wet dry in a planted aquria

[apisto_shores]

I have a 125gal tank with a wet/dry filtration unit that I'm wanting
to convert to a planted tank. Can I keep the wet/dry or do I need to
switch to a canister?

 

[Terje]

If you want to add CO2 tou shouldn't use a wet/dry filter.

 

[apisto_shores]

What if I don't use co2 then is it ok to use a wet/dry?
If I use co2 why can't I use the wet/dry filtration?

 

[Terje]

You can use CO2 and wet/dry, its just that a lot of the CO2 will disappear. It would be the same effect as if you place the tube which pumps the water in to your tank above the surface.

 

[fishgeek]

i dont understand how a wet dry filter can actually reduce in tank CO2 levels either
can you explain more fully

my logic suggests that the co2 dissolved in the water is going to be lost when passing through any filter impeller and that the turbulence leads to outgassing
though i though plant utilisation would mean most co2 would be used for photosynthesiation prior to losses in the filter unless heavily supplementing ?

how far wrong am i?

andrew

 

[Terje]

I'm no expert. It's just what I've been told by people I belive know of what they are talking about, and to me it makes sense.
The way I've understood it, is that CO2 will dissappear faster when the surface gets bigger and when there's movement.
Maybe someone else could explain this better? :roll:

 

[Xanathos]

Wet and dry filters and plants dont go well together for a few reasons.

First of all, a wet and dry is VERY effective in transforming amonia to nitrite, than nitrate. The fact that the bacteria have access to large quantity of oxygen ( because of the dry part of the filter ) greatly accelerate and improve the nitrogen cycle, wich is a big advantage if you keep large fish or a lot of fish in the same tank since it removes toxins way faster than an ordinary filter.

But, the main problem is, plant also consumes a part of the amonia released in the aquarium in the form of amonium. Since your filter works way faster than the plants, it makes a competition between the two of them, thus greatly reducing plant growth because they lack a very important nutrient in the form of amonium. Nitrate will be consumed by plants, but it's much more easily absorbed in it's amonium state.

That why it's not a very good idea to put both of them together..

Phil

 

[fishgeek]

thanks phil, makes sense on the nitrogen side of things being limited by better filtration

andrew

 

[farm41]

Plants will use the nitrogen in nitrate form too, and it will be there until the plants use it, or the water changes reduce it.

Co2 is so cheap, just turn it up. I have a 10lb tank on each of my 75's, lasts 13 months, cost is $9.90 to refill, I have the spraybars on both tanks mounted in the back 1/2 down the wall and pointed up. Lots of circulation, rolls the water at top, but gentle movement below. I suppose it wastes some co2, but it's cheap. Plants are growing like crazy, fish too.

I have a 155g waiting on the front porch for time to set it up, it will get halides, wet/dry and a 10lb tank of co2.

JMHO

 

[BigDaddy]

Surface agitation creates gas exchange at the surface of the water. The reason the CO2 outgases is because it is trying to reach an equilibrium with the CO2 in the air (which is significantly less than the 25ppm you want in a planted tank). So, wet/dry filtration or even bio-wheels are not your first choice for filtration if you want a CO2 injected planted tank.

Pressurized CO2 setups may be able to compensate by increasing the bubble count, but for those with yeast generators... you want ever last bit of CO2 to count.

 

[blue_rams]

apisto_shores

A wet-dry is not so good for the reasons above (denitrification) but a 'sump' works.

Take out the bioballs, add a sponge for mechanical filtration, place heater (BELOW min water level-Importaint), CO2 diffusor/controler, and everything else in main tank down in the sump.

So you get good water movment, a constant water level, a lack of surface scum, and less visible non-fishness in the tank. Keep the water level high to minimize outgassing. With a lit sump I even keep a small plant nursery.

 

[LyreTail]

Just reduce agitation and the sump will still work. The idea is to reduce CO2 loss due to too much agitation. The same reason Bio wheel filtration is not optimal for a planted tank. The idea of replacing bio balls with sponge material was a valid option, But I would prefer the Bio balls as they tend to clog less. You just do not want water cascading over them and instead have the water flowing through them calmly. Sometimes you can do this by raising the sump level or taking out some bio balls
The nitrification problem is not really a problem as the plants will out compete the bacteria for ammonia. In many high lighted planted tanks the bacterial filtration nearly disappears because the bacteria have less ammonia. I found this out the hard way trying to seed a new tank from a planted tank. It took a lot more sponge material to make it effective

I personally can not stand canister filters for maintenance, but that is just my personal attitude

 

[apistoboi]

why wet/dry filtration doesn't work for plants

here's a good metaphor that really helped me understand why wet/dry doesn't work for a planted tank. of course everyone knows the importance of co2 for plants. your planted tank is like a bottle of coke, pepsi, sprite, etc., what happens to a soda bottle when you shake it? having a wet/dry along with a heavy planted tank releases alot of co2. in other words, wet/dry in a heavily planted tank will shake your tank, releasing alot of co2 just like shaking up a soda bottle (flaten it).

 

[dw1305]

Hi all,
Andrew, I think you are entirely correct.

Andrew wrote:
"I don't understand how a wet dry filter can actually reduce in tank CO2 levels either can you explain more fully. My logic suggests that the co2 dissolved in the water is going to be lost when passing through any filter impeller and that the turbulence leads to outgassing though i though plant utilisation would mean most co2 would be used for photosynthesiation prior to losses in the filter unless heavily supplementing ? how far wrong am i?"

The water will pick up atmospheric O2 and CO2 as it trickles through, whilst there won't be as much CO2 available as if you supplemented their will be as much or more than in a non-supplemented tank. Plants grow quicker with CO2, high light and regular feeding, but many aquatic plants grow fine with no CO2, little feeding and enough light, and that growth may be more sustainable, and the tank will certainly be more stable, which is what I like.

Having said that, plants certainly grow better with more CO2, tomato growers burn propane and we do this experiment in class, it's quite spectacular.
<http://www-saps.plantsci.cam.ac.uk/articles/cabomba/cabomba.htm>

I think that wet and dry trickle filters are very suitable for all tanks, I've been trying to persuade loricariid keeper (on another forum), that a planted trickle filter and powerhead will provide better conditions for fish with a high O2 demand than any other option. I would definitely have them on my tanks if my wife didn't have an aversion to the noise.

cheers Darrel

 

[dw1305]

Hi all,
Should have read all the rest of the post before replying. Xanthos is right, the trickle filter will have a huge amount of de-nitrification potential, this is not necessarily a bad thing, in fact I think it is a positive, it just reduces the variety of plants you can grow.

In the UK in the wild some plants are alway found in low nutrient ("oligotrophic") conditions, ones I can think of are Lobelia dortmanna, Luronium natans, Isoetes spp., Pilularia globulifera, Fontinalis antipyretica and Ranunculus penicillatus, but there will be plenty more.

These are plants which grow slowly and that would be my suggestion for planting in a tank with a wet/dry - mosses, ferns, Echinodorus tennellus, Marsilea crenata and if it's very low pH, Brasenia, Eriocaulon, Blyxa etc.
I would think many plants suggested for low light conditions would do, as they will have slow growth rates.

cheers Darrel