水草情迷

WT兄同小弟講的差不多喎!不過比你講左先添!正所講英雄所見.......

Because they are ugly, they are used in sump filter inside the cupboard. For non-planted it is very effecitive an save method.
according to the experiement of "Tropical Fish Hobbist", the algae almost remove all PO3, PO4, NH3, NH4+, No2......, Most important is that it require very little light and no need to add any co2.

I would said it make senses for non-planted aquarium.

agree with you.
also it is also applying to sea aqualrium. some peoples use ugly algae in sump filter as well. There are even an international company reproduce and supply those kind of algae.

植物净水法不是新鮮事物,所有水草書都有講,我唸最有趣是為何發x不用較美觀的莫絲而要用黑毛呢?!我猜多半是冇時間换水,放木加莫絲又怕人捉不到魚不便,其實所有野都係講平衡

話雖如始,但唔知有幾多朋友可以在舊發記那一缸黑麻麻及長滿黑毛藻的$98元精選藍酋長內揀到心儀的鯛鯛呢?個人覺得,要比數佰元在一個'sump tank'一樣的魚缸內揀魚始終不是一個消費者應得的待遇.

我都見過莫絲上o既絲藻同玻璃上o既green spot 出泡 ar!
但其實藻大量滋長始終唔係一件好事,一但藻類大量死亡,一樣會污染水質。
但我覺得有藻並不是完全一件壞事,就好似眾前輩所講,對水質有穩定作用。所以只要唔阻住觀賞,或者太大量,我就唔理佢地。

http://www.notcatfish.com/aquaticplants/algae.htm
http://www.notcatfish.com/equipment/sump_filter.htm


Algae filter in sea aquarium
http://www.dupla.com/e027.htm

Company supply algae filter.
http://www.ecosystemaquarium.com/html/reefugium.html

退出

um.............in my memory, the black algae only happen to their "fish tanks", not "grass tanks"..............so, in that point of view, I think they can control the black algae if they want.......in fact, I think controlling black algae in "fish tanks" is easier than controlling it in "grass tanks". And agree to "TonyC", their "fish tanks" appear black algae very soon after their setting up.
Also, I want to raise a point, I think it will be better if we don't treat every tank with same method...........I mean something good for "fish tanks" may not be good for "grass tanks" & something good for "fish tanks" may not be good for "fish tanks", that all.

賣魚的商店應不應用黑毛藻去穩定水質?
受害者會是誰?買魚和養草的,一不小心便手尾長,魚街又 多生意了,買藥買草翻缸
受益者會是誰?賣魚的和賣草的商店
看來是一個"好"的商業策略.不知是有心或無意.

根據你地的分享,水草和水藻唔係直接的敵人,佢地只係在某d地方係競爭對手.水入邊其中一些原素固然對佢地都有好處,這些原素成為他們彼此的競爭目標.但係其他個d原素對佢地黎講就係各取所需.

水藻都係水生植物,對水質有正面的作用,作為穩定水質的其中一份子,也使到水中的生態世界比較完備. 為使魚缸成為我們心目中的水底世界,水草我們便用工作魚來幫助水草成為缸中的強勢,填補藻類減少的生態空間.

那麼,我又有一個問題:水草和水藻既然不是全面的競爭對手,佢地所需用的原素就不是完全重疊.這些原素可能包括對魚類有害的原素.這些原素是否非要靠換水才可解決呢?

仍需指教....多謝.

I didn't think that issue at this angle before, Alex Hing's point is 有道理. When the a grass tank is "attacked" by the things from "fish tank", it can be so terrible...........
I also dont understand why some of their tanks are "stabilized" by moss while others are "stabilized" by black algae.
however, it is not easy (I think some what impossible) to know rather they are "有心或無意"

你好似忽略了水中缸中存在好多不同的菌!這些菌在水草與藻類淨化水質過程裡,扮演了非常重要的角色,以完成及平衡整個水質淨化及生態循環的過程!舉例,如果缸中的魚數量不是很多,又這些魚從來不餵飼的話,換水?可能幾個月甚至一年先至換水三分一都得!即只要補充溢散了或蒸發了的水份即可!(起碼小弟覺得是這樣!)
小弟不是針對發記賣魚應送藻與否,只是把一些自已的養魚養草感覺說出來而已,有錯請指正!

Whenever you buy some new fish, plant, rock, wood....etc.,
it is always better to keep it in a small separated tank for some days (with or without medicine) before adding to your main tanks.

It is the best prastice but many few people follow.
I did that when I kept more than 20 discus.
New fishes/plants sometimes bring dead to your old tanks.

New fishes/plants are somehow very dangerous even if you don't see anything abnormal in shop's tanks.

我有一個經驗可同各位分享.我曾經在露天的地方,用一個水筒養了幾條米奇及黑摩利,三年來從未轉水,只是用水喉水直接補充蒸發了的水.結果,生了很多絲藻,差不多整個水面都是,而且有太陽的日子就勁多泡.魚怎樣呢?當然久不久就有死魚,但生的比死的快,到我清缸時,竟然有三十幾條魚呢!