# AGA 2019 Vin Video Presentation



## happi (Dec 18, 2009)

First of all, let me say thanks to Vin for such a nice talk which was highly detailed and well explained. Vin also had great sense of Humor during his presentation. This presentation will certainly help a lot of people who are struggling for the last 50 years and I highly encourage people to watch the video. The data was also gathered from many well known people, including Marcel. I personally want to thank Vin to bringing up Marcel in his presentation. That guy never fully got the credit he deserved, but now he finally got recognized. Thank you Vin. 

There is one thing I believe was not accurately presented in the presentation, however. In Marcel's Wallachi experiment tank (see pic), the tank used the same water parameters but different nutrient levels.

Here's a quote directly from Marcel:

"First two tanks (from left to right) are EI recipes, tank #3 and #5 are Marschner's recipes (the tank #5 runs on the recipe I have gave you; the tank #3 runs on 2-times more concentrated recipe which had the same amount of nitrogen as EI recipes)."


More info regarding his work can be found here: https://golias.net/akvaristika/expe...c6Kpxg1SyuyuWrgeRd6DB87B 2Ta9p_EU7PJGjNLU4oD4

I apologize, if this isn't the right time or right place to discus this, but I thought I'd share whatever I know. Thanks again for such a beautiful presentation.


----------



## jcoulter (Mar 12, 2018)

happi said:


> I highly encourage people to watch the video.


Where can we watch this video?


----------



## Positron (Jul 22, 2013)

I'd love to get my hands on a link


----------



## EdWiser (Jul 14, 2015)

Join the AGA. You get to watch all the talks from all the conventions. 

https://www.aquatic-gardeners.org/


----------



## jcoulter (Mar 12, 2018)

EdWiser said:


> Join the AGA. You get to watch all the talks from all the conventions.
> 
> https://www.aquatic-gardeners.org/


I am indeed a member. Wanting to see this presentation was one of the main reasons I signed up.

Unless I'm missing it, the video is not posted yet. Correct me if I'm wrong.


----------



## Immortal1 (Feb 18, 2015)

jcoulter said:


> I am indeed a member. Wanting to see this presentation was one of the main reasons I signed up.
> 
> Unless I'm missing it, the video is not posted yet. Correct me if I'm wrong.


 If you are indeed an AGA member, than the video is posted and able to be viewed. 

Once you login to www.aquatic-gardeners.org you should see your 
*AGA: Your Member Profile*

Once there, scroll down and you should see
*Online Members-only Benefits:*

TAG ArchiveClippingsVideo - A selection of streaming video from our conventionshere you will see Full AGA 2019 Stream


----------



## jcoulter (Mar 12, 2018)

Immortal1 said:


> jcoulter said:
> 
> 
> > I am indeed a member. Wanting to see this presentation was one of the main reasons I signed up.
> ...


Yea, I definitely don't see it. I see stuff from previous years but nothing from 2019. Tried both mobile and desktop.


----------



## jcoulter (Mar 12, 2018)

So I emailed them to figure out what was wrong.

The response I got was that the presentation is *NOT* free to members, but is free for attendees (as part of their registration fee).

Further, *the presentation(s) currently isn't available to non-attendees at all.* They plan to make it available in the future, for a fee.

Part of me wishes they were more transparent with this regard. Part of me blames myself for spending money without all of the details.


----------



## Immortal1 (Feb 18, 2015)

jcoulter said:


> So I emailed them to figure out what was wrong.
> 
> The response I got was that the presentation is *NOT* free to members, but is free for attendees (as part of their registration fee).
> 
> ...



Ah,that would explain things. Thought it was odd that one member would not be able to see the same thing that another member could see.


----------



## Asteroid (Jul 26, 2018)

I don't belong to the AGA, but I'm sure it's a fine organization, so I could only analyze the picture. Soft Water = Good, Hard Water = Bad 

Also on the three tanks to the right. Why is the bacopa (I think) much greener (along with the sand) than the two tanks on the left?


----------



## EdWiser (Jul 14, 2015)

This is where the planted hobby and freshwater hobby is so far behind the saltwater hobby. 
Here is is all 26 talks from last years MACNA. https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLBaMLrfToJyxpfTRGKg_YMBgWEic1j0MT 

These are posted a few weeks after the convention after they have been rights cleared. Bulk Reef supply sponsors the videos. 

Instead of 300 attendance like the AGA convention this past years MACNA had 3000 attendance. The 3 rd MACNA held 23 years ago had 300 in attendance. 
I go every year. 

To grow the hobby education should be available to all. I am a member of the AGA. Also but one must educate to lift the hobby to the next level.


----------



## happi (Dec 18, 2009)

If you look at Marcel website, most of the stuff that is discussed in this video was covered already by Marcel long ago, well as most of the members here who have done several experiments, you will find similar conversations in this video. but I still encourage you to watch the video and make your own conclusions.

Am not entirely sure why you have to pay for this information when it should been available for free to uplift the planted aquarium hobby.


----------



## EdWiser (Jul 14, 2015)

What is he web address ?


----------



## Asteroid (Jul 26, 2018)

EdWiser said:


> ...
> Instead of 300 attendance like the AGA convention this past years MACNA had 3000 attendance. The 3 rd MACNA held 23 years ago had 300 in attendance.
> I go every year...


Just out of curiosity how many attended the AGA convention 10 years ago?


----------



## EdWiser (Jul 14, 2015)

Don't know that info but if this year it was 300 I bet is was really small. The first Macna was a club meeting between the Cleveland ohio club and the Toronto canada club. A total of 20 people. My club has held four of them. Our first back in the 90's had 1500 people attending.


----------



## happi (Dec 18, 2009)

EdWiser said:


> What is he web address ?


https://www.golias.net/akvaristika/index.php

Unfortunately you have to use Google to translate the website


----------



## EdWiser (Jul 14, 2015)

Thanks I am fine with that. I use to translate German aquarium books by hand.


----------



## Saxa Tilly (Apr 7, 2015)

Thanks @happi and others for the kind comments. Wish more of you were there. Great to hang with Immortal1 and a few others in Seattle. 

I've been called many things but I post as Saxa Tilly here and as Pikez over at Barr Report. 

The first two-thirds of my talk was a summary of my Rotala Kill Tank experiments, which was set up to figure out why Rotala stunt so often for so many people. The last third was a summary of takeaways from my 'social media database' and finding commonalities in tank conditions of experts and semi-experts who grow Lythraceae (Rotala, Ammannia, and Cuphea) without any tip stunting under a wide range of conditions. 

I hope the AGA makes the video available for streaming soon for non-attendees. I pushed my 1 hour time slot to 1:15 but even then, I was unable to get to some of the nitty gritty details. I was unable to go into details on Marcel Golias' results, which I feel deserves more attention. His experiment design is damn near flawless and no one else has come close, which means you can use his results as a jumping off point for future experiments. 

Having said that, I am just as interested in finding out WHY Tom Barr is successful. The current state of the hobby says Tom's approach is successful because of very high CO2 and excellent maintenance. Sure, good CO2 and great maintenance are important, but that is a woefully inadequate and inarticulate explanation for the success of that method. The 'it works in my tank, therefore, critiques have been falsified' is an equally unacceptable retort. Arguing about these things is a hobby onto itself here on TPT and FB. 

Anyway, it turns out there are surprising commonalities in approaches. I haven't cracked this nut yet and I don't have all the answers. There are two conditions that seem to drive chronic tip stunting - no, it is not CO2 or maintenance - and they are the bicarbonate content of the water (KH) and WHERE the nutrients are provided to the plant. 

The easiest way to stunt these plants (worst case scenario) is hard water with high KH + inert substrate + high water column dosing. If you move the nutrients deep into the substrate and leave the water column completely unfertilized with NPK + traces, there is little or no stunting. 

On the flip side, if you have very low KH, EI ferts and inert substrate do not cause stunting, at least in R. wallichii. 

There is a hypothesis that suggests that HCO3 interferes with nitrogen uptake. This needs further work. There are also published papers (I've only read the abstract) that suggest high bicarb content interferes with calcium transport to shoot tips. Iron too. It appears that these bottlenecks are bypassed if you root-feed...again, possibly due to nutrient selectivity of root cells vs leaves. 

Clearly, there's still lots to unpack here. But at least now I know EXACTLY WHY Tom's approach is successful. I also know why Marcel and Happi are equally successful. It all makes sense to me anyway. 

Kill Tank Experiments continue...I'm scheduled to speak at Chicago in September. CAPS club. Don't know details yet. 


- Vin (find me on FB and message me with anything that might be relevant).


----------



## Immortal1 (Feb 18, 2015)

Saxa Tilly said:


> Thanks @*happi* and others for the kind comments. Wish more of you were there. Great to hang with Immortal1 and a few others in Seattle.
> 
> Kill Tank Experiments continue...I'm scheduled to speak at Chicago in September. CAPS club. *Don't know details yet*.
> 
> - Vin (find me on FB and message me with anything that might be relevant).



Well worth the trip to Chicago - really enjoyed what I heard in Seattle. Keep us posted when you can :grin2:


----------



## Greggz (May 19, 2008)

Saxa Tilly said:


> Kill Tank Experiments continue...I'm scheduled to speak at Chicago in September. CAPS club. Don't know details yet.
> 
> - Vin (find me on FB and message me with anything that might be relevant).


Great post and interesting stuff Vin.

Chicago in September....count me in!


----------



## jcoulter (Mar 12, 2018)

Hi all, some questions.

I'm still in the process of reading through the Rotala Kill thread, but I had a question (or three) I was hoping some kind person here could answer, not necessarily Vin, though I'd love to hear his opinion as well.

Given the results from the above mentioned thread and subsequent presentation...

1) What is the bigger detriment : high kh or high EI fertilizing? In other words, in a tank with high kh water and ei fertilizing, would it be more impactful to switch to RO water or moving fertilizers to the substrate?

Which leads me to...(and this may be a really newb question, please forgive me)
2) To what extent can root tabs work with an *inert* substrate? Is it beneficial (and to what extent)? Pointless? I've briefly familiarized myself with the idea of CEC but not how impactful it is.

When I started this post I had more questions but they seem to have escaped me for now.



Saxa Tilly said:


> Having said that, I am just as interested in finding out WHY Tom Barr is successful. The current state of the hobby says Tom's approach is successful because of very high CO2 and excellent maintenance. Sure, good CO2 and great maintenance are important, but that is a woefully inadequate and inarticulate explanation for the success of that method.





Saxa Tilly said:


> Clearly, there's still lots to unpack here. But at least now I know EXACTLY WHY Tom's approach is successful.


Sorry if I'm dense but could you elaborate? You do know or you do not know?

I'm not privvy to the FB discussions and have yet to make my way through the Rotala Kill thread, but...

Honestly, seems like there is a LOT of infighting within this community. That is incredibly deterring. This hobby is supposed to be calming and peaceful but reading some stuff is just...ugh...yuck.


----------



## Maryland Guppy (Dec 6, 2014)

happi said:


> https://www.golias.net/akvaristika/index.php
> 
> Unfortunately you have to use Google to translate the website


There is a lot of good info posted by Marcel, I'd rate it as a good read by all means!


----------



## cl3537 (Jan 28, 2019)

Saxa Tilly said:


> Thanks @happi
> There is a hypothesis that suggests that HCO3 interferes with nitrogen uptake.


This has also been taken even further in Strawberry plants(I forget if I sent this to you), that the use of Ammonia can mitigate the deleterious affects of high bicarb content.

Which can shed light on why @happi and Marcel have seen positive results and reduction of stunting with using Ammonia/Urea why many popular fertilizers (Tropica and others) also use a variety of N sources.


----------



## happi (Dec 18, 2009)

Saxa Tilly said:


> Thanks @happi and others for the kind comments. Wish more of you were there. Great to hang with Immortal1 and a few others in Seattle.
> 
> I've been called many things but I post as Saxa Tilly here and as Pikez over at Barr Report.
> 
> ...


 we might have answer to several questions as of now, we still need to explore more and still need to answer some of the unanswered question including the one you have mentioned, but We are not that far away from answering those, i wish Marcel Himself was here, am pushing him to come back in the hobby again, we still exchange emails and i am hoping that one day he will return and shed more lights, even though his website always shed tons of lights on these topics. 

there are many plant sp. which are prone to stunting, Ammania, Wallchi etc for example, we can actually grow them in majority of waters, i have seen some people grow these even in Utah's Hard tap water, this water here is rich in Ca, Mg, Cl, S, Na etc as well, but wallachi seems to grow quite well in it, anyways for me personally i can grow almost any plant, i have tried wide ranges of fertilizers, chemicals, ratio, chelated, non chelated, organic, non organics etc, in my experience plant grow well if they have to spend less energy to derive nutrients, Urea vs KNo3 for example, you will constantly be trimming wallachi no matter if other nutrients are present in bit higher amount, i have already covered most of these topics in the past and am sure people can easily find it. we can certainly grow plant in inert substrate without root tabs if water column dosing is derived from easily available nutrients. Ammania sp. obtained very fast growth but still had some minor leave twist, which vanish when that same dosing become less and more frequent instead of one single dose. we put Marchner ratio to test (require pure Ro/DI water) the results can be seen in Marcels website or the pic i pointed out earlier, where the entire solution was totally based on this ratio, where N was based on 50% in NO3 and 50% in NH4 form, results were quite amazing even with such a high doses of N and little Micros, when i tested this under different environment such as water with added Ca, Mg, Co3, KH etc, i started to see issues again, first one was twisting in some sp, Fe deficiency etc started to appear quite often, when KH was reduced, good results appeared again. i was able to pull off different results with different methods, if one really want to grow plant they should keep the KH low, like i have said before, if KH could interfere with the fertilizer solution, imagine what it might be doing in your aquarium. Marcel have covered the Co2 part as well, where he talked about higher co2 act like steroid and actually make things worse for plant and contributes to twisting and other issues in plants, he recommended 15-20 ppm for Co2.

here's another quote from him, which is referring to that pic i posted earlier, some of these were personally shared with me, they are subject to change as he have mentioned " preliminary" : 

"​First two tanks (from left to right) are EI recipes, tank #3 and #5 are Marschner's recipes (the tank #5 runs on the recipe I have gave you; the tank #3 runs on 2-times more concentrated recipe which had the same amount of nitrogen as EI recipes).

So now we seem to know what are the optimum ratios of elements for (at least some) plants. Our findings are only preliminary yet, but it seems that plants really prefer to uptake nutrients in a well-balanced ratios. This is not our own discovery. Scientists found this out long before us, but we were not sure if it applies for aquatic plants also. Some hobbyists recommend to add an extremely high amounts of nutrients into our water thinking that the excess is best for them, or that it is not detrimental. But this is not true. It is a proven fact that the terrestrial plants grow best when the nutrient levels are low, but continuous. To ensure a continuous supply of small amounts of nutrients to the terrestrial plants is a problem, but not so in our tanks where we can add all the essential nutrients on a regular basis. So we have try it, and found out that the continuous supply of a small amount of nutrients is the key to the best growth even with the aquatic plants."


----------



## Saxa Tilly (Apr 7, 2015)

jcoulter said:


> Hi all, some questions.
> 
> I'm still in the process of reading through the Rotala Kill thread, but I had a question (or three) I was hoping some kind person here could answer, not necessarily Vin, though I'd love to hear his opinion as well.
> 
> ...


Pick your poison? Ha. EI vs high KH? Based on what I've learned in the last few years, I'd choose EI over high KH any day. 

Lots of people grow Rotala and Ammannia well under EI. No matter how much it might upset your world view, lots of people grow these plants under high nutrient levels. I'm not interested in proving them wrong! I am interested in the whys and hows of their results. 

I continue to learn new mechanisms by which high KH (bicarbonates) interfere with good growth in many plants. 95% of plants are tolerant of high KH but Lythraceae do not seem to tolerate high KH well at all...in the presence of high nutrients. They do fine in high KH water if you dont fertilize. They do fine in low KH water if you do or dont fertilize. The issue is not necessarily the fertilizer levels, but the conditions under which you apply that fertilizer. 

I'm having issues uploading images...pardon me if this backfires. 

R. wallichii in high KH + EI


Same tank, same plant. Zero KH + EI


Switching to RO with close to zero KH and a decent amount of GH will help a lot. Doing that with commercial clay substrate and some root feeding will help even more. Doesnt have to be either or. 

If you're unable to produce RO or purchase Aqua$oil, then use stuff like rootabs or Osmocote along with MTS. It'll work.

As for the bickering and arguing. Yeah, it's hard to find good info when you have to wade thru all that crap. I tune it out. I have my circle of people offline that I talk to. And I visit TPT may be once a month.


----------



## Positron (Jul 22, 2013)

Higher KH is definitely a limiting factor, but what is "high" KH? The KH out of my tap is about 3-3.5. Is that high? Hmmm


----------



## Maryland Guppy (Dec 6, 2014)

Positron said:


> Higher KH is definitely a limiting factor, but what is "high" KH? The KH out of my tap is about 3-3.5. Is that high? Hmmm


This would be very dependent on what you are growing now or what you plan to grow in the future.
3-3.5dKH is not a high KH level, most plants would be fine.

My target is 1dKH but never as low as "zero".


----------



## Rainer (Jan 30, 2011)

Maryland Guppy said:


> This would be very dependent on what you are growing now or what you plan to grow in the future.
> 3-3.5dKH is not a high KH level, most plants would be fine.
> 
> My target is 1dKH but never as low as "zero".


In my case, r.wallichii and cuphea a. are on my list for the upcoming tank. Tap here is 6.7 dKH and the logistics of changing it are difficult, so I may have to give up. I would like to hear from Saxa Tilly on the thresholds first though.


----------



## Edward (Apr 11, 2005)

Positron said:


> Higher KH is definitely a limiting factor, but what is "high" KH? The KH out of my tap is about 3-3.5. Is that high? Hmmm


 There is no definite number. It is rather a linear rate of deterioration with increasing KH. 

When I use slightly KH leaching substrate, I can see on wallichii shape the increasing KH levels. Usually, 0 – 1.5 dKH is fine, at 1.5 – 2.0 dKH it starts growing little smaller, at 2.0 – 3.0 dKH it looks bad, and at > 3.0 dKH it stops growing. This is with CO2 and very strong light intensity.

Without CO2 and under low light it grows ok in 5 dKH water, looks green though.

I’ve been talking about growing plants in zero KH water for two decades. Every time I mentioned it, I received “resisting” responses. Nevertheless, it is nice to see fewer people resisting and more people accepting it.


jcoulter said:


> Honestly, seems like there is a LOT of infighting within this community. That is incredibly deterring. This hobby is supposed to be calming and peaceful but reading some stuff is just...ugh...yuck.


 The impact of hatred and hypocrisy.


Saxa Tilly said:


> As for the bickering and arguing. Yeah, it's hard to find good info when you have to wade thru all that crap. I tune it out. I have my circle of people offline that I talk to.


 +1


----------



## Maryland Guppy (Dec 6, 2014)

Rainer said:


> In my case, r.wallichii and cuphea a. are on my list for the upcoming tank. Tap here is 6.7 dKH and the logistics of changing it are difficult, so I may have to give up. I would like to hear from Saxa Tilly on the thresholds first though.


HCl is an option!


----------



## Greggz (May 19, 2008)

Saxa Tilly said:


> The first two-thirds of my talk was a summary of my Rotala Kill Tank experiments, which was set up to figure out why Rotala stunt so often for so many people. The last third was a summary of takeaways from my 'social media database' and finding commonalities in tank conditions of experts and semi-experts who grow Lythraceae (Rotala, Ammannia, and Cuphea) without any tip stunting under a wide range of conditions.


Vin thanks for sharing here. I always look forward to hearing your latest.

Couple of questions and thoughts. These experiments all focus on Lythraceae. Are there similar experiments with other groups of plants? Should there be? Or is the position that if Lythraceae do well, everything else should as well?

I’ve discussed Wallachii with you before, and have never had much luck with it. Since I lowered KH (from 4.0 to less than 1.0), I added a small bunch. Have had it going for about 6 weeks, and while not perfect, it’s alive, growing, and better than any other time. Makes sense given your comments.

I’ve also had Rotala Macranda Variegated for over two years. Most of the time at KH 4, and only recently at lower levels. Dosing over that time frame has been anywhere from NPK 27-18-42 to 12-5-13. It’s seen micros from CSM+B at extremely low levels (0.12 Fe weekly), to custom micros at 1.05 Fe weekly (current 0.525). It’s never really missed a beat. The only time I had a serious issue with it was when I experimented with higher B in my micros. Stunted it and lost all color in hours. 

So are all Lythraceae created equal? It seems to me there are lots of shades of grey even with that family.

Which leads me to the next thing I have wondered about and your thoughts. If you perfect a Wallachii experiment, and find the parameters to bring out the absolute best in it, how does that translate over to the average hobbyist with a tank full of 20 or 30 different species? Will that same environment bring out the best in each of those?

IMO that’s where it seems things get tricky. Different tanks, different substrates, different plants, different source water, different fish loads, different light intensity, different maintenance habits, pretty much different everything. I just haven’t seen a “recipe” that works for every situation. Do you think there is one?

I’ve been experimenting for a few months with much lower macro dosing. All in all, things have gone well, which I think is partly because of my lower KH. But I have noticed some groups, like Ludwigia, are not as robust as they once were. I’m actually going to be boosting things up a bit to see how they react. But if I do so and it works, will Wallachii suffer? My guess is yes.

So I guess my point is the tricky thing to me is providing the right mix to bring out the relative best in as many species as possible at one time. That is my goal and seems to be the goal of the average hobbyist here. And we all seem to have winners and losers, and sometimes we don’t know why. It seems to me it would be helpful if there were more information available on prime conditions for other varieties of plants. Might help folks choose plants more wisely given the soup they are providing, and explain why some fail. 

Anyway, sorry for rambling. I try to relate these experiments to my own tank, and I am sure others do as well. But not many are focused on Rotala/Ammannia/Cuphea, so trying to figure out how to relate all this to the average hobbyist like me.


----------



## happi (Dec 18, 2009)

Wallchi grown in Flourite, KH 2, GH 4, PH below 6, dosed custom recipe by me. His tank lacked colors due to lightning but wallchi grew very well and required frequent trimming.


Ammania sp. I believe one of them is golden and not sure about the ID on the 2nd one, this one grown under Marchner based modified recipes. I did few experiments on these sp. It was also observed that these guys stunt quite easily if you dose a big dose in single dose.


----------



## Saxa Tilly (Apr 7, 2015)

Positron said:


> Higher KH is definitely a limiting factor, but what is "high" KH? The KH out of my tap is about 3-3.5. Is that high? Hmmm


Most plants will be perfectly fine at 3 KH. But my talk and my current obsession are the more finicky Rotala, Ammannia and Cuphea, which will find 3 KH to be somewhat borderline if you want to dose heavy into the water column. I haven't yet figured out responses to 1, 2, and 3 KH for these plants.


----------



## Saxa Tilly (Apr 7, 2015)

Edward said:


> There is no definite number. It is rather a linear rate of deterioration with increasing KH.
> 
> When I use slightly KH leaching substrate, I can see on wallichii shape the increasing KH levels. Usually, 0 – 1.5 dKH is fine, at 1.5 – 2.0 dKH it starts growing little smaller, at 2.0 – 3.0 dKH it looks bad, and at > 3.0 dKH it stops growing. This is with CO2 and very strong light intensity.
> 
> Without CO2 and under low light it grows ok in 5 dKH water, looks green though.


Sounds very familiar.

In my earlier post with the two wallichii pics, what I failed to mention was that the KH was zero or pretty damn close. The pH was in the mid 3s. Yup. You read that right. R. wallichii does just fine at zero KH and pH of 3.6 or so. But this pH is not sustainable long term because many nutrients become increasingly less available once you go below 4.5 or 5. After a few weeks at pH 3.6, wallichii was the only one thriving. Many of the other plants started to slow down...along with biological filtration... and that brought on some algae. Easy fix though. Try KH of 0.5 to 1 or so and your pH at max CO2 will be around high 5s to 6. That's a nutrient friendly pH. 

Oh I had several species of rainbows at pH 3.6. No issues.


----------



## Saxa Tilly (Apr 7, 2015)

Greggz said:


> Vin thanks for sharing here. I always look forward to hearing your latest.
> 
> Couple of questions and thoughts. These experiments all focus on Lythraceae. Are there similar experiments with other groups of plants? Should there be? Or is the position that if Lythraceae do well, everything else should as well?
> 
> ...



Hey Gregg - I'm laser focused on Lythraceae. I'd like to play with Alternanthera eventually because that's another plant a lot of people have trouble with. But for now, everything I'm saying applies ONLY to Lythraceae. 

I'm also finding that Lythraceae is not monolithic in their growth requirements. Wallichii and pedicellata are very different beasts. A. pedicellata and artificial cultivars of R. macrandra actually pout when there isnt enough nutrients...while wallichii do really well. 

Having said that, in tanks where I have 'fixed' Lythraceae, the other troublesome plants like AR and Ludwigia glandulosa have flat leaves. The Osmocote Kill Tank grows damn near everything flawlessly despite hard water and no water column ferts...because all the goodies are in the substrate. But when that substrate is depleted it will be like it ran full speed ahead into a wall. It will end quickly and badly. We all thought I was bonkers to try that tank. I was the most skeptical. But, boy, it was absolutely the most eye opening experience. 

It is difficult to bring out the best in all plants at once without very low KH and substrate feeding. Cuphea is a classic example - what fixes its leaf shape and form will wipe out some color. If you want perfect leaf shape and bright red color in Cuphea, you gotta rely on root feeding. 

Perfect example is Dennis Wong's tank (I'm in Singapore BTW as I type this). He has super soft water, high light, good CO2, very light water column dosing but what really sets his tank apart from all that is the deep (6") of soil. A few inches of raw soil topped with Aquasoil AND he inserts Osmocote beads INDIVIDUALLY under most of his plants. Every single thing he puts in his tank grows well. Frankly, I cannot think of a better way to grow plants. When he posts pretty pics on FB, most people trip over each other to ask about his lights! Lights?! Who cares?! When you see pretty pics of a super healthy tank, people should be asking about KH and substrate. Then ask about water column ferts. 

I think you have inert substrate (?)...sorry cant recall. I am not surprised that Ludwigia start to peter out with increasingly lower macros. Greedy plants. 

Hope my rambling was helpful.


----------



## Greggz (May 19, 2008)

Saxa Tilly said:


> I'd like to play with Alternanthera eventually because that's another plant a lot of people have trouble with.


Thanks for the response and +1 on Altenanthera. 

I can keep it alive, but never really flourishes. I am sure there is a key, but decided not to chase it and just enjoy the plants that do well.


----------



## Discusluv (Dec 24, 2017)

Its really refreshing to hear a counter-argument to the "root-tabs are a waste of money" crowd that argues this is true in all cases. 

Those members have been silent in this thread. Wonder where they went?


----------



## Rainer (Jan 30, 2011)

Maryland Guppy said:


> HCl is an option!


Even if it can be safely run through a doser pump in the sump, there's still going to be a shock to the inhabitants during WCs. I'm limited to using a water changer tap connection, absent a major plumbing upgrade in the basement, so the tank will fill with tap and only slowly lower as the doser kicks in afterward.

Anyone have a formula for determining ending pH when lowering KH by one degree? I need to reevaluate fauna options if I do this, perhaps plants too. Would be nice to have some Tonina.


----------



## Maryland Guppy (Dec 6, 2014)

Rainer said:


> Even if it can be safely run through a doser pump in the sump, there's still going to be a shock to the inhabitants during WCs. I'm limited to using a water changer tap connection, absent a major plumbing upgrade in the basement, so the tank will fill with tap and only slowly lower as the doser kicks in afterward.
> 
> Anyone have a formula for determining ending pH when lowering KH by one degree? I need to reevaluate fauna options if I do this, perhaps plants too. Would be nice to have some Tonina.


You have a sump just dose it directly in the sump manually -1dKH @ a time.
Inhabitants should not be bothered. @Immortal1 posted something like 3ml per 20 gallon = -1dKH
I followed and it was about spot on.


----------



## Saxa Tilly (Apr 7, 2015)

Discusluv said:


> Its really refreshing to hear a counter-argument to the "root-tabs are a waste of money" crowd that argues this is true in all cases.
> 
> Those members have been silent in this thread. Wonder where they went?


Root feeding is probably a poor feeding method for few types of plants - floating plants and obligate aquatics like Vallisneria. However, some obligate aquatics like Blyxa benefit from root feeding. Some Eriocaulaceae like Tonina and Synonanthus have such poor root development that they are probably best nourished thru water column. Pantanal is another one that can grow a foot of stem to every inch of root, so it too is just as well water-fed. 

I will openly confess to being anti-root tabs and Osmocote as recently as a few years ago. My thinking back then was that root tabs and Osmocote have unpredictable release profiles depending on substrate disturbance, type of substrate, and depth of substrate. 4 inches of BDBS is probably much better are sequestering root tabs than 2 inches of fluffy Aquasoil. 

Sometime later this year, I plan to set up 3 or 4 sixty gallon tanks with very rich substrates and no water column dosing. Some with just MTS and others with MTS and Osmocote. I will test for nutrient leaching into water column using ICP-MS. Did that with the original Osmocote Kill Tank and saw ZERO ppm nitrate in the water...suggesting leaching was absent or Osmocote was depleted. But that was just one reading a few months after set up. Did not test it regularly. 

Don't take my word for it. I am regularly wrong...and will openly admit it. Try it and see how it works for you.


----------



## Saxa Tilly (Apr 7, 2015)

Greggz said:


> Thanks for the response and +1 on Altenanthera.
> 
> I can keep it alive, but never really flourishes. I am sure there is a key, but decided not to chase it and just enjoy the plants that do well.


Do you have any AR Mini now that you've lowered your KH? May be worth a re-try. AR Variegated, which has historically been even bigger pain in the ass for me, does really well in the Osmocote Kill Tank. Not sure how to interpret that, but AR is a plant that frustrates a lot of people. I suspect (but dont know for certain) that what fixes Rotala will fix it too.


----------



## Maryland Guppy (Dec 6, 2014)

Discusluv said:


> Those members have been silent in this thread. Wonder where they went?


Don't fret, they are still circling the carcass, none have landed yet!
Give them time.
Let things soften up a bit in the heat! >>>


----------



## Discusluv (Dec 24, 2017)

Saxa Tilly said:


> Root feeding is probably a poor feeding method for few types of plants - floating plants and obligate aquatics like Vallisneria. However, some obligate aquatics like Blyxa benefit from root feeding. Some Eriocaulaceae like Tonina and Synonanthus have such poor root development that they are probably best nourished thru water column. Pantanal is another one that can grow a foot of stem to every inch of root, so it too is just as well water-fed.
> 
> I will openly confess to being anti-root tabs and Osmocote as recently as a few years ago. My thinking back then was that root tabs and Osmocote have unpredictable release profiles depending on substrate disturbance, type of substrate, and depth of substrate. 4 inches of BDBS is probably much better are sequestering root tabs than 2 inches of fluffy Aquasoil.
> 
> ...


I trust that you know much more than this newbie. :smile2:

I have low-tech tank- a 180 gallon with earth-eating cichlids that constantly sift sand and shift plant roots. It is a challenge to get anything to grow. I do light water column dosing relative to many others; but, use root-tabs consistently. 

Water is KH 3/GH 5. 

I grow swords, crypt spiralis, valisneria, ambula, some ludwigia's and many types of java ferns, anubias, etc...
It is a challenge without Co2; but, my expectations are not real high. 

Bump:


Maryland Guppy said:


> Don't fret, they are still circling the carcass, none have landed yet!
> Give them time.
> Let things soften up a bit in the heat! >>>


LOL! I can always count on you to make me laugh. :laugh2:


----------



## Saxa Tilly (Apr 7, 2015)

Rainer said:


> Even if it can be safely run through a doser pump in the sump, there's still going to be a shock to the inhabitants during WCs. I'm limited to using a water changer tap connection, absent a major plumbing upgrade in the basement, so the tank will fill with tap and only slowly lower as the doser kicks in afterward.
> 
> Anyone have a formula for determining ending pH when lowering KH by one degree? I need to reevaluate fauna options if I do this, perhaps plants too. Would be nice to have some Tonina.


This is what I did:

You need a good KH test kit (LaMotte) and a calibrated pH meter. And a 5 gallon bucket. 

Add a couple of ml of HCL to 5 gallons of water in the bucket, circulate the water in the bucket with a powerhead for a few minutes. Track pH and measure KH. Extrapolate to your tank size. If you do not go thru this exercise, you can overshoot, get to zero KH and then have leftover unreacted acid that causes issues. 

Bigger issue is lack of safety precautions. If you are not careful, you could end up in the ER with one eye. But you cannot deny the efficacy of this old method. Inverts may have issues - I dont know. But fish are fine. I have dumped 75 ml of 2M HCL into 60 gallons of water without any issues. Fish were fine. There will be a sudden spike in dissolved CO2, so add the acid right after a water change and BEFORE turning on CO2.

My ghetto cheat sheet for figuring out how much HCL to add to my tap water.


----------



## SingAlongWithTsing (Jun 11, 2015)

Saxa Tilly said:


> This is what I did:
> 
> You need a good KH test kit (LaMotte) and a calibrated pH meter. And a 5 gallon bucket.
> 
> ...


do we have to worry about how much Cl would be left over?
because I think if I try to drop my dkH from 11 to 3 i might end up putting approximately 100 ppm Cl into the water column


----------



## Saxa Tilly (Apr 7, 2015)

SingAlongWithTsing said:


> do we have to worry about how much Cl would be left over?
> because I think if I try to drop my dkH from 11 to 3 i might end up putting approximately 100 ppm Cl into the water column


Yes, at some point, the excess chloride may start causing issues. Also depends on how much chloride is present in your tap. My tap water has about 90 ppm chlorides, so I'm certainly adding to it by using HCL. I have not calculated or measured how much chloride I end up with after adding 75 ml of 2M HCL to 60 gallons of water. 

I don't know at what point excess chlorides start causing issues. 

On paper, sulfuric acid is another option because you'd be adding sulfates, which plants tolerate much better than chlorides. But sulfuric acid is far more dangerous than hydrochloric acid. Some 20-year old from Florida is going to read this and try it and end up in the hospital. It's always Florida. Don't be that guy.


----------



## Greggz (May 19, 2008)

Saxa Tilly said:


> Don't take my word for it. I am regularly wrong...and will openly admit it. Try it and see how it works for you.


Refreshing to hear and I feel the same way.

I've made lots of changes to my tank over the years, and remind people that whatever I said years ago in my journal I believed to be true at the time.

And my other favorite saying is that your mileage may vary. No guarantee that anything that happens in my tank will happen in yours. Only way to find out is to try it. 



Saxa Tilly said:


> Do you have any AR Mini now that you've lowered your KH? May be worth a re-try. AR Variegated, which has historically been even bigger pain in the ass for me, does really well in the Osmocote Kill Tank. Not sure how to interpret that, but AR is a plant that frustrates a lot of people. I suspect (but dont know for certain) that what fixes Rotala will fix it too.


Yeah this is a good point. I probably need to revisit several of the plants I have become expert at killing. Maybe I'll even throw some Osmocote under them. I've got a bag I bought years ago that is still pretty much full.

I did get some Tonina sp Lotus Blossom from Joe, and it is doing very well. Not a surprise I never had any luck with similar species before.


----------



## Deanna (Feb 15, 2017)

Arrived: one who finds inert substrate and no root tabs to work perfectly (for those plants I’ve used). However, I will say that I currently use only stems (exceptions: Dwarf Sag, Hair Grass and Blood Vomit). Many years ago, under low-tech, I had Swords which were lush in inert substrate. Used dirt, from my backyard (capped with psychedelic gravel), in the 60’s and no column dosing (didn’t know better) and plants thrived. Works both ways.

Currently: dKH < 1 (pH ~5.5) and fert routine close to PPS. Substrate PAR ~70 and ~35ppm CO2.

Had AR (Scarlet Temple) with nice lush, flat leaves, but got tired of it and recently ripped it out. Now, just working with AR Mini.

Let us hearken back to these experiments: http://www.plantedtank.net/forums/33-plants/876457-so-called-heavy-root-feeders-fact-fiction.html

Non-stem plants may benefit from root tabs (some species that I’ve not tried may need it), but I’ve never observed a difference in my little world when I’ve had them. Who knows: under my current conditions, maybe root tabs would cause my plants to do something else, but then I might have to get scuba gear to stay under water for constant grounds-keeping. It’s hard to generalize in this hobby with high confidence.


----------



## Maryland Guppy (Dec 6, 2014)

Saxa Tilly said:


> But sulfuric acid is far more dangerous than hydrochloric acid. Some 20-year old from Florida is going to read this and try it and end up in the hospital. It's always Florida. Don't be that guy.


12" long pipettes are really handy in this regard.
No pouring involved/spillage. Use for Glut too!




Greggz said:


> I probably need to revisit several of the plants I have become expert at killing.


Low KH can really change the playing field with many species!




Discusluv said:


> LOL! I can always count on you to make me laugh. :laugh2:


What is a hobby without humor? :grin2:




Saxa Tilly said:


> 95% of plants are tolerant of high KH


Once the move to 1dKH the 5% that appreciate higher KH grow dismal.
Ah the double edged sword! :|




Saxa Tilly said:


> However, some obligate aquatics like Blyxa benefit from root feeding.


Usually we are in agreement but I don't know about B.japonica?
I've been growing it for years, my experience thus far.
1. KH of 5, inert sub, PPS dosing.
A 3" slow grower with little branching and a fine appearance.

2. KH of 2, hot capped soil, heavy EI macro dosing & low micro dosing.
Still a 3" grower with extended branching, good roots and can't seem to sell enough of it.
Would flower submerged.

3. KH of 1, inert BDBS, 60% EI macro dosing & .09ppm Fe per week micro dosing.
B.japonica is on steroids, 6" tall plants branch @ sub level and above.
Roots are extensive, many roots broken when uprooting.
No more flowering has occurred under these parameters.
My bet is on the lower micro dosing not the reduction in KH?

Your thoughts?


----------



## Asteroid (Jul 26, 2018)

My B. Japonica has always grown extremely well with normal EI dosing ranges good co2 in either inert or AS without adding anything. But again I have soft water. 

I would say the majority of plants that are known to a typical hobbyist do not need root tabs (if column is dosed sufficiency.) Not to say some might grow faster or somewhat bigger, but is it a race? They grow perfectly healthy without. Even Seachem states on their website that you don't need both.


----------



## Discusluv (Dec 24, 2017)

Deanna said:


> Arrived: one who finds inert substrate and no root tabs to work perfectly (for those plants I’ve used). However, I will say that I currently use only stems (exceptions: Dwarf Sag, Hair Grass and Blood Vomit). Many years ago, under low-tech, I had Swords which were lush in inert substrate. Used dirt, from my backyard (capped with psychedelic gravel), in the 60’s and no column dosing (didn’t know better) and plants thrived. Works both ways.
> 
> Currently: dKH < 1 (pH ~5.5) and fert routine close to PPS. Substrate PAR ~70 and ~35ppm CO2.
> 
> ...


I dont recall you ever telling me or any one else root tabs were not working in my/their tanks and were wasting money in using them.
You have said (like now) that, in your own tanks, you had not noticed any marked improvement by using them. 

You have found they dont work for your own application.
far cry from telling me what they do/dont do in my own tank.


----------



## Desert Pupfish (May 6, 2019)

Asteroid said:


> My B. Japonica has always grown extremely well with normal EI dosing ranges good co2 in either inert or AS without adding anything. But again I have soft water.
> 
> I would say the majority of plants that are known to a typical hobbyist do not need root tabs (if column is dosed sufficiency.) Not to say some might grow faster or somewhat bigger, but is it a race? They grow perfectly healthy without. Even Seachem states on their website that you don't need both.


Maybe I'm missing something here as a planted tank newbie, but if you have hard water (and much of the US does), why wouldn't you just use root tabs or Osmocote rather than going to the expense & hassle of using RO water and having to dose every day on top of that? I understand that some stem plants do better with water column dosing, but then again many of those also require softer water to do well anyway. I get that some people like the challenge of overcoming obstacles and growing plants not otherwise suited for their local condition , and enjoy tinkering with their tanks & creating custom fertilizer doses. But it doesn't sound like it has to be that way.

Seems many people--like Happi in Utah--grow many plants well with hard water & substrate fertilizers. Wondering if there should be a separate thread in the fertilizer forum for this where people can share their experiences and advice for newbies.....


----------



## Deanna (Feb 15, 2017)

Discusluv said:


> I dont recall you ever telling me or any one else root tabs were not working in my/their tanks and were wasting money in using them.
> You have said (like now) that, in your own tanks, you had not noticed any marked improvement by using them.
> 
> You have found they dont work for your own application.
> far cry from telling me what they do/dont do in my own tank.


That's true. I am careful to say that root tabs are _unnecessary_ and not state that they don't work as fertilizers (they do work). The link I put in the above post simply works through a process that shows that everything can be done through the water column, at least for those plants in the experiment, and i have found the same thing in my tanks.



Desert Pupfish said:


> Maybe I'm missing something here as a planted tank newbie, but if you have hard water (and much of the US does), why wouldn't you just use root tabs or Osmocote rather than going to the expense & hassle of using RO water and having to dose every day on top of that? I understand that some stem plants do better with water column dosing, but then again many of those also require softer water to do well anyway. I get that some people like the challenge of overcoming obstacles and growing plants not otherwise suited for their local condition , and enjoy tinkering with their tanks & creating custom fertilizer doses. But it doesn't sound like it has to be that way.
> 
> Seems many people--like Happi in Utah--grow many plants well with hard water & substrate fertilizers. Wondering if there should be a separate thread in the fertilizer forum for this where people can share their experiences and advice for newbies.....


You’re right about the challenge in the hobby making it interesting for many of us. IMO: the reason that most of us that use RO water, do so to gain more control over what it is that we each, individually, want as target parameters. As an example; I could not achieve the dKH I do using my tap water, unless I started playing with things such as HCL. I also like the ability to control the TDS of my water for the sake of what I think is good for my fish.

I don’t think that the use of root tabs for most is a function of their GH, so you may be missing something there. As far as dosing with root tabs, there is an issue of time-release and whether or not too much or too little is dosed or leaches into the water column (depends upon the tank setup). Same can be said for active substrate. To me, the simplicity is in dosing the water column and I use DIY auto dosers for most of my nutrients (dose CaSO4 weekly, if needed, with my w/c because of its’ solubility issue).

In a way, we do share advice for newbies: we answer their questions and try to address their problems. You could also try to find journals of people that have setups that you might want yourself, then follow those and post in them along the way for advice.


----------



## Rainer (Jan 30, 2011)

Saxa Tilly said:


> This is what I did:
> 
> You need a good KH test kit (LaMotte) and a calibrated pH meter. And a 5 gallon bucket.
> 
> ...


Thanks for the advice and giving me a rough idea where my tank parameters would be dosing HCL. I've done a little research on fauna appropriate for a community tank which indicates that if I were to take the dKH down to around three, the water would be too acidic for shrimp and snails. Rasboras would be okay at 3 dKH but it's too low for tetras, gobies, rainbowfish, ricefish, cories, and endler's (15 dKH is the LOWER limit for those).

As much as I wanted r. wallachi and cuphea anagalloidea, HCl isn't practical in my case. Thanks to everyone who helped answering my questions.


----------



## Deanna (Feb 15, 2017)

Rainer said:


> Rasboras would be okay at 3 dKH but it's too low for tetras, gobies, rainbowfish, ricefish, cories, and endler's (15 dKH is the LOWER limit for those).


In the spirit of 'every tank may be different'; I have many Rasboras, tetras and cories swimming happily in dKH < 1 and pH ~5.5.


----------



## Greggz (May 19, 2008)

Rainer said:


> Rasboras would be okay at 3 dKH but it's too low for tetras, gobies, rainbowfish, ricefish, cories, and endler's (15 dKH is the LOWER limit for those).


Can only speak to my own tank, but my Rainbows do great in KH less than 1.0.


----------



## Asteroid (Jul 26, 2018)

Aren't rasboras and tetras mainly from soft water habitats. My congo, cardinals, gold, embers always did great in KH 1-2


----------



## Rainer (Jan 30, 2011)

That's what I love about this hobby: no two data sources agree most of the time. 

The source I checked was https://aquaticarts.com/collections/shrimp-safe-fish-all-shrimp 

Unfortunately, the expected low pH from HCl, aquasoil, and CO2 would not support the invert populations I had in mind, so I'm back to square one.


----------



## Deanna (Feb 15, 2017)

Asteroid said:


> Aren't rasboras and tetras mainly from soft water habitats. My congo, cardinals, gold, embers always did great in KH 1-2


Yes, they are, in terms of what we, in the US, call soft water (GH). If someone was referring to soft water as a function of KH, it was probably European sourced. However, with so much breeding going on, I suspect that most tetras that are in our LFS are adapted now to soft water (GH). This particular issue was around tetras and alkalinity (KH). You probably just missed the KH reference.


----------



## Saxa Tilly (Apr 7, 2015)

Maryland Guppy said:


> Usually we are in agreement but I don't know about B.japonica?
> I've been growing it for years, my experience thus far.
> 1. KH of 5, inert sub, PPS dosing.
> A 3" slow grower with little branching and a fine appearance.
> ...


Blyxa may benefit from root feeding but that's not the same as needing it. It's one of the few obligate aquatics with elaborate root systems, so I applied root feeding and it did really well. Having said that, not much seems to bother most Blyxa...other than fresh Aquasoil ammonia burn. It does really well under most conditions. I have not noticed a clear preference for lower micros...could be the case. I don't know.


----------



## Saxa Tilly (Apr 7, 2015)

Rainer said:


> Thanks for the advice and giving me a rough idea where my tank parameters would be dosing HCL. I've done a little research on fauna appropriate for a community tank which indicates that if I were to take the dKH down to around three, the water would be too acidic for shrimp and snails. Rasboras would be okay at 3 dKH but it's too low for tetras, gobies, rainbowfish, ricefish, cories, and endler's (15 dKH is the LOWER limit for those).
> 
> As much as I wanted r. wallachi and cuphea anagalloidea, HCl isn't practical in my case. Thanks to everyone who helped answering my questions.


I know very little about inverts. Kept some Amanos that lived for a few years and my cherry red bred like rabbits, but that wasn't because of my skills. Conditions were moderate. 

But as for fish, virtually all tetras in the hobby come from very soft water. I'd say about half of them, including Corys, come from near-zero KH. I'm lucky to be able to spend quite a bit of my time collecting and observing in the wild. TDS (not dKH!) of 1 or 2 ppm and pH around high 3s is common in black water areas. 

The wallichii pics from a couple of pages back had 0 KH and pH of about 3.6 or so. Raindows of several species were eating and courting. I'm not suggesting that's their preferred conditions...but that even if you had KH of 1 and pH of 5, they'd be thrilled. 

The fish can certainly handle it...not sure about inverts.


----------



## Blue Ridge Reef (Feb 10, 2008)

I'd also wager that crystal reds/bees would be thrilled in that if there was enough GH to molt okay. Might have some shell issues with snails.


----------



## Discusluv (Dec 24, 2017)

Deanna said:


> That's true. I am careful to say that root tabs are _unnecessary_ and not state that they don't work as fertilizers (they do work). The link I put in the above post simply works through a process that shows that everything can be done through the water column, at least for those plants in the experiment, and i have found the same thing in my tanks.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 Yes, everything can be done in the water column with steady liquid dosing and Co2. I agree, Ive read about this in many journals. Absolutely see that. 



99.9 % of these individuals are high tech, keep elaborate charts of their micro interactions, and speak in tongues to me. 



What about the low-tech hobbyist that has different priorities? One who doesn't understand or cares to understand the elaborate chemical charts of the interaction of micro-nutrients? Who forgets to dose liquid ferts more than she remembers? Who has plants as a backdrop to her fish? Those rootabs come in handy. Almost a "busy-girls answer to liquid fert dosing". [I do dose seachem liquid ferts- but, I have to remember].


You know? :grin2:





Oh, you know, the rudest proponent of the "rootabs are wasteful" chorus has joined the conversation. 

Greatly modifying the "rudeness" factor, _of course,_ attempting to sound more mature like @Deanna ( who I greatly admire). >


----------



## Maryland Guppy (Dec 6, 2014)

Discusluv said:


> 99.9 % of these individuals are high tech, keep elaborate charts of their micro interactions, and speak in tongues to me.
> 
> Those rootabs come in handy. Almost a "busy-girls answer to liquid fert dosing".
> 
> Oh, you know, the rudest proponent of the "rootabs are wasteful" chorus has joined the conversation.


Toungues is typically gibberish that know one understands yet many are willing to commit to it as a spectacular event.

Here this talk would be more like Aramaic and some folks would just need a translation! :grin2::grin2::grin2:


Don't remember what root tabs you use and I have little experience with them.
Osmocote Plus seems like the ticket with macros included.


----------



## Discusluv (Dec 24, 2017)

Maryland Guppy said:


> Toungues is typically gibberish that know one understands yet many are willing to commit to it as a spectacular event.
> 
> Here this talk would be more like Aramaic and some folks would just need a translation! :grin2::grin2::grin2:
> 
> ...


:laugh2:
I use Seachem rootabs.
I dont like those little neon orange-ball thingies in Osmocote - they clash with my lipstick.


----------



## Blue Ridge Reef (Feb 10, 2008)

While I'm not really a proponent of root tabs, I really appreciate this.



Discusluv said:


> What about the low-tech hobbyist that has different priorities? One who doesn't understand or cares to understand the elaborate chemical charts of the interaction of micro-nutrients? Who forgets to dose liquid ferts more than she remembers? Who has plants as a backdrop to her fish? Those rootabs come in handy. Almost a "busy-girls answer to liquid fert dosing". [I do dose seachem liquid ferts- but, I have to remember].


I'm switching two tanks *back* to high tech this year, but this time off has sure been nice. I've been doing passive CO2 on them, might be worth looking into, IMO. You won't get those 30 PPM values, but it's a pretty stark difference from when I was running them purely low tech. If you have stems and fast-growing plants, pressurized CO2 can kind of be a pain. The tanks just get thick with growth before you know it, and thinning and pruning becomes a weekly job. I swear I could watch guppy grass grow when my 125's were running CO2 and HQIs. And fert dosing was a never ending job and I was too haphazard with it. With what I *think* is my understanding of it now, I believe I can follow an EI protocol and just do my favorite slow growers like fancy mosses, buce, anubias, dwarf HG, and so forth with moderate lighting and get the results I wanted when I first went into high tech. I'll of course start threads when I get around to it. My better half wants the hardwood floors refinished first (they do need it), so the tanks have to move (twice) before I can set my old CO2 system back up but I feel pretty sure I can get a re-do with slower growers and moderate lighting that will make me happy.


Discusluv said:


> 99.9 % of these individuals are high tech, keep elaborate charts of their micro interactions, and speak in tongues to me.


I feel ya there! I can wrap my brain around most of it, but there are values and measurements that are beyond my pay grade so to speak. I don't even want an FE test kit! I have TDS pens, GH/KH, pH and the 3 main forms of nitrogen that I (occasionally) test already. I guess my biggest reservation with root tabs is that I've never noticed a benefit. I can't say I've ever set up an identical control tank and compared by any means.


----------



## Discusluv (Dec 24, 2017)

Blue Ridge Reef said:


> I guess my biggest reservation with root tabs is that I've never noticed a benefit. I can't say I've ever set up an identical control tank and compared by any means.





Neither have "they". But, it doesn't stop them from telling me _Im a mess_. :x
_Whatevah! ~_


----------



## Blue Ridge Reef (Feb 10, 2008)

"I do what I want!"


----------



## Edward (Apr 11, 2005)

Rainer said:


> I've done a little research on fauna appropriate for a community tank which indicates that if I were to take the dKH down to around three, the water would be too acidic for shrimp and snails. Rasboras would be okay at 3 dKH but it's too low for tetras, gobies, rainbowfish, ricefish, cories, and endler's (15 dKH is the LOWER limit for those).





Rainer said:


> The source I checked was https://aquaticarts.com/collections/shrimp-safe-fish-all-shrimp


 The website couldn’t be more wrong.


----------



## Discusluv (Dec 24, 2017)

When it comes to reliable info on fish ( online, anyways)- look at either _Simply Fish or Fishbase.com._ 
An even better option is to pick up a used copy of _Baensch's Aquarium Atlas_ by Hans A. Baensch and Rudiger Riehl on Amazon. 

_Never_ rely on the stats from retailers.


----------



## Rainer (Jan 30, 2011)

The first of those links is dead and the second triggers an AV warning.


----------



## Discusluv (Dec 24, 2017)

Rainer said:


> The first of those links is dead and the second triggers an AV warning.


 Sorry, I dont know why I put "Simply" fish. It is _Seriouslyfish._

_Seriously Fish ? Feeling fishy?
_


----------



## Maryland Guppy (Dec 6, 2014)

Rainer said:


> The source I checked was https://aquaticarts.com/collections/shrimp-safe-fish-all-shrimp


Endlers 15-35KH ??? :frown2::frown2::frown2:

Time to find a new website and my some steep pricing, bet their shipping is off the hook too.


----------



## Asteroid (Jul 26, 2018)

Desert Pupfish said:


> Maybe I'm missing something here as a planted tank newbie, but if you have hard water (and much of the US does), why wouldn't you just use root tabs or Osmocote rather than going to the expense & hassle of using RO water and having to dose every day on top of that? I understand that some stem plants do better with water column dosing, but then again many of those also require softer water to do well anyway. I get that some people like the challenge of overcoming obstacles and growing plants not otherwise suited for their local condition , and enjoy tinkering with their tanks & creating custom fertilizer doses. But it doesn't sound like it has to be that way.
> .....


Just to further elaborate on what @Deanna stated. Root tabs are a supplemental form of fertilizing for certain plants. They can't aid in any plant that is not in the substrate like ferns, anubias, buces and moses. In addition they are best placed under a thicket of stems or a large plant like a sword. It's much harder to get coverage from a root tab for a full carpet of HC. So those are some of the reasons you wouldn't just use root tabs, unless your going low tech and have some plants that you just place the tabs under.

If you look at most tanks done by professional aquascapers these days (i.e. IAPLC) most of the top tanks don't even have plants in the substrate they have mostly moses, buces, ferns in hardscape heavy layouts.


----------



## Jeff5614 (Dec 29, 2005)

Asteroid said:


> If you look at most tanks done by professional aquascapers these days (i.e. IAPLC) most of the top tanks don't even have plants in the substrate they have mostly moses, buces, ferns in hardscape heavy layouts.


Not to derail the thread, but what do you think about that? As someone who can scape a tank well, do you like it or do you prefer a nice carpet?


----------



## happi (Dec 18, 2009)

I have yet to see the need for root tabs for aquatic plants. If you are seeing better growth after adding root tabs, "how you know for certain they are not leaching into the water in slow phase"? Under such scenarios most kits won't detect many nutrients as they are quickly removed by plants.


----------



## Discusluv (Dec 24, 2017)

happi said:


> I have yet to see the need for root tabs for aquatic plants. If you are seeing better growth after adding root tabs, "how you know for certain they are not leaching into the water in slow phase"? Under such scenarios most kits won't detect many nutrients as they are quickly removed by plants.


No benefit of root tabs? Even in a case where someone isnt dosing in water column?


It appears you are very experienced in growing aquatic plants. Me, gosh-- admittedly a complete amateur. I was reading some past posts on root-tabs and substrate feeding to get some context regarding this question. Because, really, if its doing me no good in my low tech tank - why bother, right?. But, then I stumbled upon this. 
Now, Im really confused. 
Whats your take on the following quote. 

Quote from Tom Barr: link: https://www.plantedtank.net/forums/...ers/101887-what-plants-benefit-root-tabs.html

_"Plants take up nutrients from both the leaves and roots, this is also true for terrestrial plants, but they have less reason to do so, still, they do have the ability.

Aquatics have a highly reduced cuticle, so they are really good at the water column uptake. If they have roots, then they will also take up nutrients in the sediment.

Do not fall this Steer manure..........use both locations, not "either or", "preferred" business, that's based on myths and poor understanding of aquatic plant physiology.

They are opportunist, they will take nutrients wherever they can find them.
So use both and that makes the trades go away and the method more robust.

Stem or Rossette plants, this does not matter, most swords/Crypts come from strong stream/river currents, they need roots otherwise they get swept downstream, they also need them when the water recedes during the dry season and when they flower. The roots also act as storage organs that allow the plant to go months without good conditions.

None of these traits and issues have a thing to do with whether they prefer anything as far as nutrients in one location compared to another.

Stem plants have the same issues, but address their habitat in a different manner, but they can be just as dependent on sediment as any Crypt or sword............

This is a myth.

Examples are excellent sword and crypts grown in plain sand with good water column ferts. And excellent stem plants grown in soil based sediments without any dosing to the water column.

Explain such results in this context?

It does not support such hypothesis and certainly not as far as dosing and aquarium horticulture is concerned. Using sediment ferts such as soils , clays etc is easier than dosing water columns, but that's true for all aquatic plant growing methods compared to dosing of the water column.

Wisest to use both locations, then the dosing of the water column is that much easier and then the sediments act as a back up. This obviously would yield the best growth also if you where to make a prediction.

So do that."

Regards,
Tom Barr
_


----------



## Desert Pupfish (May 6, 2019)

Asteroid said:


> Just to further elaborate on what @Deanna stated. Root tabs are a supplemental form of fertilizing for certain plants. They can't aid in any plant that is not in the substrate like ferns, anubias, buces and moses. In addition they are best placed under a thicket of stems or a large plant like a sword. It's much harder to get coverage from a root tab for a full carpet of HC. So those are some of the reasons you wouldn't just use root tabs, unless your going low tech and have some plants that you just place the tabs under.
> 
> If you look at most tanks done by professional aquascapers these days (i.e. IAPLC) most of the top tanks don't even have plants in the substrate they have mostly moses, buces, ferns in hardscape heavy layouts.


Thanks. I'm not looking to create a competition-worthy aquascape. From what I understand, those minimalist ADA-style scapes can be trickier to grow & maintain with out getting overrun with algae than a more conventional heavily planted tank. What I'm striving for is a healthy & attractive environment for a group of angels; and some otos, shrimp, snails etc to help keep it clean of algae & detritus, and the substrate aerated. So I'm aiming for a lushly planted tank with a mix of rooted plants, stems & epiphytes that will do well in the various parts of the tank, that can handle the bioload, and keep things balanced and as low maintenance as possible. I travel a lot, so want things as balanced as possible so if I have to skip a weekly cleaning or WC, or can't do daily fert dosing, the whole thing won't crash on me.

From the posts on this thread & elsewhere, it sounds like there's no magic demarcation between substrate & water column. Unless you've got a very tightly capped substrate, ferts from the water column will circulate through the substrate to the roots, and conversely nutrients from root tabs or Osmocote will travel into the water column and be taken up by stem plants & epiphytes. I'm using STS, so it should absorb & slowly release water column nutrients into the rootzone, and excess root tab nutrients from root tabs or Osmocote not absorbed by the STS will be released into the water column for the benefit of epiphytes. Please correct me if I'm wrong about this. 

Deanna & others have suggested that lean dosing with balanced water column ferts like Leaf Zone or Flourish will help in substrate fertilized tanks. I'm certainly willing to experiment with this to find the sweet spot that supports healthy plants but not crazy fast growth that would require constant trimming & daily dosing. I want to enjoy my tank and fishes, not be a slave to it. That said, if I see enough insanely beautiful fruit stand pics on here, I may end up drinking the Kool-Aid and end up falling down the CO2/high PAR/high EI dosing rabbithole.....


----------



## happi (Dec 18, 2009)

@Discusluv

"I have yet to see the need for root tabs for aquatic plants. If you are seeing better growth after adding root tabs, "how you know for certain they are not leaching into the water in slow phase"? Under such scenarios most kits won't detect many nutrients as they are quickly removed by plants."

depends on how you look at my Quote, am not saying plant don't benefits from root tabs, what am saying is that plant grow quite well with liquid dosing only, even in Inert substrate or plant that are floating or attached to wood, rocks etc. IME, i never felt the need to add any root tabs. uptake wise, there are certain things Aquatic plant are better at from root vs leaves uptake, for example: NH4 seems to be up taken better through leaves than roots, if you have heavy fish load and root tabs at the same time, most of the plant growth is coming from fish load rather than root tabs. also having a acidic soil is more important to plants than having a root tabs. 

those who are tired of Osmocote+, they can try these one:
https://icl-sf.com/uk-en/explore/fruit-vegetables-arable-crops/controlled-release-fertilizers/

https://icl-sf.com/us-en/products/ornamental_horticulture/osmocote-blend-a901316-19-5-8/

in the first link, i couldnt find them, if you do then you are in luck, you can literally make a better roots tabs by adding say 10 pellet from Urea/NH4, 8 from K, 1 from P etc and change the pellet quantity and ratio of NPK based on this design, they also have Ca, Mg, Fe/Traces etc, which can be used in the same manner to adjust the ratio's if needed.

in the 2nd link, i would give this one a go, i am planning on giving this a test along with some other members if they are willing to pay the price for this product, as it comes in bigger bags and bit expensive. i like it how it's made based on Oxide as well instead of So4, EDTA, DTPA etc. Fe and other elements are made up from oxide which is also Used by ADA product in their liquid ferts, i wont be surprised if some of their other products are made from same minerals/elements, oxide is not easily soluble unless you add strong acid to it, so it makes a perfect stuff for our root tab addition especially in acidic soil. one think i did notice is that this product doesn't add any Mo, not sure the reason behind it, but we can easily use Mo oxide or liquid dose Mo acid or other Mo based products to balance that. 

i think the planted tank members should also try it and we can have a great discussion on it.


----------



## Discusluv (Dec 24, 2017)

happi said:


> @*Discusluv*
> 
> "I have yet to see the need for root tabs for aquatic plants. If you are seeing better growth after adding root tabs, "how you know for certain they are not leaching into the water in slow phase"? Under such scenarios most kits won't detect many nutrients as they are quickly removed by plants."
> 
> ...


----------



## Deanna (Feb 15, 2017)

I don’t know if this is instructive, or not, and it is certainly limited given the few species involved. Two other observations regarding substrate fertilization:

1) When I moved from a 20-gal to a 29-gal, I put in an undergravel filter, which was in vogue then. For about twenty years, I had it set up this way. In it, I had a sword, some anubias and various simple stems. It was low tech, with a 20W fluorescent bulb and occasional dosing of K and Fe combo ferts and no other macro or micro dosing (had lots of fish). Plants all thrived but, of course, had very slow growth (although the sword did have to constantly be trimmed) and very little algae. Later, I increased light and added Excel, but that’s a different story.

Anyway, during those twenty or so years, I was amazed at how well the sword and anubias did. Being an undergaravel filter, you could see the open ~1” space beneath the filter, through the bottom of the tank. The roots of the sword and anubias penetrated the filter slots below the 2” of inert substrate and expanded across about half the floor of the tank. Nothing down there but mulm. The water was pulled down through the substrate and up the risers on either side. My belief is that the roots simply fed upon the nutrients that were constantly being cycled through the substrate from the water column, i.e.; the water column nutrients were feeding these massive white roots. I’ve often wondered if UGF’s are really so bad.

2) About a year ago, I changed out my Flourite substrate for 2” of inert CaribSea Peace River capped on an inch of sand. I have never used root tabs in this setup. However, my substrate is loaded with nutrients. Testing the water about 1” deep into my substrate and comparing it to the water column:

```
Nutrient (ppm, degree)     Water Column     Substrate
NO3                           5-10             >25
NH3/NH4                          0               0
PO4                              1               0 
Iron                             0             >=1.0
GH                               3               3
KH                              <1              <1
TDS                             92             101
```
Observations/Suppositions: 
- The PO4 is probably bound to the iron.
- Other metals likely higher in the substrate, like iron.
- Seachem Fe test can’t detect DTPA (ferric) iron, so much/most of the iron in the substrate must be in the ferrous form.

Rhetorical question: How much more useful nutrient, to the roots, do root tabs provide?


----------



## Desert Pupfish (May 6, 2019)

happi said:


> @Discusluv
> 
> "I have yet to see the need for root tabs for aquatic plants. If you are seeing better growth after adding root tabs, "how you know for certain they are not leaching into the water in slow phase"? Under such scenarios most kits won't detect many nutrients as they are quickly removed by plants."
> 
> ...


This is brilliant--I love this. I'd be happy to participate, but it sounds like ideally you'd need different formulations for soft/acidic water/substrate vs hard water/alkaline substrate. Perhaps a group could go in together to purchase the ingredients, and two different batches could be made--one for soft and another for hard water. Then interested members could pay for the customized tabs, test them in their tanks, and report on their results? If so, definitely count me in......


----------



## Discusluv (Dec 24, 2017)

I dont know, last time I provided numbers on what I dosed in liquid ferts in the water column I was told that I might as well not be dosing it at all it was so low and inconsequential. And, like I said, I forget to dose as much as I do remember [this already inconsequential number.} But, I do routinely- every three months, put down the root tabs because I get them from auto-shipped from Amazon every three months to remind me. All four tanks get them: the 180 gallon, the 60 gallon and the 2-30 gallons. 

Now, @Deanna may have something about the fish waste contributing a great deal to nutrients for plants. I wonder how much though, given my large and frequent water changes ( and vacumming) with the sensitive fish I have. Discus, Wild Altums and geophagus, etc...


----------



## jcoulter (Mar 12, 2018)

What all nutrients does fish waste contain? NPK? Micros?

Assume a heavy fish load, would it be wise to cut back on micros?


----------



## Discusluv (Dec 24, 2017)

jcoulter said:


> What all nutrients does fish waste contain? NPK? Micros?
> 
> Assume a heavy fish load, would it be wise to cut back on micros?


Good question.


----------



## Maryland Guppy (Dec 6, 2014)

jcoulter said:


> What all nutrients does fish waste contain? NPK? Micros?
> 
> Assume a heavy fish load, would it be wise to cut back on micros?


My guess would be about 65% of excretions would be liquid and quickly be an ammonia based nitrogen source.
The 35% would be solids so just read the phish food contents.

Micros contain many metals just in small quantities.

Warning, I could be very wrong!


----------



## Deanna (Feb 15, 2017)

jcoulter said:


> What all nutrients does fish waste contain? NPK? Micros?
> 
> Assume a heavy fish load, would it be wise to cut back on micros?


“You are what you eat” applies in the fish world as well. It is primarily whatever is in your fish food and this usually includes all of the micros, except enough iron. Many of us have gone through decades, in low-tech tanks, never having had to add micros (except iron) because of this. Generally, it's best to add some as you can never know exactly what is there. Following the directions will be safe and assure minimal coverage.

Concerning macros, fish start the N stream, which you can eventually measure as nitrate. It’s the ammonia (ignoring NH3 vs. NH4 issues for the moment) that fish produce that worries us into setting up our BB to convert into the safer nitrate form. Fish also produce/pass phosphorus in the form of PO4 (phosphates). That takes care of the N and P, and both of these are easily and cheaply measurable.

What they will never produce enough of is potassium (K) and iron, and both are difficult to measure. This is why so many companies provide these products combined into one dose.

So, can you just add K and Fe? Maybe. Most of us have done it in the past. It would be limited to low-tech setups and may require some monitoring (via water testing and plant observation) to be sure of sufficient quantities. If you add something like Excel, it will increase plant growth and may necessitate the need for more dosing.


----------



## Asteroid (Jul 26, 2018)

Jeff5614 said:


> Not to derail the thread, but what do you think about that? As someone who can scape a tank well, do you like it or do you prefer a nice carpet?


Hey @Jeff5614

Personally I can appreciate all kind of scapes. There's something about a great carpet that can't be matched. But then again do you prefer looking at a mountainside in the fall (dutch/very heavy stems) or a Canon or a national park with large rock formations like Yosemite. As long as it's arranged in some sort of interesting arrangement and doesn't look like a salad bar.


----------



## Greggz (May 19, 2008)

jcoulter said:


> What all nutrients does fish waste contain? NPK? Micros?
> 
> Assume a heavy fish load, would it be wise to cut back on micros?


Fish load will generate mostly Nitrates and Phosphates (fish food). 

But all fish loads are not created equal. My tank is very well stocked by planted tank standards, but also gets lots of regular maintenance and light fish feeding, and the impact is small. In an overstocked tank that is not well maintained and overfed, it could be much more. 

And some nutrients, like potassium and iron, are not provided by fish waste.

So what does it mean? It's all relative to each particular tank. The only way to know if it's wise to cut back on any nutrient is to try it. Much depends on the particular tank, how heavily it's planted, and the plant species being kept. 

So far I have not seen a high light, high tech tank here thrive on fish waste only. I tried it early on, just adding K and iron, but my plants were starving. Would likely work fine in low tech, but not in a tank full of fast growing stems. Boosted dosing, and they did much better. To be honest, it's something I don't really consider much any more. If a dosing scheme works, it works. 

But as usual, that is just my experience, your mileage may vary.


----------



## Discusluv (Dec 24, 2017)

Greggz said:


> your mileage may vary.


Summed up nicely ...


----------



## Deanna (Feb 15, 2017)

This thread reminded me that I had I was going to post results of an analysis on my fish food, about a month ago, in another thread. Now, I can’t remember which thread it was (you know how that goes), so I’ll post it here.

I had taken my daily fish food dose (1.2 grams) and put it into a gallon of RO/DI water. It took about a month to fully dissolve. What I found is that these 1.2 grams creates about 3.6ppm of something (unknown composition) based upon a TDS (700 scale) measure. I did find between .25 and .5ppm total ammonia and ammonia is converted to nitrates at close to 1:1. I’m sure there is a decent amount of phosphorus in there given the high protein content of the food. I’d guess close to the N amount. So, that leaves about 2.6ppm of unaccounted something, although there will be traces in there as well.


----------



## Edward (Apr 11, 2005)

Yes, we know plants do better in lower KH, we don’t need more low KH versus high KH experiments. I have done it and shared it 15 years ago. What we need more is testing high KH with a variety of mineral variations. Let’s say 10 dKH with NO3 or with NH4 or with urea, or varying Ca or Mg levels, perhaps micro nutrient ratios, or is it Na, S or Cl? It would be wonderful if we could find solution for plants in high KH water conditions since most local tap water is hard (high KH).


----------



## Maryland Guppy (Dec 6, 2014)

Edward said:


> Yes, we know plants do better in lower KH, we don’t need more low KH versus high KH experiments. I have done it and shared it 15 years ago. What we need more is testing high KH with a variety of mineral variations. Let’s say 10 dKH with NO3 or with NH4 or with urea, or varying Ca or Mg levels, perhaps micro nutrient ratios, or is it Na, S or Cl? It would be wonderful if we could find solution for plants in high KH water conditions since most local tap water is hard (high KH).


 @Edward this was a hard one to "like", but I did.

Regrettably I was not a plant enthusiast 15 years ago.
The SW days were ending then and I took a break.
Hard to like since lower KH can be too easily achieved with RODI or HCl dosing these days.

My high KH/alkalinity days were just "okay" for plant growth.
Low KH tests I can't get chelates to break down in micros yet, this is on the good side of things, I guess.

I could kick myself for not discussing alkalinity with Ghazanfar.
Been over his house several times in the past 18 months and didn't see an RO system, not sure what he is using???
Maybe tap water in that area of Virginia is to the liking? I don't know.


----------



## Asteroid (Jul 26, 2018)

Why is Barr on the chart twice? Mistake or because of various EI levels?


----------



## Desert Pupfish (May 6, 2019)

Maryland Guppy said:


> @Edward this was a hard one to "like", but I did.
> Hard to like since lower KH can be too easily achieved with RODI or HCl dosing these days.
> 
> My high KH/alkalinity days were just "okay" for plant growth.
> ...


I'd beg to differ that lower kH is "easily achieved" if your baseline tap water is hard. It may be straightforward, but buying & setting up an RODI system isn't my idea of easy. And certainly not cheap. As a planted tank newbie, I can attest that if we want to attract more people to this hobby, we need to make it easier to get into. Otherwise it'll remain a specialty of people with the money, time & interest to create their own water, roll their own micros, buy & set up CO2 systems, specialized intense lighting, hundreds of $$ spent to test for all the various nutrients & water parameters, and hundreds of hours spent online sifting through various threads to get an idea of what might work for them. Call me a cockeyed optimist, but I've seen lots of beautiful low tech tanks with lush & colorful plants, and am hoping I can get there myself someday--without bankrupting myself in the meantime.

Edward's suggestion to have fert recommendations for high kH is a good one, IMO. NilocG already has this in his Thrive+ vs Thrive liquid fert line. What I'd love to see is a set of recommendations for customizing fert mixes based on baseline water parameters. E.g. if your water has high calcium but low magnesium, or vice versa, etc. I know you can spend hundreds to get all the specialized kits needed to test all this, but you'd attract a lot more people to the hobby if it were easier to know what to get without having to play Jr chemist & mad scientist. Making it easier to grow lush plants using their tap water is the best way to get people hooked & want to push the envelope and start experimenting to get the fruitstand tanks they see in pics online. Then they can follow you down the rabbit hole to the more advanced aspects of the hobby

Stepping down off my soapbox now...


----------



## Greggz (May 19, 2008)

Desert Pupfish said:


> Stepping down off my soapbox now...


Good post and I get everything you are saying.

However, here's the thing. It is complicated.

Each eco system has many different parameters. Even with the chart above regarding KH, each one of those tanks may have different substrate, light level, CO2 level, plant selection/density, maintenance routines, pruning/trimming methods, macro ratios, micro mixes, GH, etc. Each needs to be looked at in it's entirety to fully understand what is going on.

So in the end, no magic recipe that I have seen yet. Even in a low tech environment, one must get many things in balance to be successful. Dealing with one's source water is just one of them. There is a learning curve (trial/error) no matter if low/med/high tech.

As to cost of high tech set ups, yes it can add up quick. But that isn't different than any other hobby. If I have learned one thing, it's that joining a forum on any hobby leads to needing things you previously may not have known even existed. Ask me how I know.:wink2:


----------



## Discusluv (Dec 24, 2017)

Desert Pupfish said:


> I'd beg to differ that lower kH is "easily achieved" if your baseline tap water is hard. It may be straightforward, but buying & setting up an RODI system isn't my idea of easy. And certainly not cheap. As a planted tank newbie, I can attest that if we want to attract more people to this hobby, we need to make it easier to get into. Otherwise it'll remain a specialty of people with the money, time & interest to create their own water, roll their own micros, buy & set up CO2 systems, specialized intense lighting, hundreds of $$ spent to test for all the various nutrients & water parameters, and hundreds of hours spent online sifting through various threads to get an idea of what might work for them. Call me a cockeyed optimist, but I've seen lots of beautiful low tech tanks with lush & colorful plants, and am hoping I can get there myself someday--without bankrupting myself in the meantime.
> 
> Edward's suggestion to have fert recommendations for high kH is a good one, IMO. NilocG already has this in his Thrive+ vs Thrive liquid fert line. What I'd love to see is a set of recommendations for customizing fert mixes based on baseline water parameters. E.g. if your water has high calcium but low magnesium, or vice versa, etc. I know you can spend hundreds to get all the specialized kits needed to test all this, but you'd attract a lot more people to the hobby if it were easier to know what to get without having to play Jr chemist & mad scientist. Making it easier to grow lush plants using their tap water is the best way to get people hooked & want to push the envelope and start experimenting to get the fruitstand tanks they see in pics online. Then they can follow you down the rabbit hole to the more advanced aspects of the hobby
> 
> Stepping down off my soapbox now...


Excellently said .


----------



## Desert Pupfish (May 6, 2019)

Greggz said:


> Good post and I get everything you are saying.
> 
> However, here's the thing. It is complicated.
> 
> ...


No magic recipes to be sure. And there are lots of variables--that what makes it interesting--and at times maddening. 

What I probably didn't say very well is that what's needed are some hard water guidelines/recommendations that are easily decipherable for newbies. Of course with caveats that nothing is one-size-fits-all, YMMV, etc. If I knew enough I'd do it myself, and once I've learned enough to have some success will likely create a sticky or something on this at some point. But in the meantime, there appear to be people on here successfully growing good plants in hard water, and it'd be great to have all that knowledge & experience in one place so people don't have to spend countless hours sifting through various threads to find snippets of knowledge that are hard to form into a cohesive plan of action for their situation. 

What I may do (next month, after I'm back from my next round of travel) is start a hard water thread, and hope that those who have experience will contribute & help create a knowledge base.


----------



## happi (Dec 18, 2009)

Edward said:


> Yes, we know plants do better in lower KH, we don’t need more low KH versus high KH experiments. I have done it and shared it 15 years ago. What we need more is testing high KH with a variety of mineral variations. Let’s say 10 dKH with NO3 or with NH4 or with urea, or varying Ca or Mg levels, perhaps micro nutrient ratios, or is it Na, S or Cl? It would be wonderful if we could find solution for plants in high KH water conditions since most local tap water is hard (high KH).



Edward, Exactly. if you guys are interested in hard water such as 11 DKH and 21 DGH, i was able to grow many plants while using Seachem product during that time, i mean this date back 10-15 years ago. if i had to take a guess why it was working so well, i would say "Urea" in seachem product, Urea seems to work very well even in harder water, i even had fish in this tank, PH of the tank was 7.2 without CO2.


----------



## cl3537 (Jan 28, 2019)

happi said:


> Edward, Exactly. if you guys are interested in hard water such as 11 DKH and 21 DGH, i was able to grow many plants while using Seachem product during that time, i mean this date back 10-15 years ago. if i had to take a guess why it was working so well, i would say "Urea" in seachem product, Urea seems to work very well even in harder water, i even had fish in this tank, PH of the tank was 7.2 without CO2.


It depends heavily on plant selection, type of scape and intensity of light and duration. It is MUCH harder with hard water to succeed than with soft water. Vin mentioned a solution, which is low/med light, lean ferts, and likely you avoid high demand or nutrient hog plants and carefully control light so that you don't see deficiencies even with lean ferts. 

You are balancing between a rock and a hard place, raise ferts get algae or stunting(with lythraecae), or keep lean and get deficiencies and some algae anyway if light is too high with some species. The solution is medium PAR, maintain lean ferts and keep species that are okay under those conditions. 

I just don't see someone with kh=1 *having experience with this balance*. When lard on ferts and Co2 heavy works without issues it is so much easier.


----------



## SingAlongWithTsing (Jun 11, 2015)

happi said:


> Edward, Exactly. if you guys are interested in hard water such as 11 DKH and 21 DGH, i was able to grow many plants while using Seachem product during that time, i mean this date back 10-15 years ago. if i had to take a guess why it was working so well, i would say "Urea" in seachem product, Urea seems to work very well even in harder water, i even had fish in this tank, PH of the tank was 7.2 without CO2.


were you using aquasoil back then too?


----------



## Desert Pupfish (May 6, 2019)

Edward said:


> Yes, we know plants do better in lower KH, we don’t need more low KH versus high KH experiments. I have done it and shared it 15 years ago. What we need more is testing high KH with a variety of mineral variations. Let’s say 10 dKH with NO3 or with NH4 or with urea, or varying Ca or Mg levels, perhaps micro nutrient ratios, or is it Na, S or Cl? It would be wonderful if we could find solution for plants in high KH water conditions since most local tap water is hard (high KH).


Thanks for this, @Edward. Would you happen to have a link to those results you shared? I think many of us would find those informative.

Excellent suggestion to test varying water column nutrient combinations in high kH. I think @happi had suggested something similar in an earlier post on this thread about making custom root tabs. If an enriched/fertilized substrate and lean water column dosing are the key to success in hard water, it'd be great to test out what combinations of these would work best. If the gurus on here are willing to create some hard water combos to test, I'm guessing many of us would be willing to buy them, test them out, and report back on the results. This could inform recommendations on which off-the-shelf roottabs & liquid ferts like Flourish or LeafZone would be best for newbies with hard water. Or better yet, people like Tom Barr or Colin G could create versions of their products specifically for hard water. A fella can dream...


----------



## Greggz (May 19, 2008)

happi said:


> Edward, Exactly. if you guys are interested in hard water such as 11 DKH and 21 DGH, i was able to grow many plants while using Seachem product during that time, i mean this date back 10-15 years ago. if i had to take a guess why it was working so well, i would say "Urea" in seachem product, Urea seems to work very well even in harder water, i even had fish in this tank, PH of the tank was 7.2 without CO2.


I agree this is an area that needs more exploration.

When I got started, for about a year I used softened well water. KH was through the roof, about 18 or so. Degassed pH about 8.2.

I was reasonably successful even with very high KH. But that took a lot of trial and error to determine which plants would make it. Not a surprise I didn't have much luck with most Rotalas, and other species that I now understand clearly prefer softer water. 

So some would do very poorly, but at the time I had no idea why. Makes perfect sense now. 

My dosing was quite high, but some species like most Ludwigia thrived. So while I do believe everything is much easier in lower KH, I think with the right mix of plants you can have a very nice set up in high KH. To me the right mix of plants really is the key. You can bang your head against the wall over and over again with some species, but they will never thrive. Having a better understand of which plants to include/avoid in high KH is something that I think would benefit many.


----------



## EdWiser (Jul 14, 2015)

Would be nice if a list of plants could be determined as to what KH is best for them to thrive.


----------



## happi (Dec 18, 2009)

SingAlongWithTsing said:


> were you using aquasoil back then too?


tank was running on seachem flourite back then


----------



## Rainer (Jan 30, 2011)

EdWiser said:


> Would be nice if a list of plants could be determined as to what KH is best for them to thrive.


https://www.flowgrow.de/db/aquaticplants


----------



## Saxa Tilly (Apr 7, 2015)

Just when I thought I was out...

OK - the screen grab from my Rotala Kill Tank presentation speaks to/for Rotala and Ammannia only. Without the context of the 75 minutes of non-stop talk/BS that came before it, someone is certainly going to use it out of context. 

To repeat what I said earlier in the thread, the first two-thirds of the talk was about my own experiments, where I established (to myself) that tip stunting was not caused exclusively by CO2 issues. After 3 years of experiments, it looked like conditional nutritional intolerance. The last two thirds was a 'meta analysis' if you will, of KH and nutrient conditions in successful Rotala tanks owned by others. 

While we all want to or think we remain open to facts, it is impossibly difficult to not cling to our established biases as new, contrary information comes along. 

Fortunately for me, the more I talked to successful Rotala growers, the more my preexisting biases kept being reconfirmed. And that was: Rotala and Ammannia grow well without stunting in both low and high KH water. That they are conditionally intolerant to high nutrients in high KH water. That a combination of low KH and low water column is a highly successful approach. That root feeding while keeping a rich nutrient source in the substrate is an easy way to grow these plants in high KH water. 

The screen grab above was created earlier in the year. Since then I have continued to ask successful Rotala growers their water and nutrient conditions. The L-shaped zone of success on the chart has a lot more people's names on it now. 

EVERY SINGLE successful grower of Rotala and Ammannia continues to fall into the L-zone. Even those who disagree with my findings fall into the L-zone. 

The top right quadrant is a tough spot to grow these plants. That quadrant is still empty. I have yet to see someone consistently grow these plants in high KH water + inert substrate + EI. 

While EI fans will swear up and down that this is not a nutrient issue, I point to the blank quadrant on the chart. 

Someone, anyone, please, prove me wrong. I am not being snarky. I really do want someone with Florida or Texas water to grow 10-15 species of Lythraceae together in inert substrate and EI. Why are there no examples of successful tank under those conditions?

The next time you're on Facebook and you see all the Johnny Come Lately EI experts (half the dudes on High Tech group) telling us geezers that we're incompetent horticulturists for not being able to grow these plants well, click on their profile and look up where they live. It's invariably in soft water zones in the pacific northwest, NY, or other soft water spots. Or they're using RO. 

Also, someone asked why Barr was listed twice - he has grown Lythraceae well with nothing by Aquasoil and CO2 in very soft water. Zero added nutrients. That is a really easy way to grow these plants. But there is a time limit. Once the soil is depleted, you need to start a new tank with a new substrate.


----------



## Greggz (May 19, 2008)

Saxa Tilly said:


> I have yet to see someone consistently grow these plants in high KH water + inert substrate + EI.


Hey Vin describes exactly what I tried many times years ago. 

I had little idea of what I was doing (only slightly more now!:wink2, and I can tell you I was able to kill those plants very well with that set up. But heck KH wasn't even on my radar then.


----------



## Saxa Tilly (Apr 7, 2015)

Greggz said:


> Hey Vin describes exactly what I tried many times years ago.
> 
> I had little idea of what I was doing (only slightly more now!:wink2, and I can tell you I was able to kill those plants very well with that set up. But heck KH was even on my radar then.


Me too, Gregg. For years. 

You CAN grow all these plants in rock hard water. No RO and not hydrochloric acid. 

Just stick all the nutrients deep in the substrate. Add fish food and CO2 to the water. Nothing else. 

Without getting into the scientific weeds, there are several plausible explanations for this. For noobs who just want pretty plants without having to become chemists, just know that root-feeding while lean dosing water works like a charm. 

Or if you have hard water and dont want to mess with ferts under the substrate, go with Seachem or something like it...or save a bundle and make your own lite liquid ferts. 

There are two options for hard water folks.


----------



## SpringHalo (Oct 13, 2017)

Saxa Tilly said:


> Just when I thought I was out...
> 
> OK - the screen grab from my Rotala Kill Tank presentation speaks to/for Rotala and Ammannia only. Without the context of the 75 minutes of non-stop talk/BS that came before it, someone is certainly going to use it out of context.
> 
> ...



What do you define as consistently grow? I'm running 50% EI in 9 GH, 7 KH tap water in BDBS and my two rotala species are growing just as fast as my other stems. Is it a quantitative nodes-per-inch, or stem inches-per-week, leaf size, etc?


----------



## Asteroid (Jul 26, 2018)

Saxa Tilly said:


> ...
> 
> Also, someone asked why Barr was listed twice - he has grown Lythraceae well with nothing by Aquasoil and CO2 in very soft water. Zero added nutrients. That is a really easy way to grow these plants. But there is a time limit. Once the soil is depleted, you need to start a new tank with a new substrate.


I actually asked, I was curious so thank you for explaining. That's interesting, was that done as an experiment by Barr, because I thought he always preached dosing EI from Day 1 even with AS. I know I have started many tanks with AS and I just dosed K and micros for the 1st 6 mths or so thinking they were lacking in the AS. It's interesting that healthy stems will grow without adding anything other than what's in the tap, which might have been enough in Barr's case. 

Starting a new tank with a new substrate just so a newbie doesn't get confused is not necessary if you plan on adding something to the WC or to the substrate it's only if you want to run it with nothing but the AS long-term is what I assume you mean.


----------



## Edward (Apr 11, 2005)

If you have a picture of Rotala wallichii growing in 10 dKH water, can you post it please?


----------



## Saxa Tilly (Apr 7, 2015)

SpringHalo said:


> What do you define as consistently grow? I'm running 50% EI in 9 GH, 7 KH tap water in BDBS and my two rotala species are growing just as fast as my other stems. Is it a quantitative nodes-per-inch, or stem inches-per-week, leaf size, etc?


I define successful growth in the top right quadrant as:

- Any KH above 7 or 8

- Any inert substrate

- Full EI or higher

- fully unstunted tips with flat leaves without fraying or twisting and species specific internode distance. (I say this because plants like Cuphea anagalloidea sometimes do well in harder waters but internodes are too short and leaves are dimpled. Cuphea leaves are supposed to be flat like Lindernia, with long internodes.)

- Ideal growth in two or three wallichii forms, a couple of macrandra, Cuphea anagalloidea, Ammannia pedicellata, A. gracilis, A. senegalensis, and the plant making the rounds as A. crassicaulis. This list isnt random. It's calculated to test various preferences. 

Your KH is getting to the point of being troublesome. Your dosing at half EI probably helps too. I'd be curious to see how you fare with the list of plants above. 

I've grown all of these plants in high KH water, but either with very low water column or very rich substrate. At the same time, I can grow macrandra really well without CO2 and without ferts at all in BDBS...it's really slow, color is pathetic, but not stunting. 

I suspect that in your case, if the KH was in the 10-12 range and you went full EI, that you'd see stunting issues.


----------



## Saxa Tilly (Apr 7, 2015)

Asteroid said:


> I actually asked, I was curious so thank you for explaining. That's interesting, was that done as an experiment by Barr, because I thought he always preached dosing EI from Day 1 even with AS. I know I have started many tanks with AS and I just dosed K and micros for the 1st 6 mths or so thinking they were lacking in the AS. It's interesting that healthy stems will grow without adding anything other than what's in the tap, which might have been enough in Barr's case.
> 
> Starting a new tank with a new substrate just so a newbie doesn't get confused is not necessary if you plan on adding something to the WC or to the substrate it's only if you want to run it with nothing but the AS long-term is what I assume you mean.


Barr has been doing this roughly as long as I have. If you've been doing this for that long, sooner or later, you set up tanks with vastly different approaches. He may set up low nutrient tanks because they are less work. But, generally, yes, he is an EI proponent, even with Aquasoil. 

If I set up a brand new tank wtih AS, I'd do exactly what you did. K and Fe and a hint of traces. But you will run out of macros eventually and Ludwigia start to struggle. During months 2-4, AS can grow damn near anything without stunting. No other ferts needed. 

I have a very old tank with ancient AS. I must add macros to the water column...because isnt much left in the substrate. I dont feel like spending $500 a year on new AS, the efforts of swapping out the substrate and the algae during the first month.


----------



## Saxa Tilly (Apr 7, 2015)

Edward said:


> If you have a picture of Rotala wallichii growing in 10 dKH water, can you post it please?


There is one higher up the thread, but that's in the 7-8 range KH. Sort of medium high. That's easy. 

My tap water in California has dropped in KH a couple of points in the last few years. I'm sure I have pics of wallichii from the 1990s when my water was 10 KH. Used mostly Tropica Master Grow with laterite and clay under the substrate. Nothing else. If i were to put that tank in the matrix above, it'd be firmly in the bottom right quadrant near Kramer and Knott.

Did you have issues at KH 10 with wallichii? Poorer growth or stunting?


----------



## Edward (Apr 11, 2005)

Edward said:


> If you have a picture of Rotala wallichii growing in 10 dKH water, can you post it please?
> 
> 
> Saxa Tilly said:
> ...


 I use soft water because of my fish so no problems here. 

The way I understand your presentation is low KH versus high KH, perhaps your idea is more complex than I can see. You are saying these selected plants grow nice in low KH. In high KH, they grow also as long as the other conditions are met. My question is, do they look as nice in high KH as in low KH? Because growing them not stunted and not twisted is not good enough for high KH area growers when they are never red and just look like grass.


----------



## SpringHalo (Oct 13, 2017)

Saxa Tilly said:


> I define successful growth in the top right quadrant as:
> 
> - Any KH above 7 or 8
> 
> ...



Thanks for the info. I originally had full EI going but was getting algae issues so I reduced it down to where it is now, and it's been working for several months. I'm planning on trying the HCl method to reduce KH, but will try that in a different tank to start. Do you know anyone in the midwest that has those species that I could buy from to test?


----------



## cl3537 (Jan 28, 2019)

SpringHalo said:


> What do you define as consistently grow? I'm running 50% EI in 9 GH, 7 KH tap water in BDBS and my two rotala species are growing just as fast as my other stems. Is it a quantitative nodes-per-inch, or stem inches-per-week, leaf size, etc?


Which species? It also depends on your definition of 'healthy' can you please post close up shots of the two species.
I can't grow Rotala Rotundifolia at half EI, kh=5, gh=8. It stunts and branches like crazy(not being trimmed at those branch points) and the leaves have marks.


----------



## jcoulter (Mar 12, 2018)

Rainer said:


> https://www.flowgrow.de/db/aquaticplants


Careful with this website...the kh readings definitely are very suspect. Rotala Macandra? kH 0 to 12?? :surprise:


----------



## cl3537 (Jan 28, 2019)

Saxa Tilly said:


> To repeat what I said earlier in the thread, the first two-thirds of the talk was about my own experiments, where I established (to myself) that tip stunting was not caused exclusively by CO2 issues. After 3 years of experiments, it looked like conditional nutritional intolerance. The last two thirds was a 'meta analysis' if you will, of KH and nutrient conditions in successful Rotala tanks owned by others.


Those who want to understand your point and message will, those with softwater who have never seen problems with 'lard on' just don't want to get it. Some people will only beleive what they see in their own tank and will extend their experience incorrectly to those with vastly different water chemistry. Thanks for promoting this unpopular topic and continuing to present it here.




> While we all want to or think we remain open to facts, it is impossibly difficult to not cling to our established biases as new, contrary information comes along.


Especially on this forum in particular. Couldn't have said it better myself. :wink2:



> Fortunately for me, the more I talked to successful Rotala growers, the more my preexisting biases kept being reconfirmed. And that was: Rotala and Ammannia grow well without stunting in both low and high KH water. That they are conditionally intolerant to high nutrients in high KH water. That a combination of low KH and low water column is a highly successful approach. That root feeding while keeping a rich nutrient source in the substrate is an easy way to grow these plants in high KH water.


I think the common denominator is the water column needs to remain lean to grow them well at all. The nutrient supplementation in substrate is tricky and needs to be explored more especially when it changes over time. 

I am not sure if 'healthy' species grown in hard and soft kh water look exactly same though?, (it may be species dependent).



> While EI fans will swear up and down that this is not a nutrient issue, I point to the blank quadrant on the chart.


Barr didn't test EI in a controlled way and with controlled measurements in different water chemistry, most of his observations are with 'his tank' and were largely successful. Extending it to other tank conditions (lower plant mass, harder water etc) is where his assumptions break down.



> Someone, anyone, please, prove me wrong. I am not being snarky. I really do want someone with Florida or Texas water to grow 10-15 species of Lythraceae together in inert substrate and EI. Why are there no examples of successful tank under those conditions?


I'd like someone to take up the challenge. 



> The next time you're on Facebook and you see all the Johnny Come Lately EI experts (half the dudes on High Tech group) telling us geezers that we're incompetent horticulturists for not being able to grow these plants well, click on their profile and look up where they live. It's invariably in soft water zones in the pacific northwest, NY, or other soft water spots. Or they're using RO.


+1

Thanks for posting here I hope you stick around.


----------



## cl3537 (Jan 28, 2019)

Rainer said:


> https://www.flowgrow.de/db/aquaticplants


0 - 10 dkh for S. Repens
0 - 12 dkh for Rotala Rotundifolia 

Unfortunately both are woefully inadequate for describing the specific conditions under which both of these thrive.
We need an 'Anecdotal Report' database on TPT to report specific findings for specific plant species. The more report and information in it (even if contradictory) the better and more useful it will become.


----------



## happi (Dec 18, 2009)

*Rotola*








https://ibb.co/jwmCdtS







https://ibb.co/Ky6QRHv







https://ibb.co/jwmCdtS







https://ibb.co/Krq4gnb

4th one is Marcel Experiment, other one are mine, rotola Wallachi, rotola Erni. my test confirm if you can grow these Rotola sp, in similar pattern, you can almost grow any rotola. my soil is also almost 3 year old, IME i repeat again the main success is due to presence of NH4/urea in the liquid form as that is what i was dosing. i have shared these experiments before but they didn't get much attention as people were not willing to accept things at that time. maybe people with hard water should try Urea instead of KNO3 to see what results they get in there tanks.


here's some pics from a friend, the Utah's hard tap water while using safetsorb, he said he used half EI here, you can see that Wallchi did somewhat ok







https://ibb.co/pPp1W76







https://ibb.co/6Wb95Vf







https://ibb.co/tZzmwxb







https://ibb.co/x6LLQXm His Water Report


----------



## Edward (Apr 11, 2005)

happi
the water report says dKH 5 to 15 depending on the actual location, so what is it? Also, Mg is 13 to 42 ppm. That has a big impact, my wallichii prefers Mg < 5 ppm. 

This one does't look happy:









Detail:


----------



## Desert Pupfish (May 6, 2019)

Saxa Tilly said:


> If I set up a brand new tank wtih AS, I'd do exactly what you did. K and Fe and a hint of traces. But you will run out of macros eventually and Ludwigia start to struggle. During months 2-4, AS can grow damn near anything without stunting. No other ferts needed.
> 
> I have a very old tank with ancient AS. I must add macros to the water column...because isnt much left in the substrate. I dont feel like spending $500 a year on new AS, the efforts of swapping out the substrate and the algae during the first month.


Thanks for weighing on on this--you've cleared up a lot of my questions--and others' too, I suspect. 

So in your experience, about how long does AS with just K, FE & micros last? (on average--I know it's gonna be variable). And once it becomes depleted, can you use Osmocote+ or root tabs to replenish it? Or do you then have to add lean macros to the water column to compensate for what the soil has lost? And once you start dosing macros, how do you define "lean"? And are the results going to be as good with lean macro dosing as they were when the plants were just relying on soil+k+Fe+traces?

As a newbie with a potting soil (very thin layer) plus STS substrate in my low tech, I'm trying to figure out how long it'll last before I have to start dosing macros, and what the best way would be to do that (root feeding vs water column)

Thanks again for this discussion.

Bump:


Saxa Tilly said:


> If I set up a brand new tank wtih AS, I'd do exactly what you did. K and Fe and a hint of traces. But you will run out of macros eventually and Ludwigia start to struggle. During months 2-4, AS can grow damn near anything without stunting. No other ferts needed.
> 
> I have a very old tank with ancient AS. I must add macros to the water column...because isnt much left in the substrate. I dont feel like spending $500 a year on new AS, the efforts of swapping out the substrate and the algae during the first month.


Thanks for weighing on on this--you've cleared up a lot of my questions--and others' too, I suspect. 

So in your experience, about how long does AS with just K, FE & micros last? (on average--I know it's gonna be variable). And once it becomes depleted, can you use Osmocote+ or root tabs to replenish it? Or do you then have to add lean macros to the water column to compensate for what the soil has lost? And once you start dosing macros, how do you define "lean"? And are the results going to be as good with lean macro dosing as they were when the plants were just relying on soil+k+Fe+traces?

As a newbie with a potting soil (very thin layer) plus STS substrate in my low tech, I'm trying to figure out how long it'll last before I have to start dosing macros, and what the best way would be to do that (root feeding vs water column)

Thanks again for this discussion.


----------



## Discusluv (Dec 24, 2017)

Desert Pupfish said:


> Thanks for weighing on on this--you've cleared up a lot of my questions--and others' too, I suspect.
> 
> So in your experience, about how long does AS with just K, FE & micros last? (on average--I know it's gonna be variable). And once it becomes depleted, can you use Osmocote+ or root tabs to replenish it? Or do you then have to add lean macros to the water column to compensate for what the soil has lost? And once you start dosing macros, how do you define "lean"? And are the results going to be as good with lean macro dosing as they were when the plants were just relying on soil+k+Fe+traces?
> 
> ...


 It refreshing to see a conversation that touches on dosing/root fertilization in the low-tech aquarium. 

I am also interested in hearing these questions answered.


----------



## cl3537 (Jan 28, 2019)

happi said:


> IME i repeat again the main success is due to presence of NH4/urea in the liquid form as that is what i was dosing. i have shared these experiments before but they didn't get much attention as people were not willing to accept things at that time.


Its an interesting theory and it has been proven for strawberry plants but the mechanism and efficacy in the aquarium is still yet to be proven more data is needed.

Carbonates inhibit Nitrogen uptake presumably(the author speculates) by raising pH and Ammonium lowers pH and allows for better bioavailability of Fe in soils allowing for better growth.

https://www.researchgate.net/public...rmltoGH-uhJOtvclcynGQFJKBaGOO-y6t4ODaypb9lkLI

I beleive anyone can download the full text of this article for free.

However your aquarium anecdotes/experiments/posts are largely forgotten because they lack control of variables and the details are poorly explained/documented.

What you state as a 'fact' is far from proven.


----------



## happi (Dec 18, 2009)

Edward said:


> happi
> the water report says dKH 5 to 15 depending on the actual location, so what is it? Also, Mg is 13 to 42 ppm. That has a big impact, my wallichii prefers Mg < 5 ppm.
> 
> This one does't look happy:
> ...


yes Edward the guy did have some unstable parameters, his water source would change every few months, he is currently using RO water. he did mention that he couldn't keep certain plants at certain time of the year due to this reason


----------



## Saxa Tilly (Apr 7, 2015)

Edward said:


> I use soft water because of my fish so no problems here.
> 
> The way I understand your presentation is low KH versus high KH, perhaps your idea is more complex than I can see. You are saying these selected plants grow nice in low KH. In high KH, they grow also as long as the other conditions are met. My question is, do they look as nice in high KH as in low KH? Because growing them not stunted and not twisted is not good enough for high KH area growers when they are never red and just look like grass.


The stunted pic you posted is high KH + EI + inert sub. 

The colors were roughly the same with low or high KH in my tanks. Not that different. 

I know AGA has made my talk available to convention attendees. AGA members who did not attend do not have access yet. Not sure why...or when it'll be widely available. I suggest you watch it for filling in missing data, context and nuances that are missing in this thread. Too long/difficult to rehash the whole thing here.


----------



## Saxa Tilly (Apr 7, 2015)

Desert Pupfish said:


> Thanks for weighing on on this--you've cleared up a lot of my questions--and others' too, I suspect.
> 
> So in your experience, about how long does AS with just K, FE & micros last? (on average--I know it's gonna be variable). And once it becomes depleted, can you use Osmocote+ or root tabs to replenish it? Or do you then have to add lean macros to the water column to compensate for what the soil has lost? And once you start dosing macros, how do you define "lean"? And are the results going to be as good with lean macro dosing as they were when the plants were just relying on soil+k+Fe+traces?
> 
> ...


I think fresh aquasoil + K + Fe + a hint of traces + decent fish density can last a year with good health. Aquasoil probably has a bit of P left over at that point. Soil will be almost fully depleted of N in a few months. So after a year, you may need to add a little N. If you want to keep it lean, aim for, say, 10 ppm nitrates. Try ammonium nitrate or urea, both are good ideas. Keep a ludwigia in the tank to tell you when you're underdosing N. 

Once soil is depleted, you cannot replenish it. Root tabs or O+ can help root feed the plants, which will now need a source of food other than the soil. If I were to design a tank with a 1 year shelf life, I'd feed 80% thru roots and 20% foliar. 

Root feeding remains unpopular for several reasons. I get it, but, boy, is it easy and powerful and fixes a whole host of issues. Rich substrate with soft and lean water fixes a lot of headaches...assuming you know how to maintain and add CO2.


----------



## Saxa Tilly (Apr 7, 2015)

cl3537 said:


> Barr didn't test EI in a controlled way and with controlled measurements in different water chemistry, most of his observations are with 'his tank' and were largely successful. Extending it to other tank conditions (lower plant mass, harder water etc) is where his assumptions break down.
> 
> 
> Thanks for posting here I hope you stick around.


Tom claims he's tested everything over the decades. Says he's grown several types of Lythraceae in hard and soft water. I want him to be right. If he's conducted experiments whose results contradict mine, I have not seen clearly documented results - like Marcel Golias'. 

But my experiences do not match Tom's. I have not found 'larding on' to be universally consequence free. 

Tom claims ratios of nutrients are nonsense. He may be right, but I suspect some plants probably have contrary opinions about this. 

CO2 is not the universal culprit. It is damn important and easy to screw up. But also not impossible to correct. If your plants are still stunted, who you gonna call?

So, do we only lay blame for stunting at the feet of poor maintenance? No. I call my buddy burr to the stand. Look at this tanks - they are as CO2-optimized and pristinely-maintained as they get. Yet, he has some issues with Lythraceae. 

I'll say this: Tom's insistence that we pay more attention to care and maintenance should not be ignored. Won't fix stunting. But sure as hell will fix algae and a lot of other issues.


----------



## Asteroid (Jul 26, 2018)

cl3537 said:


> T...
> Barr didn't test EI in a controlled way and with controlled measurements in different water chemistry, most of his observations are with 'his tank' and were largely successful. Extending it to other tank conditions (*lower plant mass*, harder water etc) is where his assumptions break down...


In soft water I have personally never had a problem dosing regular EI levels in terms of growing Rotala or having algae issues in lower plant mass setups. As long as the rest of the program is followed (regular water changes, good husbandry, light, co2.) In terms of algae, I have done minimalist aquascapes this way, iwagumi and even my current scape in my sig (which has minimal plant material) is getting regular EI dosing with pretty much no issues. Barr had plenty of tanks that had minimal plant mass and used a form of EI dosing. Not sure where you getting that from.

There is obviously compelling information presented that hard water is an issue for certain plants with heavy dosing. You'd have to be really close-minded not to see that IMO.


----------



## happi (Dec 18, 2009)

Marcel website, The English Version is up for those who have hard time translating it.

https://golias.net/akvaristika/english.php


----------



## EdWiser (Jul 14, 2015)

What test kits would you recommend to track water parameters closely.


----------



## ipkiss (Aug 9, 2011)

@happi, thanks. even ALSO a wealth of information for a lot of things other than the discussion at hand. I'm particularly liking the algae page.. https://golias.net/akvaristika/experiments-algae-organics.php


----------



## happi (Dec 18, 2009)

ipkiss said:


> @happi, thanks. even ALSO a wealth of information for a lot of things other than the discussion at hand. I'm particularly liking the algae page.. https://golias.net/akvaristika/experiments-algae-organics.php


you Welcome, i think i need to make a new thread on this one as it can easily get lost in here.


----------



## Edward (Apr 11, 2005)

Saxa Tilly said:


> You CAN grow all these plants in rock hard water. No RO and not hydrochloric acid.
> 
> Just stick all the nutrients deep in the substrate. Add fish food and CO2 to the water. Nothing else.
> 
> ...





Saxa Tilly said:


> The colors were roughly the same with low or high KH in my tanks. Not that different.


 If I lied and told you this was grown in 10 dKH, would you believe it?


----------



## Saxa Tilly (Apr 7, 2015)

EdWiser said:


> What test kits would you recommend to track water parameters closely.


LaMotte KH and pH probe.

Bump:


Edward said:


> If I lied and told you this was grown in 10 dKH, would you believe it?


Yes.


----------



## Saxa Tilly (Apr 7, 2015)

Edward said:


> If I lied and told you this was grown in 10 dKH, would you believe it?


I was in a hurry yesterday when I responded with just one word: yes. 

It warrants a slightly longer response: yes, wallichii will grow perfectly well in 10 KH. It is a really good old school low-tech plant. It's been in the hobby for decades. I know people who grow it is rock hard tap water with nothing but capped dirt as substrate. I've grown it this way. I've also grown it in inert sub with no CO2, no ferts, and low light. I've also grown it over soil capped with gravel and nothing else. 

It'll grow well under PPS pro or Seachem Comp level ferts at KH 10. 

When grown under these conditions, leaf structure is really good, but color may not be bright red. 

Bright lights, CO2, and rich substrate increases color. Super soft water + EI + Aquasoil + bright lights improves color even more, but then it grows annoyingly fast. 

Lots of ways to skin this cat. 

However, if the above pic was 10 KH + inert sub + high CO2 + high light + EI...well, then, I am skeptical.


----------

