# Tropica aqua soil



## Singy 86 (20 Jan 2022)

Hi new to the group, I just have some questions I would like some information on.
I’m setting up a new tank a have a tank set up and am going to be transferring fish over to the new one. I’m just wondering if I use tropica aquasoil mixed with some fine sand and fine gravel as a base layer then top off with a fine sand and fine gravel mix will I be able to introduce fish straight away? I will be running two mature canister filters of my old tank on the new tank!
Any advice information would be greatly appreciated thanks👍


----------



## jamiepearson (20 Jan 2022)

That soil doesn't need capping with sand/gravel.

I had a leaking tank so had to rescape in a new tank and tropica soil, and move the livestock into it straight away. I initially tested daily for nitrite and ammonia. There was some nitrite so I ended up having to do two 90% water changes a day for 10 days


----------



## Singy 86 (20 Jan 2022)

Thanks for the info mate, I tried to do some research online for it leeching ammonia but couldn’t really find any it just said doesn’t leech much.🤔


----------



## arcturus (20 Jan 2022)

Singy 86 said:


> Hi new to the group, I just have some questions I would like some information on.
> I’m setting up a new tank a have a tank set up and am going to be transferring fish over to the new one. I’m just wondering if I use tropica aquasoil mixed with some fine sand and fine gravel as a base layer then top off with a fine sand and fine gravel mix


New Tropica soil will release ammonia, but in lower amounts than ADA soil.

Be aware that a mix of fine sand with soil or gravel will not stay the same for long. Why are you mixing sand, gravel and soil? 



Singy 86 said:


> will I be able to introduce fish straight away? I will be running two mature canister filters of my old tank on the new tank!
> Any advice information would be greatly appreciated thanks👍


I would wait a couple of weeks with several water changes to make sure that the ammonia released from the new soil will not cause issues and to let the new soil to start stabilizing. Will this be a planted tank with new plants?


----------



## jamiepearson (20 Jan 2022)

I've since done a rescape and for the month prior I had four bags of soil in four buckets of water, changing the water twice a week, which leached off the ammonia before putting it into the tank. And planted very heavily from the start


----------



## Singy 86 (20 Jan 2022)

I’ve seen some videos of doing a substrate mix of sand, gravel and aqua soil and putting it in fine mesh bags and laying on bottom of tank in areas where you plant stem plants and just cap it over with a sand and fine gravel mix for your decorative finish so it’s locked in place to give your rooted plants nutrients and can’t break loose. Don’t know what you guys think of that?


----------



## Singy 86 (20 Jan 2022)

Jamie I have thought of doing that with the mesh bags filled with above mix so that worked for you? Just keep doing regular water change on the buckets and keep testing?


----------



## jamiepearson (20 Jan 2022)

No, I just have aquasoil with no topping of sand. I'm not yet convinced the MD Fish Tanks mesh bag method works long term - I wonder how much the roots can actually penetrate deep into the bag - but happy to be proven wrong. 

The month in a bucket of water was easy, just leave the soil sat in the bucket, no testing necessary - it doesn't matter if there's ammonia while it's in the bucket. I only changed the water so it wasn't stagnant. 

There was subsequently no ammonia once the soil was in the aquarium. Caveat again - my planting was very heavy, which could have dealt with ammonia rather than the bucket pre soak


----------



## AlecF (20 Jan 2022)

Purely personal taste, but I love my sand topping, but I do wish I had remembered to put a plastic mesh over the aqua soil I put in below as grains do pop through and look unsightly. I find sand easy to plant into and clean.


----------



## Singy 86 (20 Jan 2022)

That’s great information jamie think I will do the bucket trick as tank will be only here in a month or so. Yeah on the md tanks bags do you think I would just be better using it as I loose base layer and capping with a decent amount of sand/gravel as I want the natural sand look but just make it deep enough to stop fish digging it up! It will be heavily planted yes plenty of stem plants and dwarf sagg and some well established Amazon swords and then some Java ferns and anubias on wood and stone.


----------



## Hufsa (20 Jan 2022)

Id go for the bags, the mesh size on them should be more than sufficient for plant roots to get through, youd be surprised what plants can do. Let us not forget dandylions growing through asphalt. Youre gonna have soil coming up left and right unless you lock it down there. The biggest stuff always ends up on top. 
Just my two cents


----------



## arcturus (20 Jan 2022)

Singy 86 said:


> That’s great information jamie think I will do the bucket trick as tank will be only here in a month or so. Yeah on the md tanks bags do you think I would just be better using it as I loose base layer and


I have used mesh bags with small pieces of lava rock on the bottom of the tank, but the goal was to raise the substrate at the back of the tank and stabilize the hardscape, and they work very well. The bags will also work with a mix of soil and gravel but I would not put any sand in there though. You do not want the substrate to become anaerobic and therefore you need some water circulation. The sand will not help with that and will do nothing for the plants as well. If you need a filler, add small pieces of lava rock.



Singy 86 said:


> capping with a decent amount of sand/gravel as I want the natural sand look but just make it deep enough to stop fish digging it up!



Good luck with that  You will have Physics, fish, shrimp, and snails working against you.  If you use sand to cap the soil it will be just a matter of time until it becomes a mess, with the larger pueces of soil popping up everywhere. I would use the sand only for the visible areas of the tank without plants. In planted areas you barely see the soil anyway. Elsewhere  I would just use soil.


----------



## jamiepearson (20 Jan 2022)

I too have used mesh bags containing lava rock for raising the height. When I broke down that scape, there absolutely was some root penetration through the mesh but not a great deal, the roots also going horizontal. But there was no nutrition in the bags so that could be why. This was 53B so fairly rooty olants.
If the options are mesh bags or no bags and sand capping (and uncapped soil not an option), I'd defo go bags. I think the soil is bound to come up without


----------



## Singy 86 (21 Jan 2022)

I’m think I’m going to go with mesh bags with small lava rock and tropica soil inside but as I need to scape and add the fish pretty much straight away I will soak the bags like you did Jamie to get the ammonia out of it and keep Chang the water In the buckets and test for ammonia after say 3/4 weeks. Then just cap it with corse sand and fine gravel mix. Then just test daily for ammonia and nitrite and just do water changes as needed. Do you think that will work?


----------



## jamiepearson (21 Jan 2022)

I do. But why are you adding lava rock? I would use it for bulking up because it's cheaper than aquasoil for a 120cm tank then adding soil on top. But if you don't need to do that and are adding sand on top, then put 100% soil in the bags -  more nutrients. Related note, will you be keeping the scape more than a year? You might need to add root tabs at some point, but can't of course add to the bags just the sand


----------



## AlecF (21 Jan 2022)

My John Innes soil mix hasn't come through my sand at all. Whereas the aqua soil does.


----------



## Singy 86 (21 Jan 2022)

I was just going to


----------



## Singy 86 (21 Jan 2022)

Will be keeping the scape for as long as possible I think. How long would you say before I need to add root tabs? I have used them before on planted tanks with no soil and had good results just added them every 2/3 months


----------



## Singy 86 (21 Jan 2022)

I’m just going to add lava rock and soil to the mesh bags to build up the back corners and in the middle/foreground use flatter bags of probably just soil for the dwarf sag and other foreground plants. Also heard it hold beneficial bacteria in the lava rock?


----------



## arcturus (21 Jan 2022)

jamiepearson said:


> I’m just going to add lava rock and soil to the mesh bags to build up the back corners and in the middle/foreground use flatter bags of probably just soil for the dwarf sag and other foreground plants.


What is the size of the tank and the height of the soil you are planning?

Lava rock in bags is usually used in large-ish tanks to raise the substrate because it is much cheaper than aquasoil. It also helps stabilizing the substrate slope and the hardscape. But this layer is mostly a filler and it is not going to provide relevant nutrition to the plants. The plants will use the nutrients in the substrate and aquasoil that sits on top of the lava rock. In small tanks you can skip the lava rock altogether because the cost factor becomes less important. If you need to stabilize the soil then you can use mesh bags with soil in them. However, I would not mix the lava rock with soil. Either you use lava rock as filler with soil on top, or you just skip lava altogether and use soil only.



jamiepearson said:


> Also heard it hold beneficial bacteria in the lava rock?


Lava, as a porous rock, provides a good place for bacterial colonies. Bacteria will be all over the substrate and hardscape. But note that this lava rock will be below all the soil, which means the amount of water circulating through it is going to be low and the oxygen will not be high. These are not the best conditions for beneficial bacteria. Nevertheless, lava is irregular in shape and there will be many gaps between the rocks. This is important so that the bottom layer does not become anaerobic. If you use a compact layer in the bottom (e.g. fine sand), it can become anaerobic over time. In any case, in a planted tank the plants will do most of the needed filtration.


----------



## Singy 86 (20 Jan 2022)

Hi new to the group, I just have some questions I would like some information on.
I’m setting up a new tank a have a tank set up and am going to be transferring fish over to the new one. I’m just wondering if I use tropica aquasoil mixed with some fine sand and fine gravel as a base layer then top off with a fine sand and fine gravel mix will I be able to introduce fish straight away? I will be running two mature canister filters of my old tank on the new tank!
Any advice information would be greatly appreciated thanks👍


----------



## dw1305 (21 Jan 2022)

Hi all, 


arcturus said:


> You will have Physics, fish, shrimp, and snails working against you. If you use sand to cap the soil it will be just a matter of time until it becomes a mess, with the larger pueces of soil popping up everywhere.


<"Granular convection">, not only <"nuts in muesli"> but also different sized particles in the aquarium substrate.

cheers Darrel


----------



## Jaseon (21 Jan 2022)

The effectiveness of nitrifying bacteria's ability to colonise your media has nothing to do with how porous it is. K1 media is not porous, and its be shown to be one of the best out there both statically, and fluidly. Porous media clogs easily, and encourages Heterotrophic bacteria which can slow down, and even stall your filter altogether. Bacteria needs a good flow of oxygen so it easily colonises onto media instead of through it. The structure of a lot of 'porous' media is to tight to allow the flow of water through the media which the bacteria thrives on.










						7.1. Review of Media
					






					aquariumscience.org


----------



## dw1305 (21 Jan 2022)

Hi all, 


AlecF said:


> My John Innes soil mix hasn't come through my sand at all. Whereas the aqua soil does.


I'd guess that is down to particle size as well as density. 

I tried capping <"Moler clay cat litter with sand">, and that was actually "_sand capped with cat litter_" pretty much instantly because the cat litter was less dense and had a larger particle size.

cheers Darrel


----------



## Singy 86 (21 Jan 2022)

It’s a 1200 aquascaper tank 120x50x45 was thinking of having it raised slightly at the back so that’s why I was thinking lava rock in the mesh bags with the soil but if you think just lava rock in the base of the tank and bags just filled with soil layer on top would be better I’m happy to go with that ( my first time using aquasoil had planted tanks in the past but only with root tabs). Thanks for all the information


----------



## AlecF (21 Jan 2022)

dw1305 said:


> Hi all,
> 
> I'd guess that is down to particle size as well as density.
> 
> ...


Darrel, yes, I'm sure you are right. Also, the soil etc forms a genuine "mulch" and breaks down, so there isn't any solid element large enough to come up through the sand? I had Fluval aqua soil – I forget the actual name – and it broke down into bits, which wormed their way up through the sand, like having blackheads. The "earth" mix doesn't do this ever in any of my 4 small tanks. I can just imagine the cat litter sifting upwards and how annoying that would be. Sand is one of those things that it only works if it looks pristine. I wouldn't;t combine it with aqua soil again. If I was redoing my big community tank I'd use some kind of Walstad soil blend with sand, along with root tabs. It's true one gets the odd yellow osmocote spot, but they are easier to remove or push down. It always seemed to me that bits of clay were more liable to trap detritus, whereas it's surprising how easy it is to hoover things up off of sand.


----------



## arcturus (21 Jan 2022)

Jaseon said:


> The effectiveness of nitrifying bacteria's ability to colonise your media has nothing to do with how porous it is. K1 media is not porous, and its be shown to be one of the best out there both statically, and fluidly. Porous media clogs easily, and encourages Heterotrophic bacteria which can slow down, and even stall your filter altogether. Bacteria needs a good flow of oxygen so it easily colonises onto media instead of through it. The structure of a lot of 'porous' media is to tight to allow the flow of water through the media which the bacteria thrives on.


You are right, it’s not about porosity but surface area and other variables such as oxygenation. This topic has been <recently discussed at length here>. In this case, what matters is using a substrate in the bottom of the tank that does not promote anaerobic bacteria. At the end of the day, the  choice of filter media in a planted tank is a secondary discussion since bacteria <do not  depend on it for nitrification>


----------



## Jaseon (21 Jan 2022)

arcturus said:


> You are right, it’s not about porosity but surface area and other variables such as oxygenation. This topic has been <recently discussed at length here>. In this case, what matters is using a substrate in the bottom of the tank that does not promote anaerobic bacteria. At the end of the day, the  choice of filter media in a planted tank is a secondary discussion since bacteria <do not  depend on it for nitrification>


My post wasn't directed at anyone in particular, but Im trying to exclude porous out of my understanding of it as it reminds me of the the way some seem obsessed over it including me at one time. Ive been in discussion with various people who have channels on social media who use things like biohome for instance, and swear by it religiously. I have not had many good encounters if i try to explain why its not all its cracked up to be. 

Besides that its good for me to try and explain it in my own words as much as possible, and if im wrong im fully expected to be pulled up on it so i can amend why im wrong, and fill in the gaps.


----------



## dw1305 (22 Jan 2022)

Hi all,


Jaseon said:


> Ive been in discussion with various people who have channels on social media who use things like biohome for instance, and swear by it religiously. I have not had many good encounters if i try to explain why its not all its cracked up to be.


I'm not surprised, conversations about <"cycling"> and <"filter media"> rarely <"go well">. It isn't the product, as such, that I have a particular problem with, it is <"the cost"> and marketing strategy.  

There is also the fact that Biohome users have invested in it, often both financially and emotionally,  and no-one likes being told that they didn't get a bargain. It is a <"premium price">, but not necessarily <"a premium product">. If some-one gave it to me I would use it, <"I'm just not going to go and buy it">.

I've not <"used Biohome">, but I'm happy that it is a <"perfectly acceptable biological filtration medium">, but not for any of the claims that <"Richard makes  about it">.

cheers Darrel


----------



## Jaseon (22 Jan 2022)

dw1305 said:


> Hi all,
> 
> I'm not surprised, conversations about <"cycling"> and <"filter media"> rarely <"go well">. It isn't the product, as such, that I have a particular problem with, it is <"the cost"> and marketing strategy.
> 
> ...


You seem to be 50/50. I think there are far better media out there both efficiency and, cost wise.


----------



## dw1305 (22 Jan 2022)

Hi all,


Jaseon said:


> I think there are far better media out there both efficiency and, cost wise.


I'm sure you are right. I'm honestly not that bothered about <"which filter media I use">. I don't like <"floss, or fine sponge (PPI 30 or denser)">, but after that it doesn't really matter.

If I've got  manifesto it's <"this one">, but with the following proviso.


dw1305 said:


> Thanks Ed, but I definitely need write a less angry, more fluffy, properly referenced one.
> 
> Apologies to @Miss-Pepper as well, it wasn't meant to come over quite like that. It also looks like I failed to read @Tim Harrison's or @Lauris's posts, before I posted mine.
> 
> Reading through (both) my posts this morning I think I might have been channelling my inner "Clive".



cheers Darrel


----------



## Jaseon (22 Jan 2022)

dw1305 said:


> Hi all,
> 
> I'm sure you are right.
> 
> ...


Im only go off the links/info you and others provide. If i say this is no good because you show its no good then all of a sudden it doesnt matter anymore.


----------



## dw1305 (23 Jan 2022)

Hi all, 


Jaseon said:


> If i say this is no good because you show its no good then all of a sudden it doesnt matter anymore.


It <"isn't all of a sudden">. I don't like <"the advertising"> (or the price) of a lot of these products, but I really think it <"doesn't particularly matter for planted tank keepers">.  

<"Aquarium Science"> really doesn't like Biohome, but he is keeping fish in <"insane stocking densities">. 

cheers Darrel


----------



## Jaseon (23 Jan 2022)

dw1305 said:


> Hi all,
> 
> It <"isn't all of a sudden">. I don't like <"the advertising"> (or the price) of a lot of these products, but I really think it <"doesn't particularly matter for planted tank keepers">.
> 
> ...


Right, and like you said here,


> The problem with any discussion about biological filter material is that all literature and discussion produced by companies and salesman concentrates on factors that aren't really important, like absorbency and pore space, hence the wick test etc. and endless arguments about which media has the largest surface area. You want a media which doesn't inhibit flow, the only real requirements are that the water flowing from the filter is still oxygenated.


So we are talking about all types of this kind of tightly packed porous material?

Im not saying its completely rubbish, but why have it at all when there are so many other cheaper, and effective alternatives. Im talking this kind of media specifically, and how its commonly used which is separate to wherever it matters in planted tanks or not. So when i hear someone say look how porous it is my reply to that is,

The effectiveness of nitrifying bacteria's ability to colonise your media has nothing to do with how porous it is. K1 media is not porous, and its be shown to be the best out there both statically, and fluidly. Porous media clogs easily, and encourages Heterotrophic bacteria which can slow down, and even stall your filter altogether. Bacteria needs a good flow of oxygen so it easily colonises onto media instead of through it. The structure of biohome is to tight to allow the flow of water through the media which the bacteria thrives on.

I know there are other finer points, and considerations, and everything can be affected by other things, but as a starting point is that wrong or what do i need to amend or change so i have a more coherent understanding of it?

As for Aquarium science i dont see where he makes the point thats he's running his tests under heavy load or why it should matter. I guess his results could easily be transferred to lower stocking levels just your media whatever you choose would take longer to reach the same results?


----------



## dw1305 (23 Jan 2022)

Hi all, 


Jaseon said:


> So we are talking about all types of this kind of tightly packed porous material? ...... the effectiveness of nitrifying bacteria's ability to colonise your media has nothing to do with how porous it is. K1 media is not porous, and its be shown to be the best out there both statically, and fluidly. Porous media clogs easily, and encourages Heterotrophic bacteria which can slow down, and even stall your filter altogether. Bacteria needs a good flow of oxygen so it easily colonises onto media instead of through it. The structure of biohome is to tight to allow the flow of water through the media which the bacteria thrives on.


Yes that is it. 

The porosity, <"wick test">, <"denitrification"> etc. are all just a red herring. As soon as you know that <"Kaldnes (K1) type floating bed media"> is the preferred option in aquaculture, by <"Aquarium Science"> etc., and it doesn't have any internal porosity, it tells you that the <"area of internal pores"> isn't that important.

"_Tightly packed_" is relevant, because we need the filter media to remain aerobic, so that nitrification, the oxidation of ammonia (NH3/NH4+) and nitrite (NO2), continues. <"Dissolved oxygen"> is the key metric, pretty much everything is irrelevant.

If the sellers of these media wanted to back up their claims they could use <"isotope labelled ammonia"> and/or <"search for the genes"> that code for ammonia and nitrite oxidation. 


Jaseon said:


> As for Aquarium science i dont see where he makes the point thats he's running his tests under heavy load or why it should matter. I guess his results could easily be transferred to lower stocking levels just your media whatever you choose would take longer to reach the same results?


They are <"insane stocking rates">. The actual numbers are in the linked thread. 

The reason it matters is that there is a huge amount of ammonia flowing into his filters and <"he doesn't have plants">, so he needs optimal nitrification to avoid a <"positive feedback loop"> of high ammonia levels leading to dead fish, leading to higher ammonia levels, leading to more dead fish etc. 

cheers Darrel


----------



## Jaseon (23 Jan 2022)

dw1305 said:


> The reason it matters is that there is a huge amount of ammonia flowing into his filters
> 
> cheers Darrel


So we would get different efficiency/performance results on the media with a lower load? Maybe media that ranked lower would do better under a lighter load...that wouldn't make sense?

I think the results would be the same just it would need a longer duration of the test to see the results.


----------



## dw1305 (23 Jan 2022)

Hi all, 


Jaseon said:


> So we would get different efficiency/performance results on the media with a lower load?


I would guess that the media would be a lot more similar in performance. When I open a canister filter (after ~six months) I often find that there is very little that <"you could describe as "biofilm">.  I don't worry about this, and I'd guess I would have to add a huge amount of bioload before I got to the <"thick and sticky stage">. 




Caption: "_A Well Functioning Aquarium Filter_"

cheers Darrel


----------



## Jaseon (23 Jan 2022)

dw1305 said:


> Hi all,
> 
> I would guess that the media would be a lot more similar in performance.
> 
> ...


Right, (and i don't mean to be fastidious), but why concern ourselves with the stocking rates in which the tests were put under?  

So with the planted scenario what would be the main function of our artificial filtration? I think this was brought up before, and i guessed mechanical. Didn't you say you run a pre filter, and no biological media to speak of in your main filtration?

I keep being drawn into thinking about the Walstad method as the ultimate conclusion to any tank where plants are dominant. I dont know if i would have the nerve to cut the artificial umbilical cord, and let the plants do all the work though, but id like to try it.


----------



## dw1305 (23 Jan 2022)

Hi all,


Jaseon said:


> So with the planted scenario what would be the main function of our artificial filtration?


Really <"belt and braces"> and  to deal with the continued increase in bioload as your fish grow (and/or reproduce) or you have an unnoticed dead fish etc. As a general rule low nutrient conditions favour <"microbial diversity">, and a <"diverse assemblage of microbes"> is what you want to respond to changes in ammonia loading.


Jaseon said:


> Didn't you say you run a pre filter,


I have an <"intake pre-filter"> on all my filters, <"some are DIY">, but I now mainly use the <"big (12" x 4" x 4") drilled sponge blocks"> they sell in Koi  places, for smaller tanks I cut them down, but you can buy 4" sponge cubes etc.


Jaseon said:


> and no biological media to speak of in your main filtration?


I usually 2/3 fill the filter body with <"Eheim "coco-pops"> (or <"floating cell media etc.">) and coarse (PPI10) sponge (usually just the <"pads that came with the filter">). This maybe more than you need, but I'm working on the principle of  <"_if it ain't broke don't fix it_">.


Jaseon said:


> I keep being drawn into thinking about the Walstad method as the ultimate conclusion to any tank where plants are dominant. I dont know if i would have the nerve to cut the artificial umbilical cord, and let the plants do all the work though, but id like to try it.


Former member @Bart Hazes tried it have a look at <"going filterless">. I would note that even Diana Walstad herself now recommends some water changes and water movement, the details are in <"Walstad revises">.

cheers Darrel


----------



## Jaseon (24 Jan 2022)

dw1305 said:


> Former member @Bart Hazes tried it have a look at <"going filterless">. I would note that even Diana Walstad herself now recommends some water changes and water movement, the details are in <"Walstad revises">.
> 
> cheers Darrel


Im not sure the links to his blog are working or it may be down, As for Walstad id always want to go with some circulation maybe use a small pump or power head with a sponge. The sponge would be more to protect the pump than act as a filter, but you would get it as an added bonus? Its not going completely filterless, but would maybe be a good idea as a safety net as the plants grow in fully? Maybe one of these,


----------



## dw1305 (24 Jan 2022)

Hi all,


Jaseon said:


> As for Walstad id always want to go with some circulation maybe use a small pump or power head with a sponge......Maybe one of these,


I've used the <"power-head and sponge combination"> a lot. I like a sponge browsing surface for shrimps etc. Personally I don't like the idea of the "Wavemaker" type power heads which I always worry are going to  shred your smaller livestock.





If I had more tanks I would use an <"air main, Czech jet-lifter, HMF and air pump set up">.

cheers Darrel


----------

