# Problems after using E.I



## Dolly Sprint 16v (5 Jun 2009)

Gang@ukaps

There has been several threads posted regarding problems after starting E.I dosing, has anybody worked out the percentage of people having problems after E.I v off the shelf fertz, Inc the reasons why this problems occurs.


Regards
Paul.


----------



## Superman (5 Jun 2009)

I think someone (maybe Clive) mentioned something in another thread which sounds sensible.

People start using EI and their plants grow much better than before but don't sort out the balance between light, flow, co2, ferts quick enough given the increase growth.

If you're careful can keep that balance in mind, you shouldn't have any problems.


----------



## Nelson (6 Jun 2009)

hi, 
i understand what clark is saying but i  am having algae problems since starting EI and am getting sick of hearing about co2 and flow.all  i hear is increase co2 and flow.well i nearly gassed my fish and if i increase my flow anymore my fish will be pinned against the glass.my fish were nearly gassed and my algae has got worse. sorry if i sound paranoid but i think theres more to it than that and people are holding back on info.just the way i feel at the moment.


----------



## GreenNeedle (6 Jun 2009)

> all i hear is increase co2 and flow.



That is why so many blame a method for failure and never reach the holy grail 

Believe me I was one and was banned from this forum for 'getting sick' of the CO2 statements.  However I can vouch for their validity.

Even if the method is PPS Pro and low dosing.  you may blame the method but unless you have looked at the lighting and CO2 levels then how can anyone ever suggest the method does not work 

Namely PPS-Pro is very lean  therefore adequate CO2 still needs to be maintained but at a lower rate because with less nutrient you SHOULD use less light and therefore need less CO2 to reach a good level.

With EI the nutrients are unlimited.  This means that the plants have enough nutrients to grow to whatever rate the light is allowing them too.  CO2 NEEDS to be supplied at an adequate rate.

DO NOT assume that improving CO2 means upping the rate of injection.  CO2 levels will vary throughout the tank quite significantly even with super flow.  In Tom Barrs test the ppm next to the source (diffuser etc) was around the 100ppm whereas at the substrate it was in the 10ppm region.

We can therefore assume we are looking for the 'balance' where we want to make sure there is enough in the lower ppm areas.

So how can we do that?  Improve CO2 distribution via better flow rates or methods.  If the CO2 is spread out better then less needs injecting to still maintain the '10ppm' near the substrate thus supplying enough through the tank without raising the ppm to dangerous levels in the high ppm areas.  Poor flow and upping the injection rate COULD mean having very toxic levels in the high ppm areas and still not enough in the low areas.

So whilst we suggest improving CO2 that can mean increasing injection but more often than not it is a case of the CO2 not being adequately distributed.

Also note that reactors whilst diffusing the CO2 100% SILL suffer the same problems.  You have to remember that with a diffuser you see the bubbles, you see them rise to the surface and therefore see that CO2 is gassing off.  With a reactor the same process is occurring but you can't see it.

AC


----------



## ceg4048 (6 Jun 2009)

nelson said:
			
		

> hi,
> i understand what clark is saying but i  am having algae problems since starting EI and am getting sick of hearing about co2 and flow.all  i hear is increase co2 and flow.well i nearly gassed my fish and if i increase my flow anymore my fish will be pinned against the glass.my fish were nearly gassed and my algae has got worse. sorry if i sound paranoid but i think theres more to it than that and people are holding back on info.just the way i feel at the moment.


Hmm...this is an interesting point of view. Been accused of being overly verbose and obnoxious but never been accused of "holding back" information before. :? 

Here is the inverse of this idea; imagine how sickened the people who don't have algae are when all they hear is people with algae accusing them of holding back. In fact, normally, the people who are holding back information are often those who are seeking help. Without full disclosure about tank configuration and maintenance practices we have to obtain a mind reading certificate from the department of motor vehicles.

Rome was not built in a day, and many of the folks who no longer have algae problems are those that have learned how to grow plants after suffering algae for YEARS on end. So if algae sufferers are willing to take a step back and not go mental, a solution is available. What we need are specific details, photos and a positive attitude. Wanna know what else make us sick? This mad rush to add fish to an injected tank without first learning how to grow plants. What's the hurry? No fish in the tank means no fish getting gassed. It's so simple.

We continue to advise of the various factors involved in a successful planted tank; flow, distribution CO2, cleanliness, control of light and so forth. We haven't held back anything. There is no secret Kryptonite or magic incantations uttered by Druids under a full moon.

Asking about problems after EI dosing is nearly as absurd as asking how many people have fallen off their bicycle shortly after learning how to ride a bicycle, and then trying to determine how many times  the bicycle was at fault.
Instead of asking how many people have algae with EI, why not look deep into The Matrix and find the number of tanks on this planet that have serious algae problems and which are owned by hobbyists who can't even spell EI? Then, count the number of responses that blame nutrients in the water column.

The chemistry of life and the biophysics of a planted tank are extremely complicated so there are no turnkey options. The goal of the hobbyists should be to understand the basics of plant growth so that he/she can observe a tank and make informed decisions when trying to solve a problem.

We were all born in The Matrix which imprisons our minds. Those of us who have been liberated can see the path. Whatever secrets are out there involve freeing of the mind, because that's where algae actually starts...

Cheers,


----------



## CeeJay (6 Jun 2009)

Clive
Your eloquence makes me smile   
Neil. 
Hope you don't lose heart and keep at it.


			
				nelson said:
			
		

> i think theres more to it than that and people are holding back on info.


I must say I don't agree with that statement. I've had loads of help round here and you're talking to a plant muppet who used to spend Â£20-Â£30 a month on plants just to keep my tank 'looking nice'.   Haven't bought a plant since I've been round here and my tank is still looking nice.  
One thing I have learnt with this planted tank game is 'everything comes to he who waits'


----------



## Dolly Sprint 16v (6 Jun 2009)

ceg4048 said:
			
		

> We continue to advise of the various factors involved in a successful planted tank; flow, distribution CO2, cleanliness, control of light and so forth. We haven't held back anything.
> 
> 
> My sympathy goes to Neil to who is having problems with Algae after using E.I dosing, I too am in the same situation as Neil and in my opinion my tank has been on a steady down hill spiral since I started using E.I dosing. After numerous threads posted and replies received, I took the advice given:
> ...


----------



## LondonDragon (6 Jun 2009)

Paul why increase lighting if you have algae problems?? You should turn it down a little no increase it!!

Also tank with a high plant mass need good filtration, a 600lph rated filter is not good enough for a 200 liter tank IMO. I have a 780lph external and a 1000lph internal and I don't think the filtration in my tank is adequate (125 liter tank), I am planning on upgrading the external to an EX1200.

Increase CO2 to the maximum your fish can handle, dose EI at the same rates you are doing at present and reduce the lighting, also remember to keep up with the maintenance, maybe while you are having algae issues perform two 50% water changes per week rather than 1, and keep on top of filter maintnance also. But reduce the lighting not increase it or you just asking for trouble the more light you add the more of everything else is needed, I had the same issues in my tank when I tested 144w of light over it lol


----------



## Dave Spencer (6 Jun 2009)

Flyfisherman said:
			
		

> Question â€“ So where do you go now??
> Regards
> Paul.



Paul, I promise to do my best to get round yours next weekend.  

Nobody is holding anything back. UKAPS was set up to promote the hobby. Nevertheless, it is always hard to diagnose peoples` problems with just pics and words. For all we know, people may have messed up their fert calculations and have the fert solution bottle at 20ppm KNO3, rather than adding 10ml to 240l and making the 240l 20ppm after dosing.

There are all manner of things to go wrong lurking behind the more obvious symptoms, but it is not the method, it is the execution of the method that goes wrong.

All our tanks have algae spores in them. They are being bombarded daily by them, yet many of us aren`t aware of this because the environment is not suitable for them. There is no secret, other than concentrate on growing healthy plants. After all, that is what EI was set up to do. EI has nothing to do with algae.

Dave.


----------



## Nelson (6 Jun 2009)

hi,
think i should say sorry for my post.worded a bit strong  .a little bit drunk  .

clive...had my fish longer than i've had plants and didn't want to get rid of them to try and grow plants.wrong :?: ,i don't know.
if i ever start a new tank no fish for sure until tank is sorted.

anyway,sorry if i offended anyone


----------



## Dolly Sprint 16v (6 Jun 2009)

LondonDragon said:
			
		

> Paul why increase lighting if you have algae problems?? You should turn it down a little no increase it!!
> 
> Also tank with a high plant mass need good filtration, a 600lph rated filter is not good enough for a 200 liter tank IMO. I have a 780lph external and a 1000lph internal and I don't think the filtration in my tank is adequate (125 liter tank), I am planning on upgrading the external to an EX1200.
> 
> Increase CO2 to the maximum your fish can handle, dose EI at the same rates you are doing at present and reduce the lighting, also remember to keep up with the maintenance, maybe while you are having algae issues perform two 50% water changes per week rather than 1, and keep on top of filter maintnance also. But reduce the lighting not increase it or you just asking for trouble the more light you add the more of everything else is needed, I had the same issues in my tank when I tested 144w of light over it lol



Paulo

With reference to the filter - I was concerned regarding the flow rate of my EX 1200 and took advice on improving my filtration, the filter i am running now is an Ehiem 2080 OEM flow rate of 1700, according to clive there is no way will you achieve this when is full of media, the majority of filter loose 50% of their flow rate when full of media - see attached thread 

viewtopic.php?f=20&t=6021&start=0

I had issue before the lighting improvement and my hc was dying so I increased the lighting due to the depth of the tank 18" deep, so if you increase your lighting evrything else has to be increased - correct. 

I also have a 20 litre tank that is in better condition than my big tank apart from the HC is stuggling but that due to lack of light as my ludwigi repens is blocking the light. Ferts used on this tank is Easylife Profito and nothing else.

Regards
paul.


----------



## LondonDragon (6 Jun 2009)

All I am saying is watch for the light levels, I have seen George grow HC in relatively low light, and I can't even grow it at 144W on a 125 litter tank, does that mean I need to increase my lighting too??  Course not I need to lower it a lot which I have, the problem I have is the Bosemani Rainbows are not CO2 tolerant at all but I can't get rid of them


----------



## Superman (6 Jun 2009)

Just because the HC is dying doesn't mean that you need to increase the lighting.
How would you describe it dying, as it could easily be a deficiency of ferts or co2. Just because you're doing under the method of EI, you still need to tailor the dosing the suit you tank and that the ferts won't be equally distributed throughout the tank (same with co2).


----------



## GreenNeedle (6 Jun 2009)

ADA tanks have lovely carpets of HC and whilst the tank owners believe from the technical specs that their beloved ADA lighting units are highlight this has been proved wrong by tests done by TB at AFA where he tested a load of the ADA competition setups and found the ADA lighting rigs to be much much lower PAR than you would expect by looking at the wattage stated etc.

Whether this is a concious decision by ADA to reduce lighting to the levels Amano uses himself by supplying high specced units to keep the light obsessed happy whilst reducing their output via lower ballasts or less efficient reflectors I do not know but Amano DOES NOT use the amount of light that is suggested on the very popular Fitch Family article that is always banded about whenever someone suggest there is no need for highlight.  this article is pushed at me at least once a week by the many who refuse to believe that Amano does not use highlight!!!!

Why do I bring this up?  HC and Glosso as stated by TB are essentially low light plants.  They do however need good CO2 Notice I haven't put high CO2!!!  Why?  Because like I said earlier.  TB tests show in the region of 10ppm at the substrate.  We aim for 30ppm or more to get 10ppm at the lower ppm areas.  Therefore we can assume that the magic number of ppm is 10ppm or less for high CO2.  The 30ppm means that adequate CO2 is throughout the tank (unlimited.)

I don't agree with Paulo r.e. huge filtration needed although it is different for every tank and setup so for some it may be needed and some may not.  My 125Ltr has a single external 700lph (300ish after reduction) and as far as I am concerned it does the job perfectly.  I use the 1500lph Koralia for flow boosting.

The next thing is that lph and lighting are much the same as the CO2.

Lighting - 3WPG does not mean that the light is better than 1WPG.  The 1WPG may be setup at a better height, better positioning and better overall spread/coverage and therefore provide better light than a poorly positioned 3WPG.  This is one reason that I don't like thin luminaires that have multiple tubes next to each other.  Even if they do have individual reflectors you can't space them out as they are all fixed together.  People do have success with them but I would suggest they would get the same results with less tubes if they were able to space them out better and gain better coverage too.

Flow / Lph.  1 person may have 10x turnover and 1 person may have 30x turnover.  Again positioning the setups differently can mean that the 10x is better than the 30x.  I am not a fan of Koralia type pumps being positioned pointing downward.  If they point level then the flow will automatically push down and when it hits glass it will also rebound.  Then there are those that use their Koralia pumps and have them setup with conflicting flows.  This meaning that they push against each other thus cancelling a lot of the flow out!!!

CO2 - As before get the above 2 right then this is much easier to get levels right.  Your DCs may be both yellow but there is absolutely no way there is parity throughout the tank.  It just isn't possible.  As per the TB tests there will be huge differences at various points in the tank.  The 'parity' we are after is ensuring that all areas reach the 'minimum' level.  This may be 10ppm or less and means some areas (next to source) will be at 100ppm+ levels.  My Rasboras stay next to the diffuser playing around all day virtually.  should they not be dead?

A lot of people do this the wrong way round.  They say right I have got highlight so all I need to do is up the ferts and CO2.  In theory yes this is good.  In practice it is much much harder to maintain levels high enough for highlighting and is a struggle for many even with much lower lighting.  Also the question is there is that highlight even needed.  This is why the suggestions have been lower the lighting and get a balance rather than raise the ferts and CO2 to match the high lighting.  Reason being that it will be much easier for you to master the levels at a lower light and from there you can move upward with more confidence, knowledge and ability if you so choose 

To describe my experiences I was one of those that tried to cut corners with everything.  I have always had high plant mass.  I always got algae in swathes but not as bad as many.  I had big problems when I started using EI.  I also went the highlight route at the beginning.  This is what we were all told by sites such as APC.  I have always added fish from the start because like you fish are No1 and the same fish go from scape to scape.  They are out of the tank for a day or less and then back in once scaped.

However once I started to get the lighting down (0.6WPG to 1.4WPG) I started to be able to get the CO2 managed.  I then added the Koralia once I struggled with flow due to incredible plantmass (which I did not want to reduce.)  This improved the flow and after trying several positions I managed to get the CO2 perfect again before moving onto LED lighting with awesome spread.  The LEDs is only 1.12WPG but without a PAR meter I could not tell you what they would be equivalent to in T8/T5 etc.  I would say that 1.12WPG is in the region of 2-3WPG on the T12 scale from comparing growth rates within the tank.

Where am I at now?  Now that I now how to do things I can setup a scape from the start safe in the knowledge that the flow may need a little tinkering due to a change in positioning of plants/hardscape etc.  Confidence is quite a big thing in this hobby IMO.  I also have confidence enough to start a tank with slow growers from the start.  No fast growers at the start to 'help fight algae' etc.  I do not suffer algae breaks at the beginning.

So I can setup a tank with the fish in from the start, the final plants without any 'helper weeds' etc. and this is all down to learning.  The grail is quite hard to get to but once you hit the grail it is like cycling up a very steep 2 mile hill it may take you hours  Once you hit the top it is all easy riding down the other side and you never need to reclimb the hill unless you want to 

Keep at it and follow the advice.  We don't hold anything back.  We don't keep secrets.  We share our experience gained in the main from our failures and our struggles and for most people this means that they don't have to suffer the pain that we did saving them a fortune in comparison to what we spent trying to reach the grail.  Follow the advice to the letter and give things time.

The final thing is do not follow mathematics or Physics or Chemistry to the letter of the law.  They have their part to play but following them rigidly does not work in this hobby.  They can be used as starting points but you may find that the succesful conclusion is as far from the 'calculation' or long understood belief as it can possibly be 

Good luck

AC


----------



## ceg4048 (6 Jun 2009)

nelson said:
			
		

> hi,
> think i should say sorry for my post.worded a bit strong  .a little bit drunk  .


OK, no more tonic for you mate. We're gonna put you on a strict lemonade and biscuit diet.  



			
				nelson said:
			
		

> clive...had my fish longer than i've had plants and didn't want to get rid of them to try and grow plants.wrong :?: ,i don't know.
> if i ever start a new tank no fish for sure until tank is sorted.


Well, this isn't necessarily wrong, just a disadvantage for a plant newbie. As discussed in the CO2 Tutorial, adjustments to the CO2 levels have to be done carefully and the results are never instantaneous. CO2 related algae is tenacious and one has to execute stringent procedures such as multiple large water changes, keeping the lighting low, keeping the plants trimmed, dosing liquid carbon where feasible and so forth. Furthermore, one has to ensure that in fact the algae is a CO2 related one and not some other type of algae. BBA takes weeks to clear. Another factor that many newbies don't understand (and it might be our fault for not making this clear enough) is that CO2 does not kill or deter algae. What it does instead is that it makes the plants healthier. This is a critical point that most people completely overlook. Algae are plants too and they enjoy nutrients and CO2 just like any other plant. Listen to this concept; Algal blooms are suppressed or deterred in an environment of healthy plants. The microsecond that a leaf becomes unhealthy algae will be triggered. The goal of EI and CO2 injection is not to kill algae. Your focus as a plant grower is not to kill algae, because, of course, this is impossible. Your goal is to simulate an environment where plants are in top health and are growing In such an environment, algal spores will sense that this is not a good time to bloom and they will remain in "suspended animation" but they will always be waiting for the opportunity to bloom. Our goal is to prevent that opportunity from arising by optimizing plant health. So EI eliminates the possibility of ill health that may result from malnutrition but EI cannot prevent the other ways in which plants can fail, such as a dirty tank, or poor/unstable CO2, or too much light, or poor/blocked flow for example. All variables of the biochemical equation must be satisfied. This is environmental engineering so you must always be thinking about optimizing the environment. So forget about killing algae - that is a complete misguided thinking. Instead, think about optimizing health. When you see algae appear you must immediately think; "The plant health has failed, how can I return it to full health?". DO NOT think "Oh, damned algae, how can I get rid of it?" otherwise you're doomed from the start. 8) 



			
				nelson said:
			
		

> anyway,sorry if i offended anyone


We've all been there mate. We know EXACTLY how you feel. Yet we've persevered (with a little help from our friends). We pick ourselves up and carry on. Soon, you'll refine your technique, grow great plants and you'll look back and wonder what all the fuss was about...  

Cheers,


----------



## ceg4048 (6 Jun 2009)

Flyfisherman said:
			
		

> LondonDragon said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Paul I don't really understand the rationale here. As stated in the thread you referenced, the 10X rule of thumb requires that a 200L tank be powered by 2000LPH of filter rating or more. However, flow rating by itself guarantees nothing. The flow must be distributed properly. We've discussed this ad nauseum. So whether this means a rework of the filter return or moving to spraybars, we always advocate that the majority of the plants should gently sway with the current and that dead zones ought to be avoided.

Secondly, as others have pointed out repeatedly, it is always a mistake to assume that if HC is doing poorly then increasing the lighting is a solution. Increased lighting typically causes more problems than it solves, so in only very special cases would we EVER suggest a lighting increase, that's for certain. So while it's true that increased lighting requires an increase of other things you have made a fundamental error in your assumption. Lighting is probably not the reason your HC is struggling. You should have increased everything else EXCEPT the lighting. As you can see, this is yet another way in which algae occurs which has nothing to do with EI. If you create the conditions which cause algae to bloom and then you feed that bloom by dosing EI levels, well then of course the levels of nutrients will accelerate the algal blooms. This is hardly surprising. Again, it's not that that EI nutrient levels kill algae, but that the nutrient levels prevent malnutrition. Malnutrition is one causal factor of algae, but there are other causal factors which have nothing to do with EI. Growing plants successfully means understanding the various ways that plants can suffer malnutrition as well as the various causes of algae. EI is therefore only part of the strategy.

Cheers,


----------



## Dolly Sprint 16v (6 Jun 2009)

Gang@Ukaps

quick note to advise you all that there will be no more threads raised from me from regarding E.I dosing as it does not work for me and I will not be E.I dosing in the future. As I have previously stated early my tank has been on a downward sprial since commencing E.I and I am not prepare to spend any more money on something that not works for me.

Regards
paul.


----------



## GreenNeedle (7 Jun 2009)

Paul - it is your decision at the end of the day and we have to respect that.

I would just say that I have posted many times that I wish that forums when I began were at the stage many are at these days where lots of people can give the advice that cuts out the spend trying to get to the holy grail.

I spent approx Â£2000 on my tank (including tank, equipment, fish, plants and everything else etc.) wher if I were to go out and buy the replicate setup I could do it for Â£600.  The other Â£1400 was spent on equipment that either didn't do the job needed, plants being replaced etc.  Of course I recouped some of the money but not at the cost 

My guess with your tank is not that EI is the problem, not that you are short of CO2 injected.  I think you have these nailed more than likely.  I think the problem is either due to the circulation and/or maintenance.

Lighting can be reduced to make things easier but a simple filter clean followed by adjusting positioning of outlets and flow equipment could be all that is needed 

If you are struggling with EI then you will struggle with all other methods.  The lighting will still be driving the growth and without adequate dosing then nutrient defficiencies will only add to the current problems!!

Like I said earlier over my first year or 2 I went from the stage where every week I was pulling out algae to where I can now confidently ignore the 'add fast growers from the start' statements.  I don't vac my substrate, I overfeed.  Basically I ignore a huge number of the rules that we would suggest for someone learning due to the knowledge and confidence in my setup to 'cope' with me flaunting these rules 

I hope you continue with planted tanks and please believe that the golden suggestion of reducing lighting will IMO be the key for you to start the upward climb 

Good luck in whatever you decide

AC


----------



## Dolly Sprint 16v (7 Jun 2009)

SuperColey1 said:
			
		

> Paul - it is your decision at the end of the day and we have to respect that.
> 
> I have added my comments in red text
> 
> ...



regards
Paul.


----------



## GreenNeedle (8 Jun 2009)

I'll not cover old ground then BUT I will say this r.e.



> I think through my experience with E.I people should consider the type of plants they have - slow / medium or fast grower then decide whether they should go down this line.



My current scape and previous scape had only 'slow growers'  being ferns, anubias and crypts!!!  My substrate is Tropica with sand.  Even though I had what many call low light (0.9WPG T5HO) over a 125 Ltr and therefore many would suggest that EI dosing was not needed.  However algae wasn't a problem.

I have also used the PMDD+PO4 recipe from JamesC's site and that is much leaner if you are worried r.e. EI levels.  That also worked pretty well 

I'll leave it at that 

AC


----------



## Mark Evans (8 Jun 2009)

i find it quit interesting how some folks dont get on with EI, for me i cant get on without it, i get paranoid if i don't use EI,


----------



## Superman (8 Jun 2009)

> I am thinking that due to the plants I have, which are not fast growers the surplus fertz (NPK) that they have not used on Saturday remains within the water column, more fluid added on Monday NPK and the same on Wednesday - this means excessive amounts of NPK within the water column that the plants cannot or have not use up, so it has feed the algae spores in other words i have been overdosing with NPK through out the week, thread post regarding "What would be the net affect of overdosing". I think through my experience with E.I people should consider the type of plants they have - slow / medium or fast grower then decide whether they should go down this line.



Remember that alage can be considered a plant and that once it's "hatched" from it's spore stage, it uses normal ferts to grow. We're not saying that dosing EI will kill the algae just help to prevent it from starting. Algae "hatches" from it's spore stage when the right conditions hold, which is mainly triggered by ammonia.

I would say that EI is not the problem, it's the algae that's in there. 

Once you have algae in your tank and dosing EI, you need to keep removing algae infected leaves immediately or it'll just spread. Do a 2 or 3 water changes each week to remove as much algae spores as possible.

Things take a few weeks to show signs of turning the corner and don't expect things to happen immediately.

What you showed is that your old routine was not providing non-limiting nutrients for plant growth, so going back to that method might not fix the problem.

You need to find the balance in the tank, each one is different and just keep trying as, as soon as you crack it, you're onto a winner.


----------



## chris1004 (9 Jun 2009)

High Paul sorry that you are disillutioned with things at the moment my heart goes out to you as I know from first hand experience how you feel.



			
				Flyfisherman said:
			
		

> regards
> Paul.



For what its worth Paul I had a similar background in my tank and found that it caused me no end of problems. You can view my troubles here:-

viewtopic.php?f=19&t=4713


Now I'm not saying that this is definatly your problem but I am fairly sure that it was a large part of mine...Its only been a month or so since I removed it but things have improved massivly since, still early days yet though to be totally certain I know.

When I actually removed the background the algae was so thick on the very top edge that I could scrape it off in thick wads and the deep cracks of the background on closer inspection was also found to be thick with algae. With this ammount of resident algae in the water it didn't really matter how many plant leaves I was pulling off the algae had a stronhold from which to launch its attacks, the ferts just kept it well fed.

I would be interested to know whether anyone has successfully used EI in conjuntion with a textured background?

For the record mine was a jewel imitation rockface, now residing in my 'to be taken to the tip' pile..


----------



## GreenNeedle (9 Jun 2009)

As with all things there are examples of success with textured backgrounds.  Different people have different setups and learn to master their own setup 

I have seen a lot of problems with structured backgrounds though 

I would think it would be one of those things that is not a problem to a well setup tank but fuels the problem in tanks that are still being mastered 

AC


----------



## Dolly Sprint 16v (9 Jun 2009)

chris1004 said:
			
		

> High Paul sorry that you are disillutioned with things at the moment my heart goes out to you as I know from first hand experience how you feel.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Chris 

I was using the back ground prior to E.I dosing, if you review the picy of the tank taken on the 23.11.2008 and look to the right hand side you will see the back ground. I have my suspicions that my plants were no consuming a vast amounts of fertz due to them being slow growers and by adding more every other day was putting an abundance of fertz in the water column which in turn promoted algae to grow faster. 

The comment I made regarding whether people going down the line of E.I was referring to the types of plants they have within the tank ie slower / medium or fast growers and the quantity of plants.

May be if I had reduced the amount of NPK solution being added the story would be different, I was adding 50 mls per dosing, maybe I should have started of with a low dosage of 5 mls and increased the dosage by 5mls at a time until the optimum levels of dosing was achieve. I am not going to know the outcome as I have pack it in.

Regards
Paul.


----------



## aaronnorth (9 Jun 2009)

> I have my suspicions that my plants were no consuming a vast amounts of fertz due to them being slow growers and by adding more every other day was putting an abundance of fertz in the water column which in turn promoted algae to grow faster.


adding more fertilisers increases the demand for CO2. 
Ok, your drop checker may be green, but then you have to look at distribution, again you have enough turnover but are you sure it is being circulated properly in every corner.
one thing leads to another so you just have to find the swet spot.


----------



## Dolly Sprint 16v (9 Jun 2009)

aaronnorth said:
			
		

> > I have my suspicions that my plants were no consuming a vast amounts of fertz due to them being slow growers and by adding more every other day was putting an abundance of fertz in the water column which in turn promoted algae to grow faster.
> 
> 
> adding more fertilisers increases the demand for CO2.
> ...



I wont know - as i have packed it in.

Regards
paul.


----------

