self-sustaining curiosities - Page 4
Tropical Fish

Tropical Fish Keeping - Aquarium fish care and resources » Freshwater Fish and Aquariums » Advanced Freshwater Discussion » self-sustaining curiosities

self-sustaining curiosities

This is a discussion on self-sustaining curiosities within the Advanced Freshwater Discussion forums, part of the Freshwater Fish and Aquariums category; --> I hope that's the acronym.......

Check out these freshwater fish profiles
Red Tailed Tinfoil Barb
Red Tailed Tinfoil Barb
Pictus Catfish
Pictus Catfish
Like Tree22Likes

Reply
LinkBack Thread Tools vBmenu Seperating Image Search this Thread vBmenu Seperating Image
self-sustaining curiosities
Old 03-20-2014, 03:40 PM   #31
 
jaysee's Avatar
 
I hope that's the acronym....
jaysee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2014, 04:57 PM   #32
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaysee View Post
I hope that's the acronym....


ok ok

K.I.S.S.

now that all better?
beaslbob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2014, 07:22 PM   #33
 
Tolak's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by beaslbob View Post
KISS.

my .02
I'm feeling the love!
Tolak is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-21-2014, 01:23 AM   #34
 
i am better off answering questions to keep me focused.

most of my inquiries lately (very recently) have been to inquire on what should i be looking out for to see what could go wrong.

much of my thinking is all over the place as much knowledge for aquariums is all over the place, ... like something as simple as nutrient availability

so if you read and find something you can comment on for points to remind me of something to consider, or look for, ideas to use, ... great, i gain ideas to use, curiosities to consider, or things to avoid & rethink, ... and the rest, ignore it, ... i know i cover way too many topics in a post, ... and often what i consider to be a single area or topic, tends to cover several different things.

---

for months now my area of research on the net has been to inquire about & for nutrient makeup for a substrate.

this has included how nutrients are affected by pH, ... not the simple chart, but what does each nutrient change into that makes it inaccessable or more accessable to the plants ?

i do not think the concern for a self-sustaining tank starts at the plants, nor at nutrients, but at bacteria (also where it ends)

bacteria process and release nutrients into the substrate for plants & into the water column.

in the biological food-chain most see primary consumer, secondary & the guys at the top of the food-chain (3 levels)

for water (freshwater & marine) they draw the basic first level at phytoplankton.
i have not seen anything that suggests nutrients are water soluble so much in a non-organic form.
i have come across many references that bacteria provide this form for plants (and phytoplankton)

---

i have 2 containers of greenwater, both have been running for several months without any added nutrients of any sort.

i have come across many people talk about greenwater, either in their tank (unwanted) or as a culture (wanted) that have problems crashing within a few weeks.

i don't know if i mentioned it previously in this thread or in another thread, ... a concern that bacteria may not be able to process fish poop & detritus at a speed fast enough to keep up with demand in the tank ... it's not the surface area for the bacteria that's the problem. ... it's bacteria getting access to high nutrient detritus in a continuous manner without being smothered or otherwise plugged up with additional detritus.

---

everyone is worried about toxic buildup of waste, the second or third or ... whatever the reason or excuse for water changes is at this point (first being nitrates), ... after the first reason for water changes is delt with it's very unreliable to hear what the next reason or excuse for water changes is, ... it changes depending on who is talking about the reasons for water changes at the time.

as mentioned above, fish waste.

it has to be processed, it has to be broken down, it has to be reduced to a non-toxic state that can be processed by phytoplankton, algae, plants (one or more of these 3)

it has to be broken down at a rate that equals or exceeds the rate detritus is added to the system (by the system)

here i have seen no concern other than water changes & cleaning filters being offered.

---

as i sit here thinking on what to write, what simple one point of focus to help slow myself down so i am thinking about and writing about one thing at a time, ... and i covered, ... oh dear, gotta be a half-dozen :(

substrate, nutrients, detritus breakdown, pH, filters, ... food-chains, ... who knows what else.

but isn't this all one part, ... nutrients being recycled in an aquarium ?

i sit here thinking, and chances are for water filter, HOB, or canister, i'm going to need a foam sheet the size of a wall in the aquarium to suck water through & hope it doesn't plug up with detritus faster than it gets processed.

phytoplankton & algae & plants (together or alone) i believe tend to demonstrate that they could process nutrients released by bacteria breaking down detritus as fast as that bacteria could make it available

---

i'm all over the place because i'm easily distracted by my own curiosities into other areas i could look into.

light, CO2, ... picking algae & plants based on what the top level i want in the food-chain in my tank.

---

i started my search wanting a fish that was omnivore, primarily herbivore, ... for a small fish, it's hard to find herbivores smaller than 6", it's hard to find omnivores smaller than 4", ... imagine how impressed i was to find the florida flag fish at little over 2", ... only problem it's always hungry (but that seems to be an issue with herbivores in general)

there was mention (either here or in the "self sustaining ecosystem" thread) about a balance between different levels of food, ... i'm not seeing it that way (among the many things i don't see the same way others do.

once the nutrients are availaible, ... phytoplankton gets the nutrients, and reproduces to a point of homeostasis (if a healthy balance) or it crashes itself - and i have no idea what the difference is)

but fish (fry excluded) can't sustain themselves on phytoplankton they need something larger, (rotifers, moina, daphnia, copepods, artima, and/or others) that they can eat. these zooplankton will eat and reproduce till they crash the system, i do not believe there will ever be a homeostasis between these 2. if there is is plenty of food for more zooplankton, more will be produced, ... till the phytoplankton cannot keep reproducing at a fast enough rate (regardless of nutrient availability) to sustain populations, ... and the whole thing will fall apart.

then we've got the flagfish (well my fish of choice for this self-sustaining idea), ... to eat the zooplankton, ... and reproduction is much slower, so no matter how healthy the zooplankton population is, the flagfish population can be monitored and maintained at a specific number to keep bellies full without eating too many zooplankton to unbalance the system.

if the surviving zooplankton are insufficient to deal with the phytoplankton population at this point, additional critters can be obtained that can deal with excess phytoplankton that will have a slow rate of growth so as to not offer an unbalancing to the system if monitored with the same ease that the flagfish are being monitored.

---

that was me getting way off topic - sorry

water changes for a self-sustaining system are going to unbalance the system, it's a loss of nutrients in a system nutrients are not being added to.

in a system where pH is boss, ... as a pH that is too high or too low reduces or even removes certain nutrients from the system, i have heard many suggest things breaking down would acidify the system, the substrate, both, ...

i don't know about the substrate, i have not heard anyone test this, i would love to hear beaslbob give a pH test of the substrates in one of his older tanks, ... his water column tests providing a high pH of 8.x tends to say that pH affected by stuff breaking down is propoganda instead of fact, i have seen the same high pH in my tank as well, ...

it's things like this where what people say is going to happen, or what people insist and are scared of will happen, ... then someone does it anyway and finds rather the opposite is true, ...

i'm not happy with beaslbob's methods of talking about his system

but between tanks that started out different, that reached the same pH, and peoples common views that the tank would become acidic, ...

i don't know how to say this nicely, so i'm not

all that is clear from that one point is what is believed is clearly not what seems to be going on, ... instead of people taking a hint that they don't know what is going on they just change what they are arguing for and still the argument is for exactly the same result in the end.

i won't argue that in the decades past where water changes were more 'new-age' in the hobby keeping certain sensitive fish was largely luck, and more likely luck will run out, ... or they were doing those water changes we follow religiously now.

but reasons for water changes now, ... i hear lots of people point out what they think is going to go on, and their reasons for promoting water changes, ... and those reasons turn out to be wrong.

people argue the tanks are going to be acidic, and bob & myself experience exactly the opposite.

so i can't say this nicely, ... but things like this tends to suggest you don't know what you're talking about.

sure it's one point, and probably the only one for awhile i could say 'see, see, told you so', ... like some child who won a prize at a carnival. ... i just don't want to be the same child who in his enthusiasm tripped and the new toy fell in the mud.

so all i can say is the popular view for one small point turns out to be wrong

i can either believe everything everyone is telling me to do (no need to reinvent the wheel)
or i could learn by experience the truth behind what everyone is saying (and reinvent the wheel)

or maybe find that there's only a few things that are needed to be done to be the difference between self-sustaining (from a human intervention scenario)

or maybe i find it's one loose end after another and only at that point will i be more than welcome to share everything i have learned to say "it can't be done"

but all i know now, ... no one knows why it can't be done, what people do know is why it hasn't worked in the past

yes i know my thoughts are all over, pick and choose points to attack, or points to listen to, or points to say 'i'm not going to be part of this anymore, or points to remind me, or points to become curious about.

people consider the food cycle to be ... oddly, they imagine what goes on at scales smaller than they can see, or they don't consider them, ...

poop from bacteria seems to be raw nutrients for plants

i have never heard of anyone talk about bacteria in a tank other than the few strains that deal with the ammonia cycle.

as for what i am to consider here, ... i'm not so keen on anoxic zones, i have heard that these are needed for some nutrients to be recycled (sulfur i think) ... i am not concerned with promoting these as they become competition for nitrogen, ... either the plants get them or the anoxic zones get them, and i think plant roots tend to provide O2 to the substrate anyway reducing or even eliminating anoxic areas.

i should end this for now, ... i'm more than willing to focus on single points, ... but clearly i don't know what single points to be considered, then i end up all over the place and confusing everyone :(
Flear is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-21-2014, 03:11 AM   #35
 
Sorry flear but I'm done with this thread until you shape up and from the sound of it most of the others already are. I skimmed that post and got maybe half of it. If you are not going to try any harder to explain you opinions I am not going to try any harder to read your posts. This is not a discussion.... it is your opinion.... and until this site can figure out the difference I'm not going to bother discussing it. Discussion is the name of this section but what actually goes on here is debatable.....

You are thinking far to high up on the scale of everything and you will fail. Chemistry will win in the end regardless of what you think or believe.

I gave you about 150 pages of text under the recommendation that you read it. It would answer a ton and more of what you are asking if you take the time to understand it. I know you at best glanced at it to be replying this early.

You want to talk about the redox potential, anoxic environments, nutrient cycling, nutrient deficiency, nutrient toxicity, and all the other chemistry you need to make this theoretically work I can do that. Whether you actually bother to learn these is a moot point. Trust me.... the trophic levels are not were your problems lie. The inability to nutrient cycle will break down the trophic levels very quickly. Your flagfish, phytoplankton, zooplankton are all subject to this. Since after all chemistry dictates biology and the only thing that dictates chemistry is physics. But hey nothing like learning with hands on experience I say.

I'm not against you flear nor I am I with you. If you can't take the effort to straightforward explain yourself and not hit on two dozen separate issues in one post and if you actually took the advice you are given. Then I might actually take the time to help you but until then you are on your own and can keep fumbling in the dark tripping over the real issues. It doesn't effect me in the least. Other then your posts do have a certain amusement when I am drunk...
Tolak likes this.
Mikaila31 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-21-2014, 07:00 AM   #36
 
i'm going to see if i have that book already downloaded, ... otherwise it's a $9 book for me to download.
Flear is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-21-2014, 08:36 AM   #37
 
the link i gave you had the entire text on it. Some 600 pages.
Posted via Mobile Device
Mikaila31 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-21-2014, 09:19 AM   #38
 
mikaila, ...

it's good i have gotten to where i am now, ... a year ago i would have looked at any text book sized material and said "too much", ... currently i have pretty much exhausted everything with instant answers.

it's not a reluctance to learn so much as where i am at (physically) in my life, ... at home study time is virtually nil, at work (oddly) i have tones of time to learn and study.

i am very pleased scribd isn't blocked here at work :)

thanks, ... i should get through this in a few days
Flear is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2014, 02:40 AM   #39
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flear View Post
currently i have pretty much exhausted everything with instant answers.
Theres are your own answers not actually anything you have bothered to debate. I did go through this train wreck of a post and have highlighted everything I know to be partially or completely incorrect with my current understanding of chemistry, biology, and ecology.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Flear View Post
i am better off answering questions to keep me focused.

most of my inquiries lately (very recently) have been to inquire on what should i be looking out for to see what could go wrong.

much of my thinking is all over the place as much knowledge for aquariums is all over the place, ... like something as simple as nutrient availability

so if you read and find something you can comment on for points to remind me of something to consider, or look for, ideas to use, ... great, i gain ideas to use, curiosities to consider, or things to avoid & rethink, ... and the rest, ignore it, ... i know i cover way too many topics in a post, ... and often what i consider to be a single area or topic, tends to cover several different things.

---

for months now my area of research on the net has been to inquire about & for nutrient makeup for a substrate.

this has included how nutrients are affected by pH, ... not the simple chart, but what does each nutrient change into that makes it inaccessable or more accessable to the plants ?

i do not think the concern for a self-sustaining tank starts at the plants, nor at nutrients, but at bacteria (also where it ends)

bacteria process and release nutrients into the substrate for plants & into the water column.

in the biological food-chain most see primary consumer, secondary & the guys at the top of the food-chain (3 levels)

for water (freshwater & marine) they draw the basic first level at phytoplankton.
i have not seen anything that suggests nutrients are water soluble so much in a non-organic form.
i have come across many references that bacteria provide this form for plants (and phytoplankton)


---

i have 2 containers of greenwater, both have been running for several months without any added nutrients of any sort.

i have come across many people talk about greenwater, either in their tank (unwanted) or as a culture (wanted) that have problems crashing within a few weeks.

i don't know if i mentioned it previously in this thread or in another thread, ... a concern that bacteria may not be able to process fish poop & detritus at a speed fast enough to keep up with demand in the tank ... it's not the surface area for the bacteria that's the problem. ... it's bacteria getting access to high nutrient detritus in a continuous manner without being smothered or otherwise plugged up with additional detritus.

---

everyone is worried about toxic buildup of waste, the second or third or ... whatever the reason or excuse for water changes is at this point (first being nitrates), ... after the first reason for water changes is delt with it's very unreliable to hear what the next reason or excuse for water changes is, ... it changes depending on who is talking about the reasons for water changes at the time.

as mentioned above, fish waste.

it has to be processed, it has to be broken down, it has to be reduced to a non-toxic state that can be processed by phytoplankton, algae, plants (one or more of these 3)

it has to be broken down at a rate that equals or exceeds the rate detritus is added to the system (by the system)

here i have seen no concern other than water changes & cleaning filters being offered.

---

as i sit here thinking on what to write, what simple one point of focus to help slow myself down so i am thinking about and writing about one thing at a time, ... and i covered, ... oh dear, gotta be a half-dozen :(

substrate, nutrients, detritus breakdown, pH, filters, ... food-chains, ... who knows what else.

but isn't this all one part, ... nutrients being recycled in an aquarium ?

i sit here thinking, and chances are for water filter, HOB, or canister, i'm going to need a foam sheet the size of a wall in the aquarium to suck water through & hope it doesn't plug up with detritus faster than it gets processed.

phytoplankton & algae & plants (together or alone) i believe tend to demonstrate that they could process nutrients released by bacteria breaking down detritus as fast as that bacteria could make it available

---

i'm all over the place because i'm easily distracted by my own curiosities into other areas i could look into.

light, CO2, ... picking algae & plants based on what the top level i want in the food-chain in my tank.

---

i started my search wanting a fish that was omnivore, primarily herbivore, ... for a small fish, it's hard to find herbivores smaller than 6", it's hard to find omnivores smaller than 4", ... imagine how impressed i was to find the florida flag fish at little over 2", ... only problem it's always hungry (but that seems to be an issue with herbivores in general)

there was mention (either here or in the "self sustaining ecosystem" thread) about a balance between different levels of food, ... i'm not seeing it that way (among the many things i don't see the same way others do.

once the nutrients are availaible, ... phytoplankton gets the nutrients, and reproduces to a point of homeostasis (if a healthy balance) or it crashes itself - and i have no idea what the difference is)

but fish (fry excluded) can't sustain themselves on phytoplankton they need something larger, (rotifers, moina, daphnia, copepods, artima, and/or others) that they can eat. these zooplankton will eat and reproduce till they crash the system, i do not believe there will ever be a homeostasis between these 2. if there is is plenty of food for more zooplankton, more will be produced, ... till the phytoplankton cannot keep reproducing at a fast enough rate (regardless of nutrient availability) to sustain populations, ... and the whole thing will fall apart.

then we've got the flagfish (well my fish of choice for this self-sustaining idea), ... to eat the zooplankton, ... and reproduction is much slower, so no matter how healthy the zooplankton population is, the flagfish population can be monitored and maintained at a specific number to keep bellies full without eating too many zooplankton to unbalance the system.

if the surviving zooplankton are insufficient to deal with the phytoplankton population at this point, additional critters can be obtained that can deal with excess phytoplankton that will have a slow rate of growth so as to not offer an unbalancing to the system if monitored with the same ease that the flagfish are being monitored.

---

that was me getting way off topic - sorry

water changes for a self-sustaining system are going to unbalance the system, it's a loss of nutrients in a system nutrients are not being added to.

in a system where pH is boss, ... as a pH that is too high or too low reduces or even removes certain nutrients from the system, i have heard many suggest things breaking down would acidify the system, the substrate, both, ...

i don't know about the substrate, i have not heard anyone test this, i would love to hear beaslbob give a pH test of the substrates in one of his older tanks, ... his water column tests providing a high pH of 8.x tends to say that pH affected by stuff breaking down is propoganda instead of fact, i have seen the same high pH in my tank as well, ...

it's things like this where what people say is going to happen, or what people insist and are scared of will happen, ... then someone does it anyway and finds rather the opposite is true, ...

i'm not happy with beaslbob's methods of talking about his system

but between tanks that started out different, that reached the same pH, and peoples common views that the tank would become acidic, ...

i don't know how to say this nicely, so i'm not

all that is clear from that one point is what is believed is clearly not what seems to be going on, ... instead of people taking a hint that they don't know what is going on they just change what they are arguing for and still the argument is for exactly the same result in the end.

i won't argue that in the decades past where water changes were more 'new-age' in the hobby keeping certain sensitive fish was largely luck, and more likely luck will run out, ... or they were doing those water changes we follow religiously now.

but reasons for water changes now, ... i hear lots of people point out what they think is going to go on, and their reasons for promoting water changes, ... and those reasons turn out to be wrong.

people argue the tanks are going to be acidic, and bob & myself experience exactly the opposite.

so i can't say this nicely, ... but things like this tends to suggest you don't know what you're talking about.

sure it's one point, and probably the only one for awhile i could say 'see, see, told you so', ... like some child who won a prize at a carnival. ... i just don't want to be the same child who in his enthusiasm tripped and the new toy fell in the mud.

so all i can say is the popular view for one small point turns out to be wrong

i can either believe everything everyone is telling me to do (no need to reinvent the wheel)
or i could learn by experience the truth behind what everyone is saying (and reinvent the wheel)

or maybe find that there's only a few things that are needed to be done to be the difference between self-sustaining (from a human intervention scenario)

or maybe i find it's one loose end after another and only at that point will i be more than welcome to share everything i have learned to say "it can't be done"

but all i know now, ... no one knows why it can't be done, what people do know is why it hasn't worked in the past

yes i know my thoughts are all over, pick and choose points to attack, or points to listen to, or points to say 'i'm not going to be part of this anymore, or points to remind me, or points to become curious about.

people consider the food cycle to be ... oddly, they imagine what goes on at scales smaller than they can see, or they don't consider them, ...

poop from bacteria seems to be raw nutrients for plants

i have never heard of anyone talk about bacteria in a tank other than the few strains that deal with the ammonia cycle.

as for what i am to consider here, ... i'm not so keen on anoxic zones, i have heard that these are needed for some nutrients to be recycled (sulfur i think) ... i am not concerned with promoting these as they become competition for nitrogen, ... either the plants get them or the anoxic zones get them, and i think plant roots http://www.tropicalfishkeeping.com/n...&p=4153042tend to provide O2 to the substrate anyway reducing or even eliminating anoxic areas.

i should end this for now, ... i'm more than willing to focus on single points, ... but clearly i don't know what single points to be considered, then i end up all over the place and confusing everyone :(
These things you need to research more. Answering your own questions can only ever get you so far. I could certainly break down and explain each of these points but the answers are complex and like you mentioned time is a commodity of sorts and I simply do not have much to spend on this. The Dodds text should help in this regard.

Also flear this is your final warning from me on your posts. One of the basic formal rules of discussion is to present your ideas clearly. Another train wreck like how that post was setup and I don't care if you figure out how to keep fish on the moon, its not worth reading or responding to. If it helps limit your posts to a max of 3 points of discussion(clearly explained) and no off topic stuff, put the rest in a word document for yourself. We can deal with the presented ones then move on to the other ones and you may find as we go that other points get explained. If you can't manage that then enjoy fumbling in the dark.

BTW you have 1-2 weeks to go through that text per most formal rules, so don't rush. I'm not asking you to read it but to understand it. Tho typically I have found out the more you know the less you understand and it can be a vicious cycle.

I am completely unbiased on the outcome of this flear. It does not change anything for me one way or the other. Most ppl here don't have issue with your ideas or theories its how you are presenting them.

PS. If you can't say it nicely, don't say it at all. The mods may not believe in the rules for formal discussion/debate/argument but I do.
Mikaila31 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2014, 06:37 AM   #40
 
jaysee's Avatar
 
self-sustaining curiosities

Mikaila I'm impressed that you read it cause I sure didn't. Flear - help yourself a little and stop the diarrhea of the fingers. You're honestly starting to reminding me of bob here, obstructing discussion.
jaysee is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
self sustaining Flear Advanced Freshwater Discussion 1 01-22-2014 08:35 AM
Self Sustaining Aquarium senyk Invertebrates 7 07-15-2013 08:43 PM
self sustaining tank? Crocer Freshwater and Tropical Fish 4 06-05-2011 02:35 AM
Self sustaining ecosystem. james7139 Beginner Freshwater Aquarium 18 12-09-2010 01:15 PM


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:49 PM.