# best fish for algae control.



## JNB (Apr 19, 2011)

I am trying to decide what fish to add to my tank to help control various types of algae, esp. staghorn and hair algae. (I have already addressed other issues such as lighting, overfeeding, etc.) You can find different opinions about fish all over the internet, but maybe someone here has some helpful experience they would like to share. I have a 55 gal community tank that includes small fish like neon tetras. 

Possible fish for general algae control and the issues that I have heard are involved:

SAE: Adults will eat my mosses, may move over to eating fish food as adults.

Otto cats: I have 5, they work hard, but are not able to do as much as needed. Buy more?

Mollies: I have a couple of gold ones, but even though they nibble constantly, it seems like they never get anything to come off.

Bristlenose pleco: I have one a couple, but not good for algae on plants with small leaves and moss.

Shrimp: Too small to do much unless I really stock the tank heavily.

Rosy barbs: get too big and will eat my moss.

Red barbs: Just don’t do all that much.

American Flag fish: Not a good community fish, get aggressive.

Nerite snails: My clown loaches eat them, I don’t want a million snails in my tank.

Any Thoughts?


----------



## redchigh (Jan 20, 2010)

Well, as for the Nerite snails, they don't reproduce in freshwater.
Pest snails handle the algae for me.. (And no, I don't have 'a million'.)

Have you tried amano shrimps? Other than that you're pretty much out of luck. Stick to manual removal. If your lighting etc is balanced, it should not be an issue... And even the prettiest tanks require manual labor.

What kind of algae are you having trouble with?


----------



## Guppie luver (Feb 2, 2011)

Well you could get more otto's they I think can do it.


----------



## JNB (Apr 19, 2011)

No, I haven't tried them. I feed the fish lightly once a day and keep the light on for 2 hours in the AM, off for5, then on for 5 hours (so it's on when I am at home). This works fine with my plants, as they grow quite well. I have staghorn and long hair algae which grows crazy fast in the couple of places it is living since I removed or cut back all of the infected plants. Covering the sides of the tank to prevent any light from the window (which isn't very strong) does not do a lot. I don't measure a lot of water parameters other than pH, so I can't give you the details about those. Water changes and manual removal every few days do not do a lot to slow it down.


----------



## sik80 (Mar 16, 2010)

Warning with amono shrimp is that as mine have got older they've developed a taste for healthy plants - particularly my wisteria. They do an amazing job eating algae but I'm gonna rehouse them into thier own tank soon

Don't think ottos will eat hair algae

SAE can become aggressive and won't eat as much algae when they're mature

There may be other steps you can take to reduce algae - adding liquid plant fertiliser may seen counterintuitive but it will help the plants you have to make more efficent use of the ammonia and light in the tank > staving the algae. Also bulbs rated around 6500k are best for plants - bulbs that are above or below this k rating are likely to result in algae as the plants can't use the light.


----------



## Boredomb (Feb 21, 2011)

sik80 said:


> Don't think ottos will eat hair algae


The Otos I have do not eat hair algae. I know this because I generally get it on the tops of my jungle val. near the surface of the water closet to the lights. :-? Not sure if they normally do or not but mine don't.


----------



## Byron (Mar 7, 2009)

Can you post a photo of this "algae" problem? Algae will occur in all aquaria, you cannot prevent it, and I'm wondering if what you have is normal but perhaps not to you. I say this because with the minimal light period you have, and if the plants are doing well, I can't see how algae could be an issue.


----------



## martian123 (May 21, 2011)

i would get more ottos if they are working so far


----------



## JNB (Apr 19, 2011)

My camera will not focus through the glass well enough to take a meaningful picture, but over half of my plants were so tangled in hair algae that I cut them off or pulled them up and staghorn grows about ¼ inch high on many of the rocks. Maybe now that the plants have been removed I will be able to dose with some flourish excel, get a few of Amano shrimp and keep things under better control.


----------



## JNB (Apr 19, 2011)

I just found this page comparing algae eating fish and inverts that is interesting. Robyn's Algae-Eating Animals Comparison Table Page


----------



## Guppie luver (Feb 2, 2011)

Well I think I was wrong  ok so is the algae going away?


----------



## redchigh (Jan 20, 2010)

Try Crossocheilus siamensis. Supposed to be a great algae-eating fish... (Unlike other fish called 'flying fox' in stores, this one remains peaceful)

It also eats hair algae and staghorn. Sounds perfect for you.


----------



## onefish2fish (Jul 22, 2008)

i have to agree with byron that if your plants are in good shape they will compete with the algae helping to keep it at bay. 
adding a nutrient like flourish may only increase your problems as the algae is feeding off excess nutrients.
water changes WILL help as the lower your nitRATE is, the less the algae will have to feed off of. 
exactly what type of lighting and how strong is it? cutting back on lighting for a few days may help too, even keeping the tank dark for a 2-3 day period would be benificial.
i have to say, adding a problem to fix a problem isnt the best of ideas IMO. more livestock means more bioload, which seems your tank is having an issue with at the moment. a good example of this would be, if i had a mouse problem, i wouldnt buy cats because then i'd have a cat problem, then i would have to buy dogs, then i have a dog problem, ofcourse this is just an example but see where im going?

i suggest cutting back feedings to every other day, stop dosing any plant nutrients for about 2 weeks, keeping the tank dark for 2-3 days, then performing a partial water change when you get your lights back on and seeing where you are at.


----------



## redchigh (Jan 20, 2010)

The difference is that Excel is a carbon source... Not sure I agree with it, but lots of people claim excel will kill algae. (And most mosses.)


----------



## JNB (Apr 19, 2011)

I mentioned Excel because on other forums and on the Excel website it says a good dose of Excel will kill hair algae, for some unknown reason. I have not heard about damage to moss, so I need to check that. I thought I would do it once to get things started. I don't think I have too much of a bioload right now because I only have 2 guppies, 2 mollies, a few small oto cats, a few neon tetras and 2 bristlenose plecos in my 55 gal. (My previous Bristlenose recently went nuts one night and ate 4 neons, bit the rear end off two other fish, and ate my one cherry shrimp. I dropped him off at a store, so he's gone too. All of the "remains" were removed.) 
My lighting is two 6500K t-5's, so not super bright.
Perhaps I should get a bunch of plants now that I cut mine back to help suck up any nutrients, but I don't want to spend a lot of money and toss half of them out when they get infested.


----------



## redchigh (Jan 20, 2010)

Gluteraldehyde is not just an algicide, it's a biocide...
Used (at higher doses) for sterilising hospital surgical tools, and as a fixative for labratory slides.. (Due to it's ability to quickly kill cells by crosslinking their proteins).

Yes, Excel is made out of Gluteraldehyde. At low doses (.5 - 1.0ppm) it can kill algae, liverworts, mosses, and vascular plants (like anarchis). Slightly higher doses can damage the heart and nervous system of fishes.


----------



## Byron (Mar 7, 2009)

I have issues/concerns with some of the suggestions in this thread.

First, algae occurs* solely* due to light. Obviously it needs nutrients, but these will be sufficient from just a few fish. If light is available, algae will occur. Different algae occurs in different tanks, why is not exactly known. But all knowledgeable sources agree that light is the factor that causes them [green and red species, the diatoms are something else, not a true algae anyway].

If plants are present, do not stop feeding them. This often makes algae worse. Of course, things still have to be balanced, so too many organic/mineral nutrients will increase the algae if light is available and CO2 is not sufficient for the plants. More on this momentarily.

Excel is a liquid carbon supplement and sometimes--I say sometimes--will kill off brush algae. But not always, and there are side issues like its clear detrimental effect on some higher plants and as redchigh noted fish.

Acquiring new fish to handle algae is not wise unless you have space and want the fish. I have a trio of Farlowella vittata in my 70g because I like them as a fish, and the fact that they consume common algae is a bonus. They do not touch other types except common green and diatoms.

Which brings me to that linked list of algae-eating fish. I don't know what the author means by "most attached types" of algae, but this appears next to almost every fish listed, and I can assure you they do not eat all those algae. Enough on that.

Light causes algae, nothing more, and I believe you have too intense a light. Clearly the tank's biological balance is out. By T5 I assume it is HO. Two tubes over a 55g is a lot of intensity, and if the nutrients are not sufficient to handle it you will have algae. Are these 48-inch tubes? One T5 HO is equivalent in intensity to 1.5 regular T8 tubes of the same type, so 2 T5's means 3 T8's, and that is way too much light for a natural low-tech setup without CO2 diffusion and daily nutrient dosing. My 55g 4-foot tank had one T12 tube and the plants were fine and I had no algae. I now understand why your reduced light period had no effect on limiting the algae.

The plants were doing well because they had good light, but only so far as the nutrients (all 17) were available. Obviously with so much light, CO2 would be gone within a couple hours, and the other nutrients were probably not sufficient either. At that point the plants stop photosynthesizing, and algae takes advantage.

Until you reduce the light to one T5 tube at most, you will not solve the algae problems. I can guarantee it. On my 115g tank, which is 5-feet and wider and deeper than your 55g, I have two 48-inch T8 tubes, and some 140 fish. I currently have 9 hours of light to keep the algae in check. This is 1/3 less light than you have over a tank that is about 1/2 the area. That is quite a difference in light.

Byron.


----------



## JNB (Apr 19, 2011)

I must admit that the whole light issue has become confusing for me. My intention was to have a tank with a good number of plants in it (which it had until I took a lot of them out this week). On Aquatic Plant Central everyone is all about more light, more light, more light. The idea is that if your plants are growing well, they will use all the nutrients and the algae won't grow. Most people on there use four T-5's on a 55Gal. People told me that two should be adequate if I am happy with only low light plants on a well, but not heavily planted tank like mine. Well I have no experience with a well planted tank, and I am happy with low light plants, so I do what they recommend and get a double T-5 HO, 54W, 6500K bulb fixture. Now my fixture will not run with only one bulb in it, so I am stuck with that one. I have blacked out my tank for a day or two and it kills the algae...for about three days.


----------



## redchigh (Jan 20, 2010)

There is our way, and their way. There is no right way.

We have experts ( like Byron), and they have their experts (Tom Barr).

I bet they most of them at lleast do pressurized CO2 (and probably EI dosing) though... And most of us here do not. Maybe some flourish, or some dirt, no CO2, and low light.

(Since these fish we keep live in the forest after all.. They like shade.)


----------



## Byron (Mar 7, 2009)

There is a lot of conflicting information concerning light for a planted tank, just as there is for many other fish-related issues. And sometimes each is correct--for their situation.

One still reads in current articles that nothing less than 2 watts per gallon will grow plants. Well, that is absolute nonsense. I haven't "imagined" that the plants are growing in my tanks for over 20 years with less than 1 watt per gallon light. The photos under "Aquariums" below my name on the left are of my recent tanks, since I joined this forum, but they all illustrate the lighting ideas I set out in the article "A Basic Approach to the Natural Planted Aquarium" and only the 70g has just over 1 watt per gallon, the rest are all under. I think the plants look pretty good.

Several issues have to be considered when selecting light. As redchigh mentioned, the fish are first and foremost--at least for me: I keep Tropical Fish in tanks with live plants, rather than Aquatic Plants in tanks that happen to have a few fish like some of these aquatic hobbyists do. And fish are stressed under bright light, there is ample scientific evidence of that. Second, one has to decide what plants you want. Some need more light than others. Just as fish compatibility is crucial to a successful "community" aquarium, so is plant compatibility. And a major component of "compatibility" for fish and plants are requirements in terms of light, filtration (water flow rates), heat, etc.

I remember Tom Barr writing that for a low-tech (natural) planted tank, one should always start with the minimum light necessary for the plants you want, then add nutrients to balance that and work it out. Otherwise, he said, you will be growing algae. I fully concur.

I have been at this quite a long time, and I have made mistakes along the way. I have also, I hope, learned a lot. And I am certainly willing to share what I can. I want aquarists with planted tanks, esp the first timers, to have success; a failure often means losing the hobbyist, and we don't want that.

Byron.


----------



## JNB (Apr 19, 2011)

Since I am stuck with my light for now, how does this sound:
I do a blackout for a day or two, add a lot of new plants to take up some nutrients, add something to eat some hair algae, like a few Amano Shrimp, and see what happens.


----------



## redchigh (Jan 20, 2010)

What are you dosing at the moment?
One of the problems could be the irregular lighting schedule... A timer is only about $4.


----------



## JNB (Apr 19, 2011)

I'm not dosing with anything. I do have a timer and I have it set at the on-off-on schedule based on what was recommended to me on Aquatic Plant Central and by a local specialty fish store. They said it might disrupt the algae growth while not harming my plants. It seems to have worked to some extent - the growth went down maybe 50% and the plants are fine so far.


----------



## Byron (Mar 7, 2009)

Please take what I will say as a sincere effort to help you resolve this, not as continued harping on the light issue.

You don't have a balance and success will not occur until you do. There is no "alternate" way. For instance, plants need light of a certain intensity and duration in order to photosynthesize. If the intensity is too little, extending the duration does not compensate; and vice versa. And in both cases, algae will take advantage.

Providing light with no nutrients or with insufficient nutrients to balance will not work. Plants can only photosynthesize when they have sufficient light intensity and duration and all 17 nutrients are available. As soon as one of these is missing (inadequate), plants will slow down photosynthesis or stop altogether. It is what botanists call the law of minimum. Light should always be the limiting factor to plant growth (photosynthesis), and if it is you will not have problems with algae, ever.

The "siesta" approach as it is often called works to limit algae in most circumstances. However, it is not due to the light per say, but due to CO2 (carbon dioxide). In a natural setup CO2 occurs naturally, from the fish and bacteria in the substrate breaking down the organics. More occurs from the bacteria than the fish. But it is limited. Plants will photosynthesize to the max, that is, full out, as long as everything is available. As soon as any essential nutrient (or light) is not, they stop; they will slow in some instances since they can store some nutrients and they use their reserves. Carbon is the macro-nutrient required in the greatest supply. In most natural aquaria, it will be the nutreint in_ least_ supply. And as soon as it is depleted, photosynthesis stops; plants cannot store carbon, it must be constantly available as long as light is present.

Plants photosynthesizing full out use up the available carbon (CO2) fairly quickly. They use it faster than it can naturally be produced, so it becomes exhausted. Within a few hours usually, depending obviously upon the CO2 being produced in the aquarium. A siesta light schedule of 5 hours on, 3 hours off and 5 hours on [then off for the rest of the night] will usually work. The 3 hours off allows the CO2 to rebuild. This is tied to the diurnal pH fluctuation in a natural planted tank. The pH lowers during darkness because the CO2 adds carbonic acid to the watder; pH rises during daylight because the CO2 is being taken up by plants.

Many of the other nutrients will be available in an established aquarium but in varying levels. Some occur via tap water (another important reason for weekly water changes), most via fish foods although in very variable amounts, and we can add them via fertilizers. Depending upon what is naturally available, additional fertilization is usually beneficial. And contrary to some, it will not increase algae--unless something else is missing (i.e., carbon) and light continues to be available.

Byron.


----------



## redchigh (Jan 20, 2010)

You definately need to dose flourish... didn't you mention that already?

Sometimes it helps to throw everything you know out the window and start from the ground up.


----------



## JNB (Apr 19, 2011)

I really appreciate everyones help. As far as advice, what would you recommend I do? Right now I have 2 hrs on, 5 off, 5 on for the lights. I can adjust that of course. Flourish or Flourish Excel I can dose (weekly?). Also add some new plants to restock the tank and suck up some nutrients, and get some algae eaters? My moss is getting filled with algae, so I will definitely be getting some shrimp. I am going to get a SAE and if it gets too big and eats all my moss I can always drop him off at the store. What do you think?


----------



## Byron (Mar 7, 2009)

JNB said:


> I really appreciate everyones help. As far as advice, what would you recommend I do? Right now I have 2 hrs on, 5 off, 5 on for the lights. I can adjust that of course. Flourish or Flourish Excel I can dose (weekly?). Also add some new plants to restock the tank and suck up some nutrients, and get some algae eaters? My moss is getting filled with algae, so I will definitely be getting some shrimp. I am going to get a SAE and if it gets too big and eats all my moss I can always drop him off at the store. What do you think?


I really do not advocate getting any fish solely for algae control [shrimp are fine, they have so little impact on the system, though they will eat very, very little of this, and only certain types]. SAE only eat brush algae; they are shoaling and should be in a group; they get large and can be boisterous.

Excel I do not recommend. If you are contemplating using it as a nutrient (carbon), it has to be dosed daily. Used as a spot remedy for brush algae [which to my knowledge is the only type is directly seems to sometimes affect] I believe aquarists apply it directly on the algae. Be warned it does negatively affect some plants. Mosses for instance, and Vallisneria, and a few others. This reaction seems to vary, so other factors may be involved, but enough aquarists have had whole stands of Vallisneria literally melt and Mosses disintegrate that it is a risk. And as redchigh noted, fish can be affected.

Flourish Comprehensive is a complete nutrient fertilizer containing levels of all nutrients except oxygen, hydrogen and carbon which they naturally assume will be in the aquarium sufficiently. It is used once or at most twice a week.

But we are back to the light which is still the source of the algae. Recent studies reported in the UK have suggested that plants can manage with a minimum of 6 hours of light each 24-hour period, assuming nutrients are in balance. If replacing the fixture is really not an option, I would suggest having one 6-hour light period each day, no more. With the Flourish Comprehensive, and provided there is sufficient CO2 in the tank to balance this, plants will photosynthesize and algae will be left out.

If the light is a fairly recent purchase, the store may exchange it. I had one for over a week and took it back for this same reason. They do after all want your continued business, and being satisfied is the best way of keeping it.


----------



## SinCrisis (Aug 7, 2008)

i had a BBA a few years back and i dosed excel to kill it. I had to buy a syringe and apply directly to infected areas. I think the thing is that excel is caustic when heavily concentrated, the application shocks the algae. However, right after (a day or so), I had to vacuum the substrate and do a 75% water change to reduce the effects of overdosing excel and reduce my nitrate levels. If you just kill off the algae and not correct the balance, the algae will come back. I once overdosed excel on a small tank and it killed almost everything. All my snails died over the next few days, my mosses browned, everything except the anubias which was growing emersed. Its really not safe to overdose it for the purpose of killing algae.

For my tank now, I dose excel once every 2 days, i haven't had any algae issues and it hasn't thrown my tank out of wack, nitrates a nice 5ppm.

I think your best bet right now is to go into the tank and cut off all the effected plants, do a water change, plant a bunch of new plants and start on a flourish comprehensive regime. I dont think a blackout is needed, one or 2 days wont make much of a difference anyway, my BBA survived 3 day blackout. Not sure about staghorn, but ime, its a pretty stubborn algae as well.


----------



## JNB (Apr 19, 2011)

OK, here's my plan of action: I definitely can't return the light, so I'll cut that down to 6 hours/day.As recommended, I'll get a bottle of Flourish Comprehensive. The plants I did not remove before look kind nasty after this algae issue, so I will toss most of them and restock with new plants. Of course, there is a water change along with it all.


----------



## llexpress20 (Mar 19, 2011)

I have a couple mollies, a snail, 3 emerald green cories and a sucker fish in my 55 gallon and I don't have any problems--they do a good job!


----------



## Inga (Jun 8, 2010)

I agree with everything Byron has said. He hasn't steered me wrong yet.  On the fish topic however I just want to add that I have a whole bunch of little Otto's and I love them. They are so cute and fun to watch. They are also very busy little algae eaters and though they likely do not eat all kinds, they do keep my glass squeaky clean. I also do see them eating algae off my plants often. If they are not a fish you appreciate, don't get them for algae removal though.


----------



## Byron (Mar 7, 2009)

When I was in Vancouver yesterday I had a couple hours so I visited the Library and browsed through some back issues of TFH, from the latter half of 2007 I believe it was. I came across a 2-part article on algaee by Laura Muha who authored a monthly column for a couple of years that was entitled "The Skeptical Fishkeeper." She wrote on scientific/technical issues, like the effects of pH, temperature, tank sizes on fish growth, water changes--and algae.

She had been having a real problem with algae, and after setting out all the issues that can contribute to algae--high ammonia/nitrates, organics, light--she came to her own observations on how to control algae. Regular partial water changes (weekly, 40-50%) and reducing the light intensity; applying these after a thorough cleaning of the existing algae prevented its return.

In one of the same issues there was a guest column by Tom Barr, a trained botanist. Most here will recognize his name. He wrote that one of the worst problems in a planted tanks is what he calls HLD. High Light Disease.


----------



## JNB (Apr 19, 2011)

If I find out I really have to change 50% (27 gal) of water a week to keep away my algae I'll just learn to live with it!:mrgreen:


----------



## Byron (Mar 7, 2009)

JNB said:


> If I find out I really have to change 50% (27 gal) of water a week to keep away my algae I'll just learn to live with it!:mrgreen:


I change 50-60% weekly and it does not prevent algae, and Laura found the same. It is only one factor and as in everything with an aquarium, it needs to be balanced with the others.


----------



## JNB (Apr 19, 2011)

How many gallons a week is that? That's dedication:notworthy:


----------



## Byron (Mar 7, 2009)

JNB said:


> How many gallons a week is that? That's dedication:notworthy:


In total, with 7 tanks, probably around 185 gallons. Obviously not with buckets; I have a Python. Every Wednesday, it takes 2-3 hours max, varies depending upon how much plant trimming or re-arranging I do. It's just a necessary part of keeping fish to me; if I couldn't do this, I would never have fish.


----------



## redchigh (Jan 20, 2010)

Seems close to 120 gallons with all his tanks. Luckily he has a python.


----------

