| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#1
26-02-2004, 09:10 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Surface turbulance in a planted non CO2 inject tank, good or bad?
I know that surface turbulence is bad in a planted CO2 injected tank since
it drives off the extra CO2 that is pumped into the tank. However, what about a planted non CO2 injected tank, like mine? I'm setting up a 55G planted tank with 1.75wpg, and instead of CO2 I'm using Flourish Excel. Do I want surface turbulence or not? I can see both an argument for and against it. For ... you want to rep the CO2 that is being used up by the plants. Against ... you don't want to drive off any CO2 that is produced by the fish and the plants at night. So which one is right? Thanks, Harry -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =----- http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! -----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =----- |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Planted Tank Focus Group -- CO2 tank system | Freshwater Aquaria Plants | |||
| Is 1.6 wpg enough for a low maintenance, non CO2 planted tank | Freshwater Aquaria Plants | |||
| Optimum light period for planted and non-planted tanks..? | Freshwater Aquaria Plants | |||
| Surface turbulance in a planted non CO2 inject tank, good or bad? | Freshwater Aquaria Plants | |||
| Surface turbulance in a planted non CO2 inject tank, good or | Freshwater Aquaria Plants | |||
Linear Mode
