# Problem (for years), old leaves have lots of algae, new leaves are just fine



## elusive77 (Sep 27, 2016)

Algae normally grows on the older leaves first, so that's what you would expect to see when there is an imbalance in the tank. There are 4 main things that are needed to be in balance in order to grow healthy plants, which in turn prevents algae growth. They are light (too much or too little), nutrients (too much or too little), co2 (too little), and tank maintenance. I don't know enough about your lights or fertilizers to know whether they are too much or too little. 

The thing that jumps out to me based on the information you gave above is the co2. Bubbles per second is never a good way to measure co2. On very small tanks you might be able to get away with it, but on a big tank like yours, to get enough co2 it would be a constant stream of bubbles that would be impossible to count. You also don't know how much of that co2 is actually getting dissolved into the water to be used by the plants. So instead you should be measuring ph drop. When co2 is injected, it drops the ph of your water. By measuring the difference in ph between degassed water and the water a peak co2 injection, you can accurately determine how much co2 your plants are getting. 

This is best done with a calibrated ph pen/probe, which I would highly recommend using. It can be done with a ph test kit, but it will not be as accurate. You want to first test the ph of your degassed tank water. So take a cup of water from your tank and then let it sit for 24-48 hours. This will allow all dissolved gasses (including co2) to exit the water. Measure the ph of this water. Then measure the ph of your tank water during the middle of your lighting period. You want at least a full point drop in ph, if not more. Most go into the 1.2-1.4 drop range. If you are under that, you need to tweak your co2. This will obviously involve turning up the co2. Often you will also find that you need to turn your co2 on an hour or two before your lights, and try to get to the full 1 point drop as the lights are coming on. It will take some time to get it right. Only make small changes each day, and then measure the ph several times throughout the lighting period to see how much drop you get. And pay close attention to your fish. If you see them all up at the top of the tank, then you know you've gone too far. You will also want to make sure you have good surface agitation using a powerhead or a good spray bar from your filter. Point them up to the top of the tank until you see a good ripple across the top. This will help get good gas exchange, which will allow more oxygen into the tank to help your fish.

I would also recommend reading through the information on this website: https://www.2hraquarist.com/ Dennis has a compiled a very good and comprehensive guide to planted tanks that everyone can learn something from.


----------



## enb141 (May 14, 2018)

Thanks for your explanation, specially regarding CO2, I'm gonna explain what I use to "measure" the CO2 in my tank.

I use one of those glasses that have liquid that when no CO2 turn blue and when have lots of CO2 turn yellow, visually they look almost yellow (lime green).

About the bps it it about 3 or 4 bubbles per second but I don't fill the bubble counter with water, I use glycerin instead so 1 bubble in glycerin is probably 3 or more bubles in water.

Now about water circulation, the Fluval FX4 is indented for tanks up to 200 gallons, mine is 75 so is way way overkill at least to my knowledge and also I have a Magnum polisher that runs in a contrary position so I think the water circulation is fine, at least in the GPH. 

About putting the water stream pointing to the top, I tried it for increasing the gas exchange but if I do then the color of the pH reader gets greener (dark green) instead of getting (light green).

Thanks for the link you gave me, I'll read it for sure.


----------



## elusive77 (Sep 27, 2016)

Those are called drop checkers. And while they are essentially doing the same thing by measuring the ph drop, they are not very accurate. It also takes an hour or two for the co2 level inside the bubble to be what it was in the tank. So you are actually seeing the co2 levels of several hours before. I started out using a drop checker to measure co2 and could never seem to get my levels right. It always seemed to be lime green for me, but my plants struggled. When I started to measure ph directly, I found I was actually only getting a .6 drop or so. And then I was finally able to get my co2 dialed in and get the good plant growth and health I wanted. So I will always recommend measuring co2 this way.

As far as flow goes, do you have a spray bar? I would recommend it if you don't. It allows for slower flows spread out over a larger area. It mixes the water better, which spreads the co2 around better. It will also allow you get that ripple on the top of the water without agitating it so much that you lose co2, which I'm guessing is what is happening in your case. You don't want the water to break, just undulate. And your filter is not overkill. You generally want 10x your tank size in gph, so at 700 gph, that is about right. My 2 filters give me about 650gph, but I also run two small powerheads pointed at the surface to help with gas exchange.


----------



## jeffkrol (Jun 5, 2013)

Ambient widow light is horrible for stability..


----------



## enb141 (May 14, 2018)

elusive77 said:


> Those are called drop checkers. And while they are essentially doing the same thing by measuring the ph drop, they are not very accurate. It also takes an hour or two for the co2 level inside the bubble to be what it was in the tank. So you are actually seeing the co2 levels of several hours before. I started out using a drop checker to measure co2 and could never seem to get my levels right. It always seemed to be lime green for me, but my plants struggled. When I started to measure ph directly, I found I was actually only getting a .6 drop or so. And then I was finally able to get my co2 dialed in and get the good plant growth and health I wanted. So I will always recommend measuring co2 this way.
> 
> As far as flow goes, do you have a spray bar? I would recommend it if you don't. It allows for slower flows spread out over a larger area. It mixes the water better, which spreads the co2 around better. It will also allow you get that ripple on the top of the water without agitating it so much that you lose co2, which I'm guessing is what is happening in your case. You don't want the water to break, just undulate. And your filter is not overkill. You generally want 10x your tank size in gph, so at 700 gph, that is about right. My 2 filters give me about 650gph, but I also run two small powerheads pointed at the surface to help with gas exchange.


Interesting advice about CO2, just one question, do you used the blue regent that need to be filled with your tank water or do you used the one that was already mixed?

About the spray bar, I think my canister does a good job circulating water, my FX4 is an upgrade from Fluval 306, the FX4 has dual output so you can manually choose 2 independent water flows.

I also just bought an skimmer so maybe that will help too.

When I said the FX4 was overkill I was trying to say was that the capacity for filtration media is a huge upgrade than my previous Fluval 306.

About my ferts this is what I'm using with the exception of micros, because they don't sell CSM+B anymore, new ones comes with EDTA or EDTA+DTPA, so I'm not sure if I should try to use EDTA or EDTA+DTPA instead of CSM+B.









PPS-Pro (EDTA) Aquarium Plant Fertilizer Package - Jars


Shop PPS-Pro (EDTA) Aquarium Plant Fertilizer Package (Jars) for your planted aquarium aquascape. Brand: Green Leaf Aquariums (GLA). Orders ship fast worldwide and get free shipping on orders $125.




greenleafaquariums.com










jeffkrol said:


> Ambient widow light is horrible for stability..


It just receives light from the right, a little bit, but what I don't know if I'm doing good or bad is to try to get the same "illumination", in other words I'm not sure if when I'm trying to illuminate the tank to not look pale, I'm over illuminating it.


----------



## elusive77 (Sep 27, 2016)

enb141 said:


> Interesting advice about CO2, just one question, do you used the blue regent that need to be filled with your tank water or do you used the one that was already mixed?


I've used both types of reagents. I've also made my own based on information from this site. None of them worked effectively for me.


> About my ferts this is what I'm using with the exception of micros, because they don't sell CSM+B anymore, new ones comes with EDTA or EDTA+DTPA, so I'm not sure if I should try to use EDTA or EDTA+DTPA instead of CSM+B.


As far as ferts go, unless your ph is consistely below 6.0 you will want to use DTPA. This is mainly for Iron as it is the one that needs a chelate the most. EDTA and DTPA are both types of chelates. They envelop the Iron and prevent it from interacting with other Ions in the water, like calcium. The reason this is necessary is that once iron comes into contact with calcium, it precipitates out of the solution making it unavailable to the plants. Plants are able to use it in it's chelated form though. EDTA starts to break down at a ph of 6.0, and by 6.5 half of the iron has precipitated out. DTPA is better at higher ph. It holds well until 7.0, but by 8.0 60% of the iron will have precipitated out. There is another chelate called EDDHA which holds until up to 9.0 ph, but it is not easy to come by. So if you have the choice, choose DTPA.



> It just receives light from the right, a little bit, but what I don't know if I'm doing good or bad is to try to get the same "illumination", in other words I'm not sure if when I'm trying to illuminate the tank to not look pale, I'm over illuminating it.


Really, any natural light that directly hits the tank is not good. I would avoid any if at all possible. Even if it doesn't seem like a lot, natural light is much more powerful than artificial. You want to be able to control how much light the plants are getting, because when there is too much you start to see algae.


----------



## Greggz (May 19, 2008)

+1 on everything @elusive77 said above.

Based on the pictures I would also focus on maintenance. I would get on a regular water change schedule. Those small water changes are not doing much, and that can lead to excess accumulation of organics. Better to perform large water changes at regular intervals. Also helps with keeping parameters stable. 

Also focus on gravel vacs, filter cleanings, and removal of any dead/decaying plant matter. An uber clean tank is your friend.

Saying your dose PPS Pro 2 ml macros and CSM+B 0.7 ml micros daily means nothing to most people. Try to start thinking in terms of ppm of each fert you are dosing. 

You have a mix of slow growing low light plants that need little in nutrients and a few faster growing stems that would prefer higher light and more nutrients. They can be difficult to keep together. You want to figure out what you want out of this tank. Do you want to grow more fast growing flowery stems? Or do you want to keep it simple with low light plants?

And like mentioned above 3 bps is almost nothing in a tank that size. It should be a steady stream too many bubbles to possibly count.


----------



## enb141 (May 14, 2018)

elusive77 said:


> I've used both types of reagents. I've also made my own based on information from this site. None of them worked effectively for me.


Good to know, so I followed your advice, I started to add more CO2, I don't have a pH system to measure it but I'll try to get one to test the real CO2 in my tank.



elusive77 said:


> As far as ferts go, unless your ph is consistely below 6.0 you will want to use DTPA. This is mainly for Iron as it is the one that needs a chelate the most. EDTA and DTPA are both types of chelates. They envelop the Iron and prevent it from interacting with other Ions in the water, like calcium. The reason this is necessary is that once iron comes into contact with calcium, it precipitates out of the solution making it unavailable to the plants. Plants are able to use it in it's chelated form though. EDTA starts to break down at a ph of 6.0, and by 6.5 half of the iron has precipitated out. DTPA is better at higher ph. It holds well until 7.0, but by 8.0 60% of the iron will have precipitated out. There is another chelate called EDDHA which holds until up to 9.0 ph, but it is not easy to come by. So if you have the choice, choose DTPA.


GreenLeafAquariums only sells EDTA+DTPA so I guess that's the one I need to use.




elusive77 said:


> Really, any natural light that directly hits the tank is not good. I would avoid any if at all possible. Even if it doesn't seem like a lot, natural light is much more powerful than artificial. You want to be able to control how much light the plants are getting, because when there is too much you start to see algae.


Is under control (mostly), it only receives a tiny little bit (20 minutes a day tops) and only does on sunny mornings and also only on a tiny little part at the bottom right side of the tank.




Greggz said:


> +1 on everything @elusive77 said above.
> 
> Based on the pictures I would also focus on maintenance. I would get on a regular water change schedule. Those small water changes are not doing much, and that can lead to excess accumulation of organics. Better to perform large water changes at regular intervals. Also helps with keeping parameters stable.
> 
> Also focus on gravel vacs, filter cleanings, and removal of any dead/decaying plant matter. An uber clean tank is your friend.


I know, that's why I do a 30% - 50% water change with substrate cleanup on Sundays beside the 5% - 15% that I do on almost every day.

The small water change that I do daily is to keep the same water volume and to remove top layer of oil and also to keep the same water level instead of adding RODI to keep the same water levels.



Greggz said:


> Saying your dose PPS Pro 2 ml macros and CSM+B 0.7 ml micros daily means nothing to most people. Try to start thinking in terms of ppm of each fert you are dosing.


According to GreenLeafAquariums website I'm adding this with 2ml:

0.20ppm NO3
0.020ppm P04
0.266ppm K
0.020ppm Mg

Duno about the trace elements because they don't sell CSM+B anymore.




Greggz said:


> You have a mix of slow growing low light plants that need little in nutrients and a few faster growing stems that would prefer higher light and more nutrients. They can be difficult to keep together. You want to figure out what you want out of this tank. Do you want to grow more fast growing flowery stems? Or do you want to keep it simple with low light plants?


Well, actually I really want something like from the tank at the left side that this guy has on the video







Greggz said:


> And like mentioned above 3 bps is almost nothing in a tank that size. It should be a steady stream too many bubbles to possibly count.


Yes I know, that's why I'm using glycerin instead of water, but as elusive77 suggestion, I'm starting to add more CO2 gradually.



I forgott to say that I also dose at midnight glutaraldehyde, micros and macros because I can't do it before the lights turns on, so I don't know if this precipitates some elements before the plants can use it, I was doing this at midday before but a few weeks ago I started doing this at midnight (that's the only time I can do it before the lights are on).

About CO2 injection, yes, I start the injection 1 our before the lights go little dim, with the ramp up so the lights start to ramp up at 7 AM with the CO2, so I have 1 our of slow ramp up, then a more pronounced ramp up after 8 AM.

Here's the schedule of my radions.


----------



## enb141 (May 14, 2018)

After almost a week of increasing the CO2, the Anubias and Cryptocorine are finally getting off the algae, the red plants and the Moneyworth still have algae on old leaves, so do you think I should still add more CO2 or those plants are lacking of something else?

By the way I added more glutaraldehyde as well and also more micros and macros.


----------



## 10487 (Jan 6, 2007)

years ago, i went on vacation for 7 days. had lots of algae all over my tank , walls, plants, ornaments, etc. when i came back it was SO perfect, no algae. I asked my roommate what he did to it? did he add algaecide? he said "i know NOTHING about caring for fish, but you were SO adamant that i feed a tiny amount or only every other day, & so ADAMENT that i turn the lights off each night, well I barely fed them & only maybe twice, and I might have turned the light on once for a few hours" ....... all i had to do was leave, problems solved. I must have used too much light & too much food!


----------



## elusive77 (Sep 27, 2016)

enb141 said:


> After almost a week of increasing the CO2, the Anubias and Cryptocorine are finally getting off the algae, the red plants and the Moneyworth still have algae on old leaves, so do you think I should still add more CO2 or those plants are lacking of something else?
> 
> By the way I added more glutaraldehyde as well and also more micros and macros.


It sounds like turning it up helped but you probably still need more. You really need to test for it, or you'll never know for sure how much you're getting. Even if you just use the API ph test kit, that will give you a general idea. 

And I wouldnt go adding more ferts just yet. Get the CO2 nailed down first. It's always a good idea to only change one thing at a time. Otherwise if the tank starts looking better (or worse) you won't know which thing you changed caused it.

Take some time while you're dialing in the CO2 to come up with a good plan for ferts. Again I suggest using the site I linked above to learn as much about fertilizers and the different methods for using them. Then pick one and go with it. If you have questions, ask and we'll help as much as we can.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk


----------



## enb141 (May 14, 2018)

Sand said:


> years ago, i went on vacation for 7 days. had lots of algae all over my tank , walls, plants, ornaments, etc. when i came back it was SO perfect, no algae. I asked my roommate what he did to it? did he add algaecide? he said "i know NOTHING about caring for fish, but you were SO adamant that i feed a tiny amount or only every other day, & so ADAMENT that i turn the lights off each night, well I barely fed them & only maybe twice, and I might have turned the light on once for a few hours" ....... all i had to do was leave, problems solved. I must have used too much light & too much food!


Yes, after all this years I have done lots of crazy things, for example a few months ago, one of my Radions died so I only had 1 light for about 1 month, yes from that side of the tank the plants were not getting much algae but the red plants were struggling to get good colors.

I also stopped dosing for months which had a pretty much low algae and clear water but the red plants looked so crap.

So maybe it worked for your tank but I don't think that's gonna work on tank.



elusive77 said:


> It sounds like turning it up helped but you probably still need more. You really need to test for it, or you'll never know for sure how much you're getting. Even if you just use the API ph test kit, that will give you a general idea.
> 
> And I wouldnt go adding more ferts just yet. Get the CO2 nailed down first. It's always a good idea to only change one thing at a time. Otherwise if the tank starts looking better (or worse) you won't know which thing you changed caused it.
> 
> ...


Yes I've been reading the like you gave me, I'm still reading it, first I got into the algae section, but I'll start reading the ferts section as your suggestion.

What pH should I measure/have?


----------



## elusive77 (Sep 27, 2016)

enb141 said:


> Yes I've been reading the like you gave me, I'm still reading it, first I got into the algae section, but I'll start reading the ferts section as your suggestion.
> 
> What pH should I measure/have?


That's good. You can learn a lot of from there. The ph measurement I'm talking about is the one to help determine co2 levels. It's the testing process I explained in my first post........ test your degassed water, and then test your tank water at the peak of your lighting period. We don't care so much what the ph itself is, but he difference between those two measurements. It's the most accurate way to determine how much co2 is getting into your tank. And that's a critical thing to know.


----------



## enb141 (May 14, 2018)

Hi, a little update, I don't have a pH probe yet but I've been adding more CO2 and glutaraldehyde, so the weird thing is that at first (a few weeks ago) the GSA on anubias were receding, but now they are getting covered again with GSA, I haven't change pretty much nothing, I just added seachem purigen to my canister and changed the activated carbon, the lights are about the same (just a tiny little bit more red), the only thing that changed was that the Micros and the Glutaraldehyde are now dosed with dosing pumps so instead of dumping 4 ml at midnight or macros, now I dump them from 5 AM to 6 PM in small amounts every 30 minutes, same for glutaraldehyde, 14 ml dumped from 5AM to 6PM every 30 minutes.

The rest is the same, same lights (a tiny bit more red) and micro doses instead of one or two big dosing for macros and glutaraldehyde.

I've been increasing the CO2, now the color is almost yellow, I'm not sure if I still have to add more co2.

So my only suspect is the seachem purigen but what else do you think is bringing back the GSA?


----------



## Bandit1200 (Dec 11, 2010)

It could be the way you changed the application of the glutaraldehyde, since it is degraded by light. I'm assuming it is being added during your light cycle. The amounts that you are adding every 30 minutes could be broken down almost as rapidly as it enters that tank. If so, you would never reach a usefull level of it.


----------



## enb141 (May 14, 2018)

Bandit1200 said:


> It could be the way you changed the application of the glutaraldehyde, since it is degraded by light. I'm assuming it is being added during your light cycle. The amounts that you are adding every 30 minutes could be broken down almost as rapidly as it enters that tank. If so, you would never reach a usefull level of it.


Before I automated the dosing, I was adding the glutaraldehyde twice a day about 7 ml (each dose) from a closed container that doesn't receives sun light and I got basically the same results.

Do you suggest using less doses but with more glutaraldehyde, for example instead of dosing 0.40 ml every 30 minutes, should I dose 4 or 5 ml 3 times a day?


----------



## Bandit1200 (Dec 11, 2010)

enb141 said:


> Before I automated the dosing, I was adding the glutaraldehyde twice a day about 7 ml (each dose) from a closed container that doesn't receives sun light and I got basically the same results.


I don't mean to imply your source had degraded, but that the light in the tank is breaking it down. The exact rate of it happening I couldn't guess, but if the same amount previously worked and now it doesn't, it may indicate that it is breaking down at a rate nearly that which you are adding it.



enb141 said:


> Do you suggest using less doses but with more glutaraldehyde, for example instead of dosing 0.40 ml every 30 minutes, should I dose 4 or 5 ml 3 times a day?


My experience with it was adding it all at once. I usually added it late in the afternoon when I got home from work, so it was only exposed to light during the last couple of hours of the light cycle. I can't remember exactly the ratio I was adding it, but according to others here on the forum it was a very high dosage. I gradually over the course of weeks increased the daily dosage until I had it "dialed in" for my situation. I had no issues with any of my plants or fish at the levels I was dosing, but you may have different results at higher dosages. I'd have to go back and look at some of my old posts, but I want to say I was using it at 1ml/gallon in my 75g planted tank.


----------



## enb141 (May 14, 2018)

Bandit1200 said:


> I don't mean to imply your source had degraded, but that the light in the tank is breaking it down. The exact rate of it happening I couldn't guess, but if the same amount previously worked and now it doesn't, it may indicate that it is breaking down at a rate nearly that which you are adding it.
> 
> 
> My experience with it was adding it all at once. I usually added it late in the afternoon when I got home from work, so it was only exposed to light during the last couple of hours of the light cycle. I can't remember exactly the ratio I was adding it, but according to others here on the forum it was a very high dosage. I gradually over the course of weeks increased the daily dosage until I had it "dialed in" for my situation. I had no issues with any of my plants or fish at the levels I was dosing, but you may have different results at higher dosages. I'd have to go back and look at some of my old posts, but I want to say I was using it at 1ml/gallon in my 75g planted tank.


Maybe I'm not adding too much, according to my calculations I'm dosing 14ml of Metricide 28 daily for my 75g tank.

Maybe that's the problem, probably I'm dosing just too low?


----------



## Bandit1200 (Dec 11, 2010)

enb141 said:


> Maybe I'm not adding too much, according to my calculations I'm dosing 14ml of Metricide 28 daily for my 75g tank.
> 
> Maybe that's the problem, probably I'm dosing just too low?


It's possible that increasing the dosage could help, but you may want to research the Metricide 28 vs 14 before you do any additional dosing. I don't have personal experience with the 28, but it's been cautioned against using in our tanks because of the added surfactants.


----------



## enb141 (May 14, 2018)

Bandit1200 said:


> It's possible that increasing the dosage could help, but you may want to research the Metricide 28 vs 14 before you do any additional dosing. I don't have personal experience with the 28, but it's been cautioned against using in our tanks because of the added surfactants.


Which glutaraldehyde are you using?


----------



## enb141 (May 14, 2018)

An update, after testing the tank water for about 24 hours (after taking some sample for degassing) I got 7.8pH and my tank at the middle of the CO2 dosing is about 6.6pH so should I add more CO2 or should I use RO DI water instead of tap water?


----------



## Eric Tran (Jul 7, 2016)

Looks like a 75 gallon tall tank. With tall tanks, you have to watch for flow to the lower parts. This is one thing that helped my plants thrive when I was in a similar situation. Looking at your videos you can tell that flow is very uneven. You can see co2 bubble density in the top half of your tank, but almost nonexistent in the bottom half. Some spots near the top and middle have a lot of flow while bottom portions of the tank have very little flow. This could explain why the lower leaves of your tank have algae, look weak, or completely fall off. They aren't getting as much nutrients and co2. A quick fix would be to install a spraybar in the back the length of your tank. You don't want a jet-like spray from it, just a smooth flow without turning down the filters, that way you still have max turnover rate. This can be done by increasing the size of the holes in the spraybar so overall volume of turnover is high, but water isn't as turbulent. This will achieve great flow and elimiinate dead spots, and any dirt or debris will be picked up into the flow and into your filter. Your tank will look much cleaner as a result and plants will thrive.


----------



## enb141 (May 14, 2018)

Eric Tran said:


> Looks like a 75 gallon tall tank. With tall tanks, you have to watch for flow to the lower parts. This is one thing that helped my plants thrive when I was in a similar situation. Looking at your videos you can tell that flow is very uneven. You can see co2 bubble density in the top half of your tank, but almost nonexistent in the bottom half. Some spots near the top and middle have a lot of flow while bottom portions of the tank have very little flow. This could explain why the lower leaves of your tank have algae, look weak, or completely fall off. They aren't getting as much nutrients and co2. A quick fix would be to install a spraybar in the back the length of your tank. You don't want a jet-like spray from it, just a smooth flow without turning down the filters, that way you still have max turnover rate. This can be done by increasing the size of the holes in the spraybar so overall volume of turnover is high, but water isn't as turbulent. This will achieve great flow and elimiinate dead spots, and any dirt or debris will be picked up into the flow and into your filter. Your tank will look much cleaner as a result and plants will thrive.


The other guy also recommended me a spray bar, I was also thinking to add a circulation pump (Aqua Illumination nero 3) at the bottom of the tank, about 3 inches above the soil with variable speed.

Thanks for the advice, I'll check it out.


----------



## Eric Tran (Jul 7, 2016)

One thing I look at with good flow is that particles in the tank should follow the same pattern over and over. For example flow is not good if you don't know whether a co2 bubble will hit the outflow of your filter and get blasted to the middle of the tank, or turn and go down into a low flow area of your tank. I call that random flow, which is what you don't want in a planted tank since not all plants will get the same amount of nutrients and co2. You want more of a gentle circular flow, or a laminar flow. If this was my tank I would add a spray bar, then position the polishing powerhead in the right back corner facing the outflow towards the filter input. that way the spray bar will flow water towards the top front of the tank, then hit the glass and flow down to the substrate, and through the substrate to the back glass. then the polishing powerhead will push the flow towards your filter input.


----------



## enb141 (May 14, 2018)

Eric Tran said:


> One thing I look at with good flow is that particles in the tank should follow the same pattern over and over. For example flow is not good if you don't know whether a co2 bubble will hit the outflow of your filter and get blasted to the middle of the tank, or turn and go down into a low flow area of your tank. I call that random flow, which is what you don't want in a planted tank since not all plants will get the same amount of nutrients and co2. You want more of a gentle circular flow, or a laminar flow. If this was my tank I would add a spray bar, then position the polishing powerhead in the right back corner facing the outflow towards the filter input. that way the spray bar will flow water towards the top front of the tank, then hit the glass and flow down to the substrate, and through the substrate to the back glass. then the polishing powerhead will push the flow towards your filter input.


One question, how the spray bar water should point? horizontal, 45 degrees, just a few degrees?


----------



## Eric Tran (Jul 7, 2016)

Position the spray bar 2-3 inches or so below the waterline and point it a few degrees towards the surface to create a little gentle surface ripple for o2 exchange. Not too much or Co2 will outgas.


----------



## Greggz (May 19, 2008)

A spray bar aimed up at the surface is a good thing. Creates oxygen which a healthy tank needs and creates a good flow pattern.

But I highly doubt your problems have anything to to with a lack of flow. Most of the best tanks in world have far less flow than folks would imagine. IMO adding a circulation pump will just create more problems. Too much flow is worse than too little. 

Sounds like you are getting your CO2 dialed in, but that creates a greater need for fertilization. 

Earlier you listed this as your dosing:

0.20ppm NO3
0.020ppm P04
0.266ppm K
0.020ppm Mg

This is pretty much the same as nothing. And a well run tank does not need any Glut. It's probably doing more harm than good. 

Try to start thinking in terms of providing plants what they need not preventing algae. Healthy happy plants are easily the best defense.


----------



## Deanna (Feb 15, 2017)

As @Greggz mentioned, a high-tech tank (pressurized CO2) does not need glut (Excel) for plant growth purposes. It is effective, though, as an algaecide. However, it only affects red algae (hair types/BBA), not GSA. If you want to use an algaecide on the GSA, try a surfactant approach, such as API’s AlgaeFix. I think that the 2 Hour Aquarist also has a good product. Split the recommended dosing of these products in half and do the second dose a few hours after the first. This will help your fauna, as the surfactant can make gills less efficient.

Longer term, I’d look to your nutrient balance (keep organics under control, as well) as the current problem. You have experienced significant changes to the two most important aspects: light and CO2. Changes can take many weeks to manifest in cause and effect observations. You seem to have kicked your light and CO2 into high gear. This is going to accelerate uptake of fertilizers, assuming there is proper balance. If things are out of balance, you may run short of certain nutrients, which will stall growth and make plant leaves and other surfaces ripe for algae growth. If balance is maintained, you still may need more of all ferts due to increase growth.

I’d review your entire dosing, hopefully with measurements of all macros (including Mg and Ca). At a minimum, look at NO3 and PO4. Maintain a minimum 10:1 ratio. Many of us, with high-tech tanks insist upon a minimum of ~5ppm PO4. Sufficiently high PO4 does inhibit GSA.


----------



## enb141 (May 14, 2018)

Greggz said:


> A spray bar aimed up at the surface is a good thing. Creates oxygen which a healthy tank needs and creates a good flow pattern.
> 
> But I highly doubt your problems have anything to to with a lack of flow. Most of the best tanks in world have far less flow than folks would imagine. IMO adding a circulation pump will just create more problems. Too much flow is worse than too little.
> 
> ...


Yes, that's what I was dosing before, but now I'm dosing much more, this is what I'm doing right now daily

NO3 1ppm
PO4 0.30 ppm
K 1.35 ppm
Mg 0.10 ppm

I was dosing twice that much but at the seventh day I got about 300 TDS, even after doing 80% water change, I just could reduce it to 200 TDS using tap water at 150 TDS, so I decided to reduce and dose the above instead.




Deanna said:


> As @Greggz mentioned, a high-tech tank (pressurized CO2) does not need glut (Excel) for plant growth purposes. It is effective, though, as an algaecide. However, it only affects red algae (hair types/BBA), not GSA. If you want to use an algaecide on the GSA, try a surfactant approach, such as API’s AlgaeFix. I think that the 2 Hour Aquarist also has a good product. Split the recommended dosing of these products in half and do the second dose a few hours after the first. This will help your fauna, as the surfactant can make gills less efficient.
> 
> Longer term, I’d look to your nutrient balance (keep organics under control, as well) as the current problem. You have experienced significant changes to the two most important aspects: light and CO2. Changes can take many weeks to manifest in cause and effect observations. You seem to have kicked your light and CO2 into high gear. This is going to accelerate uptake of fertilizers, assuming there is proper balance. If things are out of balance, you may run short of certain nutrients, which will stall growth and make plant leaves and other surfaces ripe for algae growth. If balance is maintained, you still may need more of all ferts due to increase growth.
> 
> I’d review your entire dosing, hopefully with measurements of all macros (including Mg and Ca). At a minimum, look at NO3 and PO4. Maintain a minimum 10:1 ratio. Many of us, with high-tech tanks insist upon a minimum of ~5ppm PO4. Sufficiently high PO4 does inhibit GSA.



As mentioned above I tried overdosing ferts but I decided to reduce them because after doing water changes for about 80% of water, I still got lots of nutrients left in the water, even using RO water (10 TDS), I was only able to reduce from 300+ TDS to 180 TDS.


----------



## Deanna (Feb 15, 2017)

300 ppm TDS isn't that high. As I mentioned, the balance is important. For example, much, if not most, of that 300 TDS could be water hardness, which could impact uptake of other nutrients, even if there are sufficient levels of those nutrients.

Is there any chance of getting test results on NO3, PO4, K, Ca and Mg? If not, can you, at least, report NO3, PO4, GH and KH values? Also, for each, what test kit are you using?


----------



## enb141 (May 14, 2018)

Deanna said:


> 300 ppm TDS isn't that high. As I mentioned, the balance is important. For example, much, if not most, of that 300 TDS could be water hardness, which could impact uptake of other nutrients, even if there are sufficient levels of those nutrients.
> 
> Is there any chance of getting test results on NO3, PO4, K, Ca and Mg? If not, can you, at least, report NO3, PO4, GH and KH values? Also, for each, what test kit are you using?


300 ppm maybe is not that high, but at that rate (I tried it for about 2 weeks), I would need to do 80% water changes twice a week, so that's why I decided to reduce the dosing by half.

For PO4 I could use Hanna, for NO3 and KH Salifert, for the rest, I don't have test kit yet, maybe for Calcium I could use the Hanna for salt water but I'm not sure if it works.

At what time should I test it?


----------



## Deanna (Feb 15, 2017)

enb141 said:


> 300 ppm maybe is not that high, but at that rate (I tried it for about 2 weeks), I would need to do 80% water changes twice a week, so that's why I decided to reduce the dosing by half.
> 
> For PO4 I could use Hanna, for NO3 and KH Salifert, for the rest, I don't have test kit yet, maybe for Calcium I could use the Hanna for salt water but I'm not sure if it works.
> 
> At what time should I test it?


I'd test it at any point when you are reading 300 TDS. However, for many of these tests, e.g.; NO3 and PO4, it is better to do it when you can read it by natural light, but not direct sunlight.

Salifert is good for NO3, but cumbersome for KH (if you haven't already bought it, API's kit is good). For PO4, the Hanna low-range colorimeter or Salifert. Note: for both, above 3ppm, dilute 5:1 with RO or distilled water, then multiply result by 5. API kit is good above 3ppm.

I can tell you how to check for Ca and Mg individually, but I think it will be ok to just measure GH and we'll assume that the Ca:Mg ratio is good. However, I do see that you are dosing Mg and, apparently, not Ca. I don't know if that will throw the Ca:Mg ratio out of balance. Either the Salifert or Sera kits are good for GH (I've found the API kits to vary in quality).


----------



## enb141 (May 14, 2018)

Deanna said:


> I'd test it at any point when you are reading 300 TDS. However, for many of these tests, e.g.; NO3 and PO4, it is better to do it when you can read it by natural light, but not direct sunlight.
> 
> Salifert is good for NO3, but cumbersome for KH (if you haven't already bought it, API's kit is good). For PO4, the Hanna low-range colorimeter or Salifert. Note: for both, above 3ppm, dilute 5:1 with RO or distilled water, then multiply result by 5. API kit is good above 3ppm.
> 
> I can tell you how to check for Ca and Mg individually, but I think it will be ok to just measure GH and we'll assume that the Ca:Mg ratio is good. However, I do see that you are dosing Mg and, apparently, not Ca. I don't know if that will throw the Ca:Mg ratio out of balance. Either the Salifert or Sera kits are good for GH (I've found the API kits to vary in quality).


Before doing my respective 80% water change, here are the values I could test.

Phosphates: 4.8 (Hanna)
Nitrates about 50
Alkalinity: 3.304 (Hanna Marine)

I'll do more tests (GH) when I have it.


----------



## Deanna (Feb 15, 2017)

50ppm NO3 is somewhat high, given your dosing, although it’s hard to tell how much is added by the root tabs. I prefer to avoid root tabs, as they provide inconsistent leaching of nutrients and the plants can get all they need from dosing the water column. Further, the PO4, although a good ppm level, is unexpectedly high, given the dosing (same qualifier, though, on the root tabs). I’m suspecting that the high NO3 and PO4 may be a reflection of high organics. This can occur with a lot of fish and/or overfeeding, decaying plants and general maintenance issues. You may want to look into these things, because high organics can exacerbate algae problems. 

Another possible cause of the high NO3 and PO4 could be incorrect dosing calculations or pumps that aren’t doing what you think they are. Double-check those two possibilities. If you do determine the reason for these high levels, and can bring them down, do keep the PO4 in the current area, by increasing PO4 dosing, if necessary. Again, we are trying to find out why these nutrients are high at the moment.

CO2: as others have mentioned, you would, ideally, target a pH drop of ~1.0-1.5 to achieve ideal CO2 levels. I’m not sure how you are getting a pH reading of 7.8, as the Fluval Stratum, I believe, buffers ph to about 6.6. Are you sure about the Hanna marine checker being correct for freshwater? I have a Hanna alkalinity checker designed for fresh water. If your KH is actually a lot higher than your marine checker reads, then the high pH is possible (which would also burn out the Fluval Stratum quickly). You may want to get a KH test kit from API to check this. 

Do a 50% water change weekly for a while, as opposed to the multiple changes with varying amounts. This will help establish some consistency, which may help.


----------



## enb141 (May 14, 2018)

Deanna said:


> 50ppm NO3 is somewhat high, given your dosing, although it’s hard to tell how much is added by the root tabs. I prefer to avoid root tabs, as they provide inconsistent leaching of nutrients and the plants can get all they need from dosing the water column. Further, the PO4, although a good ppm level, is unexpectedly high, given the dosing (same qualifier, though, on the root tabs). I’m suspecting that the high NO3 and PO4 may be a reflection of high organics. This can occur with a lot of fish and/or overfeeding, decaying plants and general maintenance issues. You may want to look into these things, because high organics can exacerbate algae problems.
> 
> Another possible cause of the high NO3 and PO4 could be incorrect dosing calculations or pumps that aren’t doing what you think they are. Double-check those two possibilities. If you do determine the reason for these high levels, and can bring them down, do keep the PO4 in the current area, by increasing PO4 dosing, if necessary. Again, we are trying to find out why these nutrients are high at the moment.
> 
> ...


Most of my fish died about a month ago, back then I was using tap water, one of the pumps got stuck releasing all the gluth at the same time so I had to do a 90% water change but that water had chlorine so almost all my fish died.

About the gravel, I've been excessively cleaning it with a turkey blaster so I don't think is anything related to that.

Maybe because I was using tap water, I exhausted the fluval stratum that is about 2 years old.

My guess as yours is that the seachem tabs are the ones excessively leaching minerals (I have about 30 tabs in the gravel).

My Hanna reagent is old so I'm gonna check for a new one too, this one for freshwater.

After all my fish died, I got a ro/di filter so now I'm using 10 tds water for my water changes but that was just 2 weeks ago, so now I got a few questions.

So what about now that I'm using low TDS water, what if my water pH is 6.5, should I buffer it with CO2 to 5.5?

If I do the 1 point test of CO2, the stratum buffer properties will be exhausted in 48 hours right, so my pH should be 7?

My pumps are new as well, but I'll check if they are dosing what they should, which I think so because they only dose a few drops every 30 minutes from 5 AM to 5 PM.

What nitrates, KH, GH, phosphates, pH values should I have?


----------



## Deanna (Feb 15, 2017)

enb141 said:


> About the gravel, I've been excessively cleaning it with a turkey blaster so I don't think is anything related to that.


I’m not sure what the purpose of doing that is.



enb141 said:


> Maybe because I was using tap water, I exhausted the fluval stratum that is about 2 years old.
> 
> After all my fish died, I got a ro/di filter so now I'm using 10 tds water for my water changes


RO/DI water has to be re-mineralized if it is the only water being added to the tank, following water changes. However, active substrates can also do this, but you’ll have to measure GH and pH to determine if your substrate is still doing this. There are many such re-mineralizers on the market, such as Seachem Equilibrium, if you don’t want to do the fine tuning yourself. Before doing this, consider the next few paragraphs.

To determine if your substrate is still active, you need to know what the GH and pH levels are that the substrate is supposed to provide. It should be available on the manufacturers website or you may find it by searching this forum. Then, test both GH and pH (be sure water is fully degassed). It might be better to take some gravel out, place it in a separate container and add RODI water, as I can’t tell how your dosing, or other things that may be in your tank, may be affecting GH and pH (KH).

If your readings are way off from what the substrate should be doing, then it’s exhausted and you will have to re-mineralize your RODI water. If the readings match what the substrate should be doing, but your tank readings don’t compare well to the sample container, then the problem is probably something you are adding during dosing or something in the tank that is adding to GH and/or KH, such as decorations.



enb141 said:


> So what about now that I'm using low TDS water, what if my water pH is 6.5, should I buffer it with CO2 to 5.5?
> 
> If I do the 1 point test of CO2, the stratum buffer properties will be exhausted in 48 hours right, so my pH should be 7?


This gets at the issue of KH (carbonate hardness) as it relates to CO2 and pH. You can do much research, here on the forum, to get a better understanding, if you wish. Essentially, we don’t usually look at CO2 pH changes as buffering. The pH changes that are due to CO2 don’t move the KH values much or affect livestock (within reason). So, yes; whatever your degassed pH is (6.5), the CO2 target will be 1 point lower.



enb141 said:


> My pumps are new as well, but I'll check if they are dosing what they should, which I think so because they only dose a few drops every 30 minutes from 5 AM to 5 PM.


I suggest that you change your dosing frequency form every half-hour to once a day, maybe twice if you think it really matters. I don’t think that these hobby-grade pumps are going to give you the accuracy, at a few drops, that you think they are. Besides, once a day is fine for plants and will allow you to measure the dosed amount, for verification, more easily.



enb141 said:


> What nitrates, KH, GH, phosphates, pH values should I have?


This is getting into personal preferences as a function of CO2 injection, plants, livestock, etc. As a very broad general idea, I would say NO3: 10-25ppm, PO4: 3-6ppm, GH: 2-6 dGH, KH: 1-3 dKH. pH doesn’t matter too much and is a function of KH levels when fully degassed. Generally, I’d keep pH below 7.0 for many reasons.

I probably missed some relevant aspects to all of the above, given a quick response. Hopefully, other members will chime in.


----------



## enb141 (May 14, 2018)

Deanna said:


> I’m not sure what the purpose of doing that is.


Well basically what I meant is that I do gravel clean up this way








Deanna said:


> RO/DI water has to be re-mineralized if it is the only water being added to the tank, following water changes. However, active substrates can also do this, but you’ll have to measure GH and pH to determine if your substrate is still doing this. There are many such re-mineralizers on the market, such as Seachem Equilibrium, if you don’t want to do the fine tuning yourself. Before doing this, consider the next few paragraphs.
> 
> To determine if your substrate is still active, you need to know what the GH and pH levels are that the substrate is supposed to provide. It should be available on the manufacturers website or you may find it by searching this forum. Then, test both GH and pH (be sure water is fully degassed). It might be better to take some gravel out, place it in a separate container and add RODI water, as I can’t tell how your dosing, or other things that may be in your tank, may be affecting GH and pH (KH).
> 
> If your readings are way off from what the substrate should be doing, then it’s exhausted and you will have to re-mineralize your RODI water. If the readings match what the substrate should be doing, but your tank readings don’t compare well to the sample container, then the problem is probably something you are adding during dosing or something in the tank that is adding to GH and/or KH, such as decorations.


I don't have decorations, only one tiny dritfwood and plants, so maybe you are right the properties of the substrate are gone but after the water change I add 1 tsp of seachem equilibrium, this increases my initial tds from 50 to 120.

Basically I'm doing what this guy does (at minute 13 he starts to talk about RO water and GH)








Deanna said:


> This gets at the issue of KH (carbonate hardness) as it relates to CO2 and pH. You can do much research, here on the forum, to get a better understanding, if you wish. Essentially, we don’t usually look at CO2 pH changes as buffering. The pH changes that are due to CO2 don’t move the KH values much or affect livestock (within reason). So, yes; whatever your degassed pH is (6.5), the CO2 target will be 1 point lower.


Ok, so this week I ended up without CO2, so for about 2 days I just tested my pH without adding any CO2 and I got 7 pH but the same water that I took 2 days before (saved in a cup and waited for that to get degassed) and this water got the same 7.8 pH as previously, is kind of weird to me because this time I was using 10 TDS water and the previous test was with tap water (150 TDS)

So which one should I trust, the one in the tank that says 7pH so I have to buffer with CO2 to 6pH or should I buffer it to 6.8 pH?

I think I over buffered with CO2 my tank a few days ago to 6pH, because all my snails are not moving and I think they died 

So if I have to buffer with CO2 to 6pH I think is too much, at least for my margarita snails, and I need them, they were doing a good job with algae.



Deanna said:


> I suggest that you change your dosing frequency form every half-hour to once a day, maybe twice if you think it really matters. I don’t think that these hobby-grade pumps are going to give you the accuracy, at a few drops, that you think they are. Besides, once a day is fine for plants and will allow you to measure the dosed amount, for verification, more easily.


I did that before (dosing everything before the lights went up) but after watching the tank, dosing every 30 minutes was a huge improvement, I don't know why but the colors of the plants and the growth is much better dosing small drops every 30 minutes than dosing everything before the lights turn on.

I'm not using a toy grade dosing pumps, I'm using those from BRS with a very very precise software that I made, so the precision is very consistent.



Deanna said:


> This is getting into personal preferences as a function of CO2 injection, plants, livestock, etc. As a very broad general idea, I would say NO3: 10-25ppm, PO4: 3-6ppm, GH: 2-6 dGH, KH: 1-3 dKH. pH doesn’t matter too much and is a function of KH levels when fully degassed. Generally, I’d keep pH below 7.0 for many reasons.
> 
> I probably missed some relevant aspects to all of the above, given a quick response. Hopefully, other members will chime in.


Thanks for your help and time, I just ordered my GH test kit, and I check again to see what GH values do I have.


----------



## Greggz (May 19, 2008)

enb141 said:


> I don't have decorations, only one tiny dritfwood and plants, so maybe you are right the properties of the substrate are gone but after the water change I add 1 tsp of seachem equilibrium, this increases my initial tds from 50 to 120.
> 
> Basically I'm doing what this guy does (at minute 13 he starts to talk about RO water and GH)


If I were you I would quit using TDS and start thinking in terms of ppm of whatever you are dosing. There are many other things affecting TDS besides what you are dosing to raise dGH. 




enb141 said:


> Ok, so this week I ended up without CO2, so for about 2 days I just tested my pH without adding any CO2 and I got 7 pH but the same water that I took 2 days before (saved in a cup and waited for that to get degassed) and this water got the same 7.8 pH as previously, is kind of weird to me because this time I was using 10 TDS water and the previous test was with tap water (150 TDS)
> 
> So which one should I trust, the one in the tank that says 7pH so I have to buffer with CO2 to 6pH or should I buffer it to 6.8 pH?


It could be your soil is still buffering dKH. So you took a sample out at 7.8 pH, but the water in the tank kept buffering down to 7.0 pH. Not saying that for sure, but that is a likely scenario. Could also have to do with testing methods.



enb141 said:


> I did that before (dosing everything before the lights went up) but after watching the tank, dosing every 30 minutes was a huge improvement, I don't know why but the colors of the plants and the growth is much better dosing small drops every 30 minutes than dosing everything before the lights turn on.
> 
> I'm not using a toy grade dosing pumps, I'm using those from BRS with a very very precise software that I made, so the precision is very consistent.


Dosing every 30 minutes has nothing at all to do with success or failure. I dose all of my macros at one time once a week after water change. And I know many of the best planted tankers from around the world, and not one doses anything hourly. In fact, I can't think of one that uses dosing pumps. Just saying you're focused on the wrong thing.

And despite what you might think, it's not your dosing that is leading to TDS at 300. I dose way more than you into my 120G full of Rainbowfish and my TDS is constantly around 150 ppm. As others who are trying to help you have noted you have got a real wild card with that many root tabs in your soil. Way, way too many for your tank. Most likely they are leaching nutrients which increased TDS. 

And all that Glut is probably doing more harm than good. Despite what you hear from beginners, there is no need for Glut in a well run tank. And too much can really weaken some plants which of course brings on algae.


----------



## enb141 (May 14, 2018)

Greggz said:


> If I were you I would quit using TDS and start thinking in terms of ppm of whatever you are dosing. There are many other things affecting TDS besides what you are dosing to raise dGH.


I know but if your TDS is 50 and then suddenly you add Seachem Equilibrium and then your TDS increases to 120, then your Equilibrium is the most likely thing that increased your TDS.

That's why I measure it immediately after a RO water change.


Greggz said:


> It could be your soil is still buffering dKH. So you took a sample out at 7.8 pH, but the water in the tank kept buffering down to 7.0 pH. Not saying that for sure, but that is a likely scenario. Could also have to do with testing methods.


I was using the same pH probe for both.

So my question is which one should I trust to do the one point pH drop?


Greggz said:


> Dosing every 30 minutes has nothing at all to do with success or failure. I dose all of my macros at one time once a week after water change. And I know many of the best planted tankers from around the world, and not one doses anything hourly. In fact, I can't think of one that uses dosing pumps. Just saying you're focused on the wrong thing.
> 
> And despite what you might think, it's not your dosing that is leading to TDS at 300. I dose way more than you into my 120G full of Rainbowfish and my TDS is constantly around 150 ppm. As others who are trying to help you have noted you have got a real wild card with that many root tabs in your soil. Way, way too many for your tank. Most likely they are leaching nutrients which increased TDS.
> 
> And all that Glut is probably doing more harm than good. Despite what you hear from beginners, there is no need for Glut in a well run tank. And too much can really weaken some plants which of course brings on algae.


This week I reduced the dosing and yesterday I tested my water and was only 170 TDS, so I have few guesses

1) the minerals of macros and micros were at bottom of the container so that's why the increased of nutrients and now that those minerals were dosed, the water has much less minerals, hence the reduced TDS of this week.

2)the seachem tabs are started to get depleted so the leaching is starting to fall back.

3) this is really a question: this week I reduced my CO2, also the CO2 tank got empty so I left my aquarium with no CO2 for 2 days, do CO2 increases the TDS as well (I doubt) but I would like to know if that's possible

About the dosing pumps, well from my other bad habit (hobby) is reef tank so in that world, dosing small amounts is way better than dosing everything at once. You are right, lots of people do dosing everything at once. I used to dose everything before the lights went on but to me, I've seen better results dosing small amounts during the lights period.

The guys from GreenAqua use gluth, and they seem to have good looking aquariums. that's why I use it, specially because I'm tired of the algae so I was trying everything to se what can kill it.


----------



## Greggz (May 19, 2008)

enb141 said:


> I know but if your TDS is 50 and then suddenly you add Seachem Equilibrium and then your TDS increases to 120, then your Equilibrium is the most likely thing that increased your TDS.
> 
> That's why I measure it immediately after a RO water change.


This is true. And if your TDS is suddenly going up then you likely have an issue you need to look into. But you don't need it to monitor your dosing. Get to know either the Rotalabutterfly or Zorfox planted tank calculators and start thinking in terms of ppm that you are putting in the tank.



enb141 said:


> I was using the same pH probe for both.
> 
> So my question is which one should I trust to do the one point pH drop?


You are getting into a complicated subject. If your dKH is not stable (substrate buffering) then you are better off relying on a constant CO2 flow rate. You are chasing a moving target. So the best peak pH drop will be different as the dKH changes. It's much easier if you your dKH is stable.

So in your case, you need to keep adjusting your flow rate until you hit a point where plants are happy and fish are not showing signs of distress.



enb141 said:


> This week I reduced the dosing and yesterday I tested my water and was only 170 TDS, so I have few guesses
> 
> 1) the minerals of macros and micros were at bottom of the container so that's why the increased of nutrients and now that those minerals were dosed, the water has much less minerals, hence the reduced TDS of this week.
> 
> ...


CO2 does not affect TDS. The other guesses are just that..... guesses. Could also be better maintenance, a larger water change, less fish feeding, etc. But in general lower TDS is a good thing so whatever it is it's a positive.

I can assure you dosing hourly has no effect on your tank. This is one of the problems in the hobby, assigning cause/affect incorrectly. You may be seeing better results, but I am confident that is because of other things going on in the tank. Heck could just be the tank is stabilizing/maturing and plants are adapting to that.

Plants love stability and hate change. When you dose a lot more then dose a lot less, or skip CO2 for a few days, you upset the balance and plants can rebel. Get back on track and they perk back up. One of your goals should be to keep levels stable.

To that end right now you are dosing hourly. Then when you perform a water change you remove 1/2 the nutrients. Now the macro level is much lower until it gradually builds back up. That is not good for the plants. You would be better off putting in a larger dose right after a water change to bring those levels back up and keep them stable.

I don't know much about Green Aqua. I see they are trying to sell stuff. Just keep in mind using too much glut can be worse than not using any at all. Once again at larger doses it can weaken some plant species. Weak plants are magnets for algae.


----------



## Deanna (Feb 15, 2017)

Adding some re-enforcing and some mitigating comments to @Greggz well-considered response to your questions and issues;

CO2 - My personal preference, regarding these type of things is to know the numbers, as opposed to the “do it until it looks good” approach. Both approaches work to establish a healthy plant mass. This means that I like to know the pH drop for CO2 targeting. So, I understand your desire to do so. However, as @Greggz mentioned, to do this, the KH level must be identical in the two samples. This can be done by taking a pH measurement from your tank when fully gassed and then take a water sample at the same time. Let the sample sit for a day or two (can be accelerated with aeration). When it is fully de-gassed, take a pH reading and compare that to the initial tank reading.

TDS - You were, nominally, following the PPS Pro system (initial dosing method mentioned), which is designed to minimize maintenance (mainly water changes) and nutrient measurement activity However, in a contradictory way, you were doing the opposite of PPS Pro with the extremely frequent and variable water changes. Additionally, most of the advice you were getting has not been with PPS Pro in mind. I think that the PPS Pro method is fine, but it should be observed if that is the chosen path. In that case, the TDS measurements are mainly what you rely upon to keep things consistent and with minimal effort.

From my observations, most members seem to prefer a more active involvement in maintenance, measurements and other aspects of a planted tank, which is why the guidance has been along the lines of such things, which includes focusing upon ppm measurements as opposed to TDS measurements. I happen to prefer this more active involvement, as well. As @Greggz also mentioned, nutrient consistency is important. I also use an auto-dosser, but this is to maintain targeted nutrient levels (measured as ppm) between water changes. However, following a water change, I front-load nutrients to the targeted level, in recognition of the 50% loss of these nutrients due to the water change.

As mentioned by several of us, I believe that much of the distortions you are seeing are due to the leeching effect of the root tabs and substrate. So, if you use those, you will have to gain a feel for what they are doing by taking measurements of nutrients, pH, and TDS, perhaps weekly, and try to gauge their impact by observing changes in these values over time. This also means that any dosing and water changes must be kept consistent during this observation period. It won’t be precise, but it will show, somewhat, the total effect of the leeching as the sources decay and the effect if you replenish them.

As previously mentioned, the glut will add nearly nothing, if anything, to plant health in a sufficiently dosed CO2 system. Regarding algae, it will not inhibit GSA. If red algae is being targeted, it is better to hit it with a one-time dose of 1-1.5 ml / gal of glut for a quick knock-down, rather than continuos dosing that is designed as a carbon supplement in a low-tech tank.Is it possible that Green Aqua is addressing a low-tech tank situation?


----------



## enb141 (May 14, 2018)

Greggz said:


> This is true. And if your TDS is suddenly going up then you likely have an issue you need to look into. But you don't need it to monitor your dosing. Get to know either the Rotalabutterfly or Zorfox planted tank calculators and start thinking in terms of ppm that you are putting in the tank.


According to GLA, 500 ml should have this mix

K2SO4 - 29.3 grams
KNO3 - 32.6 grams
KH2PO4 - 2.9 grams
MgSO4 - 20.2 grams

Which should be dosed daily for 1 mL* per 10 gallons, so in my case, I have to dose 7.5 ml (75 Gallons)

That concentrations should give:

1ppm NO3
0.1ppm PO4
1.33ppm K
0.1ppm Mg


I did a little variation, so instead of KNO3 - 32.6 grams, I reduced to 16.3 grams and for phosphates I increased from KH2PO4 - 2.9 grams to 9 grams.

Right now, I'm dosing about 5.3 ml daily, I tried twice the amount but right now I reduced to 4.5 ml until a few days.

Now I slowly increased it to 5.3ml, that's gonna be my current dosing for at least one week.




Greggz said:


> You are getting into a complicated subject. If your dKH is not stable (substrate buffering) then you are better off relying on a constant CO2 flow rate. You are chasing a moving target. So the best peak pH drop will be different as the dKH changes. It's much easier if you your dKH is stable.
> 
> So in your case, you need to keep adjusting your flow rate until you hit a point where plants are happy and fish are not showing signs of distress.


Well that's kind of weird, as far as I know you can't reduce KH, if the substrate adds some minerals then the KH will increase.



Greggz said:


> CO2 does not affect TDS. The other guesses are just that..... guesses. Could also be better maintenance, a larger water change, less fish feeding, etc. But in general lower TDS is a good thing so whatever it is it's a positive.
> 
> I can assure you dosing hourly has no effect on your tank. This is one of the problems in the hobby, assigning cause/affect incorrectly. You may be seeing better results, but I am confident that is because of other things going on in the tank. Heck could just be the tank is stabilizing/maturing and plants are adapting to that.
> 
> ...


Plants needs nutrients, they don't care if the nitrates are 1 ppm or 10 ppm, what they care is if they have enough nitrates for consume (and so on for the rest of minerals). So if you had 20 ppm nitrates, then 50% water change, you will end up with 10 ppm, so to plants that doesn't matters.

I'm totally agreed with you about stability, that's why slow dosing over all day every 30 minutes same for CO2, I'm trying to maintain the same CO2 values over the lights on period.






Greggz said:


> I don't know much about Green Aqua. I see they are trying to sell stuff. Just keep in mind using too much glut can be worse than not using any at all. Once again at larger doses it can weaken some plant species. Weak plants are magnets for algae.


I'm thinking to phase out gluth but on the other site (ukaps), they suggested me to use gluth.



Deanna said:


> Adding some re-enforcing and some mitigating comments to @Greggz well-considered response to your questions and issues;
> 
> CO2 - My personal preference, regarding these type of things is to know the numbers, as opposed to the “do it until it looks good” approach. Both approaches work to establish a healthy plant mass. This means that I like to know the pH drop for CO2 targeting. So, I understand your desire to do so. However, as @Greggz mentioned, to do this, the KH level must be identical in the two samples. This can be done by taking a pH measurement from your tank when fully gassed and then take a water sample at the same time. Let the sample sit for a day or two (can be accelerated with aeration). When it is fully de-gassed, take a pH reading and compare that to the initial tank reading.


I did that, but I ended up with a very low pH (5.9 - 6.0) which killed all my snails so I reduced the CO2 dosing, so right now my minimum pH is 6.4 and my highest pH as mentioned before was 7.8 (totally degassed for 48 hours outside the tank)



Deanna said:


> TDS - You were, nominally, following the PPS Pro system (initial dosing method mentioned), which is designed to minimize maintenance (mainly water changes) and nutrient measurement activity However, in a contradictory way, you were doing the opposite of PPS Pro with the extremely frequent and variable water changes. Additionally, most of the advice you were getting has not been with PPS Pro in mind. I think that the PPS Pro method is fine, but it should be observed if that is the chosen path. In that case, the TDS measurements are mainly what you rely upon to keep things consistent and with minimal effort.
> 
> From my observations, most members seem to prefer a more active involvement in maintenance, measurements and other aspects of a planted tank, which is why the guidance has been along the lines of such things, which includes focusing upon ppm measurements as opposed to TDS measurements. I happen to prefer this more active involvement, as well. As @Greggz also mentioned, nutrient consistency is important. I also use an auto-dosser, but this is to maintain targeted nutrient levels (measured as ppm) between water changes. However, following a water change, I front-load nutrients to the targeted level, in recognition of the 50% loss of these nutrients due to the water change.


That's why I'm trying to "guess" the current consumption of my plants, so I don't have to do 50% water change twice a week due to lots of extra nutrients in the water column.

I use the TDS as measurement, if is increasing rapidly, that means the water is receiving too much nutrients, in the ideal world the TDS should have to change, but that's impossible so my best bet is to let the TDS to increase slowly.

Currently I'm just doing one water change on saturdays or sundays for about 60%.



Deanna said:


> As mentioned by several of us, I believe that much of the distortions you are seeing are due to the leeching effect of the root tabs and substrate. So, if you use those, you will have to gain a feel for what they are doing by taking measurements of nutrients, pH, and TDS, perhaps weekly, and try to gauge their impact by observing changes in these values over time. This also means that any dosing and water changes must be kept consistent during this observation period. It won’t be precise, but it will show, somewhat, the total effect of the leeching as the sources decay and the effect if you replenish them.


After thinking about this, I'm gonna do a TDS measurement just after the last dose of my pumps, and before the pumps start dosing again the next day, so that TDS will be mostly due to the Root tabs and soil, but since my soil is pretty old, about 2.5 years old, I don't think is leaching too much.



Deanna said:


> As previously mentioned, the glut will add nearly nothing, if anything, to plant health in a sufficiently dosed CO2 system. Regarding algae, it will not inhibit GSA. If red algae is being targeted, it is better to hit it with a one-time dose of 1-1.5 ml / gal of glut for a quick knock-down, rather than continuos dosing that is designed as a carbon supplement in a low-tech tank.Is it possible that Green Aqua is addressing a low-tech tank situation?


Well in one of their videos they showed a dosing pump that they received from a manufacturer, in the configuration they were using 3 bottles (macros, micros and gluth).

They pretty much hate low tech tanks, for them low tech always means RO water and injected CO2.

By the way, I'll try to do you suggestion about 1 - 1.5ml /gal for a quick knock down, because I'm starting to get BBA (in the event that killed most of my fish, all the SAE died).


----------



## ak7v (Jan 9, 2022)

enb141 said:


> Plants needs nutrients, they don't care if the nitrates are 1 ppm or 10 ppm, what they care is if they have enough nitrates for consume (and so on for the rest of minerals). So if you had 20 ppm nitrates, then 50% water change, you will end up with 10 ppm, so to plants that doesn't matters.


Is this really the case? Are plants equally happy with 1ppm nitrate as they are with 10 or 20 or 50? As long as it's not zero, that is evidence they can get all they need?

Or is it more like oxygen for us where they do best with a certain concentration in the water? If it's like CO2, plants want a certain concentration maintained, they don't want "just enough" to get down to 0ppm when the lights go off... right? Their happiness is related to the concentration of nutrients available over time rather than the absolute amount available to them....?

I'm just curious because I have a similar situation, have a 75 gallon tank with algae, using the GLA kit for ferts, etc.


----------



## Deanna (Feb 15, 2017)

ak7v said:


> Is this really the case? Are plants equally happy with 1ppm nitrate as they are with 10 or 20 or 50? As long as it's not zero, that is evidence they can get all they need?
> 
> Or is it more like oxygen for us where they do best with a certain concentration in the water? If it's like CO2, plants want a certain concentration maintained, they don't want "just enough" to get down to 0ppm when the lights go off... right? Their happiness is related to the concentration of nutrients available over time rather than the absolute amount available to them....?
> 
> I'm just curious because I have a similar situation, have a 75 gallon tank with algae, using the GLA kit for ferts, etc.


It may be true under certain situations. Some plants do seem to do better with higher NO3 levels, but I've only seen anecdotal info on that. However, what plants really need is nitrogen and NO3 is just one form of it. It is also available in ammonia, urea and other forms. I use NO3 readings as indicators that there is plentiful nitrogen available. NO3 is what our 'bacteria' spew out from processing ammonia. So, if there is some NO3 hanging around, I'm ok with the belief that the plants are getting all the nitrogen they need. Most of my nitrogen is supplied to plants in the form of ammonia (from fish and plant waste) and urea (dosed and some fish waste). I dose no NO3, but my NO3 readings are generally in the 10ppm area. I'd rather see a minimum 10ppm NO3 reading than 1ppm, simply because I'd be concerned about 1) bottoming out on nitrogen (then there would be zero NO3 reading) and 2) our tersts are not accurate/discernible enough to know where we are in greater than about 5ppm tolerances.


----------



## Greggz (May 19, 2008)

enb141 said:


> Plants needs nutrients, they don't care if the nitrates are 1 ppm or 10 ppm, what they care is if they have enough nitrates for consume (and so on for the rest of minerals). So if you had 20 ppm nitrates, then 50% water change, you will end up with 10 ppm, so to plants that doesn't matters.


In my experience this is completely wrong. It's exactly the opposite of what every successful planted tanker I know has experienced, and I know and am friends with many of the best from around the world.

But if you think that is the way it works then good luck to you.



ak7v said:


> Is this really the case? Are plants equally happy with 1ppm nitrate as they are with 10 or 20 or 50? As long as it's not zero, that is evidence they can get all they need?
> 
> Or is it more like oxygen for us where they do best with a certain concentration in the water? If it's like CO2, plants want a certain concentration maintained, they don't want "just enough" to get down to 0ppm when the lights go off... right? Their happiness is related to the concentration of nutrients available over time rather than the absolute amount available to them....?
> 
> I'm just curious because I have a similar situation, have a 75 gallon tank with algae, using the GLA kit for ferts, etc.


You are correct. Plants are not equally happy with 1 ppm NO3 as with 10 or 20 or 50?

If your plants uptake 1 ppm per day and you have 1 ppm in the water column they will die. 

For peak uptake of nutrients you need about 5 to 10 ten times more than they consume per day. 

And nutrient levels bouncing around is a recipe for a poor planted tank. The best tanks understand the value of stability. This is very well understood in the hobby.


----------



## enb141 (May 14, 2018)

So for example, lets say that a specific plant needs 2.4 ppm nitrates daily, so for example at your highest co2+lights moment, this plant will need 0.4 ppm nitrates, but at night could only need 0.01, so if somehow you could provide the exact amounts the plant needs at specific time, you could in theory have your water with 1 ppm all the time. In practice, that's impossible, but taking into account that you are not over exceeding (>50ppm), then you just need some nutrients, in fact, some people try to keep nitrates very low to get red coloration, the same is applied in reef tanks, where low phosphates (0.02 ppm) and nitrates (0.25) give better coloration, the problem is that current test kits are not precise enough to check low values, so most people keep 0.10 ppm phosphates and 2 ppm nitrates.

That's in theory the idea behind PPS-Pro, the other method that most people use is Estimated Index, which is based on giving more nutrients than plants are going to need.

The Caveats that I don't like about EI are:

1) EI is limited to NPK, the other macros are not taking into account.
2) EI needs more water changes than any other method due to over dosing
3) Lots of nutrients means happy plants, but also means happy algae.

In my opinion EI would be the holy grail if somehow we could inject those high nutrients to plants roots directly without adding them to the water column, hence my root tabs but unfortunately they are leaching minerals to the water column.


----------



## Greggz (May 19, 2008)

enb141 said:


> So for example, lets say that a specific plant needs 2.4 ppm nitrates daily, so for example at your highest co2+lights moment, this plant will need 0.4 ppm nitrates, but at night could only need 0.01, so if somehow you could provide the exact amounts the plant needs at specific time, you could in theory have your water with 1 ppm all the time. In practice, that's impossible, but taking into account that you are not over exceeding (>50ppm), then you just need some nutrients, in fact, some people try to keep nitrates very low to get red coloration, the same is applied in reef tanks, where low phosphates (0.02 ppm) and nitrates (0.25) give better coloration, the problem is that current test kits are not precise enough to check low values, so most people keep 0.10 ppm phosphates and 2 ppm nitrates.
> 
> That's in theory the idea behind PPS-Pro, the other method that most people use is Estimated Index, which is based on giving more nutrients than plants are going to need.
> 
> ...


None of the best tanks I follow dose EI levels. The hobby has evolved.

Lot's of nutrients does not mean happy algae. I have helped more people overcome algae by dosing more, not less. People make the mistake of thinking you can starve algae. You can't.

And limiting NO3 to bring out reds only works on a very small subset of plants. About 80% of the plants get red from high light and good health. NO3 levels makes no difference. It's also very tricky, as the red is a stress reaction. It's a fine line from bringing out a brilliant red in a Rotala and having it stunt and die. And if you have some Ludwigia sitting next to it will likely die long before the Rotala turns red.


----------



## enb141 (May 14, 2018)

Ok, so lets start from scratch, what ppm levels you suggest from Nitrates, Phosphates, etc, I think CO2 I have nailed it.

By the way, not sure if this helps or not but I was able to measure GH, the water never went red with each drop of the reagent, it started as light green, then a little bit more green and so on, so I don't know which drop was the one to check at, but my guess is that my GH was about 2 or 3.

I also had a green water algae bloom on Monday (I did 60% water change on Sunday night), the algae bloom is receding but I've seen this randomly on other occasions, I'm not sure if is exactly after I do a water change as this one, what intrigues me is that I did the water change with ro water (5 TDS) and at the end of the water change I added about 2 tps of seachem equilibrium.


----------



## Asteroid (Jul 26, 2018)

enb141 said:


> The Caveats that I don't like about EI are:
> 
> 1) EI is limited to NPK, the other macros are not taking into account.
> 2) EI needs more water changes than any other method due to over dosing
> ...


What is your information source


----------



## Greggz (May 19, 2008)

Asteroid said:


> What is your information source


LOL!

I could be wrong but I think this is an example of reading things but not doing them. There is loads of misinformation out there so it's always best to vet your source.



enb141 said:


> Ok, so lets start from scratch, what ppm levels you suggest from Nitrates, Phosphates, etc, I think CO2 I have nailed it.


It depends. Each tank is different.

There is a big difference between a low light tank full of moss/anubias/crypts/swords than a high light tank full of fast growing flowery stems. 

But let's take a look at a couple of examples. Straight EI dosing is NO3 : PO4: K at 22 : 4 : 22 with 50% water change. You might have heard of Dennis Wong. He doses his farm tank at 8 : 3 : 16. And he has lots of bright red Rotalas. 

You might have heard of Tom Barr who is credited with starting EI dosing. I talk to Tom quite often and he does not dose his own tanks at EI levels. 

I am currently dosing at 12 : 4.5 : 18. And don't get too caught up in dosing. When you see a really successful tank dosing is only aspect. Equally as important is light, CO2, horticulture, and maintenance. Get those right and you have a lot of leeway with ferts.

For reference here is all of the information about my tank. 










And here is my tank under about 200 PAR from T5HO.










My point is that there are lots of other methods besides PPS Pro and EI. And like I said, most of the best tanks in the world are somewhere in between.


----------



## Eric Tran (Jul 7, 2016)

@Greggz I know you mentioned it somewhere but what is the difference between the total weekly ppm target dose and the ei 50% wc equivalent dose?


----------



## Greggz (May 19, 2008)

Eric Tran said:


> @Greggz I know you mentioned it somewhere but what is the difference between the total weekly ppm target dose and the ei 50% wc equivalent dose?


Oh boy you had to ask!

There are two ways to look at dosing. 

The first way is looking at it as dosing the entire tank, which is the most common.

Here's the problem with that. It can mean a lot of different things depending on the water change percentage. This has do with accumulation over time.

So let's say someone says I am dosing my tank at 15 ppm NO3 weekly. There is a formula to calculate the eventual maximum theoretical accumulation. It is the ppm divided by the water change percentage.

So at 15 ppm NO3 weekly your max accumulation could be significantly different depending on your water change percentage.

15 ppm NO3 at 50% water change is (15/0.5) is 30 ppm max accumulation.
15 ppm NO3 at 75% water change is (15/0.75) is 20 ppm max accumulation.
15 ppm NO3 at 25% water change is (15/0.25) is 60 ppm max accumulation.

So years ago I went on a crusade to change the way we report ppm dosing. I prefer to look at it as dosing the amount of water removed during a water change. I call it "target" dosing. So if I remove 50 gallons of water, I dose the new 50 gallons to my "target". This takes the water change percentage out of the calculation and relates the value to what we want to see in the water column. 

So in my case above, I remove 70 gallons and then dose the new 70 gallons to 24 ppm NO3. That is the same as dosing 12 ppm to the entire tank assuming 50% water change (12/0.5 = 24 ppm). 

Now by this point I can understand if you are sorry that you asked. That's why I spend lots of time lying down with a cold compress on my forehead!


----------



## Seattle_Aquarist (Jun 15, 2008)

Hi @enb141



> Metricide 28 about 5ml (4 times a day)


The first thing I would do it discontinue the Metricide 28 dosing and do a 50% water change actually I'd do two 50% water changes 24 hours apart. Why? I know you are likely dosing the Metricide 28 as additional carbon molecules for growth and/or to inhibit the growth of algae and it is less expensive than Seachem Excel to use in your 75 gallon. Your 75 gallon tank likely has approximately 60 gallons of water, at least mine does the rest of the volume being substrate and hardscape.

Metricide 28 is a2.5% concentration of glutaraldehyde, while Seachem Excel is a 1.5% concentration of glut. Excel recommends a daily dose of 5 ml per 50 gallon (or 1 ml per 10 gallons) on a daily basis or 6 ml of 1.5% glut once a day for a tank with 60 gallon volume. *The current dosing level going into your tank is 20 ml of 2.5% glut (based on 5 ml 4X per day) or roughly 550% more than the recommended daily dose.* My experience several years ago when I started with planted tanks is that excessive dosing of glutaraldehyde actually inhibited the growth of plants to a noticeable level when I exceeded 2X the recommended Excel dosing level.

As for nutrients:


> - Fertilizers used + Ratios.
> PPS Pro 2 ml macros daily
> CSM+B 0.7 ml micros daily


*PPS Pro is a 'lean' method of dosing nutrients, I've used it. Are you really dosing only dosing a total of 2 ml in a 75 gallon tank daily?*
-Roy


----------



## EmotionalFescue (Jun 24, 2020)

I somehow haven't checked out this thread before... 



enb141 said:


> I did a little variation, so instead of KNO3 - 32.6 grams, I reduced to 16.3 grams and for phosphates I increased from KH2PO4 - 2.9 grams to 9 grams.
> 
> Right now, I'm dosing about 5.3 ml daily, I tried twice the amount but right now I reduced to 4.5 ml until a few days.
> 
> Now I slowly increased it to 5.3ml, that's gonna be my current dosing for at least one week.


for the sake of clarity and comparability, this corresponds to 2.6ppm/wk NO3, 1.6ppm/wk PO4, and 5.8ppm/wk K assuming the full 75 gallons



Spoiler



I get a strange high plugging people's random dosing figures into rotalabutterfly to produce standardized numbers in ppm/wk. I think I'm still chasing the thrill of that first "AHA!" moment...


----------



## Eric Tran (Jul 7, 2016)

Greggz said:


> Oh boy you had to ask!
> 
> There are two ways to look at dosing.
> 
> ...


Thanks for the explanation and very well thought out. For the life of me I couldn't find all the dozens of posts you made answering this exact question. I'm sure you have a copy of this reply somewhere already. 😂

So you front load all your macros into one weekly dose. I might have to try that.


----------



## Greggz (May 19, 2008)

EmotionalFescue said:


> for the sake of clarity and comparability, this corresponds to 2.6ppm/wk NO3, 1.6ppm/wk PO4, and 5.8ppm/wk K assuming the full 75 gallons


Which is basically a little more than nothing.


----------



## enb141 (May 14, 2018)

Seattle_Aquarist said:


> Hi @enb141
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Right now I'm dosing 7.6 ml of Metricide 28 daily.

As far as I know, the new Seachem Excel has the same 2.5%~2.6% as Metricide 28/14 and also, according to seachem instructions, for every water change, you should add 1 capful (5 mL) for every 40 L (10 US gallons), which I'm not extra dosing.

But as other people is suggesting, I'll either should stop using it or use it differently.



Seattle_Aquarist said:


> As for nutrients:
> 
> 
> *PPS Pro is a 'lean' method of dosing nutrients, I've used it. Are you really dosing only dosing a total of 2 ml in a 75 gallon tank daily?*
> -Roy


I'm currently dosing 6.13 ml macros and 3.06 ml micros daily.

Which means:
0.40 NO3
0.24 PO4
1.08 K
0.08 Mg



EmotionalFescue said:


> I somehow haven't checked out this thread before...
> 
> 
> 
> for the sake of clarity and comparability, this corresponds to 2.6ppm/wk NO3, 1.6ppm/wk PO4, and 5.8ppm/wk K assuming the full 75 gallons


Yes, something like 
2.86 NO3
1.71 PO4
7.60 K
0.57 Mg



Greggz said:


> Which is basically a little more than nothing.


Even with those amounts, when I checked the nitrates and phosphates a few weeks ago, before doing a water change, I ended up with 4.8 phosphates and 50+ nitrates.

And also my TDS is slowly increasing so that means, whatever nutrients I'm dosing or the substrate is releasing is increasing the TDS, which means not everything.

So my guess (and greggs) is that my seachem root tabs are leaching those extra nutrients.


----------



## Greggz (May 19, 2008)

enb141 said:


> Even with those amounts, when I checked the nitrates and phosphates a few weeks ago, before doing a water change, I ended up with 4.8 phosphates and 50+ nitrates.


How are you testing NO3 and have you tested a calibrated sample? Just saying based on what you are saying I have a hard time believing NO3 is that high.


----------



## enb141 (May 14, 2018)

Greggz said:


> How are you testing NO3 and have you tested a calibrated sample? Just saying based on what you are saying I have a hard time believing NO3 is that high.


I used a salifert test, no I don't have a calibrated sample, I'll test this week with one of those strips (I know they are junk) but just to check.


----------



## Seattle_Aquarist (Jun 15, 2008)

enb141 said:


> Right now I'm dosing 7.6 ml of Metricide 28 daily.
> 
> As far as I know, the new Seachem Excel has the same 2.5%~2.6% as Metricide 28/14 and also, according to seachem instructions, for every water change, you should add 1 capful (5 mL) for every 40 L (10 US gallons), which I'm not extra dosing.
> 
> But as other people is suggesting, I'll either should stop using it or use it differently.


Hi @enb141

Just to clarify, the concentration of glutaraldehyde (as of 2006) was 1.5%.

There was a chemist in India that posted on *indianaquariumhobbyist.com* the results of his lab analysis. Here is a post I did on Aquatic Plant Central in March of 2011 providing the information along with what is now a broken link to the website and post. However, if you can provide any information where testing was actually performed and the results were posted I would appreciate any information to the contrary. -Roy

This was the original (now broken) link to the information: http://indianaquariumhobbyist.com/c...opic&t=2917&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=30 and it was the post dated Wed Apr 12, 2006 9:09 pm.


----------



## enb141 (May 14, 2018)

Seattle_Aquarist said:


> Hi @enb141
> 
> Just to clarify, the concentration of glutaraldehyde (as of 2006) was 1.5%.
> 
> ...


Thanks for the link, I've found it in other forum, that new concentrations of gluth in Flourish Excel are about 2.5%

Has SeaChem Excel changed the formula


----------

