# John Innes No3 safe ?



## nuttersbutters (7 Jul 2015)

Anyone used this as a substrate ? Reason I've asked I because have just read a post from someone on a forum who uses it, and they were absolutely torn to pieces by one of the other members because of it.

I have seen posts on this site where some users have successfully used it, but according to this member it's deadly, especially in hard water apparently. To be fair he seemed a bit of a cocky know it all type so thought I'd get some proper advice as was also considering using it.

He mentioned that it's deadly to use with fish, and that it should never be used in hard water or with a cap of 2mm, or under hardscape. Is this guy just talking tripe ? I've read stories of many people using it with no ill effects, but he makes out that only dumb people with no regard for fish welfare would ever do such an awful thing. 

Is this soil safe to use in your opinion ? Your opinions matter more than his, and most certainly are more trusted. Thank you for any help you may be able to offer.


----------



## John S (7 Jul 2015)

I've used it in three low tec tanks with my liquid rock water. I did plant heavily and waited a month before adding livestock but I never had any issues with fish or shrimp.


----------



## OllieNZ (7 Jul 2015)

I also have very hard water and never had any issues with it, even rescaping/adding more soil to a stocked tank with no problems.


----------



## nuttersbutters (7 Jul 2015)

Damn, the person using it who got grief has just messaged me to say she's completely taken apart her aquarium and thrown everything because of how dangerous she was told it was.

Am completely gutted as I know she spent a lot of Time and money doing it. I wish she had held on to read your replies as I think I would have made such a difference. I will still message her your responses in the hope they may get her back into the hobby again. She did mention that she had had no increase in water hardness, carbonate hardness  or ph either. Thanks guys for your advice and for taking the time to reply.


----------



## ajm83 (7 Jul 2015)

Heh, I knew upon opening this thread what/who it would be about. Apparently, "The Only Way Is Walstad"!
Without wishing to indulge myself too much in the drama, it was a shame the original thread over there ended up locked before any proper discussion of the points raised could take place and she's pulled down the setup.


----------



## dw1305 (7 Jul 2015)

Hi all, 





nuttersbutters said:


> had no increase in water hardness, carbonate hardness or ph either


If your water is already hard, the additional lime from the JI No.3 won't change the carbonate hardness, or the pH. 

You've added some more carbonate buffering _*potential*_, but the amount of HCO3- ions that go into solution is dependent upon the CO2 (as H2CO3) ~ carbonate equilibrium. 

At 400ppm atmospheric CO2 levels the water is buffered to about 16dKH and pH7.8 - 8.2.  Calcium carbonate (CaCO3) is less soluble than the carbonate salts of more reactive metals, (like sodium bicarbonate (NaHCO3)) so the carbonate ~ CO2 equilibrium also buffers the dGH. 

This is also why you can get the build up of <"marl beds"> in limestone lakes and <"shell beds in Lake Tanganyika"> etc. 





nuttersbutters said:


> He mentioned that it's deadly to use with fish, and that it should never be used in hard water or with a cap of 2mm, or under hardscape. Is this guy just talking tripe ? I've read stories of many people using it with no ill effects, but he makes out that only dumb people with no regard for fish welfare would ever do such an awful thing.


 I've been through the TFF thread and the linked "Tiddlers"  post (he had a change of user name).  

I think a lot of what he posted actually makes some sense, I think the problem comes because he doesn't/can't differentiate between available and unavailable nutrients, and you get nonsense like:  





> 1Kg of soil contains  40,000mg of Iron. so if the plants take up an average 1.2mg of iron per month. A kilo has enough Iron to last the lifetime of the tank. (multiple lifetimes)


 cheers Darrel


----------



## Tim Harrison (7 Jul 2015)

It should be perfectly safe...for more info check out the tutorials section...


----------



## nuttersbutters (8 Jul 2015)

Cheers guys for the advice. I agree that he is probably a highly intelligent guy who knows his stuff. I sensed the issue was how it was put to her, in a belittling, your not as smart as me, I know best kind of way. I think that caused the most upset. But nobody wants to kill off livestock because they have allegedly done an idiotic thing. I think that's why she got rid. Having spent well over a grand, on setup, it ain't gonna happen again, for obvious financial reasons. 

I don't understand a word of the scientific stuff he replied with, but can only guess he was suggesting it will shoot hard water and pH up even higher. As far as I'm aware, the tank was doing well, was highly planted, she mentioned daily 50%'water changes in first week, then alternate days in second, and was on to every third day, so would have thought any toxins would have been well flushed out. Is this soil not sterilized anyway ?

I am no expert with this area, but I think it was near end of cycle and all readings had remained constant. Am hopeful that although she isn't continuing anymore in the hobby, that by posting this on here, that it will help ease other peoples worries and prevent the same upset for them. There is a lot of interest in using this soil, and I hope they can now do so with piece of mind thanks to your help.


----------



## Rahms (8 Jul 2015)

> as far as i can tell theres a sizeable minority on UKAPS that view their fish as decoration for the plants.



I don't see what's wrong with this.  It's definitely how I view my fish, but it doesn't mean they aren't happy and well looked after! The guys a muppet


----------



## ajm83 (8 Jul 2015)

Rahms said:


> I don't see what's wrong with this.  It's definitely how I view my fish, but it doesn't mean they aren't happy and well looked after! The guys a muppet


The implication being they are ill treated. He's posted several times about EI and co2 injection being 'abhorrent' due to their effects on fish for example.
Now, there may or may not be valid points in there. Certainly interesting discussion in any case, however the way he talks about it is too abrasive, he gets people's backs up!


----------



## john dory (8 Jul 2015)

It has to be said that fish welfare comes 2nd to plant welfare in some cases.


----------



## TonyE (8 Jul 2015)

It was me that posted on another forum about this ladies use of John Innes 3. and my concerns have been misrepresented somewhat.

particularly this:



nuttersbutters said:


> He mentioned that it's deadly to use with fish, and that it should never be used in hard water or with a cap of 2mm, or under hardscape.



my concerns were based solely on her description of her set-up.

She said she had put *3 inches of no.3 under 2 inches of sand*. Also, looking at photos of her tank it 'appeared' that the no.3 was also under her rather large rocks.

Over two posts I pointed out that this was probably too deep and she was risking anoxia within the substrate and H2S production. I advised her to poke the sand so that the overlying water could get down into the soil. and so admit Oxygen and thus prevent H2S production.. at least until the plant roots can get down there and do the same.

She said she lived in London.

I pointed out that no.3 contains crushed limestone and this could impact her water parameters.

Those were my two main concerns. H2S production and possible alterations to water chemistry.

She also stated that No.3 has no peat in it. I pointed out that this was incorrect, in fact no.3 is approx a third peat by volume.

In a subsequent reply.. her description of her tank set up changed completely.

the inches became millimetres/cenitmetres. so, 3 inches of soil across the entire base of the aquarium, became 1mm to 3cm of No3. Obviously this changed everything. poking the soil was still a good idea, but there was much less chance of it being problematic.

I also mentioned the additional 'Superphosphate' and 'Potassium Sulphate' that is added to No.3 by the blenders. it seemed unclear as to whether she was aware of this addition. I made her aware so that she could adjust her ferts regime to take the extra in the substrate into consideration. I don't even pretend to be an expert on ferts in high tech tanks.. but it did seem pretty obvious to me that the chemicals in her soil could adversely effect the ferts she was adding. possible overdosing? My intention was to prompt her to look into this side further. Ask people who are better equipped to answer these concerns than I am. they might mock me for being over cautious. thats fine.

In a subsequent private message to me she stated categorically that she wasnt going to add fish to her tank. It was going to be a 'planted tank'.  My eyes popped at that. had she said this in her original posts then my concerns (about Hydrogen Sulphide) would have been nullified. I would likely have said nothing aside from mentioning the chemicals that are in No.3. its peat and limestone components. and that due to the latter she should keep a close eye on her hardness and PH parameters. She may have had problems with her plants due to overdosing going forward.. but thats easily dealt with. poking the substrate is a good idea at least in the short term. H2S is deadly to fish... but it also kills plant roots I believe.

My responses to her were all made in good faith. I am extremely uncomfortable about the use of gaseous CO2 in aquaria that house fish. but.. her use of that method had nothing whatsoever to do with my responses. which were solely to do with the depth of the substrate she had chosen and the possible problems this could cause.

being at least aware of these potential problems is a first step towards early recognition. making it easier to deal with before the house of cards comes tumbling down.

Purely as an aside:

Over the past several months I have been asked many times about appropriate soils for a "Walstad" or "natural planted tank/NPT" set up.  John Innes No3 is always in the top 2/3 choices of easily available soils. but. Im always careful to mention what is in it. do you want peat? do you want Limestone? do you want superphospate and potassium sulphate? (Those last two are easily dealt with)
I generally favour John Innes 'seedling' which has none of the above chemicals. or 'pond soil' or even Top Soil (my own choice) but many people use No.3 and in fact Walstad mentions it herself as a viable alternative.

To suggest that i consider it 'Deadly' is ludicrous.


----------



## Tim Harrison (8 Jul 2015)

Hi Tony and welcome.

I'm sure you meant well. But IME most of your fears, genuine and thoughtful though they were, are unfounded. For more details check this out http://www.ukaps.org/forum/threads/the-soil-substrate-or-dirted-planted-tank-a-how-to-guide.18943/

However, I really don't think H2S production is something to worry about...Aquatic sediments are anaerobic by nature and macrophytes have evolved to grow in them, they will eventually oxygenate the rhizosphere and make conditions more suitable for growth. Further, released H2S is unlikely to harm aquarium critters since it is quickly oxidised to harmless sulphates in the presence of oxygen.

As for the additional lime in JI No.3 I refer you to Darrel's post #6. You don't need to worry unduly about pH either.

With regards soil depth, I've achieved excellent results with much deeper soil than 3" and with hardscape covering the capping substrate as well...no ill effects.

It maybe overkill, but as far as I know ( and I could be wrong) so called over dosing of inorganic fetz never really hurt any plants or critters, in fact its the basic premise of eutrophic dosing methods like EI, which are tried and tested.

With regard using CO2, it's not an all or nothing scenario. High CO2 and high O2 levels can coexist, the two are not mutually exclusive...in fact if the plant biomass is appropriately high, and the balance right, critters can benefit greatly from high CO2 which equals a higher photosynthetic rate and in turn greater O2 production.

Concerns about soil poking and houses of cards aside I'm sure the poster's tank in question would have been fine, and in all likelihood would have thrived.


----------



## TonyE (8 Jul 2015)

I'm not going to talk about CO2 and Nephrocalcinosis. (which you didn't mention) its irrelevant to this thread.
(I may comment on the thread that deals with this elsewhere on this site.. as it was my eMail to Nathan Hill that resulted in his blog post.. I'll need to think about that.)

Nor will I answer all your points. we have different opinions. Ive stated mine. I'm very cautious when it comes to giving advice to someone else. because the results in two tanks are never the same. i much prefer for people to be aware of any 'potential' issues. so.. if it does go horribly wrong the blame (or guilt) isn't piled on me. even if its self guilt because I chose to say nothing.

so depth of the substrate growth layer was one. setting aside its effects on fish, I'm also aware of H2S effects on plants at remarkably low levels. (0.034ppm and over) (not to mention the added sulphate in No.3) and the added limestone was another, possible issue. I fail to see how its 'ok' to use crushed limestone when people are told repeatedly to be wary of adding anything that may contain lime. "test first" - especially for aquaria that may contain intolerant fish.  The two schools of thought seem incompatible to me.
I'm glad to learn about the chemicals. (superphosphate etc and its interactions - I would still advise washing them out before use. better safe than sorry and simple to do.)

I have used your thread mentioned above in many responses to people who are looking into this method. people particularly who think the two methods 'soil/low tech' and hight tech are incompatible. your thread is a perfect example of why this is not always the case. I particularly point people at your choice of substrate.  aquatic compost in particular. or pond soil. (same thing)  Which seems to me much better than using something like No3. with its 'additives' - its much easier to add things than remove them after the fact. (I would use dolomite or oyster grit - where appropriate.)

as it happens I made my own MTS. but obviously its not appropriate to a lot of people. the act of producing it from raw top soil can be problematic if you have no 'outside'. So.. other soils. and the possible up and downsides of each. including John Innes no3.


----------



## Tim Harrison (9 Jul 2015)

That's fair enough...why don't you post your low-energy scape on UKAPS? You could do a retrospective journal. It'd be a good way to share your experiences here as well.


----------



## ian_m (9 Jul 2015)

I think you are missing the point. The reason why some soils/composts are 





nuttersbutters said:


> deadly to use with fish


 is because they contain ammonium compounds in various forms, ammonium nitrate, ammonium citrate to name a few. These are great for normal plants but deadly for fish.


----------



## Andy D (9 Jul 2015)

nuttersbutters said:


> Damn, the person using it who got grief has just messaged me to say she's completely taken apart her aquarium and thrown everything because of how dangerous she was told it was.



Maybe get her to join/post on here instead if she doesn't already...


----------



## TonyE (9 Jul 2015)

ian_m said:


> I think you are missing the point. The reason why some soils/composts are  is because they contain ammonium compounds in various forms, ammonium nitrate, ammonium citrate to name a few. These are great for normal plants but deadly for fish.



In all fairness this is not an issue with John Innes No.3 in particular as its ingredients are clearly defined and are known to be safe. The advice pretty much across the board - from any 'planted tank' source you care to examine is much the same. DO NOT USE any compost that has chemical fertilisers added. So, readily available items like grow bags are ruled out. similarly most bagged potting soils you find in any garden centre. In general the keywords to look for is "organic" or "100% (all) Natural ingredients" or to simply copy where possible already tried and tested products. (like Innes No.3) If theres the slightest doubt - don't use it. In my own case I used Top Soil (homebase) which I had seen mentioned multiple times. it contains nothing 'extra'.

In America and elsewhere in the world, the most commonly recommended compost is made by Miracle Gro. "Organic Choice potting mix" - which is a basic peat based compost with added chicken manure. Its not sold here in the UK. so people tend to use Innes no.3 because its widely available. or various other organic blends. Or indeed Top Soil.. the cheapest kind. thats additive free. You'll see it mentioned a lot. usually by the acronym MTS. which means 'Mineralised Top Soil' - mineralising is simply breaking down the organic component in the soil so to prevent potential problems later like Ammonia spikes. as well as likely intense tannin staining and possible turbidity . It also reduces the highly soluble nutrients which in the early days after submersion can lead to algae problems.simple to do.. if a little time consuming.



Andy D said:


> Maybe get her to join/post on here instead if she doesn't already...



Andy.. during the coarse of this discussion, she specifically mentioned UKAPS and mentioned that she had spoken to people here.. so...


----------



## Andy D (9 Jul 2015)

TonyE said:


> and mentioned that she had spoken to people here.. so...



Did she?

TonyE / Eutexian have you got the big tank yet?

I hope you get off to a better start on here than you did on PFK. lol


----------



## dw1305 (9 Jul 2015)

Hi all,
Welcome Tony, always nice to see a fellow low tech. non CO2 user. I'm a Walstad fan too. If you have a look at the <"Duckweed Index"> threads, it should tell you where I'm coming from. As well as <"Troi" (who has already posted)>, have a look at <"BigTom"> and <"Akwaskape"> threads for some low tech options.

Personally I wouldn't recommend JI No.3 either, mainly because of its <"high available nutrient content">.  





TonyE said:


> I fail to see how its 'ok' to use crushed limestone when people are told repeatedly to be wary of adding anything that may contain lime.


 I think the point was that if you have hard water, adding more calcium carbonate doesn't make the water any harder (for the reasons mentioned earlier in the thread). If you have soft water, which isn't fully saturated with HCO3- ions, an addition of powered limestone (calcite) or shell grit (aragonite) will add carbonate buffering and make the water harder.  

It is really back to available nutrients (as ions), and unavailable nutrients as insoluble compounds. Silicon(Si) or iron(Fe) are examples of elements where people will have a huge reservoir of these elements, but all as inert insoluble compounds (SIO2, Fe(OH)3 etc.) 





TonyE said:


> "test first" - especially for aquaria that may contain intolerant fish.


I advice people against too much reliance on test kits, I won't go into all the details, but there are lots of threads about how and why, have a look at <"EI vs PPS..."> & <"Test kits">, and linked threads.

cheers Darrel


----------



## TonyE (9 Jul 2015)

Andy D said:


> Did she?
> 
> TonyE / Eutexian have you got the big tank yet?
> 
> I hope you get off to a better start on here than you did on PFK. lol




Apparently yes. she mentioned this site specifically.

the big tank is imminent.. however theres a glitch with my Giesemann PULZAR light bar. I was promised delivery in 3 weeks. Ive now passed the 6 week mark and my patience is beginning to wear thin. The tank itself had a 12 week timeline for delivery. I've now passed that. and am all ready to proceed. with 'at worst' clip on CFL lights and ambient daylight. Not ideal. but what can I do? I really do want the Giesemann. I'll wait a little longer and see what happens. If I get the word that the tank is going to be delivered. I may demand a refund from Giesemann. we'll have to see.


----------

