Duke Posted November 3, 2005 Report Share Posted November 3, 2005 Been using zeavit for months now and everthing has been good, now I have hair algae starting to take over. Tank 1 year old Zeovit 6+ months aprox Now I don't want a shi%% fight but some coments from other zeovit users. 4ft tank weekly water changes, filtered. no siliates (spellet wrong) thanks to Chris's test kit. Feed quite heaverly other wise nigger trigger eates my coral shrim when he is hungery. alway frozen food, defrosted and rinsed. 2 x clowns 1 x blue tang 1 x royal dotty 1 x dart fish 1 x nigger trigger 2 x shrimp Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pies Posted November 3, 2005 Report Share Posted November 3, 2005 Have your tested your Phosphates? P04 is the most likley cause of hair algae, most likley introduced by frozen food. Heavy feeding of Frozen foods sounds like the root of your problem. Be interested to know what your Nitrates are, and what you KH and PH (range) is. Pie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chimera Posted November 3, 2005 Report Share Posted November 3, 2005 Yeah, also running Zeovit and started to get hair algae after about a month. Dosed less than the recommended dosing too. I had hair algae in the past but had it fully under control with Rowaphos. I also feed moderately heavily to keep the tang and angel fat. Also rinse the frozen. Im starting to get good colours from the zeovit (as opposed to without) however the hair algae is a real pain. Not major, just a dusting at worst 1/6th inch thick on some of the rocks. Running rowaphos again in conjunction with zeovit is certainly helping though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wasp Posted November 3, 2005 Report Share Posted November 3, 2005 Pies is correct, phosphate will be too high, otherwise excess hair algae growth cannot happen. Duke please answer the following What zeovit products are you dosing and how much of each? How much zeo rock are you using & how often do you change it? How much flow through your zeovit reactor, and is it on 3 hours, off 3 hours? You say the tank is "filtered". What do you mean? Do you have BB, sandbed, or DSB? What do you actually feed the fish? What skimmer are you using? BTW, don't sweat, with the zeovit system done right hair algae will cease to be a problem. The first aim of the system is nutrient reduction, and when this is achieved algae problems are over. My current tank had hair over all the rocks, the overall effect of the whole tank was green. By using zeovit I was able to change a slowly worsening nightmare into a clean tank in only a few weeks. Be great if me and other users can work through this with you and get it sorted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wasp Posted November 3, 2005 Report Share Posted November 3, 2005 Also, we really need to track progress to see if things are getting better, or worse, as changes are made. To do this accurate phosphate testing is needed. I have a Hanna phosphate colorimeter is there any way you could get water to me on the North Shore for testing? Normal kits from the LFS will not cut the mustard at the levels we are interested in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lduncan Posted November 3, 2005 Report Share Posted November 3, 2005 I'd look at the sand bed and rocks before looking to zeovit for a cause of the hair algae. Hair algae is a sign of phosphate cycling, so you may not be able to detect water soluble orthophosphate, yet still have algae problems. It just feeds off phosphate stored in the rock, rather than from the water. The iron from zeovit may not help either. But that's a secondary issue. The issue will be phosphate. Fix that, and you'll have no more hair algae. Layton Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chimera Posted November 3, 2005 Report Share Posted November 3, 2005 Also, we really need to track progress to see if things are getting better, or worse, as changes are made. To do this accurate phosphate testing is needed. I have a Hanna phosphate colorimeter is there any way you could get water to me on the North Shore for testing? Normal kits from the LFS will not cut the mustard at the levels we are interested in. Wasp, can you PM me your phone number or at least when you'd be home? I wouldnt mind getting my water tested too. It would be interesting to know what my phosphates are rather than just "undetectable". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lduncan Posted November 3, 2005 Report Share Posted November 3, 2005 Wasp, can you PM me your phone number or at least when you'd be home? I wouldnt mind getting my water tested too. It would be interesting to know what my phosphates are rather than just "undetectable". The Hanna meter is no more useful than any other hobby test kit. If you get any sort of reading, all it tells you is that your tank has more than enough phosphate. All it tests for is othophosphate, which only exists in the water when all pools of phosphate in the tank are saturated. Layton Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wasp Posted November 3, 2005 Report Share Posted November 3, 2005 Phone number is 479 5446. Call anytime after 10.00 am anyday, we'll set it up. Really, once I got the Hanna I was able to fine tune dosing etc. exactly, every zeovit user should have one. BTW Layton I actually agree with much of what you said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chimera Posted November 3, 2005 Report Share Posted November 3, 2005 yawn, are we going down this track again? http://www.fnzas.org.nz/fishroom/viewtopic.php?p=43445 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wasp Posted November 3, 2005 Report Share Posted November 3, 2005 Well I'm not, to me the purpose of this thread will be to sort Dukes tank. However to be honest some of what Layton said was constructive, nothing wrong with that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lduncan Posted November 3, 2005 Report Share Posted November 3, 2005 yawn, are we going down this track again? http://www.fnzas.org.nz/fishroom/viewtopic.php?p=43445 Nope. The issue isn't accuracy. It's to do with what your actually measuring. These kits only measure orthophosphate, not total phosphate. The hair algae may not stem from water soluble orthophosphate, but other phoshorous forms cycling in the rocks and sand bed. Zeovit and rowa are going to have trouble fighting this. It's one of the underlying motivations behind the BB method. Layton Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chimera Posted November 3, 2005 Report Share Posted November 3, 2005 It's one of the underlying motivations behind the BB method. so BB meaning no 'fine particles of crap' from the sand bed blowing onto and suffocating your rocks? And BB meaning easy to vacuum up detritus? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wasp Posted November 3, 2005 Report Share Posted November 3, 2005 Personally I largely agree. However for practical purposes free orthophosphate is the only one we can measure and doing so accurately can be useful. Once what in zeovit speak "stage 3" is reached, measuring orthophosphate becomes very useful. Stage 3, is when for several months, usually 6 months or more, orthophosphate in the water column has been kept at very low levels, allowing leaching of phosphate from rocks and substrate to occur, to the point that there is no more built up phosphate reserves left. A somewhat similar principle to Laytons rock cooking although not quite the same. Once stage 3 is reached a direct reading of free orthophosphate in the water column will give a fair indication of real phosphate levels. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lduncan Posted November 3, 2005 Report Share Posted November 3, 2005 If what you said above was true wasp, zeovit wouldn't work. You rely on bacteria to quickly grab and hold phosphorous. They do that well. The grab many times more phosphorous than they need to support their requirements. Orthophosphate exists when all organic pools are full, ie, bacteria (and other organisms) have grabbed as much phosphorous as they can. If the pools aren't full, then orthophosphate is not going to be detectable. If the water is free of orthophosphate, nothing leaches from the pools into the water, because that's what bacteria do, hold on to it, if they didn't zeovit wouldn't work. A reading on a phosphate kit only tells you that you have plenty of phosphate in your tank. Chimera: BB meaning not having rocks sitting in a sand bed which is storing detritus, and therefore phosphate, which is absorbed by the rock, and then shed from the rock as detritus and bacteria flock back into the sand bed. The hair algae feeds of the phosphate as it is shed from the rock. I think what people don't realise it that the rock produces detritus (sheds) whether you have a sand bed or BB. With a sand bed it's and endless cycle of phosphate being stored in the sand absorbed by the rock and then shed by the rock, which drops back into the sand bed due to gravity. With BB, when the rock sheds, you expect the flow to keep it in suspension so that it is skimmed out. Rock cooking is the process of rock shedding with no light, so the algae can't grow and slow the process of removing phosphate from rock which is excessively loaded with phosphate. It all settles as a bacteria flock and detritus which is physically removed. Layton Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cracker Posted November 3, 2005 Report Share Posted November 3, 2005 Easily fixed with Salifert phosphate killer. Nails it real quick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lduncan Posted November 3, 2005 Report Share Posted November 3, 2005 Sometimes yes, sometimes no. Depends what's causing the algae. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wasp Posted November 3, 2005 Report Share Posted November 3, 2005 If what you said above was true wasp, zeovit wouldn't work. Layton Hmmm... I can see where this is headed, Chimera was right. Think I'll just focus on what the thread starter wanted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetskisteve Posted November 3, 2005 Report Share Posted November 3, 2005 Remember u had a big tank move Duke that could have some effect Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chimera Posted November 3, 2005 Report Share Posted November 3, 2005 Chimera: BB meaning not having rocks sitting in a sand bed which is storing detritus, and therefore phosphate, which is absorbed by the rock, and then shed from the rock as detritus and bacteria flock back into the sand bed. The hair algae feeds of the phosphate as it is shed from the rock. I think what people don't realise it that the rock produces detritus (sheds) whether you have a sand bed or BB. With a sand bed it's and endless cycle of phosphate being stored in the sand absorbed by the rock and then shed by the rock, which drops back into the sand bed due to gravity. yeah that makes sense - i can almost visibly see this happening in my tank. sandbed gets fill of detritus, flow stirs this up landing on and leeching to/from the rocks, feeds the hair algae. i went through a stage of not having to clean my sandbed (other than stirring it up every now and then), it was very clean, white and held no detritus at all (my sandbed 'grain' is large so this was easy to see whether it was clean or not) at the same time my rocks were extremely clean, i had heaps of coralline algae and no hair algae at all. even when i had hair algae, it was only in one place and i had it fully under control in a couple of weeks with rowaphos. now, my sandbed is dirty (not majorly, but visible) and contains detritus (noticeable as its like small grains of fine, dirty coloured sand) the same detritus is covering some of the rocks especially those in the centre. interestingly the left side and right sides of the tank are near immaculate, the rocks are covered with coralline, there is no "haze" (or very little) detritus and very minimal to no hair algae on the rocks. the centre however has a film of detritus on the rocks and the worst hair algae too. other than phosphate causing this, the only other differences are 14k bulbs over the left and right sides (where algae is at a minimum) the 10k bulb in the middle is where hair algae is at its worst. additionally, the closed loops and streams provide most flow to the left and right sides, with less flow at the centre/bottom. im sure these are also contributing factors as i would expect to see the same amount of hair algae over all rocks. i am considering removing the sand and going BB for a little while to see if and how this makes a difference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wasp Posted November 3, 2005 Report Share Posted November 3, 2005 Even if your rocks are "clean", algae can grow on these trapped areas of detritus, good idea to blast them periodically and syphon out once settled. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chimera Posted November 3, 2005 Report Share Posted November 3, 2005 yeah i do half the job - blast but not syphon thats why i want to go BB just for a little while to see how much crap i accumulate! probably about time i did a big syphon too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wasp Posted November 3, 2005 Report Share Posted November 3, 2005 When I first went BB it was quite surprising how much and how quickly crap accumulated on the bottom. I remove it weekly now with each water change. This is one point where I will give Layton his due. However I'm not getting in an argument over it or knocking sandbeds there are tanks like Pies with sandbeds that far surpass anything I could ever dream of achieving. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lduncan Posted November 3, 2005 Report Share Posted November 3, 2005 yeah i do half the job - blast but not syphon thats why i want to go BB just for a little while to see how much crap i accumulate! probably about time i did a big syphon too. Just be aware that if you do go BB, then you should setup the flow so that most detritus doesn't settle. It's not a quick process once you remove sand, the rock sheds a LOT for months before it slows down. And because the sand doesn't trap and hold the nutrients, if detritus is left sitting on the bottom of the tank, it's going to cause nitrate and phosphate to rise. My rocks appeared absolutely fine before I went BB, they weren't dirty looking or covered in any sort of algae or slime, but 6 months on they are still shedding a lot of stuff, although it is starting to slow down now. Hair algae can also be hard to get rid of because the hairs just trap more floating detritus which feeds growth, so if you put the affected rocks into a high flow area then that can help clear it up faster. Layton Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pies Posted November 4, 2005 Report Share Posted November 4, 2005 Just be aware that if you do go BB, then you should setup the flow so that most detritus doesn't settle. It's not a quick process once you remove sand, the rock sheds a LOT for months before it slows down. YMMV. Suphew and a have done a little experiment. We took some rock (approx 20kg) from my tank, set it up in a 4 foot bare tank with skimmer, heater and lots of water flow (4-5 pumps). The rocks shed a bit of sand for the first few days, but since then I wouldn't say the rock has shed a LOT, if anything at all. A little sand has collected on the bottom that must have been in the rocks, but to be honest after reading 'how surprising it is how much gunk is in the rocks' and cooking our own rocks (ex my tank, DSBx2) I would say its dissapointing how little actually comes out. Pie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.