# Plant salesman says Walstad method is flawed



## slb

I have read Diana Walstad's book and several posts on this forum. I set up my tank and am ready to add plants. I live in a small town with few plant choices, so I contacted one of the big freshwater plant suppliers to order some plants overnight. I told him my plan to use a soil substrate and he proceeded to dissuade me. He said every customer he has talked to who tried to use soil has regretted it. I was able to counter all of his arguments except one. He said the biggest problem is that the organic matter (peat, bark, etc.) will decay releasing more ammonia and nitrites than the plants can absorb. This has me worried. (For example, the Miracle Grow Organic potting soil Walstad uses is almost 100% peat and other organic material, very little sand, silt, clay).

As I read Walstad's book, it seems to say that the primary benefit of soil is a long-term supply of nutrients. Can't this be achieved by occasionally adding substrate nutrients. My primary goals are no CO2, low maintenance and minimal water changes.

Is Walstad wrong? Is it possible to have a low maintenance tank with a commercial substrate, with out the decaying matter, simply by occasionally adding nutrients to the soil (something like Seachem Flourish tabs):icon_ques

I'm not trying to be a purest, I just want live plants with the least amount of trouble.


----------



## Seattle_Aquarist

Hi slb,

Interesting post! Let me guess, they also tried to sell you their substrate and fertilizer tablets?


----------



## fresh.salty

My tanks are ever changing and the use of real "soil" would be a total mess. Pulling plants out would turn the substrate upside down.

Doesn't the top sand or gravel cover want to migrate to the bottom in time?


----------



## nonconductive

i can say that walstad tanks work great if you set them up correctly. i have quite a few running with no problems.


----------



## jargonchipmunk

the soil can decay only as fast as the bacteria in the soil process it. As long as you have it capped properly, you'll only ever see nitrates, and even then, nothing your plants can't handle. The method is solid. A bit too slow-as-you-go for my likings, but for some it works perfect and you can't go more low maintenance than her methods.

that said, I think the guy just wanted to sell you some dirt with a barcode attached.


----------



## EntoCraig

In my opinion their really is no 'BEST' method. Some tanks and plant respond better to certain methods... The truth is their are minor flaws in just about every method, depending on your tank. People will swear by whatever works best for them. I have read countless books on planted tanks, all swearing by different substrates and dosing and Co2 methods. All these tank had amazing tanks. 

No need to fix what isn't broken right?


----------



## slb

Seattle_Aquarist said:


> Hi slb,
> 
> Interesting post! Let me guess, they also tried to sell you their substrate and fertilizer tablets?


No. He didn't try to push anything. His concern seemed sincere


----------



## plantbrain

I think given your goal, it's a good choice of a method.
You can also go a water column dosing method without soil.

http://www.barrreport.com/showthread.php/2817-Non-CO2-methods

This might be more along with some LFS's feelings, but both this and Soil both work very well. 

A combination of water column and sediment is what I often suggest, this way you get longer life out of each, this is perhaps more critical as you increase rates of growth typical with CO2 enriched systems, but it works well in any planted tank also. A good fish load can suffice as water column dosing also in a non CO2 soil tank.

Many folks unfamiliar and obviously.....never having mastered the method, may attempt to suggest something else, or tell of their horrors/failures..........

But there are many here that have long term success and little failure.
You could also try the mineralization process or worm castings as alternatives of a DSM to also pre mineralize the sediments, all these still work nicely and might placate and resolve some of the issues that this LFS person has/had.

Many move their plants around too much or do water changes/too many etc.......over stock the tank or under stock the plants. Those are some of the main issues, others: too much light, wrong plant species chosen, lack of patience.

It is the method for your goal I think.

Regards, 
Tom Barr


----------



## Baadboy11

If the salesman was correct then how are there plants growing in nature?? I don't think someone is coming along and filling lakes and streams with ecocomplete then dosing every day! :icon_roll


----------



## slb

plantbrain said:


> I think given your goal, it's a good choice of a method.
> You can also go a water column dosing method without soil.
> 
> http://www.barrreport.com/showthread.php/2817-Non-CO2-methods
> 
> This might be more along with some LFS's feelings, but both this and Soil both work very well. ...
> 
> Regards,
> Tom Barr


Mr Barr

I feel honored by your reply. If I dose the water column, how often will I need to do water changes? I must be honest with myself. I just can't see myself trying to run hoses out the window or lugging buckets outside in the winter. My wife really wants Discus, but I told her it probably won't work because I don't want to do the water changes


----------



## slb

Baadboy11 said:


> If the salesman was correct then how are there plants growing in nature?? I don't think someone is coming along and filling lakes and streams with ecocomplete then dosing every day! :icon_roll


I don't know what he would say, but I would guess his reply would be there is much less ammonia per gallon of water in a lake.


----------



## Chasintrades

if the short coming is the energy to do water changes and daily dosing...
spend some time reading up on 
Auto-Water Changing or employing a Python for Water Changes.
And read under equipment Wasser's Auto Dosing Sticky.

Perhaps these techniques may make some sense and offer you a different outlook on your overall goal. 

PS - Very few of us have our wives (or significant others) interested in our obsessive hobby. Having your wife interested in Discus may save you more trouble than changing the water!


----------



## Dave-H

In nature, there are rarely 'perfect' conditions and it's even rarer for those perfect conditions to persist. Plants come and go, rivers change course, and flora and fauna adapt and move on. Hence, there are lots of good techniques and no 'right' ones, in my observation.

I think Mr. Barr's ongoing openness to other techniques and the viability of different approaches to successful growing speaks volumes.


----------



## Booger

There is no perfect method. Try everything and use what works best for you. I don't like using soil and would have trouble recommending it to someone new to the hobby.

Last night I tinkered with a couple tanks. In my soil tank, it was like playing operation as I carefully moved a few plants around and was still punished with a murky mud cloud. I'm swearing off everyone's favorite aquasoil as I am incredibly tired of it breaking down and nuking my tanks. To each their own.


----------



## speedie408

ADA AS is your friend. Works very well in "low tech" tanks. Just check my 20L tank in my sig for reference.


----------



## Dave-H

speedie408 said:


> ADA AS is your friend. Works very well in "low tech" tanks. Just check my 20L tank in my sig for reference.


Very nice.. But. uhh. what does ADA AS mean??


----------



## Booger

Dave-H said:


> Very nice.. But. uhh. what does ADA AS mean??


Amano Design Aquarium Aqua Soil

Grows plants, but I find it to be a major PITA.


----------



## hbosman

Flourite is what I prefer. Yeah, you have to rinse and drain repeatedly during initial setup(PITA) but, it lasts quite along time. I am using flourite that I setup in 2004 and it shows no sign of breaking down. It has high CEC meaning that it will soak up the ferts that I dump into the water column and you can always add root tabs or Osmacote as needed under the crypts and swordplants.

The times that I added root tabs under the crypts, I haven't seen a significant increase in growth. Probably, due to EI dosing and not deep vaccuuming the gravel. I just swirl the vaccuum tube and inch or two above the gravel while draining water for a water change.


----------



## plantbrain

slb said:


> Mr Barr
> 
> I feel honored by your reply. If I dose the water column, how often will I need to do water changes? I must be honest with myself. I just can't see myself trying to run hoses out the window or lugging buckets outside in the winter. My wife really wants Discus, but I told her it probably won't work because I don't want to do the water changes


I use a simple hang on garden hose to the shower for filling, draining goes outside for irrigating, but you can drain right down the tub also, no buckets, no water spills etc.

If she really wants them, *make her do the work.*:icon_excl

You do not need, nor should do water changes if you do the method I suggested there, read it, Diana's suggestion is the same as well, no water changes. Nothing builds up much because plants remove it, the rates of growth are very slow, so the demand for ferts is also correspondingly low.

Discus could be done, but it'd be under stocked or perhaps something more like this but at 135 gal to 300 gallon scale:

Then you could do water changes or not as long as the fish load/feeding was moderately low relative to total tank volume/plant biomass.

Problem is.......many over load the fish and then wonder they have health and plant/algae problems.











Regards, 
Tom Barr


----------



## Sigmar

Baadboy11 said:


> If the salesman was correct then how are there plants growing in nature?? I don't think someone is coming along and filling lakes and streams with ecocomplete then dosing every day! :icon_roll



Yea I keep looking for the giant co2 tank at my lake,,I know its hidden somewhere.


----------



## slb

plantbrain said:


> ...You do not need, nor should do water changes if you do the method I suggested there, read it, Diana's suggestion is the same as well, no water changes. Nothing builds up much because plants remove it, the rates of growth are very slow, so the demand for ferts is also correspondingly low....
> 
> Regards,
> Tom Barr



Thanks for the advice:icon_smil I think I'll do as you suggest for the low maintenance tank (probably not the Discus as this point). In fact, I had already picked up a small bottle of Equilibrium. Would there be any advantage to combining root tabs with water column dosing?


----------



## Sigmar

I have a 110 planted Discus tank and have to be the laziest person on earth when it comes to water changes. I do a 50% water change once a mth otherwise just top off due to evaporation. I use root tabs and water column dosing once a week. My tank looks like a jungle with probably almost a dozen species of flora. Substrate in that tank is pea gravel with a ugf and powerheads (yea yea I know can't be done lol) You can make it as easy or as hard as you want it. Been doing it this way for 45 plus yrs. However when I set up my 220 I'll be using Soil Master Select so its true an old dog can learn new tricks.


----------



## ReefkprZ

fresh.salty said:


> My tanks are ever changing and the use of real "soil" would be a total mess. Pulling plants out would turn the substrate upside down.
> 
> Doesn't the top sand or gravel cover want to migrate to the bottom in time?


 its the nature of substrate in an aquatic situation for the largest chunks to move upward and the finer silty stuff to move down. I dont know how many times in marine aquariums I have seen people go over crushed coral with sand only to have the crushed coral slowly migrate bact to the top.

if you read a bag of eco-complete they brag how their product automaticly seperates into 2 layers, its because they use roughly 2 sizes of particle in their bag and physics handles the seperation. the smalles stuff settles towards the bottom and the larger chunks on top. its not because they have specially trained their substrate before shipping.


----------



## slb

plantbrain said:


> I think given your goal, it's a good choice of a method.
> You can also go a water column dosing method without soil.
> 
> http://www.barrreport.com/showthread.php/2817-Non-CO2-methods
> 
> Regards,
> Tom Barr


Tom (_or someone familiar with his non-soil method_)

I read the link and some of your other forums. Thanks for pointing me to it. Being a newbie, I'm still a little confused. Tom mentions onyx sand, leonardite, and peat. How thick of layer do I need of each and in what order? And, can I put my decorative gravel on top or will that disrupt the system?

Also, wouldn't peat have the same issues with NH4 as soil?


----------



## hydrophyte

It sounds like that salesman was one of those all-or-nothing, black-and-white thinkers.

I have seen a number of beautiful tanks set up with a Walstad kind of approach.


----------



## plantbrain

slb said:


> Tom (_or someone familiar with his non-soil method_)
> 
> I read the link and some of your other forums. Thanks for pointing me to it. Being a newbie, I'm still a little confused. Tom mentions onyx sand, leonardite, and peat. How thick of layer do I need of each and in what order? And, can I put my decorative gravel on top or will that disrupt the system?
> 
> Also, wouldn't peat have the same issues with NH4 as soil?


No, it's just one method adds ferts to the sediment, the other to the water column.

I took the assumption that water column ferts do not lead to algae.
This was shown to be correct for CO2 and non CO2 enriched aquariums.

Now.........this does not imply you should not use both of these locations for ferts either:icon_excl:icon_excl:icon_excl:icon_excl:icon_excl:icon_excl:icon_excl

You can use either or, or you might use both, we all use both to some degree, but in general........we often go with one or the other. 
Hopefully that attitude will change and more will use BOTH locations.

Peat has little nutrients in and of itself.

I would opt for ADA AS or a good clay top soil that's been washed, or Worm compost that's been boiled about 10 minutes in water, then dried and worked into some sand, say 2-3mm size with a 2-3" cap.

Those are 3 options, some use a thin layer, say 5-8 grams per square ft of osmocoat.

They all add similar things.

Some floating plants are a good idea, since they can mop up any excess and block intense light and do not require added CO2. But say 10-20% coverage only.

Regards, 
Tom Barr


----------



## Ian_4573

Seattle_Aquarist said:


> Hi slb,
> 
> Interesting post! Let me guess, they also tried to sell you their substrate and fertilizer tablets?


As well as "Total Liquid Concentrate" (with no analysis, due to trade secretes)


----------



## Hilde

hydrophyte said:


> It sounds like that salesman was one of those all-or-nothing, black-and-white thinkers.


I agree! The looks I get when I mention dirt in an aquarium reminds me of this.

Welcome to planted tank!
Here are some interesting low tech tanks. 
Here many are doing the El Natual method that Diane talks about.
Here Homer_Simpson did an experiment comparing the El Natural method to the water column dosing method.

I am doing the El Natural method. Started with it for read people only do water changes 1x a year and don't add ferts. Well after 3 months BBA (black brush algae) suffocated my plants. Now I do water changes monthly. Did not add the coral as recommended for have high ph and it raises the ph. Used pool filter sand from Lowe's to cap the dirt. For dirt I like Scotts top soil. I dose minimum for have a version of mineralized soil. Have a very thin layer of laterite, thin layer of reptile coconut bark, top soil approx 1 in. and sand approx 1 in. Total height of substrate is 3 in.

Some are simply afraid of using soil in an aquarium. At the worst you get a sand storm after moving a lot of plants around. It won't hurt the fish unless there is ammonia in the substrate, which occurs when the substrate is very old or you put house plant ferts in it. In fact, when I used play sand I had a bad sand storm in the tank and it didn't affect the fish. 
When I move I going to try Hydroton clay (hydroponic supply) under the substrate. It is used for lily's.

Keep in mind that no ecosystem is the same. In fact one told me he had 3 10 gallon tanks side by side. He dosed them all the same and had 1 light across the 3. With one he had a problems with algae.


----------



## Hilde

speedie408 said:


> ADA AS is your friend. Works very well in "low tech" tanks. Just check my 20L tank in my sig for reference.


Got a link to it? I don't see it.


----------



## aman74

plantbrain said:


> No, it's just one method adds ferts to the sediment, the other to the water column.
> 
> I took the assumption that water column ferts do not lead to algae.
> This was shown to be correct for CO2 and non CO2 enriched aquariums.
> 
> Now.........this does not imply you should not use both of these locations for ferts either:icon_excl:icon_excl:icon_excl:icon_excl:icon_excl:icon_excl:icon_excl
> 
> You can use either or, or you might use both, we all use both to some degree, but in general........we often go with one or the other.
> Hopefully that attitude will change and more will use BOTH locations.
> 
> Peat has little nutrients in and of itself.
> 
> I would opt for ADA AS or a good clay top soil that's been washed, or Worm compost that's been boiled about 10 minutes in water, then dried and worked into some sand, say 2-3mm size with a 2-3" cap.
> 
> Those are 3 options, some use a thin layer, say 5-8 grams per square ft of osmocoat.
> 
> They all add similar things.
> 
> Some floating plants are a good idea, since they can mop up any excess and block intense light and do not require added CO2. But say 10-20% coverage only.
> 
> Regards,
> Tom Barr


Currently trying to decide between mineralized top soil and ADA AS for a low tech setup. For me, the main advantage of MTS would be less or possibly no dosing. Disadvantage would be possibly being messy as I'm not a great aquascaper and the fact that I'm only gonna do one Nano right now so economy of scale dictates that I won't see any savings for one small tank.

ADA AS, I'm concerned about it turning to mud. I thought this problem had been taken care of, but I still see it being brought up. 

-Does MTS really last for 8 years or more without being depleted? 

-Anything I can add to the ADA to make it perform like the MTS? Osmocoat on the bottom, etc...

Thanks and I hope this isn't a thread hijack and that the info is useful to the OP and others.


----------



## bigbassbob

From what I have read about the walstad method and the scientific concepts behind it I believe you will be fine as long as you set it up properly. I am no expert by any means and would never claim to be one even if I had a phd. I am, however, a fisheries biology major in college. The walstad method relies on the same basic biochemical processes as found in nature. The whole point of an over planted natural tank is to mimic nature. We, however, as hobbyists can't fully mimic all of the growing and living biological organisms and nitrogen "fixers" and wouldn't want to. Most of the nitrogen fixation is done by Cyanobacteria and green algae. Who wants green algae bloomed water in their tank. On the flip side of the hobby, many reef tanks incorporate a refugium where algae growth is encouraged for this very reason. This is a concept that the walstad method and aquaponics enthusiasts use to they advantage. Most plants can't take up the free nitrogen or ammonia (NH3 and NH4) but nitrifying bacteria can and does and it produces a form of nitrogen that the plants can use. There are full scale aquaponic farms in Australia that never have to do water changes because the plants take up all of the nitrates and nitrites. From what I have gathered about walstad's method of planting a tank it is nothing more than a submerged aquaponic system. In short, so long as you set up the tank in the method described by Dr. Walstad than not only should you be fine but you have a low maintance beautifully planted tank.


----------



## plantbrain

Dang old threads...........

Bigbassbob, refigiums are more like plant filters for the freshwater people. Large macro algae mimic the fresh water plants in many ways, and then there are 40 odd species of seagrasses as well. 
Unlike most reef people, the Fresh water p[eople use the plants as the scape, not just a utilitarian approach. A refuge can look very very nice or a planted marine tank can look as good all on it's own, it's not that popular, but you can find plenty of Reef Central forums. 
ATS, use small microphytic algae and these can work on FW and Marine systems easily but they can be somewhat problematic for fresh water planted tanks.

Many, if not most planted tanks require additional NO3 from salts like KNO3. Fish waste alone cannot supply it. Even no CO2 tanks run low on NO3 IME. 
Plants can and do take up NH4 from the water. Likely a typo on your part(I've been known to many plenty of those!). N2 gas they cannot take up, only bacteria can do that job for them.


----------



## driftwoodhunter

Tom, may I ask a few questions on your comments?

A good fish load can suffice as water column dosing also in a non CO2 soil tank.

Then you could do water changes or not as long as the fish load/feeding was moderately low relative to total tank volume/plant biomass.

Very newbie-basic questions, but I only came over from the dark side (aquarium gravel and plastic plants) since finding this site. I added plants thinking it would make life more pleasant for the fish, but without knowing why. 

So on the first comment; A good fish load can suffice as water column dosing also in a non CO2 soil tank. 
I have non CO2 dirt tanks, low/medium light (par). One of the things that always gets me confused when I read about ferts is the macro/micro difference, and what wouldn't be supplied by the soil, fish, or the osmocote tabs I use for my crypts and swords. So unless my plants show obvious nutrient deficiencies, I don't need to do water column ferts? (which I don't now). I pair my plant selections to match my lighting, so I don't have to fight that battle. But how do I determine when I've found the right fish load? 

Which leads into; Then you could do water changes or not as long as the fish load/feeding was moderately low relative to total tank volume/plant biomass. How does one know when they hit that magical balance? Will it be because the water tests will show no accumulating ammonia/nitrites and the nitrate readings stabilize? I still have a heavy fish ratio to plants, but I am adding plants as I can. In the meantime it just means more frequent water changes. However the last few times I've done water changes in my 125, the readings have been identical both before and after the w/c. (0 ammonia, 0 nitrite, 40 nitrate.) Some tell me the nitrate is too high - so I keep doing water changes - some tell me it's ok because of my pH. (6.8) I should add that I also have a Hamburg Mattenfilter as well as a Marineland Emperor 400 HOB in the tank, and behind the HMF I have bundles of Matrix bio media. I'm sure that adds to my nitrification bacteria, helping to compensate for my current light plant-to-fish ratio. The 125 tank also has 1/3 surface coverage due to floating Brazilian Pennywort.

I hope this isn't a thread hijack - I thought it might help others if they have the same questions! Now I'm off to check out the Barrreport link :smile:

Thank you for your time ~


----------



## driftwoodhunter

Wow! I didn't notice how old the thread was! LOL Sorry!


----------



## Seedreemer

slb said:


> Is it possible to have a low maintenance tank with a commercial substrate, with out the decaying matter, simply by occasionally adding nutrients to the soil (something like Seachem Flourish tabs):icon_ques


Yes. There's a website dedicated to this. It's called Natural Aquariums. Some use soil, some use plain gravel. Most don't use filters. Some use plain gravel, no filter, and just sunlight for lighting. 

I used to have a 29 gallon tank that got several hours of afternoon sunlight, plain gravel, old full spectrum lights, no filter and it was pretty. Clearest water I ever had. There's a pic of it in the Luscious Low Tech thread if you search my name. It was jungle-like because I liked it that way, but I suspect you could neaten one up easily enough.

*Oops, I just saw the previous post about the age of this thread. Sorry too!*


----------



## Hilde

EntoCraig said:


> In my opinion their really is no 'BEST' method. Some tanks and plant respond better to certain methods.
> 
> No need to fix what isn't broken right?


1 had 3 tanks together with 1 light over them. The tank in the middle had BBA. All 3 were set up the same with nutrients dosed.

1 thing I have done, which was told is in her book, is have a siesta period (4hrs off)with my lights. This helps control algae for allows Co2 to build up.

Also you have to consider what plants you have. Some require a rich substrate. Also substrate peeters out in a year at the most.

It it works don't fix it.


----------



## DogFish

Baadboy11 said:


> If the salesman was correct then how are there plants growing in nature?? I don't think someone is coming along and filling lakes and streams with ecocomplete then dosing every day! :icon_roll


roud:roud:roud:

You mean plants actually live in nature without Aquasoil and someone changing the CO2 tank once a month. :hihi:


----------



## musicmarn1

just adding my thoughts since i too found a lot of resistance before going dirt, a thin layer is great about 1" no more, or even 3/4 capped with gravel, i used activ flora gravel just as an extra pop. 

if you mineralize the soil first you do get over that initial bloom where the organic material is broken down, or if you just plant super heavily as i did the first time you get over it that way i never had any algae issues beyond the smallest amount, which the bristlenose loved. 

mineralize the top soil by putting it on a tarp outside or in a greenhouse if you can, water it let it really dry then water it again, this activates the process of break down and improves the quality very significantly according to people who use this a lot, its my first time doing it this time for the 90g and i can see why it will make a lot of difference. 

but i think you will LOVE the results with dirt, save a tonne of money and never look back ! i was able to run very low lights and extremely heavy planted tank with a lot of fish in there and everyone looks super happy and healthy, i waited a week before adding fish. lots of water changes if you dont mineralize the soil, because there will be excess nutrients and while the plants are settling in you need to get rid of that algae fodder ! but again i had never ever gotten a plant to live before going dirt, and i will never go back now !


----------



## musicmarn1

*my dirt tank*

my first attempt ever 

i dirted it with 1" dirt topped with gravel (because it said instant cycle and thats just not true, it really helped though, and it is good gravel for plants)

i did a water change a day for a week then added fish then did small water changes for another week or so and now i do one a week and top it up often. no co2 low lighting and i am in love with the results ! i do add root tabs now and im in month 4-5 i think.


----------



## idleivey

Im running 5 NPT/Walstad tanks, most are under 5 gallons. I get great growth and have 1 tank with very prolific WCMs. If your really worried you could start with a small bowl I guess.


----------



## PaulG

The only thing I've changed about Walstad's method is more frequent water changes. It's not flawed, it's just different.

I know it's an old thread but still.


----------



## plantbrain

DogFish said:


> roud:roud:roud:
> 
> You mean plants actually live in nature without Aquasoil and someone changing the CO2 tank once a month. :hihi:


Sandy loam clay is what rice paddies grow on, so there is ADA soil laying there in nature, darn near the same stuff, but it's processed and rolled into grains and fired slightly to make a nice crust to prevent cloudiness. 
CO2 can/comes from underground caves/springs etc, and we find the best nicest looking plant growth in such locations. CO2 is still there even if not enriched with a gas tank.......and is often limiting for denser plant beds in natural systems.


----------



## plantbrain

driftwoodhunter said:


> Tom, may I ask a few questions on your comments? Very newbie-basic questions, but I only came over from the dark side (aquarium gravel and plastic plants) since finding this site. I added plants thinking it would make life more pleasant for the fish, but without knowing why. So on the first comment; A good fish load can suffice as water column dosing also in a non CO2 soil tank.
> I have non CO2 dirt tanks, low/medium light (par). One of the things that always gets me confused when I read about ferts is the macro/micro difference, and what wouldn't be supplied by the soil, fish, or the osmocote tabs I use for my crypts and swords. So unless my plants show obvious nutrient deficiencies, I don't need to do water column ferts? (which I don't now). I pair my plant selections to match my lighting, so I don't have to fight that battle. But how do I determine when I've found the right fish load?


You do not need to add ferts with a dirt style tank, but doing so in small amounts poses no issues I've seen in a well run non CO2 tank. NO3 will run low after about 1-2 years and then more fish feeding will help offset that.
Some dose GH booster once in awhile or Traces.
Not required, but can make the plants a bit nicer.

Fish load: I tend to suggest an overabundance of algae eaters which will also eat left over food. I use common sense here and experience.

I'd not add 6 Discus to a 40 Gallon tank, I'd maybe add 20 nice tetras or 10 rainbows etc. Then a bunch of shrimp, algae eaters etc.



> Which leads into; Then you could do water changes or not as long as the fish load/feeding was moderately low relative to total tank volume/plant biomass. How does one know when they hit that magical balance?


There's no magic.

You simply use common sense and error on the lower side and then progressively add more fish/food and see. Plants will tell you. Yellowing leaves on emergent pennywort for example, time to add more N.
Nice green color= things are doing well.

Gardening is common sense based really. Watch. Observe. 



> Will it be because the water tests will show no accumulating ammonia/nitrites and the nitrate readings stabilize?


Pretty much, assuming your N testing methods are correct.
N can be anywhere from the single digits to 40 ppm etc without any issues. 
Main thing is that they do not have large swings. 
Most times, in non CO2 systems, they run low, not high, but if you over load the fish and under load the plants.......well............. 

Common sense, set things up so* you have to add more N, not remove it.*



> I still have a heavy fish ratio to plants, but I am adding plants as I can. In the meantime it just means more frequent water changes. However the last few times I've done water changes in my 125, the readings have been identical both before and after the w/c. (0 ammonia, 0 nitrite, 40 nitrate.) Some tell me the nitrate is too high - so I keep doing water changes - some tell me it's ok because of my pH. (6.8) I should add that I also have a Hamburg Mattenfilter as well as a Marineland Emperor 400 HOB in the tank, and behind the HMF I have bundles of Matrix bio media. I'm sure that adds to my nitrification bacteria, helping to compensate for my current light plant-to-fish ratio. The 125 tank also has 1/3 surface coverage due to floating Brazilian Pennywort.


Sounds like you have too many fish frankly, if you have 1/3 area coverage with a floating pennywort, you likely need to change things if the NO3 is in fact 40 ppm. You can use that plant as a good indicator of plant health and N.



> I hope this isn't a thread hijack - I thought it might help others if they have the same questions! Now I'm off to check out the Barrreport link :smile:
> 
> Thank you for your time ~


The article I did on non CO2 is specific to not having soil as the basis, rather, water column ferts. Same general approach, but dosing once a week with a small dose of ferts, basically 1/10 to 1/20th EI.

This way, folks can use plain sand etc, but a mix of both sediment and water column yields the best results IME. Which is also true for land plants.


----------



## Misti

*questions*

Im looking to run filter-less in my 2.5 gal tank here at work. There is plenty of light and I have a white fluorescent cfl bulb in the hood. Right now I have about an inch and a half of black sand and some water wisteria and a marimo ball. I have a Marble Gene Betta and 2 Dwarf African frogs. I know I would need other plants but not sure about the soil. I don't use potting soil at home. I use Peat moss with vermiculite and compost added. Really don't want to go buy a fancy soil from the store, but Im afraid of adding general potting soil to the tank whether it has fertilizers added or not. Any advise would be helpful. :fish:


----------



## Hilde

Misti said:


> Im looking to run filter-less in my 2.5 gal tank here at work. Any advise would be helpful. :fish:


You should start your on thread on this so as to not hijack the thread.

Here are some filter-less tanks.


----------



## Misti

*ok I can see no help here*

ok thanks for the link and Im no hijacker, others have asked their questions regarding this in the same posting as well.


----------



## Misti

ahh right the one I was originally at that recommended the Walstad style tanks that led me here. Back to Google. Thank you.


----------



## CrypticLifeStyle

There's flaws in everything. Anything specific?


----------



## Flear

as i read this, skipping so very much of it.

the salesman from the LFS the OP was talking about, ...

ammonia released from decay, ... ya, this is true, unfortunately plants don't have a preference for ammonia, and thankfully there is beneficial bacteria that do, and they have a tendency to convert to nitrites, and the next stage in the (overly simplified cycle) is bacteria that convert nitrites to nitrates, ... and this the plants accept eagerly.

it's about the easiest source of nitrogen in our tanks for plants to consume

i don't remember for sure, but i think ammonium is the preferred choice for plants for a source of nitrogen, followed by nitrates. ... i could be wrong about the order, it's been awhile.


----------



## WinterSoldier.

The most difficult part of the walstad method is the soil leaching all its nutrients. I believe this can be fixed with a good cap.


----------



## Desert Pupfish

plantbrain said:


> http://www.barrreport.com/showthread.php/2817-Non-CO2-methods


I tried clicking on this link and get an error report on your site. Is the link broken, perhaps?


----------



## somewhatshocked

This is a thread from 2010 that was revived in 2013. That's probably why the link is no longer functional.


----------

