# Too Much of Some Fert?



## aclaar877 (Feb 19, 2014)

So, I seemed to grow plants fairly well up until January, when I ditched CSM+B and went to making my own traces:










Since then, I haven't noticed the dramatic improvement that so many of you have experienced. Ammania Senegalensis went downhill, so I traded notes with Vin (Saxa Tilly) and tried lowering P for a while - cold turkey for a few weeks then no more than 1 ppm per week. I never got bad GSA, nor was there much improvement in the Ammania. I believe it likes lower ferts in the water column.

About a month ago, after seeing Burr's and Greggz's success with higher macros, I ramped them up to 25/6/30 ppm per week, plus Burr's trace recipe at 0.2 ppm Fe 3-4 times per week. After three weeks of this, things look pretty bad. Keep in mind CO2 has been high - I've verified 1.3 pH drop in the worst location, and nearly gassed fish. Growth has stalled in most plants, and it seems like something is hindering nitrate and K uptake - I get leaf shedding and more pinholes in hygro than you would think with 30 ppm K per week, and the plant has hardly grown at all. And GDA is appearing on more and more plants, and also the glass. Worst it has been in ages. Here are some recent pics:

NOTE: Photos aren't loading on PlantedTank - see the recent pics here:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/?

New stunting in AR:










Almost no growth in hygro corymbosa, with pinholes:










Pogo Erectus nubs just sit there and do nothing for weeks, next to scraggly Ammania Senegalensis:










Anubias covered in algae, in lowest light portion of the tank:










Almost all stems have slowed down - Bacopa, Acmella Repens, Ludwigia Repens, Persicaria Sao Paulo, Hygro. Over a month ago I put Ammania in a garden soil pot with plenty of Osmocote balls. It looks like this-it seems to get vertically taller but always looks awful:










GH is 5.5 from tap and I raise it 2 degrees with CaSO4 since ratio with Mg is about 1:1.
KH is 3.
Lights: One BML Dutch XB at 75%, one T8 strip with FloraSun, two T5HO (color max and FloraSun) bulbs on the front of the tank, over deliberately dirty glass covers. I'm not killing the tank with PAR.

I really don't know what the problem is. My guess is that I'm dosing more traces than I think, since AR got wavy and stunted. Maybe all the SO4 from the K and Ca addition over the weeks and months is adding up and causing trouble.

Today I did a 75% water change, added only 3 tsp CaSO4, 1.5 tsp KNO3, 1/2 tsp K2SO4, 1/4 tsp KH2PO4 and 0.1 ppm Fe/trace. It just looks like I can't dose anywhere near what Burr and Greggz do on their great tanks. Tank is 155 gallons with BDBS. Hoping that lower SO4 and traces will get things back on track.


----------



## Seattle_Aquarist (Jun 15, 2008)

Hi @aclaar877,

I downloaded one of your pictures, cropped it, enhanced it, and enlarged it.....this is what I saw in the first irmage on the left hand side.









What I see is interveinal chlorosis on the newer leaves (also on the older leaves which may mean it has been going on for a while). Also I am seeing some 'hooking' of leaf tips and scalloped leaf margins on other plants in the picture. The interveinal chlorosis is likely an iron (Fe) deficiency which could be due to insufficient Fe, high pH, or excessive potassium (K). If it were me, I would start by increasing my iron dosing to 4.0 ppm and see if the interveinal chlorosis disappears with new leaves as they emerge....the existing leaves will not change since iron is an immobile nutrient. If the hooked leave tips and scalloped leaf margins continue after correcting the iron deficiency we will address those next.


----------



## burr740 (Feb 19, 2014)

This right here, something is bad wrong










Ive seen that before when I first switched from Flourish liquids to csmb at full EI (.5 3x) and a couple of times since

This isnt a deficiency, its too much of something or a severe imbalance

Can you post your exact micro recipe in ppm?


----------



## aclaar877 (Feb 19, 2014)

burr740 said:


> This right here, something is bad wrong
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thanks for weighing in - this particular photo was after Saturday's water change. I've seen it before when I don't use enough Seachem Prime/Safe. Maybe I didn't use enough. I think it could be related to chloramines in tap. I'm confident this leaf-droop will go away.

On Seattle Aquarist's point, I don't think it's Fe-related, as the past few week's I've dosed more than ever. Excess K, possibly, since I've ramped that up. Maybe jumping P from 1-2 ppm/week to six was too abrupt. As I look at Mulder's chart, it seems like K/NO3/Ca/P are all interfering with each other somehow - given the pinholes, random stunting, lack of growth all at the same time. I've tried fixing all the basics - double/triple check CO2, flow, clean filters, trim, manage light and so forth.

Micro breakdown is this, and dosed at 0.2 ppm Fe 3-4 times per week. Estimated tank volume at 140 gallons (out of 155). I don't have a scale, so I used tsp measurements, and made 500mL solutions of Mo and Cu and then took a fraction of those (5-10 mL) for the main trace mix. It's possible that my estimated 0.2 ppm dosed could have been higher, and I ran into problems that way. Ratios should be close, even if quantity was off.

Fe - .15 ppm
Mn - .06 ppm
B - .03 ppm
Zn - .042 ppm
Mo - .001 ppm
Cu - .001 ppm

I have added nickel since posting this thread.


----------



## burr740 (Feb 19, 2014)

Mo is directly involved in plants using nitrogen. Its deficiency looks like NO3 deficiency, which yours does too in a lot of ways. Its pretty low risk as far as toxicity goes, I'd double that up at least

A little more B wouldnt hurt either, get it up around Zn level


----------



## Greggz (May 19, 2008)

aclaar877 said:


> Since then, I haven't noticed the dramatic improvement that so many of you have experienced. Ammania Senegalensis went downhill, so I traded notes with Vin (Saxa Tilly) and tried lowering P for a while - cold turkey for a few weeks then no more than 1 ppm per week. I never got bad GSA, nor was there much improvement in the Ammania. I believe it likes lower ferts in the water column.


I wouldn't base much on the Ammania. Neither Burr nor I have had much success with it, under our fairly similar conditions. Why? Not sure, but it's never loved what I provide.



aclaar877 said:


> Lights: One BML Dutch XB at 75%, one T8 strip with FloraSun, two T5HO (color max and FloraSun) bulbs on the front of the tank, over deliberately dirty glass covers. I'm not killing the tank with PAR.


Have you ever tested your PAR? Unusual mix of lights, and I really have no idea. Some of the pics remind me of my tank before I redid my lights and increased PAR quite a bit. Went from 40-50ish at substrate to over 100. It was a whole new ball game. Dosing high ferts/heavy CO2 without enough light can be an issue. Plants just not as happy as they could be. 

For me, I could have made all the changes in the world, but it was enough light that I was missing.

And in general, more micros seems to increase the need for more macros. How much? Well that takes trial and error in every tank. And three weeks is really not much time in the scheme of things to figure out the best mix for your tank. 

And I agree with Burr on adjusting micros. FWIW here is my latest. Going to up B even further. I would also add even MORE plants. High dosing seems to work best with a very heavily planted tank. 

DTPA 11%	0.15
MnSO4*H2O	0.0375
ZnSO4*H2O	0.04
Na2MoO4*2H2O	0.0013
CuSO4*5H2O	0.002
NiSO4 6(H2O)	0.0005
H3BO3	0.055

And a question. What substrate are your using?

Looking forward to seeing where this goes.


----------



## Surf (Jun 13, 2017)

> Micro breakdown is this, and dosed at 0.2 ppm Fe 3-4 times per week. Estimated tank volume at 140 gallons (out of 155). I don't have a scale, so I used tsp measurements, and made 500mL solutions of Mo and Cu and then took a fraction of those (5-10 mL) for the main trace mix. It's possible that my estimated 0.2 ppm dosed could have been higher, and I ran into problems that way. Ratios should be close, even if quantity was off.
> 
> Fe - .15 ppm
> Mn - .06 ppm
> ...


It ism't clear to me if your mixing them all in liquid or just dry dosing everything but MO and Cu. IF you mix everything together in a solution that is stored for a time before use you need to make sure the water you put them in is acidic. If you don't the iron If you don't iron EDTA and iron DTPA would break down and the iron may not be available to plants. The other nutrients may also be adversely affected by the high PH in a storage bottle. When making a solution you should add some vinegar to the water before adding the other ingredients


----------



## aclaar877 (Feb 19, 2014)

Greggz said:


> I wouldn't base much on the Ammania. Neither Burr nor I have had much success with it, under our fairly similar conditions. Why? Not sure, but it's never loved what I provide.
> 
> 
> Have you ever tested your PAR? Unusual mix of lights, and I really have no idea. Some of the pics remind me of my tank before I redid my lights and increased PAR quite a bit. Went from 40-50ish at substrate to over 100. It was a whole new ball game. Dosing high ferts/heavy CO2 without enough light can be an issue. Plants just not as happy as they could be.
> ...


I've never tested PAR - based on the BML dimming, bulbs and reflectors I imagine I have less than 100 PAR. I get great pearling when I crank the BML, but if I dim to below 70% I don't get much. Using BDBS substrate. I have put Ludwigia Glandulosa and Ammania Senegalensis in pots of garden soil and plenty of O+ balls, and no improvement whatsoever. I'll probably need to find substitute plants for Ammania and Pogo Erectus, since I'm not really up for walking that kind of fert tightrope to make everything happy. I did have some decent AS and Pogo Erectus last year, though, in the low CSM+B and leaner macro dosing I was doing. But Ludwigia Palustris kind of sat there, doing nothing, until I ramped up NO3. Now it's usually my best plant. 

Adding extra Mo makes sense - it sure looks like a NO3 deficiency - slowed growth, shedding and yellowing lower leaves and so forth. I never gave Mo much thought because in recent years tap reports said it had 0.001 ppm. But the most recent report says it has zero, and Fablau was kind enough to send me some so I didn't spend $20 on a 30,000 year supply or whatever that math came to! I added it to trace mix about a month ago, but may need more.

I'm leery of adding more Boron right away, since I think it might have contributed to stunting in the past. Previous water reports had up to 0.08 ppm, but now the company reports zero. It might be fine to add more but I want to see what extra Mo does the next week or two.

I'm really tempted to try RO - maybe tap report is just wrong, and it may be easier to balance Ca/Mg starting from scratch. Tap report states Mg is 2-28 ppm, and Ca is 12-38.


----------



## Deanna (Feb 15, 2017)

Thoughts/questions to all:

In addition to reconsidering my PO4 issues recently, I’ve been reconsidering my K:Ca:Mg balance, mainly as a result of re-reading the discussion on the Mulder’s reference that @burr740 provided some time ago (http://www.cannagardening.com/interactions_between_nutrients). In it they say that:

“Applying too much calcium and magnesium can cause a potassium deficiency; the K/Ca and K/Mg ratio should always be kept above 2 (but below 10, since too much K can hinder the absorption of calcium and magnesium). Too much potassium can also prevent the absorption of certain micro-elements, such as zinc. It is particularly important to take account of this interaction when using very hard water with a high calcium and magnesium content.”

As we all know Equilibrium works for many and for many years without the need for additional K, Ca or Mg (depending upon the GH desired). As a reminder, that ratio is ~K:Ca - 2.5:1 and Ca:Mg – 3:1.

At 30ppm K and a GH of >7, I wonder if those aren’t some of the problems here. I also wonder, without looking it up, what all of the other posters ratios are. I also wonder if the K ratios matter at all. I believe that, at least, the Ca:Mg ratio is important.


----------



## Edward (Apr 11, 2005)

Deanna said:


> “Applying too much calcium and magnesium can cause a potassium deficiency; the K/Ca and K/Mg ratio should always be kept above 2 (but below 10, since too much K can hinder the absorption of calcium and magnesium). Too much potassium can also prevent the absorption of certain micro-elements, such as zinc. It is particularly important to take account of this interaction when using very hard water with a high calcium and magnesium content.”
> 
> As we all know Equilibrium works for many and for many years without the need for additional K, Ca or Mg (depending upon the GH desired). As a reminder, that ratio is ~K:Ca - 2.5:1 and Ca:Mg – 3:1.
> 
> At 30ppm K and a GH of >7, I wonder if those aren’t some of the problems here. I also wonder, without looking it up, what all of the other posters ratios are. I also wonder if the K ratios matter at all. I believe that, at least, the Ca:Mg ratio is important.


Excessive K creates N, Mg, Ca, Mn and B deficiency.


----------



## Deanna (Feb 15, 2017)

Edward said:


> Excessive K creates N, Mg, Ca, Mn and B deficiency.


...and, according to those authors, too much Ca and Mg causes, at least, a K deficiency. Rhetorical (maybe) question: do the two statements (yours and theirs) mean that GH should be kept much lower and priority should be placed upon determining the optimal K level and then back into the Ca and Mg levels?


----------



## burr740 (Feb 19, 2014)

Deanna said:


> ...and, according to those authors, too much Ca and Mg causes, at least, a K deficiency. Rhetorical (maybe) question: do the two statements (yours and theirs) mean that GH should be kept much lower and priority should be placed upon determining the optimal K level and then back into the Ca and Mg levels?


The "optimum" K level is somewhat dictated by the amounts of Ca and Mg, and visa versa. Not only Ca and mg but N and P too. (see Mulder's chart) 

In other words, "optimum" K at 10/3 Ca/Mg wont be the same as 40/10

Someone who is reconstituting 100% RO can set the levels whatever they want. 

But my case for example, using all tap with 35-40 ppm Ca, a value which isnt going to change, some of these other nutrients have to be adjusted based on that.

And by 'based on that' I mean observe plants and adjust accordingly. 20 ppm K may sound like plenty on paper, and for many tanks it is, but in a tank with a high GH it may not be, same with NO3, B, etc. Any nutrient that has an antagonistic relationship


----------



## Deanna (Feb 15, 2017)

burr740 said:


> The "optimum" K level is somewhat dictated by the amounts of Ca and Mg, and visa versa. Not only Ca and mg but N and P too. (see Mulder's chart)
> 
> In other words, "optimum" K at 10/3 Ca/Mg wont be the same as 40/10
> 
> ...


I'm with you on all of that. However, if that researcher is correct (granted they are terrestrial plants), your 35-40 ppm Ca level demands a K level of, at least, 70-80 ppm to avoid interfering with sufficient K uptake, i.e.; "optimum" K must be at that level ...unless the researcher and/or the terrestrial-to-aquatic connections are wrong. According to the write-up, you should be experiencing K deficiencies of some sort. I'm curious; at your given GH, have you ever run K at the referenced website or Flourish Equilibrium levels? Maybe our Ca and Mg levels need not be as high as most of us have them for plants, even though certain fish may need them high.

Now, I'm not saying that anything is incorrect, but is there an aquatic connection to those ratios and terrestrial studies or not? I generally haven't believed in most of the ratio issues, but am starting to think that there is an interference/enhancement aspect based upon the Mulder chart, personal experience and member comments. In fact, the Mulder chart implies that ratios/minimums exist even though there aren't any listed along those pathways. Too bad we can't build a baseline of ratios along those Mulder pathways. Individually, any of us could apply ratios to those pathways based upon our own level of each nutrient. i wonder if there would be a common theme.


----------



## burr740 (Feb 19, 2014)

Well keep in mind that's just a blog from a website selling products. The important takeaway is Mulder's Chart and the general idea of nutrients affecting one another

Here's a better one, easier to see what's doing what










And no we cannot translate those ratios to our aquariums. For one reason the availability of nutrients is strongly affected by PH levels.

Copying a post of mine from Barr Report in response to someone claiming a certain Ca:B ratio is best

https://barrreport.com/threads/r-macrandra-help.15575/page-3#post-154095



> Its hard to prescribe an optimum ratio for everyone because nutrients behave differently at different PH levels.
> 
> This chart gives a rough example of PH level's affect on nutrient availability
> 
> ...


----------



## Deanna (Feb 15, 2017)

burr740 said:


> Well keep in mind that's just a blog from a website selling products. The important takeaway is Mulder's Chart and the general idea of nutrients affecting one another
> 
> Here's a better one, easier to see what's doing what
> 
> ...


Thanks for clearer chart.

We could probably compensate for pH. The pH in terrestrial soil can vary as much as our water does. I'm not sure there is much of an impact by pH at our ranges. Example, during lights on, my pH is <5.5, yet my PO4 uptake is 4-5 ppm weekly. However, I agree on the broader implication that there are many, many variables that make precise alignment of nutrient levels difficult.

The Seachem Equilibrium is a conundrum to me and does support the author of that research. For a long time, it's been broadly used to great effect and the use of it will result in either very low Ca and Mg levels or very high K levels. I think I'm in the process of convincing myself to go off and try reducing my GH levels to fit the K ratio formula.


----------



## aclaar877 (Feb 19, 2014)

Appreciate the links - I have always been wary of too much boron relative to calcium, and didn't realize it could work the other way too. I may have increased calcium to a point where it outpaced B, NO3, and K, and possibly had a Mo shortage aggravating the NO3 uptake. If Ca was on high end of my tap report, and I was adding 10-15 ppm a week which could have built up to another 30 ppm with 50% water changes, I could have close to 70 ppm Ca in there. I'll try to test it at a LFS this week. For the past couple weeks it was looking like Leibig's law wasn't applying to my tank - I've never added ferts at these levels, and growth has been so much worse than before. Honestly, it looks like I have NO3, K and Ca deficiency all at the same time, though Leibig's law says you can't. Even stems that aren't stunted still curl downwards for the most part - AR, Acmella Repens, Hygro, Nelsonia Canescens all do it.

I can see what happens with a large water change and adding no CaSO4, but I expect it to be more wavy leaves and possible AR stunting. A neighbor had tap tested a couple years ago and it had 16 ppm Ca, 15 ppm Mg, so that's why I have always added Ca - to try to get at least 2:1 ratio. I may also increase boron - I don't have much to lose at this point.


----------



## burr740 (Feb 19, 2014)

Please update how it goes!


----------



## Deanna (Feb 15, 2017)

@burr740: I just noticed that Mulder's chart has no sulfur! I guess it really is the 'lost' macro. Wouldn't you think that there would positive and negative inter-dependencies missing as a result?


----------



## Seattle_Aquarist (Jun 15, 2008)

Hi @Deanna,

From what I can find, although sulfur deficiencies can occur it is not typically caused by an excess of another nutrient nor does an excess of sulfur cause a deficiency of another nutrient.


----------



## burr740 (Feb 19, 2014)

Deanna said:


> @*burr740*: I just noticed that Mulder's chart has no sulfur! I guess it really is the 'lost' macro. Wouldn't you think that there would positive and negative inter-dependencies missing as a result?


Seems like Nitrogen is the main thing from what Ive been able to find, and it probably has to be extreme one way or the other. Sulfur is pretty harmless in the grand scheme of things

Here's a good quick summary about sulfur

https://www.pthorticulture.com/en/training-center/role-of-sulfur-in-plant-culture/

^That's a fert company but they have some pretty good articles. There's one for every nutrient and more stuff too


----------



## Deanna (Feb 15, 2017)

I also have some notes that say that too much iron can create a sulfur deficiency, resulting in chlorosis and misleading us into thinking it's an iron or nitrogen deficiency. So, that and the N could be two interactions. However, as you both said, perhaps it's not meaningful.

I think I'll put an S on my chart and put some lines to N and Fe.


----------



## jbvamos (Mar 18, 2018)

I just want to add something i've noticed about mulders chart and makes sense with what i have noticed in my tanks. Some charts show the relationships as Antagonism/Synergism and some show it is Antagonism/Stimulation. The charts that label it as stimulation difine the stimulation (synergism) as " an* increase in the need* for a nutrient by the plant because of the increase of the level of another nutrient".

What I noticed in my tank was that I raised N and P, after that I started showing interveinal chlorosis on older leaves of staurogyne repens which I believe to be magnesium deficiency. I believe the N and P stimulated the plant to want more magnesium and there wasn't enough in the water column to supply it. What i am getting at is I think I was misunderstanding what the chart was actually representing.


----------



## Edward (Apr 11, 2005)

Deanna said:


> I also have some notes that say that too much iron can create a sulfur deficiency, resulting in chlorosis and misleading us into thinking it's an iron or nitrogen deficiency. So, that and the N could be two interactions. However, as you both said, perhaps it's not meaningful.
> 
> I think I'll put an S on my chart and put some lines to N and Fe.


 More fun,

Symbols:
(Lo O.M.) - Low Organic Matter
(Hi O.M.) - High Organic Matter


----------



## Deanna (Feb 15, 2017)

Edward said:


> More fun


I like that last (fourth) one. It gives much clearer indication of interactions than the first three.


----------



## Edward (Apr 11, 2005)

This one looks good, it has all the ions we use, N, P, K, Mg, Ca, S, Cl, Fe, Mn, B, Zn, Mo, Cu, plus Na, (except Ni). 

Nevertheless, we have to take into consideration the fact that elements availability in Soils and in Hydroponics (aquariums) in relation to pH are not the same.

Symbols:
(Lo O.M.) - Low Organic Matter
(Hi O.M.) - High Organic Matter


----------



## Deanna (Feb 15, 2017)

@Edward brings up a good point about pH and nutrient availability. As we lard on the nutrients, or run them lean, we should consider the pH effect upon each nutrient when we are deciding how much to add or subtract as we try to fit nutrient levels to the Mulder chart activity. In the spirit of offering different images that may help others grasp these concepts, I’m attaching some I like.

We’ve all seen the colored bar charts for pH effects upon nutrient absorption. Below is one that I find to make a little more impact concerning optimal regions. As an example, one nutrient that sticks out as being of concern is PO4. Many of us run pH well below 6.5 due to CO2 levels. This chart really points that out. Perhaps more frequent dosing is needed (see below) of certain nutrients in view of the pH aspect. EDIT: Whoops! @Edward's hydroponics chart indicates a complete reversal of this aspect vs soil use. @Edward: can you pouint to multiple sources for the hydroponics chart?










Another view of Mulder's chart:










The only thing missing here might be dose frequency. Recently, I’ve been Googling this topic and finding more and more data that high-frequency dosing can be beneficial to uptake rates of less mobile nutrients. Over and over, the emphasis highlights that frequent dosing of P, in particular, enhances overall health. I recall that some of you have found this to be true in your own experiences.

Of course, these charts and data all apply to terrestrial plants. We are all assuming that they also apply to aquatic plants. Let’s hope they do.

I have been reconsidering my PO4 plan recently and have been using the above tools to approach this. For a long time, I have been holding PO4 levels in the 10 ppm area on the assumption that it inhibits GSA. A few weeks ago, I lowered it to 1-2 ppm. Oddly, my NO3 disappeared – I mean down to zero! The normal bio-load I have pushes NO3 naturally into the 20-30 ppm area. I’ve recently forced NO3 down into the 5-10 ppm area with heavy Purigen use. NO3 starts the week at 2-5 ppm and drifts up to 10 ppm by weeks’ end. Now, I see low PO4 causing an NO3 deficiency and I’ve tested it by withdrawing it and adding it 3-4 cycles now. I see no direct link, on Mulder’s chart, between N and P so, perhaps it’s causing a limitation in K and/or Ca (or Zn) and stalling growth, thereby causing a backing-up of NO3 in my tank. Still trying to sort through this.


----------



## aclaar877 (Feb 19, 2014)

Update: By the end of last week, things were starting to turn around. Ammania Senegalensis started growing decently from the tips, which hasn't happened in months. Pogo Erectus looked like it was starting to grow too. I reduced the dosing of PO4 last week, and wondered if NO3 was still high and the tank was suffering from all the CaSO4 I've dumped in over the past months, trying to minimize tip stunting since my tap is about equal Ca/Mg.

This week I did a 1/3 water change, since plants seem to do better with more stability in my tank. No CaSO4 this week, and trying dosing along the lines of 13/1.3/13 for macros and less micros, to see if I can keep Ludwigia and Lythraceae happy. Just to be safe, I put some Osmocote NPK balls under AR, Persicaria SP, and a few others to try to jump start their growth. I now have a GDA explosion, and some BGA, possibly due to the ammonia. And it probably added more NO3 and PO4 than I wanted, so I may have blown the ratio I was going for. AR looks awful, even worse than the days struggling with CSMB levels. Plants pearl awesome, but many of them just don't grow at all - root tabs, pots of garden soil don't help one iota. Hygro continues to develop pinholes and shed leaves as well. Again, it seems like something hinders K uptake in the hygro, and I don't think its the added calcium. I'm guessing PO4 and/or NO3 here. Wish I hadn't added the Osmocote balls, since they don't seem to help one bit on anything.

Since last week ended OK, it probably wasn't a problem with CaSO4. I believe my tank responds best to having lower NO3 and PO4 in the water, while keeping Ca and K relatively high. The best growth I've ever gotten was with MTS under fluorite, with Osmocote NPK balls, iron in the MTS, and only K in the water column. That same soil (minus the red clay) is in pots now, and plants don't respond at all. I need to get a PO4 test kit to see what kind of levels I'm at, and go from there. 

Again, this site won't take my pics in the gallery. Most recent five photos show the GDA, GSA and stunted carnage. https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/?


----------



## burr740 (Feb 19, 2014)

I use flickr and here's what you have to do:

From your gallery page, the page you linked, click the photo you want to post. Then on the photo's page that comes up, at the bottom right click on the down arrow. You'll see options pop up for various sizes. Click view all sizes.

The next page will have the pic in 1024 usually with all other options above it. Click whatever size you want to post.

Now right click the image and "copy link location".

Paste this link between [ img] link [ /img] tags, closing the spaces


----------



## Greggz (May 19, 2008)

burr740 said:


> I use flickr and here's what you have to do:


Interesting. I use flickr but I do it differently. Don't know which way is best, but will try yours too.

After uploading the photos, I click on "You" then "Camera Roll".

Then if you hover your mouse over the upper right hand corner of any pic, a set of opposing arrows pops up.

Click on them, and then the photo shows up center screen. Right click on image and "copy image address". 

At the site, click on "insert image" icon, the paste.

Probably a case of many ways to skin a cat.


----------



## burr740 (Feb 19, 2014)

Greggz said:


> Interesting. I use flickr but I do it differently. Don't know which way is best, but will try yours too.
> 
> After uploading the photos, I click on "You" then "Camera Roll".
> 
> ...


Interesting. I never use 'camera roll' because it has mine sorted into weird groups like food and beverage and what not. I could probably go through and edit all that to be something different...but I have like 4K pics hosted.

 I always go, you > photostream. Everything is there in chronological order starting with the last pic uploaded


----------



## jbvamos (Mar 18, 2018)

aclaar877 said:


> Update: By the end of last week, things were starting to turn around. Ammania Senegalensis started growing decently from the tips, which hasn't happened in months. Pogo Erectus looked like it was starting to grow too. I reduced the dosing of PO4 last week, and wondered if NO3 was still high and the tank was suffering from all the CaSO4 I've dumped in over the past months, trying to minimize tip stunting since my tap is about equal Ca/Mg.
> 
> This week I did a 1/3 water change, since plants seem to do better with more stability in my tank. No CaSO4 this week, and trying dosing along the lines of 13/1.3/13 for macros and less micros, to see if I can keep Ludwigia and Lythraceae happy. Just to be safe, I put some Osmocote NPK balls under AR, Persicaria SP, and a few others to try to jump start their growth. I now have a GDA explosion, and some BGA, possibly due to the ammonia. And it probably added more NO3 and PO4 than I wanted, so I may have blown the ratio I was going for. AR looks awful, even worse than the days struggling with CSMB levels. Plants pearl awesome, but many of them just don't grow at all - root tabs, pots of garden soil don't help one iota. Hygro continues to develop pinholes and shed leaves as well. Again, it seems like something hinders K uptake in the hygro, and I don't think its the added calcium. I'm guessing PO4 and/or NO3 here. Wish I hadn't added the Osmocote balls, since they don't seem to help one bit on anything.
> 
> ...


What I always do in a situation like this is a huge water change, even back to back huge water changes like 80% to reset the tank and then add back the nutrients at the levels you want them to be at. Dosing errors can and will happen and this makes sure some level isn’t out of whack. 

I would also mix up a new trace mix in case an error was made in that process. Milligram scales are extremely cheap and a lot more accurate then the teaspoon measurements you are using. I had a lot of your symptoms, but to a lesser degree and found that a 5:1 Fe:Mn ratio worked a lot better. I agree with burr740 that there is too much of something in the tank. You could also purchase a commercial trace mix like flourish trace for a temporary experiment to see if things turn around. 

This situation is hard because for me I get flustered and do so many different things, that I’m not sure what helped the situation. Keep it simple, clean the tank, reset the water column, dose back all your macros and rule out a bad micro mix by mixing up a new solution or purchase flourish or equivalent and focus on just that for a week or two. It doesn’t take long to see if your headed in the right direction. Keep this thread updated, I’m curious what you find. Good luck


----------



## Igor95 (Aug 19, 2017)

Literally in the same boat. Please update, and good luck!


----------



## aclaar877 (Feb 19, 2014)

Thanks Burr, for the Flickr tips. I think I linked pics from there before but forgot how to do it. Not sure why I can't upload to my gallery on this site.

I ordered a mg scale for a more accurate trace mix, to rule out that possible problem. I may have a micro ratio imbalance that is getting aggravated by high P. It shouldn't be this hard, and I have all the tools for a really nice tank. From Mulder's chart you can see that high P can impact Cu, Ca, K, Zn and Fe. When you can't grow a plant in a pot of soil loaded with nutrients, something in the water is likely the problem.

I'll do another resetting water change (I feel like I'm always doing this...), redo the trace mix, and update next week.


----------



## aclaar877 (Feb 19, 2014)

UPDATE:

I decided to eliminate the possibility of a micro imbalance, so I got a scale, distilled water, distilled vinegar, and did it by the book. I noticed that my 11% DPTA iron was a lot less dense than the powdered micros, given the round granule structure, so in the old mix when I was using teaspoons I ended up with a lower Fe/micro ratio than I thought. I was shooting for 2:1 Fe/Mn at the time, and ended up with even a lower ratio than that. I decided to measure KNO3, CaSO4, and KH2PO4 just to see, and it turns out KNO3 was less potent than I thought (compared to calcs on RotalaButterfly), and CaSO4 (Plaster of Paris) and KH2PO4 were more potent than I thought. Maybe the powders have absorbed moisture, or granules have different shapes which cause variation in the actual weight of a teaspoon, but this was an interesting find. 

Given these discoveries, the tank has really turned around in the last 10 days. GDA on the glass is way down, new growth is looking really good across the board. Noticed the impact on AR almost immediately, and I have noticed much less leaf shedding across the board. Right before I made the change I was losing almost all Hygro leaves - even ones that were nice and green and hardly any pin holes were coming off right at the stem. Since the change I don't think I've had any come off like that.


----------



## aclaar877 (Feb 19, 2014)

ANOTHER UPDATE: 

I couldn't leave good enough alone - I tried increasing ferts to Greggz's levels for a couple weeks and pretty much had terrible results, which I'm trying to recover from. Slow or no growth across the tank (~20 species), and extra GDA. Plants clearly aren't happy, and the only thing resembling a deficiency is hooked leaf tips in AR. But that shouldn't happen when Ca is 35-40 ppm. After a few weeks trying that, I dosed lower levels, along the lines of 15/3/20 and 0.4 ppm Fe/Traces, using a Burr mix with 3:1 Fe/Mn ratio. Things improved some, but growth is still extremely slow. I haven't trimmed Hygro in a month, and I used to need to trim it almost weekly. Ludwigia Repens is a couple of 3-inch nubs that haven't grown in a month, and I grew mountains of this stuff six months ago. Nelsonia Canescens hasn't grown at all in a month, and AR has grown maybe an inch in six weeks. How is this possible with abundant ferts and 1.3 pH drop? I have no hair algae, no BBA whatsoever, no GSA, just GDA on glass and lower leaves. And no leaf shedding, thankfully. I have a couple AR stems that have stunted, but 90% of them have not. 

What to do with no obvious deficiency, but almost no growth? I calibrated an NO3 test kit, tested my nitrates, and they were in the 40-50 ppm range. I had to cut a sample by 5x to get it a distinguishable color on the API nitrate chart. I always have dosed more K than NO3, so I estimate K could be in the 60 ppm range. These levels shouldn't cause a problem, though, since Tom Barr has grown amazing plants with levels higher than this. I wonder if, looking at Mulder's Chart, that my K and NO3 levels are impacting Ca uptake and growth in general. I will reduce K and NO3 over the coming days and see if things turn around. I thought that Boron could be causing the random stunted AR tips, but it seems unlikely at the 5:1 Fe/B ratio that I have been using in the mix. Just to be safe I made a mix without B, and I can dose B separately if stunting gets worse. 

Stay tuned! I would actually prefer to see deficiencies rather than this current scenario, where there is almost no growth. Pinholes, leaf shedding, I know how to fix that!


----------



## burr740 (Feb 19, 2014)

Dont think you should reduce NO3 below 15 per week (if Im understanding correctly). Low NO3 can work but usually everything else has to be low.

And if Ca is 35-40 ppm w/high Mg in the tap, well you cant really lower everything.

Have you tried going back to the exact macro routine you were're dosing right before making your own micros? And then using a similar Fe amount with the custom blend?

Or, sounds like things were pretty good at the 9/13 update. Maybe start back from there.

In other words, instead of trying to fix all these strange new issues, which only happened when you tried to fix a few smaller issues. Go back to the best reference point you have for a couple of weeks and then readdress the smaller issues.

Fwiw Nelsonia canescens is wrong, that plant is actually Limnophila rugosa. Bartohog was able to flower it last year


----------



## aclaar877 (Feb 19, 2014)

burr740 said:


> Dont think you should reduce NO3 below 15 per week (if Im understanding correctly). Low NO3 can work but usually everything else has to be low.
> 
> And if Ca is 35-40 ppm w/high Mg in the tap, well you cant really lower everything.
> 
> ...


Yeah, I won't let NO3 crash. I'll start by not adding the extra K2SO4. The Ca from tap report is only 17, with Mg at 18, so I have been adding 10-15 ppm Ca at water changes. With buildup I'm probably at the 35-40 mark.

The macro routine from better days was 1/2 tsp KNO3, 1/2 tsp K2SO4, and about an 1/8 tsp of KH2PO4 on a 155 gallon tank 3-4x per week, so rather light dosing. Once I got my scale I found out that my KNO3 doses were even less than thought (it's less dense, or my spoons aren't accurate). Traces then were custom mix, 2:1 Fe/Mn ratio without Cu, B and Mo since I didn't receive those yet. But I was only dosing about 0.05 ppm 2-3 times a week. Sometimes I would add extra macros at water change time. And I would get some pinholes and minor leaf shedding, but decent growth compared to now. I started doing this again this week, but thinking through the reaction of plants (hooked tips and slow growth) suggests something is affecting calcium and maybe nitrate, given that test reading. Like you, my tank was very sensitive to CSM+B. I've gone up to 0.2 ppm 4x per week with the higher macros, but didn't see it cause stunting, which is good. Anyway, I feel one step closer to figuring this out.


----------



## Greggz (May 19, 2008)

aclaar877 said:


> Nelsonia Canescens hasn't grown at all in a month, and AR has grown maybe an inch in six weeks. How is this possible with abundant ferts and 1.3 pH drop?


I'm travelling again, and have to look over this whole thread again in detail when I get time.

But I can tell you L. Rugosa (N. Canescens) can pretty much withstand ANY fert dosing and still grow like mad. I'm just wondering if there is anything else going on that should be considered? 

Just saying I kept it for three years, and there is not an amount of too much ferts I have seen that could stop it from growing. We always point to ferts but has anything else changed??


----------



## aclaar877 (Feb 19, 2014)

The only other thing I can think of changing is measuring fert weights rather than just using teaspoons. It turns out my 1.5 tsp holds 12.35 g K2SO4 per scoop, which would add 10.46 ppm for 140 gallons. Rotalabutterfly shows 1.5 tsp adding 8.13, so it was adding 2+ ppm more than I thought. The same scoop of Plaster of Paris weighed 6.4 g, which adds 3.56 ppm Ca. The calculator says 1.5 tsp would add 2.58 ppm. So that scoop isn't accurate or my powders are denser than thought. But, that shouldn't be a game-changer. I've done many 50-70% water changes, and these shouldn't have added up to crazy levels. I had larded on K with that 1.5 tsp measuring spoon in recent weeks. 

Also, I don't really know what my Ca levels are--maybe I've added so much that the other macros can't keep up. I tested 20 mL of tank water and tap, and it took 17 API drops to register the tank water, and 11 to register the tap. That means I've added enough CaCO3 from the Plaster of Paris to raise KH 1.5 degrees. But, larding on 4-5 of the 1.5 tsp spoons of plaster of paris after each water change didn't seem to cause problems earlier this year, before I started weighing it.

Right now I'm blasting the tank with light and CO2, trying to get some growth. I think L. Rugosa has put out one new node in the past month - very different than when I got it from Burr earlier this year. I'm thinking of letting the tank consume some macros and see if I can hit a sweet spot again, or see some deficiencies, which ever comes first. I predict Hygro will show pinholes first, but so far it isn't. Looking at Mulder's chart again, it just seems like I have some negative Ca-K-N (and possibly Boron) interaction going on, preventing uptake and growth. It makes me think about going RO, but one would think I have almost perfect tap water with GH of 5.5 and KH around 3.


----------



## burr740 (Feb 19, 2014)

Rugosa is a very easy plant. Have to think something obvious is missing for it to be at a stand still. Dang if I can see what it might be though

I dont think the problem is too much something, Ive seen this plant tolerate levels that crumble other plants and keep right on trucking


----------



## Surf (Jun 13, 2017)

> Ratios should be close, even if quantity was off.
> 
> Fe - .15 ppm
> Mn - .06 ppm
> ...





> The Ca from tap report is only 17, with Mg at 18, so I have been adding 10-15 ppm Ca at water changes. With buildup I'm probably at the 35-40 mark.


I noticed you are adding everything the plants need except magnesium. You say your water has about a 1 to 1 ratio of calcium to magnesium But it is possible that changes seasonally. Also a 1 to 1 ration of Ca to Mg is normally rare. so perhaps your water has less magnesium than you think. Also CSM+B does have magnesium which did work better for you . So with sufficient light CO2 and everything else you might be pushing magnesium levels into deficiency. So at this point it might be worth it to buy some epsom salt ( pure with no scent or anything else added).


----------



## aclaar877 (Feb 19, 2014)

Surf said:


> I noticed you are adding everything the plants need except magnesium. You say your water has about a 1 to 1 ratio of calcium to magnesium But it is possible that changes seasonally. Also a 1 to 1 ration of Ca to Mg is normally rare. so perhaps your water has less magnesium than you think. Also CSM+B does have magnesium which did work better for you . So with sufficient light CO2 and everything else you might be pushing magnesium levels into deficiency. So at this point it might be worth it to buy some epsom salt ( pure with no scent or anything else added).


Yeah, you could be right. I looked at the water report again, and the range of Mg is from 2 to 28 ppm, and Ca is from 12 to 38 ppm. Most recent test shows 17 Ca and 18 Mg, and a fellow aquarist in town had it tested at 15/16 at one point. Hard to know how what it is on any given day. I wondered Mg myself, as the tops of Ludwigia Palustris are yellowish with red veins, but that could also be because they are very close to the light. They have been redder in the past. I dosed 4 ppm Mg, plus 5 ppm K and 1 ppm PO4 today. My hunch is that nitrate is higher than some plants like. Pogo Erectus and Ammania Senegalensis also are dormant, and they don't seem to like high nitrate in the water. Limnophila Belem is another plant I got from Burr, which grew nicely at first and has since been dormant. Osmocote tabs do nothing for the plants in question, either.


----------



## Greggz (May 19, 2008)

aclaar877 said:


> My hunch is that nitrate is higher than some plants like. Pogo Erectus and Ammania Senegalensis also are dormant, and they don't seem to like high nitrate in the water. Limnophila Belem is another plant I got from Burr, which grew nicely at first and has since been dormant. Osmocote tabs do nothing for the plants in question, either.


Yeah you are probably onto something there.

I haven't had much luck with Pogo E or any Ammania. But other species flourish.

And here's the thing, it's very difficult to create an environment that will please every plant. Along the way I've decided to focus on ones that like the soup I am serving. Many times I've changed things to try to please one and others suffered. 

So good luck getting it solved, but just a thought to keep in mind.


----------



## aclaar877 (Feb 19, 2014)

Well, I can't believe it. It looks like there was a magnesium shortage, despite the water report. Maybe this time of year it's down near the 2 ppm range. Three weeks ago, I added 4 ppm and saw color improve in less than a day, amazing pearling, and saw decent vertical growth again. That weekend I did a big water change, added 15 ppm Ca and 4 ppm Mg, and couldn't believe the plants - it looked like they really wanted to grow for a change - great pearling, and almost all of them "reaching" vertically for the light all day. I haven't seen this in ages. I got 2-3 new nodes on L Rugosa too.

The growth didn't last, though. Following week I again added 15/4 ppm Ca/Mg at water change, and things went south again. Some AR crinkled up and stunted, L Rugosa, Rotala Rotundifolia stopped growing, overall growth slowed, and some BGA showed up despite good flow, O2, clean filters, etc. I recently gassed a pleco, so I don't think it's a CO2 problem. After the initial Mg dose I saw what the tank is capable of when water parameters are right. My guess is that since Mg was no longer limiting, macros and maybe traces ran low. Macros were 15/3/20, and there is a lot of plant mass in the tank now. Symptoms look like either boron deficiency or excess in AR - I'm tempted to hit it with a good dose of B to see if AR improves. New leaves are small, curled and brittle, just like the old problems with CSM+B. I wonder if the extra Ca impacted the boron uptake? Perhaps the macros and micros need to increase since I've driven up Mg and GH. The good thing is that GDA on glass is almost nonexistent, when before I had to wipe it 3-4 days after a water change.

I'll probably tone down the extra Ca/Mg - adding something like 10/3 should be enough, but I may need to get GH and Ca test kits since the tap report has such a wide range for each.


----------



## aclaar877 (Feb 19, 2014)

UPDATE- despite high light, high ferts and high CO2, plants like Lymnophila Rugosa, Persicaria SP and now AR are stuck and not growing. Even Osmocote and Jobes sticks in the substrate aren't helping at all. Nothing happens. The plants aren't stunted - they just sit there and don't grow. I had no algae problems until I got green water after adding Jobes sticks, but I have a UV to help with that. I don't care about algae - I know how to handle it. I just want some growth!

Not trusting the API Nitrate kit, I got the Salifert kit yesterday and measured around 45-50 ppm nitrate. Given recent dosing (5:1 NO3O4) and the makeup of Osmocote/Jobes, I probably have 8-9 ppm PO4 in there. Yet there is yellowing and disintegration of lower leaves, much like a nitrate deficiency. I have grown these plants well before in lower dosing, so I'll cut NO3 by half with a water change and see if things perk up.

Ludwigia Palustris loves the higher ferts, however. Lymnophila Belem is growing better vertically, but still without any red/purple color. All green.


----------



## Surf (Jun 13, 2017)

> UPDATE- despite high light, high ferts and high CO2, plants like Lymnophila Rugosa, Persicaria SP and now AR are stuck and not growing.


Sorry to hear about your troubles. I use RO water and one difference for me is that I use 0.01ppmCu. Most fertilizers use a dose of 0.001ppm Cu since tap water typically has some copper in it. But maybe your water has little to no copper in it. If that is the case you should try increasing it. With copper pipes in widespread use in home and utility pipes I would not expect Cu deficiency with tap water. 

I tried a number of different commercial fertilizers and I could never get constant results with any of them. The plants didn't grow most of the time. One of the biggest difference between all those fertilizer and the one I am using now is about 20 times more zinc (0.02ppm) and 10 times more copper (0.01ppm). 

Another thing you could do it to have your water tested with this:
https://www.amazon.com/gp/huc/view.html?ie=UTF8&newItems=C28d7605f-e573-4b9a-ba5f-faf71d4874da%2C1
You could use it to compare your dose targets to what is actually in the water. That might tell you where the problem is.


----------



## Ddrizzle (Jan 30, 2019)

On my last scape I was overdosing ferts for the plant mass and I didnt realize the aquasoil was soaking it up. All of the plants were stunted and/or the second generation leaves and on slowly died and got covered in algae.

After 4 weeks of no dosing and normal water changes, some of the plants statyed growing again and even exploded.

I don't think I could have mentally controlled myself to stop dosing for so long, but I said [censored][censored][censored][censored] it and was preparing for a ndw scape during that time so I "let it go".


----------



## aclaar877 (Feb 19, 2014)

I don't think copper is the problem, since I have copper pipes and include it in custom trace mix. I've allowed nitrate to drop to 20-25 ppm, and just started seeing some GSA on glass, so that indicates PO4 is getting low. I've resumed dosing 3 ppm a week of PO4. Most plants are growing OK, but after reading Deanna's post on a Rotala Macranda thread, she noted that accidental high trace dosing caused growth to slow or stop, and old leaves of plants curled drastically. That's what I'm experiencing, especially with AR, Persicaria SP, and Giant Hygro. Acmella Repens isn't growing either, which has always been an easy plant for me ever since I bought some from Burr. Ca is 35-40 ppm and Mg is 15, so it shouldn't be a calcium problem. AR isn't stunting at the tips, but it's hardly growing at all. Old leaves are curled up, though, and if there is one thing that gives AR trouble, it seems to be high traces. I've run the BML Dutch XB at 100% for a while since I have minimal algae, just to try to get some better growth. I have been dosing iron/traces at 0.06 ppm daily, and it may be too much. I haven't been weighing each dose, and maybe the medicine cup I'm using isn't that accurate, and maybe my tank volume estimate is off. I'll reduce iron/traces and will see what happens with those plants. Perhaps there are some residual traces from O+ balls I added a month or two ago, as well.


----------



## aclaar877 (Feb 19, 2014)

Another Update: Still struggling with L Rugosa, Persicaria SP, AR Mini and Acmella Repens - all plants I've grown well before. Giant Hygro grows very slow with pinholes in lower leaves and shedding. Seems like I have a rather unique problem - no stunting, no algae problems, no BBA, but no growth in some species. Root tabs do nothing. For iron/micros, I have reduced it to 0.06 ppm 3x per week, down to a week cold turkey with no traces, and it hasn't seemed to help anything. 60-70% water changes weekly. 

I've re-read the Custom Trace thread and Share Your Dosing thread, and decided to go all-in for at least two weeks with high macros and micros, and reducing light a little. I've run the BML LED at 100% for some time, trying to get some better growth. High light may drive the good plants (L Palustris, Bacopa, L Repens, Vals) at expense of others, even though I don't have algae problems at the moment. *The root of my problem could lie in Mg variability - local water report has a 2-30 ppm range.* Right now my tank is at GH of 11 and Ca of 40, so that indicates Mg would be around 23. The high Mg may drive a need for even more Ca (most leaf tips still hook down a little) and everything else. I remember Burr saying he has to base his dosing around his Ca levels, and I probably need to do the same around Mg. Months ago the tank responded well to extra Mg, now it seems the pendulum has swung the other direction... If you look at Mulder's chart, high Mg would drive a need for higher K and Ca, and that's what my plants seem to be telling me.


----------



## aclaar877 (Feb 19, 2014)

UPDATE: Lymnophila Rugosa finally turned around and is growing again. AR Mini is growing very slowly, but it's not stunted. The only stuck plants at the moment are Persicaria SP, Acmella Repens, and AR Roseafolia. Neither is stunted - the tops look fine, but there is virtually no growth. High Mg may not be ideal, (I calculate around 20 ppm from Ca and GH) but I don't think it's the culprit here. I find the plants look better when I raise Calcium to 35-40 ppm (tap is around 16), otherwise leaves curl downward in several species.

I posted my problem on a Facebook group several weeks ago, and among the suggestions to double-check KH, CO2, and manage biomass, one commenter said that he can consistently attribute stalled growth to organic matter buildup. I thought that wasn't my problem, since I did 50-60% weekly water changes and didn't have an algae problem. But, I did a deep vacuum in some of the tank, including the area that I put Lymnophila Rugosa, and the plant started growing again. I intend to do this in the AR Roseafolia and Persicaria sections, and see what happens. I though mulm buildup in sand would be a good thing, but maybe it isn't. Roots have always looked fine though. I thought organic buildup would contribute to algae and tip stunting before it would cause stalled growth, but I guess that's not always the case. Funny thing is, my glass has never been this clean - I used to have to wipe GDA every week, and I haven't needed to do that for quite a while. Lesson - organic buildup and cleanliness can stall growth despite non-limiting ferts and CO2. And you may not have an algae problem, either.


----------



## aclaar877 (Feb 19, 2014)

Still dealing with very slow growth, a little AR stunting, and I'm wracking my brain trying to figure out what the problem could be. I have never paid so close attention to cleanliness, flow and maintenance in my life. All ferts are in a good range to grow plants. I've recently tried weekly macros between 10/2/12 to 20/5/25, and custom traces around 0.4-0.5 weekly, sometimes daily dosing and sometimes every other day. 60-70% water changes every week without exception. Salifert NO3 test is reading at 25 ppm, so I don't appear to have any nutrient soup going on.

Even jam-packed O+ capsules under a single AR and Persicaria stem don't seem to do a thing for them compared to other stems in the group, so it's not a root feeding issue. Giant Hygro gets great CO2 and flow and barely grows. Overall new growth looks decent on everything, but it just stays that way - no additional new growth to speak of. Crypts and vals are currently growing very slowly. Bacopa, Ludwigias and Sagittaria seem fine. Floating a couple stems of AR hasn't helped.

Where to go from here? 

1. Try a micro mix without copper. It's possible copper pipes plus my dosing is too much. I feel like I check Mulder's chart every other day for something, but Cu can interfere with P, Mn, Fe, and N, and I wonder if this could snowball into K uptake problems since Fe and Mn assist K uptake.
2. Get a pH pen. I've never used one in 12+ years and grew plants fine before, but must double check CO2. Though it seems these plants don't care how much CO2 I throw at them, at the moment.
3. Drop trace dosing to bare minimum, maybe 0.02-0.03 daily? Plants grew well at 0.015 DPTA and 0.015 CSM-B a couple years ago, and I understand you need more than that with SO4-based elements.
4. Plant AR and Persicaria in pots with soil. It didn't help Ammania Senegalensis in the past, but I could try it with these plants.


----------



## Surf (Jun 13, 2017)

> Where to go from here?


I think you need to get your water tested. 



> https://www.amazon.com/gp/huc/view.h...f71d4874da,1
> You could use it to compare your dose targets to what is actually in the water. That might tell you where the problem is.


When I first tried making my own micro mix. i did work better than nay fertilizer I purchased. However growth did slow a bit earlier this year and then got a lworse. So I sent a sample out for testing. Basically everything I was dosing was in the lab report. The valve didn't always match my mix but generally there were close. Buttwo element did show up at zero. CL and Mn. Now I was adding chloride salts to my RO water but the demand was a lot higher than I expected. Also My Mn dose was close to your dose at 0.06ppm. 

So I took the following actions I started dosing Mn daily at 0.035ppm. There was some improvement for that week. Then I increased the Chloride in my GH booster. That got me even more growth and pearling. I have since reduced the Mn does to every other day at 0.035ppm. I will probably be sending out another sample for testing soon. To see how the tank is responding. 

This left me a little perplexed. Everything I saw said I was doing close to what plants would need but the demand for Mn and CL was a lot higher (about 4 times ) than any plant scientific study I read indicated. I eventually learned that some bacteria get the energy they need by converting soluble Mn and Fe to insoluble oxide. Bacteria and animals also need chlorine. Also in large hydroponics farms high Mn consumption has been obersved.

So the big thing I learned is that you cannot balance the fertilizer just for plants. _You have to ballance it for your plants, the bacteria in your tank, and animals. _ Also just carefully looking for deficiencies in your aquarium plant Often may lead to incorrect conclusions. For a lab test However it can be very easy to say that the "test is wrong!" and ignor the results. It is better to to assume the test is right and take action to address the issues the test identified. If it doesn't work either the test was wrong or somthing else that the test cannot detect was going on (the test I linked to earlier will not detect Carbon, organics, nitrogen in the water sample.


----------



## burr740 (Feb 19, 2014)

aclaar877 said:


> 1. Try a micro mix without copper. It's possible copper pipes plus my dosing is too much. I feel like I check Mulder's chart every other day for something, but Cu can interfere with P, Mn, Fe, and N, and I wonder if this could snowball into K uptake problems since Fe and Mn assist K uptake.
> 2. Get a pH pen. I've never used one in 12+ years and grew plants fine before, but must double check CO2. Though it seems these plants don't care how much CO2 I throw at them, at the moment.
> 3. Drop trace dosing to bare minimum, maybe 0.02-0.03 daily? Plants grew well at 0.015 DPTA and 0.015 CSM-B a couple years ago, and I understand you need more than that with SO4-based elements.
> 4. Plant AR and Persicaria in pots with soil. It didn't help Ammania Senegalensis in the past, but I could try it with these plants.


1. Surfs advice on getting your water tested is the best way to know this for sure. Otherwise you're just guessing. Could be something else is really high in your tap, like B, etc.

I wouldnt get too obsessed with Mulder's Chart. While it _is_ a good reference when things arent making sense, or for fine tuning a micro recipe, its easy to go down a rabbit hole because basically everything effects everything. You just dont want one thing getting out of hand. Like inadvertently adding 50 extra ppm of K using pre-made GH booster 

2. This would be good to do regardless. But I have a feeling during all this time you've cranked CO2 enough to rule that out. If you havent, you should

3. No, you dont necessarily need more using SO4 compounds, primarily because they absorb easier/faster than chelated compounds. So even though some of them may not stick around as long, plants can get them quicker. It is also theoretically easier to overdose.

Since lower micro levels is a main point of reference to what worked well in the past, I would try reducing them further and see what happens. Something like .075 3x per week

Not sure what recipe you're using but this is a good one, proven in my tanks to be better than some of the precious ones

Fe DTPA 11% - .15
Mn - .045
B - .030
Zn - .040
Cu - .0025
Mo - .0015
Ni - .0005

Dose half of everything for .075 doses, reduce everything in proportion. FYI most of my plants like .1 or .12 3x better than .15. Seems like a small difference but it can have a big effect.

I would also keep macros on the high side of what you listed above, 20/5/25 per week

4. Couldnt hurt but I dont think this is the main problem, especially since you've had good results in the past with the same substrate.


----------



## aclaar877 (Feb 19, 2014)

Thanks Surf and Burr - interesting points about Mn and Cl. I did a 50% water change last night and made a micro batch without copper last night, pretty close to Burr's ratios listed above. I can try extra Mn, but I think I would be dosing enough with what I've been doing.

Here are some figures from water report, though I don't know if any would be problematic:

Chloramines - up to 3.1 ppm. I neutralize with Seachem Safe, and get droopy leaves if I don't.
Fluoride - 0.5-0.8 ppm
Chlorates - 130-290 ppb
Chloride - 31-42 ppm (shouldn't be deficient)
TDS - around 170 ppm

Water report is from two rivers, and the company says my source has 0 ppm Boron. But the other river has 0.06 ppm, so if they made a mistake I could be overdoing the Boron. I don't have a major stunting problem, though, so I'll keep dosing it for now.


----------



## burr740 (Feb 19, 2014)

I wouldnt increase Mn beyond a 3:1 Fe:Mn ratio unless you are positive there is a situation like Surf described. Mn plays heavily on Fe efficiency and too much can quickly bring on a deficiency. This is from repeated personal experience not just Mulder's chart.

For the first year or so doing the custom micros, I (and everyone else) was using a 2:1 ratio. Because thats what most of the research says is best. Horticultural and agriculture research. Well it might be best in a soybean field but not in our aquariums. Having a 3-4:1 or even 5:1 ratio works a lot better. A lot better.


----------



## aclaar877 (Feb 19, 2014)

Adding a few pictures this week - overall the tank is doing fairly well, though the lack of growth in the backline of Acmella, Hygro and Persicaria messes up the height aspects of the scape a little bit. 









Stopping the copper dosing didn't seem to do much, so I'll use the mix that has 0.001 ppm per 0.2 ppm Fe, and may increase it even further. If I have high copper in tap, the cutting out very small doses probably won't matter anyway. I upped the iron for a 4:1 ratio with Mn, and also dose a little extra iron on non-micro days, so I should approach a 5:1 ratio.

I turned off the UV sterilizer, just to make sure it wasn't messing with DPTA iron. I'm also thinking of not changing as much water - give the tank some stability for a couple weeks. Let it get used to rich macros and modest micros at 0.075 Fe every other day. Maybe tap has something in it, or maybe the neutralized chloramines are causing trouble. A couple years ago the tank did pretty well with 30% water changes.

Some decent new growth on AR mini and regular, but I have seen this before. A nice new leaf on a couple stems, just a little bit to get your hopes up, then stalling and no growth.


----------



## Grobbins48 (Oct 16, 2017)

aclaar877 said:


> Some decent new growth on AR mini and regular, but I have seen this before. A nice new leaf on a couple stems, just a little bit to get your hopes up, then stalling and no growth.


This has been my exact experience with AR and AR Mini- Seems like things are going well with it, then all the sudden it stunts- even with no parameter changes. I decided to stop chasing this plant and moved onto others that like my water.


----------



## isonychia (Nov 19, 2013)

Deanna said:


> l
> 
> 
> I have been reconsidering my PO4 plan recently and have been using the above tools to approach this. For a long time, I have been holding PO4 levels in the 10 ppm area on the assumption that it inhibits GSA. A few weeks ago, I lowered it to 1-2 ppm. Oddly, my NO3 disappeared – I mean down to zero! The normal bio-load I have pushes NO3 naturally into the 20-30 ppm area. I’ve recently forced NO3 down into the 5-10 ppm area with heavy Purigen use. NO3 starts the week at 2-5 ppm and drifts up to 10 ppm by weeks’ end. Now, I see low PO4 causing an NO3 deficiency and I’ve tested it by withdrawing it and adding it 3-4 cycles now. I see no direct link, on Mulder’s chart, between N and P so, perhaps it’s causing a limitation in K and/or Ca (or Zn) and stalling growth, thereby causing a backing-up of NO3 in my tank. Still trying to sort through this.


How are you measuring your NO3 and PO4? 

I measure mine with the API tests. I have never shown zero on my tests and there is no way I could decipher an uptake with that test going by colors. It’s just not accurate at all. I also did a calibration at one point and it was off by at least 10ppm. I ask this because I hear people mention these low uptake rates ie 5-10ppm. But I always wonder how they can be so sure and use those results to benefit their theories. 

My tank problems could probably benefit from access to very accurate tests as it seems I’m cursed by some water chemistry, unknown problems. Even though this hobby says it’s not needed it seems I always see posts with specific testing and detailed ppm data.


----------



## Deanna (Feb 15, 2017)

isonychia said:


> How are you measuring your NO3 and PO4?
> 
> I measure mine with the API tests. I have never shown zero on my tests and there is no way I could decipher an uptake with that test going by colors. It’s just not accurate at all. I also did a calibration at one point and it was off by at least 10ppm. I ask this because I hear people mention these low uptake rates ie 5-10ppm. But I always wonder how they can be so sure and use those results to benefit their theories.
> 
> My tank problems could probably benefit from access to very accurate tests as it seems I’m cursed by some water chemistry, unknown problems. Even though this hobby says it’s not needed it seems I always see posts with specific testing and detailed ppm data.


IMO, the API tests are nearly useless for NO3 between 5 and 40 ppm due to the strong need for violent shaking of the second reagent and, mainly, due to the fact that I cannot distinguish the colors between about 5 and 40 ppm. I have found that the Salifert kit (which I've been using now for many years) is far easier to use (no shaking) and far easier to distinguish colors from 0 to 20 ppm. I have calibrated it, several times, and it has met the challenge.

The API PO4 test is fine at about 5 ppm and above, maybe a little less. However, as I mentioned in the post you referenced (whenever I wrote that), my PO4 is generally below 3 ppm and the API is useless for that. Again, the Salifert kit comes to the rescue. It is difficult to go below 1 ppm, though, even with the Salifert kit. So, I also have a Hanna low-range PO4 kit which is very precise (for our hobby) and correlates well to both the Salifert (in the 1-3 ppm area) and to calibration solutions (in the 0-3 ppm region).

All in all, I don't think that high precision in readings is all that helpful for indicating problems, e.g.; we will never know precisely how much N our fish and rotting things produce nor the uptake of our plants. I do like increased precision at low ppm levels where a 1 point difference may be more meaningful when ppm is at 2 vs a 1 point difference when ppm is at 40. Basically I want to make sure that I don't ever drop to zero and want to keep an eye on the trend. At low ppm levels, kits such as API won't allow that.


----------



## aclaar877 (Feb 19, 2014)

Interesting finding by Deanna. Lower PO4 is something that I haven't tried recently. I got much better growth in the past when I had a little GSA on the glass by the end of the week, so it's worth trying. I don't have a kit at the moment to test it though. I deep-vacuumed the Acmella and Persicaria areas, but no change visible yet. L Rugosa has turned around nicely though-it's starting to take over the tank... Starting to see yellowing old leaves on Broadleaf Sag, and some modest Ludwigia leaf shedding, so that suggests NO3 could be getting low. I have Salifert and API nitrate kits. API always reads beet-red, even if I cut the sample or use fewer drops and then do the math for the actual level. Salifert usually reads 20-25, but when I calibrated it the 10 ppm looked like 50. That was with 33 mg of KNO3 in 2 liters of water. It could also be that my scale isn't accurate in that low range, which makes me worry about the trace mix - Cu, Mo and Ni all use low measurements like that in my mix. I've found it's easier to read the plants than test kits, so I can let PO4 drop and see if there is some improvement. Easy to reverse it if I start seeing GSA with no growth improvement.

I'm really tempted to switch the substrate to Safe T Sorb or something with higher CEC. Seems much easier to grow a wider variety of plants by relying more on root feeding and leaner water column ferts.


----------



## Seattle_Aquarist (Jun 15, 2008)

Hi @aclaar877,

I see you have been dealing with this issue since mid-August; that is a long time and can be very frustrating. I see you are in Missouri, I grew up in St. Louis County.

1) What part of the state are you in?
2) Are you on well water or municipal water? 
3) Name of water utility?

I did not see it mentioned in the posts, what size tank is this?

What light is on the tank?

What is the photoperiod?

I did see some tap water parameters from August, what are the current tap water readings?

pH =

dKH =

dGH =

nitrates (ppm of NO3) =

What are the current water parameter readings in your tank? I am not interested in what you are dosing or how much; just what is currently in your tank.

pH =

dKH =

dGH =

ammonia (ppm of NH3) = 

nitrites (ppm of NO2-) = 

nitrates (ppm of NO3+) = 

Why the ammonia and nitrites? You apparently have been adding Osmocote Plus as root tabs and Jobes sticks to the substrate. Osmocote Plus contains ammonium nitrate and ammonium phosphate. I cannot locate a list of ingredients for the Jobe's Fertilizer Spikes.

Water changes: 

How much? 

How often?


----------



## aclaar877 (Feb 19, 2014)

Roy, thanks for weighing in. Here are the details:

Location: Fenton, MO
Water: Municipal, confirmed source is Meramec River by Missouri American Water.

Tank Size: 155 gallon bowfront

Lights: BML dutch XB in the back, 2 inches off top of tank. Normally dimmed at 75-80%. Sometimes crank to 100% for a couple hours to indulge in better pearling and try to get some growth out of stalled plants in the backline underneath it. Middle is single T8 without reflectors, for longer viewing. Bowfront has 48" T5HO with Floramax and Colormax bulbs.

CO2: Pressurized through 3"x24" Griggs reactor with bioballs, two Rena XP3 filters run through it.

Photoperiod: 7 hours, and T8 is on for 10 total hours.

Current Tap:
pH = 8.4 (bright purple on old API high pH) Degassed tank is usually 7.4-7.6. Kit may be off - it's from 2004.
KH = 4
GH = 7
Ca = 20 (API kit cut into 5 ppm increments)
NO3 = 0
Nitrite = 0
Ammonia = 1.0 - this is a big surprise to me. Could chloramines cause ammonia readings?

Tank, right now:
pH = 6.4, measuring furthest from CO2 outflows
kH = 4
GH = 10
Ca = 35
NO3 = 30-35, Salifert kit a shade darker than the 25 reading
Nitrite = 0
Ammonia = 0

Water changes - 50-70% weekly, without exception. 70% tends to stress or kill tetras (maybe the ammonia in tap?), so I try not to do that much anymore. I get "leaf droop" if I don't use enough Seachem Safe.


----------



## Seattle_Aquarist (Jun 15, 2008)

Hi @aclaar877

I could also use a full tank shot and closeups of new and old leaves on the stems / plants that seem to be having the most difficulty. 



> Chloramines (also known as secondary disinfection) are disinfectants used to treat drinking water and they: Are most commonly formed when ammonia is added to chlorine to treat drinking water. Provide longer-lasting disinfection as the as the water moves through pipes to consumers.


PS: A phosphate reading if you have one please.


----------



## aclaar877 (Feb 19, 2014)

Seattle_Aquarist said:


> Hi @aclaar877
> 
> I could also use a full tank shot and closeups of new and old leaves on the stems / plants that seem to be having the most difficulty.
> 
> PS: A phosphate reading if you have one please.


I don't have a phosphate kit at the moment, but if nitrate was reading 35 ppm then phosphate is probably around 7 given my recent dosing ratios. I am reducing PO4 to see if that helps - I'll add some as soon as I see GSA on glass or anubias. I wonder if nitrate has been too low, with false readings from the dechlorinator. New growth looks OK on Acmella, Persicaria, Hygro and most AR stems - they just don't grow. Older leaves are very ratty because I haven't had to top them in months. I also noticed some slightly yellow new growth L Repens and Acmella which might indicate I need more NO3. So I'm doubling down on that. I definitely have old growth issues as you can see in the close-ups, which would be mitigated if I had to trim and replant more often. I placed an AR stem in a pot of soil with O+ on Wednesday. I read today that plants need about a week to respond to higher NO3 - with my water changes I never really let that happen.




























L Belem looks decent, just totally green and it barely grows. Once in a while it gets a hint of purple highlights:



















On this Broadleaf Sagittaria you'll see hints of Mg deficiency, but that shouldn't happen with the levels I have (15-20 ppm):


----------



## Seattle_Aquarist (Jun 15, 2008)

Hi @aclaar877,

I see leaf tip hooking, interveinal chlorosis, and leaf cupping on various leaves of the plants. The high nitrates, calcium, and magnesium (based upon 35 ppm Ca and dGH of 10 computes to 22.2 ppm of Mg) are all troublesome.

f it were my tank I would do a re-set. Do a 50% water change every other day until your nitrates are about 15 ppm. Be sure to use de-chlor when doing your water changes. I use Seachem Prime or Seachem Safe but make sure what you are using removes chloramines. Do not dose any nutrients between water changes. When the nitrate ppm is down to 15 ppm (hopefully by mid-week or so) post all the water parameter readings again please. Then we are going to wait one week.


----------



## aclaar877 (Feb 19, 2014)

Seattle_Aquarist said:


> Hi @aclaar877,
> 
> I see leaf tip hooking, interveinal chlorosis, and leaf cupping on various leaves of the plants. The high nitrates, calcium, and magnesium (based upon 35 ppm Ca and dGH of 10 computes to 22.2 ppm of Mg) are all troublesome.
> 
> f it were my tank I would do a re-set. Do a 50% water change every other day until your nitrates are about 15 ppm. Be sure to use de-chlor when doing your water changes. I use Seachem Prime or Seachem Safe but make sure what you are using removes chloramines. Do not dose any nutrients between water changes. When the nitrate ppm is down to 15 ppm (hopefully by mid-week or so) post all the water parameter readings again please. Then we are going to wait one week.


OK, a couple weeks ago I did a large water change and got GH to 8 with Ca at 30 which would mean Mg is around 17-18. Allowed NO3 to drop to 15-20 ppm, and looking at all plants the things that jump out are very slow growth, deteriorating old growth (partly due to no need for regular topping), new growth looking OK across the board, no stunting, and minimal algae. Pinholes, yellowing and leaf shedding in Hygro Corymbosa, some leaf shedding in ludwigias and some of those leaves looking relatively healthy and still shedding. Its not like they gradually withered away and then dropped. I also had a stem of AR in a soil pot with plenty of O+, and it did absolutely nothing for two weeks, so I took it out of the pot. Also a packed O+ tab under a Hygro stem seemed to have no effect as well.

Decided to double-down on cleaning - removed all plants, vaccumed entire tank, re-sloped sand toward the back, trimmed ratty bottoms and started over. The previous observations suggest mobile nutrient problem, so increased macros to 15/5/25 with 2/3 of that dosed at the water change. Custom micros at 0.05 Fe daily, using the mix without copper just to see.Things started looking better, good pearling and seeing some growth emerge quickly on both AR types. Toward the end of the week I added 5/1/10 macros, saw reduced pearling, so went back to the trace mix with copper and dosed 0.1 ppm Fe. Overnight I saw lots of ludwigia palustris leaf shedding, and hygro is still shedding old yellow leaves with pinholes, but new growth is looking better. Measured NO3 at 30 ppm, so PO4 is likely 5-6.

I still wonder if copper is problematic - water company report has zero samples above threshold, but that threshold is 1.3 ppm. Saw a facebook thread where someone noted that K should be around 2x Mg, so I want to try that along with lowering NO3. I may have to arrange all my dosing based on high Mg from the tap. That's an approach I haven't tried yet. Kekon had some interesting experiments 12 years ago where his tanks turned around when he kept K high and lowered NO3. I think I got a hint of that after my big cleaning, but progress stopped during the week either from NO3 climbing back up or maybe something (copper?) in the trace mix. The mix only has 0.001 ppm copper per 0.2 ppm Fe, so I'm not adding all that much really. I'm honestly about to pay for a fancy lab test to see what's in my water, if I can't turn this around. When things are right, I see new leaves quickly emerge with great pearling, and then that seems to stop by the time the end of the week rolls around.


----------



## Seattle_Aquarist (Jun 15, 2008)

Hi @aclaar877,

You are only dosing 0.05 ppm of iron (Fe) daily? So 0.30 ppm per week (assuming dosing 6X per week). Rotala Butterfly recommends 0.2 ppm of Fe 2 - 4 times per week or 0.4 - 0.8 ppm weekly. I personally dose 0.63 ppm of Fe weekly.

So you maintained the 15-20 ppm of NO3 for how long? 1 week, 2 weeks? Exactly how quickly are you expecting plants to respond to changes? I typically wait about a month between changing water parameters before making a judgement as to the effect. Constant changing of my nutrient levels never allows my plants to acclimate and I can never tell what is working or what isn't. Obviously you seem to have your own opinions on how to progress, I certainly wish you all successes. -Roy


----------



## aclaar877 (Feb 19, 2014)

Seattle_Aquarist said:


> Hi @aclaar877,
> 
> You are only dosing 0.05 ppm of iron (Fe) daily? So 0.30 ppm per week (assuming dosing 6X per week). Rotala Butterfly recommends 0.2 ppm of Fe 2 - 4 times per week or 0.4 - 0.8 ppm weekly. I personally dose 0.63 ppm of Fe weekly.
> 
> So you maintained the 15-20 ppm of NO3 for how long? 1 week, 2 weeks? Exactly how quickly are you expecting plants to respond to changes? I typically wait about a month between changing water parameters before making a judgement as to the effect. Constant changing of my nutrient levels never allows my plants to acclimate and I can never tell what is working or what isn't. Obviously you seem to have your own opinions on how to progress, I certainly wish you all successes. -Roy


I waited two weeks with the lower nitrate, and things were getting worse. When hygro sheds all but it's top 2-3 nodes, with yellowing leaves and pinholes and slow growth, it seemed foolish to maintain that course. Yes, I may have schizophrenia by doing so many resets the past several months, but the tank responds quickly when things are right - I see nice new growth emerging and good pearling. Then I worry about getting too low on ferts, keep adding them, and find myself in the same situation all over again with stalled-out growth. Things actually worked much better in the past at 0.03 ppm Fe three times a week, with half that from CSM-B. Very similar to what Burr was doing before making his own micros. I'd be surprised if I really need 0.4-0.8 per week, but I can certainly try it.


----------



## Surf (Jun 13, 2017)

Stop the guessing get your water tested: https://www.amazon.com/ICP-Analysis-Elemental-Water-Test/dp/B071HVPBVD/ref=pd_sim_199_3/143-4754022-5433815?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=B071HVPBVD&pd_rd_r=60b5d79a-45c7-4b92-a02e-cf3c0218ad01&pd_rd_w=Q0vly&pd_rd_wg=vRJNd&pf_rd_p=04d27813-a1f2-4e7b-a32b-b5ab374ce3f9&pf_rd_r=HF57DVBPGXYB375Q6SSQ&psc=1&refRID=HF57DVBPGXYB375Q6SSQ

It cost 30 dollars and in only1 week we will know the exact levels of 13 of the 14 plant nutrients. The lab test cannot detect nitrogen levels but you can easily test for that with a standard aquarium test kit. We won't have to guesss about copper or anything else. Excessive levels will also show up and then we can make adjustments to your fertilization routine to reduce excesses and eliminate any deficiencies.


----------

