Oops, I posted my thoughts in your journal thread. Errr, sorry about that. I guess for posterity I should copy and paste them into this thread:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Delphinus
Wow, that does seem high. IMO though, in and of itself, the number shouldn't cause you concern if the livestock appears otherwise healthy and happy and whatnot. Ie. I think people tend to focus too much on things like "Oh no! My tank's pH is 8.1 and everyone else is at 8.4, I should add some pH up or something" - which is folly because the pH itself is only a summation of other variables at play. And of course, if the tank is doing fine at 8.1 then one shouldn't worry about it not being 8.4.
But, I have to say I'm a bit surprised to see those numbers if you're running a calcium reactor. I thought running a reactor tended to pull the #'s downwards. For example, on any tank I run, typically I see pH swings around something like 8.1 to 8.5 without a reactor on a tank, and about 7.8 to 8.2 when there is a reactor on the tank.
Sooo anyhow I have no idea what to make of your #'s, that is interesting indeed, although like I said if your livestock is otherwise doing fine I wouldn't sweat it too much.
Maybe because your tank volume is so large it has an easier time shedding any excess CO2 from the reactor?
|
It could be that the photosynthesis from the algae has an effect ... but .. exactly how much are we talking here? I would not have guessed that the effect would be so profound on 400 gallons..