# Hair algae



## ddavila06 (Jan 31, 2009)

i think that is what i have. the tank:
20L w flourite sand, coralife aqualight t5 fixture w 10k and 65k bulbs on a timer for about 8-9 hours
fish are 6-8 aspidora spilotus and pair of apistogramma baenchi inka.
some anubias and baby tears..rocks and wood with moss.
i beed doing enough excell for a 20 gals for the past week or so. light had been off for 4 days. thing is still lurking aroun.............
suggestions?


----------



## Zapins (Jul 28, 2004)

Hair algae seems to resolve by itself after a while. Usually it seems to go away if you add more nitrates. Give it another two weeks and keep up the water changes and excel.


----------



## Soup12 (Nov 1, 2013)

also amano shrimp eat it up like crazy. Only thing I know that will touch green hair algae


----------



## ddavila06 (Jan 31, 2009)

sigh..there was a lot of amano shrimp today at the GWAPA meeting.....
so no luck on my part. one tank has been torn apart, everything but the anubias was trashed and all rockwork and stuff has been bleached. will bleach the substrate as soon as i find a new spot to hold them fishies...

but, the sad news are that im seeing more hair algae in other tanks.. is saddening  

HELP wanted..!


----------



## ddavila06 (Jan 31, 2009)

still no luck...
still adding excell..
still growing algae 

took two photos while cleaning tanks today. sort of brushed my fingers through the hairgrass and thats what came up...:


----------



## Zapins (Jul 28, 2004)

What are your nitrate levels? Apparently increasing nitrate levels will reduce the growth of hair algae.


----------



## ddavila06 (Jan 31, 2009)

Zapins said:


> What are your nitrate levels? Apparently increasing nitrate levels will reduce the growth of hair algae.


no clue. i dont test anything except ph and only when i notice something gone way too wrong


----------



## JeffyFunk (Apr 6, 2006)

What are u dosing? Did u change sources or get a new supply of KNO3? I've found that most KNO3 is contaminated with ammonium impurities that leads to hair algae. Look up how to purify it by recrystalization. I had a similar problem with my KNO3 Source and that solved my issues...


----------



## tonnakpil (Jul 29, 2013)

I just pull these out of my tanks and eventually they just go away.


----------



## ddavila06 (Jan 31, 2009)

JeffyFunk said:


> What are u dosing? Did u change sources or get a new supply of KNO3? I've found that most KNO3 is contaminated with ammonium impurities that leads to hair algae. Look up how to purify it by recrystalization. I had a similar problem with my KNO3 Source and that solved my issues...


i dose flourish excell to prevent algae and iron on occasion just for the heck of it. low maintenance non co2 tank.

Tonnakpill i wish it was that easy.. i torn apart one tank that just looked awfull a few weeks ago. bleached hard and now its gone there..


----------



## Yo-han (Oct 15, 2010)

So no macro's except carbon and no traces except for iron?


----------



## ddavila06 (Jan 31, 2009)

Yo-han said:


> So no macro's except carbon and no traces except for iron?


yes. low tech easy going. works for 5 other tanks. taller tanks. not working for the 20longs only


----------



## Yo-han (Oct 15, 2010)

Thats no low tech, thats like you eating only chocolate No serious, by adding the carbon, you made your low tech tank into a higher tech tank. Your plants will grow faster because they are no longer carbon limited. This way they need more phosphate, more nitrate and more traces. You are supplying only iron. 

If you want to stay/do low tech, I would drop the carbon and iron and supply your aquarium with a decent complete tracemix. These usually contain more than enough iron for a low tech. If you want to continue using carbon, I still advice to use traces, you can keep adding iron but your aquarium will probably use NO3 and PO4 faster than you add by feeding. So it might be necessary to add these as well, but only time will tell!


----------



## ddavila06 (Jan 31, 2009)

Yo-han said:


> Thats no low tech, thats like you eating only chocolate No serious, by adding the carbon, you made your low tech tank into a higher tech tank. Your plants will grow faster because they are no longer carbon limited. This way they need more phosphate, more nitrate and more traces. You are supplying only iron.
> 
> If you want to stay/do low tech, I would drop the carbon and iron and supply your aquarium with a decent complete tracemix. These usually contain more than enough iron for a low tech. If you want to continue using carbon, I still advice to use traces, you can keep adding iron but your aquarium will probably use NO3 and PO4 faster than you add by feeding. So it might be necessary to add these as well, but only time will tell!


i like the "trace" idea. i want to mention that i only add ecxell about once a week and only to keep algae away in the trouble tanks :crazy:
iron i won it so why not using it.. 

im in the market for 4 20h so i guess i will just bleach everything and start over...thanks


----------



## Yo-han (Oct 15, 2010)

ddavila06 said:


> i like the "trace" idea. i want to mention that i only add ecxell about once a week and only to keep algae away in the trouble tanks :crazy:
> iron i won it so why not using it..
> 
> im in the market for 4 20h so i guess i will just bleach everything and start over...thanks


Maybe this tank has just a little more light. Or perhaps the fluctuation in carbon availability is causing the trouble, I don't know. The fact is that this tank is missing something your other tanks aren't. I would start with traces

If it works, you learned something for when it happens again. If it doesn't work, you can always bleach everything!


----------



## JeffyFunk (Apr 6, 2006)

If you read the article on the method of controlled imbalance, C. rubilar states that the main source of hair algae is ammonia(ium). I've found that the main source of ammonia(ium) is usually from my nitrate fertilizers as an impurity. If possible, the easiest way to get rid of nitrogen waste is the addition of purigen to your canister filter or a similar type resin.


----------



## Yo-han (Oct 15, 2010)

JeffyFunk said:


> If you read the article on the method of controlled imbalance, C. rubilar states that the main source of hair algae is ammonia(ium). I've found that the main source of ammonia(ium) is usually from my nitrate fertilizers as an impurity. If possible, the easiest way to get rid of nitrogen waste is the addition of purigen to your canister filter or a similar type resin.


Purigen doesn't adsorb ammonia. Only the organic precursors

I once believed the ammonia causing algae theories. Since than I've a contant NH3/4 monitor which measures up to 0.001 ppm. I can have all kind of outbreaks without the ammonia coming over 0.002 in my datalog. The other way around, ADA brighty K does contain ammonia and this doesn't cause hair algae. Not so sure about ammonia and algae anymore... Perhaps some organic precursors...the quest continues!


----------



## JeffyFunk (Apr 6, 2006)

Yo-han said:


> Purigen doesn't adsorb ammonia. Only the organic precursors


Agree, though you can also buy ammonia specific resins (so the point is the same still).



Yo-han said:


> I once believed the ammonia causing algae theories. Since than I've a contant NH3/4 monitor which measures up to 0.001 ppm. I can have all kind of outbreaks without the ammonia coming over 0.002 in my datalog. The other way around, ADA brighty K does contain ammonia and this doesn't cause hair algae. Not so sure about ammonia and algae anymore... Perhaps some organic precursors...the quest continues!


I find a few things troubling about this statement. First of all, if your monitor can only go up to 0.001 ppm, then of course it will never measure 0.002 ppm... Do you mean it has a sensitivity down to 0.001 ppm?

Second of all, how does your monitor work? What type of probe do you have? From working in a laboratory and working with ion selective electrodes, i can tell you that the probes are selective for either NH3 or NH4+, not both. The probes are also pH sensitive... For example, most NH3 probes require you to raise the pH above 11 in order to convert all of the NH4+ to NH3. Ammonium probes are more versatile and have a broader pH range of 4-10 (though i'd be hesitant to use them with a pH >7, personally). How did you verify that the electrode was working correctly? Were you able to monitor the pH near the electrodes as well? According to the literature, low pH values can interfere with the NH3 measurements as well...

My point is this - While i think it's great that you have access to an NH3 monitor, how can we be sure that it was working properly? All of the references i've read on NH3/4 analysis mention very long reaction times @ concentrations <0.1 or <0.01 ppm and the potential for interferences at the reporting limits increases... and so here you mention you had a reporting limit an order of magnitude lower of 0.001 ppm. How were you able to verify your results @ this very low reporting limit?


----------



## Yo-han (Oct 15, 2010)

A sensitivity of 0.001 indeed, and no I didn't verify anything. It measures NH4+ and pH at the same time. It is by no means suitable for scientific analysis, but for aquarium purposes I think it is enough. I measure way higher after adding bright special lights (not brighty K as mentioned in my previous post), yet, no extra algae.


----------

