What brand of Fertilizers are you using?

[plantbrain]

Well, ferts are ferts.

that is the nice thing when we discuss chemistry and use terms like "NO3"(nitrate) which is the same no matter who makes it, sells it, brand names etc. Horticulture and agriculture have the same issues, deals, they have brand names but the bottom line is what is most economical for them.

For us, whether we waste a little N or P matters not, it's only a few pennies at most. For a large scale farming operations, it matters a lot due to fert cost and thousands of hectares.

Comparing brands is not much use really, we are interested in the minerals, so we want ppms of NO3, PO4, K+ etc.

The only area of interest and real conservative use is Traces as they cost the most and are more brand name based.

Oddly, few have even bother to test/develop test that are applicable for us. I simply used non limiting conditions under very high light for CO2, all ther macro nutrients/GH etc, then added a lot and slowly reduce it down until I had a negative response to the plant growth, then added it back to the next highest level.

This addresses what we want to know, how much is just enough non limiting Traces.

Regards,
Tom Barr

[dougz]

On the flip side, DIY ferts, is pretty easy to use, but requires a bit more know how and experience.

Can you elaborate?

What else do you need to do besides add the prescribed amounts to some water and mix it all up and add it to the tank?

I haven't been adding any macros, just a capful of Flourish every other day, and now I have string algae issues..

My C02 drop checker is in the green, but I have no idea how many ppm that means..

None of my plants, including the riccia, are pearling, and I don't want to add much more, as my pH will go still lower (I have it set via pH controller for 6.7).

Thoughts?

[Dan Pellegrini]

Knowing what is in the various fert lines helps when you are dealing with folks that use them, and their claims. It also gives some idea as to other approaches (i.e. ratios) from educated sources.

Without some information about what you are using, you are operating blind with their products - not sure if one more squirt is too much, etc. Perhaps a lot of people just want to believe that their car starts by magic in the morning - I like to have a little more concrete understanding of what is going on - so when something goes wrong, I have enough information to address the problem correctly.

I too would love to blissfully pump simple quantities of magic liquid into my tanks and watch them thrive. IME there are too many variables with high-tech tanks to acheive any real longterm success doing it this way. In fact that would be an interesting poll - find out if there is really anyone out there that has had longterm (3+ years at least) success with planted tanks, following a commerical products recommended dosing instructions without ever needing to learn a little more about what was in the products, etc...

dougz - I would start a seperate thread for help with your tank

[StanChung]

Originally Posted by dougz

My C02 drop checker is in the green, but I have no idea how many ppm that means..

None of my plants, including the riccia, are pearling, and I don't want to add much more, as my pH will go still lower (I have it set via pH controller for 6.7).

Hi Doug,
If your tank's pH is 7.7 before the CO2 is turned on then you'd be ok at pH6.7 after the CO2 is turned on say 1/2 hour later.

If you're using some designer soil like ADA's, the pH could drop as low as 5.5 without even adding CO2.

To me the drop checker is only an acidity checker/ornament. How well it measures CO2 is questionable in new tanks when the soil is still potent.

[Dan Pellegrini]

This is why you should be using a reference kH solution in your drop checker, NOT tank water. Otherwise you are right, it is just an ongoing pH test

[dougz]

If your tank's pH is 7.7 before the CO2 is turned on then you'd be ok at pH6.7 after the CO2 is turned on say 1/2 hour later.

If you're using some designer soil like ADA's, the pH could drop as low as 5.5 without even adding CO2.

To me the drop checker is only an acidity checker/ornament. How well it measures CO2 is questionable in new tanks when the soil is still potent.

My tank set point is 6.7 (was 6.8, i just changed it). When I do water changes I add tap water (7.8) to demineralized water to get a rough pH of 6.8, then add it to the tank, with conditioner and after heating it to around 77F.

Hey Stan, thanks for the feedback..

My substrate is Eco-complete, with an inch of pure powdered laterite under that.

I didn't notice much of a drop in pH from the Eco, if any..

I'm going to get a Lamotte CO2 tester and see what my actual ppm is..

I noticed today that my riccia is starting to pearl a bit, finally (woohoo!), after lowering the pH setpoint, and thus the time the CO2 controller keeps the solenoid open..

Maybe I'll drop it down one more point to 6.6 tomorrow..

I'm going to start EI dosing with dry ferts from Green Leaf here soon, too..

This is why you should be using a reference kH solution in your drop checker, NOT tank water.

Can you elaborate? The instructions were for me to add 1 drop of the KH solution (4.0? I duuno), and then fill the bulb half full with tank water.

[StanChung]

Eco complete is not a peat based soil if I'm not mistaken so it would not do much to the pH if any.
Dan's right about using a reference kH solution.
Nowadays I don't even check the CO2. I just make sure the diffusor is fizzing and the plants are fizzing later without the fish gasping!

[Dan Pellegrini]

The problem with tank water is that other things can effect your pH (not just kH/CO2). When you use a kH reference solution like this:

KH Standard

INSTEAD of tank water, then add your pH regent to that for your drop checker, you will be dealing with 2 knowns - pH and kH. Thus CO2 is the only thing that can change - then your colors will be relevant. Using tank water is not at all useful in most cases

[dougz]

Hmm..

Ok, thanks!

I thought that one drop of solution that came with the drop checker (an orange solution) was the KH standard..

Would I fill the bulb half full, as before?

Would this stuff be as good as the product you linked?

http://www.greenleafaquariums.com/co...-standard.html

[Dan Pellegrini]

Yes, that is the same stuff. Use it in place of tank water. You can use it in your pH test kit, then take that liquid and put it in your drop checker

[dougz]

You can use it in your pH test kit

??

Ok, so just use this in place of tank water, got it..

Not getting the pH test kit reference..

[Dan Pellegrini]

I just use my kH reference in my API test kit for pH instead of tank water, then use a little plastic dropper to transfer that test water (kH solution + pH regent) into my drop checker.

[dougz]

Ah, gotcha..

Well, I have an API pH test kit..

But it's been a while since I opened it to make my first tests, and they're only good for 3 months, apparently..

I'll order some of that stuff from Green Aquariums..

I have other stuff I have to pick up there anyways (ferts).

[plantbrain]

This has gotten a bit off topic, please bear with it.

DC's are not that responsive. They only measure CO2 where they are placed.
They are not that easy for many folks to determine a precise pH reading inside the ball, we get Blue, Green and Yellow for determinations typically, hardly precise...............

So those are the 3 trade offs when using them.

They are a rough guide.
That's it.

They do get around the Kh issue however.

But at a price.

You still need to really know what good plant health and growth looks like, be able to rule pother issues like nutrients, filter cleanings etc, pruning ..........then tweak the CO2 more by eye.

There are some pricy equipment items folks could use, but they are not economic viable. So eyeballs are perhaps the best thing we have and some experience.

Plants make the best test kit truthfully, but new folks and even some older folks have issues with it.

CO2 is the hardest thing to measure and the most variable and causes the most issues.

So learn all you can about it.
Only when you have mastered full control of CO2 can you fairly judge light and nutrients. Every so often the CO2 drops off and I go after it as well. No one is "immune".



Regards,
Tom Barr

[dougz]

What about the Lamotte test kit for CO2?

[Orlando]

Ive been testing with a few new all in one macro/micro. Also have started with my own trace blend of nutrients that seem to work extremely well

-O

[defdac]

HEEDTA based liquid micro "Mikro+" from Välkommna till Haack´s PMDD
CaCl2+MgSO4 as GH-boost.
KNO3+K2SO4+KH2PO4 as macros.

[plantbrain]

Originally Posted by StanChung

Eco complete is not a peat based soil if I'm not mistaken so it would not do much to the pH if any.
Dan's right about using a reference kH solution.
Nowadays I don't even check the CO2. I just make sure the diffusor is fizzing and the plants are fizzing later without the fish gasping!

Exactly, I think most folks that can pull off a nice tank again and again do this, the plants are the test kit.

Still, using that type of aquarium as a control reference, we can test and measure that, rather than assuming it is something that it very well might not be.

ADa lights where very low(more so that I certainly expected), CO2 is rarely measured, the total nutrient content is actually quite high, even if the methods aquarists use to measure nutrients(only in the water column, not in the sediment) are unable to measure them.

If you have more total nutrients, clearly, the plants will grow better, longer etc, if you have less total, then they will not grow as well or as long.

The issue is that folks do not include sediment sources, and that causes bias in the conclusions when you leave out 1/2 the location for nutrients.

Folks do this all the time, do not get the most basic of logic, drives me nuts. haha These nutrients in sediments are still available at low levels to algae and to plants(that's why they are measured, not jus the water column for any ecology or allocation studies). At low light, there's less demand for nutrients and CO2.

So this all make sense once you go back and measure it and applies well to what is known about aquatic plant growth. Now you can still eye ball CO2, I do, but I also like to know more about the model and the processes.
I'm not one to test for dosing's sake, I have larger questions.

Still, for newbies, it can be tough learning how to dial in the CO2 correctly, but with lower light, it's easier. I have to wonder if this was a conscience thing or was it just trial and error with Amano/ADA? Seems more like a trail and error.

Amano comes from the older school of less light and when high light is added, he is timid about it and conservative. This is wise.
Soil nutrients is also old school, and likewise, when it comes to adding ferts to the water column, again, he's fairly timid, but with lower light, this is not an issue.

Overall, the lower light makes life easier for planted tanks, but many get tunnel vision with nutrients.

Regards,
Tom Barr