# Lighting-Siesta & CO2



## dwalstad

Hello Folks,

I have brand new data for you on lighting and CO2. It firms up my argument for the Siesta Regimen, that is, to give plants an "afternoon nap".

Below is a figure showing CO2 measurements on my 50 gal tank over the course of a day. The day starts at 7:00 AM when lights come on, so that is TPt 0 (Time Point zero). As you can see, CO2 is rapidly depleted over the next 5 hours. It drops from 5 mg/l at TPt 0 to 2 mg/l at Tpt 5 (Noon). This can only be due to plant photosynthesis.

If I leave lights on continuously all day for 12 hr to 14 hr, CO2 continues to decrease and level off at 1 mg/l and stay there throughout the afternoon. This is not ideal. It means plants are competing for not much CO2 all afternoon. Since algae is better at getting CO2, it gives algae an opening.

However, the Siesta totally changes things. At noon, plants get a 4 hr nap (TPt 5 to TPt 9). Overhead lights are off. Even though this tank is near a window, it looks like window light isn't enough to keep photosynthesis going. So you see a rapid rise in CO2 during "nap time".

When nap is over and lights come back on again at 4:00 PM (TPt 9), the CO2 has bounced back to 4.5 mg/l. This is perfect! Plants now have some CO2 in the afternoon to use for there photosynthesis. As you can see, plants are taking up CO2 almost all afternoon and evening. CO2 decreased from 4.5 mg/l to about 3 mg/l at 9:00 PM (final TPt 14).

The Siesta Regimen is ideal on several levels:


Saves electricity. Lights are on only 10 hr instead of 14 hr (with all my tanks this saves me $6/month)
Gives plants the nice, long photoperiod that they need to do well (I discussed this earlier with documentation; photoperiod should be at least 12 hr)
Fits in with plant physiology and CO2 dynamics (discussed here)
Probably helps with algae control
I repeated the CO2 measurements on 3 other tanks. Same lovely pattern you see here.

I am submitting a full discussion to _The Aquatic Gardener_ for publication next year. However, I wanted APCers to see this new data showing how sweet the Siesta Regimen truly is.

Now, all my tanks (with submerged plants) are on Siesta Regimen.


----------



## mudboots

AWESOME!!! You know, I keep looking at my tanks and not testing for anything, but there's always that little guy in my head telling me something's just not quite right. I remember you mentioning a while back about a siesta period, but I had completely forgotten about it until this post. I've been trying to swap between 10 and 8 hour photoperiods with differing intensities to see if I can improve my plant vigor.

Thanks for the reminder, but especially for the actual data to back it up. I guess it goes without saying what I'll be doing on my lunch break this afternoon with the timers, though I'll leave the emmersed "Wetland" as is.


----------



## nfrank

i love the idea of siesta, but for different reasons. I am not home during the day. It is frustrating that i cant view my plants early in the morning and late at night, even with 12hr photoperiod. Some folks solve this problem by time shifting their tanks, allowing some for early viewing and others for the evening.

BTW, Diana's observations about decling CO2 levels do not apply to tanks with CO2 injection. In fact, I give mine a 4-6hr midday burst of light. I may add a siesta to viewing purposes only. That said, I do concur with Diana's conclusions regarding natural decline in CO2, benefit to reduce mid day lighting when that occurs and the likely connection to algae.

A second BTW is that plants do not necessarily need more than 10hrs of light and certainly not at the same intensity. Many of our aquarium plants are not tropical and come from sub-tropical climate which have an annual variation in photoperiod. For example, dozens of plants we keep are native to SC and elsewhere in the southern US. The amazon sword plant doesnt come from the Amazon. Several Echinodorus originate in southern Brazil/Uruguay/Argentina. 
These are the subtropical regions
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Subtropics.png


----------



## Crispino Ramos

Will this postulate, work in this schedule? -

Lights on from 4am to 12 noon
Lights off from 12 noon to 7pm
Lights on from 7pm to 10pm

This will save me on electric bills if it would work similarly as your schedule. Thanks.


----------



## Alex123

Great to hear, I have used this concept for a couple years now, mainly because it saves money and good for plants but now we have something more concrete which is great!


----------



## Andy Ritter

Interesting data. 

Any idea whether this affects the fish, either good or bad (such as disrupting their natural body clock, breeding, etc)?

Thanks,

Andy


----------



## dwalstad

Andy Ritter said:


> Any idea whether this affects the fish, either good or bad (such as disrupting their natural body clock, breeding, etc)?


The Siesta Regimen approximates summer conditions. That's what you want for maximum plant growth.

I have kept my tanks on the Siesta Regimen for at least a year. I have not detected any problems with fish or plants.

However, some fish may need increasing daylength (approach of Spring) to trigger breeding. This is something I'm not an expert on.


----------



## Diana K

I do that in the summer so the tanks do not overheat. The first year I did this there was significantly less algae in the tanks. This year it did not seem to make much difference to the algae. 
On: 6AM - noon
Off: Noon - 4PM
On: 4PM - 9PM

Most tanks are near windows, but in the summer the curtains are closed in another attempt to keep the house (and tanks) cooler. Still bright, but not direct sun.


----------



## ObiQuiet

This is great! I love hard data that I can put into action immediately... 

I've been wondering for a while if there's anything in plant physiology that indicates that an Off-Half-Full transition into and out of the siesta period is better than Off-Full-Off, but clearly that's fine tuning of a valuable technique.

-ObiQuiet


----------



## bosmahe1

I take it that this method isn't meant for pressurized CO2. It would still work with pressurized CO2 I think but, the savings wouldn't be there because the CO would be on for 16 hours. Unless, you run CO2 24/7 or use a PH Controller.


----------



## Perianth

I too appreciate your providing this information. I started using this technique last summer with great results. My first thought was that the siesta mimicked nature by providing shade from an overhanging tree. I noticed a definite decline in algae by using the siesta method. In the past I have tried varying light intensity throughout the day with not much benefit that I could tell.


----------



## dwalstad

Perianth said:


> I started using this technique last summer with great results. I noticed a definite decline in algae by using the siesta method. QUOTE]
> 
> Thank you for writing.
> 
> Isn't it nice when you can both save electricity AND get better results?
> 
> The Siesta method is totally natural for fish and plants. The summer sun shines and a few clouds shade the water midday. Then the clouds disperse, the sun comes out, and the plants start cranking up again.


----------



## Crispino Ramos

What are the benefits of this technique aside from saving on electricity, keeping the tank cooler in the summer afternoon and decreased algae?


----------



## nkambae

Crispino Ramos said:


> What are the benefits of this technique aside from saving on electricity, keeping the tank cooler in the summer afternoon and decreased algae?


You need more?!?!?!? :shock:

stu


----------



## Zapins

bosmahe1 said:


> I take it that this method isn't meant for pressurized CO2. It would still work with pressurized CO2 I think but, the savings wouldn't be there because the CO would be on for 16 hours. Unless, you run CO2 24/7 or use a PH Controller.


Yep, I think this is meant for soil tanks without high lights and pressure CO2. Her data says 4.5 ppm CO2, in a high tech tank it is around 30 ppm all time so CO2 isn't the limiting factor with pressurized CO2 systems.


----------



## Sumthin Fishy

Very interesting..I reset all my timers for a longer nap period.

I was wondering if you had tested other nap regimens? Would be even better to have shorter, more frequent siestas in order to provide higher and more consistent CO2 levels throughout the day? This seems very natural and “cloud like”. Or is there some advantage to allowing the CO2 to drop that far?


----------



## Dustymac

Excellent! Thanks Diana. I'm not so sure about the algae benefits since there are lots of species which grow even in low light. And if algae grow utilizing less CO2, if your tank gets direct or indirect sunlight, won't the algae keep growing during the siesta while the plants are dormant? 

That said, getting the same plant growth with four hours less energy expenditure is a no brainer. The timers are switched and the plants will be making zzzzs in about ten minutes. 

Jim


----------



## Crispino Ramos

nkambae said:


> You need more?!?!?!? :shock:
> 
> stu


I want to summarize the take home message of this thread. Do I need more? - that, I did not say or imply. Don't read between the lines or be shocked - take it easy, Stu!


----------



## nkambae

No worries... I was just bein' goofy. I understand wanting to learn and understand more. It's why I frequent so many forums and ask questions myself. I use a siesta period on most of my tanks as well. For the reasons mentioned and it works well with our schedule, that is, being able to view the tanks when we are home.

stu


----------



## davemonkey

Wonderful inrformation! I have used a siesta before, but switched to a straight 12 hr period. Now that my main 2 tanks are El Natural, and after seeing your results, I have just set my timer back to the 5-on, 4-off, 5-on daylength.

I talked with mudboots about this and he said he's already seen a good response in his lotus (not hugging the substrate anymore). Neat!


----------



## Crispino Ramos

What's El Natural?


----------



## f1ea

I am using a similar method to the siesta regime, basically after reading previous posts where DWalstad mentioned her siesta period. This one thread is very helpful for showing some "support" of what she had been stating earlier...

Sunlight reaches my tank in the morning (9am - 11 am) and then some more again in the afternoon (2pm - 5pm). Lights come on at (6pm - 10pm) but the tank is pretty dark from 5-6pm. So in total i have a partial siesta at around noon and a darker siesta at 5pm... it has worked pretty well, as when i had the lights on earlier i got lots of algae and much warmer temperatures.

I'm sure this method works even for high tech, though perhaps some folks may not even care to have a healthy regimen, or a more conservative approach to replenish Co2.... but definitely the fish and plants wont mind having a siesta period, on the contrary, real tropical ecosystems get shading... they even have siesta days.


----------



## dwalstad

Sumthin Fishy said:


> I was wondering if you had tested other nap regimens? Would be even better to have shorter, more frequent siestas in order to provide higher and more consistent CO2 levels throughout the day? This seems very natural and "cloud like". Or is there some advantage to allowing the CO2 to drop that far?


I did not test other nap regimens. I honestly believe that there's not too much to gain with minor changes. Plus, they're impractical for most people (e.g., my timers only allow one Siesta).

More importantly, CO2 is constantly being generated during that 5 hr. That's why the CO2 doesn't ever go to zero. In the graph (see below), you'll see that the lowest CO2 readings are still at 2-3 mg/l. [Without the 4 hr nap, CO2 did go to absolute zero in some of my tanks after 8 hr light.]

Let us not forget the bacteria. Plant photosynthesis oxygenates the tank; this increased oxygen immediately stimulates bacterial metabolism, and in turn, produces more CO2. That's why there's such a sharp rebound in CO2 during the Siesta. The plants may be napping, but the bacteria are cranked up by a morning "oxygen high".

Because of stimulated bacterial activity, plants are getting much more CO2 than just the 5 mg/l CO2 they started out with at dawn.

As to Crispino's question: What is El Natural?

El Natural is keeping tanks with the principles discussed in my book _Ecology of the Planted Aquarium_: a soil underlayer, moderately hard water, adequate lighting, and a wide variety of plant species.

NPTs (Natural Planted Tanks) based on El Natural principles do not get CO2 injection so conserving CO2 is important. The Siesta Regimen is a very cool way to provide plants with more CO2 during the day. The Siesta Regimen probably won't help folks that are injecting their tanks with CO2, since these plants are "awash" in CO2 all day long.

This forum is mainly for those interested in NPTs and natural systems.


----------



## Sumthin Fishy

dwalstad said:


> I did not test other nap regimens. I honestly believe that there's not too much to gain with minor changes. Plus, they're impractical for most people (e.g., my timers only allow one Siesta).


I recently bought a new timer and found that it was a great improvement over my older ones. It's more compact and the pins are permanently attached. You can easily set half-hour intervals throughout the day. I liked the new one so much I ended up replacing all of my older timers!

http://www.homedepot.com/h_d1/N-5yc...splay?langId=-1&storeId=10051&catalogId=10053

Using a timer like this, it would be easy do something like 1.5 hr on/.5 off intervals to smooth out the CO2 level.


----------



## londonloco

Sumthin Fishy said:


> I recently bought a new timer and found that it was a great improvement over my older ones. It's more compact and the pins are permanently attached. You can easily set half-hour intervals throughout the day. I liked the new one so much I ended up replacing all of my older timers!
> 
> http://www.homedepot.com/h_d1/N-5yc...splay?langId=-1&storeId=10051&catalogId=10053
> 
> Using a timer like this, it would be easy do something like 1.5 hr on/.5 off intervals to smooth out the CO2 level.


These are the timers I use all over my house, for all my tanks and my xmas lights. $4 at Walmart also. Recently I've found 3 prong ones...great timers.


----------



## bosmahe1

Sumthin Fishy said:


> I recently bought a new timer and found that it was a great improvement over my older ones. It's more compact and the pins are permanently attached. You can easily set half-hour intervals throughout the day. I liked the new one so much I ended up replacing all of my older timers!
> 
> http://www.homedepot.com/h_d1/N-5yc...splay?langId=-1&storeId=10051&catalogId=10053
> 
> Using a timer like this, it would be easy do something like 1.5 hr on/.5 off intervals to smooth out the CO2 level.


It doesn't mention having a third prong for ground. If not, it isn' safe for most aquarium lights. Walmart has a timer with a third prong ground for about the same price. They are where the christmas lights are this time of year.


----------



## londonloco

bosmahe1 said:


> It doesn't mention having a third prong for ground. If not, it isn' safe for most aquarium lights. Walmart has a timer with a third prong ground for about the same price. They are where the christmas lights are this time of year.


You can buy a plug that converts from a 3 prong to 2 prong, I've used them for years before the timers were available in 3 plug, with no issues.


----------



## Zapins

londonloco said:


> You can buy a plug that converts from a 3 prong to 2 prong, I've used them for years before the timers were available in 3 plug, with no issues.


The third prong is a grounder prong. It connects the device plugged into the timer to the ground attached to the house. A ground prevents electrical shorts by sending the electricity produced during a short down the cable into the ground outside the house. Without a ground, if something were to go wrong and there was no ground then the electricity looks for the shortest path from the device to the earth, which usually turns out to be a person's body who is doing fish tank maintenance resulting in electrocution or fire. A ground is definitely recommended for safety, but as you said devices will work without them... its just not safe.


----------



## Sumthin Fishy

My aquarium lights have only 2 prongs as they are for smaller tanks. But if you have 3 prongs, then you should definitely use the three prong version of the timer for proper grounding. It's readily available also, though a little more expensive.

http://www.homedepot.com/Electrical...splay?langId=-1&storeId=10051&catalogId=10053


----------



## ObiQuiet

Zapins said:


> Without a ground, if something were to go wrong and there was no ground then the electricity looks for the shortest path from the device to the earth, which usually turns out to be a person's body who is doing fish tank maintenance resulting in electrocution or fire.


A minor contribution: The above is definitely true. It is also true that especially for those without grounded lamps, a *very* good thing to have is a GFCI/RCD breaker, powerstrip or outlet -- for two-pronged lights they will also protect a person from electrocution. In fact, I'd say its a necessity in any case -- grounded lamps or not, small tank or large. Kind of like an airbag or ABS brakes -- now that they're available, it's sensible to have them.

I happen to use those little timers, and they are very good, inexpensive and flexible. The extra $ went to a GFCI wall outlet.

-ObiQuiet


----------



## londonloco

Zapins said:


> The third prong is a grounder prong. It connects the device plugged into the timer to the ground attached to the house. A ground prevents electrical shorts by sending the electricity produced during a short down the cable into the ground outside the house. Without a ground, if something were to go wrong and there was no ground then the electricity looks for the shortest path from the device to the earth, which usually turns out to be a person's body who is doing fish tank maintenance resulting in electrocution or fire. A ground is definitely recommended for safety, but as you said devices will work without them... its just not safe.


Right, but the converter has a ground, on the bottom, it's metal and sticks out right below where the third prong is. It is safe if you buy the correct converter.


----------



## bosmahe1

londonloco said:


> Right, but the converter has a ground, on the bottom, it's metal and sticks out right below where the third prong is. It is safe if you buy the correct converter.


Unless it connects to a ground in the circuit or a cold water pipe, that adapter is bypassing the safety of a third wire ground. Without an efficient third wire ground and if you touch something hot via skin or water, you effectively complete the circuit and that's the part that hurts. I would imagine you aren't using a GFCI outlet as well. I typical circuit breaker for a wall outlet circuit is usually 15 amps, that amount is very dangerous for you. It only takes .5 amps to stop your heart.

For your safety, use three pronged cords, outlets and timers and a GFCI. I three prong timer costs $6.00 at walmart. Even if it cost ten times that amount, I'll bet its still cheaper than your insurance deductable.


----------



## londonloco

bosmahe1 said:


> Unless it connects to a ground in the circuit or a cold water pipe, that adapter is bypassing the safety of a third wire ground. Without an efficient third wire ground and if you touch something hot via skin or water, you effectively complete the circuit and that's the part that hurts. I would imagine you aren't using a GFCI outlet as well. I typical circuit breaker for a wall outlet circuit is usually 15 amps, that amount is very dangerous for you. It only takes .5 amps to stop your heart.
> 
> For your safety, use three pronged cords, outlets and timers and a GFCI. I three prong timer costs $6.00 at walmart. Even if it cost ten times that amount, I'll bet its still cheaper than your insurance deductable.


Hmmmm, not the way I understood it. Not saying that's not true, just saying I have different understanding of the way the converters work. I do have GFCI outlets on 2 of my tanks, left over from my reef days, actually need to get a third one for a 29g I just set up. Never think of it when I'm at Home Depot, this conversation just might make me remember........


----------



## ObiQuiet

..


----------



## mudboots

ObiQuiet said:


> ..


+1...just kidding...I can't wait to see how everything looks Saturday night


----------



## bosmahe1

londonloco said:


> Right, but the converter has a ground, on the bottom, it's metal and sticks out right below where the third prong is. It is safe if you buy the correct converter.


What is that metal connected to? Not trying to be difficult, just trying to convince you to set it up in a safe way. I've been working with electricity since 1980 and have had first hand experience with shocks.


----------



## The Rockster

Hi,
The "Siesta Period", photo period has been around for decades. Last time I read about it was in Encyclopedia of Aquarium Plants. (2003)Can't remember the first time. 
My last attempt was the 4-4-4 version. (For algae control)

I tried to match the automated Co2 to the lights (on prior-off early X 2). I was told this kept the Ph fluctuating, and the dynamics of this was detrimental to the health of the Discus.

Although initially, this strategy seemed to limit algae growth, there still was algae. After months, I decided, this was not really natural, and did not address my algae issue enough to continue.

However, I try and keep my mind open to others' experiences, and will follow this thread.

opcorn:


----------



## Phil Edwards

Diana,

Do you have replicate measurements or just the data set you presented? I'm really interested in seeing what the standard deviation is on these levels. Have you tried external CO2 supplimentation during the low hours? 

The one thing I've always had trouble with concerning NPT or El Natural aquaria is the lack of CO2 input relative to the volume of plants in the tank. ie, a pond or lake has a much larger input of CO2 enriched ground water and other sources of biogenic dissolved organic and inorganic carbon relative to the amount of higher plants than an enclosed glass box. 

Have you ever experimented with maintaining high X-Carbonate levels in one of your tanks? I'm thinking of rivers in karst regions that originate from springs supersaturated with CO2 and carbonate molecules such as the San Marcos in TX and many rivers in Florida. They seem very productive and "clean" even in high PAR regions. 

I haven't had the facilities to do experiments like this on my own and am curious to know if you have. 

Regards,
Phil


----------



## Dustymac

londonloco said:


> Right, but the converter has a ground, on the bottom, it's metal and sticks out right below where the third prong is. It is safe if you buy the correct converter.


I guess this is the converter you're talking about?










If so, it only works to preserve the chassis grounding if the terminal ring is screwed down beneath the outlet box cover. Otherwise the grounding is lost. Manufacturers who include three-pronged plugs do so to satisfy UL safety requirements. These requirements are not oppressive and you bypass them at significant risk.

That said, theoretically you could jump the ground to the white/neutral wire and maintain ground since they both end up clamped to the same bus in the service panel, but that would absolutely necessitate all electricians wire outlet boxes correctly. Otherwise almost certain electrocution would result. Since electricians do make mistakes, electrical inspectors don't test every outlet, and GFCIs won't work unless the outlets are properly wired, everyone serious about safety should buy one of these outlet testers:










Then get a plug-in GFCI to protect every aquarium circuit you have if the circuit isn't already protected. It's a small price to pay for what you get in return.

Hope this is helpful,
Jim


----------



## bosmahe1

Dustymac said:


> I guess this is the converter you're talking about?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If so, it only works to preserve the chassis grounding if the terminal ring is screwed down beneath the outlet box cover. Otherwise the grounding is lost. Manufacturers who include three-pronged plugs do so to satisfy UL safety requirements. These requirements are not oppressive and you bypass them at significant risk.
> 
> That said, theoretically you could jump the ground to the white/neutral wire and maintain ground since they both end up clamped to the same bus in the service panel, but that would absolutely necessitate all electricians wire outlet boxes correctly. Otherwise almost certain electrocution would result. Since electricians do make mistakes, electrical inspectors don't test every outlet, and GFCIs won't work unless the outlets are properly wired, everyone serious about safety should buy one of these outlet testers:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then get a plug-in GFCI to protect every aquarium circuit you have if the circuit isn't already protected. It's a small price to pay for what you get in return.
> 
> Hope this is helpful,
> Jim


Good one Dustymac!


----------



## bosmahe1

My apologies to Ms. Walstad and everyone for adding posts that were off topic but, I thought it important to continue due to a safety issue. Since Dustymac finished up the point rather well, I will not continue adding off topic posts here.

Again, my apologies!


----------



## dwalstad

bosmahe1 said:


> My apologies to Ms. Walstad and everyone for adding posts that were off topic but, I thought it important to continue due to a safety issue. QUOTE]
> 
> I appreciate what you have written. I agree with you that discussing electrical safety is very important.
> 
> Thus, I have started a new thread with an appropriate title (e.g., "Safe Electrical Wiring").
> 
> Folks, let's try to stay organized!


----------



## bmedeiros678

So if I have my plants growing above the water, this method does not apply?


----------



## Zapins

No because CO2 concentration is greater in the air and algae doesn't grow out of water on plants...


----------



## dwalstad

Phil Edwards said:


> Diana,
> Do you have replicate measurements or just the data set you presented? I'm really interested in seeing what the standard deviation is on these levels.
> Regards, Phil


I have replicate measurements on my 50 gal without the Siesta. They were done on 3 different days, but results look almost identical. Rapid CO2 uptake in the morning and then it slows down and levels off in the afternoon and evening.

I showed you all a single Siesta measurement on this same tank-- my 50 gal Rainbowfish tank. It is *totally* different than measurements without the Siesta. I did Siesta measurements on 3 other tanks that day. Same pattern that I showed you all in the graph.

The full data will be published in _The Aquatic Gardener _early next year. It will explain how I did the measurements, show measurements on other tanks, and have a full discussion. For those who are interested, you can purchase sample copies of _The Aquatic Gardener_ for $6.

Also, the Siesta Regimen was suggested to me by CS-Gardener in this forum. I don't know where he/she got the idea, but I surely like it.

Finally, the Siesta Regimen is mainly for submerged plants and NPTs, not High-tech tanks or tanks with emergent plants.


----------



## nfrank

I have not yet implemented Siesta on my CO2 injected tank, but plan to do so.

I dont use a controller. My CO2 is injected at a constant rate, 24/7. I only casually monitor CO2 with pH measurements, primarily to set the "bubble rate". My pH drops at night and then rises during the day as plants are consuming CO2 faster than it is supplied. This corresponds to a diurnal cycle somewhat analagous to what Diana describes, but obviously at a higher level. Unfortunately, i dont have hard data to share.

What i expect to happen with implementation of siesta for this CO2 injected situation is an increase in CO2 levels during the that period. When the lights come back on, the plants should be happy, maybe even pearl. Only "negative" that i can think about is possible change in morphology. Some plants like Echinodorus change the shape of their leaves between short day and long day conditions. It could also affect the behavior of the fish, but can imagine some positive changes and possible breeding that come with longer-day conditions.

Are there any negatives that people can hypothesize or report regarding siesta with enhanced CO2 input?

Regarding history of siesta, I first learned about it from the 1993 Dennerle Nature Aquaristic "_System for a problem free aquarium_."

Sorry for merging an NPT and non-NPT discussion.


----------



## dwalstad

nfrank said:


> Are there any negatives that people can hypothesize or report regarding siesta with enhanced CO2 input?
> 
> Regarding history of siesta, I first learned about it from the 1993 Dennerle Nature Aquaristic "_System for a problem free aquarium_."


I can't imagine any negatives. If there are problems, I hope that you'll let us all know. 

Interesting that Dennerle mentioned the Siesta method. I don't have his book. Would you please tell us what he wrote? Daylength, length of siesta, how it helped, etc?

Thanks!


----------



## Phil Edwards

Thanks for the info Diana, I look forward to reading the article.

~Phil


----------



## mudboots

Just FYI I tried the siesta while out of town for 8 days. I noticed much better (quite impressive, especially _Rotala rotundifolia_ and _Nymphoides sp. Taiwan_) growth in just this short time compared to growth rates over the past few weeks, so evidently the plants were happy with the nap-added CO2 kick. On the down side, my water is tinted green again, which means the water algae was also appreciative. I'll lift the lights a few inches and do a couple 10% water changes and see what happens.


----------



## TAB

correct me if I'm wrong, but your lights are either on or off, there is no middle ground?


----------



## Dustymac

mudboots said:


> On the down side, my water is tinted green again, which means the water algae was also appreciative. I'll lift the lights a few inches and do a couple 10% water changes and see what happens.


Hey Boots,
Just for kicks, who was feeding your fish while you were gone? The reason I ask is my experience shows a direct relationship between algae growth and nutrient input. In my case, after 10 days since adopting the siesta method, the algae situation is apparently the same.

Jim


----------



## Dustymac

TAB said:


> correct me if I'm wrong, but your lights are either on or off, there is no middle ground?


Last time I checked, you're absolutely right! 

BTW, one of my tanks gets sunlight and it's interesting to see the fauna and flora during the siesta period. From what I can tell, it's business as usual for the fish and snails.


----------



## mudboots

Dustymac said:


> Hey Boots,
> Just for kicks, who was feeding your fish while you were gone? The reason I ask is my experience shows a direct relationship between algae growth and nutrient input. In my case, after 10 days since adopting the siesta method, the algae situation is apparently the same.
> 
> Jim


Hey Jim,

I kind of over-fed before we left and let them "fast" while we were away. One problem is that I feed too much. Not on purpose of course, but after seeing how healthy the fish were upon returning home they obviously don't need as much as I have been giving them. It looks like a change in nutrient inputs will be in the plan with raising the lights a little, along with lots of patience...

Darren


----------



## Dustymac

mudboots said:


> Hey Jim,
> 
> I kind of over-fed before we left and let them "fast" while we were away.


Oh well, there goes that theory! Thanks Darren! 

Jim


----------



## mudboots

On the plus side, one of my Anubias has sent up a floral bud and 4 of my 12 Apistogramma macmasteris have paired off and spawned (after only a month in the tank). I guess the lighting just set the mood...


----------



## HVS

Great topic. I apologize if this question is not in the correct thread. I am pretty sure after reading Ms. Walstad's posts and everything about El Natural that is what I am going to do. My question is on lighting. I have a 55 gallon tank and I am thinking about doing a 2 bulb 48" fixture using 1-40 watt Sylvania Gro Lux and 1-40 watt Sylvania Gro Lux Wide Spectrum bulb, both T-12 bulbs. The combo of the two is great for plant growing as you will read from Newt here in these forums. Would that be a decent lighting set up for an El Natural?


----------



## mudboots

HVS said:


> Great topic. I apologize if this question is not in the correct thread. I am pretty sure after reading Ms. Walstad's posts and everything about El Natural that is what I am going to do. My question is on lighting. I have a 55 gallon tank and I am thinking about doing a 2 bulb 48" fixture using 1-40 watt Sylvania Gro Lux and 1-40 watt Sylvania Gro Lux Wide Spectrum bulb, both T-12 bulbs. The combo of the two is great for plant growing as you will read from Newt here in these forums. Would that be a decent lighting set up for an El Natural?


That seems pretty close to just-right, and maybe have a little bit of window light available just in case. I almost would say just a touch more lighting would be good, but davemonkey (one of the moderators here at APC) is also experimenting with El Natural in a 55 and seems to be a little on the high side. With a few more watts than what you've got he's got some green water causing headaches...you might shoot him a PM. Also, I forget what type of lights Diana Walstad is using, but she may have some experience with T12 or know someone who does who can give you some first-hand information on them and their efficiency.


----------



## Diana K

I have several tanks with 4' long fluorescent lights. 
(2) 40 watt T-12 over a 55 is not really very much light. With REALLY GREAT reflectors you might be OK, or with a good window exposure to add to the light this might work. I have a few tanks like this, but they are only 45 gallons, (4' long, and vary, but are about a foot wide and a little over a foot tall; 15-16" mostly) and (2) T-12s + sunlight work on these tanks, but only for low light plants. 

I also have a few of my 4' long tanks with hardware fixture with (2) T-8 bulbs and some T-12s. Mostly these are taller and wider tanks, so the wpg still come out about the same as the above described 45 gallons, but I think the T-8s are more efficient bulbs, and I can grow some plants in these tanks that do not grow in what seems to be the same wpg but just from T-12 bulbs. 

Mixing up the bulb type seems a good idea, I certainly do that. Of course this means even less watts of any one wavelength, so might really mean there is less light that even the package label says, when you look at it from the plants' point of view. 

I am running these tank for me to look at, too, though, and the mixed wavelengths result in aquariums that look natural to me, and are colorful, without the fish or plants looking 'weird' because of specialty bulbs that are very restricted wavelengths.


----------



## veryzer

Dustymac said:


> Excellent! Thanks Diana. I'm not so sure about the algae benefits since there are lots of species which grow even in low light. And if algae grow utilizing less CO2, if your tank gets direct or indirect sunlight, won't the algae keep growing during the siesta while the plants are dormant?
> 
> Jim


Any feedback on this interesting point?

Thanks.


----------



## mudboots

veryzer said:


> Any feedback on this interesting point?
> 
> Thanks.


I like Jim's question as well. I can say this though; I know of 3 people now using the siesta and none of them have algae problems. I'd say 4, but I'm the 4th, and I ALWAYS have algae problems. I'm not sure why I insist on learning things the hard way or ignoring others who warn me, but that's just the way it goes I guess. Anyway, I hope I'm on the track to being the 4th person I know who uses a siesta and has no algae issues, which so far means reducing the solar flare lighting to something a little more accurate for what I need.


----------



## Tyrone Genade

Diana K said:


> I have several tanks with 4' long fluorescent lights.
> (2) 40 watt T-12 over a 55 is not really very much light. With REALLY GREAT reflectors you might be OK...


I ran my 60 gal (120 x 45 x 50 cm) with 2 40W tubes for years getting excellent plant growth. At first it was with the Phillips New Generation Flutone (which are like natural daylight) and later, because I was cheap, with plain cool whites. Plants grew well. My pygmy chain swords at a depth of 45 cm were nice and red and running rampant.

As you are using Gro-lux tubes which peak in the red you should do even better. I have 3x 30W tubes over the same tank at this moment: 1 Grolux and 2 Aquastars. The HM growing under the Grolux grows horizontal while those directly under the Aquastars are growing straight up in search of more light. Under the Grolux and at depth of 45 cm the Riccia pearls. I have Cabomba in the tank and it grows like a weed.

Instead of the 2nd Grolux, rather go with a Triton, GE Aqua Rays or something which is more full spectrum (like Biolux) or like daylight so you can balance out the Grolux which look pale and look more red and blue rather than green.

Best of luck HVS.


----------



## Dustymac

Here's an update after six weeks...

In the 55 gallon NPT, the one which gets some sunlight, there was one significant change after initiating a 4-hour afternoon siesta: the Corys stopped spawning completely. Plant and algae growth seem about the same as far as I can tell. Ten days ago I stopped the siesta and the Corys started spawning again. Weird.

Even more weird, in the 45 gallon which gets little to no sunlight and has the same siesta, some three year old Black-lined Tetras started showing some preliminary spawning behavior. That lasted for a week but now it's business as usual. Plant and algae growth are also about the same and that tank is still getting a siesta. So, I'm saving energy on one of the two tanks. 

Jim


----------



## trag

Dustymac said:


> Here's an update after six weeks...
> 
> In the 55 gallon NPT, the one which gets some sunlight, there was one significant change after initiating a 4-hour afternoon siesta: the Corys stopped spawning completely. Plant and algae growth seem about the same as far as I can tell. Ten days ago I stopped the siesta and the Corys started spawning again. Weird.


I don't know if it's relevant, but my corys always spawn at dawn and a little after. Perhaps having two photoperiods confuses them?

In response to the much earlier post from the fellow who asked about having several siestas in the day: I don't know what it would do for or against plant growth, but it would be terrible for your lights. The hourly rating on fluorescent and metal halide lights assumes a certain number of hours of continuously on operation (at least 3 hours). If you use shorter 'on' periods than that, then you are turning the lights on and off more often than the specification considers and your light bulb life will be shortened to less than the published bulb specification.

In other words, turning your lights on and off shortens the light bulbs' lives. It's probably worth it for one siesta per day. More than one...well I guess it's a personal decision based on your pocket book.

Using the siesta method certainly seems to reduce algae in my tanks. I have two 39 watt 6500K T5 HO bulbs on each 30 gallon (12" X 36") tank and without the siesta algae gets to be a problem. It's still an annoyance, but it's not threatening to crawl out and eat Tokyo.


----------



## dwalstad

trag said:


> Using the siesta method certainly seems to reduce algae in my tanks. I have two 39 watt 6500K T5 HO bulbs on each 30 gallon (12" X 36") tank and without the siesta algae gets to be a problem. It's still an annoyance, but it's not threatening to crawl out and eat Tokyo.


Theoretically, the Siesta can help plants better compete with algae in the afternoon (lights come on after CO2 has had a chance to build up a little). It may not help control algae in every situation, but I'm glad to hear that it helps in yours.

Thanks for writing!


----------



## zolteeC

dwalstad said:


> Theoretically, the Siesta can help plants better compete with algae in the afternoon (lights come on after CO2 has had a chance to build up a little). It may not help control algae in every situation, but I'm glad to hear that it helps in yours.
> 
> Thanks for writing!


This is quite an old, but interesting thread. How was the water CO2 level measurement done?

I would like to experiment with my NPT. I am no chemist. I have very hard water, so probably very little CO2 and much more bicarbonate. I have methyl-red and titration equipment so I should be able to measure Total Alkalinity. Would this measurement make any sense? (say after lights turn ON and repeated after a few hours?)


----------



## hoppycalif

You can learn a lot about CO2 in your tank, and have some more fun, too, if you use a drop checker to measure the CO2 in the water. This isn't a really accurate way to measure CO2, but it is still very informative and interesting. Typically people use 4 dKH water in their drop checker, but for this type of application, where you want to see changes in CO2 concentration in the 3 ppm to 15 ppm area, you need to use lower KH water. See this chart:









I played around with this idea for awhile on my tank and enjoyed it, so you might also.


----------



## zolteeC

hoppycalif said:


> You can learn a lot about CO2 in your tank, and have some more fun, too, if you use a drop checker to measure the CO2 in the water. This isn't a really accurate way to measure CO2, but it is still very informative and interesting. Typically people use 4 dKH water in their drop checker, but for this type of application, where you want to see changes in CO2 concentration in the 3 ppm to 15 ppm area, you need to use lower KH water. See this chart:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I played around with this idea for awhile on my tank and enjoyed it, so you might also.


Thanks Hoppy for the hint... I will try to get a drop checker and experiment with it.


----------

