# Akadama drl topped with fluorite black



## pejerrey (Dec 5, 2011)

I'm going to go bananas with the substrate. 

I'm young to use like 30liters of akadama drl small grain to cover a DIY UGF, and about 30ltrs of fluorite in top of that. Why? Because I want to create a nice slope from both corners towards the middle (valley), I want akadama buffer and nutrients but I love to plant in fluorite. Akadama doesn't hold plants down sooooo good.... IME.

I could also use only akadama and get rid of the existing fluorite but I kinda wanna use it.

Any thoughts? Can the fluorite just be sucked in to the akadama inter granular spaces??


----------



## eklikewhoa (Aug 29, 2006)

The fluorite would fill the crevices between the akadama but if used enough of it will top nicely.


----------



## pejerrey (Dec 5, 2011)

What if I use a coarse mesh sandwiched in between them?


----------



## SCMurphy (Oct 21, 2003)

Lets start with your UGF. You can grow plants on a UGF but you still have to do the maintenance that a UGF requires, which is clean the mulm out of the filter bed every now and again. You won't be able to do this effectively if you put a mesh between your substrates, and you probably won't like the mixing of the substrates when you clean the filter bed. I would rethink the UGF or the dual layer substrate, they don't seem compatible.


----------



## hydrophyte (Mar 1, 2009)

Are Fluorite and akadama really all that different? Aside from grain size and color it seems to me that they are comparable materials.


----------



## pejerrey (Dec 5, 2011)

SCMurphy said:


> Lets start with your UGF. You can grow plants on a UGF but you still have to do the maintenance that a UGF requires, which is clean the mulm out of the filter bed every now and again. You won't be able to do this effectively if you put a mesh between your substrates, and you probably won't like the mixing of the substrates when you clean the filter bed. I would rethink the UGF or the dual layer substrate, they don't seem compatible.


Plants growing in akadama with a UGF about 2-3months 










The UGF


----------



## pejerrey (Dec 5, 2011)

hydrophyte said:


> Are Fluorite and akadama really all that different? Aside from grain size and color it seems to me that they are comparable materials.


Correct me of I'm wrong?


Akadama is an active soil with nutrients and fluorite black is inert without nutrients.

Plants root way better in fluoride than in akadama IME.


----------



## eklikewhoa (Aug 29, 2006)

The mesh will keep them separate.


----------



## OverStocked (May 26, 2007)

SCMurphy said:


> Lets start with your UGF. You can grow plants on a UGF but you still have to do the maintenance that a UGF requires, which is clean the mulm out of the filter bed every now and again. You won't be able to do this effectively if you put a mesh between your substrates, and you probably won't like the mixing of the substrates when you clean the filter bed. I would rethink the UGF or the dual layer substrate, they don't seem compatible.


you should feel special. It has been like 9 months since SCMurphy posted here!


----------



## pejerrey (Dec 5, 2011)

Awesome possum!


----------



## Bahugo (Apr 18, 2011)

Akadama is nutrientless. It buffers water, and has a very high CEC rate.


----------



## pejerrey (Dec 5, 2011)

I just read a post from a uk forum where that was stated. Meaning that akadama is inert but it strips KH and GH from the water column and retains nutrients... Fluorite = akadama minus buffer


----------



## eklikewhoa (Aug 29, 2006)

essentially the same in that sense.


----------



## pejerrey (Dec 5, 2011)

interesting, people dont like fluoride to keep/breed cardinias, but love akadama for the same purpose.... why?


where do my plants get nutrients from? (small tank, no ferts, nor co2)


----------



## pejerrey (Dec 5, 2011)

Btw, I wish I knew this before I bought like 32 liters of akadama thinking that was a nutritious substrate! Lol! 

I guess I will stick with dosing like a maniac again.


----------



## cardgenius (Mar 27, 2011)

pejerrey said:


> interesting, people dont like fluoride to keep/breed cardinias, but love akadama for the same purpose.... why?


Flourite wont bring the PH down like Akadama will. I think thats the main reason.


----------



## Alyssa (Sep 16, 2011)

People use it for shrimp tanks because it buffers the KH, GH and PH and has high CEC, not because it helps grow plants or has it's own nutrients.

But the high CEC means that it can deliver whatever it grabs from the water column and make it available for roots. It is also supposed to last longer than Aquasoil in that it breaks down less - so you won't need to replace it as quickly. Plus it doesn't have that ammonia spike in the beginning like AS does.

It is better than flourite in the sense that it CAN buffer the water to make the GH/KH/PH more stable for shrimp that are sensitive and thus harder to keep - as flourite isn;t going to buffer anything really.


----------



## pejerrey (Dec 5, 2011)

Shhh
Edit, I had to leave before correcting the post

I was saying :

Seems like the way to go!


----------



## SCMurphy (Oct 21, 2003)

I'm not sure from your response that you understood my post.


----------



## sayurasem (Jun 17, 2011)

Everybody talking about akadama is nutrient-less... But isn't it intended for bonsai pots? Don't bonsai need nutrients?

Sorry I'm not bonsai person, but its kinda desn't make sense to me.


----------



## Lurch98 (Oct 7, 2011)

sayurasem said:


> Everybody talking about akadama is nutrient-less... But isn't it intended for bonsai pots? Don't bonsai need nutrients?
> 
> Sorry I'm not bonsai person, but its kinda desn't make sense to me.


The bonsai need to be fertilized as well. Most bonsai substrates don't directly provide nutrients without supplementation. Akadama is mainly used in bonsai for similar reasons to aquatic planting, for its CEC ability, as well as slow release of small amounts of retained water. Bonsai substrates are primarily focused on good draininage to prevent root rot, with some thought to retaining nutrients. Large, sharp, and free draining are what most bonsai people would shoot for.

There's also the "it comes from Japan" mystique that can't be escaped in bonsai. People pay large premiums for anything that "comes from Japan."  Kind of like an ADA sticker.


----------



## shrimpster (Jan 31, 2012)

ok, get ready, here comes my rant: 

Having grown/maintained 200+ bonsai at a time and having used every possible soil/potting soil/pumice/lava/gravel combination in an attempt to minimize my expenditures on "expensive specialized" substrates, I eventually realized that though akadama may be expensive to buy up front, the results provided far exceeded not only my expectations, but was also cheaper to use due to lower fertilizer usage (high CEC (Cation Exchange Capacity)), less need to water (high CEC), and most importantly: not one single lost specimen due to root rot (uhhh...if you think those sss grade benibachi are expensive).

Akadama is NOT a manufactured product, but rather comes right out of the earth with the only modification being the sizing of the particles. It is the result of volcanic activity and is merely harvested (think small scale strip mining). It will eventually run out. It has only been found in Japan. Trust me when I say that there are people who do nothing but hunt for a domestic source of akadama or even something close to it. It is truly unique not because it comes from Japan, but because that is the only place it has been found. 

I personally don't buy into the "made in Japan" mystique. When I am looking for something, I research and make a decision based on something in addition to someone else's opinion (facts for instance). I don't care where something comes from or who made it. If it's the best solution for the situation then that's what I do. Thus my coming to accept akadama as the best solution for health, vigor, and consistency for my bonsai.

One can also purchase a very pricey pumice from Japan as well that has a ph/mineral profile that compliments akadama very nicely. It turns out that here in the US we also have virtually an identical pumice available for pennies/lb versus the dollars/lb pumice from japan. Turns out I use the US pumice (and not just in the bonsai :wink. If there was an alternate/cheaper but similar quality of akadama from anywhere other than Japan I would use that too.

I'm not above "status" buying (omg I really want some of those benibachi pure lines), but I really just want the best working product regardless of where it came from.

Being new to planted tanks (2yrs), I was amazed after joining this forum to find the posts about akadama. Those peeps are craaazy I thought when I first read some. But after a little reading, I realized that in the planted tank, akadama does all the same things as for my bonsai: buffers pH, kH, and gH; holds nutrients/toxins out of the h20 column where the plants can get them, but not the fish/shrimps; causes root differentiation; and (with a ugf) it allows self-cleaning (flushing) as well. 

I plan on converting all of my tanks over to akadama except those whose occupants need kH or a gH higher than 4.


disclaimer: my knowledge of akadama came from my sensei's and my bonsai supplier (who used to directly import container loads and then bag it). Of course, depending on who is reading this post, my knowledge is pure conjecture and my memory has been corrupted by the shrimps :icon_lol:


----------



## Alyssa (Sep 16, 2011)

shrimpster said:


> I plan on converting all of my tanks over to akadama except those whose occupants need kH or a gH higher than 4.


Well, you won't be able to get any more akadama in the US for a while (if ever again), so if you have a source that actually STILL has some (folks are falling over themselves to buy up the last stock in the US before it's all gone) - you ought to buy up every bit you can afford to as it will be running out in the US *quickly* and it might not ever get past the FDA again ... hard to say.


----------



## somewhatshocked (Aug 8, 2011)

The manufacturer and the importer(s) will have to do a better job with permits and documentation, to be quite honest.

Organic matter (root bark, essentially) was found in the latest shipments and they've all been held. 

The manufacturer's documentation process has been sorely lacking. As soon as that's been cleared up with the USDA, it'll be back. Happens all the time with soil products - from ADA to Fluval.


----------



## Alyssa (Sep 16, 2011)

ohhh I sure HOPE so! I really wanted to use it!


----------



## shrimpster (Jan 31, 2012)

It's a well known secret in the bonsai community that akadama is not inert. It has been sold to the "man" as inert in the past in order to get it through customs. Thus the bags declaring "pumice" on the side:icon_lol:. I have never had a bag of akadama w/out some level of OM--usually tiny root hairs--never bark though as the topsoil is striped off to get down to the akadama. From what I understand it has always been a problem passing customs because of the lack of ability to prove it is a sterile/inert product. 

The importer I knew had problems with almost every container load. Relationships with the customs agents was apparently helpful as "new" ones universally rejected the akadama.

Alyssa--I guess the stash in the attic just got more precious :icon_smil. After the birth of my daughter the vast majority of the bonsai were sold off and we had lots of supplies left-over. With only a few bonsai left I figured I had a lifetime supply, but now with using it in my tanks, I may have to try and get in contact with my old importer. 

obtw if you're really desperate, try joining a local bonsai club. Almost every club has at least one member who hoards for just such occasions


----------



## pejerrey (Dec 5, 2011)

Plants growing in akadama with a UGF 










It is really difficult to me to understand how is it that this plants are so happy with "no nutrients at all" and the very scarce feeding I do every other day!


----------



## sayurasem (Jun 17, 2011)

so pejerrey saying Akadama has nutrients in it?


----------



## pejerrey (Dec 5, 2011)

Shrimpster is saying that.

I say: If there wasn't people saying that it doesn't have nutrients , judging by my plants, I would think that it does. In fact I thought it was an active substrate until I was told the opposite here in this thread. This is why I wanted to use it under fluorite.
One thing is for sure, my plants didn't look like that in the tank with fluorite black only and no co2. I believe the guy is saying that akadama drl has to say that is an inert soil to cope with importing difficulties otherwise. That is all.


----------



## shrimpster (Jan 31, 2012)

Indeed akadama in not inert like a flourite-type substrate. 

It has a VERY high CEC. CEC is the ability for a substance to "hold and release" ions. Any ferts (ions) you put in the tank will either be taken in by the leaves of the plants or it WILL be grabbed by the akadama (on the surface) through an electrical charge. 

With a ugf, the h20 column you dose will be pulled through the entire thickness of the akadama bed further enhancing its' ability to hold more nutrients/toxins 

When the plants' roots hit the akadama particle, their charge neutralizes the akadama's electrical charge and allows the nutrient to be taken in by the roots.

Akadama's high CEC means that nutes/toxins are held with great efficacy. This also means less nutrients will go much farther than with a "inert" substrate.

As a side: There are three main soil particles and they are defined by size from largest to smallest: SAND (largest), SILT (medium), CLAY (tiny). As the particle size shrinks, the molecular charge goes up. Sand has almost no CEC, silt has a moderate charge, and clay the highest. More than anything else, this explains why less nutrients are needed for the same effect in clay-type soils than in sand.

Try to think of inert as having little or no CEC.

Active substrates do not necessarily mean "Pre-loaded" with nutrients even though there are ones on the market that are. All active substrates have a fairly high CEC--at least the ones' I am aware of.


----------



## OverStocked (May 26, 2007)

A high cec doesn't make something not inert. And a low cec doesn't mean it is inert. 




Sent from my iPhone 4S


----------



## shrimpster (Jan 31, 2012)

OverStocked said:


> A high cec doesn't make something not inert. And a low cec doesn't mean it is inert.
> 
> Excellent point.
> 
> ...


----------



## klaus07 (Nov 23, 2011)

akadama is an excellent substrate that allows you to control how much you need to fertilize your plants. Since it has a very high CEC, it does a very good job of presenting root feeding plants with the minerals they need from the subrate. While it is true you have to add your own, even soil subrates like MOGC run out of nutrients eventually and you have to go the substrate fertilization route anyway. This is not a knock on MGOC, it is however only one of many alternatives.

There is another big difference between Akadama and fluorite. Fluorite is hard fired and can handle the rough abuse of vacuuming the substrate. Whereas Akadama will break down into much smaller particles, not nearly as badly as aqua soil. Remember, akadama is meant for bonsai culture. I like all of the soils mentioned so far, just remember that each has advantages and trade-offs. If it were me and I was using an undergravel filter I wouldn`t use akadama unless I only intended to keep the tank running for about a year. I would want something that could handle the roughness of vacuuming without breaking down.
I like the mesh over the ugf as well as the biological media beneath it. You may actually be able to do some vacuuming by hooking up the siphon to the uplift tube.


----------

