Messages posted by: question

viulian wrote:@calin

Momentan si eu studiez reducerea No3 dintr-un acvariu marin, si Aqua Medic recomada debit chiar de 1L/h (in acest PDF: http://www.aqua-medic.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/NR400-Manual.pdf paragraful 5.1). De asemenea, se pare ca e necesar sa si hranesti acele bacterii cu o sursa de carbon - la modelul NR400 trebuie sa adaug hrana separat din cand in cand si pentru acele bacterii care consuma No3 sa produca N2 pe cand la modelul cu sulf pare ca trebuie sa introduci si CO2.
Presupun ca si la plantate e asemanator, trebuie o sursa de carbon - dar nu stiu cat de suficient e cel din apa in caz ca se fertilizeaza cu CO2 ?

Ei avertizeaza si asupra zonelor 'moarte' caci la acel debit foarte mic apa nu va curge peste tot prin medii (si isi vand astfel solutia lor cu o alta pompa de recirculare in interior).

@Pippo

Nu stiu cat tine de temperatura comportamentul pestilor ... cu temperatura mare cred ca initial ar trebui sa observi probleme cu lipsa de oxigen (cu toate ca la 29 de grade se zice ca nu e asa grav) si in loc sa stea jos ascunsi, ar sta la suprafata apei ?

Produsul Hydrocarbonate este Calcium carbonate (0.15 g/100 mL la 25°C) si are nevoie de aditie de CO2 pentru a se obtine bicarbonat. Lumea a tot fugit de sulfuric acid, hydrogen sulfide, tripotassium phosphate, tigers, lions, bears, oh my! In masurarea potentialului redox apar iar pareri impartite, ca si in cazul ph controller-elor, desi aici nu exista si alte componente, precum cele ale alcalinitatii, altele decat bicarbonatul, care sa impiedice masurarea. La -300mv, bacteriile au terminat nitratul si transforma si sulfatul, producand hydrogen sulfide (Acidity pKa = 7.0 (carbonic acid : Acidity pKa1 = 6.367)). Sulfidele (sarea) vor face parte din alkalinity asa cum face parte bicarbonatul ori sarea acidului boric. Cantitatea de hydrogen sulfide produsa, ca si cantitatea de sulfuric acid ce paraseste filtrul cu sulf nu reprezinta o problema la volume atat de mici ale materiei prime si ale reactivilor, nici in cazul unor reactoare mult mai mari decat NR5000 si unui volum de materie prima pe masura. Mai mult, in cazul filtrului cu sulf, aditia acidului sulfuric se realizeaza atat de diluat incat, cred ca mai interesanta ar fi neutralizarea acestuia cu oxizi de calciu si magneziu, poate o mica parte de hidroxid de potasiu si incercarea obtinerii unor food additives de tipul celor prezente in produse ca Preis Diskus minerals, continand, de ce nu, si elemente micro ale dietei, zinc, cobalt, ferrious and manganese sulfate, ca produse finale, create in filtrul hydrocarbonat si aditionate in acvariu sub forma de urme, o data cu apa filtrata. In acvariu, apa chioara, schimburi de apa, cu aqua chiara (RO/DI).

In subiectul denitrificarii avand ca substrat siporax, are intradevar loc, la orice debit, mai ales cand exista toc, uree+nickel, acid citric, ascorbic sau sorbati. Toti reactivii, inclusiv elemental sulfur, mentionati sunt aditionati in mod obisnuit acvariilor plantate si se gasesc, practic peste tot, in locurile de profil. De fapt, microporii se infunda usor, iar design-ul exterior al unor astfel de medii tine cont, poate nu si in cazul de-nitrate-ului, de mentinerea unui flow ridicat overall.

Maybe it is AEC, not BEC. As in Anion Exchange Capacity.

Poti incerca si cu Dennerle Ammonium Stop Supra? Poate e adsorbtie fizica, a unui acid, a unui compus organic, etc. Cate unitati de pH erau in timpul minunii?

It was just about frequent water changes.

01-23-2005, 07:11 AM admin_old Join Date Jan 2005 Posts 25 The Estimative Index of Dosing, or No Need for Test Kits The Estimative Index - What is it? as Tom Barr wrote: The Estimative index is a simple method to dose nutrients for any tank without test kits. In a nut shell, the aquarist doses frequently to prevent anything from running out (plant deficiency) and does large weekly water changes to prevent any build up (Plant inhibition).

PlantaGold 7 A shot in the arm for your aquarium. GB. wrote: Many plants excrete inhibitors. In nature, these inhibitors are washed away by the flowing water. If no water is changed over a prolonged period, plant growth may start to flag - despite adequate fertilization. DENNERLE thus recommends: Replace 25-50 % of the aquarium water with tap water at a temperature corresponding roughly to that of the aquarium water at least once every two weeks.

No debate in here, it was about the same subject - regular water changes. In nature it is known that the plants are taking up various heavy metals thus cleaning the environment, though, it is also known that the rate of the uptake is limited. So, there is a thing called plant inhibitor. I know that this is old, but, now that the thread is revived, I was reading it all and I was like, oh, come on, the one who finds EI these days for the first time has definitely this text in mind. I mean, that was the whole idea, to dose excessively but to revert the enriched environment to better guess the range of nutrient uptakes. It is true that the plants are excreting products to protect themselves, to keep the insects away or to suppress the growth of other organisms for example, and it is common sense to believe that the inhibitor must be some sort of a similar substance. It is true that it is common practice to have texts like these on the products since dupla invented the wheel. Therefore, it is a nice advice to take these ideas as bland/concrete/touchable/practical as possible. It is common sense to have both the deficiency and the excess columns in the table of nutrients.

01-23-2005, 07:11 AM admin_old Join Date Jan 2005 Posts 25 The Estimative Index of Dosing, or No Need for Test Kits The Estimative Index - What is it? as Tom Barr wrote:Adding excess nutrients and CO2 allows plants to grow well together without competition. This (pointing to an image of the original text) is typical generalized model for growth and uptake of a variety of autotrophic organisms. Based on something from the original text, from a horticultural perspective, it is more productive to provide non limiting conditions (something from the original text) for aquatic Macrophytes as the target concentration is much wider as well as higher associated growth rates. Maintaining a set static concentration continuously through time is difficult and impractical to most horticulturists, but a useable range is rather easy to accomplish. Aquatic macrophyte limiting can be useful when exploring individual species differences and responses, but this is hardly a good method for stable horticulture. Non limiting nutrient and light levels need to be quite high before inhibition occurs. These inhibitory levels are unknown for many nutrients as far as aquatic Macrophytes are concern and are generally bounded by toxic concentrations to fauna such as fish and invertebrates (see something on the original text). This range provides an enormous useable range that is relatively easy and simple to target to provide stable levels for horticulture. The limiting range is much narrower and more difficult to provide a stable range from a practical standpoint by not providing much error in dosing and loading rates. Since light typically drives uptake rates, lower intensity of light will provide for less error at low limiting nutrient levels as long as the light compensation point is still being met. Generally, lower light intensities near the light compensation point have a lower range when non limiting nutrients are provided as well. The study done by Tropica showed this with Ricca and Van et al (1986) showed this same result with three submerged aquatic Macrophytes. In both cases from a horticultural perspective, non limiting nutrient levels are superior with more robustness in stable culturing methods with lower light intensity.

Porcu wrote:forta asupra geamului din fata al unui acvariu e aceeasi indiferent la latimea lui. Chiar daca la latimea de 10 cm sau de 50 cm, forta asupra geamului din fata e aceeasi.

Asadar e adevarat ca acest calculator era bine realizat. @Porcu: Se poate numi latime, latura mai mica decat lungimea, cu cati cm?