Has anyone actually solved the surface film issue without a surface skimmer?

[snowballs99]

No surface skimmer,
or air pump.

I noticed this is only an issue in CO2 tanks.
Even tanks with 0 water movement, like LRB aquatic tanks don't have this issue.

I'm sure organics have something to do with it as well, but I've kept tanks that were very lean, only plants and some neocaridina shrimp and it still had this issue.

 

[Art]

I've only solved it with a skimmer or significant surface agitation. In the old days, I remember someone would use old newspaper once a week to remove it.

 

[PeerUnk]

I noticed this is only an issue in CO2 tanks.

No offense, but why would a surface film be an issue?
And secondly, my non co2 tanks have a thin film, so it’s not exclusive for CO2 injected tanks.

Happy tanking!

 

[Art]

Water surface gas exchange is important. There is a thought that the film limits that.

 

[snowballs99]

No offense, but why would a surface film be an issue?
And secondly, my non co2 tanks have a thin film, so it’s not exclusive for CO2 injected tanks.

Happy tanking!

Hello,
Notably it blocks air exchange.
If you add co2, it stops a lot of the co2 bubbles from escaping and will just get trapped on the surface. Very easy to end up gassing the tank this way and makes adding co2 very unstable.

Generally everytime I see surface a decent surface film, that tank needs a small water change and the surface film removed, I will start getting algae in a few days from the instability due to lack of oxygen.

 

[Burr740]

It has something to do with the bio-maturity of the tank and the overall well being. It doesnt necessarily indicate theres a problem, but in a mature well-running tank it generally doesnt exist and/or will eventually disappear on its own

 

[Burr740]

Generally everytime I see surface a decent surface film, that tank needs a small water change and the surface film removed, I will start getting algae in a few days from the instability due to lack of oxygen.

I would suggest this algae appears for a different reason, its a sign of the same underlying problem thats causing the persistent surface film to begin with. Something is causing the plants to be internally unhappy even if theres no outwardly visible signs yet. Unhappy plants leech undesirable "stuff" into the water, and unhappy leaves get algae. Can take that a step further and say only unhappy leaves get algae

 

[PeerUnk]

Thanks @Art and @Burr740, these are the responses I would expect.

One can have a thick white surface scum, and quite thin film like the one below in my tank.


If you notice the film-less right side (done by surface agitation of a wave maker) and the left side where the film gets pushed to. I tend to believe this thin film isn’t a problem to me, as I have lots of surface gas exchange done by the wave maker van air pumps. But it is an indicator some plants could be healthier. Maybe due to Bolbitus or anubias, as they are the single two plants getting BBA . Maybe due to not having their roots in soil, some malnutrition of micros or CO2 painfully low. Will find out some day if these two are the ones leaching sugars and amino acids out of their vascular tissue.

Cheers.

 

[Burr740]

Thanks @Art and @Burr740, these are the responses I would expect.

One can have a thick white surface scum, and quite thin film like the one below in my tank.
View attachment 11347

If you notice the film-less right side (done by surface agitation of a wave maker) and the left side where the film gets pushed to. I tend to believe this thin film isn’t a problem to me, as I have lots of surface gas exchange done by the wave maker van air pumps. But it is an indicator some plants could be healthier. Maybe due to Bolbitus or anubias, as they are the single two plants getting BBA. Maybe due to not having their roots in soil, some malnutrition of micros or CO2 painfully low. Will find out some day if these two are the ones leaching sugars and amino acids out of their vascular tissue.

Cheers.

This is gonna sound backwards and it took me several years to realize it, but epiphytes on hardscape in a high energy tank will be the first ones to show macro deficiencies

To me logic suggests they would be the last ones to need more. Not needing a lot to begin with it seems as long as theres some in the water they should be good. Not so. They need there to be high levels present so they can get what they need. The higher a concentration is, the easier it is for a plant to take it in

Hypothetical example its easier for an Anubias to take in the 2 ppm they need if theres 30 ppm in the water, compared to just 5 ppm in the water. It has to do with the plants internal ionic balance where the push and pull of negative anions and positive cations is always taking place (nutrients are either one or the other)

Another way to illustrate it is think of a pack of lions over a fresh kill. The slow and the weak eat last, and scraps

This is where the long held belief that epiphytes are prone to algae comes from. Theyre not prone to algae. They just need more nutrients present than the fast growers do. If your epiphytes are getting algae and everythibng else looks good, raise ferts and watch them get better. Usually its just macros

Of course all nutrient talk assumes co2 is good. However in the case of epiphytes I dont believe more co2 is needed in the same way for the same reasons that more nutrients are. But it goes without saying that co2 should always be the first thing ruled out

 

[Dennis Wong]

No surface skimmer,
or air pump.

I noticed this is only an issue in CO2 tanks.
Even tanks with 0 water movement, like LRB aquatic tanks don't have this issue.

I'm sure organics have something to do with it as well, but I've kept tanks that were very lean, only plants and some neocaridina shrimp and it still had this issue.

haa this is a good observation.
Sudipta shaw might have covered it somewhat in his AGA presentation (if not you can message him to elaborate). worth it to check it out.

 

[PeerUnk]

This is gonna sound backwards and it took me several years to realize it, but epiphytes on hardscape in a high energy tank will be the first ones to show macro deficiencies

To me logic suggests they would be the last ones to need more. Not needing a lot to begin with it seems as long as theres some in the water they should be good. Not so. They need there to be high levels present so they can get what they need. The higher a concentration is, the easier it is for a plant to take it in

Hypothetical example its easier for an Anubias to take in the 2 ppm they need if theres 30 ppm in the water, compared to just 5 ppm in the water. It has to do with the plants internal ionic balance where the push and pull of negative anions and positive cations is always taking place (nutrients are either one or the other)

Another way to illustrate it is think of a pack of lions over a fresh kill. The slow and the weak eat last, and scraps

This is where the long held belief that epiphytes are prone to algae comes from. Theyre not prone to algae. They just need more nutrients present than the fast growers do. If your epiphytes are getting algae and everythibng else looks good, raise ferts and watch them get better. Usually its just macros

Of course all nutrient talk assumes co2 is good. However in the case of epiphytes I dont believe more co2 is needed in the same way for the same reasons that more nutrients are. But it goes without saying that co2 should always be the first thing ruled out

It all makes sense. Epiphytes without their roots in the substrate miss out on a big perk of the substrate. As it can be a big reservoir of microbes and nutrients, in a plant available form. So they deserves to be compensated for missing out.

Cheers.

 

[BenB]

I knew about this thread and came to it looking for answers to what happened to me today. The answer isn't here, but my question is related, so I'm going to ask.

My surface skimmer has slowly clogged up over the last few days, the top of my water was definitely goo, and my plants had slowly almost stopped pearling. They should be OK though. They have plenty of fertilizer and the filter should get the CO2 dispersed easily enough. I was finally able to change the sponge in my skimmer today, and within an hour the plants were back to pearling and the water like champagne. To me it doesn't make sense that the surface film would be an issue to the plants. Any ideas?

 

[Kwyet]

It interferes with gaseous exchange. It’s my understanding that plants take in CO2 and release oxygen during the photoperiod, and reverse the process during the dark hours, so the film would interfere with this process.

 

[PeerUnk]

My surface skimmer has slowly clogged up over the last few days, the top of my water was definitely goo, and my plants had slowly almost stopped pearling. They should be OK though. They have plenty of fertilizer and the filter should get the CO2 dispersed easily enough. I was finally able to change the sponge in my skimmer today, and within an hour the plants were back to pearling and the water like champagne. To me it doesn't make sense that the surface film would be an issue to the plants. Any ideas?

Don’t know… Perhaps the goo blocks light that much so photosynthesis is lowered below the point of oversaturation? Or less flow?

 

[BenB]

Don’t know… Perhaps the goo blocks light that much so photosynthesis is lowered below the point of oversaturation? Or less flow?

Yeah, it's odd. I don't think it's coincidental but there's sometimes no good answer.

 

[snowballs99]

haa this is a good observation.
Sudipta shaw might have covered it somewhat in his AGA presentation (if not you can message him to elaborate). worth it to check it out.

I had the membership but couldn't find his video. I saw yours and a few others who was doing the same presentation.

 

[snowballs99]

Thanks @Art and @Burr740, these are the responses I would expect.

One can have a thick white surface scum, and quite thin film like the one below in my tank.
View attachment 11347

If you notice the film-less right side (done by surface agitation of a wave maker) and the left side where the film gets pushed to. I tend to believe this thin film isn’t a problem to me, as I have lots of surface gas exchange done by the wave maker van air pumps. But it is an indicator some plants could be healthier. Maybe due to Bolbitus or anubias, as they are the single two plants getting BBA. Maybe due to not having their roots in soil, some malnutrition of micros or CO2 painfully low. Will find out some day if these two are the ones leaching sugars and amino acids out of their vascular tissue.

Cheers.

Yes, that's exactly what I mean.
If you turn off the wavemaker responsible for that surface motion, the surface film will get thicker and thicker until something starts going wrong in the tank.

 

[BenB]

I had the membership but couldn't find his video. I saw yours and a few others who was doing the same presentation.

I found it. On the AGA page go to Archives, Convention Video Archive, 2024, and it is the 5th one down.

I thought his talk was game changing. A few years ago I saw in videos by MD aquascaping that he was growing nice planted tanks in higher light without CO2. I don't watch a lot of videos, but I was going to see if he described more how he did it. Then I was at this talk where Sudipta grows in very high light. It was so good and could be a game changer for people who don't want to deal with or aren't able to afford CO2. It would take a lot of patience though which I don't have.

 

[Koan]

I found it. On the AGA page go to Archives

Did you purchase the 2024 stream?


The free-with-membership portion of 2024 doesn't appear to include Sudipta's talk

 

[BenB]

I'm just a regular member.
They usually release all the videos right after the convention to anyone who will pay for them, and then slowly add them to the regular member section over the next year. Some of you check back, and if it's not there, I'm on some committee or membership group. I'll ask about it.