175
40................................. 940..............................300
65................................. 1700............................ 570
80................................. 1885............................ 625
Additionally you need to turn over the total volume of water (both tanks plus sump volume) 4x an hour.
Ex-President-North American Discus Association-NADA
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
I would have loved to keep the water hyacinth but there is only about 12 inches of space above my sump. That stuff is crazy and grows up to 3.85 feet tall. I was having to try and prune almost the whole plant. Again, without space constraints, I think it would be more effective than algae but haven't got to try it yet.
Agreed, that the CO2 probably doesn't do a whole lot but it is enough to keep the algae from consuming the KH when I inject it directly into my sump. That's how I adjust the CO2 rate. CO2 is not required for an algae scrubber. From what i've seen, it's very rare to use CO2 with a scrubber and people have had mixed results. You could just monitor the KH and add some occasionally. Depending on your bioload, the natural CO2 in the water could be enough on it's own and you might not notice a decline in KH at all.
I've also noticed that the limiting nutrient has to be monitored. For my setup it's usually P. I still have to occasionally dose P to keep that from being the limiting nutrient in the tank. I've seen other people dose Fe occasionally for their scrubber but I've never had to.
That's great news you had success with the water lettuce! I'm glad we have these discussions. It was my second choice after the hyacinth and seems to grow pretty low. Maybe I'll give it another try after having learned more about plant requirements.
In my experience water lettuce does well when there is very little surface agitation. not sure how your sump is designed but mine thrived with in my sump with nothing but a cfl bulb for light when I placed it after a piece of poret foam. the surface was calm but there was still plenty of flow in the tank.
I am also very interested in this. For people that have pretty dirty water like we have in Iowa (legal limit of 10ppm nitrate with a lot of phosphate and organics) it would be nice if they work. Also it's not exactly likely that water is going to be getting cheaper in the future and in some areas it will get very expensive.
Bud (turbo algae scrubbers) https://www.algaescrubbing.com/ lives in my city and is an active member of the reef club. I really like his design and have thought about using one but imo they are mutually exclusive with large W/C. I mean there is no point if doing 70% daily w/c with 10ppm nitrate as the scrubber will never be able to deplete the organics.
I am pretty surprised that phosphate is the limiting nutrient with all the foods discus eat. It does happen, but with with scrubbers in the reef world typically nitrate is depleted long before phosphorus or another element like iron is limiting before P.
Update: 1st problem found – Fry deformities. All adult fish doing great.
Rick got me looking a lot closer at the fry dorsal fins and I noticed a very high percentage (easily over 50% maybe close to 85%) with deformed dorsal fins.
2015-12-18 - 1.jpg2015-12-18 - 4.jpg
Important notes:
- These fry were spawned in water with minimal WC. After the eggs were laid, I performed a 40% WC (the first in a couple months) with RO water and did not buffer it back up for a few days.
- The Nitrates and phosphates always measured between 0-5. Usually close to 0.
- The Algae scrubber consumed all of the KH (including Calcium?) and other minerals at a few points bringing the KH down to 0 until I started monitoring it more closely.
Possible culprits:
- Genetics. Maybe… but I think highly unlikely because the percentage of deformed fry seem to be about the same from both pairs of parents (remember the foster fry). The first batch of fry from test #1 from the blue turquoise parents only had a 22% rate of deformed dorsal fins. Probably still on the high side but they had more WC before I started to grow them out and less “scrubbed water”
- Polluted water. Maybe, but all of the other fish are thriving.
- Something else I put in the water that was on my hands. Ie: lotion, soap, yard work chemicals, who knows, etc… I have no idea on this one.
- 40% RO water change after the eggs were laid and then buffering back up to 330 TDS after a few days was too much of a TDS, GH, or PH swing
- Mineral / calcium deficiency. Pretty much all of the other instances I found of fry with deformed dorsal fins had very low KH or TDS in common. Because all of the adult fish seem to be thriving, I’m leaning toward a calcium / mineral deficiency in the water.
This seems to be a common occurrence with fry but very rarely at this high rate from what I’ve found. People in the discussions below have wondered if this is genetic or water related and I think we answered that question. At least we figured something out so far!
2008 discussion on deformed dorsal fins:
http://forum.simplydiscus.com/archiv...p/t-47864.html
2010 instance of deformed dorsal fins:
http://www.discusforums.com/forum/ar...p/t-21039.html
1999 discussion:
http://discus.yuku.com/topic/1005/De...s#.VnRbyhUrKUk
2014 discussion:
http://forum.simplydiscus.com/showth...ed+dorsal+fins
2015 discussion:
http://forum.simplydiscus.com/showth...ed+dorsal+fins
I would love to hear experienced breeders thoughts on this. Is there a higher deformity rate with a lack of calcium or RO/DI water?
I’m assuming their fins won’t grow back normally? I’m thinking of giving the fry another week or 2 of monitoring. If the permanent deformity rate is too high, we can try out a chosen solution (increasing calcium / minerals is a possible one?) with another batch of fry in a test #3.
Long post… If you’re still with me, good job! You officially do not have ADD/ADHD!
Time to cull. I do not think it was genetic. It would have been from lack of minerals or poor water conditions either one.
-john
IMO dorsal fin deformities at this age is almost always bacterial in nature. Most likely while the fry where on the cone. Low mineral content can cause deformities as well, normally gill plate issues, but this occurs later. This will not correct itself (fin deformities). As you are starting to learn, there is a lot more to WQ then nitrates. As I was alluding to earlier, if your going to combat bacteria/protazoa/parasites via UV, your going to have to make some alterations to your system.
-Rick
Ex-President-North American Discus Association-NADA
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
It could be bacteria but I don’t think so because I placed the eggs within a container with methylene blue until they were wigglers before giving them back to the dad for natural rearing. Similar to this picture below. There are no other signs of bacteria in the tank or on the fish.
methylene blue example.jpg
Credit: http://www.reef2rainforest.com/2013/...h-eggs-part-1/
Interesting thread http://forum.simplydiscus.com/archiv...p/t-62898.html
With a comment from Al:
“I'm a firm believer that discus "can" take minerals like calcium up thru their gills... its been published for many fish... I've posted this before...I have done experiments here where I have really pushed the feeding and growth in Rowater and have seen multiple defects...floppy fins...dorsal ray defects,curved and short gill plates.. same batch fry different tank same feeding... given calcium chloride in the water and the defects are not present.”
(Al, I hope you don’t mind me quoting you. Great experiment.)
Other links which suggest mineral deficiencies lead to dorsal deformations.
http://www.discusfishy.com/page/2
http://aquariumworld.nz/forums/topic...ilemma/?page=2
http://www.americanaquariumproducts....H.html#calcium
I’ve added additional trace elements and calcium bringing the tank up to 470 TDS, 3 KH and 7.2 PH. I’ve ordered a calcium tester and will monitor that and PH more consistently. The only thing I'm worried about is decreasing hatch rates with the addition of more minerals and calcium...
I haven’t culled the fry yet but will post those final results. Once I have culled these fry I’ll soon have another batch of fry for test #3. In test #3 I will immediately add additional calcium and minerals once the fry are wigglers.
At this point, I think an Algae Scrubber can definitely be used to reduce the amount of water changes needed for a healthy aquarium but need additional testing to find out how an algae scrubber effects the water. I think these test of extremely limited water changes show us the weaknesses (or strengths) of an algae scrubber and how to compensate if somebody decides to go that route.
We’ll see what happens in test #3!
Your barking up the wrong tree. As you may or may not know, I have raised more than my fair share of fry, and while yes, calcium deficiency can lead to deformities, normally not at this stage of development. I have had spawns through 2 months in much lower TDS water than what you describe with no issues what-so-ever.
As soon as you accept the fact that your issues were bacterial in nature, the sooner you can make adjustments to correct the problem. I would strongly suggest staying with your algae scrubber/UV setup but removing the community tank from the setup. This will allow your UV's to function at a lower flow rate with a higher turnover. It would also make the experiment a little more relevant, as I can't see anyone going with that setup as it now stands.
A 40-50 gallon breeding/grow-out tank coupled to a 20 gallon sump/algae scrubber/UV would be a better way to go in my opinion, right now, I think your just asking to much of the equipment you have.
Here is a batch I raised out during the 2012 Contest:
http://forum.simplydiscus.com/showth...d-x-Dark-Angel
TDS was never above 120 through 12 weeks, no dorsal fin deformities, and at nine weeks 30 of the juvies got placed into a 40 gallon grow-out tank with it's own 36 watt UV.
I did have a batch of fry with issues like yours from another pair I documented. This should convince you to cull the deformed fish as they will never develop nicely or grow out of their short comings.
http://forum.simplydiscus.com/showth...F1-(ARSG-x-VR)
Last edited by nc0gnet0; 12-20-2015 at 06:09 PM.
Ex-President-North American Discus Association-NADA
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Thanks for taking the time to post Rick. I think I see the light (UV light that is!).
That Tefe x F1 (ARSG x VR) pair is pretty amazing.
I'm contemplating making UV or other adjustments to the system. I'm definitely not an experienced breeder. Maybe part or the majority of the bacterial problem you mentioned was not changing any water in the small container while it had the eggs in it? I thought the methylene blue would be sufficient. Novice breeder mistake...
Sorry to those people that already know these items I'm learning.
I'll try this again and we'll have an even larger batch of fry for test #3 for anybody interested. Keep your fingers crossed!
AquaticSuppliers.comFoods your Discus will Love!!!
>>>>>I am a science guy.. show me the science minus the BS
Al Sabetta
Simplydiscus LLC Owner
Aquaticsuppliers.com
I take Pics.. click here for my Flickr images
AquaticSuppliers.comFoods your Discus will Love!!!
>>>>>I am a science guy.. show me the science minus the BS
Al Sabetta
Simplydiscus LLC Owner
Aquaticsuppliers.com
I take Pics.. click here for my Flickr images
Luke,
If you want to get the most info out of your experiment , my advice is not to cull yet. Grow them out longer. Not because the deformities may reverse but so you can document in better detail the nature of the deformities. You will be able to see them clearer....and photo document better. Additionally if you keep the full compliment of fry and raise them longer it will tell you just how much bioload your scrubber and system can handle.
Experiments are seldom cut and dry...everything goes as planned.Often we learn from one set of problems and then try again. Deformities are a problem, but theres alot to be learned from them here IMO.
Al
AquaticSuppliers.comFoods your Discus will Love!!!
>>>>>I am a science guy.. show me the science minus the BS
Al Sabetta
Simplydiscus LLC Owner
Aquaticsuppliers.com
I take Pics.. click here for my Flickr images