Finally an easy solution to bryopsis! - Page 10

jdieck · #**226** 06/29/2007, 10:48 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by raddogz
I actually purchased mine from HD. I am curious as to is just chemical leaching or is the absorption of undeseriables and then leaching it back into the water much like when live rock will leach back phosphates into the water.

Sorry Twallace for hijacking the thread a bit but I'm curious as how this all started to go out of control for me.

No it does not absorb but rather leaches some of the chemicals from the Styrene.
This is were I got the acrylic ones
http://www.lightingdiffusers.com/Sto...=EA%2D050%2D24

fishnfst · #**227** 06/29/2007, 10:59 PM

I think I might have to make my racks out of acrylic and just drill a ton of holes in it

fishnfst · #**228** 06/29/2007, 11:08 PM

Here is another place that came up with just a quick google search.. They are about 10 bucks cheaper but I'm not sure what shipping is like..

jdieck · #**229** 06/30/2007, 05:21 AM

A link will be helpful

salty joe · #**230** 06/30/2007, 07:50 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by jdieck
By removing the eggcrate you have removed a source of chemical leaching into your tank that feed algae.
I ran a series of comparisons running my frag tank with styrene plastic made eggcrate (The 1/4" thick one most commonly found in hardware stores) versus acrylic made eggcrate (the one 1/2" US made) and there is noticeable difference in the algae promotion. With styrene bryopsis and hair algae develops in just a couple of weeks while with acrylic it basically is non existant.

Was this difference in algea growth system wide, or only on the eggcrate?

jdieck · #**231** 06/30/2007, 09:18 AM

Only growing on the eggcrate, the rest of the system did not have any hair nor Bryopsis algae

wilsonh · #**232** 07/01/2007, 06:05 AM

The Kent product seems to be doing the job, just wondered if there is anyone who has tried the Kent product and it has NOT worked?

SaltyDr · #**233** 07/01/2007, 05:15 PM

I cycled my tank 8 weeks ago and within the first week had bryopsis everywhere. Everything looked like a Chia Pet. It still grows, just slower and is brown and kind of slimey. It still is very aggressive, though. I just started dosing the Tech M so hopeful I'll have success. This stuff (bryopsis) sucks. Sorry, had to get this off of my chest.

Peter Eichler · #**234** 07/01/2007, 05:22 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by SaltyDr
I cycled my tank 8 weeks ago and within the first week had bryopsis everywhere. Everything looked like a Chia Pet. It still grows, just slower and is brown and kind of slimey. It still is very aggressive, though. I just started dosing the Tech M so hopeful I'll have success. This stuff (bryopsis) sucks. Sorry, had to get this off of my chest.

Are you sure it's Bryopsis? IME is usually has to be introduced on a frag or something and doesn't very often just spring up from live rock. From your description it sounds like it might be Derbesia with some other type of algae growing on it...

SaltyDr · #**235** 07/01/2007, 07:27 PM

I am 99% sure it is bryopsis. I believe it came in on some live rock I got from the Florida Keys. It was definitey "fern"-like and looks like all of the pictures. It also spreads like wildfire from the smallest bits. I'll clean the glass and within 2 days it's starting up ALL over the glass. Hopefully this magnesium trick will work.

Peter Eichler · #**236** 07/01/2007, 07:47 PM

Jeesh, even on the glass? While Bryopsis can survive in very low nutrient conditions I'd say with your newer tank it's getting plenty of food. Goodluck with the Mg treatment and let us know how it works out.

raddogz · #**237** 07/01/2007, 09:33 PM

I get mine on the glass too. It seems to have slowed down, but I also have been doing more agressive skimming - skimming very very wet.

SaltyDr · #**238** 07/02/2007, 06:32 PM

I skim wet and have both GFO and Seachem Phosgard (aluminum) in the sump along with activated carbon. Fuge is running with Chaeto and Bryopsis is even in there. This stuff is a plague. The only nutrients in the whole system came with the liverock. I had diatoms for like a day and a bit of true hair algae (now gone) and this nightmare. The snails are doing an OK job in spots, but anywhere they don't get to in a few days gets covered. I had some Halimeda growing and this gets covered too. Cleaning it off of the glass with the magfloat just chops it up and spreads it around even more. VERY frustrating, especially with a new tank and it seems like I did everything "right". If I can't eventually get this under control I might have to nuke everything and start over, which I will do only as a last resort. Although it grows fast, it has been coming in a mushy brown and I think that must be a sign that it is finally struggling.

raddogz · #**239** 07/02/2007, 06:38 PM

I cleaned off the glass this weekend with a plastic putty knife. The stuff came right off, and I siphoned up the loose "stuff". The loose stuff is certainly brown and a tad mushyish. I bought a stiff stainless steel bristle brush and have been scrubbing off the smaller rocks of bubbly algae and bryopsis. Rinse the smaller rocks well, and putting them back.

cichlid nutz · #**240** 07/05/2007, 11:24 AM

Bump....Thank everyone involved for this thread. Hope it got the "Month" award cause it seems well worth the info. Am ordering my Tech M as soon as I finish this and will put my results up asap.

Roland Jacques · #**241** 07/05/2007, 03:48 PM

Could this reaction of Bryopsis die off be due to sulphate ions and not really the mg? Just thinking out loud here.

As i just went though this it seems Epson salt, Reef Advantage ( which appears to be 4 parts Epson salt / one part mg chloride) and Kent M Tech (???) have the best results in killing the bryopsis. With the higher chloride mg having much lesser effects on Bryopsis. Any thoughts?

TWallace · #**242** 07/05/2007, 03:49 PM

It's possible the sulfate has something to do with it. I tried using solely Mag Flake (magnesium chloride) and it had no effect on the bryopsis. I don't know what Tech M has in it, but it worked in both my systems.

raddogz · #**243** 07/05/2007, 03:52 PM

I can't pinpoint for sure as I have been making multiple changes at this point. Ever since I have removed the eggcrate the growth of the hair algae has slowed down considerably.

Mr31415 · #**244** 07/05/2007, 04:11 PM

I read the first couple of pages from this topic a while ago and tried using Mg to zap my bryopsis. It seems as if this thread is long since off topic (I might be wrong - was too lazy to catch up), but here is my experiences.

Well, it did not work. Bryopsis is happier than ever. However it *did* kill all my pink hair algae. Maybe it helps someone else.

Roland Jacques · #**245** 07/05/2007, 04:15 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mr31415
I read the first couple of pages from this topic a while ago and tried using Mg to zap my bryopsis. It seems as if this thread is long since off topic (I might be wrong - was too lazy to catch up), but here is my experiences.

Well, it did not work. Bryopsis is happier than ever. However it *did* kill all my pink hair algae. Maybe it helps someone else.

What kind of mg did you use? That is really where the topic is now.

TimTen · #**246** 07/05/2007, 04:36 PM

great info thanks a lot

Mr31415 · #**247** 07/05/2007, 04:53 PM

I could not get my hands on anything other than Tropic Marine's BioMagnesium. I know - not the best choice.

wilsonh · #**248** 07/05/2007, 05:53 PM

Well just to repeat, has anyone used the Kent product and it has NOT worked?

If there has been 100% success with that product it would just about wrap it up. It would then be a case of What's In It?

raddogz · #**249** 07/05/2007, 06:04 PM

If I only made that one change then I can say "yes" to your question. It seemed to take me forever to get to the 1600ppm range for my 120g system, once there I made so many dramatic changes it's difficult for me to say that was the decisive magic bullet.

Roland Jacques · #**250** 07/05/2007, 08:45 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by wilsonh
Well just to repeat, has anyone used the Kent product and it has NOT worked?

If there has been 100% success with that product it would just about wrap it up. It would then be a case of What's In It?

This is how it looks to me so far

Epson salt = 100% successful (only 2 people have tried it)

Kent Tech M = 100% successful (what's in it? I'm guessing Epson salt.)
I have to conclude it is Epson Salt because most who have tried chloride had very poor success. and What else could be the deference?

I know im jumping to this conclusion. At this point it seems reasonable, don't you think?

Maybe some of those others who failed with the chloride will try the Epson salt.