This is using NativePlanter's suggested dose of 1 oz per 10 gallons, and that was per water volume, not tank volume (I use deep sandbeds which occupy a fair amount of the tank volume).
I have to admit, I got a little itchy last night, as the cyano crashed (didn't realize there was this much in there), the tank turned kool-aid red, like some plague of Moses or something. But no one seemed very bothered by it. I had a couple corbicula mussels surface in the 100 gallon, but they're reset themselves into the substrate today. The tanks are now un-red, and have a tannic, yet crystal appearance, if that makes any sense.
I'll be doing my usual 50% monthly water changes on Sunday, which will be the first chance I'll get at it. I would imagine that while the H202 would oxidize a lot of the carbon fixed by algae into CO2 (the bubbles you will see), there's still got to be an overall increase in nutrient loading (or re-loading, however you want to look at it). It will definately be interesting to crack open the canister filters and see what they look like.
I had a pretty heavy mess in my Florida tank due to feeding a large amount of pellet food (I knew I hated pellet and flake for some reason), and so this tank looks like it will require another dose. However, I can't say that it was the fortitude of the cyano in this system... I absent mindedly left a carbon bag in for the first 5 minutes right where I was dosing into, so that probably ate up a good deal of the peroxide off the bat. Still, as bloody red as the tank was, I'd hate to see everything purge at once
![:)](http://forum.nanfa.org/public/style_emoticons/default/icon_smile.gif)
What I really like about this is that it doesn't seem to have affected the cyano down in the sandbed, out of the photoreactive zone. And that's where I want my algae building itself and fixing nutrients. This seems like a great way to favor development where I want it.
By the way, I saw this in another thread searching and searching for the dosage in a great many very similar threads lol...
The amount of Hydrogen Sulfide it would take to deleteriously affect your fish is enough evolving all at once to make you puke if you were standing next to the aquarium, it's really a pretty stable molecule.
The problems people find are associates of conditions where Hydrogen Sulfide develops, not the chemical itself. Anoxic, hydric substrates aren't a problem. In fact, they're a benefit because they're getting rid of some of the nitrogen issues. However, in our highly eutrophied, nutrient loaded glass boxes... High nitrogen loads can exceed the capacity of the sediment to process it, which is problematic in itself. As well, cyano typically begins to take over, and some of the chemicals evolved by cyanobacteria are downright evil.
It's kinda like a stinky sewer in the old days. Was it the "mal-aria", the "bad air" killing people? Definately what you'd notice! But it was the not-so-stinky, invisible cholera and other water borne diseases from fetid water that was really doing the job. Think how long it took humans to figure that one out.
Fear not the deep, enriched substrates!
Todd