# FE EDDHA



## Craig Matthews

I have very hard water so I'm needing to dose Fe eddha but as I've read it tints the water red. I'm thinking to not mix it in my ei micro mix but add seperately on micro day. Do I add a tiny amount so the water does not turn red or should it turn slightly red indicating that there is enough? Will the red tint fade as it's uptaken by the plants or constantly be there,
Thanks


----------



## dw1305

Hi all,





Craig Matthews said:


> should it turn slightly red indicating that there is enough? Will the red tint fade as it's uptaken by the plants or constantly be there,


Have a look at @Zeus. thread on <"FeEDDHA"> and <"https://www.ukaps.org/forum/threads/olympus-is-calling-red-mist-feeddha.43046/page-13">, I'd go for a slight pink tint and I think it will fade over time.

cheers Darrel


----------



## Zeus.

Bet we have the same water supply Criag so same issue . I have added Fe DTPA to my micro mix and light sheilded all the piping and then add Fe EDDTA manually on Micro ferts day whilst I work out what dose works before I commit to adding it to the micro mix. The tank can get very red if you dose to 0.5ppm which was compounded as I had Glowlux T5 tubes ( Glowlux have a high red output in the red spectrum which makes the pink tinge stand out more IMO) on at the time which I have swapped for some 6500K T5 tubes I had already and not as bad. After WC the tank is lovely and clear.
Yes it does seem to clear as the week goes on a little but the Fe DTPA in my micro mix does seem to recharge the Fe EDDTA tinge a little 
I have considered using RO water and mixing 50;50 to resolve the issue but would need a big storage tank for my 200-300litre WC. Can get the RO water locally at £0.06p per litre

Heres what it looked like just before WC 9had just done a massive trim and mini rescape of some plants - end view if 1.5m long tank





Tank had been dosed  0.3ppm Fe DTPA and about 0.1ppm Fe EDDTA this week


compared with Fe EDDHA weekly dose of 0.6ppm with growlux tubes on




In my 50L tank the pink tinge isnt as bad as the tank has less width and depth OFC 
Plants looking better in both tanks IMO


----------



## Craig Matthews

Ok thanks Darrell


----------



## Craig Matthews

I bet we have the same supply it's super hard 127mg/l calcium my micro mix will be EDTA so it doesn't have an effect, I out some eddha in my micro mix bottle and added to some sample water and wow it's red. I have the fluval 2.0 led light.i have no idea how to measure the iron content as I've read in here the tests are not even accurate so it's pointless? I was thinking of just adding a pinch straight to the tank until it turns slightly red/pink but if I'm doing this every micro day I'm assuming it will stay pink? I was thinking about ro water to it's very cheap but the hassle of lugging big drums about is abit off putting.


----------



## dw1305

Hi all,


Craig Matthews said:


> i have no idea how to measure the iron content as I've read in here the tests are not even accurate so it's pointless?


You can't easily test for iron (Fe) ions in the water, if you were a water company you would use <"ICP-MS">.


Craig Matthews said:


> I was thinking of just adding a pinch straight to the tank until it turns slightly red/pink but if I'm doing this every micro day I'm assuming it will stay pink?


Yes I'd just add a pinch, and when you can't see any pink tinge add another pinch, plants don't need a lot of iron. The problem with very hard water is that there aren't any iron ions available, all the iron is combined into insoluble compounds and none of it is plant available.


Zeus. said:


> Plants looking better in both tanks IMO


@Zeus.  's is the really important point, it doesn't seem very scientific but it works, just watch the plants. Scientists do this, they just call it a "bioassay".

The main thing to note is that because iron isn't mobile within the plant you will get a lag period before <"new non-iron deficient growth"> occurs.

cheers Darrel


----------



## Craig Matthews

Thanks Darrell I'll do the bioassay and see how it goes over the next couple of weeks with the pinch method im sure my problem is hard water causing insoluble iron, I've also been adding 1 tea spoon if magnesium daily as old leaves if helferi yellow then die off I think it's a mixture of both elements


----------



## Craig Matthews

Thanks Darrell I'll do the bioassay and see how it goes over the next couple of weeks with the pinch method im sure my problem is hard water causing insoluble iron, I've also been adding 1 tea spoon if magnesium daily as old leaves if helferi yellow then die off I think it's a mixture of both elements


----------



## Craig Matthews

Zeus to be fair the pictures don't look to bad, I could probably live with that especially because I have black phantoms,barbs and pristella tetra they would probably benefit. Lovely tank as well mate


----------



## Zeus.

Here a pic just taken after 50-60%WC yesterday my EI macro mix then today with auto doser it was dosed my Micro mix with Fe DTPA 0.1ppm




I then dosed Fe EDDTA manually 0.05ppm when I got home





So as you can see the  Fe DTPA @ 0.1ppm is no notable difference but the  Fe EDDTA @ 0.05ppm extra does go pink.

So depends on what your target Fe ppm dose to how pink it goes. Plus bigger tanks go more pink for same ppm dose 



Craig Matthews said:


> Tao degassed at 8.1ph, tank before co2 7.7 and with co2 7.3 I'm having to go down eddha route



You could go down the Fe DTPA route -
Fe chelated by DTPA: min 10.5%
Practical pH stability range: 4 – 7.5 (in aqueous solution).



Craig Matthews said:


> If I'm dosing it every other day with macros will my water be constantly tinted or does it fade as it's uptaken by the plants? Or should I dose once a week until slightly pink and it would be sufficient or will it get bounded by the po4 on macro day?



Well I am in the early weeks/months of using it, so just trying to see what works myself, but it does seem to fade then I dose some more OFC - I am probably dosing too much as its the EI way of things. But think finding the dose that works and dose it every micro ferts day is the best option, then once you find what works just add Fe EDDTA to your normal Micro dose to hit the Fe EDDTA tank ppm that works - well thats my plan 

Good question about the PO4 and I am unsure of the correct answer - Maybe @dw1305 or @Oldguy or someone else could answer better than me!


----------



## Craig Matthews

Hmm very Interested to find out if all this makes a difference, I'm a newbie to all this higher rachy of elements so I'm pretty naive to how it all works. I read iron tests are not accurate how are getting your readings for iron ppm Zeus or is there a mathematical matrix solution?


----------



## Zeus.

Craig Matthews said:


> I'm a newbie



Me too still finding my feet and lots to learn 



Craig Matthews said:


> mathematical matrix solution?



Yep Rotala Butterfly select the volumes and ppm





 So a 10ml dose to my 500L tank yields 0.1ppm Fe - so for every 1ml of stock solution I add I add 0.01ppm Fe in 500l tank and one tenth the dose for 50l tank

but I use Fe eddha (7%) not Fe eddha (6%) as above but Fe eddha (7%) not on list so I use Fe DTPA (7%) calculation below for amount to add to 1 litre and its in the right order IMO




So 71g of Fe EDDHA (7%) to 1 litre of water

then I used excel and few spreadsheets bit of maths. Plus the data sheets from the products I got from solufeed checked the maths all seem in the right order, recheck recheck the maths


----------



## dw1305

Hi all,





Craig Matthews said:


> I read iron tests are not accurate how are getting your readings for iron ppm Zeus or is there a mathematical matrix solution?


You know how much iron (in ppm = mg/L) you've added from the percentage of iron in the compound (6% for FeEDDHA), how many grams you've added and the volume of the aquarium. You can use one of the <"online calculators">, if you aren't confident about your calculations. 

The availability of a nutrient depends on it staying in solution as ions, plants can only take up nutrients as ions from solution. Some compounds are always soluble, so when you add potassium nitrate (KNO3) you know that all the K+ and NO3- ions you've added are in solution and available to the plant, but it isn't like that with iron (or phosphorus (P)) compounds, most of them are insoluble. 

So basically you can add as much iron chloride (FeCl3.6H2O) as you like, but it doesn't supply much plant available iron, because as soon as it dissolves the Fe+++ ions will find other anions (PO4---, OH-, HCO3- etc.) in solution and precipitate out as solid compounds, which are unavailable to the plant. The plant only has a very brief window of opportunity before the iron ionbs are mopped up and become solid precipitates.

When we use a chelator, like EDTA or EDDHA, the iron is bound in a complex organic acid, which means that it is unavailable to form other compounds, and also unavailable to the plant. If we keep the chelator in the dark this is how things remain, but FEEDTA is degraded by light which allows a trickle of iron ions (Fe+++) to be released into the aquarium. 

cheers Darrel


----------



## Oldguy

It's all a bit of a compromise. If the transition metal ions are too strongly chelated they will not be available to plants but as simple ions they tend to precipitate out of solution and again become unavailable to plants. The EI dosing regime of macros and micro nutrients on alternate days tries to minimize these effects. There is however another important factor that is the replacement of the chelated trace element (as an ion) by other metal ions. This replacement competition can be reduced if all the transition metal ions are chelated but there will also be Mg and Ca ions present in the tank water which can displace your chelated trace metal ions. The jockeying for position is dependent on concentration of competing ions and the pH of the tank water with regard to the chelating agent being used. Iron ions have about a 24hr half life in typical fish tank waters as soluble salts.

The chelating ligands are also typically photo-degraded. This and ion replacement produce a slow release of transition metal ions as simple salts for plant utilization. [It is possible with heavy handed application of the chelating agent to mobilize metals out from plant tissue and into solution].

Unfortunately most of the data in the public domain and of research interest is focused on hydroponic or horticultural, especially foliar feeds for fruit crops, applications.

The stuff we buy from our LFS is derived from such data and generalized to one size fits all and profit maximized to make a niche market worth playing in. It is always worth remembering that the bottle is the most expensive bit in production and water, if it is an aqueous product, the most abundant component.

Well worth following @Zeus with his trials. Excellent tank Zeus keep up the posts, we watch with interest. We also watch as the market moves to supply the more specialist reagents. God Bless the Internet.


----------



## Zeus.

dw1305 said:


> FEEDTA is degraded by light which allows a trickle of iron ions (Fe+++) to be released into the aquarium.



So how is the Fe in FE-EDDHA released I asked myself 

*Understanding of the Mode of Action of FeIII–EDDHA as Iron *
Quote
_The very low reduction potential of the chelate FeIII–EDDHA (EDDHA= ethylenediamine N,N′‐bis(2‐hydroxy)phenylacetic acid) makes it unreactive in photochemically or chemically induced electron transfer processes. The lack of reactivity of this complex toward light invalidates photodegradation as an alternative mechanism for environmental elimination. However, in spite of its low reduction potential, the biological reduction of FeIII–EDDHA is very effective. Based on electrochemical measurements, it is proposed that FeIII–EDDHA itself is not the substrate of the enzyme ferric chelate reductase. Likely, at the more acidic pH in the vicinity of the roots, the ferric chelate in a closed form (FeL−) could generate a vacant coordination site that leads to an open hexacoordinate species (FeHL) where the reduction of the metal by the enzyme takes place._
Unquote

So from above it is proposed the  FeEDDHA is biological reduced by the plants roots to free the Fe for uptake

IRON CHELATE INTERFERENCE: THE DOWNSIDE OF FE-EDDHA AND FE-HBED - quote _Fe-DTPA is a great iron chelate product, but it exhibits rapid photodegredation. One study reported a half life of 30 minutes in full sunlight. When I used Fe-DTPA, I found my iron levels would drop from 2.5ppm to 0.0ppm within 3 days _unquote  so fast photodegredation for FeDTPA - so this makes me think should I dose my Micro mix with FeDTPA in it in one dump or multiple ? multiple for the photoperiod seems to be the obvious answer to me and easy to do with PLC so three equal doses two hours apart from lights on done 

*Iron Sources in Hydroponics : Which One is the Best ?* another interesting read



Oldguy said:


> Unfortunately most of the data in the public domain and of research interest is focused on hydroponic or horticultural, especially foliar feeds for fruit crops, applications.



Yep but you use the tools/papers on hand


----------



## Oldguy

Zeus. said:


> Yep but you use the tools/papers on hand



Yes we do and like you do empirical trials and note the results. It's an age old conundrum is it Science, Technology or Engineering that take the lead in development. We can but try and as the Saxon proverb goes 'We must row with the oars that we have.'

Research, think (twice), do and evaluate. The cycle of progress.

I use EDTA as my tank water is suitable and use alternative day dosing and assume photo degradation and central ion replacement by GpII ions to release Fe ions. No precipitation of iron and no obvious shrimp deaths from Cu. Used to have a useful contact at Allied Colloids which made a range of chelated compounds which I played around with but that was a different time.


----------



## Oldguy

Zeus. said:


> multiple ? multiple



I would go for multiple small doses. A 30 min half life is short.



Zeus. said:


> plants roots



To what extent are the roots of aquatic plants comparable to those of terrestrial plants for nutrient uptake. Also would the iron complex diffuse through the substrate at a fast enough rate. I go back to my earlier point that much of our information is from hydroponics and hence terrestrial plant growth.


----------



## dw1305

Hi all,





Zeus. said:


> So how is the Fe in FE-EDDHA released I asked myself......





Zeus. said:


> _However, in spite of its low reduction potential, the biological reduction of FeIII–EDDHA is very effective. Based on electrochemical measurements, it is proposed that FeIII–EDDHA itself is not the substrate of the enzyme ferric chelate reductase. Likely, at the more acidic pH in the vicinity of the roots, the ferric chelate in a closed form (FeL−) could generate a vacant coordination site that leads to an open hexacoordinate species (FeHL) where the reduction of the metal by the enzyme takes place._


That is interesting.

The question would then be what happens in hydroponics, (and for floating plants), can they still generate reducing conditions in the rhizosphere? and make the Fe++ ions available? If FeEDDHA works as an iron source in hydroponics it would suggest that they can (or possibly there is another mechanism that makes the iron ions (FE++(+)) available?). I can see that @Oldguy has just asked the same questions, so I'm going to assume that I'm on the right track.

I know a lot of the work on the biochemical mechanisms of iron uptake in roots was done using _Limnobium, _I'll see which iron sources they used. 

I must admit I had just assumed it was photodegradation, I didn't check.





Zeus. said:


> ? multiple for the photoperiod seems to be the obvious answer to me and easy to do with PLC so three equal doses two hours apart from lights on done


It should give you a slight increase in iron availability, I'm not sure that would relate to an increase in growth, mainly because of the low requirement of plants for iron, "some" is usually "enough".

cheers Darrel


----------



## dw1305

Hi all, 





Oldguy said:


> Also would the iron complex diffuse through the substrate at a fast enough rate.


I think the iron reduction would occur within the rhizosphere, so with very little spatial separation from the root. Roots are leaky structures, and plants can use these exudates both for direct uptake of ions and to alter the microbial assemblage to their advantage. 





Oldguy said:


> To what extent are the roots of aquatic plants comparable to those of terrestrial plants for nutrient uptake.


Because roots can only take up nutrients as ions from solution I suspect that there isn't really much difference, what may differ is the associated microbial assemblage. My guess is that this is where a lot of the current research effort is targeted. 

I've just down-loaded <"Sampling root exudates – Mission impossible?"> which may have some of the answers. 





dw1305 said:


> iron uptake in roots was done using _Limnobium_


Looks like <"Evidence for the Uptake of Non-Essential Ions and Essential Nutrient Ions by Root Hairs and Their Effect on Root Hair Development"> is the reference I want, it says (however this was using Tomato):




cheers Darrel


----------



## Zeus.

Oldguy said:


> I would go for multiple small doses. A 30 min half life is short.



Yes. But the half life of 30 mins was from full sunlight. I have slight the daily dose to 3 doses ATM as was easy to do, but do plan to design a Logo PLC software that will dose the daily dose equally in multiple doses every 30mins, Just need to design it should be straight farward @ian_m might even get it done before I get time as he is quick at it


----------



## Oldguy

Zeus. said:


> design a Logo PLC software



I feel that I have had a good day if I can turn my PC on.


----------



## Zeus.

Design sorted How to Use a PLC to control your tank one dose splits into 20 smaller doses and it each dose is 24 minutes apart from lights on, should supply a steady trickle of free Fe during the photoperiod form the Fe DTPA


----------



## Oldguy

dw1305 said:


> iron uptake in roots was done using _Limnobium,_



That would be very useful.

Some people tell me that having a fish tank is very restful, I wonder


----------



## dw1305

Hi all, 





Oldguy said:


> That would be very useful.


The original papers are  <"Ullrich CI, Novacky AJ (1990) Extra- and intracellular pH and membrane potential changes induced by K+, Cl−, H2PO4 -, and NO 3 uptake and fusicoccin in root hairs of _Limnobium stoloniferum_."> _Plant Physiol_ *94*:1561–1567 &  <"Are Redox Reactions Involved in Regulation of K+ Channels in the Plasma Membrane of _Limnobium stoloniferum_ Root Hairs"> A Grabov, M Bottger - _Plant Physiology_, 1994.

Neither of those specifically talks about ferric reductase activity in the rhizosphere, but they go through the physiology of root hair ion uptake. I'm not a plant physiologist and I had to ask some-one who is to "help me with the long words". 

This one should be available to everybody: <"Grillet L & Schmidt W (2017), The multiple facets of root iron reduction, _Journal of Experimental Botany_ *68:*18, 5021–5027"> and is a bit more accessible. 

This is below pH7 







and this one is above pH7






It looks like this is a pretty universal mechanism in all plants (from the Bryophytes upwards), other than grasses.

cheers Darrel


----------



## dw1305

Hi all, 





Oldguy said:


> Some people tell me that having a fish tank is very restful, I wonder


That is sort of why I've pushed the <"Duckweed Index">. It has a basis in science, but all the interesting/scary* bits are hidden under the hood.

Personally I would like to be able to quantify everything about the way a tank works, how plants grow, the interaction between DOC and nutrient availability etc. but it isn't a realistic aspiration and I'm a pretty shoddy aquarium keeper, so I need to cut to the chase, which for me is:


dw1305 said:


> Rather than the regular addition of nutrients, I use <"a different approach">. I have a floating plant (usually <"_Limnobium laevigatum">_) and ,<"heavy planting"> of <"easy" plants"> in the tanks. I just watch the <"growth and leaf colour of the floating plant"> (so not CO2, or light, limited), all the time the leaves are green and the plant growing (how ever slowly) I don't add any nutrients (other than whatever arrives via water changes).
> 
> When plant growth (or leaf colour) deteriorates I add some nutrients, once growth has resumed it is back to observing and waiting.


*delete as appropriate.

cheers Darrel


----------



## Oldguy

dw1305 said:


> all the interesting/scary* bits



I must admit I like to know how stuff works, not a rivet counter, but the more technical side of 'having a tank' maintains a connection with a past life. Seldom test the water, as you say if the fish and plants are doing well then all is well. However a few toys in the cupboard are a good investment when you are a stand alone.

Still saddened by people who just do not see plants.


----------



## Zeus.

Oldguy said:


> I must admit I like to know how stuff works



+1 



Oldguy said:


> Still saddened by people who just do not see plants.



I dont see the fish that much - see plants/algae then scrimp then snails then fish


----------



## dw1305

Hi all, 





Oldguy said:


> Still saddened by people who just do not see plants


<"Plant blindness">. 

In aquarium terms plants are the gift that keeps on giving, but it is a struggle trying to persuade people that plants are net oxygen producers, massively increase nitrification potential etc. 

cheers Darrel


----------



## Zeus.

dw1305 said:


> plants are net oxygen producers



Diatom algae  watched a good program on it on netflix 'One Strange Rock'


----------



## dw1305

Hi all, 





Zeus. said:


> Diatom algae  watched a good program on it on netflix 'One Strange Rock'


I haven't seen that one. The estimate is that over half the Earth's oxygen is attributable to Marine Algae, and Diatoms will make up a good proportion of that. The figure quoted is 40% for Diatoms, but the estimates for the proportion of the Earth's oxygen from marine phytoplankton is between 55% - 80%, so that doesn't really help very much.  

cheers Darrel


----------



## FishWorks

Happy Easter Everyone!

Just a brief intro, I have a new thread which is about FE DTPA but was invited here since its a chelator topic aswell.
From my general readings, DTPA chelator is stable up to 7 PH, above 7 it starts degrading and chemical half-life happens at 7.5 (50% concentration point).
Link Below (go all the way down to the section about half life):
https://www.ukaps.org/forum/threads...water-supply-with-an-allinone-solution.52972/

So I think DTPA is a great chelator if you can bring your PH below 7.5 which is an easily done with CO2 injection.
My Hi-Light Tank for example, my water parameters 8.1 PH, 4 KH, 4 GH. After CO2 injection, I come down to 7.1 PH and I have about 90% FE DTPA remaining. Thinking about those numbers, then up to 8.5 PH, FE DTPA is still pretty good. Craig comes down from 8.1 PH to 7.3, which is why Zeus is telling Craig:


Zeus. said:


> You could go down the Fe DTPA route -
> Fe chelated by DTPA: min 10.5%
> Practical pH stability range: 4 – 7.5 (in aqueous solution).



So as long as you can get below 7.5 PH (like say 7.4), then dosing FE DTPA (hopefully 1-2 hours into the photoperiod), you still have about 60% FE DTPA which is a good amount. You don't need a whole lot, that 60% for a few hours is enough.
I can quote Darrel and Ceg4048 on this:


ceg4048 said:


> The thing about Iron though, is that the plants don't really need a lot and in a high tech tank, within an hour or so the plants has as much Fe as it needs, so it really is not a big problem. If you lost 50% of the Iron then just dose more often and it will get there





dw1305 said:


> Yes I'd just add a pinch, and when you can't see any pink tinge add another pinch, plants don't need a lot of iron. The problem with very hard water is that there aren't any iron ions available, all the iron is combined into insoluble compounds and none of it is plant available.




So I get down to what is bothering me, If ones goal were to dose 1ppm FE DTPA weekly using standard EI on Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday (.33ppm each time), would anyone agree with me that a single dose on each of these days is enough?
or would you prefer to dose twice in 2 hour intervals? or dose three times in 2 hour intervals?
Perhaps you would prefer to dose FE DTPA at 2ppm or 3ppm per week?



Zeus. said:


> so this makes me think should I dose my Micro mix with FeDTPA in it in one dump or multiple ? multiple for the photoperiod seems to be the obvious answer to me and easy to do with PLC so three equal doses two hours apart from lights on done



I can see that Zeus, like me, is also wondering about the dosing method above . Because of EI method, we can dose in excess and not care about Algae, provided you dont go ridiculous amounts (like say a sensible 3ppm FE DTPA versus a ridiculous 50ppm FE DTPA). So if we wanted healthy growth, we could dose thrice per day on Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday (Each dose .33ppm, that will be 9 doses totalling approximately 3ppm)? Would this be okay for livestock like Cardinal Tetra?

Cheers,
-Harry


----------



## Zeus.

I just had a look on rotala butterfly and a quick Google and both surgest 5ppm of Fe is safe for freshwater livestock, but no expert OFC.
But your surgestion to allow for the the dissociation constant changing with the different pHs so if it's only 50% dissolved dosing double the dose will make the initial dose closer to the target, however as the Fe ions are mopped up by the plants as they need/use them this will reduce the total Fe ions in solution and more of the percipited Fe should then dissolve into solution to maintain equilibrium so it should ( I think ) regulate itself to some extent as the plants uptake Fe so a double dose may not be needed IMO.
But having said that from what I have read the chemistry of the availibity/interactions of ions with very hard water gets more complex, hence the reason why you tend to see/read about tanks with soft or RO reminerilsed water doing so well.


----------



## Craig Matthews

I'm a week into dosing a tea spoon tip of Fe eddha using the slight pink tint method and haven't encountered any problems with live stock. The tint does dissapear rather quickly in 24hrs. I haven't has enough time to comment on a change will need a few more weeks. I haven't used equations or ppm, grams etc as I'm very poor at maths although the rotala butterfly website Zeus mentions gave me a answer it's very good just need some scales. Even though my pH with co2 goes below 7.5 I'd rather use eddha to get use of the maximum Fe content possible in solution,also it's best to fertilise before lights on which is before the co2 pH drop so the plants eat before their hard day's work under the light plus it also gives you flexibility of dosing times as work/life applies. I'll report back after time for results. Thanks to everyone who is participating.


----------



## FishWorks

Zeus. said:


> But your surgestion to allow for the the dissociation constant changing with the different pHs so if it's only 50% dissolved dosing double the dose will make the initial dose closer to the target



I just gave it some thought today. Since I estimate I have 90% FE-DTPA at 7.1 PH, I could give it an extra half dose. My original target was 1ppm FE per week, new target would be 1.5 ppm.

I found a link from 6 years ago with Tom saying to increase dosing DTPA 2-3x per week to reach target levels.
However, I don't know the original assumed dosing concentration and frequency in the link, he just says compensate by dosing daily, or 3x per week with DTPA.
link below (scroll all the way down):
https://www.plantedtank.net/forums/11-fertilizers-water-parameters/217705-dtpa-edta.html

Perhaps it would be better to dose .25 ppm twice per day, 3 times a week for an approximate total of 1.5 ppm per week.


----------



## Zeus.

dw1305 said:


> @Zeus.'s is the really important point, it doesn't seem very scientific but it works, just watch the plants. Scientists do this, they just call it a "bioassay".



Think Darrel nails with the ''bioassay'' IMO, what is actually happening on the actual [Fe] isnt important and can be difficult to actually confirm what is happening, but if the plants are better for it and no livestock suffer then its a winner. After all thats EI dosing - dose in excess at safe levels and if the plants are doing well you can try cutting back if you wish and find out how much is actually needed but that takes a lot of time and effort and our tanks requirements are changing all the time as well. Its all right looking at dissociation constants with different pHs but these are done in close to distilled water I would of thought, I would bet with the minimum of other ions present and are tanks are far from that esp if you have hard water which if your using FeDTPA or FeEDDHA you will have so its a case of suck it and see as far as I'm concerned, well thats the way I understand it is,unless someone has some great paper that confirms what is actually going on.


----------



## Craig Matthews

So I've been dosing Fe eddha for a few weeks now adding  tip of a teaspoon as per recomended on this thread and gaining the slight pink tinge, after a week it looked liked my plants perked up abit more vibrant and my Xmas moss started showing alot more growing tips and java fern has sprouted loads of new shoots so all cushty. Prior to buying and installing puriden filter media I done some reading on ukaps and its been stated a few times purigen removes bio waste and not non bio waste to clarify the water, I've had it in a week the water is alot clearer but.... I no longer get the pink tinge from eddha and the purigen media is looking pinkish so I can only assume that the purigen is removing the eddha? Anyone have any experience using purigen and its effects on their fertiliser's?


----------



## dw1305

Hi all,





Craig Matthews said:


> So I've been dosing Fe eddha for a few weeks now adding tip of a teaspoon as per recomended on this thread and gaining the slight pink tinge, after a week it looked liked my plants perked up abit more vibrant and my Xmas moss started showing alot more growing tips and java fern has sprouted loads of new shoots so all cushty.


Good, that sounds promising. 





Craig Matthews said:


> I no longer get the pink tinge from eddha and the purigen media is looking pinkish so I can only assume that the purigen is removing the eddha?


I don't have any experience with Purigen and iron chelates, but the pink colour would indicate that you are right, and the FeEDDHA is being removed by the Purigen.

Seachem are evasive as to the <"exact mode of action of purigen"> but it probably removes <"molecules by size">. Most large molecules would be organic "wastes": proteins, structural carbohydrates, tannic and humic compounds etc.

All the nutrients we add, other than iron chelates, would be as ions. When you add the salt potassium nitrate (KNO3) it become  K+ & NO3-. An ion is a single atom (or simple compound) plus (NO3-), or minus (K+), an electron.

This is <"NaEDTA">, but <"FeEDHHA"> would be similar in size.




cheers Darrel


----------



## Craig Matthews

So basically iron chelate are large enough molecules for the purigen to hold on to them where as other nutrients are simple compounds and slip through the media?


----------



## dw1305

Hi all,





Craig Matthews said:


> So basically iron chelate are large enough molecules for the purigen to hold on to them where as other nutrients are simple compounds and slip through the media?


Yes, that looks fairly conclusive from the pink tinge of the Purigen.

cheers Darrel


----------



## Zeus.

So if the Purigen is mopping up the FeEDHHA which I think is fairly conclusive from the observations of Craig, I can see no reason why it should mop up the FeEDTA or FeDTPA as well  not good news for Purigen users


----------



## Craig Matthews

I agree Zeus because as Darrel stated the complex compound of iron but when we have chelated mixes of ferts is it just our iron that is chelated into a more complex compound making it easier for purigen to grab a hold or other micro's too?


----------



## dw1305

Hi all, 





Zeus. said:


> So if the Purigen is mopping up the FeEDHHA which I think is fairly conclusive from the observations of Craig, I can see no reason why it should mop up the FeEDTA or FeDTPA as well


 Yes, I would think it would. 

Somebody could ask on the <"Seachem forum">, although I suspect the response would need a certain amount of "interpretation".  There is a thread, but it isn't <"very informative">.

cheers Darrel


----------



## dw1305

Hi all, 
Here is another Seachem forum <"EDTA and Purigen"> thread. 

cheers Darrel


----------



## Craig Matthews

I will try ask tonight, interesting thread and how the seachem support likes to turn to blaming the water supply.


----------



## dw1305

Hi all,
There are also Clive's @ceg4048 comments in <"Can purigen strip....">.

cheers Darrel


----------



## Craig Matthews

Interesting, so if EDTA is bound by purigen then higher more complex chelates, DTPA and of course eddha are most certainly bound by purigen. That confirms Zeus's thoughts. If after regeneration the purigen releases chloromines that's potentially becoming toxic to live stock?


----------



## dw1305

Hi all, 





Craig Matthews said:


> If after regeneration the purigen releases chloromines that's potentially becoming toxic to live stock?


I think it is probably a theoretical concern for planted tank keepers, because the plants are going to mop up any trickle of ammonia (from the breakdown of chloramine) fairly effectively.

cheers Darrel


----------



## Craig Matthews

So seachem got back to me with the following reply, Darrell's philosophy is %100 correct regarding the large molecular size of the chelates. I suppose it depends how quickly the plants uptake the iron for any consequences with the purigen?


----------



## dw1305

Hi all, 





dw1305 said:


> Somebody could ask on the <"Seachem forum">, although I suspect the response would need a certain amount of "interpretation".





Craig Matthews said:


> So seachem got back to me with the following reply


Fair play to Seachem, that is a pretty straight-forward and unequivocal answer. 





Craig Matthews said:


> . I suppose it depends how quickly the plants uptake the iron for any consequences with the purigen?


Yes. The more efficient the chelator is the more likely it is to be bound by the purigen. In very hard water (where you would be more likely to FeEDDHA) any iron (Fe++(+)) ions will be mopped up pretty quickly by carbonate (HCO3-), hydroxide (OH-) or phosphate (PO4---) anions and will form insoluble compounds.

cheers Darrel


----------



## Craig Matthews

Damn, It sounds like I'm fighting a losing battle with my hard water, po4 from the tap, purigen I can remove easily. My Fe eddha or any iron chelate for this matter just gets bound one way or another, RO seems the only light at the end if the tunnel.


----------



## PARAGUAY

I have emailed Seacham in the past( a test kits query) and got a very good response from the technical side aggreing with UKAPS a lot about their limitations -- and also the benifits, and they were pretty generous about some of their competitors


----------



## dw1305

Hi all,





Craig Matthews said:


> I'm fighting a losing battle with my hard water, po4 from the tap


I'd just see what happens. Plants just need a trickle of iron, they don't need very much. If your plant health is good, with green, normally sized new leaves, then the plants are getting enough iron. That is why I like the response of a <"non-CO2 limited plant as a visual indicator of nutrient levels">, it does a way with a lot of agonising and testing etc.

The same applies to watching the "pink tinge" in the water, it is an easy visual way of telling whether you have iron present





Craig Matthews said:


> .....purigen I can remove easily.


I'd take it out, otherwise it is constantly going to be fouled by the FeEDDHA and you are going to get through a lot of Purigen.





Craig Matthews said:


> RO seems the only light at the end if the tunnel.


RO works because it is a "blank slate", the only things in your tank water are the things you've added. Against that you have the expense and environmental impact. 

I'm a rain-water user, it gives you some of the advantages of RO, and gets around the issue of chlorination and waste of water.

cheers Darrel


----------



## Craig Matthews

Well I've recently acquired some hornwart to I might float abit rather than plant in the substrate see how it reacts. Cheers Darrel I will take the purigen out and delete any possible negative side effects on the FE.
Have a good weekend


----------



## dw1305

Hi all,





Craig Matthews said:


> I've recently acquired some hornwart. I might float abit rather than plant in the substrate


_Ceratophyllum_ spp. are always really floaters, even if you anchor them. Hornwort has been used as a <"model plant"> for plant physiology studies on leaves, because it doesn't have the capacity to ever develop any <"roots">.





Craig Matthews said:


> ... see how it reacts


It occurs on all the continents other than (Antarctica) and can grow in a wide range of water hardness, so I would expect that it is pretty efficient at taking up those ions that are in short supply in hard water (like Fe+++). It can definitely use bicarbonate (HCO3-) as <"a carbon source">, which is usually a good indication of adaptation to hard water. 

cheers Darrel


----------



## Craig Matthews

Aha I see, I did read that hornwart is a floating plant but can be anchored in substrate, it does not develop roots but something similar to enable anchoring? I've taken the purigen out so I'll give it a week or two and keep an eye on the pink tinge.you can see the purigen colour, admittedly it is somewhat brown from bio and waste but there is a red hue to it. Seachem state it should last around 6 months I think they say it works out at 1 gram for every gallon so this bag is 100 grams=100 gallons and my tank is only 30 gallons way below their stated threshold and I'm not over stocked so alot of the colour is indeed FE EDDHA


----------



## dw1305

Hi all, 





Craig Matthews said:


> it does not develop roots but something similar to enable anchoring?


Whenever I've seen it in the wild it has been free floating, and the same in my tanks and <"water buckets">. 

I assume people anchor it by planting the base of the stem in the substrate, and presumably they keep on doing this every time it floats free.

cheers Darrel


----------



## Zeus.

@dw1305 Been thinking about rainwater rather than using RO and could pick up some more water butts 240L which if it rains would be ideal and just pump some of the rainwater into the tank say 50:50 with tap water, but average WC uses about 200-300l weekly, so some weeks might not have enough to have the same mix every week dependant on rainfall OFC so was thinking does it need to be the same mix every week ? so if no water in butt use straight from tap if I have enough rain water mix it up. The water harness would vary week to week and the target pH OFC but would the plants suffer ? after all water in rivers and streams will vary also with the rainfall


----------



## dw1305

Hi all,





Zeus. said:


> Been thinking about rainwater rather than using RO and could pick up some more water butts 240L which if it rains would be ideal and just pump some of the rainwater into the tank say 50:50 with tap water, but average WC uses about 200-300l weekly,


I've got about a thousand litres of rain-water storage, I use a bit of it for watering the containers, but mostly for the water changes in the tanks and I still run short at some times when its dry. 

If I was getting through a 150L a week, I'd be looking at as much as 10,000 litres of rain-water storage.

cheers Darrel


----------



## X3NiTH

Might be too much of a dKH swing if hopping between rain 50:50 and 100% tap. Different scenario but same effect, I've stupidly just managed to start melt down in my Buce again by swapping out inert substrate for what appeared to be inert sand that turned out to have crushed coral in it, the addition of CO₂ in this tank made the dKH go from a consistent 8 to 20 and climbing and it's pretty catastrophic on the plants, even my Narrow mini leaf Java fern has gone glassy and started melting (much more sensitive to changing conditions than regular Java fern, like Buce it is agonising that it takes so long to grow and I've now lost over 50% of it sigh). The same sand I had been using for a few weeks in a non CO₂ injected tank and that has remained inert at dKH8 which is why I thought it was inert to use elsewhere, I should have checked, my bad.


----------



## Craig Matthews

dw1305 said:


> Hi all,_Ceratophyllum_ spp. are always really floaters, even if you anchor them. Hornwort has been used as a <"model plant"> for plant physiology studies on leaves, because it doesn't have the capacity to ever develop any <"roots">.It occurs on all the continents other than (Antarctica) and can grow in a wide range of water hardness, so I would expect that it is pretty efficient at taking up those ions that are in short supply in hard water (like Fe+++). It can definitely use bicarbonate (HCO3-) as <"a carbon source">, which is usually a good indication of adaptation to hard water.
> 
> cheers Darrel



So my planted hornwort has taken a turn for the worst, needles have gone from green, yellow and now browning so dying. Can I pin this on the fact that it's a floating plant? I'm not 100% sure as I'm finding all my plants are growing, slowly but the older growth as in the leaf before the new one very quickly dies and gets BBA so I'm guessing co2 problem, don't think it's light as I have just a fluval 2.0 over a juwel Rio 125 at about 500mm above substrate level so I'd say that low light.


----------



## dw1305

Hi all, 





Craig Matthews said:


> so I'm guessing co2 problem


 Can you get a picture? I wouldn't have thought it was CO2, it grows pretty well for me without CO2 , and it can use bicarbonate (HCO3-) as a carbon source.

This is it in my <"Black-worm (_Lumbriculus)_ buckets">, which are pretty much in full sun, and get very warm in the summer. 




 

cheers Darrel


----------



## Craig Matthews

Yes no problem, I'll post some pics later today when I get home,thanks Darell


----------



## Craig Matthews

Hi Darrell, the photos of my hornwort. You can see the browning of the needles but the grow tip still grows. I'm finding this is happening to alot of my plants. Growing but dies off older growth then BBA attacks.


----------



## dw1305

Hi all,





Craig Matthews said:


> the photos of my hornwort.


Craig that is a _Myriophyllum_ species. 

Somebody else @Mick.Dk?  will need to tell you which one. 

cheers Darrel


----------



## zozo

Craig Matthews said:


> I'm guessing co2 problem, don't think it's light





dw1305 said:


> Craig that is a _Myriophyllum_ species.



I can't tell you witch one it is..  But this is usualy how you will find it growing in nature.




The submersed form is rather delicate.. If it doesn't pop the surface soon it doesn't live very long. I guess this plant needs a lot of trimming..




I have grown this plant also in high tech years ago and it is pretty difficult to get it going in a constant submersed form. Myriophyllum beeing sensitive and melt away submersed also happens in the full sun outddoors. I'm also growing it outdoors and it grows best in an inch of water. Go 4 inch deep and the submersed stems get naked in no time, even if it sun blasted the intire day. Definitively not a light issue.

My best guess, it is a CO² issue, but one that might be not very safe for your lifestock if you try to meet it.  Than its getting it to grow fast enough and dense enough to keep it beautifull due trimming and replanting..

Might add it depends on the sp. for example the M. aqautica grows very robust and can root in deeper waters. The smaller and more delicate Myriophyllum sp. such as in the picture the M. aquatica Redstem is much smaller and absolutely prefers more shallow conditions.


----------



## Craig Matthews

It's very weird, it looks like the needles are browning under the light but when I take it from the tank it looks green maybe it's just not highlighted enough out the tank. I will try and float it see what happens. I'm having troubles with my co2. Degassed tank water is 8 but I can't get the pH to drop below 7.2 even with no surface agitation. Thanks for your reply soon


----------



## Mick.Dk

Craig Matthews said:


> Hi Darrell, the photos of my hornwort. You can see the browning of the needles but the grow tip still grows. I'm finding this is happening to alot of my plants. Growing but dies off older growth then BBA attacks.


Looks suspiciously like Myriophyllum aquaticum.......... which is on the EU list of invasive species,  not alowed to trade or keep. This could explain,  why you got it under the name of hornworth.
To be honest,  you should dispose of it (in an environmentally safe way), just on suspicion it might be Myr.  aquaticum, since this plant is really causing big time trouble around the world.


----------

