# Water changes



## Kitbag (30 Mar 2018)

I have been keeping tropical tanks for 15 years and understand the need for regular water changes in those. 

I’m new to planted tanks with low bio load from fish and am surprised by the size of water changes that are being carried out in this side of the hobby. 

What’s the reason behind such large percentage water changes?

Thanks in advance.


----------



## Tim Harrison (30 Mar 2018)

It's really all about reducing the concentration of both dissolved and solid organic compounds to help to prevent algae.
Plants grown in high-energy tanks - those that are CO2 injected, with eutrophic dosing - produce a large amount of metabolic waste, and so require regular and substantial water changes.

Plants in low-energy tanks grow around 10x slower and therefore do not produce so much metabolic waste, therefore water changes do not need to be so substantial or frequent.

In a newly set up tank even more frequent water changes are often recommended to reduce the ammonia spikes often associated with cycling and to cope with the organics released by plants transitioning from emersed to immersed growth.

Plus water changes in general help to keep critters healthy and happy.


----------



## dw1305 (30 Mar 2018)

Hi all,





Kitbag said:


> I have been keeping tropical tanks for 15 years and understand the need for regular water changes in those. I’m new to planted tanks with low bio load from fish and am surprised by the size of water changes that are being carried out in this side of the hobby. What’s the reason behind such large percentage water changes?


I'm a low tech tank keeper, but I still like regular water changes. I change a small volume every day, but you could change more water, more infrequently.

I've been advocate of planted tanks (with heavy planting) as a technique for maintaining water quality on non-plant based forums and people have often assumed that plants are instead of water changes, and that plant based filtration is instead of microbial based filtration, but neither is true. 

Plant based filtration is always plant/microbe filtration, and plants are an adjunct to water changes, rather than an alternative. 

The advantage of actively growing plants (whether you add CO2 or not) and water changes is that you can maintain very high quality water, and as @Tim Harrison says high quality water helps keep your livestock healthy.  

It has come up quite a lot in the <"forum as a question">, partially because Diana Walstad, in the first edition of <"The Ecology of the Planted Aquarium">,  didn't recommend water changes. 

Have a look at <"Fish health....">.

cheers Darrel


----------



## tam (30 Mar 2018)

Planted tanks get a bit lumped together sometimes. Those doing high tech aquascapes with CO2 tend to be the ones also doing 50% weekly water changes. Partly because they often use EI dosing, which is basically adding more nutrients than plants could need so they never run out, and managing that by changing 50% of the water to keep it balanced.

There is much more variation to planted tanks than just that though. People have all sort of water change schedules from big and fequent to average to very infrequent. It just depends on the tank setup, the plants and the fish and what you want for your own tank.


----------



## Tim Harrison (30 Mar 2018)

dw1305 said:


> The advantage of actively growing plants (whether you add CO2 or not) and water changes is that you can maintain very high quality water


I think that trying to grow healthy aquatic plants has made an enormous contribution to critter husbandry, not least by providing better water quality. In fact it's bought about several hobby paradigm shifts, overturning accepted aquarium dogma. Most of us are aware that inorganic nutrients don't cause algae, and aged water does not have magical properties.


----------



## Delapool (31 Mar 2018)

Some here are going from cichlid tanks to planted tanks and are just set up for large water changes (eg drains / drums with pumps / etc where they heat / stabilise tap water over night - mainly for deeper water African cichlids that don’t handle changes in water so well). And as mentioned above are doing a larger water change to reset the tank from ferts dosing. While shifting house, I had to let the water changes slide quite a bit and did think water quality / smell was off (high tech tank).


----------



## HiNtZ (31 Mar 2018)

Could it be possible to run a high tech, highly dosed tank with say monthly water changes with the help of a huge activated carbon/sand stack to get rid of the organic compounds? Maybe have it purge the entire tank once a week after lights off?

I don't dislike doing water changes, it's part of the fun - but it's fun to think about.


----------



## wolfewill (31 Mar 2018)

The PPS fertilization method reduces the amount of water changes, but this only works if you are comfortable with water test kits. The process requires weekly water testing and monitoring to judge when to do water changes. Success comes with mature tanks only, from my experience, but in stable, moderately lit tanks with reduced dosing and CO2, water changes may only be needed every two or three months....... Now I'm going to wait for the 'booing' and 'hissing' to start from the opponents of water test kits for planted tanks......


----------



## wolfewill (31 Mar 2018)

Oh, and PPS stands for perpetual preservation system.


----------



## sciencefiction (31 Mar 2018)

wolfewill said:


> Success comes with mature tanks only, from my experience, but in stable, moderately lit tanks with reduced dosing and CO2, water changes may only be needed every two or three months.



You can grow plants in quite appalling conditions, and grow them successfully, without much algae, irregular or no water changes, as you said, as long as the tank is mature. But you can't keep fish in such tank...They won't last long. So what one's success entails is not the same as another's definition of success.


----------



## Tim Harrison (31 Mar 2018)

wolfewill said:


> Oh, and PPS stands for perpetual preservation system.


We know ...as for testing, are you mad , and no or optional water changes...that's just lazy 
https://www.ukaps.org/forum/threads/perpetual-preservation-system.28966/

IME, you can pretty much get away with a multitude of sins in a mature planted tank...they are incredibly biologically stable.


----------



## dw1305 (31 Mar 2018)

Hi all,





Tim Harrison said:


> Plus IME, you can pretty much get away with a multitude of sins in a mature planted tank...they are incredibly biologically stable.


That is it, <"mature planted tanks"> give you a lot more wriggle room. If you have floating, or emergent plants, they have Diana Walstad's <"aerial advantage"> and that gives even greater resilience.  

We don't know exactly why, but densely planted tanks definitely have greater stability and resilience.

As a general rule, in ecology, low nutrient loadings foster diversity, and diversity brings stability. This works over the whole range of ecosystems from <"microbial assemblages"> to tropical rain-forests.

cheers Darrel


----------



## wolfewill (1 Apr 2018)

sciencefiction said:


> But you can't keep fish in such tank...They won't last long. /QUOTE]
> 
> They do quite well. L





sciencefiction said:


> But you can't keep fish in such tank...They won't last long.


You clearly have missed something. I've been keeping healthy fish in all my tanks, using PPS, for years. This has nothing to do with doing 'no water changes'. Water changes are necessary when certain thresholds are crossed. It's about maintaining a balance between fish health and plant health, and there is a huge sweet spot in which both can thrive. I have had tanks to go without for about 100 days, but often if one nutrient, or TDS, or perhaps water clarity is beyond a certain threshold, then I do a water change. I do over 50% in each case.

But let's also walk a mile in my shoes: In the winter in this country the tap water temperature in near 40 dF, or 4 dC. I have a 330 gallon fresh water, heavily planted tank (lots of fish). I need to keep the water temperature above 76 dF to keep Barclaya longifolia from going dormant, and have a hot water tank that won't keep up if I try to fill the tank as quickly as the water pressure will allow. So, when refilling the tank, it needs to be done slowly, and the water temperature of the incoming water checked occasionally to ensure the temperature is steady... not to hot, nor too cold. This takes over three hours. I knew this before I set up the large tank because in the summer, I was filling all of my other tanks at the same time with the water taps on full. I found out the hard way that I couldn't do this in the fall, winter or spring and maintain the water temperature above the mid 70s dF. So, before I installed the 330 g tank I did some homework: How to do water changes a infrequently as possible, because it takes a very long time. That's when I began to explore PPS. After years of doing this, I think I've got a better than average grasp of the situation. It works, and works well if you pay attention to details. I use Seachem test kits for nitrite/nitrate and phosphate, and a TDS meter to ensure that the 'untestables' don't add to the tds beyond a certain point. The average time between water changes varies for each tank and I haven't done the math but I'm guessing that the average for all my tanks is between 30 and 60 days. Also understand that for a new set up I do frequent water changes, several times a week in some cases and certainly once a week for the first few months.


----------



## wolfewill (1 Apr 2018)

Tim Harrison said:


> We know ...as for testing, are you mad , and no or optional water changes...that's just lazy
> https://www.ukaps.org/forum/threads/perpetual-preservation-system.28966/



Yes, I got the idea from just such forums. And I consider this forum to be the best available (and in no small part to the civility that are accorded everyone - so I'm treating the first part if this post as a joke).



Tim Harrison said:


> IME, you can pretty much get away with a multitude of sins in a mature planted tank...they are incredibly biologically stable.



And this bit is very true.


----------



## Tim Harrison (1 Apr 2018)

Yes, sorry that was an attempt at humour, though in retrospect, obviously a clumsy one. I've said before I'm not adverse to testing, but it's as well to be aware of the pitfalls of hobby grade test kits 
I must admit to not really being that familiar with PPS, but from what little I've read it appears not too dissimilar to EI. It might be missing the point, but EI can be fine tuned to suit individual requirements...


plantbrain said:


> Now, dosing non limiting ferts can be modified and slow and progressively reduced and with good observations, able to hit what is called the critical point(90%-100% growth rate). You bump the dosing back up to the last prior amount, that is your target specific to your tank.
> Then you can reduce water changes and not need to test or worry about ferts/CO2/light, you can focus on the fish and the gardening.


Another possible alternative is Darrel's Duck Weed Index https://www.ukaps.org/forum/threads/do-we-really-need-that-much-fertiliser.48499/#post-504181 that whole thread is perhaps worth a read.


----------



## sciencefiction (1 Apr 2018)

wolfewill said:


> The PPS fertilization method reduces the amount of water changes, but this only works if you are comfortable with water test kits. The process requires weekly water testing and monitoring to judge when to do water changes. Success comes with mature tanks only, from my experience, but in stable, moderately lit tanks with reduced dosing and CO2, water changes may only be needed every two or three months...





wolfewill said:


> You clearly have missed something.



Your original quote implies that "in a stable, moderately lit tanks with reduced dosing and CO2, water changes may only be needed every two or three months"

So what exactly have I missed? Reading this without any other information/explanation provided implies one will be ok doing 5-6 water changes a year....



wolfewill said:


> I have had tanks to go without for about 100 days, but often if one nutrient, or TDS, or perhaps water clarity is beyond a certain threshold, then I do a water change. I do over 50% in each case.





wolfewill said:


> But let's also walk a mile in my shoes:



Then you go on to explain the reason why you skip water changes, etc.....

You know, I kept 7 larg-ish clown loaches in a 80l plastic bin for 2-3 months. Nothing happened, they were perfectly fine afterwards. But why not trying to keep them a couple of times a year in an 80 litre plastic bin, every year....see if they'll be fine. The same applies to water changes. If you skip water change the odd time for 2-3 months, especially in a mature stable tank, not much will happen. But make it a habbit and we'll see then...

From your explanation I understand you may be skipping water changes for 2-3 months during winter, etc...but you go back to water changes once you can or on emergency basis.  I am guessing this is not without a reason, otherwise why say you do your 50% water changes when needed and also when not restricted by weather conditions, etc...So your initial advise that one can do water changes once every 2-3 months is invalid completely and makes no sense when the full context is taken into account. You can't have it both ways....Therefore be careful when advising that one can get away with one water change every 2-3 months in a stable tank as one may take that literally....Because you're not doing what you're preaching.


----------



## wolfewill (2 Apr 2018)

Tim Harrison said:


> Yes, sorry that was an attempt at humour, though in retrospect, obviously a clumsy one.



And I apologize for being so defensive.



Tim Harrison said:


> I must admit to not really being that familiar with PPS, but from what little I've read it appears not too dissimilar to EI.



I _don't_ mean PPS Pro or PPS Classic. But after writing that, I quickly tried to find a site that would describe the original PPS but I can't find much. This forum certainly doesn't seem to have anything which properly describes this system.



Tim Harrison said:


> It might be missing the point, but EI can be fine tuned to suit individual requirements...



The original PPS is just as good at fine tuning for the individual tank's requirements. Nitrate and phosphate solutions are made separate and added separately to achieve the targets for each tank. I have purposefully added livestock to provide much of the nitrates, and presently I don't need to add much nitrate at all. Just small doses to maintain the targets I've determined for each tank. I use Rex Grigg's solutions of KNO3 and KH2PO4 and dose three times per week. And on alternate days I dose a micro fertilizer either Seachem Comprehensive or CSM+B to achieve an iron concentration of 0.1 ppm. At the end of each week I test for nitrates, phosphates and dissolved solids. I am presently doing six tanks and the testing takes about 15 minutes. If one parameter is straying too high - perhaps I overfed, or something died and wasn't removed - I do a water change. I also monitor the glass algae, water clarity and time since the last filter cleaning. If anything seems out of line, I do a water change. Otherwise, I calculate the uptake of the macros over the week and top up to achieve the targets I've set. I add comparatively more of the phosphate solution than nitrate but the in-tank targets are the same as EI: Nitrates at 10, 20 or 30 ppm, and phosphate in a 1:10 ratio to NO3. When I start up a new tank I start at the high end of the target ranges and work down once the tank matures. The end result is largely dependent upon the light levels, and I try to match the type of plants in any tank to the lighting. I've experimented several times with additional calcium and magnesium but I have never noticed any differences. I dose Seachem Equilibrium after each water change to achieve at least 4 dGH as our tap water here is very soft.


----------



## wolfewill (2 Apr 2018)

sciencefiction said:


> So what exactly have I missed? Reading this without any other information/explanation provided implies one will be ok doing 5-6 water changes a year....



I'm responding to your original comment: 


sciencefiction said:


> But you can't keep fish in such tank...They won't last long



This is factually incorrect. Fish and crustaceans do well.  



sciencefiction said:


> From your explanation I understand you may be skipping water changes for 2-3 months during winter, etc...but you go back to water changes once you can or on emergency basis.



There is rarely an emergency. Water changes using this system merely resets the water parameters so I can more easily achieve my intended targets for the macros. In the over 30 years I've been in this hobby I've had far fewer emergencies using PPS than before I started using it. But that's not to say that I wouldn't have done just as well with EI. They are very similar.



sciencefiction said:


> ....why say you do your 50% water changes when needed and also when not restricted by weather conditions, etc...



I don't go back to doing weekly water changes in the summer. Why would I when I don't have to? And I never said I don't use PPS in the summer.



sciencefiction said:


> So your initial advise that one can do water changes once every 2-3 months is invalid completely and makes no sense when the full context is taken into account.



You are reading something into what I've written that I haven't actually written.



sciencefiction said:


> Therefore be careful when advising that one can get away with one water change every 2-3 months in a stable tank as one may take that literally....Because you're not doing what you're preaching.



I'm not preaching - this isn't a religious forum. I was merely answering a question asked by another member of this forum and the conversation spun from that. You sound threatened by this idea.


----------



## dw1305 (2 Apr 2018)

Hi all,





wolfewill said:


> This forum certainly doesn't seem to have anything which properly describes this system


<"This one?">.

cheers Darrel


----------



## wolfewill (2 Apr 2018)

dw1305 said:


> Hi all,<"This one?">.



There is nothing in that post that actually describes PPS. There's more about EI in there than PPS.


----------



## dw1305 (3 Apr 2018)

Hi all,
I think the important bit is the plants, once you have plenty of actively growing plants realistically everything else is just froth. 

I'd be the first to admit I'm a pretty shoddy fish keeper and because of that I like risk management. It isn't a very exciting approach, but you isolate all the single points of failure and then you try and build in extra capacity and negative feed-back loops.

I have access to <"hundreds of thousands of pounds worth of analytical equipment">, and the staff that know how to use them, but there are still some problems with getting accurate values for all the chemical parameters I might be interested in, and one of the chief problems is time. I can use simple techniques (water changes, the duckweed index, conductivity measurement) to negate the need for water testing.

There is a much more complete discussion of this in <"PlanetCatfish: Cycling Question"> and <"PlanetCatfish:Using deep gravel....">.

cheers Darrel


----------



## Tim Harrison (3 Apr 2018)

dw1305 said:


> I think the important bit is the plants, once you have plenty of actively growing plants realistically everything else is just froth.


I agree with Darrel wholeheartedly; it's certainly been my experience. By the time the tank matures and becomes biologically stable I doubt it really matters what fertz system you choose to use, even if it's limiting you'll still get some growth and the tank will usually remain healthy. So as far as PPS is concerned, I guess that maybe why success comes with mature tanks only.



dw1305 said:


> I have access to <"hundreds of thousands of pounds worth of analytical equipment">, and the staff that know how to use them, but there are still some problems with getting accurate values for all the chemical parameters I might be interested in, and one of the chief problems is time.


Hobby grade test kits might get you somewhere near the ball park, but again I doubt they are reliable enough to support a fertz regime like PPS which relies on accuracy. Water chemistry isn't my strong point but I'm guessing that if water changes are infrequent there is a greater chance the concentrations of ions or compounds that interfere with test kit results may increase and effect accuracy further. Neither of which is perhaps really that crucial in a mature tank; again maybe why PPS success comes with maturity only.


----------



## a1Matt (3 Apr 2018)

dw1305 said:


> I can use simple techniques (water changes, the duckweed index, conductivity measurement) to negate the need for water testing.



I'm all about the simple techniques (Ideally while relaxing in a chair in front of the tank  ), and can add the following to the list:

Observe fish and inverts behaviour
Touch the glass to check tank temp
Watch how much plants are swaying to see if filter is clogged
Listen for pump whine to see if prefilter is clogged
Sniff water when feeding (this is my main indicator and I'm quite evangelical about it!)
Observe all plants for deficiencies
Etc



wolfewill said:


> I also monitor the glass algae, water clarity and time since the last filter cleaning.



These are also on my list.

If you, or anyone else, finds a good link detailing the original pps I'd love to read up on it.


----------



## wolfewill (4 Apr 2018)

Darrel, I have some questions:



dw1305 said:


> ....but there are still some problems with getting accurate values for all the chemical parameters I might be interested in, and one of the chief problems is time.



Time for what exactly? Time on the equipment? Time to research the issues? And this:



dw1305 said:


> I can use simple techniques (water changes, the duckweed index...



What is the duckweek method?


----------



## wolfewill (4 Apr 2018)

Tim Harrison said:


> ....I doubt it really matters what fertz system you choose to use,...



This is probably very true. In my search for a dosing/water change strategy, I investigate PMDD, PPS, EI and the ADA method (that I could find), it became apparent that they all have much in common. If I had only a few tanks, and they weren't too large, I, too, would be using something like the EI method. I believe that water changes are a good thing and will always help to make things more stable, but they aren't really as important once a tank has grown in. So for me, with 650 usg of aquariums, it saves a lot of time. We also have some of the cleanest tap water in the world here. So that counts toward the decision I made.



Tim Harrison said:


> So as far as PPS is concerned, I guess that maybe why success comes with mature tanks only.



Very true.


Hobby grade test kits might get you somewhere near the ball park, but again I doubt they are reliable enough to support a fertz regime like PPS which relies on accuracy. Water chemistry isn't my strong point but I'm guessing that if water changes are infrequent there is a greater chance the concentrations of ions or compounds that interfere with test kit results may increase and effect accuracy further. Neither of which is perhaps really that crucial in a mature tank; again maybe why PPS success comes with maturity only.[/QUOTE]


----------



## wolfewill (4 Apr 2018)

Sorry guys, but I'm now having trouble editing my last post. It ends in the middle and left much of my response on the cutting room floor. I don't have an 'edit' option below my own posts.


----------



## wolfewill (4 Apr 2018)

Tim Harrison said:


> Hobby grade test kits might get you somewhere near the ball park, but again I doubt they are reliable enough to support a fertz regime like PPS which relies on accuracy.



Somewhere in the ball park is good enough. I need to know if there is none, a little, just enough or way too much of the macros to do PPS properly. The toxicity of these ferts are so far removed from the ranges we need to deal with in a planted tank that strict accuracy is not necessary. [Great, that's what I was trying to add.]


----------



## wolfewill (4 Apr 2018)

a1Matt said:


> I'm all about the simple techniques (Ideally while relaxing in a chair in front of the tank  ), and can add the following to the list:
> Observe fish and inverts behaviour;
> Touch the glass to check tank temp;
> Watch how much plants are swaying to see if filter is clogged;
> ...



Absolutely! Thank you for adding that.



a1Matt said:


> If you, or anyone else, finds a good link detailing the original pps I'd love to read up on it.



Yah, and I guess I would like to know too. I'll try to refine my search better to eliminate PPS Pro and PPS classic. But more later. Hockey game on, gotta go. And since my team tanked early, I all over the Jets.


----------



## sciencefiction (4 Apr 2018)

I believe that people will go great lengths to find a way not to do water changes, or at least not very regularly. Regular large water changes eliminate the need of any tinkering, yet, people prefer spending their time in testing in the hope of finding the magic formula or a "system". There is no system that works better than large regular water changes, no matter the tank set up...
Ideally, when one has certain claims about their "magic system", I'd really love the see long term recorded results....Time stamped videos and pictures would do, over the life span of their fish with the least life expectancy....Then I may change my mind....Otherwise it is just useless talk. So, how about some fish pics and videos to see how one's "system" works?


----------



## kadoxu (4 Apr 2018)

sciencefiction said:


> I believe that people will go great lengths to find a way not to do water changes, or at least not very regularly. Regular large water changes eliminate the need of any tinkering, yet, people prefer spending their time in testing in the hope of finding the magic formula or a "system". There is no system that works better than large regular water changes, no matter the tank set up...
> Ideally, when one has certain claims about their "magic system", I'd really love the see long term recorded results....Time stamped videos and pictures would do, over the life span of their fish with the least life expectancy....Then I may change my mind....Otherwise it is just useless talk. So, how about some fish pics and videos to see how one's "system" works?


This is now being achieved in the Saltwater hobby, so I'd say the magic system is not that far away from coming to the Freshwater side of things.


----------



## dw1305 (4 Apr 2018)

Hi all,


wolfewill said:


> Time for what exactly? Time on the equipment?


Pretty much, for conductivity you can just dip the meter in and get an accurate reading, you don't need to calibrate the meter every time you use it, it has automatic temperature compensation and you don't need to construct a standard curve, or perform serial dilution, but for everything else you need to do some preparation.

If the lab. was all set up and ready to go, it would take probably 1/2 a day to do the tests, and you could run plenty of replicate samples if they weren't too dissimilar in composition.

*pH*
A pH meter needs two point calibration before every use, buffered on pH7 and, either pH10 or pH4 buffers (dependent upon whether you expect the pH to be above or below neutral), you also need to turn it on several minutes before you use it. Because pH meters are modified conductivity meters they don't work very well in low ionic strength solutions, so you may need to add a neutral salt (a salt from a strong acid/strong base reaction) to raise the conductivity without changing the pH. I use  KCl (NaCl would also do), but it has to be the pure salt.

Also the pH probes are quite high maintenance bits of kit, and need to be stored in the <"appropriate storage solution"> (usually 4M KCl).

*Ion Selective Electrode*
Accurate measurement of NO3 and NH3 you can do with an ion selective electrode, you need a hot plate stirrer and to construct a standard curve. To measure ammonia/ammonium (NH3/NH4+) the ammonia ion is liberated as ammonia gas on the addition of an excess of sodium hydroxide (NaOH):

NH4+ + OH– → NH3 + H2O

The outer membrane of the electrode has pores that allow the ammonia to diffuse through it. The change in the pH value of the inner electrolyte solution is then monitored by a combined glass electrode. It works, but it is a bit fiddly.

Ion selective meter and their electrodes are quite expensive and the gel membranes have a limited life span.

*Atomic absorption spectroscopy*
Metals you can measure directly from the filtered water via AAS (or ICP), you need a calibration curve, and you may need to dilute your sample with DI water if it has a lot of Ca++ ions etc. The method is fairly straight forward, you have a controlled flame (using air/acetylene for the AAS) and the filtered sample is sprayed into the flame (as very fine droplets <10 μm) and the spectrum produced read at the appropriate wave length for the element you are interested in. The light source used is a hollow cathode lamp, you need lamps that cover the elements you are interested in.

*Spectrophotometry*
Phosphorus (as PO4---) you can measure with spectrophotometry, using the intensity of colour of a phosphomolybdate complex. You need suitable reagents, you get interference from some other compounds, and you need to construct a standard curve etc.

cheers Darrel


----------



## dw1305 (4 Apr 2018)

Hi all, 





kadoxu said:


> This is now being achieved in the Saltwater hobby, so I'd say the magic system is not that far away from coming to the Freshwater side of things.


This is actually easier in sea water, because you have a known composition (a datum) and you can take into account the 33 ppt NaCl etc. 





wolfewill said:


> Somewhere in the ball park is good enough.


 Yes pretty much, in a planted tank, for some parameters, even an order of magnitude of latitude isn't going to matter that much. 

The really critical ones, like dissolved oxygen and ammonia, are much less likely to be an issue in a planted tank. 





wolfewill said:


> What is the duckweek method?


 It is just a method where you use the heath and growth of a floating plant as an indicator of when to feed your plants. 

It came about because we did some work on the remediation of landfill leachate, a liquid with a very high BOD. 

Because landfill leachate is highly coloured, full of colloids, greasy and of wildly differing composition dependent upon rain-fall age of the landfill, the type of rubbish land-filled etc., it is really difficult to quantify chemically. 

One way of treating it is to use the sort of primary treatment you have in a sewage works followed by secondary and tertiary treatment in "constructed wetlands". Hopefully following treatment the resulting water is of sufficiently high quality to fulfill the requirements of the discharge license. 

In the landfill we work on, the water almost always was of poorer quality than was required for discharge. We looked at ways of improving the final quality and using indicator (bioassay) organisms as an alternative to chemical analysis. 

We found that you can use trickle filters and phytofiltration to produce water that has a low enough BOD for discharge, and you can confirm the water quality by using _Daphnia, Asellus etc._  Originally we used <"_Lemna minor"> _as our floater_, _hence the "Duckweed Index". 

Have a look at <"Which NO3 test......"> and <"New Hi-Tech set up">.

cheers Darrel


----------



## wolfewill (4 Apr 2018)

Darrel, that's terrific. I did research in a lab like that many years ago, during a hiatus from this hobby. Cheers for the post.


----------



## tam (4 Apr 2018)

dw1305 said:


> *pH*
> A pH meter needs two point calibration before every use, buffered on pH7 and, either pH10 or pH4 buffers (dependent upon whether you expect the pH to be above or below neutral), you also need to turn it on several minutes before you use it. Because pH meters are modified conductivity meters they don't work very well in low ionic strength solutions, so you may need to add a neutral salt (a salt from a strong acid/strong base reaction) to raise the conductivity without changing the pH. I use  KCl (NaCl would also do), but it has to be the pure salt.



What level of accuracy do you maintain without doing all that? I recently recalibrated ours after about a year (having used it a couple of times a month and just stored it with the lid on) and it was 0.1 out. The readings between tests seem to remain stable, and adjust as expected to changes in the test water.

Not saying that it's as accurate as it would be with that level of maintenance, but more so than the dip/test kits, and seems like enough for aquarium purposes.


----------



## wolfewill (4 Apr 2018)

dw1305 said:


> ..... Originally we used <"_Lemna minor"> _as our floater_, _hence the "Duckweed Index"....



I use Sylvania to assist me with algae outbreaks when I'm doing a new tank. It provides some shade, soaks up excess nitrogenous waste and is reputed to have algae growing symbiotically in its roots thus creating a bit of a nutrient vacuum for certain types of algae (not sure about that last bit, but I throw everything but-the-kitchen-sink at it so why not, eh?). I wonder if it would provide the same results? It certainly grows differently in some of my tanks, and is especially noticeable between planted tanks and fish only tanks or tanks without CO2.


----------



## wolfewill (4 Apr 2018)

sciencefiction said:


> ....Otherwise it is just useless talk. So, how about some fish pics and videos to see how one's "system" works?



Ok, fair enough. I've posted photos on photobucket with links below. All of these photos have been taken after December 2012 which is when I started using PPS, and they've been up and public for a long time. In advance - sorry for the ads. Photobucket has become one of the most abnoxious sites I've ever been on. If I did more of this I'd find another. But for what it's worth:

http://s1157.photobucket.com/user/wolfewill17/library/story_3715?sort=6&page=1

and

http://s1157.photobucket.com/user/w...Tank/P4093915_zpslsv6bnjl.jpg.html?sort=3&o=0


----------



## Tim Harrison (4 Apr 2018)

Some nice growth in the bottom lot of shots.
And crikey, I see what you mean about obnoxious, photobucket has almost become unusable. 
Have you tried Flickr, I transferred all my images there just before photobucket started to charge.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/99942601@N07/


----------



## wolfewill (4 Apr 2018)

And here are some pics that were on my web site when it was in operation. All of these tanks were, and still are, PPS dosed.  In order from top to bottom:
A 65 g tank with large Bleeding Heart tetras, etc.
Next is my other 65 g, again before it's most recent o'haul. The Lemon tetras are hiding due to the back light.
The third one down is the 330 g tank with in it's first setup. It's on its third setup now. Recent pics haven't been taken yet.
The bottom one was my 90 g before the 330 was installed. I've also overhauled it recently but it's not grown in completely yet.
I have records of every weekly set of tests I've ever done, of every week of dosing for each tank, records of exactly when each tank had a water change and every bit of maintenance each tank has had during routine maintenance days - all back to 2012 and for water changes to 1995 (I'm a pathological record keeper). But these are all hand written and would be very tedious to present and undoubtedly very, very tedious to read through.


----------



## sciencefiction (4 Apr 2018)

Really nice setups wolfewill.! The plants look terriffic. Personally, I am more interested in the fish side of things and their history in relation to the set ups and maintenance schedule related to them.


----------



## sciencefiction (4 Apr 2018)

kadoxu said:


> This is now being achieved in the Saltwater hobby, so I'd say the magic system is not that far away from coming to the Freshwater side of things.



What do salt water creatures have to do with fresh water....Even the


kadoxu said:


> This is now being achieved in the Saltwater hobby, so I'd say the magic system is not that far away from coming to the Freshwater side of things.



And how do you think would that be replicated in fresh water set ups....taking into consideration all the fundamental differences between fresh watet and salt water....? Anaerobic denitrification....rising TDS....nitrite toxicity, etc....


----------



## dw1305 (4 Apr 2018)

Hi all,





tam said:


> What level of accuracy do you maintain without doing all that? I recently recalibrated ours after about a year (having used it a couple of times a month and just stored it with the lid on) and it was 0.1 out.


Because pH is a log scale if you have a strongly alkaline, or strongly acid, solution of high ionic strength you will always get about the right value. 

As long as the membrane hasn't dried out the meter should still be all right.

Our tap water is fully saturated with calcium carbonate and about 18dKH and 700 microS. It will always measure somewhere between pH7.8 and pH8.2, it doesn't really matter whether the meter is calibrated or not.

The problems come when you start to measure water (a weak solution with H2O as a solvent) with less solutes, or with a more even balance of acids and bases.

cheers Darrel


----------



## dw1305 (4 Apr 2018)

Hi all,





wolfewill said:


> I use Sylvania to assist me with algae outbreaks


_Salvinia_? it works really well. In terms of its growth it is just as good as _Pistia_ or _Limnobium, _and has been used extensively in tropical regions for water treatment. I <"prefer _Limnobium"> _for the Duckweed index, just because it is greener plant and it makes it easier to pick up changes of leaf colour._


wolfewill said:



			And here are some pics that were on my web site when it was in operation.
		
Click to expand...

_Perfect tank, plenty of plants, all growing really well.

cheers Darrel


----------



## kadoxu (5 Apr 2018)

sciencefiction said:


> What do salt water creatures have to do with fresh water....Even the
> 
> 
> And how do you think would that be replicated in fresh water set ups....taking into consideration all the fundamental differences between fresh watet and salt water....? Anaerobic denitrification....rising TDS....nitrite toxicity, etc....


I don't know... I promise I'd share if I did... but how does an ecosystem pond work? Does it work any different if it is an indoors ecosystem pond?


----------



## sciencefiction (5 Apr 2018)

kadoxu said:


> I don't know... I promise I'd share if I did... but how does an ecosystem pond work? Does it work any
> different if it is an indoors ecosystem pond?




Well, anyone that has expensive fish in a pond would be running it just like a tank but on a larger scale and more equipment, taking into account that the more water volume will help.  Water changes are as essential as if it were a fish tank.  As for natural lakes, I think they rely on ground water as much as they rely on rain water, so water changes are done naturally....In rivers we know what happens, we can never much the scale of "water change" a river gets..


----------



## wolfewill (6 Apr 2018)

sciencefiction said:


> ...Personally, I am more interested in the fish side of things and their history in relation to the set ups and maintenance schedule related to them.



Ok. That's going to be harder to do. I have one shot of my beloved Congo Tetras from Feb 19, 2012 while they were in my 90 g tank, and another shot of the same fish in the larger tank on Jan 4 2017. They started to die off last summer (2017). I'm going to try to put them in chronological order. Unfortunately the date stamp was not on the second one. People always commented on these as being the biggest and most colourful Congos they'd seen. They lasted a long time. Since I'm plant oriented, the fish are usually secondary, but my Bleeding Hearts were huge and they lasted for a long time as well before I sold them, my Lemon tetras breed spontaneously. I don't think this dosing strategy has any negative impacts on fish health.


----------



## wolfewill (6 Apr 2018)

sciencefiction said:


> What do salt water creatures have to do with fresh water....Even the...... And how do you think would that be replicated in fresh water set ups....taking into consideration all the fundamental differences between fresh watet and salt water....? Anaerobic denitrification....rising TDS....nitrite toxicity, etc....



If I may interject here: I thing what kadoxu was trying to say was that in the salt water side, testing is necessary despite the test kit anomalies, and they have done quite well. But perhaps I'm reading something in that's not there?.... Comments kadoxu?


----------



## sciencefiction (6 Apr 2018)

wolfewill said:


> I thing what kadoxu was trying to say was that in the salt water side, testing is necessary despite the test kit anomalies, and they have done quite well.



I am personally not against testing. I just find it unnecessary in my scenario. I think there are fish keepers that like to be in control and those that don't. I am a proponent of large regular water changes. If they're done, testing becomes irrelevant.


----------



## sciencefiction (6 Apr 2018)

You have probably all  read the story of Hanako the koi carp that lived over 200 years.....

Some quotes from practical fish keeping on the story:

_"I took off two scales from different parts of her body by using a strong tweezers. The scales were examined by Professor Masayoshi Hiro, D.Sc., Laboratory of Domestic Science, Nagoya Women's College.

"It took two months for him to acquire a satisfactory result. Using the light microscope, he photographed every part of the scales. It seems he took a great deal of trouble. When it was certain beyond doubt that the carp was 215 years old, the two of us exchanged a look of delightful surprise.

Then I had the professor examine the remaining five carp in the same pond, three white and two black ones. The examination took one year, and it was found out that three were respectively 168, 153 and 149 years old, and the remaining two were both 139 years old.

"*A stream of limpid water never ceases to flow all the year round. It is this water that flows into the pond which Hanako lives and which was carefully constructed with stones in former days. Besides that, pure water trickled from the foot of the mountain streams close by into the pond, making the favourable conditions still more favourable. The pond cannot be called large, only being about five metres square."

Hanako died in 1977 at the age of 226*.
_


----------



## plantbrain (26 Apr 2018)

Let's look back at some history: PMDD:

https://www.thekrib.com/Plants/Fertilizer/sears-conlin.html

Frankly PPS is blatantly plagerizing PMDD. 
"Edward" never once acknowledged anything he took and posted to the original authors of PMDD. 
PMDD predates PPS by 8 years.
I know both authors for PMDD as well as the PPS folks whom we have never seen a last name nor their own tanks.   

PMDD suggested using test kits to balance, but did not forgo the water changes at 25% weekly or thereabouts to minimize any build up. 
You can see the infinite series used for dilution with partial water changes using Fe as the nutrient in question.  

EI is about 90-95% PMDD. It's more a simplification of PMDD using water changes, I fully understand that the hobby is more an issue of human behavior and social issues rather than "Science" or water test kits.
Getting folks to test is a rough arugment to make.  Some will do it for a little while, then stop. Other's will test only when there's an issue, not when there is a good success. Actually they should do the opposite. Think about that one for awhile.

Non CO2 method use no water changes as the rule, but many fail as they only treat advice like a cafeteria, they pick only what they WANT and leave behind all the caveats and good advice they do not. 
Same with testing.
And same with doing frequent water changes, but that's easier for most than testing consisently.

And my non CO2 tanks, as well others who scape with them at higher level rival most CO2 enriched tanks. So why do water changes or add CO2? CO2 is poison right? 
Not good for fish or shrimp etc? If you want less work/labor, input, then that seems like a better option. No testing other than TDS if you want.

I made this point to Edward, God, 12 years ago? Ecology, waste, balance, all that was mere rubbish I guess.

Dosing? Why not just use ADA aqua soil? Add a tiny bit to the water column, replace the soil once a year? 
No test and the plants do great. You do water changes in the start, but after 1-2 months, none are done typically. 
Or you can do EI. Or a modified version thereof. 

Is rich PPS like light EI? They add the SAME things after all. And given different plant species..............densities, light intensities, CO2.......it makes sense you have success with either method, plants STILL grow. Even without CO2 and a non CO2 meoth, plants STILL grow.  Ergo, much of the claims are based on a weak premise. 

EI serves a good purpose to make the aquarist tank independent of fertilizers. Thus the aquarist can then focus on mastery of CO2, argubly the most important factor if the gas is used for anyone worth their spit. 
If you can do that, and you can do a non CO2 tank,  everything else.............. falls somwhere in between. 

BTW, I have 4 tanks that get CO2 gas, and no water changes, they also grow some of the touchinest plants I am aware of. While not "scaped", I see no reason why they cannot be. 
So I use several methods, as I have several goals, but generally, if I scape and tend a tank more, I want it to look its best, thus I am much more likely to do frequent water changes and keep it cleaner. 

So if you are honest about learning more, they perhaps learning each method is more the game plan, not just one. They all do the same things and add the same things, just at different rates. So they are NOT THAT different at the end of the day. 
People's habits? Those are the real evil, hehe.


----------



## wolfewill (28 Apr 2018)

plantbrain said:


> BTW, I have 4 tanks that get CO2 gas, and no water changes, they also grow some of the touchinest plants I am aware of. While not "scaped", I see no reason why they cannot be.



Do you do any testing on these tanks? On any tanks?


----------

