# Deficiency photos! (Yes, I've been torturing my plants again) 56k



## wkndracer

Thanks for sharing what we all try to avoid. Good pictures.


----------



## mistergreen

I'm getting gsa on my Staurogyne sp. 'Porto Velho' but no stunting so I have no idea what nutrient it's lacking. I'm adding 1/4 tsp of kh2po4 in my 75G every other day. How much are you adding?


----------



## Cardinal Tetra

Very nice. The symptoms shown can be more trusted than pictures from people who simply guess at what deficiency their plants have.


----------



## Wasserpest

Very interesting. How long did it take for the plants to show the signs? Was the P level zero?

See what happens when you starve them of nitrates.


----------



## brianS

I love seeing this kind of stuff...someone going over the edge to experiment what works and what doesn't. New meaning to the term "trial & error". In this case, error on purpose. Thanks!


----------



## Da Plant Man

You sure you did that on purpose? Lol, just kidding!

Thanks a lot sewingalot, now I know what to look for!


----------



## sewingalot

I was not adding any phosphates at the time other than what was taken from fish food/waste. It registered somewhere between 0 and .25 ppm on the tests for over a week. Not sure if it was entirely zero, but close. It took about 5 days for the minor deficiencies to start showing, but the stunting, darker coloration showed up in about 8 days. 

I'll work on nitrates next after I give the plants a good two weeks or so of over fertilizing. I'll probably do this on the 55, since it's usually the tank I experiment with. I'll even turn down the lighting to half the amount first.


----------



## Amazonfish

This is pretty awesome. Will you post your future results in this thread? Subscribed for sure :biggrin:


----------



## Rockhoe14er

wow great post. Thanks so much for this. Did you notice your plants were pearling less?


----------



## sewingalot

Sure, I can go through all the macros, and then the micros as a whole. I've been looking for micros individually, but haven't found them cheap enough to experiment with. To make sure it's not a potassium deficiency with the nitrates, I'll make sure to dose K2SO4. I have a couple neat pictures of magnesium deficiency around here somewhere back when I was using distilled water and adding back chemicals. I'll make sure to dig them up as well.

As far as pearling, there was always the microbubbles such as shown in the first picture floating around. But to be honest, I think this had more to do with the diffusion method than anything. The crappy riccia pearls within an hour or two of co2 kicking on. But there was a lot less 'streaming.' I actually consider streaming more accurate to pearling than micro bubbles, anyway. When I did see it, the stream was always coming from damaged leaves.


----------



## sewingalot

Since I wasn't wanting to stress out my downoi and UG anymore, and I had recently turned off a bank of lights on the 55 to slow down growth, the drop checker is green and I dosed EI for a week. 

Then I stopped dosing KNO3 while still dosing the others. And typical of me, I forgot to add K2SO4 in the initial stages of my restricting nitrate. Within a few days, the lower leaves of the hygro started showing signs already on the lower leaves. I figure it is because this plant in general is a nutrient hog.

So, I snapped a couple pictures after removing the leaves:



















Apparently, stressing the plants may have caused the blyxia japonica to send out a shoot:










Here are the seeds out of the pod (sorry for the blurry picture):










Pretty cool, huh? :biggrin: I am giving the plants a week or so of full EI dosing so I can give them a rest from the lack of K to see and then I will go back to restricting KNO3. Already, the leaves have stopped developing pinholes, so I am almost certain this was potassium deficiency. However, we will see when I start limiting nitrates and hopefully remember to supplement with potassium this time. I am actually setting up a pill holder with the potassium, phosphates and micros after I post this so I don't forget this time. I'll start Monday with the limiting of nitrates, so stay tuned.


----------



## Cardinal Tetra

Your signature should be "plant torturer" 
Did you plant the Blyxa seeds?


----------



## sewingalot

If letting the seeds float throughout the tank until they found refuse counts as planting, then yes.  I thought that was awesome. I didn't mean to smash the pod, but it kind of snapped open like honeysuckles do. It was neat, really.

My plants love me, and I am so mean to 'torture' them. What is really funny is the fact that I apologized to them and thanked them for letting me experiment last week. My husband laughs at me so often nowadays....


----------



## Wasserpest

Very impressive that you get these symptoms within a few days. Especially considering you turned down the lights. Your plants are some voracious eaters.

It's pretty common for plants to go generative when under stress. If you have a plant in your garden that doesn't seem to want to flower, like a Lilac or Wisteria (the big ones), you can cut off part of the root system, they'll think life is coming to an end, and start to flower. :smile:

Anyway, looking forward to your N deficiencies.


----------



## sewingalot

I think it has something to do with the fact I have a lot of fast growing stems like lindernia and hygro in the tank. They seem to eat up the nutrients pretty quick. I think it was like 5 or 6 days when I first noticed the pinholes on the bottom leaves. I keep telling myself I'm going to write things down, but I get lazy and forget. I'll probably boost the lights back up after the experiments. I'm missing the trimming now. 

Makes sense about the blyxa. I used to get my spider plants to send out babies by stressing it out a bit. I actually moved a few blyxa into another tank just in case I kill it in the 55 during all this 'torture.' 

I'm also going to use csm+b as I am getting some strange coincidences with millers and my ludwigias melting. Just want to rule this out altogether. 

After this, I'll need to give my plants a much deserved rest from me and my clever ideas.


----------



## mountaindew

I enjoy following these threads.
One gains experience from change and observation.

sewingalot aka youngfrankenstein 
md


----------



## sewingalot

Thanks, mountaindew. I was really starting to wonder if anyone actually wanted to read this kind of stuff any more. At least I am not talking to myself.


----------



## defiesexistence

If you are talking to yourself, I'm listening. It's most interesting. What's your next torture plan?


----------



## wkndracer

you are not alone,
the forum stalkers are indeed monitoring this evil plant abusing thread


----------



## barbarossa4122

wkndracer said:


> you are not alone,
> the forum stalkers are indeed monitoring this evil plant abusing thread


Lol!!!!!!!

I keep 3-5 ppm of Po4, 30 ppm of No3 and according to my dosing around 30 ppm of K.


----------



## sewingalot

defiesexistence said:


> If you are talking to yourself, I'm listening. It's most interesting. What's your next torture plan?





wkndracer said:


> you are not alone,
> the forum stalkers are indeed monitoring this evil plant abusing thread


Haha, I like the phrase 'forum stalkers.' That's cheered me up quite a bit.  I forgot to mention, I moved the rotala macranda in this tank and it's looking pretty crappy with less lighting. I wanted to see what removing nitrates does to reds. I should take a picture and update my journal before I go into nitrate torture. That way I'll have something to remember when things get ugly.

After this, I am going to dose only through the substrate and see what happens with the stems. Of course, I can't eliminate it altogether because I'll have what's naturally in our water and fish food and poop. However, I do plan not to only small water changes to minimize the amount coming in from the water. 

Oh, and then I am going to be removing the larger pieces of substrate and adding some turface in its place.

After all that, I am probably going to need someone to donate plants to me. :icon_twis


----------



## Joe.1

It is awesome to see someone with a bunch of knowledge go out of their way to do these experiments. It helps and explains alot of things for people like myself who are getting lost in all this dosing. Keep the goods coming and many thanks for all the information.


----------



## sewingalot

barbarossa4122 said:


> Lol!!!!!!!
> 
> I keep 3-5 ppm of Po4, 30 ppm of No3 and according to my dosing around 30 ppm of K.


I must ask what this has to do with anything being discussed here or over in my BBA thread where you posted something similar? This is so random....:confused1:



Joe.1 said:


> It is awesome to see someone with a bunch of knowledge go out of their way to do these experiments. It helps and explains alot of things for people like myself who are getting lost in all this dosing. Keep the goods coming and many thanks for all the information.


Haha, I wouldn't say I have a bunch of knowledge, but thanks. :icon_wink I just remember reading a bunch on nutrient deficiencies, but there are very little photos out there on them. I've gotten to the point in this hobby that I want to see "what happens if I....."


----------



## plantbrain

sewingalot said:


> I've been playing around with my fertilizers for the fun of it to see what nutrient deficiencies really look like on a plant. My plan was to dose everything but one nutrient (in excess) and to provide plenty co2. We see lots of drawings, but rarely pictures. Thought someone other than me might like to see what happens when you let your phosphates get too low:
> 
> Rotala macranda turns orangish/pink:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rotala rotundfolia sp '?' turns purplish/gets stunted:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> UG turns pale and gets green spot algae:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HC gets a darker green than normal as well. I am going to let my plants rest a while and start feeding them again. If interested, I'll show more deficiencies in the future. Probably with another tank, though because I am too in love with this tank to keep up the harassment.


I actually agree fully with each of these pics, these are classic symptoms for these specific species. You will note very different responses for each plant species, eg, we cannot bunch them all into one type of general grouping, they need to be specific to each species.


----------



## plantbrain

sewingalot said:


> I was not adding any phosphates at the time other than what was taken from fish food/waste. It registered somewhere between 0 and .25 ppm on the tests for over a week. Not sure if it was entirely zero, but close. It took about 5 days for the minor deficiencies to start showing, but the stunting, darker coloration showed up in about 8 days.
> 
> I'll work on nitrates next after I give the plants a good two weeks or so of over fertilizing. I'll probably do this on the 55, since it's usually the tank I experiment with. I'll even turn down the lighting to half the amount first.


PO4 will show up fast, Mg as well, and recovery occurs rapidly, typically starting in less than 1 hour.

N less so, CO2 fairly quick unless it is strong over time then recovery can be painfully long.

I'd give the plants 4 weeks for N.
Some goodies to work with N: Mic umbrosum, Ammannia, P stellata, Most milfoils. Also note recovery times there after. FYI, the purple color is more classic coloring in the Rotala, and the orangy color in R mac is common.
These are well known from the PMDD dosing days when all things evil where PO4. GSA is another sign.


----------



## barbarossa4122

I thought you are talking about some nutrients deficiencies. Sorry, for posting on your important threads.


----------



## nonconductive

wkndracer said:


> you are not alone,
> the forum stalkers are indeed monitoring this evil plant abusing thread


indeed.


----------



## Sharkfood

What a great thread! 

I think many of us have thought about trying these things, but don't have the space or resolve. It's nice to be able to follow how the plants respond in "real time".


----------



## Gatekeeper

Excellent thread Sara. I will concur that you should recover the system over a good period of time before starving the next nutrient. You may see things go awry if you try to jump to quickly.

Blyxa coloration is perfect. I was able to get it all the way red just once and I never was quite sure how I did it.


----------



## sewingalot

Yeah, it'll be a while before I starve the tank again, I'll give it a few weeks off of luxury uptake before I punish it more. Plus, I need to trim a bunch, things are growing out of the water again. I am noticing the phosphates are getting a little low (rotala was turning purple, GSA showing up on the glass) since upping the K. I am wondering if the plants went into high drive from the starvation mode and decided to suck up as much as possible? Kind of like your body does on yo-yo dieting. I'll leave that up to the experts to decide on. 

The blyxa coloring is pretty nice, I didn't even notice that. I do see that I spelled it wrong, though. I tend to spell things in my accent at times. And I mispronounce many things. :O) I like the deep tint it has right now, it's almost burgundy red. If you ever figure out how to repeatedly get that really red blyxa, let me know. I can get it pretty red with lots of light, but I get tired of the trimming.

I figure a month or so and I'll have some pictures on the nitrates. I am still looking for my Mg deficiency in glosso and anubias pictures from a while back. I take too many pictures, I have like thousands of pictures I never bothered to erase. When I find them, I'll stick them in here as well.


----------



## Captivate05

Shoot, looking at the pictures I'm starting to think I'm not dosing enough PO4, especially considering I'm seeing more and more GSA on some plants and the glass...

Definitely following this thread. I'm fascinated by this


----------



## sewingalot

Just up the phosphates slowly to see what is needed. Of course, I am in the minority that believes in toughing up your plants and not making them so lazy. So always take my advice with a grain of salt. Alternatively, you could just dump in a bunch and call it a day. I am more of the poetic than the scientific type.

*What really matters is doing what works for you.* <--- Just wanting to really emphasize this point.


----------



## sewingalot

While looking for the Magnesium deficiency pictures, I found one of iron deficiency in my java fern that I had bought a long time ago. Notice how green the healthy parts are in comparison. Sorry for the small picture:










The second shows this same plant in recovery (very far left). Notice how much greener it is overall. This tank was one of my earlier ones set up at work to be low tech, so be gentle:


----------



## sewingalot

plantbrain said:


> PO4 will show up fast, Mg as well, and recovery occurs rapidly, typically starting in less than 1 hour.
> 
> N less so, CO2 fairly quick unless it is strong over time then recovery can be painfully long.
> 
> I'd give the plants 4 weeks for N.
> Some goodies to work with N: Mic umbrosum, Ammannia, P stellata, Most milfoils. Also note recovery times there after. FYI, the purple color is more classic coloring in the Rotala, and the orangy color in R mac is common.
> These are well known from the PMDD dosing days when all things evil where PO4. GSA is another sign.


Taking some of Tom's advice here and will be noting the progression, recovery of species. I'll be posting a lot of pictures today, so try not to hate me, especially when some are not the best of quality! :eek5:

I decided to continue to strip the water column of all fertilizers in the 15 gallon. I was determined that algae would go away and the plants would do just fine with no outside fertilization. Boy, was I wrong! You'll love those pictures. For the record: algae is not only present, but prevalent in some areas of both tanks as I start lowering nutrients, especially the nitrates.

Also, this is actually becoming a fun experiment. I decided not to take a week off (mainly because my life worked out that way) and instead just switched from not dosing phosphates in the 55 and upping those but pulling out all the nitrates. 

For the record: This is the lowest I've ever seen my API tests get, especially with the phosphates. I put the green eheim tubing in the background just to give a color reference. Not really going for accuracy on the test kits as I know they aren't fool proof, but I am using them just to illustrate. They work well enough for my experiments.

On the left is phosphates, on the right is nitrates. Both reading dead one zero in the 15 gallon. Our drinking water is more colorful than this!









I bet you all are just waiting to see the pictures impatiently now, huh? :icon_roll

While you wait, here is the picture of the magnesium deficiency. I finally found it. Tom's right, the recovery time is quick. I wish I had a before and after of it. Notice the bottom left for the worst of it. See the dark green veining and loss of color elsewhere? I knew this was magnesium solely because I was able to recover this with just adding Mg to the water. In addition, I was consistently able to reproduce the deficiency by removing the extra magnesium.


----------



## hoshnasi

sewingalot said:


> _I decided to continue to strip the water column of all fertilizers in the 15 gallon_. I was determined that algae would go away and the plants would do just fine with no outside fertilization.


Help me out here since I am total noob. When you mean "strip the water column" are you referring to not putting in any more ferts in and waiting for the plants to digest or the frets to dissipate on their own?

By doing this I assume it reduces algae growth but also makes the plants starve a bit? Will the plants level out eventually though with a lack of ferts?

Thank you!


----------



## sewingalot

hoshnasi said:


> Help me out here since I am total noob. When you mean "strip the water column" are you referring to not putting in any more ferts in and waiting for the plants to digest or the frets to dissipate on their own?


Yes, that is exactly what I meant.



hoshnasi said:


> By doing this I assume it reduces algae growth but also makes the plants starve a bit? Will the plants level out eventually though with a lack of ferts?
> 
> Thank you!


I used to think so, but it doesn't quite work out that way. 
The plants were dying and I would remove the dead parts from the tank, yet the GDA was flourishing. I think people forget (at least I have) that algae is opportunistic. I can grow algae in waters that can't sustain even moss. It doesn't eat much. I suspect the amount needed for growth are probably not even detectable test kits. Perhaps if I got to the point I continued the experiment it would eventually level out, but I doubt it. Plants need food to survive. 

Here's the damage on the 15 gallon:










Give me some more time to finish looking through the photos I've taken to find the least blurry ones, and I'll share details.


----------



## nonconductive

very interesting!


----------



## plantbrain

And we are doomed to repeat history again & again
Actually this is good, since it matches what many found about 15 years ago now.

Sometimes for many of us, it's better to learn and see for ourselves, then we are much more sure of what we see. Simply taking my word, or Sewingalot's is not enough for many, particularly on the web.

Why?
In person, in a club etc.......fellow members can come over and see the ferts, the results, and the result is right in front of you. You rule out one thing, then that should raise 5 more new questions......

So it can help to have other folks who have gone down the path help suggest some tests, methods and to avoid some pitfalls. But not take my or their word it, learn it yourself.

I do not ask that.
I ask you to ask the questions of yourself.


----------



## nonconductive

plantbrain said:


> learn it yourself.
> 
> I ask you to ask the questions of yourself.


+1

This is where my issue lies with the web. A lot of people repeat Tom's advice just because it's Tom's. They need to come to conclusions on their own, & then agree or disagree.


----------



## plantbrain

nonconductive said:


> +1
> 
> This is where my issue lies with the web. A lot of people repeat Tom's advice just because it's Tom's. They need to come to conclusions on their own, & then agree or disagree.


Precisely, do not take my word for anything, answer it yourself, then you no longer need my advice, it's now your advice.
The results should speak for themselves if the methods are good.
No need to say much else, the result is the result.

I nag folks I know, but only to question themselves and see the fallacy that many newbies and intermediates miss, do not feel bad.......we all have made plenty of mistakes along the way, I just hope I can help more not make the same bad ones that get you stuck in a rut.

This way you can help more newbies and the next wave of newbies after that.

Once many folks "know" and answer things for themselves etc, they often fade away from forums and helping others. So a lot of experience is lost. Hopefully more will stick around and help the next generation.

A coggle of newbies on the web can be a dangerous thing:hihi:
Then an intermediate with enough to sound good, but not able to put all the parts together can get themselves in a pickle too.

But...if they have to tools and the method available to rule things out and move forward stepwise........then they can get somewhere as a group, even if not individually they can each fix their say......CO2 or light issue, at least they can rely on the other cohorts and realize that they can rule a few things fairly well.

It's much easier for 20 people to post than me aloneroud:


----------



## drlower

sara, i have really enjoyed this thread and found it very educational. you have inspired me to do some testing of my own,but im to scared to do this with my tanks. so i have decided to torture my wifes houseplants. ill let you know how it turns out.


----------



## rickztahone

Sewingalot: do you dry dose? I so, what are your ideal quantities of each fert? Tsp etc.


Tom, I follow the EI method currently and follow the recommended quantities but do not know how to determine if I need others such as Mg and others. Are there test kits to determine this?


----------



## DrLav

This link was posted the other day showing the effects of various deficiencies. However,the photos are very cool to see. The line drawings just don't do it justice.


----------



## plantbrain

DrLav said:


> This link was posted the other day showing the effects of various deficiencies. However,the photos are very cool to see. The line drawings just don't do it justice.


There are serious issues with this chart.
I'll let you all guess what they are.


----------



## plantbrain

rickztahone said:


> Sewingalot: do you dry dose? I so, what are your ideal quantities of each fert? Tsp etc.
> 
> 
> Tom, I follow the EI method currently and follow the recommended quantities but do not know how to determine if I need others such as Mg and others. Are there test kits to determine this?


Same as any other nutrient, add GH booster which adds 25% Espom salt, MgSO4. this covers K+, Mg and Ca all at once after the water change and allows folks to dial any a specific TDS if they so chose without messing with NO3/P/Fe etc.

CMS also has some Mg in it.
You can measure GH and then say Ca alone, then substract the difference since GH is both the Ca and the Mg. The remainder is Mg.

Mg is the central atom in the chlorophyll molecule, and the molecule is also very Nitrogen rich, the rest of it is basically a long Carbon tail so you need good CO2 as well.

You cannot piece meal nutrients, one effects the other and indirect effects are common when you run lean tanks, sometimes it works fine, but many other times it does not.

The question is "why".
Some(most) do not care "why", only that it "works".
We can answer why not easier than why and remove some possible candidates.

Still, correlation does not imply cause, many make this assumption(Don't be this guy/gal). All it takes are few folks to falsify the claim and it's toast.
This applies to these charts that many seem to love like those worthless light chart calculators etc. 

You cannot micromanage this stuff, better to think holistically, and with special regard to CO2. Only then can we go back and critical test nutrients one at time. It's work and many are too lazy(but wanna use their correlation alone to say a bunch of speculation), that's the plain simple truth. 

Painful, but true.

Once you master the CO2/light well, only then can you test the nutrients well. But most have not, which is why they have issues, nutrients are easy otherwise.


----------



## plantbrain

We can assume that Sewingalot's methods are good since she is getting the similar types of expression in plants that others with good CO2/light controls have as well.

Take this example: 2 folks have no algae and dose 5ppm of PO4.
One guy comes along and notes a correlation in his algae and PO4 dosing.
He states that above 0.4ppm of PO4, his algae increases.

Which of the 3 folks have a reference control and no confounding factors?
Which has a problem with their CO2 or some other nutrients, light etc?

Who would you trust to make such a determination and which tank would serve as a control in a test for algae blooms??

This same approach is useful for nutrient deficiencies or toxicities.
Or toxicity with shrimp/fish etc.

You need some degree of mastery already however...... that is the catch.
And there's always a catch.


----------



## sewingalot

plantbrain said:


> But not take my or their word it, learn it yourself.
> 
> I do not ask that.
> I ask you to ask the questions of yourself.


I love your honesty, Tom. I've made a lot of the same mistakes and have given bad information with good intentions. Now I try to limit myself to greeting people to the forum and sticking to basics. I know I am always fallible and it makes sense to me to test anything I start to believe. 

You may nag, but that's what some people need to see. A lot of the times people will say "Tom Barr says x, y and z" and that's supposed to be sufficient evidence for us all. Sometimes I think to question you makes me immediately the enemy by some. But it doesn't matter, I'm here to learn. I'll still always question when I don't understand and test it out for myself. Sometimes I wonder if you and your friend didn't test out the phosphate theory, would so many hobbyist (including me) be around today?

Yeah, this has been done before and I'm going back to beat a dead horse, but I wanted to see it for myself. I encourage others to do the same. I wanted to know what was being told to me was true and whether or not I was right in some of my assumptions. This has taught me I am wrong on lots of stuff. 




drlower said:


> sara, i have really enjoyed this thread and found it very educational. you have inspired me to do some testing of my own,but im to scared to do this with my tanks. so i have decided to torture my wifes houseplants. ill let you know how it turns out.


Haha, you don't know how long I've been wanting to test this and wouldn't go through with it for the same reason you relayed. It kind of hurts to see the tanks right now. But hey, this gives me another experiment. I can see what happens when things start to recover.



rickztahone said:


> Sewingalot: do you dry dose? I so, what are your ideal quantities of each fert? Tsp etc.
> 
> 
> Tom, I follow the EI method currently and follow the recommended quantities but do not know how to determine if I need others such as Mg and others. Are there test kits to determine this?


Rick, I've done many methods. Dry dosing, liquids, substrate only, substrate and water, and nothing at all. My ideal quantities of each fert is based on an algorithm made for me by Stephen Hawking. I swore I'd never reveal the formula. :hihi: 

Truthfully, I am still a newb at this. That's why I started doing this experiment. I think that is why I am failing at the EI and other methods, ultimately. I wasn't aware of what to look for in order to +/- the amount of nutrients along the way.

Something, I found out recently for example after giving up on the EI method? Tom actually recommends using a GH booster. This would take care of your magnesium, calcium and extra potassium. No wonder I was seeing K deficiencies. I wasn't using this. I'm actually going back and trying again with my new knowledge. I'll report back in this thread my findings. If I fail again. I'll start questioning my lighting......maybe. 



DrLav said:


> This link was posted the other day showing the effects of various deficiencies. However,the photos are very cool to see. The line drawings just don't do it justice.


This is a great drawing. However, I wonder why they fail to point out the obvious of first getting good co2 and manageable lighting? Without these things, some nutrients cannot even be taken in properly. I was having this problem with phosphates. I was showing deficiencies, but was adding in 5 ppm. The co2 wasn't up to snuff to allow this to happen. Once I adjust the co2 a bit, the phosphate deficiency symptoms disappeared.

Pictures to follow in my next posts. I just wanted to talk here and leave the picture posts pretty clean of excessive words. You know, make it a picture book. :wink:


----------



## sewingalot

Haha, I started the above post so long ago (11 pm), that I see Tom's posted already three posts. I'll go back to read it in a bit.

Pictures will be posted within an hour.


----------



## sewingalot

*Nitrate deficiencies - Algae returns!*

First up - 55 gallon tank background
No nitrates, EI dosing on all other nutrients (plus an extra 1/8 teaspoon per week on phosphates for good measure) including GH boosters. Co2 on 24/7 nice emerald green, pearling within an hour of lights on. Lights are 9 3/16 above the rim 108 T5HO during this time period. Please forgive my water spots/possible blur in the upcoming pictures.

This was the first sign I showed. This came about before even the plants started showing signs. Mostly stayed in the substrate and For those who might not know, blue green algae is actually a cyanobacteria and isn't even an algae. Also, not all but some forms of cyano are actually quite harmful to fish and humans.










Growing under the silicone, even









Closeup, it is similar in texture of pudding (yes, I always speak in food references, I'm chubby....)









Another closeup:









And it you look in the upper right, Black Beard Algae (BBA)









Guess this blows my theory on excess nutrients causing by BBA problems officially now. In both the low phosphate and nitrate scenario, BBA flourished just as it always had.

Next up? Specific plants and their reaction over this experiment. I'll post a new thread with each type of plant.


----------



## sewingalot

I just spent one half of an hour writing up a post just to find out I hit the wrong button and closed the window. I am very irritated with myself and cranky. Therefore, the next set of pictures will come along tomorrow. It is already 1:30 am here, and I need to  I must apologize for my delay.


----------



## sewingalot

*Accidental discovery*

Well, I am with my brother and I can't sleep. He has the heat up too high and I am not able to get comfortable. I sought solace in the coolest room in the house. So I figured I might as well post these for the insomniacs like myself. 

This was an accidental discover of what can happen with micro nutrients. I tried out the miller's microplex and was not doing well with it. (You could look up my melting ludwigia arcuata thread for more details.) I dosed half of what was suggested initially and the plants looked weak. But when I dosed the full amount, the ludwigias would start to melt overnight. Once I switched back over to CSM+B, the problem went away within days. Well, at least for the arcuata. My poor senegalensis bit the dust in this experiment of switching out micros. On the plus side, Csmb is cheaper. :thumbsup:

What is my conclusion? I think it could have been too little or, maybe too much. But my official conclusion is this: I am not really sure. I just know that it was related to micros. 

Just thought I would share that good dosing of micros are indeed very important.

Melting ludwigia arcuata








Recovering








Recovered










Ludwigia senegalensis/
Ludwigia sp. 'Guinea'


----------



## sewingalot

*Onto the nitrate and phosphate deficiency! (15 gallon except macranda green)*

Couple of quick notes. The 15 gallon was deprived of all nitrates and phosphates and allowed to bottom out. Co2 was pushing mountain dew green on for 9 hours. Light was on for 8 hours. Both set to timers. Riccia would pearl within the hour. The light is the 9325k 55 watt GE bulb, so things do have a more red cast to them. Wanted to point this out. I could hook up the 10,000 k for comparison today when I run home if anyone is dying to see it.

*Downoi*
Depreviation



















Recovery started










I think I figured out how to get macranda green morph back into ‘butterfly.’ Starve it of nitrates. See below. :biggrin: Maybe this is why it keeps morphing on me? I am feeding it too much? Same thing happened with magenta, it morphed back to red macranda in my tanks.

*Rotala macranda green* (This is in the 55 gallon)
Initial stages 










Last days










*Rotala sp 'butterfly' and bacopa salzmannii* (remember about the bulbs.)


----------



## sewingalot

*Finally onto the nitrate deficiency with excess dosing of all other nutrients*

*55 Gallon*
Co2 emerald green with 5 dkh solution, runs 24/7 (broken solenoid was removed). Only two 54w T5HO were used for this experiment and were on 8 hours. Bulbs are 6500k and 10,000k.

The pictures will be in order from initial days, toward end of experiment and recovery period. The recovery is only a few days old at this point. Some plants weren't included in the recovery pics because they either died or haven't recovered yet. 

I’ll have to update in a month or so. I have also decided to initially start out with only 2 bulbs to see if Tom is right about things growing just as nice. I figured why not?

I'll comment more later, but now it is time for me to get ready for the day.

*Bacopa sp ‘japan’*









*Bacopa sp. 'Araguaia'/Bacopa salzmannii*



























This is actually the same stem days apart. This is at the end of the experiment and the later is the recovery.

















*Lindernia sp india*












































*Hemianthus micranthemoides*
Deficiencies showed up quickly. BGA loved this plant as it was close to the substrate.










Notice the platy sneaking in the picture?


















*Eriocaulon sp ‘type 2’*


















*Echinodorus 'vesuvius'* (this name was recently changed, but I don’t remember the new one)









*Micranthemum umbrosum *



























*Rotala macranda red*


















*Rotala rotundfolia sp ‘colorata*’


















Recovery:


----------



## Rockhoe14er

wow excellent post.


----------



## sewingalot

I forgot to mention this earlier in this thread and it's relevant. My camera was recently broken and shows some of the pictures in particular the reds and whites to have a little weird tint to them because it was stuck on some weird mode of white balance. I am sorry that that happened, but I have since gotten another simple point and shoot camera (for my anniversary) and the later pictures were taken with that. I still wanted to give you guys a visual, though. The squashed node length the melting leaves, curling and stunted new growth is what I was trying to illustrate, anyway. If you what to know more about the coloring and you are unsure of it because of the funky tint on some of the pictures, please don't hesitate to post a question here or pm me. I'll try my best to give you a color description to accurately describe it.


----------



## lauraleellbp

Did you notice any coloration changes with lack of K?


----------



## sewingalot

Not really. I had a little parameters of yellow and sometimes brown outside of the pinholes. Eventually the leaf would loose it's vigor, but it took a long time for me to see that occur. Usually because I pick of leaves like that as soon as I see them. No need to give algae a landing pad of oozing nutrients.


----------



## Captivate05

So... the nitrate deficiency pictures are the like a reflection of my tank...

Oops. Guess I was adding far too little ferts, so I went back to square one EI recommendations for EI. Life's been hectic for me lately, so I have been forgetting to dose my tank. Time to bust out the medicine thingies that you put your daily meds in for a week, and get like four of them. That should help...

I'll report back if I see improvements.

Thanks Sara, for holding these experiments. You're helping me out a lot roud:


----------



## lauraleellbp

Nice of Sara to offer up here tank as a guinea pig, isn't it? :biggrin:

Now when newbies ask how to tell when their plants are nutrient deficient, we've got someplace to link them to, with everything all in one spot! roud:

Acutally that just made me think- something like this would be sticky or article-worthy, Sara...


----------



## sewingalot

Oooh! I forgot pictures:

Late stages of rotala butterfly: 




























And what I thought was GDA (green dust algae) is actually mostly BGA (cyanobacteria) and diatoms!!!


----------



## mistergreen

Next deficiency, CO2!

Hey, document which algae show up and die off too. I found a scientific abstract online saying thread algae loves CO2 but I'd have to buy to get the full paper.


----------



## AoxomoxoA

sewingalot = awesome  

I absolutely love your threads, I think I may learn more from your experimenting than anyone/anywhere else. I don't have the [censored] to abuse my plants:redface:I only figure these same things out when I screw up as opposed to trying to prove & reprove.

Thank you :fish:


----------



## sewingalot

One important thing to remember, though! You've got to get that co2 and light dialed in. Trust me, I am the worst at blasting my tanks and getting the co2 out of whack. I am not saying you have to use low light, because I appreciate super bright tanks more for personal reasons, however, you have to remember if your co2 isn't working at its optimum, nutrients may be in excess in the water column but the plants aren't able to eat them all up. I've found a strong correlation with co2 and phosphates. Every time I was having problems with algae, the phosphates were through the roof, and the plants started to suffer. What was happening is my tank didn't have two things, good consistent co2 and enough nitrates. I wanted to say phosphates caused all my problems, and for a long time, I strongly believed that. Now I am realizing that tanks are a system. Every thing relates from filters to maintenance to nutrients to co2 to light.

I kind of think of co2 as an appetite. The more co2 provided, the hungrier the plants get. And I think of light as the stomach. The brighter the light is the bigger the stomach. So they need more food to be satisfied. So if you do push extreme light levels with good co2, you may need more than the EI method starting point, especially as your tank grows. That's my thinking, though.

And for algae? Well, as you can see in this example, it can still live quite fine in lower nutrient levels (i.e. fish food/waste) if still provided adequate light. Want to get rid of algae? Prevent it. Have healthy plants and you won't notice the parts that stay behind and eventually, many will just live in silence in spore form waiting for you to screw up that system again. :hihi:


----------



## sewingalot

mistergreen said:


> Next deficiency, CO2!
> 
> Hey, document which algae show up and die off too. I found a scientific abstract online saying thread algae loves CO2 but I'd have to buy to get the full paper.


Sorry for the double post, but you ninja'd me.  I have a ton of deficiency photos of co2. Just look at my journals. :hihi: But if anyone out there wants to agree to send me some plants if I torch every thing, I'll be happy to once I see what happens with the EI - 2 boring dull lights recovery.

Yeah, I'll keep track of the algae too. Just remind me after the plants recover and I'll start it all over again in the 55. I'm not torturing my 15 any more. :icon_wink



dirtyhermit said:


> sewingalot = awesome
> 
> I absolutely love your threads, I think I may learn more from your experimenting than anyone/anywhere else. I don't have the [censored] to abuse my plants:redface:I only figure these same things out when I screw up as opposed to trying to prove & reprove.
> 
> Thank you :fish:


Thanks for the compliments. I just wanted to test why I kept failing. These threads kind of evolve as a result. Just remember dirtyhermit, don't follow my examples unless you want disaster to strike. :biggrin:


----------



## plantbrain

sewingalot said:


> Guess this blows my theory on excess nutrients causing by BBA problems officially now. In both the low phosphate and nitrate scenario, BBA flourished just as it always had.


Steve and myself confirm this together, we tried everything and even 6 months long test to kill it via nutrient limitations(he PO4, me NO3).

BBA from Hades.

Took me 3 years to fix BBA once and for all.
It was the real mofro.


----------



## plantbrain

sewingalot said:


> And for algae? Well, as you can see in this example, it can still live quite fine in lower nutrient levels (i.e. fish food/waste) if still provided adequate light. Want to get rid of algae? Prevent it. Have healthy plants and you won't notice the parts that stay behind and eventually, many will just live in silence in spore form waiting for you to screw up that system again. :hihi:


And you hath learned the hardest thing to teach is algae control, focus on the plants, then algae are not an issue.


----------



## mistergreen

Have you limit micros yet?
You might have to not feed the fish in a while.


I'm seeing some discussion on this micro mix vs that micro mix... Not sure if it matters all that much.


----------



## plantbrain

Micros take no less than 3 weeks........and you need to be pretty careful, some plants are real good at dealing with limiting nutrients and others are not.


----------



## fishykid1

I've got a little thing going on in my tank as well. Let's see if we can figure it out? 

http://www.plantedtank.net/forums/g...37-my-experiment-observations-dosing-co2.html

There's my experiment thread the first time. My conclusion was that it was a co2 deficiency, as discussed between Mr. Barr and I.

However, even after increased co2 I'm *still* experiencing some minor problems. Mostly with Limnophila Aromatica and Alternanthera reineckii 'rosefolia'.

My main problem with the reneckii was definitely co2. Since I raised co2 it jumped back into shape; new growth is very straight and healthy.

This is a quicky pic of old growth, notice the curly and dis formed leaves. (don't mind the black algae...)



















Here is the aromatica. I really don't know where to go on this one. I've been dosing standard EI - minus half nitrates. Some leaves melted. >.>



















Here is the rotala, that until recently adding more co2 had really crappy growth. A few stems took off. They are showing a nice orangish color at the top of the tank and are pearling amazingly day after day. (underneath you see what it used to be about 2 weeks ago; new growth has been much stronger)










No editing was done. Standard Macro settings.


----------



## sewingalot

plantbrain said:


> Steve and myself confirm this together, we tried everything and even 6 months long test to kill it via nutrient limitations(he PO4, me NO3).
> 
> BBA from Hades.
> 
> Took me 3 years to fix BBA once and for all.
> It was the real mofro.


Six months? I think I would pull all my hair out. I agree with BBA being the devil's houseplant. That why I love it now. Something that tenacious deserves some respect. :wink:



plantbrain said:


> And you hath learned the hardest thing to teach is algae control, focus on the plants, then algae are not an issue.


Tell me about it. How many times have I argued with you on this very subject? Two years now and it's just now sinking in. I'm hardheaded. 



mistergreen said:


> Have you limit micros yet?
> You might have to not feed the fish in a while.
> 
> 
> I'm seeing some discussion on this micro mix vs that micro mix... Not sure if it matters all that much.





plantbrain said:


> Micros take no less than 3 weeks........and you need to be pretty careful, some plants are real good at dealing with limiting nutrients and others are not.


Now I'm kinda scared to go forward without setting up a backup tank. I want to have some plants left. :help: But since fishykid has graciously provided co2 photos, micros will be my next course of action after the tank has fully recovered for a few months. That is, if anyone wants me to continue on. I don't mind torturing my tank for a while if it helps others. So, it'll probably be like 2 - 3 months before I get to them. Perhaps instead, I'll setup co2 for my 20 gallon and do the micronutrients in that one.

Edit: Thanks fishykid for the great pictures! I have a question though, what made you decide to only use half the nitrates in dosing?


----------



## fishykid1

sewingalot said:


> Edit: Thanks fishykid for the great pictures! I have a question though, what made you decide to only use half the nitrates in dosing?


I have a pretty good bioload and by the end of the week I was pushing up into the 35+ppm dosing 1/4tsp. KNO3. I noticed it one week when I tested the nitrates at the beginning of the week and they were ~35ppm so I decided to not check it until the end of the week with no added nitrates (other than fish). My tank pulled it down to roughly ~15ppm. Ever since I started only adding half the amount of nitrates they have held more steady (15-20ppm a week).


----------



## mountaindew

sewingalot said:


> Six months? I think I would pull all my hair out. I agree with BBA being the devil's houseplant. That why I love it now. Something that tenacious deserves some respect. :wink:


 
I do get a kick out of it growing on the backs of snails when it can find no other place  

mD


----------



## Captivate05

Wow, I have something to show already!

I went back to this at the start of last week, forgot to dose a few times, but tried my best.

And... all that lovely wonderful GDA that had painted three sides of my tank green is pretty much gone.

Wha? Plants still look like crap, but if the algae is starting to go, I'll take that as a positive!

Really need to invest in those medicine thingies that have each day of the week on it. That way I can balance a infant with one arm, drag a toddler clinging to my leg, and use one hand to dump ferts in the tank. I'll be stuck with the kids 24/7 come to find out, as DF's work is doing mandatory overtime, which means Mon-Fri normal time, and 10 hours on Sat (great for money, not for my sanity).


----------



## sewingalot

fishykid1 said:


> I have a pretty good bioload and by the end of the week I was pushing up into the 35+ppm dosing 1/4tsp. KNO3. I noticed it one week when I tested the nitrates at the beginning of the week and they were ~35ppm so I decided to not check it until the end of the week with no added nitrates (other than fish). My tank pulled it down to roughly ~15ppm. Ever since I started only adding half the amount of nitrates they have held more steady (15-20ppm a week).


That would be a great reason. How sure of you are of the test kit, though? I use mine as gauges, but I've never like to solely rely on them. And this is coming from a test kit fiend. I'd try upping your nitrates and seeing if the limno improves. Report back if you do! 



mountaindew said:


> I do get a kick out of it growing on the backs of snails when it can find no other place
> 
> mD


That is one thing I've never seen in person, but it sounds kinda cool. 



Captivate05 said:


> Wow, I have something to show already!
> 
> I went back to this at the start of last week, forgot to dose a few times, but tried my best.
> 
> And... all that lovely wonderful GDA that had painted three sides of my tank green is pretty much gone.
> 
> Wha? Plants still look like crap, but if the algae is starting to go, I'll take that as a positive!
> 
> Really need to invest in those medicine thingies that have each day of the week on it. That way I can balance a infant with one arm, drag a toddler clinging to my leg, and use one hand to dump ferts in the tank. I'll be stuck with the kids 24/7 come to find out, as DF's work is doing mandatory overtime, which means Mon-Fri normal time, and 10 hours on Sat (great for money, not for my sanity).


That's fantastic! What did you go back and change specifically from what you were doing? You'll be really having fun remembering to dose when that baby comes, I say the pill reminder is an excellent idea for you. Speaking of babies, I miss funkyfish.


----------



## plantbrain

sewingalot said:


> Tell me about it. How many times have I argued with you on this very subject? Two years now and it's just now sinking in. I'm hardheaded.


And now you have convinced yourself.:icon_idea
I could not do it, no one can make you think something.
You have to arrive it on your own.
Some get lucky and dose EI and have good CO2/light etc..........and no issues, they need no convincing.

Others, for many many reasons do not, this is true for EVERY dosing method, it's often nothing to do with the method of dosing.

It could be the CO2/light, not enough plants, the type of plants, the fish, the sediment, the the the the.........

But if you add the dose you KNOW you did that and KNOW a little bit about there. You do not KNOW much else though.

So you can say it's NOT the FERTS.
But that is all. I do not know the cure for cancer, but I know picking my butt hair is not the cause.

Ouch.......:icon_redf


----------



## plantbrain

fishykid1 said:


> I have a pretty good bioload and by the end of the week I was pushing up into the 35+ppm dosing 1/4tsp. KNO3. I noticed it one week when I tested the nitrates at the beginning of the week and they were ~35ppm so I decided to not check it until the end of the week with no added nitrates (other than fish). My tank pulled it down to roughly ~15ppm. Ever since I started only adding half the amount of nitrates they have held more steady (15-20ppm a week).


This is the target range I tend to suggest. No need to add more, but doing so poses no risk, this is good management to adjust it down however. Start high, then slowly adjust down and then once you see negative response, dose the last highest amount.

This amoutn will vary, often widely tank to tank, and we'd also expect that.
So the only one size fits' all type of dosing would be...........the higher settings, not the lower leaner settings.

The plants are already stressed in the start point is nothing or very limiting.
You will not see the optimal non limiting level going that direction, since recovery can be long and painful. Better to start with a fat plant and lean it down.

I chose EI ranges mostly based on this idea, non limiting for most tanks.
Then folks can reduce progressively and slowly. This teaches folks more also, you know what the effects of leaner nutrients are this way.


----------



## fishykid1

Very valid point. So do you think adding the normal 1/4tsp nitrates will help the limnophila aromatica's growth go back to normal? I now have all of the plants in my 75G and I'm going to have 2X54 over it for a while until I can get a grasp on the tank.... So much bigger!


----------



## sewingalot

plantbrain said:


> And now you have convinced yourself.:icon_idea
> I could not do it, no one can make you think something.
> You have to arrive it on your own.
> Some get lucky and dose EI and have good CO2/light etc..........and no issues, they need no convincing.
> 
> Others, for many many reasons do not, this is true for EVERY dosing method, it's often nothing to do with the method of dosing.
> 
> It could be the CO2/light, not enough plants, the type of plants, the fish, the sediment, the the the the.........
> 
> But if you add the dose you KNOW you did that and KNOW a little bit about there. You do not KNOW much else though.
> 
> So you can say it's NOT the FERTS.
> But that is all. I do not know the cure for cancer, but I know picking my butt hair is not the cause.
> 
> Ouch.......:icon_redf


Picking your what?







I don't even want to know....LOL

I'm in the OTHERS category. I didn't get lucky with just dosing and forgetting. I want to know why I'm in that category. I'm willing to try the EI method out with less lights, but I'm still not fond of the dumping in fertilizers if they are not going to be used. It seems to me the leftovers just gives the algae a buffet and is a waste. 

I know what you are going to say, too. You'll bring up my uber bright lights. I'm contradicting myself, right?  Speaking of turning off a set of lights, I am hurting here. Everything looks so.....dim. How long until a person gets used to that aesthetically? But for the sake of the experiment, I'll suffer with my measly 108 w t5HO over 55 gallons at 9 1/2"......
















However, since you said the 50% water changes is arbitrary, I'm refusing to change that much water on a weekly basis. I'll use wet's calculator to keep things from building up too much, though.



fishykid1 said:


> Very valid point. So do you think adding the normal 1/4tsp nitrates will help the limnophila aromatica's growth go back to normal? I now have all of the plants in my 75G and I'm going to have 2X54 over it for a while until I can get a grasp on the tank.... So much bigger!


It could be that you just need to give your plants some more time to get used to the extra co2. I've often went ahead and stripped the bottom leaves that were damaged to speed up the recovery, but it won't be pretty for a while. You can see where I've down that not too long ago and everything was so naked. 

However, I've found that too low of nitrates definitely makes the stems smaller in diameter, especially long term. But I always suggest you go slowly and have patience. Even if I do neither....


----------



## sewingalot

*Co2*

So, since I didn't follow my plan exactly and had my bulbs on four there for a while(yeah, I know - but I'm trying!), and my co2 was nearing it's time for needing a refill(ie ran out). However, I was a faithful dosing. But! Good news, I do have some nice co2 deficiencies, Mister Green. Let's start with the hardest hit - the red plants.

Rotala macranda









(This picture is darkened a bit to show the twisted leaves a little better)









Polygonum sp. 'San Paulo'









Don't worry, it's already recovering. 









Micranthemum Umbrosum


















Bacopa sp 'Carolina' (twists on new leaves, but notice how nice they looked when co2 was running smoothly - a few leaves down)









And my good old friend and constant companion, BBA is showing back up it was actually hard to find him in the tank, but I did find some showing up (look around the sword):









So I am going to TRY my best to behave and follow the EI dosing. And keep the lights turned down even though I really, really want to up them. And the co2 is in good shape again. Until then, try to love my friend, the BBA. He's not as bad as his evil twin, the BGA.


----------



## Karackle

i'm always amazed how quickly plants grow and deficiencies show up! Your CO2 has "only" been low for like a week right? (or is my sense of timing off since i basically lost 3 days being sick last week?) 

Glad to see things are recovering now that you're sticking to just 2 lights!


----------



## sewingalot

Maybe a little longer.....I don't know how long it was trying to get my attention. The good thing about fast growing stems is the fact deficiencies/recover show up a lot faster and so you can usually correct things before the tank becomes a nightmare. About the 2 lights.....if Tom wasn't MIA right now, he'd probably be tormenting me right now about how he was right.  He actually sent me some awesome articles through pm a few weeks ago that is helping me understand things a little bit better. But boy do I hate having to tell him he was right. LOL.


----------



## bsmith

Hey if you want some more CO2 deff pics let me know. Im in the third day of no co2 in my high tech 37g. I know, its horrible but I cant get out till tomorrow to refill the tank. You should see how fast L.Pantanal reacts to low/no co2, it almost looks like a normal plant now!


----------



## happi

sewingalot said:


> I just spent one half of an hour writing up a post just to find out I hit the wrong button and closed the window. I am very irritated with myself and cranky. Therefore, the next set of pictures will come along tomorrow. It is already 1:30 am here, and I need to  I must apologize for my delay.


that's what happen when you are falling sleep and don't know where the mouse is pointed at. 


love your thread and looking forward to read it through carefully, because i have learn allot from this thread, thank you Sararoud:


----------



## happi

lauraleellbp said:


> Nice of Sara to offer up here tank as a guinea pig, isn't it? :biggrin:
> 
> Now when newbies ask how to tell when their plants are nutrient deficient, we've got someplace to link them to, with everything all in one spot! roud:
> 
> Acutally that just made me think- something like this would be sticky or article-worthy, Sara...



100% agreed, this deserve to be on sticky


----------



## sewingalot

bsmith said:


> Hey if you want some more CO2 deff pics let me know. Im in the third day of no co2 in my high tech 37g. I know, its horrible but I cant get out till tomorrow to refill the tank. You should see how fast L.Pantanal reacts to low/no co2, it almost looks like a normal plant now!


Definitely post them. Especially the pantanal. I'd be interested for sure.



happi said:


> that's what happen when you are falling sleep and don't know where the mouse is pointed at.
> 
> love your thread and looking forward to read it through carefully, because i have learn allot from this thread, thank you Sararoud:


Speaking of falling asleep, I am not going to make it much longer...going on 30+ some hours without sleep. After I wake up, I'll be sure to remind you not to follow my advice, but that of others on this thread is solid. I am recruiting algae members, after all. :biggrin:

Really trying to give the tank a few weeks off and giving it time to improve before moving on, so it may be another month or so before there is any new developments. 

Oh, and for the record, I am anti-sticky. Wait....what? Well, it made sense to me when I was thinking it.


----------



## bsmith

Okay here we go. The pantanal was looking very pale but the s.madiera was certainly the worst affected in the tank. It is absolutely tiny and stunted like I have never seen. 

Pantanal









Madiera


----------



## plantbrain

L pantanal is weirdo plant. It does some odd things. The wide leaf morphology change is interesting and curious as well. It's one of the more wimpy plants regarding light intensity.

CO2 seems less critical IME.
S. belem is tougher regarding CO2.

A good article discussing the differences in CO2 and light uptake between several species is this:

http://www.plantphysiol.org/content/58/6/761.full.pdf

Figure 6 is particularly good. Compare the light/CO2 differences between Hydrilla and then Cabomba.

CO2:
http://www.plantphysiol.org/content/82/2/528.full.pdf

If you think about how aquatic plants acclimate to CO2 levels/concentrations.........and how they down regulate Rubisco when CO2 is high, then if you reduce the CO2 or move it around a lot, you can see how this can adversely affect the growth of aquatic plants.

It "confuses" them and they never can adapt well to a given CO2 level.

Some plants might do well, like Hydrilla, others will do poorly like S. belem. Such observations are common in the hobby, where we have some species doing well, whereas others are doing poorly.

Know Nothings often say it's due to excess fertilizers or some other speculation, but insist they are correct about it. But they have not done the homework and tested the other alternatives, have not tested or measured their light for that matter, and clearly have little mastery of CO2 or measuring that. You cannot say much about ferts without first mastering light and CO2, there's no reference, no control etc. If you have a well run tank and good results with ferts based on what others that have controlled light/CO2 etc, then you likely have independence from light/CO2 issues, in other words, the tank is doing well and you can add plenty of ferts with little adverse effect. I can and could very well be incorrect about a GREAT many things, however, personal gibberish, a painful lack of logic and poor methods will never uncover such failings. 

An honest curiosity about why plants do what they do, why, how, when etc.
These are much better and more productive questions than how to nail mean old Tom :tongue:


----------



## sewingalot

Thank you for those pictures, bsmith! Fine examples. I suppose that is why I should really hold off on getting more difficult plants until I get my co2 worked out. 



plantbrain said:


> These are much better and more productive questions than how to nail mean old Tom :tongue:


:flick: But it's so much fun and you know it. I've missed having you continuously prove me wrong. I'm glad you are back from vacation and posting again. It's been boring talking to myself.  

Seriously, you will be proud of me. I turned off a set of lights and can know confirm that you were indeed correct. The plants are still growing, the reds are still red. 

I love that you brought of Rubisco! Let me ask you something, do you think if you were to get up levels of co2 to optimal conditions, feed your plants unlimited and then stop the process completely, would it take a while for the plants to start misbehaving, especially the more common, easier species?

I am thinking that's what I've been doing wrong with my plants. I think, oh, they are fine without co2/fertilizers and then a few weeks down the road it's a disaster. 

Thanks for the articles. Just took a quick glance at Figure 6 and I'm already going "Huh?" Looks like I've got some reading to do. Time to crack open that old chemistry book just to understand half of it. :icon_mrgr


----------



## plantbrain

sewingalot said:


> Thank you for those pictures, bsmith! Fine examples. I suppose that is why I should really hold off on getting more difficult plants until I get my co2 worked out.


So as you can see, it's less to do with having more and more light and some fruitcake ratio of fertilization or some specific narrow(minded) range of ppm's etc.......and much more to do with CO2.



> :flick: But it's so much fun and you know it. I've missed having you continuously prove me wrong. I'm glad you are back from vacation and posting again. It's been boring talking to myself.


I do not prove you wrong, *you prove to yourself what is wrong.*



> Seriously, you will be proud of me. I turned off a set of lights and can know confirm that you were indeed correct. The plants are still growing, the reds are still red.


Well, do not get mad if folks do not listen.
Been at it for 15 years, they still don't:redface:



> I love that you brought of Rubisco! Let me ask you something, do you think if you were to get up levels of co2 to optimal conditions, feed your plants unlimited and then stop the process completely, would it take a while for the plants to start misbehaving, especially the more common, easier species?


A few days they would be fine. Some species will adapt to no CO2, no ferts better than others. These adaptive responses are mostly what determines Ecology in space and time for many species of aquatic weeds.

Wimpy plants will have a more issues, more weedy ones, less so.



> I am thinking that's what I've been doing wrong with my plants. I think, oh, they are fine without co2/fertilizers and then a few weeks down the road it's a disaster.
> 
> Thanks for the articles. Just took a quick glance at Figure 6 and I'm already going "Huh?" Looks like I've got some reading to do. Time to crack open that old chemistry book just to understand half of it. :icon_mrgr


Figure 6 is good since it shows that each species responds to light differently and that most all aquatic plants are really low light plants.
However, CO2 uptake at such lower light levels are very different between species.

So at low light, Hydrilla will do much better than say Cabomba if the CO2 is slightly limiting. If the CO2 is non limiting for both species for the entire light period, then there's no interaction/competition between them.

Folks are freaked out about algae out "competing" plants, then do not make the obvious observation that plants compete amongst themselves:icon_idea

This is more true for CO2 than most nutrients for plant hobbyist.


----------



## sewingalot

plantbrain said:


> So as you can see, it's less to do with having more and more light and some fruitcake ratio of fertilization or some specific narrow(minded) range of ppm's etc.......and much more to do with CO2.


Don't know if I still completely agree with you on this one, Tom. I think part of the problem we have is trying to separate one element out of the group when they all interact with one another. Light is the driving force, yes, but if you can get the balance figured out, you should be able to tweak the piece you like to get the desired results.

What is the difference of limiting light as compared to limiting co2 or a nutrient? Aren't you essentially doing the same thing - basically putting a limit on how you desire to grow plants?

I often choose to limit co2 for the sake of the fish, but love light. So couldn't I theoretically limit the co2 or a nutrient in order to get the results I desire? Not saying it is the correct way by any means, I am just trying to learn the pros and cons of the alternatives.



> I do not prove you wrong, *you prove to yourself what is wrong.*


True, I do admit to having an undeniable stubborn streak and I will often hold to ideas just because they are my ideas. Just ask the husband. 



> Well, do not get mad if folks do not listen.
> Been at it for 15 years, they still don't:redface:


I rarely get mad at people for not listening. It would be like getting mad at myself. It's hard to annoy me, really.



> A few days they would be fine. Some species will adapt to no CO2, no ferts better than others. These adaptive responses are mostly what determines Ecology in space and time for many species of aquatic weeds.
> 
> Wimpy plants will have a more issues, more weedy ones, less so.
> 
> Figure 6 is good since it shows that each species responds to light differently and that most all aquatic plants are really low light plants.
> However, CO2 uptake at such lower light levels are very different between species.
> 
> So at low light, Hydrilla will do much better than say Cabomba if the CO2 is slightly limiting. If the CO2 is non limiting for both species for the entire light period, then there's no interaction/competition between them.
> 
> Folks are freaked out about algae out "competing" plants, then do not make the obvious observation that plants compete amongst themselves:icon_idea
> 
> This is more true for CO2 than most nutrients for plant hobbyist.


Forgive my ignorance, but isn't this basically *Allelopathy*? I've just noticed if I put a hygrophilia in a tank with a more delicate plant like downoi and conditions aren't ideal, that hygro is going to be more advantageous than the downoi. 

I am really trying to understand the relationships between plants and nutrients, co2, temperature, filtration, lighting, everything. I don't desire to be a genius, but I do like to know how to learn how to manipulate things in my favor.

I'm still a fan of limiting nutrients to only what plants need, and I don't know if I'll ever get over that. It must be coming from my gardening days where we worked with the soil we got so to speak.

And since I was speaking of light, my red plants are still red, but I have noticed my rotalas are no longer getting the brilliant shades. Now they are all.......green. Why is this? Do I actually need more light to get the shades I desire or is a healthy rotala actually supposed to be green? I really don't know. 

What is the way to limit growth in a lower light, higher co2, EI method tank? Because quite honestly, if I was going to start selling plants, the EI method would be great for me. I feel like I have a farm tank. 

I've also noticed everything is growing way faster than I am used to with this method. It's actually a little to fast for my taste. I used to have twice the amount of light, less co2 and less nutrients and it was easier to control growth. 

I enjoyed the more manicured look that I was able to control by manipulating the recommend systems. Is there a happy medium? Or does this come down to preference?

It seems like whenever that I am looking for answers, I just keep coming up with more questions.


----------



## mistergreen

sewingalot said:


> *Allelopathy*? I've just noticed if I put a hygrophilia in a tank with a more delicate plant like downoi and conditions aren't ideal, that hygro is going to be more advantageous than the downoi.


Plants compete in other ways too like for light and CO2.
Allelopathy are chemicals sent out by plants to affect other plants/algae. Some plants do this but it's not definitive proof in aquatics.


----------



## bsmith

The problem with trying to fine tune co2 and ferts is that there is really no advantage of doing so. Maybe with ferts N in particular youse be able to coax a bit more red forms some plants by keeping levels low. But all in all there is no disadvantage to putting a's much ferts and gas in the tank (plant wise). 

Now on the completely opposite side of that arguement is light. Too much and you obviously know the repercussions there.


----------



## K B

Its really good one on pictures but personally I do not agree to stress plants..


----------



## sewingalot

mistergreen said:


> Plants compete in other ways too like for light and CO2.
> Allelopathy are chemicals sent out by plants to affect other plants/algae. Some plants do this but it's not definitive proof in aquatics.


It seems to me if there is proven terrestrial plants that do this, it's only a matter of time before the aquatic plants are proven likewise. But I am not a scientist by profession, so I'm just tossing out speculation, not fact.



bsmith said:


> The problem with trying to fine tune co2 and ferts is that there is really no advantage of doing so. Maybe with ferts N in particular youse be able to coax a bit more red forms some plants by keeping levels low. But all in all there is no disadvantage to putting a's much ferts and gas in the tank (plant wise).
> 
> Now on the completely opposite side of that arguement is light. Too much and you obviously know the repercussions there.


I would have to disagree. There are definite advantages of fine tuning fertilizers and co2 over lighting. I know what the repercussions of too much lighting in an *unbalanced* sytem does, but I also seen the simple beauty of a lot of lighting in a _*balanced*_ sytem as well. The problem is maintaining it long term. I am not saying I couldn't do it, I am just quite honestly too lazy to keep up.

I'm not saying limiting ferts to coax out coloring, but to limit growth. I think we can all agree that phosphates can very well limit growth, even stop them to the point of decay (as can other ferts). My ultimate goal is to find that fine balance on which I can teeter and still get good, slower growth with bright light. I've hit it a few times, but I get lazy and slack off. 

When I first entered the hobby, I just wanted growth and plenty of it. And I know how to accomplish that. 

Now, I am just thinking past the concepts of the "correct" way and more like - why is it the right way? Basically, I am going back to find out why I can't do x y or z. Yeah, it's been done over 15 years ago and I should be satisfied with that, but I am not. 

It's like a watch. Some are content that it simply tells time. Me? I open the back and see what makes it tick. And I often take it apart to see if I can put it back together again.


----------



## mistergreen

Just wanted to add, I've tried the lean fert method and the EI. They both work so there's no wrong way.


----------



## mistergreen

sewingalot said:


> It seems to me if there is proven terrestrial plants that do this, it's only a matter of time before the aquatic plants are proven likewise. But I am not a scientist by profession, so I'm just tossing out speculation, not fact.


Oh, I'm sure but there's no 'proof' and I think the allelophathy is very limited due to the fact that the plant is under water.


----------



## sewingalot

K B said:


> Its really good one on pictures but personally I do not agree to stress plants..


For what it is worth, I do not condone "to stress plants." I'm just sharing pictures of my plants reactions to my manipulating different scenarios. If you want to grow plants, don't ever, ever, ever follow my methods. I'll be the first to tell you that I do not know what I am talking about. I'm just (as Laura states) poking a stick at it. If you want to learn how to grow plants, look up EI method, MTS, PPS-Pro, and others. I've personally used all the methods and each have a propose. Find what fits into your lifestyle is my only suggestion.

Now, if you want to see how to screw things up, I'm your gal. I like tearing things apart. :thumbsup:


----------



## sewingalot

Going through some old photos looking for what I want to do with my tank, I stumbled across a post were my co2 had run out for an extended time period and here is some of the more extreme examples. Notice the rampant BBA, the darkening melting leaves, the twisted growth. Just gathering more pictures for everyone that might be interested. This is the hard part. Some of the co2 deficiencies are the same as nutrient deficiencies. My thinking (not entirely sure about this, mind you) is the fact co2 limits the plants ability to take in nutrients. In higher-lighted tanks, things go south quickly as we should all know by now light drives the need for co2 which drives the need for more food, regardless of the method being used to provide that food source, it's gotta balance with the lights and co2 or you might as well be throwing your money away. Just a thought.

Co2 deficiencies


----------



## sewingalot

More deficiency pictures simply because I am really good at messing up my plants. Hope this helps people.  These parameters are for an measurement guide: 1/2 bps diffused through an elite mini filter 24/7 (counted by having my husband time me while I count the times it hits the impeller, so this could be negligible), drop checker was cracked while cleaning, but the ph is 7.4 ish out of the tap and reading about 7.0 on the test, a blue with the regent, lights 2 x 54 T5HO over 55 gallons for 8 1/2 hours daily, MTS soil packed with diy fertilizer tablets, water column dosing 1/5 teaspoon mg, 1.5 teaspoon of potassium nitrate, 1/2 teaspoon mono potassium phosphate, 1/2 of potassium sulfate and 1/2 teaspoon of csm+b total weekly. The co2 was purposely turned down for the addition of new fish and these deficiencies (curling leaves mostly) started showing within a day or so on the newer growth.

Ludwigia brevipes



























Algae that wasn't here last week now popping up with the lower co2:


















Currently setting up a new tank and cycling it just to share the micro deficiencies. I kept trying in my other tanks but I forgot that I loaded them up with root tablets and the plants were fine when I stopped dosing through the water.


----------



## peyton

L brevipes and L glandulosa seems to be the most co2 sensitive plants I've seen. I'm running my drop checkers in the yellow and I'm still see curling leaves on them.


----------



## Gatekeeper

peyton said:


> L brevipes and L glandulosa seems to be the most co2 sensitive plants I've seen. I'm running my drop checkers in the yellow and I'm still see curling leaves on them.


That sounds like a light issue as well. They are light hogs, nutrient hogs and consequently CO2 hogs. There is not "low tech", from my experience, with these plants. You need to hit them and hit them hard in order to sustain the growth we as hobbyist would like to see from these species.


----------



## peyton

Gatekeeper said:


> That sounds like a light issue as well. They are light hogs, nutrient hogs and consequently CO2 hogs. There is not "low tech", from my experience, with these plants. You need to hit them and hit them hard in order to sustain the growth we as hobbyist would like to see from these species.


 I have them in two tanks. One is a 40g with 110w of CF and the other is a 29g with 110w CF. Thats 2.75 wpg in the 40 and 3.79wpg in the 29.


----------



## sewingalot

Oh, but when you get them tweaked just right, they are beautiful! Ludwigias are the cat's meow. I am finding this species is a BIG magnesium and iron eater. They do okay for me overall in moderate co2, but I am running it so low right now, I am surprised they are still alive.


----------



## pianofish

sewingalot said:


> Ludwigias are the cat's meow.


 
Nice metaphor. :hihi:


----------



## sewingalot

^Lol, maybe this is why people think I'm an old grandma with sewing needles. :hihi: 

I'd like to do some light deficiency photos, but I am having a difficult time figuring out how to accomplish this and still have all the other things in excess. So far, I've screened my 15 gallon with 4 layers and the plants I have in there are growing. Suggestions? Maybe higher light plants like....what is a higher light plant?


----------



## bsmith

I would have to say that Ludwigias are the bees knees, elbows and shoes. 

The most co2 sensitive plant I have ever kept is syngonanthus madiera ( I think I posted some pics a couple pages back), they absolutely shrink (think tiny head shrinking native people from the Congo shrink) when the co2 goes low.


----------



## sewingalot

*Light Deficiency*

Funny, bsmith. How did I loose track of this thread? I'm finding erio type 3 is very similar in experience to your syngonanthus madiera.

Check out this horrid thing I've done to it by limiting co2. (Back left side) 









But now I have my handy dandy drop checker to guide me (thanks, Nikki!), I can start tweaking back up that co2 without gassing out the yellow shrimp. roud:

As luck would have it, I have leaves with light deficiencies to share! I got a bright idea (pun intended - hey it's my thread, so you get to read to my bad jokes) to let the floaters overtake the tank for a while and then photograph the lower leaves on the plants, as we all know how ludwigias shed leaves pretty quick in lower light situations. So onto the pain and misery:























































Here is the strange thing. The potassium deficiency (pinholes) show up first. So I wanted to say this was the issue. But, I had plenty of potassium as I am using MTS and dosing a good amount each week, twice EI levels for the hygros. So why was it showing up? Here is my uneducated guess: 

Too low of light, not enough energy to use the nutrients. Kind of like being too tired to eat even though you are really hungry. So how did I know this was light deficiency? Easy. I compared notes. I pulled off two leaves from ludwigia repens x arcuata and ludwigia repens sp. 'rubin'. And then I put them in a cup of water and left them a few days.

Here they are:



















In comparison, they are very similar. Loss of color, pinholes, disintegration. One could argue that this is also lack of co2. And you are completely correct. I have similar results when limited co2. So how does one tell the difference? That is the million dollar question.

Here is my thought. Get a manageable amount of light, don't be silly like me and start out with mega high light. Follow Hoppy's schedule if you don't have a PAR meter and shoot for medium light if you plan to use co2, I guarantee you can grow just about everything. I've grown erios, red plants, even 'low light' plants with no issues.

Invest in a co2 system. You don't have to spend a lot of money, just get the best you can afford. Always, always check your co2 first. Sure, your co2 was optimal when your plants were six inches tall, but now they are 13 inches tall. Do you really think you have enough co2? My mistake was dialing it in for a low plant mass and not adjusting as the plants grew. And I would wonder why I'd have great growth and it would suddenly drop. It finally occurred to me the bigger you are, the hungrier you are. (Made sense to me when I started comparing eating to co2, light and nutrients. Hence the food references.)

Until you understand nutrients, use a method like EI, PMDD, MTS, a prepacked system like Pfertz, Rootmedic, Flourish, whatever. Just get those nutrients in there and don't skimp on them. I'm hear to personally tell you limiting nutrients, especially phosphates, *doesn't get rid of algae*. It weakens the plants and gives algae a stronger foothold. Now, I don't suggest dumping them in and forgetting about it, I personally enjoy watching my plants, adding as needed. Do what works for you. Many swear by one method or another. I'll leave that up to the experts to debate. My personal happy combination is a little dash, pinch and sprinkle. Did you think any different? 

Next deficiency, micros and then I am pretty much done with my experimenting days....maybe. Boy, do I wish I could get the micros separate so I could do one at a time! 

P.S. I promise I can grow plants, I don't just torture them. Here's a picture.


----------



## Elohim_Meth

*sewingalot*, what is MTS, apart from Malaysian Trumpet Snails and Multiple Tanks Syndrome?


----------



## Karackle

Elohim - it's *M*ineralized *T*op *S*oil......we really need to get some new acronyms around here don't we? :hihi:


----------



## Elohim_Meth

Thank you! I might have guessed it.


----------



## VeeSe

So with plants beginning to show CO2 deficiencies within a day of CO2 turning off, what do you guys do when your CO2 cylinders need to be refilled?


----------



## sewingalot

Thanks, Kara for clarifying that one! VeeSe, if I turn down the lights when I run out of co2, the plants do pretty good for a few days. I usually just turn off the lights completely if need be. The higher your light, the higher the needs for co2 and fertilizers. Run lower lights and you can use less co2.


----------



## happi

Bump for this great thread, thanks to sara. i hope this thread does not get lost in planted tank


----------



## Sharkfood

> So with plants beginning to show CO2 deficiencies within a day of CO2 turning off, what do you guys do when your CO2 cylinders need to be refilled?


Refill them before they are empty.


----------



## xxxSHyXAxxx

i feel like i'm looking at pictures of dead people and the screams of the plants haunt my dreams


----------



## nonconductive

VeeSe said:


> So with plants beginning to show CO2 deficiencies within a day of CO2 turning off, what do you guys do when your CO2 cylinders need to be refilled?


more than one cylinder


----------



## Bahugo

Sara, 
What deficiencies happen when trace isn't dosed? Have you tested it yet?


----------



## plantbrain

To really do this test for light or co2 or ferts you NEED to be able to grow the plant in question VERY WELL to begin with. If not ...then it is hard to say if it was from the treatment or from some other issue you may have overlooked. Even there, the light micromol may be even lower due to your own inability to grow the weed. Still, if the plant grows very well, it is not bad starting point.

We can amend the light or other parameters from there as new and better info comes avail.

If you cannot grow the plant to begin with....you are not good candidate time to work on the brown thumb 1st


----------



## sewingalot

happi said:


> Bump for this great thread, thanks to sara. i hope this thread does not get lost in planted tank


Thanks, Happi. I like utilizing _the scientific method_ for my little experiments. You know, the one that keeps all things constant and only changes one variable at a time? It doesn't matter if you don't own fancy equipment to measure this or that as it is more important to keep everything the same (as best you can in a tank as it's always moving) and only change one thing to see if you can come up with a theory. 

Does this mean anything, though? Only if one could repeat the process and get the same results over and over. So at this time, I will call this sewingalot's *Theory *of Deficiencies. That means it only takes one to prove me wrong. And I am alright with being proven wrong as it means you are thinking and trying things out for yourself instead of just taking the word of people who say they are smarter than us. We were all given a brain to use, right? :biggrin:



Bahugo said:


> Sara,
> What deficiencies happen when trace isn't dosed? Have you tested it yet?


Not a lot of this was tested as I lost interest in this for the algae experiments I've been doing. My passion is algae and understanding it's importance in the world. Basically, I'm learning things for the first time some people have probably known for decades. But we've all got to start out as newbies, when picking up a new hobby. :wink:

However, if you like, when I get some free time, I'll be glad to do a longer experiment. 

However, I do have some personal experience I can share with micros. Again, this is just happenstance, so I can't swear to it. However, in general, the plant looses luster (think Semi gloss versus flat paint) first, gets some twisty, smallish crinkly growth from lack of boron, and in some plants, turns whitish.

Edit: By the way, this tank has a pink bulb; the GE9325K, and everything has a pinkish hue to it. I don't know how to correct that, so I apologize.









The picture above are early warning signs. I can guarantee you they are from not giving enough trace as I wasn't dosing trace in this tank, but all other nutrients were in excess. I have just started dosing micros again, and it's already improving today. Nothing else was changed and within a short time period and the color improved significantly.

Here is a shot of blyxa showing similar issues:










Again, adding micronutrients greatly improved it's appearance within a short time period. This tank is low on Nitrates/Phosphates in the water column. Blyxa doesn't as well with MTS alone, so adding a bit of water ferts helps greatly in appearance. I get get pictures in a day or so to show the difference when I get my camera back. I left it at a friends.


Tank is very healthy, plants are growing well and fauna are obviously doing well. :icon_wink


----------



## sewingalot

Just for you, Rich, I got my camera and took pictures. Luckily, it's only a short distance for me. I'm always leaving my camera somewhere. :hihi:

Before


sewingalot said:


>


Less than two days after adding micros:









And because I couldn't figure out which downoi I took a picture of originally:









Actually, adding micros improved other plants. Nicer growth, fuller. Downoi gaining back it's coloring, the crowns are starting to get new growth. (By the way, If you look at the lower stem of the ludwigia, that is what it looked like prior to adding in potassium nitrate. You can actually see the pinholes, smaller diameter in the leaves.) 

I don't run co2 very high on this tank, only algae issue at the moment is diatoms and other microscopic green algae, but that's fine as it's free food 
and it doesn't bother me to swipe down the glass to keep things looking pretty.:










Basically, I think there are two main differences in approaching fertilizing - farming or gardening. Some believe that you never limit the needs of a plant and give it a buffet to eat from. Others believe you give them just what they need. 

Me? Tough love. Plants in nature aren't pampered, and they often times look better for it. I am in love learning the why behind Rubisco and the Calvin Cycle. Do I know what I am talking about? More than some realize but less than I'd like to. roud: Truth is, growing plants is very easy to do, I've done it, have proof in my journal, you can see close up shots of some lovely plants, even. But I enjoy the nerdy why does this happen side of plants. Could I be wrong in my assumptions? Absolutely! The important thing is this is a hobby, and I have nothing to gain by these experiments but enjoyment.


----------



## Bahugo

sewingalot said:


> Me? Tough love. Plants in nature aren't pampered, and they often times look better for it. I am in love learning the why behind Rubisco and the Calvin Cycle. Do I know what I am talking about? More than some realize but less than I'd like to. roud: Truth is, growing plants is very easy to do, I've done it, have proof in my journal, you can see close up shots of some lovely plants, even. But I enjoy the nerdy why does this happen side of plants. Could I be wrong in my assumptions? Absolutely! The important thing is this is a hobby, and I have nothing to gain by these experiments but enjoyment.


I agree! Your experiments are the best! It's not a hobby if you don't enjoy it.. We wouldn't think of you the same way if you didn't get so much fulfillment from torturing plants and harvesting algae! lol :icon_mrgr

Thanks for the info btw, I should probably start adding micro's to my tanks again... It seems like the responded quickly though?


----------



## sewingalot

Thanks, Rich! Glad you find these amusing as I am fascinated by the why behind the hobby. I don't buy into the fact you need fancy equipment to enjoy this hobby. I started out with DIY co2 and loved the hobby more for that reason alone.

In my experience, micros and magnesium (should be a macro at it's important functions) show a response quickly.

Maybe I should throw in a few happy plant pictures like this one ever once and a while so people remember I do grow plants occasionally:









What do you think? :hihi:


----------



## nonconductive

what happened to your corys? i'm thinking about moving my long fins over to the 125. when i do i will try to get a pic of them in the little container.


----------



## Bahugo

I see a few cory's in the pic she just posted unless she has others. I think you should get a school of like 20 for your 125g Non-C! I'm so pathetic about my cory's:icon_redf I think I would have two schools of like 20 if I had a 125g, I would watch them all day lol... they are so dorky together.


----------



## Bahugo

sewingalot said:


> Thanks, Rich! Glad you find these amusing as I am fascinated by the why behind the hobby. I don't buy into the fact you need fancy equipment to enjoy this hobby. I started out with DIY co2 and loved the hobby more for that reason alone.
> 
> 
> 
> What do you think? :hihi:


I think if I had the best-of-the-best equipment and everything I would loss interest. If I didn't have to fiddle with things every once in a while I would probably end up getting bored at times. 

The tank looks very lush and overgrown in a good way.


----------



## sewingalot

nonconductive said:


> what happened to your corys? i'm thinking about moving my long fins over to the 125. when i do i will try to get a pic of them in the little container.


Sore subject. I killed them overnight running co2 at a high bubble rate to keep up the "balance" of light to nutrients to co2. Long story short, this is the reason I no longer buy into the fact you have to have crazy amounts of co2 to have beautiful plants, currently running at an incredibly low bubble count and the plants grow well enough for me. I am finding oxygen is needed as well. 



Bahugo said:


> I see a few cory's in the pic she just posted unless she has others. I think you should get a school of like 20 for your 125g Non-C! I'm so pathetic about my cory's:icon_redf I think I would have two schools of like 20 if I had a 125g, I would watch them all day lol... they are so dorky together.


Lol, you see them, that's an older picture before my experimenting days started. Rich, I had a school of 16 once upon a time in my 55, they did great. They loved it. 



Bahugo said:


> I think if I had the best-of-the-best equipment and everything I would loss interest. If I didn't have to fiddle with things every once in a while I would probably end up getting bored at times.
> 
> The tank looks very lush and overgrown in a good way.


I like the jungle mess. I'm the type that loves to see every square inch packed with plants. I'm really thinking that is why I hate the current scape in my tank. It's too empty. :hihi:

I'm with you. I love to tinker. I think it's ridiculous to spend a ton of money on gadgets you'll only use a few times in the hobby. I like figuring out other ways to make it work. Don't tell me I can't grow plants just because I don't own a widget counter. Fact is I don't believe people that try to make this out to be unobtainable for the laymen. Just a cry for attention, in my book. I personally like my cheap AGA tanks.


----------



## sewingalot

Okay, Rich this is for you:

Before:









Now:
(This particular picture is with the white balance setting overexposed to show even with over exposure, it looks better, lol)



























And this is what the drop checker looks like at the end of the day:









And this is probably the truest coloring of the downoi at the moment.









Questions?


----------



## Bahugo

Love the downoi! I might have to ask you too sneak a stem or two in on that list.  Most definitely need too start adding micro's this week.


----------



## sewingalot

Roger that. It should be fully recovered by then. And if not, just ask Cardinal Tetra what my neglected downoi looks like and I think you'll be happy still.  

Pretty much, it's difficult to tell what is nutrients and what is co2 deficiency, especially when co2 is too low and starts mimicking nutrient deficiencies. So the best way to combat this would to be load up the tank with nutrients and see in two weeks if you are still having problems with your plants. If your tank is still out of whack, then you can definitely blame either too much light or not enough co2 to support the light. Once you get that figured out, you can decide if you want to continue to load the water column with a ton of fertilizers and reset it weekly (I personally find this wasteful and potentially very harmful for the environment, and costs too much $$), or give them just enough and adjust as needed. Or you can decide to be like me and torture your plants. :hihi:

I'm all for welcoming people into embracing the dark side of the hobby (i.e. think for themselves) and not just parrot the latest trends. Where is the fun in blindly drinking the kool-aid? At least be sure you prefer kool-aid to the other beverages. :redface:


----------



## Betta Maniac

sewingalot said:


> Sure, I can go through all the macros, and then the micros as a whole. I've been looking for micros individually, but haven't found them cheap enough to experiment with.


I'd be willing to chip in since you're doing all the work!


----------



## happi

Sara, it looks like you will have to torture your plants again, so many plant related question are being asked already. 

here's one from me, have you ever tortured your plants with high KH/GH water? while adding all the ferts and co2?


----------



## whitecheese4356

thanks.
visuals always help me understand a little better!


----------



## chad320

This is too funny since I started torturing my plants a little over a month ago. I quit adding ferts all together hoping to develop a better substrate for them. So far its a fail but it sure is easy


----------



## sewingalot

Betta Maniac said:


> I'd be willing to chip in since you're doing all the work!


No need. I appreciate the gesture, though. Makes me smile. The problem I am having is finding them in smaller amounts and affordable. The husband is going to check with the science department to see if they have a source.



happi said:


> Sara, it looks like you will have to torture your plants again, so many plant related question are being asked already.
> 
> here's one from me, have you ever tortured your plants with high KH/GH water? while adding all the ferts and co2?


OOOOH! Good idea! I'll start the experiments back up in the fall once I get the new tank setup and I'll put that up on the list. Right now, I'm kind of on a hiatus from my experiments.



whitecheese4356 said:


> thanks.
> visuals always help me understand a little better!


No problem.

My methods are unorthodox, I don't like to follow mainstream, don't believe in luxury fertilizers (but don't worry, I'll like you regardless of the method you choose to follow ). I started doing this just to show what this looks like first hand. I was bored with growing plants and remembered seeing lots of photos for terrestrial deficiencies, but not many for aquatic ones. 



chad320 said:


> This is too funny since I started torturing my plants a little over a month ago. I quit adding ferts all together hoping to develop a better substrate for them. So far its a fail but it sure is easy


Chadrick, what did I teach you if anything? ONLY follow me if you want to learn how NOT to grow plants. As you have seen in my journals, I can't grow plants, it's full of algae and life is good. (Actually don't tell on my, but I am having a shortage of algae lately, wanna donate some samples?)

Add ferts, man, don't do it all at once. Think of taking a plant from the greenhouse and sticking it straight in the soil. It almost always results in a dead plant. You have to harden them to nutrient poor conditions. Do it a little at a time. I'm talking a smidgen. If you notice an issue, turn it up a notch. Keep it there, back down again after a few weeks. But I can't guarantee this will give you happiness. It's a trade off. Some plants grow differently. Some don't do well at all (blyxa). Some seem to flourish.


----------



## sewingalot

Our air conditioning broke in our house, and after loosing a shrimp due to jumping out of the 87+ degree tank, I turned off the lights, lowered the water and waited for the a/c to be fixed. It took longer than expected (part backordered), so the lights were off for a few days completely and have only been on the last few days for a few hours a day to let the fish have a break of the complete darkness and to help the plants a bit.

However, I thought this was a perfect opportunity to show more examples of light deficiency.

Oddly enough, when I turned on the lights, the algae is still happy as a lark and doing well. It must know it's welcome in my home.  Actually, there is a scientific explanation about how it is surviving, but I will not bore you all with the details. 




































































































I love how deficiencies can mimic each other. It makes it even more confusing when you try to diagnose them. I think they are so closely related that you really are better off not trying to figure out what you are doing wrong and focus on what you are doing right. :icon_mrgr


----------



## nonconductive

small hands, big heart.


----------



## sewingalot

nonconductive said:


> small hands, big heart.


Ha, are you making fun of my baby hands again? That was a sweet compliment in a backward kind of way.


----------



## nonconductive

thats chad that does that. i'm just picking up his slack


----------



## darkoon

will light deficiency cause algae too?


----------



## happi

darkoon said:


> will light deficiency cause algae too?


if you mean if too much or too little light will cause algae. in either case the answer is yes, but in most cases high light is what causes the algae. that is why we dose co2 and ferts, in low lights there are less demand of co2 and ferts.


----------



## sewingalot

Not a deficiency, but this is after a SAE at the plants. Thought it was relevant as plants being ate by animals is sometimes mistaken for deficient plants:










And potassium deficiency for good measure:


----------



## happi

Sara, your light deficiency picture seems to be very accurate, i can say this for sure because in my tank some plants turn like that when they get shaded completely. 

keep us updated with this great thread, thanks


----------



## jccaclimber

This is an excellent thread, keep it up.


----------



## 150EH

Your SAE is really hungry, it never bothers me for fish to eat plants, depending on the plant but my SAE is so old and lazy he just eats and thing that sinks and sometimes he'll even go up for flake. It looks like you have a catapillar in the tank the way he's eating.

I just had a Pelvicachromis pulcher eating my C. nurii because I had left some roots exposed when planting, the fish would have lost this battle, nurii grows way to slow for a rebound.


----------



## sewingalot

Thanks, guys. I seem to have more neglect than I do healthy plants as I am focusing on other hobbys and issues. 

I think this SAE is possessed. I've never seen such a fish to destroy plants. I had an emperor tetra nibble plants, but this is insane. 

Want to see downoi under no co2 for weeks, no nutrients for six weeks, that was under a thick layer of mini frogbit and d diandra?




























Yet, diatoms and GSA managed to flourish. :icon_eek: 

Now that I am back in the hobby as the winter months approach, I'll have to actually do something different.

I am planning on an extreme fertilizer approach. I am going to push the macros and micros to high levels. Right now, I am adding 25 - 5 - 50 NPK and .5 on the micros following iron levels. Also, putting in as much co2 as the shrimp will allow. It is a light green in 5 dkh solution.

So stay tuned for excessive nutrients! (I know, me actually pamper plants??? :smile


----------



## chad320

Wow Sara, those actually did good for the condition you explained! I noticed a small bit of HC on there too. Leave it alone, you know if you plant it that it'll die  It doesnt seem to bother the shrimpies at all either :hihi: They are looking beautiful and healthy as ever! Good luck with your new dosing plan!


----------



## genetao

This was one of the most informative threads I've read in ages! Talk about dispelling myths and hearsay!

Sara, it's almost as if we were all students in a classroom watching you present your thesis on plant deficiencies, while Professor Barr was guiding us on the importance of having a skeptical eye and urging us to use the scientific method.

Please do make this a sticky because it has such a wealth of valuable information. It's like gold to those of us who are still learning how to grow healthy plants. 

GREAT JOB!!!


----------

