# So what’s the deal with ‘heavy root feeders’?



## LidijaPN (Jan 15, 2022)

I see lots of references to certain plants (swords, val) being ‘heavy root feeders’, but I also saw quite a few people mention the whole ‘root feeder’ thing is a myth. Where do you stand? What science seems to support either of these stances? I’m reading around but can’t really work it out.


----------



## cloozoe (Feb 28, 2010)

Same here; have read both with (as usual) no support for either position. Just the standard web routine wherein endless people repeat what they've read/heard in a manner that would imply they know what they're talking about. They don't, but pretty soon the echo chamber makes it look like gospel.

that said, Tom Barr claims that water column nutrients wind up in substrate and vice versa which strikes me as logical (at least with my fine gravel, not excessively deep substrate) which renders the question moot.


----------



## latchdan (Sep 7, 2007)

Don't have any science about it but just want to put my 2 cents in.
Seems like plants that are root” feeders" have a more extensive root system. Such as crypts swords and the like compared to stem plants that can be cut and replanted. These seem to benefit more from root tabs.

I could see substrates that have high CEC would absorb nutrients from the water column.

I had Monte Carlo growing in safe-t-sorb and it grew well untill the soil was compacted. I would siphon the substrate then replant and it would continue to grow well. I switched to pool sand and root tabs and it all almost died. Switched to ada and it's growing again.

Might just be coincidence


----------



## somewhatshocked (Aug 8, 2011)

Plants can obviously feed via roots or we wouldn't be able to grow them emersed or keep them in tanks without water column dosing (sure, there are minerals in water but not usually enough to sustain great plants in my tanks with low TDS water), so that's not a myth. But it is something a tiny number of people who love to argue about fertilizer tend to claim.

Most who say "heavy root feeders" really mean plants with substantial roots. Like vals, crypts, that sort of thing that really take root, spread out and hold on. They're not just regurgitating something in an echo chamber. They're just not being clear. Some may be repeating what they've heard but as someone who reads thousands of posts per day, I'd argue their numbers are lower than the folks who mean plants with huge roots.

There are plants that do better than others when fed only from substrate. It's usually plants with extensive, substantial root systems. But that doesn't mean they don't feed equally as well from the water column.

Edit: Jinx. Looks like @latchdan beat me to the punch with some of this.


----------



## cloozoe (Feb 28, 2010)

High CEC substrates don't "absorb" anything; they adsorb up to a point and then, when adsorption sites are full, no longer do.

Barr's point is not a function of adsorption, though, just a matter of water (including whatever nutrients it contains) soaking into the substrate. If you have a small particle (eg. dirt), deep, compacted substrate, less water would penetrate less deeply, presumably, at which point we're back to your initial question about "heavy root feeders" vs not heavy root feeders. Regarding whether such a distinction exists I will remain profoundly agnostic until I see a properly designed/controlled experiment indicating one thing or the other.


----------



## Blacksheep101 (Oct 4, 2021)

I’m not going to make out I know , well much of anything really , but from personal experience when moving one single echinodorus parv plant it’s roots touched both ends of the 4 ft tank . If I forget root tabs for even less than a week they aren’t happy, slower growth and holey leaves. if I skip a water column feed they don’t bother all too much.

Are you thinking of getting a particular plant?


----------



## pauld738 (Jan 4, 2019)

Maybe another way to look at it is to clip a leaf off of a sword, val, crypt, etc and stick that into the substrate. Or for that matter, let it float at the surface.

Then clip the top off of a stem plant. Say your standard Rotala, Ludwigia.

Those plants that rely more on their root system will suffer more, if not outright fail to grow. While those that don't will grow despite not having an extensive root system.

Atleast that's the way I look at it.

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk


----------



## cloozoe (Feb 28, 2010)

"Plants can obviously feed via roots...so that's not a myth."

Neither the OP nor anyone else claims it is; the question is whether allegedly heavy root feeders are in fact disproportionately reliant on root feeding versus foliar feeding relative to other plants. And even if so, whether root feeding requires putting nutrients such as root tabs directly into the substrate as opposed to the substrate obtaining nutrients from the water column. I've never encountered anything that would convincingly answer the questions one way or the other, merely speculation, anecdotes (usually ignoring the potential impact of countless other variables) and --worst by far--people making direct statements without either (valid) support or attribution as if what they were saying was as inarguable and established as 2+2=4 based apparently on the fact that it must be true, they read it on the internet.


----------



## Asteroid (Jul 26, 2018)

In the context of planted aquariums I could say without any hesitation that you don't need to add anything to a substrate via root tabs or active soil to achieve healthy growth from the so-called "root feeders" Whether they are taking in most of the nutrients through the leaves or roots is another thing, but they will grow very well in inert sand or fine gravel as long as ferts are provided in the water column.

Too many people including myself have grown them this way. I just had a bunch of really colorful crypts for sale that were grown in inert black sand, I have an entire carpet of Crypt Parva growing in the same inert sand and the Lagenandra Meeboldii Red (Purple Avatar Pic) also grown in the same inert black sand.


----------



## mooner (Dec 2, 2007)

rant......not trying to get banned

Why can't people do there own experiments instead of relying on others in forums to make up there minds?? Otherwise you get false hoods circulating the internet, then aquarist trying these false hoods and failing, some leaving the hobby all together. How do you think this was done before the internet? books, trial and error?, showing my age here  . Consider weather or not to reply to a thread, do you have personal experience on the subject? People! try things for yourselves, you will learn and be better for it.

BTW, I use both column and substrate ferts = incredible growth when balanced with light, CO2 and maintenance. I have also run tanks with column ferts only. both work. The key item here is balance.

Cheers


----------



## somewhatshocked (Aug 8, 2011)

cloozoe said:


> "Plants can obviously feed via roots...so that's not a myth."
> 
> Neither the OP nor anyone else claims it is;


The OP did, indeed, mention it. Here the relevant excerpt:



LidijaPN said:


> but I also saw quite a few people mention the whole ‘root feeder’ thing is a myth


Which is why I said it wasn't a myth. Stop trying to stir the pot, @cloozoe. It's absolutely not welcome. The OP merely brought up a subject they're attempting to better understand.



mooner said:


> both work. The key item here is balance.


They do, indeed, both work. And you're not going to get banned for having a polite discussion with others. It takes a _*lot*_ to be removed from the forum. Like tons of drama, threats, insulting others, constantly stirring the pot or attempting theft of services. I don't see anyone here doing that.



mooner said:


> Why can't people do there own experiments instead of relying on others in forums to make up there minds??


I think a lot of people do. The vast majority do, anyway, as the vast majority of forum members just read without ever posting. But even those who do experiment in order to find what works best in their tanks often like to see what others have experienced so they have some idea of what to expect. 

You hit the nail on the head, though, about there being multiple paths to success. And sometimes half the fun is walking down them all.


----------



## LidijaPN (Jan 15, 2022)

Ok this is exactly the sort of discussion I was hoping for, thanks everyone!!! ♥ I’m re-reading everything once again to make sure I’m following what everyone is saying but for the moment it does all seem to make sense.

- obviously plants can and do take nutrients through their roots but they can also do it through their leaves from the water. Plants that grow extensive root systems get more benefits from nutrients available in the substrate.

- active substrates make the point moot because plenty of nutrients are available for whoever wants them. This is perhaps why people like @sudiorca have a lot of success with very lean fert dosing to the water column, as the plants are still fed through the roots. 

- inert substrates will also be able to provide some nutrients because they are steeped in aquarium water and so any ferts from the water column will to some degree be available through the substrate again. I need to comprehend more about the idea of cec substrates, does that mean they pull in more water? That would be my Flourite sand I guess.

- some plants might have a preference, as some people notice certain plants they have struggle with no root tabs but don’t seem to equally struggle without column dosing. There are probably plants that would be the exact opposite, and there are probably a bunch who don’t have a strict preference?

- from my own observations I have two struggling plants - swords, and hygrophila. One is an enthusiastic rooter and the other is a stem. I have to consider that neither of their issues might be coming from inadequate substrate ferts, as the sword is still adjusting to the tank and the hygrophila polysperma doesn’t seem like the type who would rely on tabs. 

- I did add some tabs to my substrate but honestly have no way of knowing how much and whether they’re changing things. I may be able to track better when the aquarium is more matured and there are less other factors to consider, like plants still adjusting. My val is going insane but I have no way of knowing if it’s the one root tab next to it or just normal val personality.

- People report success with different approaches - inert substrate and high water column dosing, active substrate and lean/ no column dosing, active substrate and column dosing. I’d be curious to know if there are people succeeding with inert substrate and no water column ferts either. I imagine they’d be growing a few very specific plants.

This is all pretty fascinating to me.


----------



## Asteroid (Jul 26, 2018)

The forum could be a wild west show of sorts, with people just firing off information. Journals can be very helpful as someone can see the full picture of someone's actual experience growing plants or setting up a tank similar to what they might want to do. 

Nothing wrong with experimenting, but there could be alot of reasons why someone might not want to add ferts directly to the substrate unless it was absolutely necessary. People posting actual results of how they grew plants is helpful for that reason.


----------



## somewhatshocked (Aug 8, 2011)

LidijaPN said:


> I’d be curious to know if there are people succeeding with inert substrate and no water column ferts either.


Plants need ferts to survive. So unless someone's source water is loaded down with minerals (some tap water is - it can be really gross in some regions of the world) or their livestock are producing a ton of waste that can be used by plants, they're likely not going to have a ton of success with anything demanding.

My tap water is loaded down with minerals (along with disgusting stuff), contains ammonia/ammonium and nitrate of about 10-15PPM on any given day. So it, along with livestock waste, can support really simple plants like slow-growing anubias and occasional ferns. Can't say any of the plants from my tanks like that have ever looked as good as in tanks where supplemental ferts are dosed.


----------



## easternlethal (Feb 13, 2016)

For stuff like this you should just read something scientific. You will learn more in 30 minutes there than several months trawling through any forum.

There are plenty of well researched and peer reviewed articles out there if you use the right keywords. Here are a few:



https://dianawalstad.files.wordpress.com/2017/05/biolfiltration2017a.pdf











Ammonium and nitrate uptake by aquatic plants from poorly buffered and acidified waters


In the Netherlands, atmospheric deposition of ammonia compounds, particularly ammonium sulphate, is an important source for the acidification of oligo…




www.sciencedirect.com


----------



## LidijaPN (Jan 15, 2022)

easternlethal said:


> For stuff like this you should just read something scientific. You will learn more in 30 minutes there than several months trawling through any forum.
> 
> There are plenty of well researched and peer reviewed articles out there if you use the right keywords. Here are a few:
> 
> ...


Thanks for that, I’ll try! I do try to search scientific papers sometimes but as this is not my field I often get lost in the weeds so to speak and have trouble finding what I’m looking for without reading a whole lot of other stuff I barely understand...

On the subject of personal experimentation, that’s what we’re all doing I suppose  but it takes a long time to reach conclusions that way, and when you start out it’s hard to say if you’re making the right ones as everything in your tank is still in flux and you don’t entirely understand how everything relates to each other.

One thing that’s fascinating me is how scientific this hobby is.


----------



## Asteroid (Jul 26, 2018)

Many scientific papers are interesting but in the context of our aquariums they aren't always applicable as they don't take into account things like algae, certain fish, etc. For example plants prefer ammonia/ammonium over nitrate, but dosing ammonia/ammonium/urea can and will cause major issues in many setups so although it might be true, it's not practical for other reasons to do that.

The best information well have that is completely applicable are hobbyists tanks with actual results in the parameters of the light we use and the fish we keep across a wide spectrum. I would take this anecdotal information any day over some scientific information outside of the aquariums we have.


----------



## LidijaPN (Jan 15, 2022)

That’s a fair point. It’s notable on the forum as well that people who focus on growing aquatic plants have different approaches and experiences to those who are more focused on fish keeping in a planted tank.

Also if scientific papers focus on how the plants do in a natural setting there could be much variation from our setups that have limited water volume and flow, different lighting etc etc


----------



## ursamajor (Oct 6, 2015)

It's too easy to get lost in the weeds in these discussions.


somewhatshocked said:


> Plants need ferts to survive.


This is the heart of it. In an aquarium, the substrate is not a waterproof barrier. Nutrients from the water end up in the substrate. Nutrients from the substrate end up in the water. So we see folks with inert substrate and EI fertilization growing plants with huge root systems. And we see people with aquasoil never dose anything and grow happy floating plants. I think the plants are a bit less concerned than we are. They just want to be fed.


LidijaPN said:


> - from my own observations I have two struggling plants - swords, and hygrophila.


By my understanding, both plants that aren't usually fussy and benefit from lots of nutrients. Meanwhile your Vals are very happy. I do think in lower nutrient systems there is some competition among plants for available nutrients. It may be that the Vals are winning the competition. You might overcome this by increasing the amount of liquid fertilizer used. Keep us posted with what helps!


----------



## minorhero (Mar 28, 2019)

Defining my term:

When people are talking about heavy root feeders, to my mind, they are 99% of the time referring to a plant that _requires_ nutrients in the substrate. Either root tabs or active substrate (be it aquasoil type or dirt).

I consider the idea of a heavy root feeder (using this term I just defined) as complete nonsense.

Yes plants that have roots use those roots to take in nutrients, this is a given. BUT, I have never seen, grown, or heard of a plant that grows in substrate that can not be grown in an inert substrate with no root tabs so long as there is proper fertilizer dosing going on in the tank.

Based on this, the idea that a plant needs active substrate or root tabs seems to be patently false. And thus the idea of a 'heavy root feeder' is frankly nonsense. Speculation on my part, but I believe the term is most likely a holdover from earlier time in planted tanks when we did not know how to grow certain plants.

So does this mean plants in inert substrate are _only_ getting nutrients from their leaves?

I do not think so. If the substrate is wet (and of course it is) then its clear water is getting to the substrate. And if water is getting to the substrate, it further follows that anything dissolved in the water is also getting into the substrate. I don't care if the substrate is sand 10 inches deep. If its wet at the bottom, then fertilizer introduced into the water column will eventually make its way there. It might take a while, but it will get there eventually.

So fertilizer dosed into the water column will be absorbed by roots as well as any other part of a plant that is capable of absorbing it.

Why does any of this matter? Well frankly only because some people will read a description of a plant and then go to extraordinary measures to try and grow said plant because it was labeled as a 'heavy root feeder' when they in reality could treat the plant like any other and would probably be better off for it.


----------



## somewhatshocked (Aug 8, 2011)

Some try to learn and ask questions to get input from others without any sort of agenda. Literally out of genuine interest because they're relatively new to the hobby. Like the OP.

Keep that in mind when responding, folks, as there's not a need to be petty or argumentative. There's not a need to get hung up on semantics and begin to bicker with others when everyone pretty much agrees on the thing that's being discussed.

Woo, internet.

Update - received quite an interesting PM. It's a good example of what not to do and a look at how to find yourself temporarily suspended. Also an example of being an unnecessary jerk:



> Dear super-moderator,
> 
> I'm always glad to depart from anyplace I'm not welcome without being shoved. In parting, you clearly misinterpreted the OP's comment regarding root feeding, as was made abundantly clear in her follow-up, as if it needed clarification. But then it's equally clear you're not the sharpest knife in the drawer.
> 
> ...


Don't be that person. It's unnecessary.


----------



## Le duke (Jun 29, 2021)

I have a boat load of 3-4’ Vals in my 75. I started off with Thrive root tabs, one per plant, and I’m guessing if there’s any of that left it’s next to nothing. I’m using inert (BDBS) substrate.

Lately, I’ve been dosing 6mL of Aquarium Co-Op Easy Green twice a week. Plants look great. Between the EG and fish waste, I have regular new runners, good growth, no yellowing and my swords had minimal die off/melting when I got them. 

At some point, when I get my FX6, reactor, in-line heater, etc. set up, I’d like to get an autodoser going too, and start EI. I had initially thought that I’d have use root tabs forever, but I’m pleased to liquid certs are an option for such large plants.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## LidijaPN (Jan 15, 2022)

Aw man I certainly didn’t want to start any arguments 😅 But I do feel that everyone in the thread so far has given an interesting perspective... I think it’s very difficult to judge tone in written language... some people have what you’d call ‘resting bi*** voice’, where their comments often come off sounding vaguely terse or slightly combative, where if you were having a real life conversation you wouldn’t feel that....

Also some people are just testy lol 😂 That pm is just weird.

On the subject at hand, I read the short article that @easternlethal linked and sadly I am none the wiser. Maybe I’m not the sharpest knife in the drawer hahah 😂 Like it said one water was acidic and the other was soft? I thought acidic water is usually soft and alkaline water is hard? Must find more scientific articles.

@ursamajor pointed out both my struggling plants are usually unfussy. It’s true, and I have other plants that should be slightly fussier doing great in the tank... my limnophila is going wild and the store guy said it might struggle without CO2.... (I know I know, I shouldn’t listen to the store guy... 😅) The sword legit could be still adjusting. He is putting out new leaves that look good. The hygrophila is really struggling, I have it from 2 sources, in 2 locations with different neighbors/amounts of light and all are unhappy. I might try a sprig of it in my jar though the jar will quickly run out of room.

@Le duke your dosing of Easy Green is like my dosing of Thrive (6ml), but your tank is 3x the size... wonder if Easy Green is more concentrated? When people were picking over my ferts thread there seemed to be a consensus that the ppm amounts were kind of in the ballpark of what one would expect... Yeah my vals love life, maybe they’re just a rambunctious plant. I definitely don’t want to feed them massive piles of root tabs if I don’t have to... I’m ok with slipping the odd one in there now and then if they like it.

I also wonder how much of a role fish stocking plays in this debate... I’m superbly lightly stocked with my 13 fish who could all fit into a single teaspoon together, so I’d guess my mileage will vary from someone with solid fish numbers.

Also on land we have desert plants who seem to survive on minimal nutrition, there are probably equivalents in the aquatic world... the slow growers I guess? I wonder if some of the stems are simply better at converting and thus make more of the available nutrition...


----------



## Anon (Mar 16, 2014)

LidijaPN said:


> I’m reading around but can’t really work it out.


Hi @LidijaPN 

May I suggest that you take a look at Diana Walstad's book, _Ecology of the Planted Aquarium_? She deals with the topic of plant nutrient uptake in this book. BTW, I'm not on commission! If you're "reading around", it's worth taking a look at this book. Shame it's not available in paperback as it's a tad expensive for some aquatics hobbyists.

Anon


----------



## LidijaPN (Jan 15, 2022)

Anon said:


> Hi @LidijaPN
> 
> May I suggest that you take a look at Diana Walstad's book, _Ecology of the Planted Aquarium_? She deals with the topic of plant nutrient uptake in this book. BTW, I'm not on commission! If you're "reading around", it's worth taking a look at this book. Shame it's not available in paperback as it's a tad expensive for some aquatics hobbyists.
> 
> Anon


I’ll see if my library has it!! Thanks for the tip!!



Blacksheep101 said:


> I’m not going to make out I know , well much of anything really , but from personal experience when moving one single echinodorus parv plant it’s roots touched both ends of the 4 ft tank . If I forget root tabs for even less than a week they aren’t happy, slower growth and holey leaves. if I skip a water column feed they don’t bother all too much.
> 
> Are you thinking of getting a particular plant?


I’m not considering any specific plant beyond my happy mishmash of everything labeled ‘easy’ hahah. Just trying to understand more aquarium mechanisms to be able to better troubleshoot the few plants who seem less than ideally happy... but at the moment I’m doubting ferts are the answer....


----------



## easternlethal (Feb 13, 2016)

LidijaPN said:


> I read the short article that @easternlethal linked and sadly I am none the wiser. Maybe I’m not the sharpest knife in the drawer hahah [emoji23] Like it said one water was acidic and the other was soft? I thought acidic water is usually soft and alkaline water is hard? Must find more scientific articles.


I agree some of articles are not easy and they will not directly give you the answer you are looking for but if you plan to stay in the hobby over the longer term it's worth investing the time to get to grips with the vocabulary and what the scientific community knows and what they don't.

Some things are better explained by aquarists especially the more practical aspects of fishkeeping but if you want to know something specific like how root feeders work and which are more efficient through their roots vs others and you want a well defined theory with experimental evidence then it's all there.

The articles are discussing how some plants (hornwort, duckeed etc) actually prefer to absorb ammonium and nitrite through their leaves and that this process occurs 24/7 without the need for co2 or light. 

Sent from my LM-V405 using Tapatalk


----------



## LidijaPN (Jan 15, 2022)

easternlethal said:


> I agree some of articles are not easy and they will not directly give you the answer you are looking for but if you plan to stay in the hobby over the longer term it's worth investing the time to get to grips with the vocabulary and what the scientific community knows and what they don't.
> 
> Some things are better explained by aquarists especially the more practical aspects of fishkeeping but if you want to know something specific like how root feeders work and which are more efficient through their roots vs others and you want a well defined theory with experimental evidence then it's all there.
> 
> ...


For sure, I’m trying to slowly get into it and try to contrast it with what I’m seeing in my little tank. 

Do you have any favorite sources for this sort of content?


----------



## Asteroid (Jul 26, 2018)

Anon said:


> Hi @LidijaPN
> 
> May I suggest that you take a look at Diana Walstad's book, _Ecology of the Planted Aquarium_? She deals with the topic of plant nutrient uptake in this book. BTW, I'm not on commission! If you're "reading around", it's worth taking a look at this book. Shame it's not available in paperback as it's a tad expensive for some aquatics hobbyists.
> 
> Anon


_The Ecology of the Planted Aquarium_ does not represent 95% of the planted tanks run by people. It doesn't rely on enriched water column dosing, but relies on nutrients from soil and fish waste, so it really is irrelevant to the discussion about root feeder vs water column feeding in a typical planted tank. It's a good method for a people who want a more self contained low energy aquarium.


----------



## LidijaPN (Jan 15, 2022)

Asteroid said:


> _The Ecology of the Planted Aquarium_ does not represent 95% of the planted tanks run by people. It doesn't rely on enriched water column dosing, but relies on nutrients from soil and fish waste, so it really is irrelevant to the discussion about root feeder vs water column feeding in a typical planted tank. It's a good method for a people who want a more self contained low energy aquarium.


I do love the idea of the Walstad method and have done some reading on that. But yeah as I’m going with an inert substrate it can’t quite work for my setup.... still makes for interesting reading tho, I’m sure.


----------



## easternlethal (Feb 13, 2016)

Asteroid said:


> _The Ecology of the Planted Aquarium_ It doesn't rely on enriched water column dosing, but relies on nutrients from soil and fish waste, so it really is irrelevant to the discussion about root feeder vs water column feeding in a typical planted tank.


A large part of the book is all about how plants remove stuff from the water column which the dirt puts into it - not just from roots within the soil.

Anyway - I would encourage hobbyists to read widely and not just with a view to getting one answer.


----------



## MoreliaViridis (May 19, 2021)

As for traditional "heavy root feeders": they can grow very well even when they are mainly fed through liquid ferts.

However, I do think there are plants that definitely prefer to have at least some root feeding. I'll refer these plants as root feeders from now on..
My list of root feeders might be different to most others.


I have been fiddling with custom ferts for a while..
And as I go down into the rabbit hole I learn more and more about the importance of roots.

This is my take on this topic:
Almost all plants can be grown very well on inert substrate(or unrooted) with only liquid fertilisations. (I haven't tried all plants so "almost".)
Almost all plants can be grown very well on active soil with no liquid ferts.
However, some picky plants are SIGNIFICANTLY easier to satisfy and tolerant to less optimal conditions when they are firmly rooted into rich aquasoil.

For example, let's say you are growing R.macrandra or wallichii attached to wood and not rooted (which is indeed possible), and for comparison you have aquasoil-rooted stems besides them.
One day you messed up calculations and stems are not liking new diet. Then unrooted attached stems will ALWAYS stunt faster then rooted stems.
You might actually be able to find the point where unrooted stems stunt and rooted ones don't.
Some plants will simply be much more forgiving when they are rooted.

You might be able to observe similar phenomenon when you trim and replant tops of sensitive stem plants.
(I might be able to get some pics when I get home. R. mac varient is doing this rn..)
Even though all stems were happy pre-trimming, replanted tops might start to stunt and pout post-trimming - with no changes on ferts or CO2.
It feels like "stunt threshold" moving down and becoming more strict.

Plants that did this for me include:
Most lythranceae (Rotala, Ammannia, Cuphea...etc.)
Alternanthera reineckii varients
Eriocaulon setaceum
Ludwigia inclinata "Pantanal"
Pogostemon erectus
.
.
...there must be more but I can't remember all


As for traditional "root feeders":
Most eriocaulon were not as bad actually. It wasn't amazing but it didn't die off instantly. E. quinquangulare was quite picky tho..
Other eriocaulaceae (syns and toninias) were just fine. I remember Tom Barr talking about toninas and their weak roots on Barr report...so I assume that is pretty likely.
Never liked vals so never had them.
I do have some crypts and swords but never tested their reaction to unrooted growth...I think swords will be just fine. I know Lagenandras do decently.


----------



## LidijaPN (Jan 15, 2022)

MoreliaViridis said:


> As for traditional "heavy root feeders": they can grow very well even when they are mainly fed through liquid ferts.
> 
> However, I do think there are plants that definitely prefer to have at least some root feeding. I'll refer these plants as root feeders from now on..
> My list of root feeders might be different to most others.
> ...


Woah that’s a lot of firsthand knowledge there 🤩 Thanks. I need to google most of those plants 😅

It makes sense what you say with a smaller ‘happiness window’. That was sort of my vague thinking too, both will work if optimal conditions are provided but there might still be a preference for one or the other depending on the plant and other conditions...

Also when we discuss ‘will it grow’ this means different things to different people- will it grow optimally? Will it technically survive? Will it have the ‘right’ color and shape?

I was very amused when discussing riccia f for example, and people from the high light/high fert/high CO2 club would be saying ‘oh yeah that just doesn’t grow without these conditions....

So I countered that it definitely does, because my riccia, which I got sort of by accident, has been quietly but steadily growing and spreading and looking very green and happy to my eye.... and they say ‘no way, show pics?!?’ And I do and they’re like ‘oh, well yeah, it grows like THAT. 🙄’

And first I was like wait what’s wrong with how it’s growing?!? It looks perfectly happy to me... but comparing pictures I see it - yes, high growth conditions riccia doesn’t even look like the same plant to mine. Dense, wildly green, pearly thick cushions which block off light to their own roots and thus detach and end up floating... massive difference from my thin skinny spindly almost hairlike strands that have a fair amount of space between them and grow upwards like a sparse beard instead of dense like a thick cushion.

So if the high conditions growth is what you’re looking for, my riccia is failing... but if you happen to like it like this, it’s doing great and my shrimp love it? Two people talking about riccia with these different expectations won’t agree on what it needs.


----------



## Asteroid (Jul 26, 2018)

easternlethal said:


> A large part of the book is all about how plants remove stuff from the water column which the dirt puts into it - not just from roots within the soil.
> 
> Anyway - I would encourage hobbyists to read widely and not just with a view to getting one answer.


Point again is most tanks don’t have dirt. Learning from hobbyists who dose the water column with a complete fertilizer and how plants grow from it is FAR more appicable then the Walstad method. Walstad relies on a “dirty” tank to feed plants, which is the opposite of what most people do. Walstad is just a small niche and is very limited in what you can grow.


----------



## MoreliaViridis (May 19, 2021)

Just to prove a point..










Apparently some guy in my country decided to not plant E. ratnagiricum (which is known to be "heavy root feeder") and instead stick them on wood and rocks.

Ones stuck on rocks are small (they are newly attached) but look at the ones on the wood..they are pretty good size and look nice.
And it seems they just grow fine without any root feeding since the person who did this managed to split and sell multiple times. 
I don't even think he cared much about ferts.

To be fair ratnagiri is one of the easy erios and we do have low KH tap most of the times...
But still most people believe you NEED aquasoil to grow good erios. Apparently you don't.


----------



## pauld738 (Jan 4, 2019)

It actually amazes me that no one has brought up hydroponics on this thread.

I mean, that's essentially what an aquarium is, isn't it? Minus the conflicting dirt/Aquasoil that gets used in some tanks and the whole immersed vs emersed thing, lol!

But then there is foliar feeding. I don't do that on a regular basis now to my house plants but I used to. It worked great.

Just thought I would throw that out there. 

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk


----------



## Quagulator (May 4, 2015)

I am guilty of preaching the "heavy root feeder" myth when I was relatively new. I read in online, threw some Flourish Tabs at a few swords, and they did amazing, so I kept doing it. What I didn't factor in was the 12 months of fish waste I never gravel vacuumed away, small water changes and non-existent filter clean outs that were really feeding those plants. 

I then gained some more experience, interacted with those on here who were clearly very successful, and I changed my tune to water column fertilizers are all that is needed. So I swapped to water column fertilizers only, preached that method to others, and all my crypts and swords did amazing. 

Now that I am passed those two phases of my aquaria career, I typically recommend a more balanced approach of both substrate fertilizing and water column fertilizing, because why limit one when you can have both with no extra effort? Where one slacks, the other picks up the balance and vise versa. 

When I look / talk about the typical "root feeders" I usually try to refer to them at nutrient hogs. They seem to thrive when they are given a big boost of nutrients. So when a newer planted tanker throws a root tab under a sword, they immediately see a bump in growth, then feed into the "root feeder" rhetoric, and the cycle continues. But in reality, that sword was just hungry and would have eaten anything that was offered to it. Give one of these "nutrient hogs" a boost of ferts, and they respond with a rush of new growth. 

It's unfortunate that I see loads of recommendations to use Flourish Tabs / API tabs and then pictures of peoples tanks supporting their claims, and usually the tanks look good, but it's not from those branded root tabs. They contain virtually zero macro nutrients plants need. So although those tanks look good, and convince new planted tankers to go out and buy the branded tabs, it's not the true reason why the plants look good. I am seeing more and more Osmocote+ rip off tabs being sold / recommended to the newer crowds, which do contain macro nutrient values, it's a welcoming change.


----------



## LidijaPN (Jan 15, 2022)

MoreliaViridis said:


> Just to prove a point..
> 
> View attachment 1039558
> 
> ...


Yep this sort of stuff fascinates me. Most people ‘know’ that ‘you HAVE to use XYZ’, and thus don’t try other methods... because who wants to buy plants and then risk killing them....

But depending on kh, temperature, livestock, light, god knows what else things can work or not work in surprising ways. 

Right now I’m trying to contrast certain things... I have a few cuttings of the same plants in jars on my window, in my main tank, and in my 1.2 gallon jar tank... so I’m looking at where they fare better. Not super scientific but interesting for sure.



pauld738 said:


> It actually amazes me that no one has brought up hydroponics on this thread.
> 
> I mean, that's essentially what an aquarium is, isn't it? Minus the conflicting dirt/Aquasoil that gets used in some tanks and the whole immersed vs emersed thing, lol!
> 
> ...


I honestly don’t know anything about hydroponics. That’s like emersed growth with roots in water? But I’m assuming they fertilize?


----------



## Asteroid (Jul 26, 2018)

I think the reason the "root feeder" thing seems to cause controversy is that it's always associated with needing to physically insert ferts into the substrate whether that be root tabs or active soils. That part of it is certainly a myth to me regardless of plant species. 

Whether certain plants might feed more through the roots or leaves who knows, but for all practical purposes they'll take it from the water column. I do agree with @Quagulator that certain root tabs can be helpful as security for a something that could be lacking in the water column if your not dosing completely.


----------



## EmotionalFescue (Jun 24, 2020)

OP and @tegra1027 threads have bee leading to a lot of good discussion lately. There's a ton of good information in the archives, but it is refreshing to have live discussions in addition to simply reading through old threads.

There's really no substitute for the discussion forum format, especially when it's the one-two punch of a rich archive plus fresh discussion.


----------



## LidijaPN (Jan 15, 2022)

Yeah it feels like there is a lot of general agreement on what’s what, and the discord comes from people having different definitions of things in their minds.

Thinking further of hydroponics, I don’t think they often involve submersed growth? Which means they circumvent all the CO2 issues of a planted tank and thus the plants will react differently to fert deficiencies than our submersed ones... ? I guess my new monstera and peace lily are hydroponics lol.

Oh yes the archives are amazing but there is a lot to be said for being able to ask for clarifications in real time!


----------



## burr740 (Feb 19, 2014)

Here's an old experiment I did, documented a few things growing side by side - So-called "Heavy Root Feeders" - Fact or Fiction??

Easy plants like swords etc, might feed heavily from the roots but certainly dont need it with a rich water column. On the flip side if you have some of those plants struggling in an inert substrate a root tab or O+ can definitely help if things are good otherwise.


----------



## tegra1027 (Nov 23, 2021)

Thanks for the tag @EmotionalFescue,,,, I just read the whole thread and here and its quite interesting. I did start to think about hydroponics as well as it directly correlates to this thread. 

Last Friday I took a Pathos vine out of a pot of soil as it is a root feeder and I place the roots in my tank. The root feeding plant's roots are still eating but now its getting its nutrients from the water, not the soil. It's the same for any root feeder in my theory. As states over and over here in many different ways, it simply may or may not do as well as it did in the soil.


----------



## pauld738 (Jan 4, 2019)

tegra1027 said:


> Thanks for the tag @EmotionalFescue,,,, I just read the whole thread and here and its quite interesting. I did start to think about hydroponics as well as it directly correlates to this thread.
> 
> Last Friday I took a Pathos vine out of a pot of soil as it is a root feeder and I place the roots in my tank. The root feeding plant's roots are still eating but now its getting its nutrients from the water, not the soil. It's the same for any root feeder in my theory. As states over and over here in many different ways, it simply may or may not do as well as it did in the soil.


There's tons of threads on pothos in fish tanks! 

The big one I read a few years ago was on monster fish keepers. Lots of back and forth at that time over its use. But it was a definite plus in any fish only tank that's for sure!

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk


----------



## tegra1027 (Nov 23, 2021)

pauld738 said:


> There's tons of threads on pothod in fish tanks!
> 
> The big one I read a few years ago was on monster fish keepers. Lots of back and forth at that time over its use. But it was a definite plus in any fish only tank that's for sure!
> 
> Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk


Someone recommended I added it as a temporary thing to help my fight against the BBA.


----------



## pauld738 (Jan 4, 2019)

LidijaPN said:


> I honestly don’t know anything about hydroponics. That’s like emersed growth with roots in water? But I’m assuming they fertilize?


Yes, the idea is to use an inert growing medium (some are clay balls of all things) and run optimized nutrient rich water over the roots. So it's a lot like everyone is saying in this discussion. Inert substrate or not the important part is providing the correct nutrients.

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk



tegra1027 said:


> Someone recommended I added it as a temporary thing to help my fight against the BBA.


That came out wrong!

I didn't mean it specifically for fish only tanks. That was just the focus of that thread. There was actually quite a bit of backlash over its use in that context. Maybe that was at the beginning of the thread. I can't imagine why you wouldn't use it to suck up excess nutrients. If you had the means. 

I hope it does help your bba. I know when I was battling bba it was all about clean water, clean everything. And possibly some luck, lol!

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk


----------



## tegra1027 (Nov 23, 2021)

pauld738 said:


> That came out wrong!
> 
> I didn't mean it specifically for fish only tanks. That was just the focus of that thread. There was actually quite a bit of backlash over its use in that context. Maybe that was at the beginning of the thread. I can't imagine why you wouldn't use it to suck up excess nutrients. If you had the means.
> 
> ...


Its been a struggle, but it could be worse... So I'm accepting the challenge.


----------



## LidijaPN (Jan 15, 2022)

burr740 said:


> Here's an old experiment I did, documented a few things growing side by side - So-called "Heavy Root Feeders" - Fact or Fiction??
> 
> Easy plants like swords etc, might feed heavily from the roots but certainly dont need it with a rich water column. On the flip side if you have some of those plants struggling in an inert substrate a root tab or O+ can definitely help if things are good otherwise.


Thank you for sharing that, it was a great read!!! Really confirmed everything we have been throwing around here.... most plants don’t care how you feed them as long as they are fed, some are slightly more drama than others, and some definitely prefer some additional nutrition at the roots while others don’t really care or they find workarounds. That’s pretty cool ♥

I still feel the issue of emersed plants like pothos or peace lily growing from tank water doesn’t quite match up to this debate because these plants have no choice, there is nothing they can intake via leaves, except CO2. But they are interesting to consider from the angle of ‘do roots need to eat from a specific substrate, or can they eat from fert rich water’. But that would be a different experiment, with some plants planted into nutrient rich substrate and other plants floated in nutrient rich water.... also probably already done by someone haha, if they’re reading this, please link us up!!


----------



## typically (Dec 29, 2006)

This has been a nice refresh on an old topic 

I tried a dirt tank and it was a fun experiment but would most likely not try it again. The mess you make moving plants is not worth the benefits IMO. BUT I wouldn't personally know the caveats if I didn't try it. 

Taking terrestrial cuttings and plopping them into an aquarium though, I very much enjoy. I never liked the long roots pothos produce when you hang it in a tank so I reused a mesh cup from a plant i bought to make a little island. Crushed lava rock for substrate, I planted an assortment of stuff. Rotala cuttings, bacopa, pothos, and inch plant. Stuck it to the side of the tank at the water level with airline tubing and a suction cup.


----------



## LidijaPN (Jan 15, 2022)

typically said:


> This has been a nice refresh on an old topic
> 
> I tried a dirt tank and it was a fun experiment but would most likely not try it again. The mess you make moving plants is not worth the benefits IMO. BUT I wouldn't personally know the caveats if I didn't try it.
> 
> ...


Very cool!! I’m planning something similar with a little utensil tub I bought that attaches with suction cups... though in a lfs they had a peace lily just suctioned to the tank side and the roots made such a beautiful little forest of white roots.


----------



## RadOtter (10 mo ago)

Figured I'd throw my two cents in here on top of all of this great info in case anyone is interested in specifics. Now, this may not translate 100% to fully submersed plants, but in both carbonic and hydroponic systems plant nutrient absorption vectors greatly vary between genera. Colleagues in my field like to simplify it down in terms of an epiphytic/terrestrial scale. This generally translates to what percentage of the plant has their xylem and phloem integrated with vascular cambium (i.e. what portion of the plant specializes primarily in gas exchange). 

Genera like Bucephalandra, Hygrophila, and even Anubias are capable of gaseous exchange on the majority of the surface area of the plant. This leaves less room for dermal layers that specialize in nutrient absorption (and a complicated carbohydrate relationship with endomycorrhizae). They make up for this by increasing their ability to absorb nutrients through their foliage. 

Other plants that have their evolutionary roots dipped further into the terrestrial camp; like the Echinodorus and Eriocaulon genera. These plants found it more advantageous to make more room for specialized dermal layers that can form relationships with fungi that break down organic compounds into usable nutrients. That is not to say that they cant also absorb nutrients alongside areas specializing in gaseous exchange, but it is greatly reduced. Usually somewhere in the 10-30% range of their subdermal absorption capacity, depending on the environment. These plants trend towards larger and softer leaves. This trait generally correlates to their native substrate cation potential. These are the plants that one might call “heavy root feeders”. The misconception many people make is thinking that this means they require an aquasoil substrate or root tab supplementation. This isn't necessarily true, as long as the substrate being used has sufficient cation potential to grab hold of soluble nutrients in the water. 

Now to confuse things even more, even though the Cryptocoryne genus tends to be terrestrial, it is in the Araceae family. This family evolved in soil that has an extremely high percentage of organic matter and minimal light, so they split up into species that are all over the board with some epiphytic tendencies, some with mostly terrestrial traits, and others that have to climb so high up into trees that they cant effectively transport nutrients from their roots to their upper foliage. Most of them solved this by developing thicker roots with room enough for both gaseous exchange and carb absorption resulting in a higher than average ability to absorb nutrients through their foliage.

Hope this helps clear things up!


----------



## LidijaPN (Jan 15, 2022)

RadOtter said:


> Figured I'd throw my two cents in here on top of all of this great info in case anyone is interested in specifics. Now, this may not translate 100% to fully submersed plants, but in both carbonic and hydroponic systems plant nutrient absorption vectors greatly vary between genera. Colleagues in my field like to simplify it down in terms of an epiphytic/terrestrial scale. This generally translates to what percentage of the plant has their xylem and phloem integrated with vascular cambium (i.e. what portion of the plant specializes primarily in gas exchange).
> 
> Genera like Bucephalandra, Hygrophila, and even Anubias are capable of gaseous exchange on the majority of the surface area of the plant. This leaves less room for dermal layers that specialize in nutrient absorption (and a complicated carbohydrate relationship with endomycorrhizae). They make up for this by increasing their ability to absorb nutrients through their foliage.
> 
> ...


Yasss! I knew if we all focused on this long enough a veritable scientist would pop in to help 🤩 Thank you so much for taking the time to share!!

I have very many questions 😅

First, are carbonic systems those where plants are grown in soil, as opposed to hydroponic where plants are grown in water?

Does the epiphytic/terrestrial scale stretch from plants who are primarily focused on gas exchange (taking in CO2 I presume?) to those who are primarily focused on absorbing nutrients? Does this mean that plants on the epiphytic side benefit more from the use of CO2 in a tank, while those on the terrestrial side benefit more from the addition of nutrients via fertilizer? Or do they equally care about nutrients, but simply ingest them via foliage vs. via roots only?

You say hygro is with buces and anubias on the epiphytic side. As hygro polysperma is the only plant visibly stunting in my tank, should I take this to mean that it is probably not a lack of nutrients in the water column that is bothering it, but something else?

Epiphytes like Java ferns, buce and anubias don’t seem to need much light- is this because they’re epiphytes or because they are slow growers? Could my hygro be suffering from lack of light even though it is on the epiphytic side of things because it is a faster grower? Or could it be suffering from lack of CO2 in the water? What would be a likelier guess?

Would a substrate like Flourite sand provide adequate cec capacity to deliver water column ferts to the roots of my swords? And, more importantly, my red tiger lotus?

Crypts apparently don’t care one way or the other? Or specific crypts prefer different strategies? Mine all certainly seem extremely unfussy.

Finally, what about frilly looking plants like limnophila sessiliflora, hornwort, or cabomba? Would they also fall on the epiphytic side of things as they don’t seem to focus much on rooting? At least mine are so far shooting up like mad with hardly any roots.

Finally-finally, are things very different with mosses, seeing as they don’t even create root systems?

This has just gotten hugely exciting ⭐


----------



## MoreliaViridis (May 19, 2021)

burr740 said:


> Here's an old experiment I did, documented a few things growing side by side - So-called "Heavy Root Feeders" - Fact or Fiction??
> 
> Easy plants like swords etc, might feed heavily from the roots but certainly dont need it with a rich water column. On the flip side if you have some of those plants struggling in an inert substrate a root tab or O+ can definitely help if things are good otherwise.


Ah the dutch master himself!
Your tank journal and custom un-chelated micros were huge inspiration for me. 
I stayed up many nights reading those. Thank you.

Very good read indeed.
I think I have seen that study on Marcel Golias's website no? (I did a fair bit of reading on his page...good stuffs.)
I knew the BDBS substrate and planting styles were somewhat familiar......


----------



## easternlethal (Feb 13, 2016)

RadOtter said:


> Figured I'd throw my two cents in here on top of all of this great info in case anyone is interested in specifics. Now, this may not translate 100% to fully submersed plants, but in both carbonic and hydroponic systems plant nutrient absorption vectors greatly vary between genera. Colleagues in my field like to simplify it down in terms of an epiphytic/terrestrial scale. This generally translates to what percentage of the plant has their xylem and phloem integrated with vascular cambium (i.e. what portion of the plant specializes primarily in gas exchange).
> 
> Genera like Bucephalandra, Hygrophila, and even Anubias are capable of gaseous exchange on the majority of the surface area of the plant. This leaves less room for dermal layers that specialize in nutrient absorption (and a complicated carbohydrate relationship with endomycorrhizae). They make up for this by increasing their ability to absorb nutrients through their foliage.
> 
> ...


And yet some plants defy all this.

Take tonina fluviatilis - supposed to be an eriocaulon but has the flimsiest of roots.

In my experience, freely available nitrites and ammonia made all the difference. Even at 20% efficiency compared to a real bryophyte I was able to get it to continue growing after the aquasoil aged off - with daily dosing urea. 

This causes me to think that soil cation is a bit of a myth because it's not just NPK which those plants need and nobody really knows what to dose to make it effective for all types of plants. People who think it works are usually dosing the water column and it's very hard to know whether it's the cation or water column that's working.

On the hydroponic note, here's my pothos. Scuse the leaves but they got singed by my commercial grow light. It's root system was an eyesore until another plant made it into a home. It grows fast even though I don't dose nitrates.


----------



## KatieMR (Jul 9, 2021)

Does what the plant is used to make a difference? I hear a lot of variations on the "I use root tabs for my xyz and when I stopped/missed a dose it starts looking bad." But then we hear stories of people saying they grow that particular plant and never use root tabs. I was just wondering if the plants maybe develop a habit of getting nutrients a certain way and if we change it they have to adjust. Or does it come down to the differences in the tanks, substrates, fertilizer routine?


----------



## RadOtter (10 mo ago)

LidijaPN said:


> First, are carbonic systems those where plants are grown in soil, as opposed to hydroponic where plants are grown in water?


Mostly, but rather than soil, in this generalized context it's better to think of it as a substrate plant. Not everything grows in soil. There is a huge range of plant media preferences. It gets even squishier when you take into account constantly adapting genotypes of species grown in artificial systems. If you've ever ordered a plant from a nursery and it was grown entirely in coir and osmocote, this is a great example of an acute adaption.



LidijaPN said:


> Does the epiphytic/terrestrial scale stretch from plants who are primarily focused on gas exchange (taking in CO2 I presume?) to those who are primarily focused on absorbing nutrients? Does this mean that plants on the epiphytic side benefit more from the use of CO2 in a tank, while those on the terrestrial side benefit more from the addition of nutrients via fertilizer? Or do they equally care about nutrients, but simply ingest them via foliage vs. via roots only?


Its not necessarily a primary focus as much as it is a redistribution of resource acquiring systems. Almost every plant needs carbohydrates (not necessarily nutrients), but depending on the environment they have adopted different strategies and even some elaborate systems on how to get them. CO2 concentration in a system doesn't necessarily play into this. That has more in relation to rate of respiration in conjunction with chloroplast volume/efficiency. I don't have in-depth first hand knowledge of all of the aquarium hobby plants. But as far as the genera in question, I think it would be safe to say they equally care about nutrients if your speaking about ratios. Nutrient requirements vary greatly between species, and especially subspecies/cultivars that were bred in artificial environments. However almost no terrestrial plants feed from root only. Even the heaviest of "root feeders" are capable of some foliar feeding. 



LidijaPN said:


> You say hygro is with buces and anubias on the epiphytic side. As hygro polysperma is the only plant visibly stunting in my tank, should I take this to mean that it is probably not a lack of nutrients in the water column that is bothering it, but something else?


I don't have first hand knowledge of H.polysperma. So I can't speak to its nutrient requirements in your system. There are too many variables involved. Lighting (spectrum and umol), temperature, and pH are all things that greatly affect a plant's ability to take in specific nutrients. Even if they are available, the plant may not be able to use them.



LidijaPN said:


> Epiphytes like Java ferns, buce and anubias don’t seem to need much light- is this because they’re epiphytes or because they are slow growers? Could my hygro be suffering from lack of light even though it is on the epiphytic side of things because it is a faster grower? Or could it be suffering from lack of CO2 in the water? What would be a likelier guess?


Light is a whole other deep dive. While there are certain trends of epiphytes needing less light, it's not a great rule to follow. There is a correlation, of course, but this is because most of the epiphytes we see in the trade had adapted to reduce competition for resources. These genera tend to have evolved in areas deep in forests where they needed to be much more efficient at using the small amount of light they can access. The faster a plant grows the higher its carbohydrate requirements are, so it stands to reason it might adopt less efficient light absorption strategies in favor of getting taller than its competitors. Less efficient light absorption tends to correlate to higher gaseous exchange and light requirements. In this instance, light and CO2 are linked; they have to be in sync. A good indicator of light starvation is to look at your nodal spacing. Measure the space between each node after you make a change in your system and see if it changes. Longer spacing between nodes will usually tell you she needs more light. 



LidijaPN said:


> Would a substrate like Flourite sand provide adequate cec capacity to deliver water column ferts to the roots of my swords? And, more importantly, my red tiger lotus?


I am not sure. I would think it depends on the age of the sand and the variability of substrate grain size. Just a quick look on their product website though it says: "Flourite® Sand is a specially fracted stable porous clay gravel" That sounds to me like it would have a great CEC. Just remember that your foliage plants are using up your nutrients. More importantly, they are not using up your nutrients equally. Each plant absorbs a specific ratio that is dependent on what is available to them given certain conditions set, like light, pH, and temperature. The remainders in your water column are not the same ratio you are putting in. 



LidijaPN said:


> Crypts apparently don’t care one way or the other? Or specific crypts prefer different strategies? Mine all certainly seem extremely unfussy.


The few cultivars I've played with also seem to be unfussy. I would assume that it is highly variable between subspecies/cultivars. There is usually less variability the closer your cultivar is to the native genotype. So the newer, fancier varieties are going to be less adaptable with tighter environmental requirements.



LidijaPN said:


> Finally, what about frilly looking plants like limnophila sessiliflora, hornwort, or cabomba? Would they also fall on the epiphytic side of things as they don’t seem to focus much on rooting? At least mine are so far shooting up like mad with hardly any roots.


Ha! "Frilly" plants actually tend to have evolved as pioneer species in fast-moving water where they needed to be hydrodynamic while increasing the surface area for gaseous exchange. Their roots are generally specialized for gripping tight to a very fine substrate. They are terrestrial, however, their vast amount of surface area gives them a unique ability to take their nutrients from where ever they can get them. 



LidijaPN said:


> Finally-finally, are things very different with mosses, seeing as they don’t even create root systems?


Very different. When you start getting into clades, there's always much arguing going on with the taxonomy (most recently just in 2019).
For the purposes of this discussion, I should have specified "Angiosperms", instead of "plants". But I didn't want to be "that guy" lol. Mosses are fascinating little organisms. However, they do not have any vascular cambium to speak of. Thinking of mosses as not having "roots" is a little off though. Mosses can still have rhizoids. Many Angiosperms also have rhizoids. Especially the monocots. I will say one of the things I find strange in the aquarium hobby is how many organisms are misnamed as mosses.


----------



## Blacksheep101 (Oct 4, 2021)

I do tend to think of tanks two ways. You either want a planted tank or a community tank.
In a planted tank you go all out for the plants , they are your primary goal. Grow them healthy and dose ferts ,test co2 balance must be correct and lighting must be tweaked to suit. You want fast growing stems and research is key so all plants are suited to grow at the conditions you’re aiming for.
Or
You have a community tank and need the right Ph, tsd, kh etc for the fish you’re keeping, you add caves , leaf litter , temp tweak , add 1-2degree colder water to help breeding etc.

the thing is , for someone that’s newer to the hobby, defining the two can be difficult. They see the STUNNING planted tanks and want that ( who wouldn’t !) then see simply beautiful fish and want those too ! The reality is compromise has to happen at the expense of something, be it the fish or the plants. Admittedly not always ..


----------



## RadOtter (10 mo ago)

easternlethal said:


> And yet some plants defy all this.
> 
> Take tonina fluviatilis - supposed to be an eriocaulon but has the flimsiest of roots.


There are always outliers in a range. That is why it is best described as a scale, not separate camps. Filamentous root systems aren't necessarily indicative of which end of the scale the species tends towards. Root structure has more to do with the aerobic properties of the plant's native substrate. 



easternlethal said:


> In my experience, freely available nitrites and ammonia made all the difference. Even at 20% efficiency compared to a real bryophyte I was able to get it to continue growing after the aquasoil aged off - with daily dosing urea.


Plants are endlessly fascinating in their ability to adapt to their environment. Especially if the change was made over a longer period of time. Above all, the simplicity of Monocots makes them especially great at reallocating resources.



easternlethal said:


> This causes me to think that soil cation is a bit of a myth because it's not just NPK which those plants need and nobody really knows what to dose to make it effective for all types of plants. People who think it works are usually dosing the water column and it's very hard to know whether it's the cation or water column that's working.


Well. Substrate CEC is definitely not a myth, but you are right in that simplifying nutrient requirements to just three compounds isn't ideal. It's not that nobody knows, it's more that there is not one singular solution. How can you expect a plant that adapted to survive deep in a rainforest growing in rich loamy soil to have even similar needs to one that has adapted to clinging to rocks in fast-moving pure water? The only way to truly know what works best in your system is to constantly perform null tests until you fine-tune each variable to find a happy medium. Also, grouping plants with similar evolutionary traits.



easternlethal said:


> On the hydroponic note, here's my pothos. Scuse the leaves but they got singed by my commercial grow light. Its root system was an eyesore until another plant made it into a home. It grows fast even


That's a really cool symbiosis you've got going on. I wonder if the foliage of the lower plant is growing that way because of a detoxifying effect from the pothos, or if its just for structural support.


----------



## easternlethal (Feb 13, 2016)

Not sure but it grows there faster than anywhere else in the tank

Sent from my LM-V405 using Tapatalk


----------



## LidijaPN (Jan 15, 2022)

Ok I am very much in love with this thread.



RadOtter said:


> Mostly, but rather than soil, in this generalized context it's better to think of it as a substrate plant. Not everything grows in soil. There is a huge range of plant media preferences. It gets even squishier when you take into account constantly adapting genotypes of species grown in artificial systems. If you've ever ordered a plant from a nursery and it was grown entirely in coir and osmocote, this is a great example of an acute adaption.


Yeah, imprecise phrasing, I meant some sort of solid ‘stuff’ - sand, soil, mud, coir, or weird white gel that comes in tissue culture cups  Interesting point that since we’re keeping these plants in ‘unnatural’ conditions they’re constantly adapting.



RadOtter said:


> Its not necessarily a primary focus as much as it is a redistribution of resource acquiring systems. Almost every plant needs carbohydrates (not necessarily nutrients), but depending on the environment they have adopted different strategies and even some elaborate systems on how to get them. CO2 concentration in a system doesn't necessarily play into this. That has more in relation to rate of respiration in conjunction with chloroplast volume/efficiency. I don't have in-depth first hand knowledge of all of the aquarium hobby plants. But as far as the genera in question, I think it would be safe to say they equally care about nutrients if your speaking about ratios. Nutrient requirements vary greatly between species, and especially subspecies/cultivars that were bred in artificial environments. However almost no terrestrial plants feed from root only. Even the heaviest of "root feeders" are capable of some foliar feeding.


Ok so most plants will take some minerals through their roots and some through their leaves, but not everyone’s leaves are equally good at this? Because in some plants they are better adapted to photosynthesis rather than mineral intake? But while light and CO2 intake are closely related because these two are used together as ingredients for photosynthesizing carbs, mineral intake is not really directly related to them because it’s part of a separate process, and flows through different channels (xylem vs phloem)?



RadOtter said:


> I don't have first hand knowledge of H.polysperma. So I can't speak to its nutrient requirements in your system. There are too many variables involved. Lighting (spectrum and umol), temperature, and pH are all things that greatly affect a plant's ability to take in specific nutrients. Even if they are available, the plant may not be able to use them.


So I might not be feeding my tank enough of something, i.e. someone might be hogging more of a specific fert ingredient which would leave the hygro struggling to get enough? My pH is around 7.4, I’m dragging it slowly downwards as I can, according to charts I’ve seen most things I’m dosing should be bioavailable at that pH... but the option of nutrient hog plant remains.



RadOtter said:


> Light is a whole other deep dive. While there are certain trends of epiphytes needing less light, it's not a great rule to follow. There is a correlation, of course, but this is because most of the epiphytes we see in the trade had adapted to reduce competition for resources. These genera tend to have evolved in areas deep in forests where they needed to be much more efficient at using the small amount of light they can access. The faster a plant grows the higher its carbohydrate requirements are, so it stands to reason it might adopt less efficient light absorption strategies in favor of getting taller than its competitors. Less efficient light absorption tends to correlate to higher gaseous exchange and light requirements. In this instance, light and CO2 are linked; they have to be in sync. A good indicator of light starvation is to look at your nodal spacing. Measure the space between each node after you make a change in your system and see if it changes. Longer spacing between nodes will usually tell you she needs more light.


Ok that makes perfect sense, different plants will invest energy in different strategies depending on what they have to deal with... So according to this simple but GENIUS test, hygro is NOT having light issues, because the node spacing hasn’t changed since she came into the tank, it’s pretty dense. My guppy grass, on the other hand, has huge node lengths in the bottom part of the tank, like 4-5cm between nodes, which then drop off rapidly around mid-tank once it reaches enough light. In fact this makes me completely reconsider my light- I had taken it for granted that it was bad and barely sufficient but looking around at everyone’s node length- lobelia cardinalis, water wisteria, rotala indica, limnophila sessiliflora, and yes even the hygro, nobody is leggy. Only the guppy grass in bottom portions.



RadOtter said:


> I am not sure. I would think it depends on the age of the sand and the variability of substrate grain size. Just a quick look on their product website though it says: "Flourite® Sand is a specially fracted stable porous clay gravel" That sounds to me like it would have a great CEC. Just remember that your foliage plants are using up your nutrients. More importantly, they are not using up your nutrients equally. Each plant absorbs a specific ratio that is dependent on what is available to them given certain conditions set, like light, pH, and temperature. The remainders in your water column are not the same ratio you are putting in.


Sand is new and advertised as having good CEC..... The ratios thing is another great point. Is there a thing that usually runs out first in a low tech tank? Is there a way to know which thing is being overly depleted without dosing each in turn? I could just up the ferts in general.... I generally try to keep tds low for my shrimp and chilis but maybe more ferts are in order. Especially because my bioload is super low. This week before water change my nitrates were coming up 10, which is pretty low for the end of the week... I am also adding the gH+, of mysterious formula you are familiar with- I mean that’s also ferts of sorts, right? Though that’s another thing I just realized I don’t understand. How come that stuff raises gH but the liquid fertilizer does not?



RadOtter said:


> The few cultivars I've played with also seem to be unfussy. I would assume that it is highly variable between subspecies/cultivars. There is usually less variability the closer your cultivar is to the native genotype. So the newer, fancier varieties are going to be less adaptable with tighter environmental requirements.


That’s pretty cool. I see people struggle with, like, flamingo crypts etc but all of mine are not particularly beautiful but deeply unbothered by anything it seems. I do like that in a plant.



RadOtter said:


> Ha! "Frilly" plants actually tend to have evolved as pioneer species in fast-moving water where they needed to be hydrodynamic while increasing the surface area for gaseous exchange. Their roots are generally specialized for gripping tight to a very fine substrate. They are terrestrial, however, their vast amount of surface area gives them a unique ability to take their nutrients from where ever they can get them.


Oh that’s genius!!! And of course now that you say it makes all the sense.



RadOtter said:


> Very different. When you start getting into clades, there's always much arguing going on with the taxonomy (most recently just in 2019).
> For the purposes of this discussion, I should have specified "Angiosperms", instead of "plants". But I didn't want to be "that guy" lol. Mosses are fascinating little organisms. However, they do not have any vascular cambium to speak of. Thinking of mosses as not having "roots" is a little off though. Mosses can still have rhizoids. Many Angiosperms also have rhizoids. Especially the monocots. I will say one of the things I find strange in the aquarium hobby is how many organisms are misnamed as mosses.


Haha please be ‘that guy’ lol, this conversation is lowkey blowing my mind! So angiosperms are flowering plants? Why do you single out monocots, are most aquatic plants monocots? I’m trying to look at veins etc but I can’t really work it out. On mosses, what gets mislabeled as mosses? Liverworts and such? My crystalwort is honestly doing better than my mosses (Java and Christmas - are those two actual mosses? They look very mossy!!) and my pellia isn’t but then I did stick it in the darkest corner hahah. I’m going to try some in a jar on the window and also some in a brighter spot.

So on my poor hygro... it is generally considered an easy plant, even a pest. My temperature holds around 25c which it should be ok with. It’s node distance is pretty tight so it’s not light deprived. So.... it’s hungry? For something specific I need to guess?

I feel like this whole thread and your few posts in particular have at least doubled my understanding of aquatic plants.

Oh yeah, also - when plants die back and then resurrect themselves or send up new shoots that are now magically suited to your tank parameters- how the heck do they do that???



easternlethal said:


> And yet some plants defy all this.
> 
> Take tonina fluviatilis - supposed to be an eriocaulon but has the flimsiest of roots.
> 
> ...


Love the pothos symbiosis!! Is that pearlweed climbing on the roots? I might let mine try the same! 

Do your fish not mind you dosing urea? Or do you not keep any in that tank?



Blacksheep101 said:


> I do tend to think of tanks two ways. You either want a planted tank or a community tank.
> In a planted tank you go all out for the plants , they are your primary goal. Grow them healthy and dose ferts ,test co2 balance must be correct and lighting must be tweaked to suit. You want fast growing stems and research is key so all plants are suited to grow at the conditions you’re aiming for.
> Or
> You have a community tank and need the right Ph, tsd, kh etc for the fish you’re keeping, you add caves , leaf litter , temp tweak , add 1-2degree colder water to help breeding etc.
> ...


This is true!!! It’s very hard not to want All The Things. Though in my case I have a very black thumb on dry land, so from the start my focus on plants was mostly easy things that will give me cleaner water and provide cover for the precious brigittae.... I have, of course, since fallen head-first into the rabbit hole and now I’m trying to get buces to turn blue, which is a solid bit of mission creep from the original plan. But apparently that’s how these things be.


----------



## Blacksheep101 (Oct 4, 2021)

Hah so true ! If you’re firmly on the low tech side then stick to low tech, easy growers. Less issues , less money wasted and you know where you stand ! 😉


----------



## easternlethal (Feb 13, 2016)

LidijaPN said:


> Love the pothos symbiosis!! Is that pearlweed climbing on the roots? I might let mine try the same!
> 
> Do your fish not mind you dosing urea? Or do you not keep any in that tank?


That's just good ole hermianthus micranthemoides. I had buce in there at one point which seemed to do equally well but I needed them elsewhere. Should've taken a picture because I literally had a wall of it.

I don't really dose urea now that I'm not trying to grow toninas and syngonanthus anymore.

If you want your buce to pop I highly recommend adding red to your lighting. They also love micros.

Sent from my SM-T820 using Tapatalk


----------



## LidijaPN (Jan 15, 2022)

Blacksheep101 said:


> Hah so true ! If you’re firmly on the low tech side then stick to low tech, easy growers. Less issues , less money wasted and you know where you stand ! 😉


Totally.... and if it fails to thrive, let it go..... there’s lots of easy plant options, no need to cling to the one that doesn’t want to be there... breaking my own rule there fishing for solutions for my hygro but it’s ALMOST making it so I feel it’s just a small tweak I need....



easternlethal said:


> That's just good ole hermianthus micranthemoides. I had buce in there at one point which seemed to do equally well but I needed them elsewhere. Should've taken a picture because I literally had a wall of it.
> 
> I don't really dose urea now that I'm not trying to grow toninas and syngonanthus anymore.
> 
> ...


Is there an easy, cheap way to add red without switching out the whole light? I was going on the theory that my light is crap and needs replacing, but considering now how the node spacing on almost all my plants is pretty tight I feel it’s not entirely justified...


----------



## Asteroid (Jul 26, 2018)

Maybe some reddish crypts, swords I've even seen a red moss (classified as an algae) around.


----------



## LidijaPN (Jan 15, 2022)

Asteroid said:


> Maybe some reddish crypts, swords I've even seen a red moss (classified as an algae) around.


Oh I meant to add red lighting without switching out my existing light. Like one of those cheap red/blue growlight strips. Though not sure on the penetration those would have... 

On the red plant side, my red val is reddish at the tops and some of the crypts are too. Indica was pink when I got it but is now growing out light green, I’ll see if it reconsiders when it climbs higher.


----------



## easternlethal (Feb 13, 2016)

LidijaPN said:


> Is there an easy, cheap way to add red without switching out the whole light? I was going on the theory that my light is crap and needs replacing, but considering now how the node spacing on almost all my plants is pretty tight I feel it’s not entirely justified...


just add any ole light as long as its red - even a clip on booklight will work.

No need to switch out your old one


----------



## LidijaPN (Jan 15, 2022)

easternlethal said:


> just add any ole light as long as its red - even a clip on booklight will work.
> 
> No need to switch out your old one


Seriously?? That gives me options!!! There are cheap indoor plant grow lights with red bulbs.... I’ll go rooting around Amazon today!!


----------



## Asteroid (Jul 26, 2018)

LidijaPN said:


> Seriously?? That gives me options!!! There are cheap indoor plant grow lights with red bulbs.... I’ll go rooting around Amazon today!!


What are you trying to accomplish?


----------



## EmotionalFescue (Jun 24, 2020)

You may also consider color correcting gels. They're used to change the color of studio lights. You just buy a sheet, cut to size, and tape it on. Depending on your light, you may be able to just cover some white diodes with red gels. For what it's worth, I have some gels on my lights right now, and I found that pink was the best for getting greens to pop. This would be really cheap to try and wouldn't require a whole additional fixture.


----------



## KatieMR (Jul 9, 2021)

LidijaPN said:


> There are cheap indoor plant grow lights with red bulbs....


I would just be careful to make sure these aren't going to get hot and effect the temperature of your tank!


----------



## LidijaPN (Jan 15, 2022)

EmotionalFescue said:


> You may also consider color correcting gels. They're used to change the color of studio lights. You just buy a sheet, cut to size, and tape it on. Depending on your light, you may be able to just cover some white diodes with red gels. For what it's worth, I have some gels on my lights right now, and I found that pink was the best for getting greens to pop. This would be really cheap to try and wouldn't require a whole additional fixture.


This is a genius idea!! Have you found what makes reds pop? I’ll see if the gels can be bought cheaply. I only need a tiny bit!!

@KatieMR Good point on heat!! They’re supposed to be led strips tho, they usually don’t get hot? Even if they’re cheap?


----------



## KatieMR (Jul 9, 2021)

LEDs shouldn't get too hot.


----------



## RadOtter (10 mo ago)

LidijaPN said:


> Is there an easy, cheap way to add red without switching out the whole light? I was going on the theory that my light is crap and needs replacing, but considering now how the node spacing on almost all my plants is pretty tight I feel it’s not entirely justified...


Actually, high-efficiency diodes are very cheap these days and are an easy way to expand your 600-700nm red range without having to replace your entire light. You can find 660nm starboards like these for 2-3$ a piece. They run right off of any old USB block you have laying around. 









Putting filters on your light doesn't really add to your spectrum. It just filters your spectrum down to favor a specific range. Filters can sacrifice vital parts of the spectrum that your plants need for other processes.


----------



## Asteroid (Jul 26, 2018)

This reminds me of the Seinfeld episode when a Kenny Rogers restaurant opened and the street sign made Kramer's apartment all red. Oh I like this idea! Anything to get those reds!


----------



## EmotionalFescue (Jun 24, 2020)

LidijaPN, soon


----------



## RadOtter (10 mo ago)

LidijaPN said:


> In fact this makes me completely reconsider my light- I had taken it for granted that it was bad and barely sufficient but looking around at everyone’s node length- lobelia cardinalis, water wisteria, rotala indica, limnophila sessiliflora, and yes even the hygro, nobody is leggy. Only the guppy grass in bottom portions.


Just as @easternlethal touched on. Spectrum is just as important as volume/umols. Light penetration is a pretty big factor. As soon as light hits the surface of your water its breaks down, and each nm group has a specific amount of energy that translates into penetration distance. Underwater spectra is starting to veer pretty far outside of my specialty, but I'd hazard a guess that all of your reds past 650nm are going to struggle to get further. So in your case, it seems like a tiny bump to your 650+ end would help out your plants relying on the light getting filtered by your taller plants. A great indicator, is the undersides of your leaves. Species that have purple undersides are a good indicator that the plant tends to favor more filtered spectra. These plants are adapted to pick up the scraps of light leftover from leafy trees blocking all off the good <500nm - uvv/uva.



LidijaPN said:


> Sand is new and advertised as having good CEC..... The ratios thing is another great point. Is there a thing that usually runs out first in a low tech tank? Is there a way to know which thing is being overly depleted without dosing each in turn? I could just up the ferts in general.... I generally try to keep tds low for my shrimp and chilis but maybe more ferts are in order. Especially because my bioload is super low. This week before water change my nitrates were coming up 10, which is pretty low for the end of the week... I am also adding the gH+, of mysterious formula you are familiar with- I mean that’s also ferts of sorts, right? Though that’s another thing I just realized I don’t understand. How come that stuff raises gH but the liquid fertilizer does not?


Definitely out of my wheelhouse here. Animals in the tanks that are not getting eaten by my plants are entirely new phenomena in my world. But Jake’s magic sauce is definitely nutrient salts. They are the compound constituents that make up that liquid fert you are using. I’d be warry of double-dipping on Ca, Mg, K2, Mn, and Fe.



LidijaPN said:


> Haha please be ‘that guy’ lol, this conversation is lowkey blowing my mind! So angiosperms are flowering plants? Why do you single out monocots, are most aquatic plants monocots? I’m trying to look at veins etc but I can’t really work it out. On mosses, what gets mislabeled as mosses? Liverworts and such? My crystalwort is honestly doing better than my mosses (Java and Christmas - are those two actual mosses? They look very mossy!!) and my pellia isn’t but then I did stick it in the darkest corner hahah. I’m going to try some in a jar on the window and also some in a brighter spot.


Lol, I was mostly referring to those little Marimo balls that people are so fond of. Yes, I think those are both vesicularia species and I think pellia and crystalwort are both liverworts?

I’d have to comb through the genera for monocots but the only one I’m familiar with is the Eriocaulon genus. I would assume that most of the pretty aquaria plants are dicots. Except for the Ceratophyllum, they are a whole heada
che that no one knows where to put.



LidijaPN said:


> So on my poor hygro... it is generally considered an easy plant, even a pest. My temperature holds around 25c which it should be ok with. It’s node distance is pretty tight so it’s not light deprived. So.... it’s hungry? For something specific I need to guess?


What makes you think it's hungry? I can only speak firsthand with H.pinnatifida, not H.polysperma, but it seems very undemanding of nutrients. My nonsterile tank is currently nute free until I can make sure these silly shrimps are actually happy. H.pinnatifida doesn't seem to require much more than the traces leaching from the contrasoil into the water column. It just prefers to not actually touch the substrate. 



LidijaPN said:


> Oh yeah, also - when plants die back and then resurrect themselves or send up new shoots that are now magically suited to your tank parameters- how the heck do they do that???


Lol. The magic of an apical meristem adapting to stress. When a plant stores loads of carbs in its rhizomes (if it survives) it can then throw all of that energy into meristem cells. The easiest way to think of them is the plant equivalent of human stem cells. Adapting and creating perfectly efficient growth to suit their environment.


----------



## LidijaPN (Jan 15, 2022)

RadOtter said:


> Actually, high-efficiency diodes are very cheap these days and are an easy way to expand your 600-700nm red range without having to replace your entire light. You can find 660nm starboards like these for 2-3$ a piece. They run right off of any old USB block you have laying around.
> View attachment 1039649
> 
> 
> Putting filters on your light doesn't really add to your spectrum. It just filters your spectrum down to favor a specific range. Filters can sacrifice vital parts of the spectrum that your plants need for other processes.


Hmmmm are you saying I could DIY it? Where would you buy those? I actually have a ton of random diodes (no idea how powerful), wires, breadboards, etc etc.... but not entirely sure I’d be able to MacGyver it all together without specific instructions... I’d be game to try tho? The brief amazon.ca search I did didn’t turn up any cheap ones... what specifically is a starboard anyway?



RadOtter said:


> Just as @easternlethal touched on. Spectrum is just as important as volume/umols. Light penetration is a pretty big factor. As soon as light hits the surface of your water its breaks down, and each nm group has a specific amount of energy that translates into penetration distance. Underwater spectra is starting to veer pretty far outside of my specialty, but I'd hazard a guess that all of your reds past 650nm are going to struggle to get further. So in your case, it seems like a tiny bump to your 650+ end would help out your plants relying on the light getting filtered by your taller plants. A great indicator, is the undersides of your leaves. Species that have purple undersides are a good indicator that the plant tends to favor more filtered spectra. These plants are adapted to pick up the scraps of light leftover from leafy trees blocking all off the good <500nm - uvv/uva.


You’re saying the red part of the spectrum might have trouble penetrating deep enough into the water, thus adding a bit more power to it might be beneficial? Sorry to keep dumbing down your sentences, I’m trying to take them apart to make sure I am parsing correctly because a lot of this is far over my head. (Japanese language and literature major lol, my studies did not prepare me for this 😂)

But is that how it works? Do two less powerful lights have the same penetration as one more powerful one? My intuition says no but I’m guessing intuition doesn’t apply here haha. Also I have zero plants with purple backs of leaves. Wish I did, it sounds pretty.


RadOtter said:


> Definitely out of my wheelhouse here. Animals in the tanks that are not getting eaten by my plants are entirely new phenomena in my world. But Jake’s magic sauce is definitely nutrient salts. They are the compound constituents that make up that liquid fert you are using. I’d be warry of double-dipping on Ca, Mg, K2, Mn, and Fe.


But here’s the thing, see, what I am adding is literally the same level as what my tap water has. It’s identical gH - just under 6. So.... if I would be using plain tap water instead of half distilled, those minerals would still be there? Probably in a slightly different ratio because who knows what’s in tap water, right? But it’s not particularly more minerals than I’d have if I were using only tap.... that would mean that people who don’t use distilled/RO shouldn’t use ferts because they’re double-dipping on certain minerals. But they definitely do still use ferts. 




RadOtter said:


> Lol, I was mostly referring to those little Marimo balls that people are so fond of. Yes, I think those are both vesicularia species and I think pellia and crystalwort are both liverworts?
> 
> I’d have to comb through the genera for monocots but the only one I’m familiar with is the Eriocaulon genus. I would assume that most of the pretty aquaria plants are dicots. Except for the Ceratophyllum, they are a whole headache that no one knows where to put.


Oh yeah the balls are pretty obvi algae balls haha. They freak me out a little. Water tribbles lol. 

I’m loving the liverworts. They’re enjoying my tank much more than mosses are. 



RadOtter said:


> What makes you think it's hungry? I can only speak firsthand with H.pinnatifida, not H.polysperma, but it seems very undemanding of nutrients. My nonsterile tank is currently nute free until I can make sure these silly shrimps are actually happy. H.pinnatifida doesn't seem to require much more than the traces leaching from the contrasoil into the water column. It just prefers to not actually touch the substrate.


Well you’d think so, right?? Someone on another forum said ‘man, I can’t grow hygro polysperma, I feel like a chef who can’t boil water.’ Like, it’s a weed. It should thrive when everything else struggles. But it ain’t.... I mean what do you make of these symptoms?

- been in the tank since the beginning (4-5 months now) and grew kinda ok at first. 

- got attacked by some underwater caterpillar monster and lost a bunch of leaves but kept growing, I replanted the tops. 

- started slowly to struggle as other plant mass increased. I thought it needed more light so tried to move it to a better position but it doesn’t care, also the node spacing is tight.

- symptoms- bottom leaves deteriorating, yellowing, getting pinholes, melting and falling off. Top growth stunting- top leaves growing out smaller and smaller, and sort of crinkly and bent, until finally they start coming out just a few mm long. They never grow, new ones come out on top of them and are also a few mm. ‘Honey, I Shrunk the Hygrophila’? 

- Got a few new stems from a different source, which took off strong but are also starting to slow down and show same symptoms, on both ends. 

- Tank temperature is 25c, 20 other easy plant species seem healthy and happy. Flow is low to help small fish but nobody else seems to mind. Nitrates in tank are fairly low at the end of the week, in spite of ferts and mineral salts. This week I measured only 10, maybe even a bit lower. Water changes are 20% weekly. There is a peace lily emersed with its roots in the tank. 

What could it be if not hungry? Depressed? Doesn’t like me personally? 😅



RadOtter said:


> Lol. The magic of an apical meristem adapting to stress. When a plant stores loads of carbs in its rhizomes (if it survives) it can then throw all of that energy into meristem cells. The easiest way to think of them is the plant equivalent of human stem cells. Adapting and creating perfectly efficient growth to suit their environment.


That is legit the coolest. I so hope the red lotus has done the right meristem cell magic because I desperately want it to thrive.


----------



## easternlethal (Feb 13, 2016)

When you're messing with color accents in lighting the general rule is add rather than subtract. So in photography studio, say if you want more blue highlights you would not just cover your light with blue or even half of it. You would just add a blue light because you don't want to mess up overall levels and balance. So it's the same idea when you want to fine tune the color in your tank.

Lighting is 90% of how a tank looks and you need several to get it really good. 

Sent from my LM-V405 using Tapatalk


----------



## Asteroid (Jul 26, 2018)

Thought this was relevant to the root feeder discussion. This is a crypt lucens growing on a piece of Manzanita wood in a tank of mine. Rich substrate needed? It was growing for about 3 months in this pic.


----------



## LidijaPN (Jan 15, 2022)

Asteroid said:


> Thought this was relevant to the root feeder discussion. This is a crypt lucens growing on a piece of Manzanita wood in a tank of mine. Rich substrate needed? It was growing for about 3 months in this pic.


That, Sir, is a very healthy looking crypt!!! ♥

Fits with what @RadOtter was saying about crypts, that a lot of them are unfussed and hugely flexible.

@easternlethal ok I’ll hunt around for red lighting I could add... have one in mind but it’s not a bespoke aquarium light. Do you think it would do anything?

Something like this? https://www.amazon.ca/Sondiko-Indoor-Dimmable-Levels-Plants/dp/B08Y5RF7TH/ref=mp_s_a_1_16?crid=HP4P0X1RLPY2&keywords=led+grow+light+strip&qid=1648127013&sprefix=,aps,236&sr=8-16


----------



## Quagulator (May 4, 2015)

One of my old tanks had a crypt wendtii 'brown' growing within a bolbitus. Low tech, PPS-Pro dosing.


----------



## LidijaPN (Jan 15, 2022)

Quagulator said:


> One of my old tanks had a crypt wendtii 'brown' growing within a bolbitus. Low tech, PPS-Pro dosing.


Ahahahahha he is just piggybacking on him there 😂


----------



## Asteroid (Jul 26, 2018)

Quagulator said:


> One of my old tanks had a crypt wendtii 'brown' growing within a bolbitus. Low tech, PPS-Pro dosing.


Another happy crypt freeing itself from the confines of the substrate. Who would've thunk it!



LidijaPN said:


> Something like this? https://www.amazon.ca/Sondiko-Indoor-Dimmable-Levels-Plants/dp/B08Y5RF7TH/ref=mp_s_a_1_16?crid=HP4P0X1RLPY2&keywords=led+grow+light+strip&qid=1648127013&sprefix=,aps,236&sr=8-16


Are you getting this to change the overall tone of the way the tank looks or to actually grow plants better?


----------



## LidijaPN (Jan 15, 2022)

Asteroid said:


> Are you getting this to change the overall tone of the way the tank looks or to actually grow plants better?


Grow plants better hopefully? But having reds pop more would be a bonus...


----------



## KatieMR (Jul 9, 2021)

LidijaPN said:


> Something like this? https://www.amazon.ca/Sondiko-Indoor-Dimmable-Levels-Plants/dp/B08Y5RF7TH/ref=mp_s_a_1_16?crid=HP4P0X1RLPY2&keywords=led+grow+light+strip&qid=1648127013&sprefix=,aps,236&sr=8-16


I am also curious what experienced aqua plant growers think of this sort of light. The light in my tank is a bit too small for my tank. I've been thinking of moving it further forward and adding a small strip to the back to keep the lighting at the back more even. This is exactly the sort of strip I've been looking for.

Also, my Hygro compact has been having the same sort of trouble you're describing @LidijaPN!


----------



## Asteroid (Jul 26, 2018)

LidijaPN said:


> Grow plants better hopefully? But having reds pop more would be a bonus...


I don't think that will grow your plants better, it will just give the overall tank a different tone. I'm sure it's not that strong to make any kind of impact on a 29G.


----------



## LidijaPN (Jan 15, 2022)

KatieMR said:


> I am also curious what experienced aqua plant growers think of this sort of light. The light in my tank is a bit too small for my tank. I've been thinking of moving it further forward and adding a small strip to the back to keep the lighting at the back more even. This is exactly the sort of strip I've been looking for.
> 
> Also, my Hygro compact has been having the same sort of trouble you're describing @LidijaPN!


Let’s look for hygro answers together!!!

@Asteroid makes a good point, at my tank depth it probably won’t work. At yours it might tho!!


----------



## KatieMR (Jul 9, 2021)

LidijaPN said:


> Let’s look for hygro answers together!!!


Yes! Plant-growing apprentices unite!


----------



## LidijaPN (Jan 15, 2022)

KatieMR said:


> Yes! Plant-growing apprentices unite!


For real tho, list all the tank parameters you can think of and I’ll list mine and we see where we overlap and whether that brings us to any conclusions? @RadOtter will help with the concluding as our resident professional plant wizard ⭐


----------



## Asteroid (Jul 26, 2018)

If your plants could talk they would be saying: Show me the carbon, show me the carbon.


----------



## Virtus (11 mo ago)

Whew, this was quite the thread to try to catch up on ha



Asteroid said:


> Nothing wrong with experimenting, but there could be alot of reasons why someone might not want to add ferts directly to the substrate unless it was absolutely necessary. People posting actual results of how they grew plants is helpful for that reason.


Curious what reasons one would not want to add root tabs to an inert substrate?


----------



## Quagulator (May 4, 2015)

Virtus said:


> Curious what reasons one would not want to add root tabs to an inert substrate?


Uncontrollability of nutrients, leaching nutrients into the water column, large weekly gravel vauuming, increased costs, increased work etc. etc.


----------



## Asteroid (Jul 26, 2018)

Virtus said:


> Whew, this was quite the thread to try to catch up on ha
> Curious what reasons one would not want to add root tabs to an inert substrate?


Definitely all the things mentioned by @Quagulator . Many newbies especially disturb the tabs and they release ammonia or other things into the water that cause algae issues. Some fish can also dig them up. If your using something like Seachem root tabs then your not adding much in terms of macros your really just duplicating Seachem Flourish liquid.


----------



## KatieMR (Jul 9, 2021)

Virtus said:


> Curious what reasons one would not want to add root tabs to an inert substrate?


I don't want to add root tabs to my substrate, not from any scientific reasons, just from too many popped capsules shooting nitrates and who knows what into my water column to torment my fish. It was a slightly traumatic series of experiences that I'm sure other newbie planters are also hoping to avoid. I've also had plants die off where I've placed root tabs (just from my incompetence, nothing to do with the root tabs), and then I have a whole strip of barren substrate I'm afraid to disturb for fear of releasing all the root tab stuff.


----------



## Quagulator (May 4, 2015)

Also worth mentioning those Flourish Tabs / API tabs contain over 75% inert material, so there isn't really a point of placing them into inert substrates.


----------



## Virtus (11 mo ago)

Quagulator said:


> Uncontrollability of nutrients, leaching nutrients into the water column, large weekly gravel vauuming, increased costs, increased work etc. etc.





Asteroid said:


> Definitely all the things mentioned by @Quagulator . Many newbies especially disturb the tabs and they release ammonia or other things into the water that cause algae issues. Some fish can also dig them up. If your using something like Seachem root tabs then your not adding much in terms of macros your really just duplicating Seachem Flourish liquid.





KatieMR said:


> I don't want to add root tabs to my substrate, not from any scientific reasons, just from too many popped capsules shooting nitrates and who knows what into my water column to torment my fish. It was a slightly traumatic series of experiences that I'm sure other newbie planters are also hoping to avoid. I've also had plants die off where I've placed root tabs (just from my incompetence, nothing to do with the root tabs), and then I have a whole strip of barren substrate I'm afraid to disturb for fear of releasing all the root tab stuff.


Well great. Now on top of everything else I'm worried about trying to get my tank cycled and ready to stock I have to worry about the root tabs _I added_ too?! 😂 

So say one did not thoroughly bury a few and the capsules were "bubbling" out of the substrate. And then this same one tried to remove them and in the process ruptured the capsules spilling the contents all over the tank. Should this person be concerned? Hypothetically speaking of course... 🤭


----------



## KatieMR (Jul 9, 2021)

Quagulator said:


> Also worth mentioning those Flourish Tabs / API tabs contain over 75% inert material, so there isn't really a point of placing them into inert substrates.


Those were actually the easiest of the ones I've tried, so I was thinking of switching back. Haha. I guess I'll amend that plan. I've been using the NilocG capsules. They have trapped air in them though, so they float and are a huge pain to get planted into the substrate.

Actually after reading this conversation, I may just not keep adding root tabs unless I'm doing a rescape or making up a new tank. They are easy to add when you are first putting in the substrate, but such a pain to add afterwards that if my plants can grow without them, I'd just rather not bother. I use fluorite which from my research has pretty high CEC, so it should be storing nutrients from the water column even if I don't use root tabs.



Virtus said:


> So say one did not thoroughly bury a few and the capsules were "bubbling" out of the substrate. And then this same one tried to remove them and in the process ruptured the capsules spilling the contents all over the tank. Should this person be concerned? Hypothetically speaking of course... 🤭


When that hypothetically might have happened to a . . . _friend_, it took me - I mean _my friend_ - 2 weeks of two to three 50+% water changes per week to pull the nitrates back down to safe levels and even then they were on the high end for a while. Since I was only measuring ammonia, nitrite, and nitrate, I'm not sure what other extras were added to the water along with the nitrates.

I will say that that is the happiest I have ever seen my plants in that tank though. All my anubias put out new leaves and my hygro actually had bright green leaves.

If you already have livestock in there, I'd start doing water changes. If you don't have fish in there . . . it's probably okay to have all that stuff floating in the water column feeding your plants (please correct me if I'm wrong!), just make sure you do a big water change before you add the fish.


----------



## Asteroid (Jul 26, 2018)

Virtus said:


> Well great. Now on top of everything else I'm worried about trying to get my tank cycled and ready to stock I have to worry about the root tabs _I added_ too?! 😂
> 
> So say one did not thoroughly bury a few and the capsules were "bubbling" out of the substrate. And then this same one tried to remove them and in the process ruptured the capsules spilling the contents all over the tank. Should this person be concerned? Hypothetically speaking of course... 🤭


I wouldn't worry too much, this thread has probably made you more aware of things so just be careful not to disturb them. If your not dosing the water column completely then yes they can provide needed nutrients, but in most cases they aren't necessary and there is downside. 

If one does come up suction it out with a hose and continue suctioning out more water (in effect doing a small water change) this will help keep the water clean of any debris from the tabs.


----------



## LidijaPN (Jan 15, 2022)

Virtus said:


> Well great. Now on top of everything else I'm worried about trying to get my tank cycled and ready to stock I have to worry about the root tabs _I added_ too?! 😂
> 
> So say one did not thoroughly bury a few and the capsules were "bubbling" out of the substrate. And then this same one tried to remove them and in the process ruptured the capsules spilling the contents all over the tank. Should this person be concerned? Hypothetically speaking of course... 🤭


Asking for a friend? Lol.

I’d say it would all depend on the number? I mean from what I understand, root tabs are more or less the same stuff as liquid ferts, but solidified/encapsulated for insertion into substrate. So there’s a vast difference between me with my 4 root tabs in a 29g and someone who peppers their 10g with sixty tabs....


----------



## Virtus (11 mo ago)

LidijaPN said:


> Asking for a friend? Lol.
> 
> I’d say it would all depend on the number? I mean from what I understand, root tabs are more or less the same stuff as liquid ferts, but solidified/encapsulated for insertion into substrate. So there’s a vast difference between me with my 4 root tabs in a 29g and someone who peppers their 10g with sixty tabs....


I Someone placed 11-12 of the NilocG capsules in a 20 long. 3 of them were coming up and I someone ruptured them while trying to remove them. I've They've only been fertilizing once a week with Thrive C so shouldn't be too much of a problem. The tank is still cycling so at least one big water change is in store before adding stock. Again, purely hypothetical...


----------



## LidijaPN (Jan 15, 2022)

Asteroid said:


> If your plants could talk they would be saying: Show me the carbon, show me the carbon.


OK I do get that argument.... I mean I get that plants grow better with higher CO2 levels. And I’m not fighting that notion, truly I’m not. (I totally am tho. I’ll never use CO2 in my tanks hahah. But that aside)

If the issue here were really just CO2, wouldn’t other plants be struggling? Why just the hygro? If the issue were CO2, wouldn’t the low tech forum be a deserted wasteland? Wouldn’t Walstad tanks fail? Wouldn’t everyone struggle if they didn’t have CO2? 

I see a lot of tanks, both here and in my group, and heck even my newbie tank, that are getting great growth without CO2, from a bunch of different (admittedly easy, but I’m ok with that) plants. 

Now hygro is supposed to be easy as they come, it’s such a weed that there are regulations prohibiting its trade from how infectious it is. I doubt it needs me to install a whole fancy set of canisters and tubes in order to live....?



Virtus said:


> I Someone placed 11-12 of the NilocG capsules in a 20 long. 3 of them were coming up and I someone ruptured them while trying to remove them. I've They've only been fertilizing once a week with Thrive C so shouldn't be too much of a problem. The tank is still cycling so at least one big water change is in store before adding stock. Again, purely hypothetical...


I think, as others have said, that your rash friend is totally fine as long as they do a good water change or two and recheck parameters before actually adding any fish 😂


----------



## Asteroid (Jul 26, 2018)

LidijaPN said:


> OK I do get that argument.... I mean I get that plants grow better with higher CO2 levels. And I’m not fighting that notion, truly I’m not. (I totally am tho. I’ll never use CO2 in my tanks hahah. But that aside)
> 
> If the issue here were really just CO2, wouldn’t other plants be struggling? Why just the hygro? If the issue were CO2, wouldn’t the low tech forum be a deserted wasteland? Wouldn’t Walstad tanks fail? Wouldn’t everyone struggle if they didn’t have CO2?
> 
> ...


So when I say "show my the carbon" it doesn't mean every plant will struggle, they are just going to grow slower many times not as full. They simply don't have the available carbon to do otherwise. So what I'm saying is you can only expect so much growth from a co2-less tank. They're making use of whatever is available. There is some co2 otherwise your plants would be dead. That's why when you add to much light to a tank that isn't co2 injected, algae takes over because the plants don't have what they need to use the light provided. 

Carbon is what makes up most of a plants tissue, Ok well you get the argument. If there is one magic bullet in this hobby it's providing co2. No method of ferts, lighting, etc can replace it.



LidijaPN said:


> If the issue here were really just CO2, wouldn’t other plants be struggling? Why just the hygro?
> 
> Now hygro is supposed to be easy as they come, it’s such a weed that there are regulations prohibiting its trade from how infectious it is. I doubt it needs me to install a whole fancy set of canisters and tubes in order to live....?


If the leaves are clean on the hygro then it's probably not getting enough nutrients, it's a nutrient hog.


----------



## somewhatshocked (Aug 8, 2011)

I see substrate vacuuming popping up with more frequency lately - and just in this thread a few posts ago. It's almost always (read that again before popping off, pot-stirrers and those keen on arguing: _almost always_ does not mean _always_) unnecessary in a planted tank. Merely removing anything unsightly from the surface of the substrate is usually more than enough. A big caveat, among others, being when something of decent size dies in the substrate - fish, big snail, that sort of thing.

But it's wild that anyone would attempt to vacuum their substrate while also using root tabs. What a waste and mess some people unnecessarily make of their tanks. Though root tabs do, in fact, work for a lot of people without altering water parameters or becoming a hassle. Especially when they're DIY, made from rich clay and contain only the additional mineral salts you want them to contain. It's one of the reasons people like me use them in sensitive shrimp tanks where water column dosing is more problematic/potentially problematic. Want to point that out for some not-yet-posting newcomers who are getting confused and may not yet realize every tank is different and what works in one situation may not work in another. (And because I've been flooded with PMs from newly-registered members asking why something works for one but not another 🤦‍♂️.)


----------



## LidijaPN (Jan 15, 2022)

Asteroid said:


> If the leaves are clean on the hygro then it's probably not getting enough nutrients, it's a nutrient hog.


What do you mean by clean leaves? No algae? I have zero visible algae anywhere in the tank. This is what the poor thing is doing:

















I’m totally fine with slow growth, sticking to easy plants, not having impressive specimens. And everyone is playing really nice in the tank. Limnophila, water wisteria, val... they’re downright booming. If they were growing any faster I’d be fending them off with a broom. It’s just the poor hygro.

By the way @somewhatshocked where’s the easiest place to source the clay for diy root tabs? And how do you decide how much stuff to add? I like what my very few root tabs have done for me but I do NOT like their price tag.


----------



## Asteroid (Jul 26, 2018)

LidijaPN said:


> What do you mean by clean leaves? No algae? I have zero visible algae anywhere in the tank. This is what the poor thing is doing:


Definitely looks deficient. Have you been testing, do you check your macro levels.


----------



## somewhatshocked (Aug 8, 2011)

LidijaPN said:


> By the way @somewhatshocked where’s the easiest place to source the clay for diy root tabs? And how do you decide how much stuff to add? I like what my very few root tabs have done for me but I do NOT like their price tag.


Not sure about sourcing in Canada. I get mine (use a few different natural clays) from a local potter. Some local craft or art supply stores may have something suitable for use and there are bound to potter supply shops somewhere in your province - maybe some that ship. Sometimes tough to go that route because they require larger purchase quantities.

Depending upon the mineral salts I'm using, I almost always load them up with ferts til they can't hold any more. Most DIYers tend to come up with an all-purpose blend but some really tailor their mix for various reasons. For example, some who don't like to dose begin recognizing certain deficiencies in their plants as their enriched substrates begin to lose their fire power and only include what they need to handle the deficiency.


----------



## LidijaPN (Jan 15, 2022)

somewhatshocked said:


> Not sure about sourcing in Canada. I get mine (use a few different natural clays) from a local potter. Some local craft or art supply stores may have something suitable for use and there are bound to potter supply shops somewhere in your province - maybe some that ship. Sometimes tough to go that route because they require larger purchase quantities.
> 
> Depending upon the mineral salts I'm using, I almost always load them up with ferts til they can't hold any more. Most DIYers tend to come up with an all-purpose blend but some really tailor their mix for various reasons. For example, some who don't like to dose begin recognizing certain deficiencies in their plants as their enriched substrates begin to lose their fire power and only include what they need to handle the deficiency.


Yeah but what about us dumb-butts who don’t know what deficiencies we’re dealing with? 😂

I can find pottery clay in art stores, is any kind good? Anything bad to look out for?

How do you know it can’t hold more? From the picture of that hygro, what would you give it? I could just give up on the hygro but irrationally I really want it to live now.



Asteroid said:


> Definitely looks deficient. Have you been testing, do you check your macro levels.


How would I do this? Last week before water change my nitrates were at 10, maybe a touch lower. I don’t know what else I’m meant to test for? I dose Thrive twice a week, I used to do 6 ml per dose and now I’ve started doing 8 because my plant mass has increased a lot and I had been doing 6 per dose from the start....

This is the tank:


----------



## somewhatshocked (Aug 8, 2011)

LidijaPN said:


> Yeah but what about us dumb-butts who don’t know what deficiencies we’re dealing with? 😂
> 
> I can find pottery clay in art stores, is any kind good? Anything bad to look out for?
> 
> How do you know it can’t hold more? From the picture of that hygro, what would you give it? I could just give up on the hygro but irrationally I really want it to live now.


Not sure entirely what deficiency you're dealing with (haven't really looked yet) and am not sure if there are other issues coming into play. But most (if new) do what you're doing by posting on forums and compare to deficiency charts to try to get to the bottom of things. I don't keep H. polysperma because it's an invasive species and a nutrient hog/super-fast grower compared to what I normally grow. I like things to creep along slowly in most of my tanks.

Look for all natural clay. No other ingredients, no preservatives, no oils, nothing like that. Some clays will have their estimated mineral makeup listed, depending upon the source.

When clay can't hold more ferts, it becomes too dry to mix and knead.

I'm sure someone else will chime to chastise you for even considering root tabs because you don't test for and micromanage micros and macros but just remember there are tons of approaches to planted tanking that could work for you. Trial and error, what one is comfortable with, what one has available to them, what one can afford, etc. could all come into play to varying degrees. (Saying that more for newcomers, not you specifically.)


----------



## LidijaPN (Jan 15, 2022)

somewhatshocked said:


> Not sure entirely what deficiency you're dealing with (haven't really looked yet) and am not sure if there are other issues coming into play. But most (if new) do what you're doing by posting on forums and compare to deficiency charts to try to get to the bottom of things. I don't keep H. polysperma because it's an invasive species and a nutrient hog/super-fast grower compared to what I normally grow. I like things to creep along slowly in most of my tanks.
> 
> Look for all natural clay. No other ingredients, no preservatives, no oils, nothing like that. Some clays will have their estimated mineral makeup listed, depending upon the source.
> 
> ...


I get you. I just read up a bit on checking macros etc and I’m definitely not buying hundreds of dollars of gear to track every individual chemical in my tank. Absolutely more power to those who do, but when I see advice like ‘oh just buy individual spectrometers (I think that’s what they’re called) or send your water off to a lab for testing’ I’m like no, how about I don’t do that? 😅

Considering that most things seem to be doing fine, I think just upping my weekly ferts a bit blindly is probably a reasonably safe move... I like what the four Seachem root tabs have done for the plants right next to them so I’d like to try making some and popping them in once in a while. I’m not looking to optimize or maximize anything hahah. Just keep things growing for my tiny fish to hide in.

Oh yeah do you add any water to the clay to make it easier to knead? Or just as it comes?


----------



## Quagulator (May 4, 2015)

KatieMR said:


> Those were actually the easiest of the ones I've tried, so I was thinking of switching back. Haha. I guess I'll amend that plan. I've been using the NilocG capsules. They have trapped air in them though, so they float and are a huge pain to get planted into the substrate.
> 
> Actually after reading this conversation, I may just not keep adding root tabs unless I'm doing a rescape or making up a new tank. They are easy to add when you are first putting in the substrate, but such a pain to add afterwards that if my plants can grow without them, I'd just rather not bother. I use fluorite which from my research has pretty high CEC, so it should be storing nutrients from the water column even if I don't use root tabs.


Flourite is actually inert and has a low CEC - Not sure where the myth started about Eco-Complete and Flourite having high CEC's. 

A few threads have sources magazines testing CEC on various substrates, Flourite had as much CEC and plain gravel / sand. 

I use the capsules with trapped air (make them myself) I just burry them deep and on an angle so they don't just float up on me. 


Also to anyone reading my posts, I am completely for using both root tabs / fertilizing the substrate and water column dosing. I was just previously stating a few of the potential draw backs to root tabs, not saying everyone will always run into those problems, just that they are potentially there.


----------



## Asteroid (Jul 26, 2018)

LidijaPN said:


> I get you. I just read up a bit on checking macros etc and I’m definitely not buying hundreds of dollars of gear to track every individual chemical in my tank. Absolutely more power to those who do, but when I see advice like ‘oh just buy individual spectrometers (I think that’s what they’re called) or send your water off to a lab for testing’ I’m like no, how about I don’t do that? 😅
> 
> Considering that most things seem to be doing fine, I think just upping my weekly ferts a bit blindly is probably a reasonably safe move... I like what the four Seachem root tabs have done for the plants right next to them so I’d like to try making some and popping them in once in a while. I’m not looking to optimize or maximize anything hahah. Just keep things growing for
> my tiny fish to hide in.


It might surprise you but I don't check anything other than co2 levels. The beauty of dosing in excess (EI) is your know it's there, you don't need to check everything or really anything once the tank gets going. I'm not into all the testing, etc. 

Another reason it's good is because it's hard to tell deficiencies. Many look the same and some are actually caused be algae and then the snails puts holes in the leaf and they think it's a fert deficiency. Adding extra dosing will not cause algae and usually safe for shrimp with most ferts.


----------



## LidijaPN (Jan 15, 2022)

Quagulator said:


> Flourite is actually inert and has a low CEC - Not sure where the myth started about Eco-Complete and Flourite having high CEC's.
> 
> A few threads have sources magazines testing CEC on various substrates, Flourite had as much CEC and plain gravel / sand.
> 
> ...


Is the trapped air there for a purpose? Or just byproduct of the capsule making process? How do you make them?



Asteroid said:


> It might surprise you but I don't check anything other than co2 levels. The beauty of dosing in excess (EI) is your know it's there, you don't need to check everything or really anything once the tank gets going. I'm not into all the testing, etc.
> 
> Another reason it's good is because it's hard to tell deficiencies. Many look the same and some are actually caused be algae and then the snails puts holes in the leaf and they think it's a fert deficiency. Adding extra dosing will not cause algae and usually safe for shrimp with most ferts.


I think upping ferts is a pretty safe bet for me at this point. We’ve been up and down my situation in a couple of threads now and it’s the one thing that seems to make the most sense... I think when they decided on recommended dosing for ‘low light tanks’ they expected people to have a few anubias and maybe a sword and call it a day.

I actually like the testing and knowing what’s happening but it’s too complex. I got everything that seemed reasonable to get. I don’t want my ‘stuff for aquarium’ cabinet to be bigger than my actual aquarium.


----------



## Asteroid (Jul 26, 2018)

LidijaPN said:


> I think upping ferts is a pretty safe bet for me at this point. We’ve been up and down my situation in a couple of threads now and it’s the one thing that seems to make the most sense... I think when they decided on recommended dosing for ‘low light tanks’ they expected people to have a few anubias and maybe a sword and call it a day.
> 
> I actually like the testing and knowing what’s happening but it’s too complex. I got everything that seemed reasonable to get. I don’t want my ‘stuff for aquarium’ cabinet to be bigger than my actual aquarium.


Yep, up ferts and keep up with regular water changes to keep everything within a reasonable range and get rid of organics. I do test initially until I get into a routine, but as I said with EI type dosing it's not necessary. 

I did grow H. Poly before I realized it was illegal in my country LOL.


----------



## Quagulator (May 4, 2015)

LidijaPN said:


> Is the trapped air there for a purpose? Or just byproduct of the capsule making process? How do you make them?


The trapped air is in there because you can't physically remove the air from the capsules, think about gravel in a jar, you can still add a bunch of water to the jar because the gravel is trapping air in between each granule. Same thing with fertilizer, it traps air between each granule. 

You can limit this by grinding up the granules of fertilizer, but then you have a very, very potent root tab to deal with. 

I make them by adding fertilizer granules into size 00 gel capsules listed as human consumable. 

I add Osmocote+, monoammonium phosphate + Zn, potash + B.


----------



## LidijaPN (Jan 15, 2022)

Asteroid said:


> Yep, up ferts and keep up with regular water changes to keep everything within a reasonable range and get rid of organics. I do test initially until I get into a routine, but as I said with EI type dosing it's not necessary.
> 
> I did grow H. Poly before I realized it was illegal in my country LOL.


that is some stunning hygro. Mine decidedly needs some pick-me-up.


Quagulator said:


> The trapped air is in there because you can't physically remove the air from the capsules, think about gravel in a jar, you can still add a bunch of water to the jar because the gravel is trapping air in between each granule. Same thing with fertilizer, it traps air between each granule.
> 
> You can limit this by grinding up the granules of fertilizer, but then you have a very, very potent root tab to deal with.
> 
> ...


you could grind up ferts and mix with ground up inert filler…. If the bubbles were a bother, that is.


----------



## Quagulator (May 4, 2015)

LidijaPN said:


> you could grind up ferts and mix with ground up inert filler…. If the bubbles were a bother, that is.


No real point, just place them as deep as you can in the substrate, on an angle or even perpendicular. Some might float up but oh well, the capsules have some time before they fully dissolve anyway, enough time to replace a few that might float up.


----------



## somewhatshocked (Aug 8, 2011)

LidijaPN said:


> Oh yeah do you add any water to the clay to make it easier to knead? Or just as it comes?


Depends upon the batch and how dry it is but a little water is usually helpful. Some even use clay that's powdered/dry/ground up, so water is a necessity for mixing things up.



Quagulator said:


> Flourite is actually inert and has a low CEC - Not sure where the myth started about Eco-Complete and Flourite having high CEC's.


The Eco Complete garbage originated with CaribSea's original marketing and packaging. All these years later and it's still causing our heads to explode. 🤯

Though, depending upon the batch, Flourite _can_ have a high CEC. Not sure if it depends upon where it's manufactured or if ingredients sometimes change or the production process changes but it can vary. Sometimes it's more like a calcined clay product that's kind of a hybrid of Turface and Flourite instead of just the usual Flourite us old heads are used to. I've had a few batches since 2018 pull so much kH from the water I had to stop adding it. In one of my Flourite Black Sand tanks I haven't been able to use water with kH in it since 2019. One of the tanks I documented in 2019 in my Cubes tank journal. Was a real headache at first because I was broke and couldn't do what I wanted to do without a lot of effort. In other batches, it's more like soft-ish pool filter sand.

Used to think it was a quality control issue but it's happened so frequently with batches to varying degrees the past few years I no longer think it is. I've reached out to Seachem multiple times but never get answers that any of us would consider sufficient.


----------



## KatieMR (Jul 9, 2021)

somewhatshocked said:


> Depends upon the batch and how dry it is but a little water is usually helpful. Some even use clay that's powdered/dry/ground up, so water is a necessity for mixing things up.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thanks for all that information @somewhatshocked! That is really helpful! I will have to go back and test my kH and see if it has changed at all from the last time I checked. I haven't been monitoring it much after the initial testing of my tank and my tap water. Now I'm curious to see if it has changed in the last 6 months since I did test it.

I am totally with you on buying all the testing stuff, @LidijaPN! I would love to be able to test everything in my tank and micromanage all the ferts and everything. But 1) I'm a receptionist, and even though I get paid well, I don't get paid _that_ much! 2) I just frankly do not have time to do anything more with my fish tank. And 3) I am out of town enough that my roommate is regularly looking after it every few months. I don't want to scare her away by making her watch all the crazy science experiments!


----------



## LidijaPN (Jan 15, 2022)

KatieMR said:


> Thanks for all that information @somewhatshocked! That is really helpful! I will have to go back and test my kH and see if it has changed at all from the last time I checked. I haven't been monitoring it much after the initial testing of my tank and my tap water. Now I'm curious to see if it has changed in the last 6 months since I did test it.
> 
> I am totally with you on buying all the testing stuff, @LidijaPN! I would love to be able to test everything in my tank and micromanage all the ferts and everything. But 1) I'm a receptionist, and even though I get paid well, I don't get paid _that_ much! 2) I just frankly do not have time to do anything more with my fish tank. And 3) I am out of town enough that my roommate is regularly looking after it every few months. I don't want to scare her away by making her watch all the crazy science experiments!


Same, I’m plotting how to prep all the stuff for hubs so he doesn’t implode during the 5 weeks me and the kid will be away this summer. Like pre-blend the tap and the distilled and the gH+ mix and just tell him ‘put in 4 bottles every week’


----------



## Virtus (11 mo ago)

LidijaPN said:


> Same, I’m plotting how to prep all the stuff for hubs so he doesn’t implode during the 5 weeks me and the kid will be away this summer. Like pre-blend the tap and the distilled and the gH+ mix and just tell him ‘put in 4 bottles every week’


No luck getting him hooked yet?


----------



## LidijaPN (Jan 15, 2022)

Virtus said:


> No luck getting him hooked yet?


Not even a little. 

‘Aren’t they pretty, the new killifish?’
‘...they’re pretty.’
‘But you’re not looking!’
‘...I saw them yesterday and still remember how pretty they are.’


----------



## KatieMR (Jul 9, 2021)

I think my roommate was more interested in getting a fish before I got one and she found out what all goes into keeping a fish alive and healthy. She does at least love to look at my tank though (when it isn't full of algae). A lot of my best fish pictures are ones she took.


----------



## RadOtter (10 mo ago)

LidijaPN said:


> Hmmmm are you saying I could DIY it? Where would you buy those? I actually have a ton of random diodes (no idea how powerful), wires, breadboards, etc etc.... but not entirely sure I’d be able to MacGyver it all together without specific instructions... I’d be game to try tho? The brief amazon.ca search I did didn’t turn up any cheap ones... what specifically is a starboard anyway?


Sorry I'm a bit slow on the response. I have to remain sterile for most of the day, so although I can sometimes read through posts, I cant actually type anything significant.

Random diodes and breadboards? That certainly sounds pretty MacGyvery to me. I'm surprised you haven't heard of DigiKey. They are definitely the best place to order raw components for projects like this. Great customer support too. 

Starboards are just diodes that come preattached to little circuit boards for people who don't want to mess with a soldering iron. Below are the boujie ones I use for spectrum tuning, but you can find cheaper ones for $2-$3usd. For that small <4cu ft you would probably only need two, but three would give you a better spread while also highlighting what you want to pop. If you really want to dive deep there is an overly complicated way to figure out exactly the volume of >650nm you need if you know the exact umols of your current light.






XPEEPR-L1-0000-00C01-SB01 New Energy | Optoelectronics | DigiKey


Order today, ships today. XPEEPR-L1-0000-00C01-SB01 – LED Lighting COBs Engines Modules LED Module series Red Starboard from New Energy. Pricing and Availability on millions of electronic components from Digi-Key Electronics.




www.digikey.com







LidijaPN said:


> But is that how it works? Do two less powerful lights have the same penetration as one more powerful one? My intuition says no but I’m guessing intuition doesn’t apply here haha.


Sort of. They add to the overall water penetration, and dispersal, which is also important. However, once you start to account for spectra filtering from the plants closer to the surface is where higher energy gets more important. With the aquarium hobby though, dealing with static volume, you have the unique ability to save money by just adding side lighting. Might kill your look though, but it's a cheap alternative to providing higher energy diodes. 



LidijaPN said:


> But here’s the thing, see, what I am adding is literally the same level as what my tap water has. It’s identical gH - just under 6. So.... if I would be using plain tap water instead of half distilled, those minerals would still be there? Probably in a slightly different ratio because who knows what’s in tap water, right? But it’s not particularly more minerals than I’d have if I were using only tap.... that would mean that people who don’t use distilled/RO shouldn’t use ferts because they’re double-dipping on certain minerals. But they definitely do still use ferts.


You make a good point. To be honest I'm not really sure how that works. I've only just started getting to the point where I hit healthy GH, and can begin playing with excess minerals. All of my other tanks are sterile and have no animals in them. I use sucrose in place of high energy lighting to provide the necessary carbs, and high levels of nutrients for accelerated growth. 



LidijaPN said:


> got attacked by some underwater caterpillar monster and lost a bunch of leaves but kept growing, I replanted the tops


OK, Where the heck did you get an underwater caterpillar monster?????



LidijaPN said:


> symptoms- bottom leaves deteriorating, yellowing, getting pinholes, melting and falling off. Top growth stunting- top leaves growing out smaller and smaller, and sort of crinkly and bent, until finally they start coming out just a few mm long. They never grow, new ones come out on top of them and are also a few mm. ‘Honey, I Shrunk the Hygrophila’?


Definitely sounds like sacrificial chlorosis to me. Especially if the top nodes are remaining tight. Best guess is nutrients then. Probably not nitrogen though, a good place to start is giving a tiny bump to magnesium. If that doesn't slow/stop the chlorosis, give phosphorous a bump next. Changing a single variable at a time is the best way to diagnose the problem while minimizing the impact. 

Or just keep it pruned lower to a more comfortable height where it doesn't need to sacrifice energy. 



LidijaPN said:


> Got a few new stems from a different source, which took off strong but are also starting to slow down and show same symptoms, on both ends.


Both ends? As in the tips are yellowing on the new cuttings?



LidijaPN said:


> For real tho, list all the tank parameters you can think of and I’ll list mine and we see where we overlap and whether that brings us to any conclusions? @RadOtter will help with the concluding as our resident professional plant wizard ⭐


Lol. We are getting pretty far out of my field of knowledge. I'm essentially a swamp doctor.


----------



## Blacksheep101 (Oct 4, 2021)

Okay , hear me out here. I may not be completely clear in what I’m trying to put across.
You want to run low tech tanks .. so you run low tech plants . All good , you find some do better than others, it’s to be expected . I have a low tech tank that runs low nitrates and an also low tech tank that has high nitrates ( high bio load and basic feeding for plants ) with a higher light ( fluval plant 3.0 but not full lighting ).
The low/ low tech tank has stem’s turning slightly red , things just grow and grow and keep growing in this tank ! Be it stems , Monte Carlo, moss or Anubias .
The other tank can’t support a floater , admittedly may be the flow but not even duck weed wins in that tank !! The ‘heavy root feeders ‘ (not starting that arguement that’s why I quoted it )  don’t do well with supplemented feeding, root tabs and 50% plus wc .

My point is , if you want to do low tech then just stick to low tech plants that you know grow well for you. They’ll do well once they’ve settled and you can propagate. You can still have some interesting focal points in leaf shapes and colours without c02 and high lights . Also some stems will turn red in low nitrate set ups without you starving them and searching for that fine point that some high techs do ( such as shrimp only tanks )

I’m definately not saying I know the best way to do things but sometimes if you just want to stick to low tech then do so and own it!! You can still produce an amazingly pretty tank with happy inhabitants that you enjoy , at the end of the day don’t we all just want to enjoy a pretty, healthy , relaxing tank that doesn’t induce stress?

you’ll enjoy a tank more if you don’t have to fight it on a weekly basis if you want low tech. But if you want to daily dose and trim and take the time to get it ‘perfect’ the by all means do that


----------



## LidijaPN (Jan 15, 2022)

KatieMR said:


> I think my roommate was more interested in getting a fish before I got one and she found out what all goes into keeping a fish alive and healthy. She does at least love to look at my tank though (when it isn't full of algae). A lot of my best fish pictures are ones she took.


Part time pets is the best. My friend has a part time dog. Her neighbor has a dog but asked her to dogsit one week while she went to France, and my friend’s whole family fell in love with the dog…. now the lady gives them the dog whenever she goes somewhere, lady is happy, they are happy, dog is happy…. They have the best parts of havi a dog without the vet bills and lack of freedom. Part time dog  


RadOtter said:


> Lol. We are getting pretty far out of my field of knowledge. I'm essentially a swamp doctor.


So you’re saying that to sound self deprecating but probably don’t quite comprehend how cool it sounds. I hope you have a plaque that says ‘The Swamp Doctor Is In’.

I wasted my life on liberal arts, should have been a swamp doctor instead. Or at least a witch doctor. That sounds cool too.


RadOtter said:


> Sort of. They add to the overall water penetration, and dispersal, which is also important. However, once you start to account for spectra filtering from the plants closer to the surface is where higher energy gets more important. With the aquarium hobby though, dealing with static volume, you have the unique ability to save money by just adding side lighting. Might kill your look though, but it's a cheap alternative to providing higher energy diodes.


Ok no, I got nothing here. 
When you talk about ’spectra filtering’, is that the part of the light spectrum that penetrates through the leaves of the taller plants above and reaches the plants below? At the moment I don’t have a lot of mutual shading between the plants but it will become more of an issue as more things grow (especially if the red tiger lotus makes it). Then I’ll need….. higher energy lights? Or side lights? How would that work, just shine a lamp through the side of the aquarium at specific plants?

I feel like I haven’t come up with a solid light plan yet.



RadOtter said:


> You make a good point. To be honest I'm not really sure how that works. I've only just started getting to the point where I hit healthy GH, and can begin playing with excess minerals. All of my other tanks are sterile and have no animals in them. I use sucrose in place of high energy lighting to provide the necessary carbs, and high levels of nutrients for accelerated growth.


You literally feed your plants candy? 😂 And that replaces light??? Wild!!



RadOtter said:


> OK, Where the heck did you get an underwater caterpillar monster?????


It actually came with the hygro!! It was horrifying. It made a leaf coccoon and would venture out and eat the hygro leaves at mad speed. Only hygro. It decimated several stalks before I accidentally found it by trying to pull away the ‘loose leaf’ that was part of its coccoon and it wriggled out at me and I nearly screamed. I’m good with insects when I see them coming. This was like something from Alien.

Never did get an ID but closest I got was maybe some sort of moth caterpillar. It didn’t look like a damselfly larva nor did it eat anything but hygro leaves. I’m embarrassed to say I flushed it in a panic before considering the ecological repercussions.



RadOtter said:


> Definitely sounds like sacrificial chlorosis to me. Especially if the top nodes are remaining tight. Best guess is nutrients then. Probably not nitrogen though, a good place to start is giving a tiny bump to magnesium. If that doesn't slow/stop the chlorosis, give phosphorous a bump next. Changing a single variable at a time is the best way to diagnose the problem while minimizing the impact.


See? The Doctor has a diagnosis and perscribed treatment ❤ I have to source individual salts then, yay 😅 How much would a ‘tiny bump’ be? In, like, teaspoons? And not mmols per kilojoul or whatever 😂



RadOtter said:


> Both ends? As in the tips are yellowing on the new cuttings?


As in both sides of the issue are repeating on both plants - bottoms fading, yellowing, melting and getting pinholes, and tops growing smaller and smaller and more and more crooked leaves. And we might have a new patient - what are these weird leaves on my nymphoides Taiwan?? Old leaves were normal but new ones seem cupped and crooked.








To add to our hygro sitch, check this out….. hygro from new batch but in the corner, making smaller and smaller leaves and going ratty on the bottom….








Now contrast and compare - hygro that USED TO BE right next to the first one, now replantedto middle of the tank, in the general vicinity of a root tab inserted for the vals -








See how few pairs of leaves had been getting smaller and smaller? And then boom - a huge new pair.


----------



## LidijaPN (Jan 15, 2022)

Blacksheep101 said:


> Okay , hear me out here. I may not be completely clear in what I’m trying to put across.
> You want to run low tech tanks .. so you run low tech plants . All good , you find some do better than others, it’s to be expected . I have a low tech tank that runs low nitrates and an also low tech tank that has high nitrates ( high bio load and basic feeding for plants ) with a higher light ( fluval plant 3.0 but not full lighting ).
> The low/ low tech tank has stem’s turning slightly red , things just grow and grow and keep growing in this tank ! Be it stems , Monte Carlo, moss or Anubias .
> The other tank can’t support a floater , admittedly may be the flow but not even duck weed wins in that tank !! The ‘heavy root feeders ‘ (not starting that arguement that’s why I quoted it )  don’t do well with supplemented feeding, root tabs and 50% plus wc .
> ...


Oh I’m with you 100%!

I don’t want to micromanage anything and I’m happy letting go of anything that firmly decides it won’t thrive here. I don’t want to mess with nitrate starvation nor calculating every microfert nor buying a mass of equipment to figure out exactly what’s in every water molecule.

In fact I’ve already chucked out at least 4 different species because we had… different ambitions in life.

That said… if I can tweak things WITHIN my little scope - move something to a better position, feed it a little more, add a few cheap LEDs… I’m game to try? More than even getting the plant to thrive, it’s about understanding why it does or doesn’t. Hygro is a weed and should be at home in my low-lit cheap mess of a tank. I feel like we can make it work 😂


----------



## RadOtter (10 mo ago)

LidijaPN said:


> When you talk about ’spectra filtering’, is that the part of the light spectrum that penetrates through the leaves of the taller plants above and reaches the plants below?


Essentially, yes. But it also happens on the same plant, top foliage filtering the light as it travels to the bottom foliage.



LidijaPN said:


> You literally feed your plants candy? 😂 And that replaces light??? Wild!!


lol yes. Sugars are carbs, so the plant can take in the energy from sucrose instead of crafting the carbs from light. That is the basic science behind in vitro plant culturing. Do not try this at home. It can only be done in sterile conditions. 



LidijaPN said:


> See? The Doctor has a diagnosis and perscribed treatment ❤ I have to source individual salts then, yay 😅 How much would a ‘tiny bump’ be? In, like, teaspoons? And not mmols per kilojoul or whatever 😂


I cant give you quantity. By bump, I simply meant a little bit over what you are currently dosing. I'd read through one of the nutrient dosing threads. Theres a wealth of knowledge in there.

lol mmols per kilojoul?  You need to hit 1.21 gigawatts first.



LidijaPN said:


> And we might have a new patient - what are these weird leaves on my nymphoides Taiwan?? Old leaves were normal but new ones seem cupped and crooked.


Not a clue. Could it be just a hydrodynamic adaption to the suction of your sponge filter?



LidijaPN said:


> See how few pairs of leaves had been getting smaller and smaller? And then boom - a huge new pair.


Most likely environmental fluctuations. Each new set of leaves are created to match the given environment.


----------



## LidijaPN (Jan 15, 2022)

RadOtter said:


> Essentially, yes. But it also happens on the same plant, top foliage filtering the light as it travels to the bottom foliage.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yep, my guess is it’s sucking extra ferts from the nearby root tab and that immediately resolved its deficiency.

Ok this has been IMMENSELY educational and I am wildly grateful for you sticking with me and answering all my precocious elementary school kid level questions. I feel like I understand plant things much better now. 

I promise not to share my chocolate bars with my aquarium plants, and before I work out how to up individual ferts I’m gonna slightly bump up my overall dosing and see how everyone responds. It’s true that I haven’t adjusted dosing levels since the start and my plant mass has probably quadrupled in the meantime. 

On the red light thing I still have to work out the starboards and stuff.... where did you say they could be found for cheap?


----------



## easternlethal (Feb 13, 2016)

LidijaPN said:


> @easternlethal ok I’ll hunt around for red lighting I could add... have one in mind but it’s not a bespoke aquarium light. Do you think it would do anything?
> 
> Something like this? https://www.amazon.ca/Sondiko-Indoor-Dimmable-Levels-Plants/dp/B08Y5RF7TH/ref=mp_s_a_1_16?crid=HP4P0X1RLPY2&keywords=led+grow+light+strip&qid=1648127013&sprefix=,aps,236&sr=8-16


Doesn't have to be aquarium specific and would give plants a nice tint. But I would get a single bulb or cluster instead of a strip and put it on a clamp or gooseneck so you can more easily move around and a single point source producers more dramatic shadow which contributes to the pop. Also get one blue bulb which you can swap to. Then just play around. Also be aware this is for highlighting for aesthetic purposes - not plant nutrition so shouldn't be stronger than your main light.


----------



## Virtus (11 mo ago)

Swamp Doctor sounds like the next hit Discovery Channel show!


----------



## LidijaPN (Jan 15, 2022)

Virtus said:


> Swamp Doctor sounds like the next hit Discovery Channel show!


10/10 would watch for sure! 🤩


----------



## KatieMR (Jul 9, 2021)

LidijaPN said:


> I wasted my life on liberal arts, should have been a swamp doctor instead. Or at least a witch doctor. That sounds cool too.


Don't knock the liberal arts degrees! We might not know all the sciency stuff, but we know what questions to ask! A liberal arts major started a hyper-active 8 page discussion for the science people to practice explaining the science stuff in ways the rest of the world can understand!

Also, if you are MacGeyver enough to build a light, I will just buy one of yours . Just let me know when it's done and who to make the check out to! Hahaha. I am definitely not MacGeyver enough for that!

Sincerely,

A Creative Writing Major


----------



## Asteroid (Jul 26, 2018)

KatieMR said:


> Don't knock the liberal arts degrees! We might not know all the sciency stuff, but we know what questions to ask! A liberal arts major started a hyper-active 8 page discussion for the science people to practice explaining the science stuff in ways the rest of the world can understand!
> 
> Also, if you are MacGeyver enough to build a light, I will just buy one of yours . Just let me know when it's done and who to make the check out to! Hahaha. I am definitely not MacGeyver enough for that!
> 
> ...


Don't worry you really don't have to know the sciency stuff since very little of it is actually applicable to planted tanks. All that stuff that happens in nature, even the way the plants actually exist, simply doesn't happen in our little glass houses. That's why depending on what one wants to accomplish we need to do water changes, add co2, spike the substrate, etc. Generally speaking, the less you add to or interact with your tank in an effort to make it self sustaining the narrower the bandwidth gets in terms of what you can grow.

It's mostly about trial and error or learning from others that have similar setups.


----------



## RadOtter (10 mo ago)

Virtus said:


> Swamp Doctor sounds like the next hit Discovery Channel show!


Ha! Unfortunately, that would be a very depressing show. Alligators and moccasins are exciting and all on TV, but in reality, they could care less about humans when we are on their turf. Additionally, the overarching theme would be that as a species we are systematically destroying thousands of acres a year of an ecosystem containing organisms that cannot exist anywhere else. It's one thing to see glaciers melting on tv. No one wants to see furry woodland critters drowning. 😓



LidijaPN said:


> On the red light thing I still have to work out the starboards and stuff.... where did you say they could be found for cheap?








XPEEPR-L1-0000-00C01-SB01 New Energy | Optoelectronics | DigiKey


Order today, ships today. XPEEPR-L1-0000-00C01-SB01 – LED Lighting COBs Engines Modules LED Module series Red Starboard from New Energy. Pricing and Availability on millions of electronic components from Digi-Key Electronics.




www.digikey.com


----------



## LidijaPN (Jan 15, 2022)

RadOtter said:


> Ha! Unfortunately, that would be a very depressing show. Alligators and moccasins are exciting and all on TV, but in reality, they could care less about humans when we are on their turf. Additionally, the overarching theme would be that as a species we are systematically destroying thousands of acres a year of an ecosystem containing organisms that cannot exist anywhere else. It's one thing to see glaciers melting on tv. No one wants to see furry woodland critters drowning. 😓


Yeah I see this with everyone who works with nature, they’re like ‘I wasn’t prepared for it being so depressing’


----------



## RadOtter (10 mo ago)

LidijaPN said:


> Yeah I see this with everyone who works with nature, they’re like ‘I wasn’t prepared for it being so depressing’


Sorry that got a little dark. Here are some "heavy" root feeders to lighten it back up.


----------



## Asteroid (Jul 26, 2018)

LidijaPN said:


> I see lots of references to certain plants (swords, val) being ‘heavy root feeders’, but I also saw quite a few people mention the whole ‘root feeder’ thing is a myth. ...


Well eight pages later I think we can ascertain that the so-called heavy root feeders do perfectly fine without any additives to the substrate a*s long as the water column is dosed sufficiently.* 

The myth part of this is that heavy root feeders are associated with needing to physically load the substrate for them to thrive. Is this patently false. 

In the event your not dosing the water column or want to have a backup in case there's a deficiency then by all means root tabs or an active substrate can be helpful or even a necessity.


----------



## LidijaPN (Jan 15, 2022)

RadOtter said:


> Sorry that got a little dark. Here are some "heavy" root feeders to lighten it back up.
> 
> View attachment 1039784


Oh wow you are an amazing swamp doctor, your swamp looks super healthy!🤩



Asteroid said:


> Well eight pages later I think we can ascertain that the so-called heavy root feeders do perfectly fine without any additives to the substrate a*s long as the water column is dosed sufficiently.*
> 
> The myth part of this is that heavy root feeders are associated with needing to physically load the substrate for them to thrive. Is this patently false.
> 
> In the event your not dosing the water column or want to have a backup in case there's a deficiency then by all means root tabs or an active substrate can be helpful or even a necessity.


I’m upping the water column dosing and hoping to see an improvement! This thread definitely helped me gain a better overall understanding of aquatic and semi aquatic plants.


----------



## KatieMR (Jul 9, 2021)

LidijaPN said:


> I’m upping the water column dosing and hoping to see an improvement! This thread definitely helped me gain a better overall understanding of aquatic and semi aquatic plants.


Agreed! Thanks for all the information, everyone!


----------



## LidijaPN (Jan 15, 2022)

GUYS!!! I HAVE MADE A STARTLING DISCOVERY!!

Ok I’m not clear on how this isn’t mentioned more all over the place.... but you know how the Nilocg Thrive bottle says ‘Dose 1 pump, or 2 ml, per 10 gallon’? Thus implying that 1 pump delivers 2 ml?

So I’ve been breaking my head wondering why I have deficiencies, since Thrive is an EI fertilizer, and I’m dosing 12ml per week... which is according to RB and most people on the forum a reasonable amount... and ok maybe some of my plants hog more, but it still seems weird.....

So then I think wait, some people did mention using a syringe to make sure what the amount is.... let’s try that out? 

Anyway I pump out 6 squirts of Thrive into a little container and suck them up with my 3ml syringe. And they all come out to just over 2 ml. 

Now I don’t know if I’m using the pump wrong or what but it seems pretty self-explanatory.... but how can there be such an IMMENSE discrepancy between what they claim (one pump is 2 ml) and what I get (one pump is around 0.3 ml, i.e. I’ve been dosing around six times less than I thought and NO FRIKKIN WONDER everyone is starving?!?!?

I’m pretty surprised. I thought there would be some discrepancy but this is nuts. 

Now the question is - obviously I will up the dose. Should I do it slowly, so as not to shock everyone? And how slowly? 

So I have basically been doing 1ml per dose, twice a week. What should I ramp up to? I’m thinking at least 2ml 3 times per week, for a start? Is that too big a jump?


----------



## KatieMR (Jul 9, 2021)

Ooo, this is the next thing I am going to look into. I've thought it seems like less is coming out of the pump the lower the bottle gets! I guess it's time to pull my syringe out for that too!

I did look into my kH this weekend. It has gone up from 3 dkH to 4. Not a lot, but I will definitely be keeping an eye on it. The last time I checked it in this tank was October. One drop in 5 months seems like a pattern to watch.


----------



## LidijaPN (Jan 15, 2022)

KatieMR said:


> Ooo, this is the next thing I am going to look into. I've thought it seems like less is coming out of the pump the lower the bottle gets! I guess it's time to pull my syringe out for that too!
> 
> I did look into my kH this weekend. It has gone up from 3 dkH to 4. Not a lot, but I will definitely be keeping an eye on it. The last time I checked it in this tank was October. One drop in 5 months seems like a pattern to watch.


My bottle is still fairly full and the squirt dosage is WAYYY off. Check yours for sure, maybe you're also dosing much less than you thought. 

Do you top up your water outside of water changes? And do you use distilled water to do it? Top-ups with tap water can make your parameters creep up because what evaporates is just the water, not the minerals.... so if you add more water with more minerals.... you get the picture.


----------



## KatieMR (Jul 9, 2021)

Yep, I will be checking that. It would absolutely explain the algae and sad looking plants!

It is very rare that I do a top-up between water changes. At water change time, I usually fill the tank a little fuller than it needs to be, and I have a lid that covers the entire tank, so I don't lose much from evaporation, just what I pull out when I use the turkey baster to get uneaten food - also, not a super frequent issue: bettas like to eat!! My filter intake and heater are low enough that I can go quite a while without a top-up.


----------



## LidijaPN (Jan 15, 2022)

So I did my water change today and added a whopping 2.5ml of Thrive, which is, like, 3 times more than I’ve ever put in the tank haha. Now we wait.

I suck at waiting. Now we stare at the tank and worry.


----------



## Asteroid (Jul 26, 2018)

LidijaPN said:


> So I did my water change today and added a whopping 2.5ml of Thrive, which is, like, 3 times more than I’ve ever put in the tank haha. Now we wait.


Wow, your crazier than I am with ferts, good luck!


----------



## Quagulator (May 4, 2015)

Okay so lets use your scenario to expand one what I was explaining 4 pages back in this thread - You were dosing much less than you thought, much less than the plants would like - so what would happen if you have a starving sword plant in there and you placed a half decent root tab under it? It would immediately throw a surge of new leaves and you would be amazed about the root tabs effectiveness. But in reality, if you were dosing richer from the onset, the root tab would have caused a smaller response in that sword.


----------



## LidijaPN (Jan 15, 2022)

Quagulator said:


> Okay so lets use your scenario to expand one what I was explaining 4 pages back in this thread - You were dosing much less than you thought, much less than the plants would like - so what would happen if you have a starving sword plant in there and you placed a half decent root tab under it? It would immediately throw a surge of new leaves and you would be amazed about the root tabs effectiveness. But in reality, if you were dosing richer from the onset, the root tab would have caused a smaller response in that sword.


Yes, totally. This is in fact exactly what happened. I stuck exactly 4 root tabs into the tank and have had a great upsurge of growth from plants at those exact spots. Anyway I'm hoping to see some fun effects now that I am actually dosing a reasonable amount of fert. It's still a low amount - I don't want to shock the system or anything. The Thrive bottle says '3 squirts OR 6 ml', implying for my tank size I should be dosing 6 ml twice a week, and I'm only doing 3 for now. I'm pretty sure, considering how well my plants were doing even on what I now realize was less than 1 ml twice a week, that I'll see a marked uptick in growth.

Ok so I’ve posted this in my journal but this epic thread deserves an update, so!

ONE WEEK of normal(ish) ferts. I’m dosing around 3ml, twice per week. That’s 2-3 times less than what either EI or PPS would have me do, according to RB. Let us observe the ridiculous results.








The hygro that started this whole shebang. It happened to get relocated on top of a root tab, plus the water column ferts.... it decided to grow some helicopter rotor blades instead of leaves. I wonder if it will get any color as it reaches the surface.








Limno was growing strong all along, points to it for being a trooper. It’s not really growing any faster than before (it’s always been fast) but check out thickness of top fronds vs bottom. It’s lookin way fluffier.








Look at this one single weirdo indica stem. It’s also on top of a root tab... you can see the others aren’t changing yet so I don’t think they’re reacting to water ferts yet. But look at that head 😂








No idea what this one even is, got it entwined in the roots of a pothos plant I got gifted... but look how it’s taking off!! It’s nowhere near a root tab (there are only four tabs in the whole tank) so it’s reacting to the ferts I guess.

I’m lowkey terrified this new fertilizing abandon will finally land me into algaeland..... but I guess I keep an eye on it and see. I’ve also doubled my stocking (not as impressive as it sounds considering how light it was) so we will also see if I have finally found some fish that actually poop. I swear the chilis do not.


----------



## EmotionalFescue (Jun 24, 2020)

LidijaPN said:


> I’m lowkey terrified this new fertilizing abandon will finally land me into algaeland..


Keep an eye on things, but I wouldn't be too worried about it as long as you keep the same maintenance regime. With more column ferts, you may get a bit more dust on the glass in between water changes, but I don't personally find a good glass wiping to be too much trouble.


----------



## LidijaPN (Jan 15, 2022)

EmotionalFescue said:


> Keep an eye on things, but I wouldn't be too worried about it as long as you keep the same maintenance regime. With more column ferts, you may get a bit more dust on the glass in between water changes, but I don't personally find a good glass wiping to be too much trouble.


No, I like the wiping honestly 😂 the tank sparkles afterwards. 

I don’t think I’ll have issues. I have a ton of very hungry plant mass and I’m really not pushing any unreasonable amounts. It’s fun to see things start to take off. 

I feel this thread has been such perfection in terms of balance between people giving me information and all of us brainstorming together to figure out what I specifically want to achieve and how to do it.... it started as general banter on a topic I didn’t understand and ended as a game plan that is visibly improving my tank. This is why I love this place and everyone in it.


----------

