The Tint

Rain, botanicals, and the "365 Dynamic..."

As a lifelong resident of Los Angeles, when it reads here, for some reason, it becomes that biggest news around. You'll literally have people calling in radio stations, breathlessly exclaiming, "And there's just like tons of rain coming down here in Santa Monica!" (or insert your fave L.A. suburb). We freak out about it. Avoid driving in it, and generally celebrate it.

And that's how it should be, IMHO!

It's transformational, essential for our existence...and for the continued existence of many of the fishes we love, as well as the habitats from which they come.

(Pic by David Sobry)

And specifically, what interests me about rain is what happens when it rains in the wild habitats of our fishes, and how they behave. How do their habitats change with the coming and going of the rains?  What happens to the fishes during the rainy season?

I know, you're gonna say, "They get wet..." 

Look, no one likes a smartass, okay? 😆 Especially a fellow smartass!

Well, what happens in the "rainy season" in say, the Amazon Basin? (like, why did you know that I'd start there? Hmm?)

A lot of things, really.

The wet season in The Amazon runs from November to June. And it rains almost every day.

And what's really interesting is that the surrounding Amazon rain forest is estimated by some scientists to create as much as 50% of its own precipitation! It does this via the humidity present in the forest itself, from the water vapor present on plant leaves- which contributes to the formation of rain clouds.

Yeah, trees in the Amazon release enough moisture through photosynthesis to create low-level clouds and literally generate rain, according to a recent study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (U.S.)!

That's crazy.

But it makes a lot of sense, right?

That's a cool "cocktail party sound bite" and all, but what happens to the (aquatic) environment in which our fishes live in when it rains?

Well, for one thing, rain performs the dual function of diluting organics, while transporting more nutrient and materials across the ecosystem. What happens in many of the regions of Amazonia - and likewise, in many tropical locales worldwide-is the evolution of our most compelling environmental niches...

The water levels in the rivers rise significantly- often several meters, and the once dry forest floor fills with water from the torrential rain and overflowing rivers and streams. In Amazonia, it means one thing:

The Igapos are formed. 

All of the botanical material- fallen leaves, branches, seed pods, and such, is suddenly submerged. And of course, currents re-distribute this material into little pockets and "stands", affecting the (now underwater) "topography" of the landscape. Leaves begin to accumulate. Tree branches tumble along the substrate  Soils dissolve their chemical constituents, tannins, and humic acids into the water, enriching it. Fungi and micororganisms begin to multiply, feed on and break down the materials. Biofilms form, crustaceans reproduce rapidly.  Fishes are able to find new food sources; new hiding places..new areas to spawn.

Life flourishes.

So, yeah, the rains have a huge impact on tropical aquatic ecosystems. And it's important to think of the relationship between the terrestrial habitat and the aquatic one when visualizing the possibilities of replicating nature in your aquarium in this context.

This is huge, important stuff that any real "natural aquascaping" enthusiast needs to get his/her head around. 

It's an intimate, interrelated, and "codependent" sort of arrangement!

And of course, I think we can work with this stuff to our fishes' advantage!

We've talked about the idea of "flooding" a vivarium setup designed to replicate an Amazonian forest before. You know, sort of attempting to simulate some of the processes which happen seasonally in nature. With the technology, materials, and information available to us today, the capability of creating a true "year-round" habitat simulation in the confines of an aquarium/vivarium setup has never been more attainable.

The time to play with this concept is now!

Sure, you'd need to create a technical means or set of procedures to gradually flood your "rainforest floor" in your tank, which could be accomplished manually, by simply pouring water into the vivarium over a series of days; or automatically, with solenoids controlling valves from a reservoir beneath the setup, or perhaps employing the "rain heads" that frog and herp people use in their systems. This is all very achievable, even for hobbyists like me with limited "DIY" skills.

You just have to innovate, and be willing to do a little busy work.

Think about the possibilities here! It's crazy!

As the display "floods", the materials in the formerly "terrestrial" environment become submerged- just like in nature- releasing nutrients, humic substances, and tannins, creating a rich, dynamic habitat for fishes, offering many of the same benefits as you'd expect from the wild environment.

Recreating a "365 dynamic" environment in an aquatic feature would perhaps be the ultimate expression of a  biotope aquarium- Truly mimicking the composition, aesthetics- and function of the natural habitat. A truly realistic representation of the wild, on a level previously not possible.

Of course, I have no illusions about this being a rather labor-intensive process, brought with a few technical challenges- but it's not necessary to make it complicated or difficult. It does require some "active management", planning, and diligence- but on the surface, executing seems no more difficult than with some of the other aquatic systems we dabble with, right?

And utilizing botanicals is just the start, really. 

Yes, you'd have to make some provisions for "relocating" the terrestrial inhabitants of your system, like frogs, to "higher ground" (i.e.; another vivarium) during the "wet season"...or your could create a paludarium-type setup, with both a terrestrial and an aquatic component simultaneously, and not sweat it.

The possibilities for education, creative expression, and flat-out experimentation are really wide open here. A great way to examine and appreciate the cycle of life for many organisms!

Hey, wouldn't this be a cool way to play with some  annual or bottom-spawning killifishes?  Yeah! 

It's just another example of looking at Nature, then thinking of ways to really incorporate her function into our aquatic displays. 

In this world of decomposing leaves, submerged logs, twigs, and seed pods, there is a surprising diversity of life forms which call this milieu home. And each one of these organisms has manages to eke out an existence and thrive.

A lot of hobbyists not familiar with our aesthetic tastes will ask what the fascination is with throwing palm fronds and seed pods into our tanks, and I tell them that it's a direct inspiration from nature! Sure, the look is quite different than what has been proffered as "natural" in recent years- but I'd guarantee that, if you donned a snorkel and waded into one of these habitats, you'd understand exactly what we are trying to represent in our aquariums in seconds!

We also happen to like the way it looks, of course! 

Let's get to it.

Right now, however, I'm just gonna look out the window and enjoy the rain for a bit. Did I mention, it's raining here in L.A., and...

Stay inspired. Stay intrigued. Stay curious...

And Stay Wet.

Scott Fellman

Tannin Aquatics 

Down and dirty? Or perhaps, dynamic and diverse?

Since the inception of our company, we've been encouraging everyone to experiment with utilizing botanical materials for a variety of purposes in our blackwater/botanical-style aquariums. And one of the things we've been playing with has been the practice of mixing various botanical materials into the substrate directly.

Now, this isn't exactly a revolutionary, earth-shattering practice. However, it is something which we believe hasn't been played with outside of the "dirted tank"  concept in planted aquariums. Of course, the whole idea of planted blackwater aquariums is absolutely a "thing"- something that we feel will simply be a type of aquarium that aquatic plant enthusiasts set up in the near future as a matter of practice.

However, the idea of creating rich, diverse botanical-influenced substrates for the purpose of infusing tannins, humic substances, and other compounds- as well as creating a "matrix" for the growth and propagation of beneficial micro and microfauna. Yeah, using a botanically-infused substrate to create a unique, ecologically diverse, functional, and aesthetically interesting affect on the aquarium- even one that doesn't have aquatic plants in it- is a sort of different approach.

First off, the question of why you would do this looms large. 

If you really think about it, the "traditional" aquarium substrates of sand and gravel are essentially biologically "inert" materials, typically devoid of anything except minerals and carbonate ions that are of use to the aquarium. The real magic comes when we introduce life forms- or, in our practice- the materials which encourage and support biological function and diversity.

And of course, when you're talking about creating a rich substrate, consisting of decomposing organic materials (leaves, coco-fiber, and other botanicals containing lignin, etc.), that creates a matrix that may eventually consist of- and perhaps accumulate- what we'd collectively call "detritus." 

Oh, my God. NOT DETRITUS!

So the ^**&%$ what? 😆

Is "detritus", or other finely processed organic material the "doomsday machine" that will destroy your aquarium?

I don't think so.

I know-we all know- that uneaten food and fish poop, accumulating in a closed system can be problematic if overall husbandry issues are not attended to. I know that it can decompose, overwhelm the biological filtration capacity of the tank if left unchecked. And that can lead to a smelly, dirty-looking system with diminished water quality. I know that. You know that. In fact, pretty much everyone in the hobby knows that.

Yet, we've sort of heaped detritus into this "catch-all" descriptor which has an overall "bad" connotation to it. Like, anything which is allowed to break down in the tank and accumulate is "bad."

We're not talking about a substrate composed entirely of uneaten food and fish poop here.

The definition as accepted in the aquarium hobby is admittedly kind of sketchy in this regard; not flattering, at the very least:

"detritus is dead particulate organic matter. It typically includes the bodies or fragments of dead organisms, as well as fecal material. Detritus is typically colonized by communities of microorganisms which act to decompose or remineralize the material." (Source: The Aquarium Wiki)

That being said, everyone thinks that it is so bad.

I'm not buying it.

Why is this necessarily a "bad" thing?

In nature, the leaf litter "community" of fishes, insects, fungi, and microorganisms is really important to the overall tropical enviroment, as it assimilates terrestrial material into the blackwater aquatic system, and acts to reduce the loss of nutrients to the forest which would inevitably occur if all the material which fell into the streams was washed downstream!

The key point: These materials foster the development of life forms which process these materials. Stuff is being used by life forms.

And finely-grained botanical materials not only provide a substrate upon which these organisms can grow and multiply- they provide a sort of "on board nutrient processing center" within the aquarium. In my experience, based on literally a lifetime of playing with all sorts of combinations of materials in my aquariums' substrates ('cause I've always been into that stuff!), I cannot attribute a single environmental lapse, let alone, a "tank crash", as a result of such additions.

A well-managed substrate, in which uneaten food and fish feces are not allowed to accumulate to excess, and in which regular nutrient export processes are embraced, it's not an issue, IMHO. When other good practices of aquarium husbandry (ie; not overcrowding, overfeeding, etc.) are empIoyed, a botanically-"enriched" substrate can enhance- not inhibit- the nutrient processing within your aquarium and maintain water quality for extended periods of time.

Like many of you, I have always been a firm believer in some forms of nutrient export being employed in every single tank I maintain. Typically, it's regular water exchanges. Not "when I think about it', or "periodically", mind you.

Nope, it's weekly. 

Now I'm not saying that you can essentially disobey all the common sense husbandry practices we've come to know and love in the hobby (like not overcrowding/overfeeding, etc.) and just change the water weekly and everything's good. And I'm not suggesting that the only way to succeed with adding botanical materials to the substrate is to employ massive effort at nutrient export; the system  otherwise teetering on a knife's edge, with disaster on one side and success on the other. 

Our aquariums are more resilient than that. If we set them up to be.

There is a lot of science to sift through about natural river/stream/pond substrates and how they function in the wild, and much of this can be applied to what we do in our closed aquariums. Of course, an aquarium is NOT a stream, river, etc. However, the same processes and "rules" imposed by Nature that govern the function of these wild ecosystems apply to our little glass and acrylic boxes. It's a matter of nuance and understanding how they work.

I'd love to keep us in the mindset of thinking about our aquariums as little "microcosms", not just "aquatic dioramas."

And of course, the whole idea of a substrate enriched with botanical materials is completely in line with the practices of a "dirted" planted aquarium. In our case, not only will there be an abundance of trace elements and essential plant nutrients be present in such a substrate, there will be the addition of tannins and humic substances which provide many known benefits for fishes as well. the best of both worlds, I think.

It's about creating an entire ecosystem.

Embracing and fostering not just the look, but the very processes and functions which take place in natural aquatic systems. Is it as simple as crushing some leaves, adding some coconut-based material, covering it up with sand and you have an instant tropical stream? No, of course not. You need to look at things sort of "holistically"- with an eye towards nutrient export and long-term maintenance. 

LIke so many things we discuss here, I admit that simply don't have all the answers.

In fact, I admit that I probably have more questions than answers. My experience at enriching substrates with all sorts of materials has been very positive- most recently, with my "tinted" brackish water  mangrove aquarium. This tank features an abundance of different substrate materials, including decomposing mangrove leaf litter and other botanical materials.

It's been so biologically stable from almost day one as to be sort of "boring..." Phosphate and nitrate (the traditional biological "yardsticks" for analyzing aquarium water quality) have remained virtually undetectable on our hobby-grade test kits. This despite what is arguably one of the "dirtiest" (in traditional aquarium parlance, at least!) substrates I've ever created. 

However, we need more experimentation.

What is the takeaway here?

I think the big takeaway is that we should not be afraid to experiment with the idea of mixing various botanical materials into our substrates, particularly if we continue to embrace solid aquarium husbandry practices.

In my opinion, richer, botanically-enhanced substrate provides greater biological diversity and stability for the closed system aquarium. 

Is it for everyone?

Not for those not willing to experiment and be diligent about monitoring and maintaining water quality. Not for those who are superficially interested, or just in it for the unique aesthetics it affords. 

However, for those of you who are adventurous, experimental, diligent, and otherwise engaged with managing and observing your aquariums, I think it offers amazing possibilities. Not only will you gain some fascinating insights and the benefits of "on-board" nutrient export/environmental "enrichment"- you will also get the aesthetics of a more natural-looking substrate as well.

Another week. Another challenge. Another set of questions. And another opportunity for us to provide some of the answers.

Jump in there...

Stay curious. Stay observant. Stay diligent. Stay methodical. Stay open-minded...

And Stay Wet.

Scott Fellman

Tannin Aquatics 

Nothing to sneeze at! Meet the "Dregea Pod!"

As names go, I'll admit that I occasionally, for just a few seconds, miss those cutesy names we came up with for the botanicals we offer. There was something funny about the pod we now know as the "Dregea Pod." It's unusual shape reminded me of a seashell, or "concha" in Portuguese, hence the name.

Charming. And kind of accurate, because that's what the thing looks like!

That being said, when we did the "great renaming" of 2018, it was time to call this botanical what it was...Dregea. That's the genus name of our little friend, Dregea volublilis.(Pronounced "DRAY-gee-uh"), it's named after the German collector, JF Drege,  and the species name, volubulis, means "twining." This is perfectly appropriate, as the plant it comes from is also known by the inglorious common name of "Sneezing Silk" in some parts of its range (Cambodia, China, India, Indonesia, Kashmir, Laos, Maloaysia, Nepal, Philippines, Sri Lanka, Thailand, and Vietnam).

Known as "Kodippaalai" in the Tamil language, (from the region in India where the bulk of ours come from, Tamil Nadu), it's an interesting and useful botanical, to say the least. It hails from the family Asclepiadaceae, a pretty large, well-represented one! And like many of the botanicals we offer, it's beauty is more than just external!

(The "Sneezing Silk" plant, in all of its glory. Image by Dinesh Valke, used under CC BY-SA 2.0)

Now, like most of the botanicals we play with in the aquarium hobby, we use only part of the plant from which it comes. Specifically, the fruit follicle (characterized in Botany as "a dry fruit which splits down one side only"). And of course, being the diligent scientists they are, botanists would describe the follicles as "narrowly ovoid, longitudinally wrinkled, or irregularly ribbed."

The interior is smooth and shiny.

Okay, yeah. 

We describe them as "looking like a little shell", but who are we in the scientific community, right? Anyways, back the the details...

There are actually a fair number of human uses for Dregea. The young shoots are eaten, and both the leaves, stems, and roots are used medicinally. According to my research, in its native range, the plant is used to treat medical conditions as widely varying as Asthma, sore throat, and Eczema. It's even utilized as an antidote for poison in some places! The stems also yield a fiber- part of a clue to the English meaning of its species name, "twining."

Interestingly, the leaves themselves are utilized as a human food in some parts of its natural range, and the plant is actually cultivated for use as a vegetable.

(The leaves of Dregea volubilis)

So, the fruit, and by extension, the fruit follicle-which we are interested in- is known to contain many different secondary metabolites (aka "Anthocyanidins"- Delphinidin, Petunidin), Flavonoids (Rutin, Myricetin, Quercetin, Luteolin, Apigenin, Orientin, and at least one unidentified flavonoid), and Phenolic compounds. Sounds vaguely familiar, right? I'm recalling from Catappa...

And further phytochemical evaluation of the Dregea fruit revealed the presence of alkaloids, Terpenoids, Steroids, Coumarins, Tannins, Proteins, Phenolic compounds, as well as carbohydrates, glycosides, starch, phytosterol, lipids, amino acids, and lignins. 

All stuff we've heard of before in the botanical world, right?

Now, this is where we depart from the dryly scientific world for just a bit. Like many natural materials that have been used in the aquarium (like leaves), it would be easy for us to infer that some of the beneficial compounds contained in the fruit and its follicle (we'll call it a "pod" from here on out) can easily be imparted directly into the water, or assimilated easily by animals (mainly our beloved ornamental shrimp) which actually feed on the pod.

This is the kind of marketing hyperbole that I feel is rife in the shrimp "food" world, with all sorts of stuff christened as a "food" for shrimp, and the human-specific health benefits attributed to the botanical are somehow implied to be perfect for shrimp. I mean, to a certain extent, I suppose it is possible that some of the alleged benefits can "translate" into the physiology of shrimp, but man- who's actually tested them specifically for this?

Now, that being said, myself and others who have played with this botanical in our aquariums have observed that it's one that shrimp seem to adore. In fact, they really, really like grazing on and consuming these guys! I'd rather use that observation as "marketing endorsement" of sorts for this botanical. Now, they seem to love the stuff...and that's made them surprisingly popular for our shrimp keeping customers. 

In fact, it was recently featured by our good friend, Rachel O'Leary, in her cool video on shrimp aquariums with botanicals...and many of you have noticed, too. It's been a very popular seller in our collection for sure!

And this makes sense, because as a "grazing surface", and even as a supplemental food for shrimp, it is quite useful. They tend to graze on biofilms which accumulate on the exterior, which makes sense, because the aforementioned "ribbed" exterior surface does a great job "recruiting" these biofilms after the pod has been submerged for a while. And the smooth interior tends to soften after preparation and submersion, offering fishes an (apparently) easily-consumed, highly palatable food source.

As an "environmental enrichment" vehicle, the Dregea Pod, IMHO, is best appreciated as a means to impart some of its more soluble compounds (the aforementioned tannins and flavonoids) into the water, and to a greater extent, to provide a physical structure in a botanical-style aquarium.

Now, again- in all good conscience, I won't be able to make any definitive statements that using this pod imparts a lot of "____________" into your tank. You simply won't see darkly-tinted water as a result of using these pods in your tank. Rather, I think that as the botanical breaks down, some of these materials will slowly diffuse in tiny quantities into the water column.  It's a "supporting cast member" in a botanical-style aquarium- from a strictly "utilitarian" standpoint.

And yeah, once again...Shrimp love 'em!

The "functional aesthetic" component is where the Dregea Pod really shines, IMHO.  It looks pretty cool in a mixed bed of leaf litter and other botanicals, taking on a sort of "generic-tropical" appearance in the mix. And of course, its unique shape will make it a cool little hiding place for fry or tiny fishes, a foraging area, or who knows- perhaps even a little "spawning cave" for some!

Being a relatively lightweight botanical, it's easy to prepare, with a "typical" prep technique, consisting of  boiling them for 40-45 minutes to thoroughly saturate and sink them. They're really lightweight, but surprisingly long-lasting. That is, unless your shrimp tear 'em up!

Until next time...We hope you enjoyed this "deeper dive" into the popular, yet always-interesting "Dregea Pod!" 

Stay intrigued. Stay curious. Stay bold. Stay excited...

And Stay Wet.

Scott Fellman

Tannin Aquatics 

My "sphere of obsession..."

Have you ever had that one fish- or a bunch of fishes, which you "are gonna get to eventually?" You know, you're planning on setting up a tank for ___________?

Yeah, that's me.  I have a huge list of 'em.

And, with my long-time love affair with botanical-style aquariums, it's never been a better time for me to experiment with some of those more exotic fishes, most of which (surprise!) come from blackwater habitats in the wild. And most of these habitats are ideally suited to replicate in specialized aquariums.

Think of the breakthroughs we can make with some fishes in small, specialized tanks!

I have a crazy obsession with some of the unusual Anabantoids, like the "Licorice Gouramis", "Chocolate Gouramis", and such. You know, those little, somewhat shy, and rather specialized species that always seem to "do best in a dedicated setup"- six hobby "code words" for "you'll likely never keep them unless you have a 75-tank fish room."

Yeah.

Of particular interest to me of late has been the so-called Chocolate Gourami (Sphaerichthys osphromenoides). I love this species not only because of it's relatively small size- I love it because of it's subtle, "tan on brown" coloration, relatively passive demeanor, and their perfect appropriateness for a blackwater, botanical-style aquarium, replete with leaves, seed pods, and twigs.

This fish has a fairly wide range, but is well-known to come from Malaysian state of Sarawak and Indonesian province of West Kalimantan (Kalimantan Barat). They tend to be found in highly acidic, blackwater habitats, such as the endangered peat swamps and blackwater streams in rain forests. 

And it's tiny.

These little gouramis, although not known to be specifically "gregarious" in nature, are interesting when kept in groups, displaying unique behavior and color. Yet, they simply aren't community tank fishes. And they like relatively warm water, too! Like 75-82°F./24-28ºC- so you need to keep this in mind when equipping their tanks. 

On the other hand, the cool thing about some of the fishes in my "sphere of obsession" are generally small fishes. Like, usually surprisingly small. I have no idea why. Now, we already know I prefer smaller fishes, but it's kind of crazy how most of the fishes on my "wish list" are little guys. 

I think many come from specialized habitats. And that is part of the appeal to me. Like the aforementioned Gourami species...Many come from (often temporal) very acidic, sluggish, peat swamps and rivulets choked with leaves and botanical materials...right up our alley, huh? And they are usually non-competitive feeders, possibly due to their diminutive size. And as little fishes, they generally tend to stay in small physical areas, typically not straying far from a single spot. These types of habits are a neat clue for us to use when figuring out how to care for them.

I recently experimented with a small tank specifically to test a "proof of concept" for the diminutive "Green Neon Tetra", Paracheirodon simulans. It was intended not only to see how a small shoal of these little guys would do as the sole residents of a  specialized tank- it was designed to test the concept of a "pure leaf litter" style of tank. That is, a tank with no other botanical or hardscape materials except some leaves and a few twigs. 

Not only did the tank look different than any other blackwater, botanical-style aquarium I've ever played with- it functioned differently as well. It gave me some "hands-on" experience in managing such a specialized botanical-style blackwater system, in terms of water quality, biological/chemical stability, and stocking. It also gave me a chance to experiment with the idea of "non-feeding"- letting the fishes feed solely off of the micro/macro fauna that developed within the decomposing litter bed.

It was a highly successful experiment, too. Not only has it been biologically stable, with no detectable nitrate or phosphate accumulation over the 120-plus days it's been in operation, it has been interesting from a "fish-keeping" standpoint. The tight, yet relaxed shoaling behavior of the little Simulans has been really fascinating to watch, with a tremendous amount of socialization, and what almost seems like "cooperative grazing" behavior on the biofilms and other food sources  accumulating on the leaves.

Little fishes. Little tanks. Big ideas. A formidable combo, IMHO. 

Yeah, little guys.

The saving grace for fishes like this, from a typical hobbyist's standpoint, is that you CAN legitimately house them correctly in a small aquarium. In this instance, a small aquarium provides ease of environmental control, puts the fishes "closer to the food", and gives you a more concentrated field of view in which to observe them carefully- a real plus with tiny fishes!

Now, sure, you absolutely could keep them in a large tank...Yet, I think these types of fishes make a good case for the so-called "Nano-sized" aquariums. Again, this desire to help facilitate such experiments is precisely why we are offering smaller aquariums from the Ultum Nature Systems line.

So much has been written on "nano fishes" that it's hardly worth discussion here; suffice it to say, they are ideal subjects for us to play with. 

I think the broader context here is that there has never been a better time for  experimentation with fishes that would otherwise be overlooked in larger aquariums. 

The possibility of simulating specialized small habitats and executing them on a small scale is really interesting. Start by researching jungle stream or pool ecology. Learn which fishes are found in them. Try replicating those super-shallow aquatic environments with nano tanks. Keep the water in the tank shallow. Add leaves and stuff.

Observe. Explore. Enjoy. 

Another thing on my radar is the idea of biological diversity and variety in aquariums, and I think that the idea of utilizing botanical materials as we do certainly creates diversity in terms of "enrichment" of the aquatic habitat, and for providing a "substrate" for breeding fishes and other organisms, ranging from fungi to aquatic crustaceans.

I often postulate that a botanical "bed" in an aquarium functions much as a refugium does in a marine aquarium...yet the idea of perhaps setting up a freshwater refugium of sorts utilizing botanicals (or not) is still appealing to me.

The idea of creating a small aquarium that, in essence, functions like a refugium would be to experiment with one as a fry growout or rearing tank. The biologically rich system could be "pre-inoculated" with all sorts of microorganisms (I"m thinking creatures like Paramecium, various "infusoria", rotifers, etc.), that would utilize the decomposing leaves and botanicals as a food source.

Not an "exact science", or even a primary feeding scheme, but the ultimate supplemental feeding concept, which might help support growth of some of the aforementioned small fishes, such as characins, Danios, Gouramis, etc. in early growout phases.

Or, perhaps even as adults, right? 

The concept is not all that different than the "densely planted rearing tanks" of my childhood that I kept killies and livebearers in- places for fishes to get a good start on life; feeding freely on natural foods in a protected environment.

I find these types of small concept tanks really intriguing, not only in terms of supporting specific fishes- but for generalized aquarium keeping.

That's in everyone's "sphere of obsession!"

Stay inquisitive. Stay experimental. Stay bold. Stay observant...

And Stay Wet.

Scott Fellman

Tannin Aquatics 

The Acid Trip...

Are you experienced? 

The expression above comes from cultural history..specifically of the 1960's counter-culture, when the generation gap was obvious, "peace and love" were the antidote to war, Woodstock was "the thing", the seeds of rebellion were in the air, and acid was on a lot of people's minds...

Okay, different kind of "acid" than we're going to talk about today...but I felt the title was catchy enough! 😎

And I suppose, the kind we're into could be "mind-altering", to a certain extent...

We discuss the idea of "soft, acid water" in the context of blackwater aquariums, or , for that matter, aquariums in general over the decades. It's that half-mythical "destination" that many of us want tot achieve to create conditions for a host of fishes. Some of us are lucky enough to start out with soft tap water of negligible carbonate hardness,  and it's not at all "aspirational" to create acidic water- it's easy. Others of us have "liquid minerals" water spewing from our faucets, and an RO/DI unit is pretty much the only way we're ever going to venture towards that destination.

A Lot of people ask about utilizing leaves and other botanicals to lower the pH in their aquariums  As you are no doubt aware by now, many of these natural materials release substances such as  tannic and humic acids into the water, which can acidify it- IF the water has a low enough KH. Most botanicals won't do much to significantly reduce the pH if you start with hard, alkaline water, as the KH will prevent the acids released by these materials from reducing the pH. In general, it's fairly safe (gulp) to state that soft water is usually acidic, and "hard" water is usually alkaline.

Soft, acid water...It even sounds kind of cool, doesn't it?

Low pH water...the "jumping off point" for the hardcore fish keeper, right? A land where all sorts of possibilities exist...Where Altum Angels and Wild Bettas play. A land where replicating a peat swamp in Borneo or an igarape in Brazil are totally achievable. A realm where, yeah, leaves and botanicals can have a serious impact.

Low pH. 

This is currently the realm of super-experienced, highly experimental hobbyists, who are perhaps trying to unlock secrets of very demanding fishes, such as Altum Angels and others, which are known to come from and thrive in pH levels below 5.0. And, to achieve and maintain such pH levels, we're learning that the careful administration of acids, and the application of other exotic and scary-sounding techniques is required.

And the management of low pH systems, with the additional benefit of humic substances provided by botanicals, is a real "frontier" in the hobby. Even in the greater context of the blackwater aquarium world, it's seen as such. It can be challenging. But it's not the frightening sideshow it once was.

I mean, it sounds a bit scary, right? What exactly is the challenge here, besides getting the water to your desired target pH?

Understanding water quality management and the way in which denitrification occurs in closed systems in very low pH is challenging. On the surface, it seems really scary and daunting. I can't help but believe that- like so many things in the aquarium hobby-it's more of a function of the fact that we haven't done much with this in the past, and we simply don't have a "path" to follow just yet. We need to understand a different class of organisms which "run the cycle" in this environment, and how to manage them.

I suspect, that at some future point, there may indeed be more specific procedures, and perhaps even products available to manage the water quality, nitrogen cycle, and overall aquarium environment in lower pH systems. It's a highly specialized area, but one which seem to be getting more and more attention from the hobby. And really, we've seen hobbyists venture into "difficult and scary" hobby specialties before...Will the low pH blackwater/botanical-style system be the "reef aquarium" of the 2020's? We hope!

The other day, a hobbyist contacted me about the process of nitrogen cycle management in the lower pH aquarium; how it works and how we could get a cycle going...And of course, it made me once again want to kick myself in the ass for sleepwalking through biology class in college...but it also got me thinking. Specifically, he was concerned that the "bacteria in a bottle" products that are available commercially for the purpose of kick-starting the nitrogen cycle in our tanks typically don't function at lower pH levels.

It got me thinking about the nitrogen cycle and how it works in our blackwater, botanical-style tanks, and the importance of going slowly, observing and testing, and understanding where the potential pitfalls are which can (on rare occasions, fortunately) cause bad outcomes in aquariums.

I mean, we all should have at least a rudimentary working knowledge about the nitrogen cycle and how it works in our aquariums. There are numerous articles written about that in hobby literature by people who have forgotten more about it than I'll ever know, so I'll assume you have that down..

I've personally never managed a system with a pH much below 5.5 pH; this is where the "outer limits" of low pH aquariums starts for most, and this is likely the realm of Archaea, as the Nitrosomanas and Nitrobacter barely function at that point. We've seen advanced aquarists depend upon chemical filtration media to manage organics at these extremes.

And once again, I think that the real key ingredient (besides knowledge) to managing a low pH system (like any system) is our old friend, patience! It takes longer to hit an equilibrium and/or safe, reliable operating zone. Populations of the organisms we depend upon to cycle waste will take more time to multiply and reach levels sufficient to handle the bioload in a low-pH, closed system containing lots of fishes and botanicals and such.

This certainly gives the bacterial populations more time to adjust to the increase in bioload, and for the dissolved oxygen levels to stabilize in response to the addition of the materials added-especially in an existing aquarium. Going slowly when adding are botanicals to ANY aquarium is always the right move, IMHO. Period. Full stop.

And at those extremely low pH levels?

You might need to depend upon...Archaens.

Who? Huh?

They sound kind of exotic and even creepy, huh?

Well, they could be our friends. We might not even be aware of their presence in our systems...If they are there at all.

Are they making an appearance in our low pH tanks? I'm not 100% certain...but I think they might be. Okay, I hope that they might be. 

So, what are Archaens?

Refresher: 

Archaeans include inhabitants of some of the most extreme environments on the planet. Some live near vents in the deep ocean at temperatures well over 100 degrees Centigrade! True "extremophiles!" Others reside in hot springs, or in extremely alkaline or acid waters. They have even been found thriving inside the digestive tracts of cows, termites, and marine life where they produce methane (no comment here)  They live in the anoxic muds of marshes (ohhh!!), and even thrive in petroleum deposits deep underground.

(Image used under CC 4.0)

Yeah, these are pretty freakin' crazy-adaptable organisms. The old sayings that "If these were six feet tall, they'd be ruling the world..." sort of comes to mind, huh?

Yeah, they're beasts....literally.

They're the crew who manage the nitrogen cycle in low pH environments.

Could it be that some of the challenges in "cycling" what we define as "lower ph aquariums" are a by-product of a sort of "no man's land" where the pH is too low to support a large enough population of functioning Nitrosomanas and Nitrobacter, but not low enough for significant populations of Archaea to make their appearance?

Maybe?

I'm totally speculating here. I could be so off-base that it's not even funny, and some first year biology major (who also happens to be a fish geek) could be reading this and just laughing...

Yet, I  still can't help but wonder- is this a possible explanation for some of the difficulties hobbyists have encountered in the lower pH arena over the years? Part of the reason why the mystique of low pH systems being difficult to manage has been so strong?

And then- you think about the pH levels in some natural, well-populated (by fishes!) blackwater habitats falling into the 2.8-3.5 range, you have to wonder what it is that makes life so adaptable to this environment. You have to wonder if this same process can- and indeed does -take place in our aquariums. And you have to wonder if we simply aren't working with these tanks in a correct manner.

Particularly, when they fall into what we'd call "extreme" pH ranges. I wonder if the "crashes" and fears and all sorts of bad stuff we've talked about in the hobby for decades were simply the result of not quite understanding the "operating system?"

I'm kind of thinking so.

Things just work differently at those lower pH levels- in nature, and in our aquariums.

Suffice it to say,  it's not "disaster time" when you get into this range- it just requires greater understanding and a different approach to nitrogen cycle management. Taking the time to learn about the arena in which you're playing. Learning the rules and dynamics, and adjusting your practices to accommodate the requirements dictated by these parameters.

Or, as one of my buddies so eloquently put it during one of those alchohol-fueled fish conference discussions some years back, "The idea is not to kill fish with this shit..." Yup. You don't "dabble" in very low (aquaristically-speaking) pH systems-or any specialized aquatic system, really- without a game plan. Oh, and a pretty good understanding of chemistry- like, way better than what I have. 

Take the experience you've gained in other areas to this new frontier. Use that knowledge to push out further...

Read. Educate. It's out there on the internet. If you want it. You can find it, but it's not always easy to find. Google is a starting point. There are other places to search online, too. Please don't take "the easy way out" and simply email me for some kind of magical answer. I likely don't have one. Really. There isn't one. Knowledge often has to be gained by effort. Your own effort.

And often, experience.

Now, this is the part where you get more annoyed with me, because I offer little more than a challenge. A challenge to study, experiment, and learn. 

So this leaves most of us in a position of doing what we're already doing: Managing our soft, acid (in the "sixes") water aquariums in a manner consistent with good husbandry, going slowly when adding botanicals, and generally testing and observing our fishes. Ours is a world of balancing too much- and not as much as we want- a world of observation, measurement, continuous self-education and experimentation.

We can't be "casual" or "seat-of-the-pants" when we get to the lower pH ranges in the hobby. It's not "set and forget"...Active management is required. We don't enter this arena lightly, or "dabble" in it. I think we are all already aware that each and every blackwater, botanical-style tank requires thoughtful husbandry and a generalized understanding of water chemistry. And taking this body of knowledge and experience to the lower pH arena is a smart move.

So, when you've kind of got it figured out- and it IS entirely possible to do so- people may ask you that old question from the sixties, "Are you experienced?"

And you'll be able to tell them, "Yes. Yes I am."

Wouldn't THAT be a "trip?"

I think that it would. And a useful one, at that.

Stay brave. Stay undaunted. Stay educated. Stay relentless...

And Stay Wet.

Scott Fellman

Tannin Aquatics 

What happens tomorrow?

If you're new to the world of botanical-style aquariums, blackwater or otherwise- you've no doubt embarked on this journey because it offers you all sorts of new benefits, possibilities and ideas to explore.

And, if you're like a lot of hobbyists, flush with inspiration and excitement, you carefully prepare, then add your selection of botanicals to your aquarium, perhaps arranging them in a specific way, perhaps simply adding them at random. And then...

What happens next? What happens later? What happens tomorrow?

Since the very nature of utilizing materials such as leaves and botanicals will result in them breaking down in water, and not only changing in appearance, but influencing the water chemistry to a varying degree, it makes sense to view every aquarium as an evolving entity. A brand new tank, or one that you've just begun adding botanicals to, fits this description absolutely.

As the aquarium runs in, you'll see the breakdown/decomposition of the "less durable" botanicals. It's particularly noticible in leaves and materials with harder external surfaces, like Cariniana Pods, Sterculia Pods, etc. That "brand new look" of clean and sharp colors gives way to the more subtle, muted, and earthy colors of materials being affected by submersion. A "patina" begins to build. This is a great sign; the beginning of a very "earthy-looking" phase.

 At some point, you'll likely notice a color to the water. A visible "tint"- perhaps accompanied by a bit of turbidity, depending upon the amount, pace, and type of materials added. There are no specific "timetables" for how fast and how darkly your water will color. There are many factors which can affect this influence. Also, if you're a heavy user of chemical filtration media, you'll see much less impact than you would if these media were not present. Of course, I like dark, soupy water and the "biofilm-on-stuff" kind of look. But that's me. A lot of you will want the "clearwater, botanical-style" look.

Just add carbon.

You will probably get a feel for how quickly your aquarium "processes" leaves- as well as a definite opinion of what looks best for you, aesthetic-wise. I have come to embrace the more "ragged", softening and decomposing look (I guess you hardcore 'scapers would even call it a "wabi-sabi" look, huh?), and tend to leave my leaves in until they completely break down, and simply add a few leaves every couple of days to add new ones into the mix as older ones break down. 

Likely, you'll find some "in-between" that suits your tastes and stick with that. My only comment is that you'll possibly even notice the visual effect ("tint") that adding and/or leaving leaves in the aquarium for extended periods of time has on your water. Perhaps you'll just sort of "feel" when it's time to add more stuff by simply looking.

Ah, the art!

Or, you may also be a more "data-driven" aquarist who utilizes TDS or pH or some other measure to determine when to add or remove leaves- the beauty is that it's totally your call! The important thing to understand is that, like in Nature, botanical-driven habitats are influenced significantly by the presence of these materials and how they exist in them. Managing and embracing the "evolution" of a botanical-style blackwater aquarium is a completely individual thing, based on aesthetics, environmental parameters, and the requirements of your animals. As much an "art" as it is a "science."

And of course, there are biofilms. 

Biofilms are really a sign that things are working right in your aquarium! A visual indicator that natural processes are at work. Biofilms form when bacteria adhere to surfaces in some form of watery environment and begin to excrete a slimy, gluelike substance, consisting of sugars and other substances, that can stick to all kinds of materials, such as- well- in our case, botanicals.

And we could go on and on all day telling you that this is a completely natural occurrence; bacteria and other microorganisms taking advantage of a perfect substrate upon which to grow and reproduce, just like in the wild. Freshly added botanicals offer a "mother load"of organic material for these biofilms to propagate, and that's occasionally what happens - just like in nature.  

Understanding that these biofilms are normal, natural, and to be expected is an important part of what we do. Nature isn't a crystal-clear, spotless ecosystem. It's not perfectly arranged, "ratio-embracing", and  compliant with our idea of aesthetics. It's important to "deprogram" yourself a bit from what we've been indoctrinated to believe and accept in the hobby for generations.

This is part of that "mental shift" towards accepting and appreciating a more truly natural-looking, natural-functioning aquarium. The "cost of admission", if you will- along with the tinted water, decomposing leaves, etc., the dues you pay, which ultimately go hand-in-hand with the envious "ohhs and ahhs" of other hobbyists who admire your aquarium when they see it for the first time.

Ahh..."over time."

That's an important consideration, too.

One of the things that we've noticed a lot about blackwater, botanical style aquariums is that they seem to improve over time. I mean, they start our looking nice, albeit a bit "sterile", don't they? Like many other aquariums...but this look is, in my opinion, really pronounced with botanicals. And, as the water darkens, the botanicals soften, and that patina of biofilm appears, the whole scape looks more... natural.

More alive. More biologically "rich", if you will.

And it's important to know that you're not headed for some "ultimate destination." There simply is no "finish line" here! It's an evolving, ongoing, adaptable microcosm.

And what about routine "maintenance" of the botanicals?

Replace the softer stuff as needed (or not) to keep the look you like, and leave the more "durable" items in indefinitely. Observe. Understand. Study. And that's how you not only let your tank evolve naturally- but you can keep the look (and possibly even the environmental effects caused by the botanicals) consistent throughout the "working lifetime" of the tank! 

And it's our strongest recommendation that you keep thinking about Nature in the context of our botanical-style tanks. Think about how Nature really looks. Think about how Nature works with the "ingredients" She has...

In Nature, the leaf litter "community" of fishes, insects, fungi, and microorganisms is really important to the overall tropical enviroment, as it assimilates terrestrial material into the blackwater aquatic system, and acts to reduce the loss of nutrients to the forest which would inevitably occur if all the material which fell into the streams was washed downstream!

Stuff is being utilized by many life forms.

And that's what happens in our aquariums, isn't it?

If we let it.

Don't go crazy, forcing sterility on your closed ecosystem. Don't develop a "dependency" on technology or external practices. Rather, develop an understanding of how Nature processes nutrients, produces food, and strives for some sort of equilibrium. And She's done it on hero own- without our intervention- for eons.

I think we really need to think about our systems- particularly in the blackwater/botanical-style aquarium world- as little microcosms which replicate- at least on some level, some of the process which occur in nature to create a specialized but highly productive and successful- not to mention, dynamic- ecology. 

So when you look at your aquarium today- it's always a good thing to consider what happens tomorrow.

Stay observant. Stay patient. Stay diligent. Stay open-minded...

And Stay Wet.

Scott Fellman

Tannin Aquatics

Understanding the "biological operating system" of your aquarium

With so many people coming into the botanical-style aquarium world from all different sectors in the hobby, it's a given that we receive more questions about things which many of us who have been "in the game" for a while might take for granted.

Yet, it's important NOT to take anything for granted, and to consider all the possibilities, reasons, and ideas for managing our systems.

Apart from, "What botanicals should I use for a _____________ style setup?" the most common question we receive is ""Do I leave them in or let them break down in my tank?"

And of course, our simple answer is..."It's your call!"

Now, this is an important question. How we answer it- work with it- has fundamental implications for how we operate our blackwater, botanical-style aquariums.

It's as much about your aesthetic preferences as it is about the long-term health of the aquarium. It's a decision that each of us makes based on our tastes, management "style", and how much of a "mental shift" we've made into excepting the transient nature of a blackwater, botanical-style aquarium and its function. There really is no "right" or "wrong" answer here. It's all about how much you enjoy what happens in nature versus what you can control in your tank.

I tend to favor nature. But that's just me.

I like the idea of leaving materials in my aquariums until they break down completely. Long, long ago, I made that mental shift to a philosophy which says, "Hey, it's okay to have some decomposing stuff and biofilms and...detritus...in your tank. It's natural-looking!"

Now, the caveat here is that I didn't just "give myself permission" to neglect tanks or avoid basic husbandry...no, that wasn't the point. The point is to accept that materials breaking down in our aquariums can provide "fuel" for the biological processes which create long-term stability in a closed system. 

Like any other type of aquarium, a botanical-style system relies on time-honored practices of maintenance, nutrient export, and attention from the aquarist. However, one thing that we have that a lot of types of systems don't is an abundance of potential food sources for a myriad of organisms which reside in our tanks. We are very much creating a little microcosm, and it needs to respect the "checks and balances" which Nature imposes.

And of course, we can't ever lose sight of the fact that we are creating and adding to a closed aquatic ecosystem, and that our actions in how we manage our tanks must map to our ambitions, tastes, and the "regulations" that Nature imposes upon us.

She'll kick your ass if you don't pay attention.

Personally, I don't mind the "look" of a tank with decomposing leaves and botanicals. Where some might see "dirty", I see "natural." I see the ultimate expression of ephemeral and the living embodiment of "wabi-sabi"- an acceptance of the beauty of transience. And I don't think my tanks look that "dirty".

Like most aquarists how play the botanical-style aquarium game, I do understand that aquariums have some limitations to how hard you can push them...

Everything that you add into your aquarium that begins to break down is bioload. That's a fundamental consideration that we have to put in our heads. It's not "good" or "bad"- it's simply a consideration.

Everything that imparts proteins, organics, tannins, etc. into the water is something that you need to consider. However, it's always been my personal experience and opinion that, in an otherwise well-maintained aquarium, with regular attention to husbandry, stocking, and maintenance, the "burden" of botanicals in your water is surprisingly insignificant.

And these systems are remarkably stable once established.

Even in test systems where I intentionally "neglected" them by conducting sporadic water exchanges, once I hit my preferred "population" of botanicals (by building them up gradually), I have never noticed significant phosphate or nitrate increases that could be attributed to their presence. Those biological "yardsticks" for water quality are pretty significant, IMHO.

It's also important to consider that the breakdown of botanical materials, if left in your system, can be utilized by animals and plants. Yep, this is particularly important in the context of planted botanical-style/blackwater aquariums! 

Allowing plants, fishes, shrimp, and bacteria the chance to utilize the decomposing botanicals in their life cycle is an important part of the game, IMHO. Being overly fastidious about siphoning out every speck of dirt or botanical material as it breaks down is "overkill", in my opinion, and can be just as detrimental as over-doing things. 

Nature strikes a balance. Nature thrives on efficiency. When you're adding botanicals to a tank, you're not just doing "aquascaping"- you're laying down the groundwork for the "biological operating system" of your aquarium. As such, you need to think "big picture" here. (That "functional aesthetics" thing again!)

And while we're talking about adding botanicals, from time to time, I need to revisit the "doomsday scenarios" that could occur. Now, it's important to note that the very few "disasters" we've been told about typically happened under a few situations or combinations of them:

1) The aquarist did not prepare anything as instructed

2) A significant amount of botanicals relative to water volume was added all at once to a long-established aquarium

3) A significant amount of botanicals was added to an established tank in a very short period of time (like within a few days)

Now, again, there are always anomalies, but these situations are almost "set ups" for some types of issues. Typically, what happens is you'd see fishes gasping at the surface for oxygen, which becomes rapidly depleted by the addition of a large influx of materials breaking down, which can also overwhelm the biological filtration capacity of a tank. 

Usually, the "rescue" consists of increased vigorous aeration and a succession of water changes, removing the botanicals, use of activated carbon, etc...the typical "emergency fixes" for problems of this nature.

The best preventative is to go slowly. To consider impacts.

The reality is, adding botanicals to your tank and using them, replacing them regularly, etc, is no more "dangerous" than anything else we do as aquarists. You simply need to go slowly, apply common sense, follow our prep instructions, and observe your tank carefully.

Is that a guarantee of success? Of course not. Could you have some weird combination of events, local water composition, overly sensitive fishes, etc. which could give you a disastrous outcome? Of course. 

Look, stuff can still occasionally go wrong, even when you follow instructions and employ common sense. Aquariums are closed natural ecosystems, and changing the delicate balance within them always risks disrupting established biological processes. Just like using additives, CO2, or other regimens in our tanks, when we "invade" the actual processes, stuff that we don't anticipate can happen.

It's the reality of Nature, and a reminder that, although we can control some things, Mother Nature calls the shots...We are treading on Her turf, and we have to understand that there are no guarantees for success "just because."

She owes us nothing. 

It's not a bad thing. It's just...reality.

Now, all that doom and gloom and "reality checking" being said, Nature PROVIDES us with something. For free.

Huh?

Consider...detritus.

Yeah, detritus. Produced by the "processed" and decomposing plant matter, detritus, is considered by many aquatic ecologists to be an extremely significant food source for many fishes, especially in areas such as Amazonia and Southeast Asia, where the detritus is considered an essential factor in the food webs of these habitats.

And of course, if you observe the behavior of many of your fishes in the aquarium, such as characins, cyprinids, Loricarids, and others, you'll see that in between feedings, they'll spend an awful lot of time picking at "stuff" on the bottom of the tank. In a botanical style aquarium, this is a pretty common occurrence, and I believe an important benefit of this type of system. 

I am of the opinion that a botanical-style aquarium, complete with its decomposing leaves and seed pods, can serve as a sort of "buffet" for many fishes- even those who's primary food sources are known to be things like insects and worms and such. Detritus and the organisms within it can provide an excellent supplemental food source for our fishes!

The dynamic of input and utilization of materials from the surrounding forest habitats is fascinating and profound for those of us who wish to mimic these habitats in our aquariums... And we can, to a certain extent, by utilizing botanicals as part of our aquarium's "operating system."

Nature offers us abundance, challenges, guidelines, and hard and fast "rules." How we choose to work with them is our choice, our decision, and our privilege.

Stay curious. Stay inspired. Stay bold. Stay diligent. Stay undaunted...

And Stay Wet.

Scott Fellman

Tannin Aquatics 

GUEST BLOG: AQUATIC PLANTS IN NATURE BY JOHNNY ARCHER

Editor's note:  As we move deeper into the botanical style aquarium world, more minds are opened. More new tanks are started. More new ideas are executed on. And yet, the real "boss" in charge of the whole operation is Nature. She dictates the pace, the evolution, the success of all that we do. And understanding what happens in Nature can most definitely effect what happens in our aquariums. In this guest piece by our beloved freelance biology nerd/philosopher, Johnny Archer, he touches on the emerging love affair we have with aquatics plants, and how they grow in blackwater habitats- in his own unique style, of course!

Introduction

In my last article, I stated that the "Nature Aquarium" as the hobby embraces it is a lie, because nature is, well- "dirtier." I want to expand on some of those points of that article and talk more about aquatic plants in nature and how botanicals and plants have a very close relationship. For this article, I’m going to put things in categories, knowing full well that Mother Nature hates that and likes to jumble things up a bit. The perfect example of this is: 

Scientist: Species cannot interbreed with one another!

Mother Nature: You sure about that?

Scientist: Yer?

Mother Nature: Just have a look at Neanderthal DNA

Scientist: Okay, what am I looking for?

Mother Nature: (Points at a part of Neanderthal DNA then points at the Homo sapiens DNA)

Scientist: Wait how did their DNA get into ours?

Mother Nature: How do you think it got there?

Scientist: No No, That cannot be right, we outsmarted them, cause we were more clever, but that doesn’t explain the DNA…… Which must mean……we…….” intermingled”.

Mother Nature: You weren’t smarted just more….. “kinky”

Scientist: I think I’m going to puke

When talking biology, putting things into categories is just asking to be wrong, but I will for this article because spectrums are harder to write about. Aquatic plants grow in 3 environments; in the water,  in the splash zone and on the banks or floodplains. Let’s start with the first environment, the water.

Aquatic plants in the water 

The first thing to say about plants growing in water is that it’s a terrible idea. The properties of water make it really difficult. Plants need light for photosynthesis, but water absorbs light really quickly. After roughly 20m in clear water, most light will be absorbed and its just blue light remaining at 20m. Red light gets absorbed within 5 meters. These values plummet as soon as you add tannins or any particulates like mud. So plants are already handicapping themselves with light for photosynthesis before I even talk about gasses.  

Water holds very very little gas compared to say… Air. Blue whales are the largest creature to ever roam our planet and there is a very good reason why they have held onto their lungs rather than ditched them for gills. Their oxygen demand is soo huge for their exothermic bodies to keep warm in the ocean, water just doesn’t hold enough oxygen to satisfy their needs. One of the reasons Whale sharks can grow so large is that they are endothermic (get most of their heat from the water) so their oxygen demand is a lot smaller. Okay back to plants. Plants not only require oxygen but also carbon dioxide, and this is the limiting gas. For most plants there just isn’t enough CO2 in the water to satisfy their growth rates, and therefore they will die off. 

Then there’s the issue of Nitrogen, Potassium and Phosphorus (NPK) aka macronutrients. In the terrestrial world, there are Nitrogen-fixing bacteria in soil that can use Nitrogen gas from the atmosphere and can convert it into Nitrogen compounds such as protein. Bodies of water generally require an external input of NPK from another habitat which we refer to as allochthonous material. The perfect example of this allochthonous material is from botanicals and excretions from animals that find their way from terrestrial to the aquatic environment. Which means the nutrients aren’t necessarily available to the plants in the water. 

Then there is the physicality of flowing water. Aquatic plants are fragile and although they can cope with a good water flow they struggle with water at high velocity. If you’re thinking, aren’t they the same thing? Well no they are not. To give you an example a pressure washer has an extremely high velocity that can clean thick mud off a car a but has a very low flow rate. Compared with my local river which has a large flow rate but doesn’t have enough velocity to knock a duck off its feet. Aquatic plants are only able to survive where the water flow and velocity are small enough that fine particulates are able to settle like sand, silt and dead leaves. So the plants have somewhere to plant their roots.

Further up river where it's more rock and pebbles than sand, when the river floods, the river bed can become mobile as the water will pick up stones, boulders and even trees trunks and take them downstream. If you struggle to imagine what this would look like imagine the bolder scene in “Raiders of The Lost Ark”- then imagine Indiana Jones having roots instead of legs (ouch). I think you could now imagine a plant in a flooded river.

When I lay it out like this I’m surprised that any plant could survive this environment. But where there is a will, Mother Nature has a way. So the first plants that can survive are of the annoying single-celled variety, Algae. Algae have a much lower demand on all of these aspects than plants which is why it can be a bloody bugger to get rid of the darn stuff and will grow in almost all known wet environments where there is light.

Mother Nature may have found a way, but not many, the only true aquatic genera(e.i spend 100% of the lives in water) I could think of is Elodea, Egeria, Cabomba, and Vallisneria all of which live in the water fully submerged only flowering above the water line. Aponogetons also grow in water naturally but every dry season go retreat back into a tuber to conserve energy until the water level rises then they sprout new leaves, so I’m going to count them. There is also Water Lilies and floating plants (only 9 species of floating plant In our hobby) which in my eyes cheat with having their leaves above the water to be in the oxygen and carbon dioxide rich air.

So it's not just me saying water is terrible for growing plants. The clear lack of plant genera speaks for itself. All other “Aquatic” plants actually have dual citizenship spending most of their lives above water (emergent) then spending their holidays underwater (submerged) when the river & lakes floods. SO if you struggle with growing plants underwater, don’t beat yourself up because most plants have the exact same problem. 

Soil

All the true aquatic plants live in slow-moving water where their roots are deeply planted in thick soil! If your thinking, "So what, most plants need soil- what's the big deal here?" What do you think the soil is made out of? Heres a boring definition for you:

“The upper layer of earth in which plants grow, a black or dark brown material typically consisting of a mixture of organic remains, clay, and rock particles.”- Google

The key here is "organic remains", which most importantly for us is from material such as botanicals. All you composters out there will know that you can compost anything organic from tree bark, leaves, fruits, potatoes peelings and even cardboard.  Plants grow on the fallen botanicals, literally.

Blackwater is the river, composting botanicals 

Blackwater is not perfectly suitable for many submerged plants, the tannin-rich water will block out too much light and will have little to no soil substrate (there are exceptions to this though). Blackwater habitats are the start of a crucial part of the nutrient cycle in rivers. Blackwater habitats compost the organic matter into organic remains by the use of bacteria, fungi, invertebrates and fish- all of which help with composting the botanicals into nutrient-rich soil. When the river floods, it will pick up the smallest particles and transport them downstream to where they will be deposited and will build up soils in the lower reaches of the river.

One could say without botanicals, plants couldn’t live. NO, I will say that all aquatic plants need botanicals, like fish need water.  (Preach, brother! -S.F.)

Epiphytes in the splash zones

Epiphytes are plants that grow on any surface like rocks & wood and get their nutrients from the air rain and water so they don’t need soil. Damn it!! I spoke too soon. Okay, this is embarrassing, I knew I should not have dealt with absolutes in biology. Okay okay, I think I’m just going to sweep these plants under the rug…….don't mind me, nothing to see here. 

Okay, there is actually an argument here. Epiphytes will absorb any nutrients within the water column Some of those nutrients may have leached out of the soil into the water that then gets splashed on to the plant. You could say botanicals do play a part here. To be honest this argument is soo weak that I’m just going to move on.

Aquatic plants on the forest floor.

Ah ha, I’m going to finish my argument strongly here! The forest floor is of particular interest to me as an Aquascaper, as this is where a lot of “aquatic” plants live most of the time. Which is why biotope enthusiast will bite your head off if they see Echniodorus sp. (Amazon Swords) in a Discus set up, as Echnidorus are found on the forest floor, not the main river channel where Discus come from. Aquatic plants love being on the forest floor, where their roots are firmly rooted into the rich organic soils topped off with leaf litter and their leaves, if the air soaking up as much CO₂ as they can desire. Some of those plants will live on or close to the river bank where their roots are always submerged in the water so that they don’t dry out.

The soil in rainforests has built up over millions of years, and it can support the biggest plant ecosystems on the planet. And most of the soil comes from the likes of botanicals that have been broken down on the forest floor by thousands of different species which rely on leaf litter to support their lives, like fungi or Leafcutter Ants.  

Submerged 

During floods, the “Aquatic” plants cannot run away, so they have to adapt, but thankfully they have everything they need. A highly nutritious soil for their nutrients- the remains of leaf litter for decomposition to produce carbon dioxide, which makes up for the reduced dissolved CO₂ from the rich air. They also change their leaf morphology so they can uptake the gasses easier underwater water.

Conclusion

I hope you can now see that botanicals aren’t just for blackwater aquariums. They help build up soils in the rainforest, in the rivers and lakes so that aquatic plants can thrive. So to say that botanicals have no place in the "Nature Aquarium" is a lot like saying water has no place in the river. 

Having botanicals in your planted aquarium is just what happens in nature.  

Until next time- get those hands dirty and keep those fingers green.

Jonny Archer

The big argument FOR smaller tanks...

As you know, we've celebrated the art of creating botanical-style aquariums in all their glory. Aquarium that reflect nature ina very unique way. And probably the least-discussed aspect of our work is- wait for it- the SIZE of the aquarium that you use.

The other day, I had an aquarist ask (Well, it sounded more like a demand, actually) to know why we are offering only the smaller-sized aquariums from Ultum Nature Systems for sale. Besides the immediately obvious reason (it's f- ing expensive to ship large aquariums!), there is a good reason...they fall in line with a personal philosophy of sorts.

I've had fellow hobbyists approach me over the years after talks and such, and sort of "apologize" that their tanks weren't "large" and that they didn't keep "big fish."

Huh? What?

That is sad... Totally unnecessary...What's up with the apology thing? Like, what's wrong with keeping small fishes and modest-sized aquariums? Where does this stuff come from?

Now, first off- I don't think that super-tiny tanks are great for everyone, either. They allow little to no margin for error, so you need to employ maximum skills when maintaining one. You can't overstock. You need to employ solid husbandry and a healthy dose of common sense. So let's just get that one out of the way.

So, what is the simple origin of this apparent bias?

I like smaller fishes. 

Big fishes are cool, but- well, they're BIG. AND they eat and poop a lot. And they need large physical spaces; otherwise, most home aquariums are the equivalent of you or I spending the rest of our lives in our (comfortable) living room. I mean, great, you have satellite TV, snacks, a comfy couch...but after a while, those four walls start to close in a bit, right? Well, in my warped mind, that's how I see it.

It's not like "bigger is better." At least, not always.

In fact, many of the largest tanks I've seen which feature humongous fishes still seem kind of absurd. I'm kind of against the practice, if you haven't guessed by now.

I'm kind of militant about it, actually.

I remember in my custom aquarium installation days, I used to hate it when a customer would build, say, a 500-600 gallon aquarium, and then want to stock it with BIG fishes, like full-size Triggerfishes, Morays, large Angels, and Tangs. Oh, and sharks. I have no idea what it is about keeping a shark in a relatively large- but not large enough aquarium that appeals to people. Quite frankly, I'm not so sure what it is about keeping sharks in general in an aquarium that appeals to people....that's another thing for another time.

Anyhow, my observations of the general public, and a good segment of the aquarium-keeping community over the years seems to indicate that a lot of people just figure, "I have a really large tank. Now I can keep some large fishes in there!" I never understood why we just sort of accept that idea as "the way."

I mean, sure-in theory, you could keep larger, more metabolic-waste-producing fishes in a larger tank- of course. Yet, then you have this group of really big fishes that can make a really big mess, possibly grow even larger, and ultimately end up with the same issue that many of us face- not having a large enough aquarium for all of the fishes you want to keep.

Why not keep MORE small fishes...lots of 'em- in an environment that provides more than enough physical space, creates an interesting environment for them, and that they won't outgrow? Like, ever. I mean, can you imagine how many Axelrodia riesei  or Tucanoichthys tucano you can keep in a 500-gallon aquarium? Umm, I dunno- a shitload of 'em, maybe?

Of course, the immediate counterargument we'll hear is, "Do you know how much it would cost to purchase 250 Tucanoichthys tucano?" And my smart-ass counterargument is, "If you can afford to purchase, outfit , and run a 500-gallon aquarium, you can afford to spend $12USD a piece on some half-inch fish!"

(Gee...I wonder why I don't do much in the way of "tank build consulting"  anymore?)

I'm on a roll here...And I've not yet even finished my first cup of coffee today, late though it may be!

And, of course, it works both ways, too.

One of the most common "pro-nano" arguments is equally as dumb, IMHO. As you know, it typically goes like, "Well, the smaller aquarium allows the fishes to be closer to their food, and for you to observe them more easily." 

Urghhh.

That's the reason why you keep a "nano" aquarium? REALLY?

Honestly, I can discuss the absurdities of that assertion, but it just will raise my blood pressure. We can do better than use those lame excuses as a rationale for keeping little tanks.

I love more modest-sized tanks. (provided the caveats about their care discussed above are taken into account)

I think they're cool, fun, practical, economical; purposeful..and I suppose you COULD make the argument about keeping track of tiny fishes and having them be closer to their food...but man, it's sort of funny to me. There's a lot of ways to feed tiny fishes in larger aquariums, IMHO. Really. And if you look hard enough, you'll see plenty of the little guys in that monster tank. Really. I mean, we find them in streams, so why can't we find those tiny Rasbora or whatever, in a 300-gallon tank? 

Now, back to the nano tanks...What about the fact that you can use nano's as a "testbed" for dozens of really crazy ideas...deep botanical beds, "100% Banana Stem Pieces substrates", a huge ball of Water Sprite and nothing else, crushed leaf litter substrates, Catappa Bark "flooded forest floors"- yeah...all sorts of zany stuff that's too expensive/time-consuming/experimental to do in a 50-100 gallon tank! 

The eternal wisdom of common sense, and the temptations of "tea" revisited...

There is that expression, "Speed kills" which sometimes seeps into our conversations about aquariums. You know, you can't rush the nitrogen cycle. You shouldn't add too many fishes too fast. In our instance, you have to slowly add botanicals to an existing system. 

Things which, if you violate the rules of Nature, you'd get away with them perhaps 9 times out of 10...but the one time you push it- BLAM! Doomsday. Blowing off common sense, or pushing it to the limit- has its place in experiments- if you're willing to take the risk.

Otherwise, it's just not smart.

We have spent a lot of time educating our community on the common sense aspects of working with botanicals. We literally have hundreds of articles about almost every aspect of our "craft." And for good reason. Part of it was a desire to help others succeed by knowing everything we knew about this stuff. About the good, the bad, and the- well, stupid. 

We felt- and still feel- that although everyone needs to use as much common sense as possible when playing with botanicals, it's just as much a part of our job to encourage best practices as it is to offer all this cool stuff. Encouraging patience, going slowly, evaluating, and understanding the stuff that can go wrong if you don't use common sense.

Stuff that's become part of hobby "lore." And in our case, part of the evolving "best practices." The very, very few disasters we've seen happen on this journey have almost always been caused by our own error. Not following common sense. Misunderstanding the "rules" of Nature. Rushing stuff..Going too fast, too hard. Not thinking it though. That's why we write about some of these things in "The Tint", and have discussions about them- over and over and over again. Every day. 

And yet, have you ever noticed that there are certain things we simply don't like to do as hobbyists?

Like, waiting for stuff. We love "hacks" and shortcuts.

Impatience is, I suppose, part of being human. However, in the aquarium hobby, it occasionally drives us to do things that, although are probably "no big deal" on their own- can become a sort of "barometer" for other things which might be of questionable value or risk. ("Well, nothing bad happened when I did THAT, so...") Or, they can cumulatively become a "big deal", to the potential detriment of our fishes.

We get casual. We become "complacent"- and we make assumptions. And you can't make assumptions with nature. We have to accept responsibility for what we do and why. And as humans, we occasionally fall back into practices that, to me, at least- reek of impatience.

One of the things that I have an issue with in our little hobby sector is the desire by many "tinters" to make use of the water in which the initial preparation of our botanicals takes place in as a form of "blackwater tea" or "blackwater extract."

Now, while on the surface, there is nothing inherently "wrong" with the idea, I think that in our case, we need to consider exactly why we boil/soak our botanicals before using them in the aquarium to begin with. 

I personally discard the "tea" that results from the initial preparation of botanicals- and I recommend that you do, too. Here's why:

As I have mentioned many times before, the purpose of the initial "boil and soak" is to release some of the pollutants (dust, dirt, etc.) bound up in the outer tissues of the botanicals. It's also to "soften" the leaves/botanicals that you're using to help them absorb water and sink more easily. As a result, a lot of organic materials, such as lignin, proteins, and other stuff, in addition tannins and humic substances- are released.

So, why on earth would you want a concentrated "tea" of dirt, surface pollutants, and other organics in your aquarium as a home-brewed "blackwater extract?" And how much do you add? I mean, what is the "concentration" of desirable materials in the tea relative to the water? I mean, it's not an easy, quick, clean thing to figure, right?

There is so much we don't know. We're just learning how to utilize the botanicals themselves correctly and safely; is it wise to use concentrated waste extract to our tanks?

A lot of hobbyists tell me they are concerned about "wasting" the concentrated tannins from the prep water. Trust me, the leaves and botanicals will continue to release the tannins and humic substances (with much less pollutants!) throughout their "useful lifetimes" when submerged, so you need not worry about discarding the initial water that they were prepared in.

In my opinion, it's kind analogous to adding the "skimmate" (the nasty concentrated organics removed by your protein skimmer via foam fractionation in your marine aquarium) back into your aquarium because you don't want to lose the tiny amount of valuable salt or some "trace elements" that are removed via this process.

Is it worth polluting your aquarium for this?

I certainly don't think so! 

Do a lot of hobbyists do this and get away with this? Sure. Absolutely. Am I being overly conservative? No doubt, I am. In nature, don't leaves, wood, and seed pods just fall into the water? Of course.

However, in most cases, nature has the benefit of dissolution from thousands of gallons/litres of water, right? It's an open system, for the most part, with import and export processes far, far  superior and more efficient than anything we can hope to create in the confines of our aquariums! 

Okay, I think I beat that horse up pretty good!

Now, I suppose there is a "silver lining" here. I mean, if you are dead-set on using some of the botanical prep water in your tank if use the water from the "secondary soak", I'd feel a lot better about that.. At least it is arguable that the bulk of the initial surface pollutants will have been released at that point. That being said, it's still a practice filled with "concentrated uncertainty."

Better yet, IMHO is the process of adding some (prepared) leaves/botanicals to the containers holding the makeup water that you use in your water exchanges. The materials will "steep" over time, adding tannins and humic substances to the water.

Even then, it's not an exact science. Or even a "science" at all. I mean, how fast are the tannins and humic substances released?

How much to use?

Well, that's the million dollar question.

Who the &%$* knows?

It all gets back to the (IMHO) absurd "recommendations" that have been proffered by vendors over the years recommending using "x" number of leaves, for example, per gallon/liter of water. There are simply far, far too many variables- ranging from starting water chem to pH to alkalinity, and dozens of others- like how much tannins and such are in the particular botanicals/leaves you're using-which can affect the "equation" and make specific numbers unreliable at best. 

You need to kind of go with your instinct.

Damn, that's a shitty excuse, isn't it? However, it's really the best thing we have to go with. We have to work with what we've got and use it in a way that make sense in the context of what we do.

The safest recommendations?

Go slowly.

Evaluate the appearance of your water, the behaviors of the fishes...the pH, alkalinity, TDS, nitrate, phosphate, or other parameters that you like to test for. It's really a matter of experimentation. 

I'm a much bigger fan of "tinting" the water based on the materials in situ in the aquarium. The botanicals will release their "contents" at a pace dictated by their environment. Of course, you can still add too many, too fast, as we've mentioned numerous times, pushing your tank to the limit. Not thinking it through and deploying patience, observation, personal responsibility, and simple common sense. Assuming things; pushing it... As we've discussed ad nauseam on these pages- that's the place where the "disaster stories" live.

It's not all "doom and gloom", of course.

It's all about developing your own practices based on what works for you.. In other words, incorporating them in your tank and evaluating their impact on your specific situation. It's hardly an exact science. Much more of an "art" or "best guess" thing than a science..at least right now. Of course, Nature will "slap you upside the head" if you challenge her; flaunt her "rules"- get complacent...

Be patient. Go slowly. Observe. Think. Apply common sense.

And the whole "tea" thing?

If you're doing it and you're happy with the results, I can't argue with that. I can only tell you that I personally wouldn't do it that way. At least, not without trying to control as many variables as possible. Personally, I'm not even certain how the manufacturers that offer these extracts for sale have determined their concentrations, formulas, and dosages.

How do they extract the "tonic?"Not trying to cast doubts on any commercially available products. I'm just curious, because I'd bet that most of us would find it pretty cool to know. I'm just trying to point out how this is a lot more complicated than we might think it is, and that having access to chemists and labs and equipment is a good starting point if we want to get really "down and dirty" with this stuff!

Although there are 3 main classes of tannins. there are hundreds and hundreds of specific tannins found in virtually all families of plants, and comprising up to 50% of the dry weight of their leaves! 

And in regards to tests?

Well, there are at least three general types of testing that you can do for tannins: Precipitation of proteins or alkaloids, reaction with phenolic rings, and depolymerization. Which one works for our purposes? How do you interpret the results? Maybe you'll be the one to crack the code. Maybe you're a chemist with access to a lab? Or, maybe you can interpolate the date from a generic "tannin test kit" and figure out how to  calculate "x" mg/l of "tannins" into a formula that is safe, predictable, and more effective for the widest variety of aquarists?

Not easy, huh?

But then again, I'm the guy telling you to toss in leaves and botanicals in your aquarium...and not really giving you "x" amount per gallon or whatever...just telling you to "go slowly, observe and test." - all "sweeping generalities" at best...so what do I know?

Yeah, there is so much we need to learn...

So much that we still don't know; and we are often operating on pure "gut instinct." The world of botanical use in our aquariums is every bit as much an art as it is a "science."

And perhaps that's not such a bad thing. Like many things in our hobby, it's very easy to overthink. And it's even easier to take shortcuts...with a wide range of potential outcomes.

Just be careful. 

Consider the "temptations of tea."

Keep studying. Keep experimenting. Keep tweaking. Keep observing.

Stay creative. Stay diligent. Stay patient. Stay observant. Stay smart. 

And Stay Wet.

Scott Fellman

Tannin Aquatics