# Ammonium Sulfate experiment



## Quagulator (May 4, 2015)

Is there any flow in that tank? looks like a thick layer of biofilm on the surface as well.... that limits gas exchange, I'm willing to put money on those two being larger factors on plant growth and cyano outbreaks rather than a lack of N or S.

Also, the only way I've gotten rid of my cyano was daily water changes for 2 weeks straight on a neglected tank, and my water is also far from being ideal for plants. Your nitrates will skyrocket dosing an ammonium form.


----------



## Chlorophile (Aug 2, 2011)

Quagulator said:


> Is there any flow in that tank? looks like a thick layer of biofilm on the surface as well.... that limits gas exchange, I'm willing to put money on those two being larger factors on plant growth and cyano outbreaks rather than a lack of N or S.
> 
> Also, the only way I've gotten rid of my cyano was daily water changes for 2 weeks straight on a neglected tank, and my water is also far from being ideal for plants. Your nitrates will skyrocket dosing an ammonium form.


Tank has around 100gph turnover lol, 5 gallon tank.
It's on an eheim 2213
I like the film though, keeps the co2 in from filter respiration.

I never have an issue getting rid of cyano when I start taking care of a tank, keep in mind this is very neglected state just want to show the worst too so if there's progress you'll be there to see it.

Will keep this updated a few times a week for progress photos and water parameters


----------



## Quagulator (May 4, 2015)

Chlorophile said:


> Tank has an eheim 2213 so close to 20x turnover lol.
> I like the film though, keeps the co2 in from filter respiration.
> 
> I never have an issue getting rid of cyano when I start taking care of a tank, keep in mind this is very neglected state just want to show the worst too so if there's progress you'll be there to see it.
> ...




I’ll be following along to see the process. I didn’t really see any filter tubes so I wasn’t sure of the turnover. 

As for the surface scum and “keeping co2” in, that is asking for Cyanobacteria. They use co2, and the bacteria we like for nutrient cycling are all aerobic and need O2, so essentially you are setting the bacteria we like up for failure, and cyano up for success. This is why in nature we see the nasty, stagnant ponds have bad cyano outbreaks. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Chlorophile (Aug 2, 2011)

Quagulator said:


> Chlorophile said:
> 
> 
> > Tank has an eheim 2213 so close to 20x turnover lol.
> ...


Cyano is photosynthetic though, like you said.. it produces the O2 our filter bacteria like! 
The plants need the co2 as well, so it's competing with the plants not the bacteria
Walstad method tanks use the film to their advantage and I've had good luck with low tech tanks without surface agitation but you might be right.
Im not gonna change that now though just so I can make sure any changes I see are strictly from fertilizer lol.


----------



## Quagulator (May 4, 2015)

Chlorophile said:


> Cyano is photosynthetic though, like you said.. it produces the O2 our filter bacteria like!
> The plants need the co2 as well, so it's competing with the plants not the bacteria
> Walstad method tanks use the film to their advantage and I've had good luck with low tech tanks without surface agitation but you might be right.
> Im not gonna change that now though just so I can make sure any changes I see are strictly from fertilizer lol.




Yes, good point, I understand it produces O2 that our cycling bacteria like, but you said you were looking to get rid of the cyano.... not keep it to produce O2, I was saying that this environment is promoting cyano growth. And cyano will outcompete beneficial bacteria for other resources (carbon and nitrogen, etc.)

As for plants using the trapped co2, speaking from experience here, cyano will outcompete plants for co2, the Cyanobacteria photosynthetic pathway seems to be more efficient than plants, that’s why the bacteria is so nasty and takes over entire tanks. 

I agree with your thought though, don’t change anything for now and let’s see if the sulphur helps correct the problem. I myself use a lot of sulphur in my tank with cyano, I have seen some improvement but I’m putting that towards increased flow, increased plant mass, increased dosing of all plant nutrients opposed to strictly the sulphur increase. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Zorfox (Jun 24, 2012)

I personally would direct my efforts on other things for this tank. Changing fertilizers would be the last thing on my list.

That said, KNO3 and (NH4)2SO4 are not equal!

KNO3 is 13.8539% nitrogen* -VS- *(NH4)2SO4 is 21.1999 % nitrogen

In the hobby (and most test kits) we typically refer to nitrates not nitrogen. This means we also have to convert nitrogen to nitrate. Nitrate and nitrogen are obviously different. Nitrate (NO3) "weight" is 62.0049 g/mol where Nitrogen is 14.00670 g/mol

To convert we do the following,

(NO3) 62.0049 / 14.00670 (N) =N to NO3 Conversion factor
N to NO3 Conversion factor = 4.426802887189702

So if (NH4)2SO4 is 21.1999% nitrogen we can also say it's X % NO3,...

21.1999 * 4.43 = 93.915557% NO3

Big difference in numbers there don't you think?

At any rate here is the dose for (NH4)2SO4 for a 5 gallon tank to raise NO3 1 ppm.

20.167985074 mg of Ammonium Sulfate will provide the following ppm,

N 0.225896663 ppm
NO3 1 ppm 
S 0.258567655 ppm


----------



## Chlorophile (Aug 2, 2011)

Zorfox said:


> I personally would direct my efforts on other things for this tank. Changing fertilizers would be the last thing on my list.
> 
> That said, KNO3 and (NH4)2SO4 are not equal!
> 
> ...


So you're saying 93 percent of the 21 percent N is NO3, and it has about 7 percent more N than Kno3..
It doesn't seem like it's all that much more concentrated by weight?

Thanks for the breakdown though, I would like to aim for 15ppm nitrate a week as a starting point so that'll help me.
I added 1/8 tsp on my first dose, whatever that means lol.

Anyway I'm not really doing this to save the tank, I'd been neglecting it and it was about to be torn down but thought I'd do a little experiment.
I wish it had co2 cause I'm probably not going to learn much from this trial on a low tech tank.


----------



## Quagulator (May 4, 2015)

Zorfox said:


> I personally would direct my efforts on other things for this tank. Changing fertilizers would be the last thing on my list.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




This is also assuming there is no immobilization of N within the microbial community. Most often N is non limiting in our tanks, we are showing some sort of NO3 reading, so we rarely see immobilization. But, you can add all the N possible in a tank with too little plants and too many microbes, where the microbes will use more N than they release, leaving plants starved for N. 

Also, another point with the slight increase of co2 concentration underneath a thick surface biofilm — there’s a reason why many of us aim for 30 ppm CO2, it’s at a high enough concentration for plants to utilize it effectively, any lower and the cyano can better use co2, guaranteeing them to outcompete plants. 

I have seen this first hand: mild cyano outbreak, I then added low concentration of CO2, within a week the cyano took over the tank, even though plants slightly responded positively to the CO2. 



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Chlorophile (Aug 2, 2011)

Don't let the cyano be the focus of this post
I've never had any problems getting rid of cyano and its been confined to that one rock for a few weeks even under neglect.

I'm doing this for the plants and to see how the filter handles ammonium from only one source (no fish)


----------



## Zorfox (Jun 24, 2012)

Chlorophile said:


> So you're saying 93 percent of the 21 percent N is NO3, and it has about 7 percent more N than Kno3..
> It doesn't seem like it's all that much more concentrated by weight?



The 93% is just the converted nitrogen. It's not actually 93%. By the time you do all the calculations you need to dose 1.5 times the amount of KNO3 as (NH4)2SO4 to get equal nitrogen.

Example, To raise NO3 in your 5 gallon tank add 151.26mg of (NH4)2SO4 *OR* 231.46mg of KNO3.

231.46 / 151.26 = 1.53

Big difference in the end don't you think?



Chlorophile said:


> Thanks for the breakdown though, I would like to aim for 15ppm nitrate a week as a starting point so that'll help me.
> I added 1/8 tsp on my first dose, whatever that means lol.


If you have a scale your can weigh a teaspoon of the ammonium sulfate. Even with that measure it's not a very accurate way to dose when the measures are so small. Instead, make a solution.

If you have a Windows based computer you can download my calculator and add Ammonium Sulfate to it. Then you can do all the calculations yourself. Including the solution form. 

To add something you will need to edit a text file. Open commercial.ini in notepad and add the following entry. Restart the calculator and it will now be in the list. You can do this for any chemical!

[Ammonium Sulfate, (NH4)2SO4]
S=0.242660
N=0.211999
NO3=0.9384777852813296
tsp=4500
sol=75400
target=N


----------



## Chlorophile (Aug 2, 2011)

Zorfox said:


> The 93% is just the converted nitrogen. It's not actually 93%. By the time you do all the calculations you need to dose 1.5 times the amount of KNO3 as (NH4)2SO4 to get equal nitrogen.
> 
> Example, To raise NO3 in your 5 gallon tank add 151.26mg of (NH4)2SO4 *OR* 231.46mg of KNO3.
> 
> ...


Awesome thank you, I have your calculator already from when I was doing KH/CO2 stuff for a 40dkh solution!


----------



## Deanna (Feb 15, 2017)

@Chlorophile

I'm curious: why (NH4)2SO4 and not urea? I assume your using K2SO4, so you're already getting plenty of sulfur. Do you just have some (NH4)2SO4 on hand and are testing it?
@Zorfox

Can I impose upon you to provide the text for urea, so I can add that to your calculator?


----------



## Chlorophile (Aug 2, 2011)

Deanna said:


> @Chlorophile
> 
> I'm curious: why (NH4)2SO4 and not urea? I assume your using K2SO4, so you're already getting plenty of sulfur. Do you just have some (NH4)2SO4 on hand and are testing it?
> 
> ...



I have urea as well, but that seems more well documented. 
My main inspiration is that my best growth ever in any tank always occurs during the cycling of Aquasoil when ammonia and nitrite levels are very high! Like disgustingly good growth lol. 

If you can keep the PH low enough, and you're adding ammonium in that form already, it should even be safe for livestock... thats another aspect of the experiment though. 
I'd probably try 24/7 co2 in a tank that used Ammonium for its N, so I could make sure my pH stays low. 

edit: Also why I'm gonna try this with fewer waterchanges so I can hopefully keep the pH lower.. the ammonium itself being a salt of Sulfuric Acid and Ammonia is acidic unlike Ammonia which is a base.. combine that with a KH lowering substrate and fewer waterchanges and it could work well. 
If you use RO it could work very well. 
Also dosing this tank in this way will allow me to test for Ammonia and Nitrite levels and see how well the plants and filter compensate so I can determine if its safe to try in my high tech tank. 
Any changes will be much more noticeable in there, but I'm worried about my fish and Ammonia or Nitrite spikes.


Purely for fun really, plus I couldn't find any info on it so i figured why not!


----------



## JusticeBeaver (Oct 28, 2017)

Deanna said:


> @Chlorophile
> 
> I'm curious: why (NH4)2SO4 and not urea? I assume your using K2SO4, so you're already getting plenty of sulfur. Do you just have some (NH4)2SO4 on hand and are testing it?
> 
> ...


Urea has a molecular mass of 60.06 g/mol and has two nitrogen atoms. So 30.03 g/mol per nitrogen atom. For potassium nitrate which has a molar mass/N you can dose 3.36x less and 2.2x less for ammonium sulfate. Keep in mind that the chemistry is much different for these chemicals. Urea will not dissociate in water and is usually broken down into nitrate in the soil (in terrestrial systems) before being absorbed by plants.


----------



## Zorfox (Jun 24, 2012)

Chlorophile said:


> Awesome thank you, I have your calculator already from when I was doing KH/CO2 stuff for a 40dkh solution!


Was the 40dKH solution for a drop checker? How did that work out for you?



Deanna said:


> Can I impose upon you to provide the text for urea, so I can add that to your calculator?


No problem at all. Be careful though. You do NOT want to target NO3 when dosing urea or ammonium sulfate. The NO3 listed is the calculated nitrogen equivalent. If you make this mistake using EI dosing, the amount of urea would likely kill sensitive inhabitants. 

[Urea, CO(NH2)2]
NO3=2.064926474758508
N=0.466460
tsp=1
sol=1080
target=N


----------



## Chlorophile (Aug 2, 2011)

Zorfox said:


> Chlorophile said:
> 
> 
> > Awesome thank you, I have your calculator already from when I was doing KH/CO2 stuff for a 40dkh solution!
> ...


Yes the 40dkh worked as a drop checker, it took a long time to change colors and a while to change back but I was able to determine that I have at least 40ppm of co2 in my tank.
Both my high range pH with 40dkh and regular 5dkh solution are quite yellow


----------



## Deanna (Feb 15, 2017)

Zorfox said:


> No problem at all. Be careful though. You do NOT want to target NO3 when dosing urea or ammonium sulfate. The NO3 listed is the calculated nitrogen equivalent. If you make this mistake using EI dosing, the amount of urea would likely kill sensitive inhabitants.


Thanks for the formulas (great calculator) and yes: I am aware of the N vs NO3 issue.


----------



## Deanna (Feb 15, 2017)

Chlorophile said:


> I'm going to try using Ammonium Sulfate


Anything to update on this? In addition to any boost in growth, I'm particularly interested to see if you get an algae bloom.


----------



## Chlorophile (Aug 2, 2011)

Deanna said:


> Anything to update on this? In addition to any boost in growth, I'm particularly interested to see if you get an algae bloom.


Sorry got a bit behind on some other tank issues, I've been dosing this at levels that are kinda insane, no algae bloom, Diatoms are still going wild but the cyano hasn't moved and theres no hair algae or anything else showing up. 
Like 1/2 tsp a couple times a week in 5 gal


----------



## Deanna (Feb 15, 2017)

@Chlorophile:

Take a look at this thread: [Wet Thumb Forum]-Ammonium vs. Nitrate - Page 2 - Fertilizing - Aquatic Plant Central, posts 14 and 17. Tom REALLY is a downer regarding ammonium. however, if you really get that internode response, it may counter his experience regarding no benefit.


----------



## Chlorophile (Aug 2, 2011)

Deanna said:


> @Chlorophile:
> 
> Take a look at this thread: [Wet Thumb Forum]-Ammonium vs. Nitrate - Page 2 - Fertilizing - Aquatic Plant Central, posts 14 and 17. Tom REALLY is a downer regarding ammonium. however, if you really get that internode response, it may counter his experience regarding no benefit.


I remember reading that actually, I'm not convinced by his arguments though.


----------



## Chlorophile (Aug 2, 2011)

Okay sorry this thread hasn't been all that eventful. 
I will be moving my analysis of this fertilizer over to my Tank Journal as this has made it out of "beta" aka 3 weeks in a highly neglected tank and only algae changes I saw was reduction of all forms except diatoms. 
I am now dosing 1/16th tsp in 33g every other day in my high tech tank. 
ammonia tests at or close to 0 within a few hours of dosing so the plants or the filter are dealing with it very quickly.

P.s. Diatoms are now also subsiding, I think they were on their own timeline and I don't think its related. 

Here is the link to the journal.

http://www.plantedtank.net/forums/1...42-33-gallon-peer-pressure-dutch-attempt.html


----------



## happi (Dec 18, 2009)

Chlorophile said:


> I remember reading that actually, I'm not convinced by his arguments though.


they can twist this argument however or whichever way they want, but NH4/Urea will always beat KNO3 in term of overall growth of aquatic plant.


----------



## dukydaf (Dec 27, 2004)

How much is for you 1/16th teaspoon in lb or mg or if dosing liquid ml /oz?


----------



## Chlorophile (Aug 2, 2011)

dukydaf said:


> How much is for you 1/16th teaspoon in lb or mg or if dosing liquid ml /oz?


so I'm dosing 1/16 tsp of Ammonium Sulfate, I actually just switched to daily because there were no negative sideffects I could see and the fish were acting fine, ammonia test was never reading a definitive .25ppm, it was closer to 0 but not quite the same yellow I'd expect. 

So I don't have a scale but.. statistically I can calculate that 1/16th tsp is 0.3080575 cm3.. 
The mass of Ammonium Sulfate is 1.77g/cm3 so I think.. (my math skills aren't great) I am dosing 0.174G of ammonium sulfate.. 174mg? Or is it 1740mg? I have no idea..

Maybe someone can double check that math for me.


----------



## dukydaf (Dec 27, 2004)

Chlorophile said:


> So I don't have a scale but.. statistically I can calculate that 1/16th tsp is 0.3080575 cm3..
> The mass of Ammonium Sulfate is 1.77g/cm3 so I think.. (my math skills aren't great) I am dosing 0.174G of ammonium sulfate.. 174mg? Or is it 1740mg? I have no idea..
> 
> Maybe someone can double check that math for me.


Thanks for the answer. To reproduce the results in my aquariums, I need a ballpark of dosing.. 

All of the calculation below should be read keeping in mind that the density of powders depends on how fine and compacted they are (large variations between doses) 

1.77(g/ml)*0.308(ml)=545mg (NH4)2SO4
545*0.22=120mg N
120/124=1 mg/L N in one dose 

And adding this 5 times per week means the equivalent weekly dose of 22mg/L NO3. Very likely it is less due to "fluffy salts". It may be that in water with low a pH a higher dose may work.


----------



## Chlorophile (Aug 2, 2011)

dukydaf said:


> Thanks for the answer. To reproduce and validate the results in my aquariums, I need exact dosing. Something doesn't seem right.
> 
> All of the calculation below should be read keeping in mind that the density of powders depends on how fine and compacted they are (large variations between doses)
> 
> ...


Hmm glad for your corroboration on this. 
I cannot confirm that through API ammonia test kit, with 1/16tsp per day I have yet to test ammonia levels in any significance beyond .25ppm
typically it looks close to 0 but maybe a tiny tiny bit more green than yellow..

I question converting it to No3 equivalent though. 
At my last calculation it seemed that KNO3 was 16%N and Ammonium Sulfate was closer to 20% N
On a mass by mass basis there can't be that much discrepancy.. I dose 1/4tsp N 3x a week so the ammonium sulfate should have a similar N number. 
Assuming it is converted 100% to no3 then yes, I guess I should expect a much higher number... 
However on test kits alone it seems like it is not making it to the bioflter for conversion..
My plant mass readily soaks it up before it is converted..

More input is very welcome! 
My math is the shortcoming on this as this has been largely as dose and look/observe experiment. 
Started with lower doses and worked up to this level which seems reasonable IMO.

edit: and yes the low PH was part of my safety concerns, I didn't start this in my primary tank until starting RO water changes with a kh of 1-2
My co2 runs for 14 hours and the pH should be consistently low.

double edit: I am using Ammonium Sulfate from Alpha Chemicals, I bought via amazon. It is a very moist powder.. very wet. I'm not sure how much could really be up to the density though unless my test kit is WAY off, as I said with this dosing it is very hard to tell if the ammonia level is between 0 and 0.25.
I think the plants are preferentially sucking this stuff up super quick, or else as your math indicates I should be seeing very high levels..


----------



## Chlorophile (Aug 2, 2011)

Ah I see you did a NINJA EDIT! lol
I was about to crap my pants when you said 132mg/l N per week!
22mg/l N seems more inline with what I assumed simply based on the percentage of N by weight when compared to products like UREA or KNO3. 

I have experienced Staurogyne Repens completely melt from excess ammonia levels and that hasn't happened yet so I am still sticking to my guns and saying that when KNO3 is dosed in levels similar to EI recommendations there is room for this much NH4. 
But I would never recommend this in a tank that isn't well cycled, nor would I recommend it in a tank with a low plant mass, I just recently dialed back plant mass after removing a good 36 square inches of thick and dense blyxa and immediately some plants react in strange ways, and I have no way of knowing if that was too much nh4, too much trace concentration, etc etc.
Start low, start at 1/32 3x a week, then go to 1/16 3x a week, and then go to 1/16 6x a week. 
I am on the latter now and don't measure ammonia in the water and don't have any change in algae. 
I have had algae before but I think my 11 hour photoperiod and the struggle to keep co2 high is to blame, adding nh4 in this high tech tank didn't change algae in anyway.


----------



## dukydaf (Dec 27, 2004)

Corrected my post for a 33g. I got confused about tank volume with the first post.

For reference :
KNO3=14% N
Ca(NO3)2= 17%
NO3= 23%N
NH4= 78%N
(NH4)2SO4=22%N
Urea = 47% N

Watch out for KNO3 vs NO3.


----------



## Chlorophile (Aug 2, 2011)

dukydaf said:


> Corrected my post for a 33g. I got confused about tank volume with the first post.
> 
> For reference :
> KNO3=14% N
> ...


Those are more precise measurements than what I looked up, thank you!
I basically saw that the percentages of N in kno3 and ammonium sulfate were within a reasonable amount of eachother and cut my dosing by a similar amount, and essentially I am doubling my N in the tank. 
However I don't assume I am doubling my N in the water column as I am making the assumption that more N will be consumed from the ammonium. 
If nitrates doubled in the water column then none of the N from nh4 was consumed and we would know the kno3 was already saturating N demand. 
I haven't gone that far in testing yet but believe that higher kno3 levels will not prohibit nh4 consumption.


----------



## Edward (Apr 11, 2005)

dukydaf said:


> ... Ca(NO3)2= 17% ...


You listed calcium nitrate anhydrous form which is not commonly used as a fertilizer. The usual form is tetrahydrate. 

Ca(NO3)2 anhydrous 17.07% N
Ca(NO3)2.4H2O tetrahydrate 11.86% N


----------



## happi (Dec 18, 2009)

Deanna said:


> @Chlorophile:
> 
> Take a look at this thread: [Wet Thumb Forum]-Ammonium vs. Nitrate - Page 2 - Fertilizing - Aquatic Plant Central, posts 14 and 17. Tom REALLY is a downer regarding ammonium. however, if you really get that internode response, it may counter his experience regarding no benefit.


 i try convincing these guys in the past but without any luck with my urea dosing, funny thing is now days these same guys are also suggesting Urea.:smile2:

Bump: for those who are trying to make solution recipe:

500 ml solution, 20 ml per 50 gallon 

Add 4.464 gram Ammonium Sulfate

this will add 0.2 N


----------



## Edward (Apr 11, 2005)

happi said:


> i try convincing these guys in the past but without any luck with my urea dosing, funny thing is now days these same guys are also suggesting Urea.:smile2:


The main disadvantage of using Urea in aquariums is the necessity to add nickel sulfate to micro mix. Not something one can get from the Home Depot.


----------



## Chlorophile (Aug 2, 2011)

happi said:


> Deanna said:
> 
> 
> > @Chlorophile:
> ...


Did my math over today and looks like I'm getting .9ppm N per 1/16th teaspoon. 
Looks like 1.2ppm ammonium...


Just did the API test kit two hours after dosing and it's at .5 ppm
Not sure if it dropped .7ppm that quickly or the test is sloppy.

In two more hours I'll test again to see if it's dropped by a similar amount.
Probably won't prove anything though because plants might be saturated and done consuming already.

If it's being consumed by the biofilter I'd expect consumption to start slow and ramp up exponentially
If it's being consumed by the plants I'd expect it to ramp up quickly and then taper off
Of course I can't separate the two in this tank so it'll probably look somewhat linear if I were able to graph it.


----------



## happi (Dec 18, 2009)

Edward said:


> The main disadvantage of using Urea in aquariums is the necessity to add nickel sulfate to micro mix. Not something one can get from the Home Depot.


i have a feeling that we really dont need to add Ni, most of us should be fine without the need to add Ni, even in 100% RO water i think we can skip the Ni, i personally add it just to make sure that its there in case if its needed, usually urea itself will eventually break down by other bacteria in our tank if i could understand this correctly, from Urea>NH4>NO3.

Bump:


Chlorophile said:


> Did my math over today and looks like I'm getting .9ppm N per 1/16th teaspoon.
> Looks like 1.2ppm ammonium...
> 
> 
> ...


with that much NH4, i would expect to see some few inches growth on stem plants, are you seeing any? if not then its quite certain that your filter media is converting NH4 into NO3 very quickly, you should also track the NO3 during this experiment and see if it is raising quite quickly.


----------



## Chlorophile (Aug 2, 2011)

happi said:


> i have a feeling that we really dont need to add Ni, most of us should be fine without the need to add Ni, even in 100% RO water i think we can skip the Ni, i personally add it just to make sure that its there in case if its needed, usually urea itself will eventually break down by other bacteria in our tank if i could understand this correctly, from Urea>NH4>NO3.
> 
> Bump:
> 
> with that much NH4, i would expect to see some few inches growth on stem plants, are you seeing any? if not then its quite certain that your filter media is converting NH4 into NO3 very quickly, you should also track the NO3 during this experiment and see if it is raising quite quickly.


Sadly I dont believe the Nitrate test kit is accurate enough for me to track 1.2ppm Ammonia's worth of Nitrate on any kind of hourly or even daily basis. I have trouble telling the difference between 10-20ppm enough anyway and the higher ones are even worse for me.

I am seeing good growth, not inches per say but maybe with better lighting I would. 
New sideshoots on some plants, a set of leaves per day. 
Less stretching for light. 
Interestingly Kimberley is growing odd, Burr said stunted. It is not as wide, its darker, the leaves are broader and it is growing quite fast, I think its just light starved at the bottom of the tank though.

Trying to upload pics but I think I'm uploading too many and it keeps crashing lol


----------



## Deanna (Feb 15, 2017)

Chlorophile said:


> Less stretching for light.
> Interestingly Kimberley is growing odd, Burr said stunted. It is not as wide, its darker, the leaves are broader and it is growing quite fast, I think its just light starved at the bottom of the tank though


If repeatable, I really like that possibility of not stretching for light. As I understand it, darker colored leaves mean more light is being absorbed and the plant is happy. Eventually, once you've deemed the approach stable, I'd like to see you withdraw the ammonium and see if the plants start stretching and turning lighter green again ...and then reverse by adding the ammonium back.


----------



## Chlorophile (Aug 2, 2011)

Just checked ammonia levels again, not much change as far as I can tell.
So plants must uptake some right away and then slow down, filter is slower to remove it.
I'll check in the morning and see if it's all gone.
I'm also thinking the biofilter could be kinda slow at this ph
I might be going a little bit heavy on it though.


----------



## Deanna (Feb 15, 2017)

Chlorophile said:


> Just checked ammonia levels again, not much change as far as I can tell.
> So plants must uptake some right away and then slow down, filter is slower to remove it.
> I'll check in the morning and see if it's all gone.
> I'm also thinking the biofilter could be kinda slow at this ph
> I might be going a little bit heavy on it though.


As you've added ammonium, have you measured NO3 changes?


----------



## Chlorophile (Aug 2, 2011)

Deanna said:


> As you've added ammonium, have you measured NO3 changes?


No, i just don't think it will be measurable. 
I might test right before water changes and then I guess the only way to compare would be go another week without ammonium and retest. 
I dont see myself being able to detect 1-5ppm of Nitrate difference on that test.


my pH and ammonia test kit..


----------



## Deanna (Feb 15, 2017)

Chlorophile said:


> No, i just don't think it will be measurable.
> I might test right before water changes and then I guess the only way to compare would be go another week without ammonium and retest.
> I dont see myself being able to detect 1-5ppm of Nitrate difference on that test.


Too bad our test kits are so difficult to distinguish low levels of change. One ppm of urea or ammonium yields 4.4 ppm NO3. My thinking is that, by adding ammonium/urea we may just be growing bigger BB colonies. If NO3 expands as these are added, that might be a good indicator. Of course, you still have that pesky internode response to flesh out.


----------



## Edward (Apr 11, 2005)

happi said:


> i have a feeling that we really dont need to add Ni, most of us should be fine without the need to add Ni, even in 100% RO water i think we can skip the Ni, i personally add it just to make sure that its there in case if its needed, usually urea itself will eventually break down by other bacteria in our tank if i could understand this correctly, from Urea>NH4>NO3.


http://www.plantedtank.net/forums/1...s/1026985-urea-co-nh2-2-a-4.html#post10764778
Bad news, urea need nickel and also doesn’t seem to do much for plants in water culture environments.


----------



## Chlorophile (Aug 2, 2011)

Deanna said:


> Too bad our test kits are so difficult to distinguish low levels of change. One ppm of urea or ammonium yields 4.4 ppm NO3. My thinking is that, by adding ammonium/urea we may just be growing bigger BB colonies. If NO3 expands as these are added, that might be a good indicator. Of course, you still have that pesky internode response to flesh out.


Honestly don't think the bacteria play a big role.
Maybe its just an assumption but I feel that in a tank with a filter and a large plant mass plants will consume much more than the benebac. 
Some assumptive knowledge is that the BB colony is reduced within 24 hours of a food shortage, which leads me to believe two things: 

1. in a low ph tank dosing ammonium every other day but at a higher level would be best so that the filter is ill-prepared to consume the ammonium. 
2. in a higher ph tank dosing every 24 hours should still provide some amount of peak ammonium for plants to use. 

also keep in mind, lower pH tanks have poorer BB in the filter, or rather it is less efficient. 
So dosing this at PEAK co2 in the middle of the day and then having it all consumed by the end of the day should be a good strategy. 

if 1ppm is 4.4ppm nitrate, I should expect to see 20ppm extra nitrate at the end of the week assuming things aren't being consumed. 
I have tested nitrates before water change and they are usually in the 10-20 range as near as I can tell. The color is not easy to read for me since it is still translucent. 
I will test on Saturday and see. If I am still at the 10-20 range then that would prove definitively that the plants can consume more N if its provided in a different form. 
If it is 40ppm then it would prove that the plants dont need as much N from both sources and I could then try to cut both N sources back by 50% and see if end of week no3 is 50% less. 
obviously growth and algae would still be important to monitor during this time.

edit: I'm assuming that in a tank with a steady release of ammonia, 100% of the bacteria are on a subsistence diet, consuming the bare minimum that they can to stay alive. 
To assume all of the bacteria were fully fed would be counter intuitive. 
Bacteria that are fully fed are going to multiply
Bacteria that multiply will no longer be fully fed as they will now have to share. 
Ergo the colony will all be recieving the bare minimum they can to stay alive, and not enough to promote an increase in colony size. 

So.. when you first dose ammonium, to some extent they will become fully fed, and they will begin to multiply, but that isn't an immediate process. 
However the plant mass doesn't fluctuate, it doesn't ebb and flow the same way. 
Plants are there and if they need nutrients they will take it when it is available. 
So the plants will be the first responders when it comes to dosing, they will take up the ammonium spike quickly, as will the bacteria to a point, but then anything beyond their own max capacity will have a delay as they multiply to compensate. 

So I am firm in my belief that the filter bacteria will not be capable of depriving the plants, and I don't think the colony growth can sufficiently remove the added nh4 spike..


----------



## happi (Dec 18, 2009)

Edward said:


> http://www.plantedtank.net/forums/1...s/1026985-urea-co-nh2-2-a-4.html#post10764778
> Bad news, urea need nickel and also doesn’t seem to do much for plants in water culture environments.


am not sure what to say on this one, but whenever i added say 1 ppm Urea as daily dose, plant grew very fast and required trimming very often. "water culture environments" am guessing you are talking about our aquarium here, correct me if i misunderstood, so you are saying urea doesn't do much for our aquarium plants? but isn't Urea in one of your pps recipe as well? 
there was an simple test done by my friend, he added little Urea to a cup of water, am not sure if it was tap water or DI water, he couldn't measure anything for the next couple of hours, then he tested again after few hours and it showed up as 0.5 ppm NH4 for example, next day 1 ppm NH4 and continue to raise as he added decent amount of urea in the cup to begin with. we can easily test this if one of you guys have NH4 and NO3 test kits, i will also double check with him to see if he still remember this test.


----------



## Chlorophile (Aug 2, 2011)

happi said:


> am not sure what to say on this one, but whenever i added say 1 ppm Urea as daily dose, plant grew very fast and required trimming very often. "water culture environments" am guessing you are talking about our aquarium here, correct me if i misunderstood, so you are saying urea doesn't do much for our aquarium plants? but isn't Urea in one of your pps recipe as well?
> there was an simple test done by my friend, he added little Urea to a cup of water, am not sure if it was tap water or DI water, he couldn't measure anything for the next couple of hours, then he tested again after few hours and it showed up as 0.5 ppm NH4 for example, next day 1 ppm NH4 and continue to raise as he added decent amount of urea in the cup to begin with. we can easily test this if one of you guys have NH4 and NO3 test kits, i will also double check with him to see if he still remember this test.


This is where I've been confused on the UREA argument. 
I am a plant and soil science B.S graduate, but that doesn't translate to aquatics very well. 
Regardless, in soils UREA does NOT convert to nh4 on its own, bacteria does that. 
Plant roots dont take up urea..
So if the goal is Urea to be converted to NH4.. why the heck aren't we just dosing nh4?

Also when we dose 1lb of N per 1000 sq ft per month in turfgrass, the response is MUCH more aggressive when done at this rate, vs .5lb of N per 1000 sq ft twice a month. 
If you want steadier growth you go with the latter, if your want aggressive greening and height you go with the former. 
The plant recieved the same dosage in the end but supply was altered and the timeline was altered.


----------



## happi (Dec 18, 2009)

Chlorophile said:


> This is where I've been confused on the UREA argument.
> I am a plant and soil science B.S graduate, but that doesn't translate to aquatics very well.
> Regardless, in soils UREA does NOT convert to nh4 on its own, bacteria does that.
> Plant roots dont take up urea..
> ...


one thing i observed while dosing Urea is that it seems to be less aggressive even though it sound very scary as people assume that its directly like dosing ammonia, the whole reason i can go banana on Urea, because i know for fact i can push it very high without issue where we cannot do that with NH4 such as Nh4NO3 or NH4SO4 etc, IMO Urea act as a slow release of NH4 which is converted by Bacteria (i personally think Bacteria does play role in Urea conversion) and Ni, Urea kind of act like oscomote pellets. i have already tried NH4 at 1 ppm Dose, it grew algae and plant quite quickly, where Urea grew plant equally but with less issue with algae, oh and plant also had rich colors and appeared fuller/bushier as well


----------



## Chlorophile (Aug 2, 2011)

happi said:


> one thing i observed while dosing Urea is that it seems to be less aggressive even though it sound very scary as people assume that its directly like dosing ammonia, the whole reason i can go banana on Urea, because i know for fact i can push it very high without issue where we cannot do that with NH4 such as Nh4NO3 or NH4SO4 etc, IMO Urea act as a slow release of NH4 which is converted by Bacteria (i personally think Bacteria does play role in Urea conversion) and Ni, Urea kind of act like oscomote pellets. i have already tried NH4 at 1 ppm Dose, it grew algae and plant quite quickly, where Urea grew plant equally but with less issue with algae, oh and plant also had rich colors and appeared fuller/bushier as well


Yeah, makes perfect sense to me. 
I am confident Urea is converted via bacteria, but I could be proven wrong. 
At any rate, the Urea is slow release like fish waste. 
Nh4 dosing is Peaky. 
thats my interest though, peak concentrations stimulate different responses. 

...sipping coffee all day wont make you nearly as hyper as chugging a few cups. 

Urea will slowly become plant food where as NH4 is already plant food. 

In my lawn I dose 1lb of urea per week per 1000 sq ft. 
It is serious as heck for greening and growth. 
But you know what works even better? 
Ammonium Sulphate. 
4 oz of ammonium sulphate in a foliar spray on turf grass causes a deeper and more intense greening than 1lb of urea. 
It causes more top growth, it causes more nutrient CONSUMPTION. 
If you want to KILL weeds with round up you add 4 oz ammonium sulphate because it is SO water soluble it can displace protein and other salts, and the plant will literally suck up the roundup so fast it is pretty much instantly dead. 
Ammonium Sulphate is nothing like urea in land, and I don't think it is in aquatics either.


----------



## Edward (Apr 11, 2005)

happi said:


> am not sure what to say on this one, but whenever i added say 1 ppm Urea as daily dose, plant grew very fast and required trimming very often.


Yes, same here when I tried in tap with 0.5µg of Ni according to the water report. But in RO without nickel addition nothing grew.


happi said:


> "water culture environments" am guessing you are talking about our aquarium here, correct me if i misunderstood, so you are saying urea doesn't do much for our aquarium plants?


Growing soilless, as hydroponics and aquariums. In the study, I described in post #58 http://www.plantedtank.net/forums/11-fertilizers-water-parameters/1026985-urea-co-nh2-2-a-4.html , “The use of urea in water-culture could be hindered because urea has to undergo hydrolysis with the release of NH4 which is harmful when absorbed by the plants. To hydrolyze urea, the enzyme urease requires Ni as a component.”

Urea is an organic molecule that is “locked” until either microorganism in soil or filter take it apart releasing NH4, or absorbed by plants as is and then unlocking the NH4. Both paths require sufficient amount of Ni. The rate and success of unlocking is strictly controlled by the concentration of Ni. 

Without enough Ni, urea can poison plants and cause chlorosis and necrosis. 

In the hydroponics study, urea did not grow more plant mass than other N sources. Though, in aquarium the urea’s advantage may be the locked form of NH4 hidden from algae.


happi said:


> there was an simple test done by my friend, he added little Urea to a cup of water, am not sure if it was tap water or DI water, he couldn't measure anything for the next couple of hours, then he tested again after few hours and it showed up as 0.5 ppm NH4 for example, next day 1 ppm NH4 and continue to raise as he added decent amount of urea in the cup to begin with.


That is the beauty of urea with microorganism and Ni.


Chlorophile said:


> Regardless, in soils UREA does NOT convert to nh4 on its own, bacteria does that. Plant roots dont take up urea..


 Yes, that’s what happens in soil and filter. Still, plants do uptake urea as is, as an organic molecule, but cannot use it until in the plant it is converted to NH4 thanks to Ni. Without Ni urea in plants is poison.


Chlorophile said:


> So if the goal is Urea to be converted to NH4.. why the heck aren't we just dosing nh4?


We could if we dosed every minute small amount, otherwise toxic. Urea is a slowly releasing NH4 product doing exactly that.


happi said:


> one thing i observed while dosing Urea is that it seems to be less aggressive even though it sound very scary as people assume that its directly like dosing ammonia, the whole reason i can go banana on Urea, because i know for fact i can push it very high without issue where we cannot do that with NH4 such as Nh4NO3 or NH4SO4 etc, IMO Urea act as a slow release of NH4 which is converted by Bacteria (i personally think Bacteria does play role in Urea conversion) and Ni, Urea kind of act like oscomote pellets. i have already tried NH4 at 1 ppm Dose, it grew algae and plant quite quickly, where Urea grew plant equally but with less issue with algae, oh and plant also had rich colors and appeared fuller/bushier as well


Agreed 100%.
When urea is added, plants eagerly suck it up not giving algae a chance. This is probably why NH4NO3 and NH4SO4 promote more algae than urea.

And Urea is easily available from farm supplies, I have 50 lb. bag, but no Ni. Happi, I need Ni...


----------



## Chlorophile (Aug 2, 2011)

Edward said:


> happi said:
> 
> 
> > am not sure what to say on this one, but whenever i added say 1 ppm Urea as daily dose, plant grew very fast and required trimming very often.
> ...


Interesting points, I think the safety of slow release nh4 via urea might be also why most who have tried it don't see results.

When aquasoil is cycling plant growth is gangbusters. S. Repens was melting at the same time. So while high concentrations to nh4 are certainly bad for some plants, it's not definitely toxic to plants.
I'm testing between .25 and shy of 1ppm ammonium, no stauro melt.
No green water no hair algae no staghorn no gda no gsa..

Let's assume plants take up 5ppm n per day from no3 for example if concentration is at 30ppm
How much more or less N do they take up when accompanied with .5ppm n from nh4-
That's what I'd like to know.
I've already seen that within one hour of dosing over 50% of nh4- is no longer detectable in the tank.
Within 24 hours it is not detectable 
How can that be explained by the biofilter? 
Conversion should increase with time as bacteria grow, I see a spike and then a tapering off.
So if I dose 50 percent less will it all be gone in one hour or do the plants take up more or less depending on concentration


----------



## happi (Dec 18, 2009)

Edward said:


> Yes, same here when I tried in tap with 0.5µg of Ni according to the water report



so you have 0.5 ppm Ni your tap water? do you see any negative effect from such a high amount of Ni and if you used urea what kind of results did you get, i am interested in increasing my Ni dose but i wasn't certain how high can we push it.


----------

