# Micronutrient toxicity.. or deficiency.. ? Pls help.



## rusticdr

I know what a lot of u must be thinking. I have read all those discussions on this topic and there r a lot of people who don't believe that micronutrients toxicity can happen. Well... I am no expert and I have not measured the micros in my tank. However the way that things have unfolded in my tank compel me to believe that it cud be micronutrient toxicity. This is my story:
Tank spec: (started In June 2016)
100 g 48x24x21 
T5ho 54w x 4 (2 6500k, 1 10000k, 1 4000k)
   Initially 7 hrs of which all 4 only for 2 hrs
   Now 6 hrs of which only 1 hr all 4 .. with 1.5 
   hr siesta inbetween when c02 will still be on
Co2 through inline reactor 2 hrs before light and off 1 hr before @ 3bps
Drop checker was green
Substrate Ada Amazonia and contro
Filters: eheim 2217 and sunsun 303b
Wavemaker x 2 800gph

Ferts:
Now initially I was doing full EI in RO water:
Macro: kno3 x 12 tsp
            Kh2po4 x 4 tsp
            Mgso4 x 20 tsp
         Dissolved in 600 ml of water
         Dosed 50 ml on alternate days
Micro: 
         Seachem flourish 8 ml 
         Seachem iron 5 ml 
         Both on alternate days
Temp of tank 28 to 29 with two 6 in 1 cooling fans 
Weekly 50% water change without fail with 8 tsp of seachem equilibrium with each change
Filters cleaned once every 3 months 

Plants: 
Hygrophila difformis
H. Polysperma
Crypt. Wendetti.
Crypt. Spiralis
Luwigia ovalis
Rotala rotundifolia hi red
R. Indica 
L. Aromatica
Anubias nana
Korymbosa compacta
L. Aquatica
Micro. Hemianthicus
Flame moss
Christmas moss
Frogbits

Fauna:
8x congo tetra
15x neon tetra
6x cardinals
4x bosemani rainbow
10x hengeli rasbora
7x asian rummy nose
3x rummy nose
3x pencil fish beckford
7x corys
3x bn pleco
4x otos
2x black molly
1x sae
1x German blue ram
1x angel fish
1x female neon gaurami
6x amano shrimp

 Fed once a day.. hikari micropellets, microwafers and frozen worms on subsequent days. 

  The initial 6 months after setting up the tank was bliss without ferts with the Ada Amazonia working and plants were growing just great. Trimming was so often. Then.. once I took over ei.. the rotala rotundifolia which was the fastest growing completely burnt out.. it lost its leaves and became Brown. Similarly I lost l. Aromatica and h. Polysperma, which is actually a weed, started breaking off. When i checked, my nitrates and phosphates were》160 and 》 10 ppm resp. I did multiple water changes. Then I reduced my ei by half but continued same micro dose. Some plants were doing ok but others not so. Stem plants were mostly not doing great. Twice burnt rotala and melted the Ech. Major and l. aromatica.  Had green hair algae too. Then I started getting the deficiency symptoms.. 
Stunted small leaves in stems 
Curling and malformed leaves
Holes with yellow edges
Dark leaves 
Leaves breaking off early
Getting absorbed from the periphery

Co2 deficiency was the first thought in my mind but the thing was that one of the plants affected was my frogbits too which s exposed to air. So I started dosing k2so4 x 4 tsp into a separate 600 ml bottle. My nitrates were at this time hovering at 40 ppm and phosphates 3 ppm. My water became hard dgh of 14. So I stopped equilibrium. There was no improvement. Most of my plants would shoot of new leaves which wud look ok but the old leaves will have holes and break off as the nutrients were being hauled off from them. I had upped my co2 to 6 bps for over 2 months as I read that co2 def can also present like this. 
 All this while I never reduced my micros. Then I started reading abt micro tox. Then I noticed that after a water change my plants wud pearl so much on the first day after which it wud reduce. So what I did was do twice weekly water changes with only macros for fertilization. So if it were micronutrient toxicity things should have improved.. but sadly it just persists. Nearly all the frogbits have dissappeared. I even reduced lights to only 54x2 for 6 hrs with a 1.5 hr siesta. But even though the plants aren't dying they shoot new leaves but the older leaves definitely show deficiency symptoms. L. aromatica shows small malformed leaves. 

Can anyone explain what s going on.. 
1. If it's co2 I have increased bps to 6 and cleaned the reactor. And why have frogbits been affected (duckweed index) 
2. Potassium def.. have been adding kno3 and kh2po4 from the beginning and now supplemented with k2s04.. any more I might cross into toxic levels.
3. Calcium def.. have been dosing two teaspoons of equilibrium last 10 days even though water shows 13 dgh. No improvement. 
4. Micro nutrient def.. have been dosing flourish regularly but it's been 5ml twice weekly when the actual recommended dose is 8 ml once or twice weekly. 
5. Micro nutrient tox.. could explain signs of potassium and calcium deficiency and also burning up of frogbits. But why no improvement after several water changes. 

Attaching pics. 

1. Initial phase without ferts. 
2. After starting ferts






Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk


----------



## rusticdr

3. Burnt plants
4. Post overdose recovery





Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk


----------



## rusticdr

Loss of l. aromatica but notice the healthy l. aquatica. This was before the recent failure. 





Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk


----------



## rusticdr

Recent pics. Before multiple water changes. 
U can notice that the older leaves have been robbed off nutrients and look unhealthy. 

















Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk


----------



## rusticdr

These were taken yesterday. The l. aromatica has such small deformed leaves. Never seen this plant behave this way before. Frogbits almost gone. L. Ovalis showing def symptoms in older leaves as are rotala indica.  Pls give ur valuable feedback.















Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk


----------



## dw1305

Hi all,
You can tell that it isn't a CO2 problem, because it is happening to your Frogbit as well, which has access to 400pppm CO2.

It is likely to be iron deficiency.  Problems with micro-nutrients are usually to do with availability, which can be dependent upon the concentrations of the other ions present in the water.

If you ever get  those really white tips to the leaves, that is a non-mobile element, and iron is the most likely
(particularly in hard water). When you add plant available iron, you won't get an instant greening, because the plant can't move it to the older leaves, but the new leaves should be healthy.  





rusticdr said:


>


You could try a different iron source, Seachem use "ferrous" gluconate which is more likely to precipitate out of solution then chelated iron.

Have a look at <"Iron deficiency?"> and linked posts.

cheers Darrel


----------



## ceg4048

Well, I mean, is it possible that you have more than one problem? That frogbit has one problem and that the submerged plants have a different problem?
Where is it written that a tank can oly have one problem?
I can see immediately that the stem plant in the very last photo has GSA, which is caused by any combination of poor CO2 + poor PO4.

The other symptoms described are of classic CO2 shortfall.

Could it be possible that the plants grew so much that they strangled themselves by blocking flow/distribution?
Could it be that there is so much plant mass that they now require a lot more CO2 yet the CO2 is attenuated?

Instead of letting everything grow wild you can keep things trimmed and neat to encourage better flow/distribution.

You can also remove some of the filter media to get a better flow rate to support the higher mass.

When plants are fed more nutrients they consume and demand more CO2.
When plants are fed CO2 they consume and demand more nutrients.
The more CO2 a plant becomes, the less efficiently it is of actually consuming CO2
The more nutrients a plant is fed the less efficiently it can uptake nutrients.

I see no toxicity issue here. Better tank maintenance and infrastructure will solve this riddle.

Cheers,


----------



## Zak Rafik

ceg4048 said:


> Instead of letting everything grow wild you can keep things trimmed and neat to encourage better flow/distribution.


Hi Ceg,
But what if the OP wants a jungle style scape or maintain dense growth? What would you recommend?
I have seen several tanks where the plant growth is so dense that the substrate nor the tank's back glass can be seen and yet have luxurious growth.
Can this be due to the tank having very good flow and this in turn transports nutrients and co2 all the the tank with no dead spots?



ceg4048 said:


> *When plants are fed more nutrients they consume and demand more CO2.
> When plants are fed CO2 they consume and demand more nutrients.*
> The more CO2 a plant becomes, the less efficiently it is of actually consuming CO2
> The more nutrients a plant is fed the less efficiently it can uptake nutrients.



What about lights? Isn't light the main driving force in nutrient and Co2 uptake rate?


Still learning.
Cheers.


----------



## rusticdr

dw1305 said:


> Hi all,
> You can tell that it isn't a CO2 problem, because it is happening to your Frogbit as well, which has access to 400pppm CO2.
> 
> It is likely to be iron deficiency.  Problems with micro-nutrients are usually to do with availability, which can be dependent upon the concentrations of the other ions present in the water.
> 
> If you ever get  those really white tips to the leaves, that is a non-mobile element, and iron is the most likely
> (particularly in hard water). When you add plant available iron, you won't get an instant greening, because the plant can't move it to the older leaves, but the new leaves should be healthy.  You could try a different iron source, Seachem use "ferrous" gluconate which is more likely to precipitate out of solution then chelated iron.
> 
> Have a look at <"Iron deficiency?"> and linked posts.
> 
> cheers Darrel


Thanks for ur reply. The thing with iron is that I have been dosing with seachem iron since the very beginning and the dose has been very even. Just 5 ml once per week. But as u can c from previous pictures I haven't had this sort of plant morphology before. True that I have burnt up some plants.. but that time I was overdosing nitrates and phosphates. Even if it's iron wat abt other features like the holes in the leaves which r not described in iron deficiency. Sorry for questioning your line of thought. Just like to be clear. That s all. 

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk


----------



## rusticdr

ceg4048 said:


> Well, I mean, is it possible that you have more than one problem? That frogbit has one problem and that the submerged plants have a different problem?
> Where is it written that a tank can oly have one problem?
> I can see immediately that the stem plant in the very last photo has GSA, which is caused by any combination of poor CO2 + poor PO4.
> 
> The other symptoms described are of classic CO2 shortfall.
> 
> Could it be possible that the plants grew so much that they strangled themselves by blocking flow/distribution?
> Could it be that there is so much plant mass that they now require a lot more CO2 yet the CO2 is attenuated?
> 
> Instead of letting everything grow wild you can keep things trimmed and neat to encourage better flow/distribution.
> 
> You can also remove some of the filter media to get a better flow rate to support the higher mass.
> 
> When plants are fed more nutrients they consume and demand more CO2.
> When plants are fed CO2 they consume and demand more nutrients.
> The more CO2 a plant becomes, the less efficiently it is of actually consuming CO2
> The more nutrients a plant is fed the less efficiently it can uptake nutrients.
> 
> I see no toxicity issue here. Better tank maintenance and infrastructure will solve this riddle.
> 
> Cheers,


Thanks for ur reply.. 
  I am a fan of urs and of course Tom Barr. So my first and foremost thought was poor co2 and poor circulation. So I increased co2 from 2 to almost 6 bps. I checked the tube for kinks and leaks. Also cleaned the inline reactor.   I also added an extra 800 gph wavemaker and a powerhead in the back. The flow around the tank is excellent so much so that u cannot find any debris on the substrate.. if i increase flow any more the tank Will look like a whirlpool.  I do know that it's densely planted but that's how it has been from the very beginning. I like it that way. And in the beginning co2 was only at 2 bps. Plants were not having these issues. And abt frogbits.. let us assume they have a different issue.. we then agree it s not co2. But then it must be nutrient related one. If a nutrient problem has markedly affected the frogbits why not the same be attributed to the other plants. Having reduced my lighting intensity a bit has slowed down the downturn a bit. So I guess light s a very important factor in driving the needs of plants. 

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk


----------



## Konsa

Hi
I had simmular issue with my floating plants in the past.I was going all over the place with thoughts what could be the issue.
It turned out that my high flow was bashing them too hard arround  and once leaves underwater they just rot away slowly.Now I managed to fix them in certain  areas and they grow just awesome.
Regards Konsa


----------



## dw1305

Hi all, 





Konsa said:


> I had simmular issue with my floating plants in the past.I was going all over the place with thoughts what could be the issue.
> It turned out that my high flow was bashing them too hard arround and once leaves underwater they just rot away slowly.Now I managed to fix them in certain areas and they grow just awesome.


It is a good point,  they don't enjoy being bashed around.


rusticdr said:


> Even if it's iron wat abt other features like the holes in the leaves which r not described in iron deficiency.


I'm not sure about what's in the aquarium based literature, but there is scientific research that shows that you get holes in the leaves with iron deficiency, in _Lemna _it is one of the first signs of low iron levels.  The marks are described as <"snake bite lesions"> (from the link, in fig. 2. "long description").





> .........Photograph C is a close-up of three or four plants. The photo is illustrating “snake-bite” lesions on the fronds that are resultant from long-term iron deficiency. The lesions are small and appear as two white dots which are side by each on the otherwise green fronds......


If you look at the tips of your plants (below) they are severely chlorotic and stunted, so it has to be a deficiency of a non-mobile nutrient (the plant can't move it to the new leaves), and one that causes <"chlorosis">.





The non-mobile <"plant nutrients"> are listed in <"Michigan State- Knowing plant....">, and iron (Fe) and manganese (Mn), are the two most likely, and are both involved in chlorophyll synthesis.

I would be very, very surprised if it isn't an iron deficiency.

cheers Darrel


----------



## Daveslaney

Agree with darrel.
I would try chelated iron along side the seachem iron. I remember reading somewhere about ferrious gluetanate although a good source of iron being very KH dependent and can become unavailable to the plants at diff KH values.
Think this is the reason most micro mixes that use it use chelated iron along side.


----------



## rusticdr

Konsa said:


> Hi
> I had simmular issue with my floating plants in the past.I was going all over the place with thoughts what could be the issue.
> It turned out that my high flow was bashing them too hard arround  and once leaves underwater they just rot away slowly.Now I managed to fix them in certain  areas and they grow just awesome.
> Regards Konsa


I read abt that too. Actually even though there s strong flow in my tank water surface does not break. And the frogbits get segregated in one corner by my fish feeding rings. So they r stationary. Anyway thanks for ur comment. 

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk


----------



## Konsa

rusticdr said:


> I read abt that too. Actually even though there s strong flow in my tank water surface does not break. And the frogbits get segregated in one corner by my fish feeding rings. So they r stationary. Anyway thanks for ur comment.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk



Hi
It may be that sagregation and the constant pressure that is pushing them tight together forsing them to push eachother leaves underwater. On the pics the leaves that are rotting are bent down and well submerged Once that happens is enevitable for the leaves to rot away.I had that in my tanks too.
Regards Konsa


----------



## ceg4048

Zak Rafik said:


> But what if the OP wants a jungle style scape or maintain dense growth? What would you recommend?
> I have seen several tanks where the plant growth is so dense that the substrate nor the tank's back glass can be seen and yet have luxurious growth.





rusticdr said:


> Will look like a whirlpool. I do know that it's densely planted but that's how it has been from the very beginning. I like it that way. And in the beginning co2 was only at 2 bps. Plants were not having these issues


Yes, I've had jungle tanks myself, and of course suffered exactly the same problem - until I solved the flow/distribution riddle in that particular tank.
I don't know if a whirlpool is necessarily the best flow pattern. Since I cannot see the tank it is difficult to analyze or suggest how to arrange the various nozzles for best effect.

There is too much evidence against the theory of nutrient toxicity. You yourself have the evidence.
You stated that you were using ADA Amazonia correct? Well did you realize that brand new ADA Amazonia contains approximately 100X EI values of nutrients?
So you were dosing 100X EI in the substrate and your plants grew fine. Then you dose 1X EI in the water column and the plants didn't do fine and so you assumed that 1X EI dosing is toxic but 100X EI is OK? No, sorry, I cannot accept that.

I can see your L. aromatica suffers poor color and has a slight case of hair algae.

Here is my L. aromatica dosed for 2 years at 5X EI. So clearly, nutrient toxicity cannot be blamed for poor performance.




Just having high flow is not enough. The flow must be distributed properly. Despite your assumption that you have good flow/distribution, it's my contention that you have a distribution problem.

Perhaps if you can show us video or photos of your pump configuration we might be able to troubleshoot.

Cheers,


----------



## Daveslaney

Fantastic plants Clive.


----------



## rusticdr

Konsa said:


> Hi
> It may be that sagregation and the constant pressure that is pushing them tight together forsing them to push eachother leaves underwater.



Thanks. I think u do have a point. I will have a look at that and get back to u. Just have a couple of them left from what used to be 50 or so. Pretty sad. 

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk


----------



## ceg4048

I went back to the images to study them more closely to see if it's possible to change some things around.
As you may know, my standard technique is to use a spraybars across the length of the back wall and to point them forward. It's my belief that this is the best starting point and that if supplementary pumps are added then they should be place in a location that best augments the flow pattern created by the spraybars.

What I see in those first images with the pump placement, I must say that I disagree with the placement, but, maybe they were OK for a while until the going got rough, when things got a bit thicker (more dense foliage).

I can just make out one green spraybar in image #2 but it looks crooked and I cannot see if it extends all the way across the back.

It also appears that you have two Koralias pointing in opposite direction, one at the front left and the other at the rear right. This is never a good arrangement because each pump actually cancels the flow of the other. All pumps are most effective when they all push together in the same direction. It's not clear to me what vision you had in mind with this particular pump arrangement. Again, you might have gotten away with this with a lighter plant mass, but as the mass increases, I believe it becomes less effective.

Cheers,


----------



## rusticdr

ceg4048 said:


> Yes, I've had jungle tanks myself, and of course suffered exactly the same problem - until I solved the flow/distribution riddle in that particular tank.
> I don't know if a whirlpool is necessarily the best flow pattern. Since I cannot see the tank it is difficult to analyze or suggest how to arrange the various nozzles for best effect.



Not saying I have a whirlpool or need one. Just saying that there s a lot of flow. But I get ur point. 



ceg4048 said:


> There is too much evidence against the theory of nutrient toxicity. You yourself have the evidence.
> You stated that you were using ADA Amazonia correct? Well did you realize that brand new ADA Amazonia contains approximately 100X EI values of nutrients?
> So you were dosing 100X EI in the substrate and your plants grew fine. Then you dose 1X EI in the water column and the plants didn't do fine and so you assumed that 1X EI dosing is toxic but 100X EI is OK? No, sorry, I cannot accept that.



Yes. That's true. But I wasn't dosing micros in the beginning. Could that be the reason?



ceg4048 said:


> Just having high flow is not enough. The flow must be distributed properly. Despite your assumption that you have good flow/distribution, it's my contention that you have a distribution problem.
> 
> Perhaps if you can show us video or photos of your pump configuration we might be able to troubleshoot,



Yes. I could post some videos of the flow pattern. Btw that aromatica looks awesome. Pls don't mistake my arguments. Not trying to prove anything. Just trying to understand more abt what's happening. Thanks so much. 

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk


----------



## rusticdr

dw1305 said:


> Hi all, It is a good point,  they don't enjoy being bashed around.
> I'm not sure about what's in the aquarium based literature, but there is scientific research that shows that you get holes in the leaves with iron deficiency, in _Lemna _it is one of the first signs of iron deficiency. iron (Fe) and manganese (Mn), are the two most likely, and are both involved in chlorophyll synthesis.
> 
> I would be very, very surprised if it isn't an iron deficiency.



I do get what u r saying and I did read through the link that u provided. Have ordered florin fe which contains both edta and gluconated forms. But the thing is that I have dosing iron regularly only recently.. probably last couple of months. Before that I used to skip dosing for weeks together. But my plants grew without these peculiar changes. Especially the l. Aromatica blossomed well. If course it used to grow well and then lost all it's bottom leaves and finally the stem used to melt away. That was again a time when I used all 4 lights too. Manganese def was in the back of my mind though.. the holes in some of the plants like the korymbosa compacta r intervenular. 



If u look closely there u can c those holes. But again I am just speculating. Maybe as Clive said there is probably more than one problem here. 
I will post a video soon for the flow. 

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk


----------



## rusticdr

ceg4048 said:


> I went back to the images to study them more closely to see if it's possible to change some things around.
> As you may know, my standard technique is to use a spraybars across the length of the back wall and to point them forward. It's my belief that this is the best starting point and that if supplementary pumps are added then they should be place in a location that best augments the flow pattern created by the spraybars.
> 
> What I see in those first images with the pump placement, I must say that I disagree with the placement, but, maybe they were OK for a while until the going got rough, when things got a bit thicker (more dense foliage).
> 
> I can just make out one green spraybar in image #2 but it looks crooked and I cannot see if it extends all the way across the back.
> 
> It also appears that you have two Koralias pointing in opposite direction, one at the front left and the other at the rear right. This is never a good arrangement because each pump actually cancels the flow of the other. All pumps are most effective when they all push together in the same direction. It's not clear to me what vision you had in mind with this particular pump arrangement. Again, you might have gotten away with this with a lighter plant mass, but as the mass increases, I believe it becomes less effective.
> 
> Cheers,



Thanks so much for taking the time and effort. Yes.. I got the idea of placing the spray bars on the back from one of ur posts. The green spray bar s eheim and it's a little slanted cos it was pretty close to the surface  and didn't want the co2 coming out to reach the surface quickly. The reactor is inline with the eheim. The other black spray bar u can c well in the first 2 pics. So these two make the water flow to the front then down and then backwards. 
The wavemakers r 800 gph sunsun models. Thought of placing them in the back too but they were just too powerful. So the front one is facing right and it's placed very close to the front glass. The rear one is very close to the rear glass facing left. So it's a anti clockwise movement when viewed from top. I did look for cancellation of flow by the way free leaves on top and inside the water drifted around. They would follow the circular movement. 
I do accept that since the eheim has the inline reactor and the sunsun canister both have low flow velocity from their spray bars. That s what made me place those wavemakers. But the only area then that would have low flow in the centre of the tank. I am manifesting deficiency symptoms in all over and in areas where is actually good flow. 
That s what puzzles me. Think a video will help. 
Cheers. 

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk


----------



## dw1305

Hi all, 





rusticdr said:


> If u look closely there u can c those holes.


That looks like the damage caused by a loricariid feeding, do you still have the Bristlenoses (_Ancistrus_)? <"They like _Echinodorus_ leaves">, and other broad leaves.

You may be able to limit the damage by feeding them courgette etc.

cheers Darrel


----------



## ceg4048

rusticdr said:


> The green spray bar s eheim and it's a little slanted cos it was pretty close to the surface and didn't want the co2 coming out to reach the surface quickly.


If you slant the bar you basically cancel out it's effect.
About 90% of the CO2 we inject never makes it to the plants. This is just a reality we have to live with, but you have to set the bars up so that they deliver the flow in the right direction. Changing their angles is counterproductive.



rusticdr said:


> The wavemakers r 800 gph sunsun models. Thought of placing them in the back too but they were just too powerful. So the front one is facing right and it's placed very close to the front glass. The rear one is very close to the rear glass facing left. So it's a anti clockwise movement when viewed from top. I did look for cancellation of flow by the way free leaves on top and inside the water drifted around. They would follow the circular movement.


You cannot play ping pong with water. It doesn't cooperate. You must place your auxiliary pumps on the back wall to augment the flow of the spraybars. This is especially important if the spraybar flow rate is weak. If the model of pump you have selected is too strong, then try to find pumps that are not too strong. I can tell right away from your description that the flow is chaotic and will only randomly deliver CO2/nutrients to where they are needed.

Again, I'm not saying that the configuration I suggest is guaranteed to work - there are just too many variables - but for sure you will need to resolve your distribution.


rusticdr said:


> If u look closely there u can c those holes.


Holes and deterioration in submerges plants are ALWAYS a symptom of poor CO2. You do not need to look anywhere else. In fact, I'm 100% certain that this is why we continue to have problems, because it is just too convenient to conclude that CO2 and flow/distribution are good, therefore the problem must be something else. 
But the plants do not lie and they do not change their response to deficiency just because it is a convenient denial for the hobbyist. You must solve your distribution and get the proper amount of CO2 to the areas of the tank where CO2 is deficient.

Cheers,


----------



## rusticdr

These were short clips I took today morning. This was after three days of no ferts as I was away from town. I changed my water in the morning 50%. Then as I was adding water I also mixed 3 tsps of equilibrium. This amt of pearling at just two lights and that too so early in the day I have not witnessed in some time. And that too every plant showed the same features irrrspective of location. Cos this was just an hr or so after lights on and the drop checker was still blue. Wat do u guys think.. //cloud.tapatalk.com/s/59d24c6bd47da/20171002_102855.mp4//cloud.tapatalk.com/s/59d24d7407012/20171002_102926.mp4

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk


----------



## dw1305

Hi all,





rusticdr said:


> And that too every plant showed the same features irrrspective of location. Cos this was just an hr or so after lights on and the drop checker was still blue. Wat do u guys think.


Because of the circumstances it may just be that the water change water was cooler than the tank water, and as <"it has warmed up"> the dissolved gases  have come out of solution.

cheers Darrel


----------



## rusticdr

Nope. It was definitely pearling. The bubbles were coming out of the leaves. The undersurface and tips. Am pretty sure of that. I am not adding anything today. Just want to c what happens. 

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk


----------



## rusticdr

ceg4048 said:


> If you slant the bar you basically cancel out it's effect.
> About 90% of the CO2 we inject never makes it to the plants. This is just a reality we have to live with, but you have to set the bars up so that they deliver the flow in the right direction. Changing their angles is counterproductive.



I corrected the slant.



ceg4048 said:


> You cannot play ping pong with water. It doesn't cooperate. You must place your auxiliary pumps on the back wall to augment the flow of the spraybars. This is especially important if the spraybar flow rate is weak. If the model of pump you have selected is too strong, then try to find pumps that are not too strong.



Ping pong is to and fro. What I have created is two circular pattern. Outer horizontal plane and inner vertical if u view from top. Don't think it's the same cos if it's all counter current it will just create turbulence and cancel put the flow. And I try to work with the materials I have and only when I am convinced there s something absolutely wrong with the flow will I consider buying smaller powerheads.



ceg4048 said:


> Holes and deterioration in submerges plants are ALWAYS a symptom of poor CO2. You do not need to look anywhere else. In fact, I'm 100% certain that this is why we continue to have problems, because it is just too convenient to conclude that CO2 and flow/distribution are good, therefore the problem must be something else.
> But the plants do not lie and they do not change their response to deficiency just because it is a convenient denial for the hobbyist. You must solve your distribution and get the proper amount of CO2 to the areas of the tank where CO2 is deficient.
> 
> Cheers,



Let's say that I agree it's co2 then why have my frogbits all but disappeared. Pls don't tell me it's due to excess flow cos that's the way it has been for a long time and back then they were flourishing so much i was dumping them into the waste on a weekly basis. One more thing.. after I started this thread I transferred just one frogbit into my nano4g low tech to c how it does. The flow on the surface of the nano s tremendous and the frogbit s constantly thrown around with submerged leaves. But I think it's recovering. Spotted a healthy new leaf. Wil keep u posted on that.

Pls don't mistake me for my arguments. I know that I am just a novice but if I accept all u say without questions then I am not truly learning and there s always a very small chance that I may be right bcos I am seeing all this first hand. Thanks again. Pls keep posting. Cheers.



Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk


----------



## rusticdr

One more short video of yesterday's pearling. Will take some pics today if possible. //cloud.tapatalk.com/s/59d2e79bec59f/20171002_102855.mp4

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk


----------



## rusticdr

Just an update on what's happening. 
What I have changed:
1. Increased the co2.. I have added a second 4kg cylinder in addition to the pre-existing 3 kg. The former has been connected to an in tank ista ceramic diffuser which leads the bubbles into a power head and forms a fine mist (Pls see pic). The 3 kg is still connected to the ista in line co2 reactor coming out of the spray bar. Both cylinders r set at 6 to 7 bps and come one 4 hrs before lights on giving a nice green at lights in the DC and almost yellow at lights off. Fish seem fine.
2. I have added a smaller power head at the back facing forward at the centre between the two spray bars to enhance forward circulation. 
3. I have switched from using approximate quantities of dry chems with a teaspoon to using a calibrated scoop and dosing according to rotala butterfly ei dosing guide. 
   I am adding mgso4 even though my water report says it has sufficient Mg bcos I believe the plants more than the testing company. 

Results: 
1. Rotala indica and hygrophila corymbosa compacta seem to have improved. 
2. Other plants show marginal or nil change. 
3. Rotala rotundifolia red did improve but it was in  pretty bad already. 
4. Frogbits still going downhill but not as rapidly. 

I have also taken two frogbits placed one in a small vessel with tank water and placed the other in a similar sized vessel with tap water. Kept both of these in sunlight. If both do well then it's flow of water which is killing them. If tap water frogbit dies then we know I need more ferts. If tank water dies.. probably something wrong with what I am dosing. If both die.. I will restart that experiment. What else can I do. 

I plan to increase co2 further this weekend to c at what point fished start to struggle and then crank down a little. The question s whether I need to go to that point. I know a lot of you have given ur inputs and valuable time. Hope i have not offended anyone by questioning your opinions.. just trying to present my side of it. Pls give ur valuable suggestions. Thank u. 


Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk


----------



## ceg4048

rusticdr said:


> The former has been connected to an in tank ista ceramic diffuser which leads the bubbles into a power head and forms a fine mist


Hi, you might also want to consider switching to an external reactor for both of the cylinders. In tank schemes don't work so well for that size tank. If you must have the units in tank then they would do a better job being fed to to the filter intake.



rusticdr said:


> I have added a smaller power head at the back facing forward at the centre between the two spray bars to enhance forward circulation.


I recall that you had two pwerheads facing in opposite directions, did you not? I still suggest that you place those under your spraybars. They are not doing you any good where there at the sides of the tank.



rusticdr said:


> I have switched from using approximate quantities of dry chems with a teaspoon to using a calibrated scoop and dosing according to rotala butterfly ei dosing guide.


This will have zero effect. Plants do not care about precision.



rusticdr said:


> Both cylinders r set at 6 to 7 bps and come one 4 hrs before lights on giving a nice green at lights in the DC and almost yellow at lights off. Fish seem fine.


This is not really good. It should not take 4 hours to accomplish saturation. The fact that the DC goes yellow well into the photoperiod is further indication that something is going wrong either in your dissolution technique or in your flow/distribution method.

The proper technique is to perform a pH profile and see if you can get a 1 pH drop by the time the lights go on.

It's also a good idea to give the tank a good trim to give yourself some breathing room while you fix your CO2.

Cheers,


----------



## rusticdr

Hey Clive.. Thank you so much for your feedback. Was hoping you would say something. Means a lot. Anyway here goes..



ceg4048 said:


> Hi, you might also want to consider switching to an external reactor for both of the cylinders. In tank schemes don't work so well for that size tank. If you must have the units in tank then they would do a better job being fed to to the filter intake.



 I installed the second cylinder cos I read Tom Barr saying somewhere that co2 misting was a good way for co2 delivery. Thought i will try that. C ant use a second reactor as the flow rate on the sunsun canister s a bit slow as it is. The filter intake sounds good. Wil c how this goes. If it doesn't improve wil try that. 



ceg4048 said:


> I recall that you had two pwerheads facing in opposite directions, did you not? I still suggest that you place those under your spraybars. They are not doing you any good where there at the sides of the tank.


 I tried placing the wavemaker as you have said but it was too powerful for that position at the back.. it's rated at 800gph. Have ordered a nano wavemaker instead to try that position.. I know u disagree with the way the flow goes in my tank rite now but there s no detritus anywhere except for the dead centre. Anyway will definitely try ur approach once the nano arrives. 



ceg4048 said:


> This will have zero effect. Plants do not care about precision.


I agree. Just didn't wanna overdose.. I know that overdosing is tye basis of EI but I am kinda paranoid rite now. U know.. nothing seems to work. So pls ignore that. 



ceg4048 said:


> This is not really good. It should not take 4 hours to accomplish saturation. The fact that the DC goes yellow well into the photoperiod is further indication that something is going wrong either in your dissolution technique or in your flow/distribution method.



Yes.. this is something I too am worried abt.. I checked for leakage and that's fine. I am trying to get a pH meter. The fact is that there s so much misting and the diffuser has a bubble counter in it so i can see the bubbles hitting the undersurface of the ceramic disc. and it's not correlating with the DC. Wil keep u posted on that pH meter.



ceg4048 said:


> The proper technique is to perform a pH profile and see if you can get a 1 pH drop by the time the lights go on.





ceg4048 said:


> It's also a good idea to give the tank a good trim to give yourself some breathing room while you fix your CO2.
> ,


I trimmed as much as possible. Have attached pic. That experiment with the frogbits is taking it's time. Both look bad. Read some threads on phosphates. There was this guy from Turkey who doses almost 2 ppm of po4 every day. My current dosing leaves me with a total of 2 ppm at the end of the week. So I am trying my hand at daily dosing of 2 ppm too. What r ur thoughts on that. I know co2 is still my primary concern but I need to tackle the frogbits too cos all the plants in the tank have one thing in common including the frogbits... the new leaves r good and old leaves r unhealthy. I know co2 explains this. But why shud frogbits show the same. And there isnt that much agitation. The water surface s not broken at all. 
I am at my wits end here. A part of me says what r u doing.. But another part wants to solve this and make a beautiful planted tank. On most days this tank s what keeps me going. Anyway thanks again for your feedback Clive. Big fan. 
Wil post some close up shots soon. 
Tc. 







Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk


----------



## vershinin_yury

Hi there. 
Your NPK level is too much for RO water.
 You need to change 100% of water. 
Then add booster, not equilibrium!!!,
 for example Caso4 and MgCo3 1:4, for EI you need GH 6, something like 30ppm Ca 8ppm Mg,
 if you'll use equilibrium you'll get skyhigh level of potassium. 
Then you need to dose NPK day by day something like 3ppm of nitrate, 3ppm of potassium and  0.4 ppm of phosphorus, 
then test it in the end of the week and adjust the dosage.


----------



## HiNtZ

I know this is an ancient thread but what happened in the end?


----------



## rusticdr

HiNtZ said:


> I know this is an ancient thread but what happened in the end?


Hi, I should have updated this thread a long time back but I was figuring out a lot of things and its taken me almost 2.5 years to figure them out. Even now I have not solved all the issues in my tank but atleast I can now grow most of the plants I try. Specially limnophila aromatica which was my nemesis (I failed to grow that plant on 8 attempts) and also hygrophila pintadifida (which I never had success).
Now coming to the issues I had discussed in the thread:
1. Regarding micronutrient toxicity: Not sure about this anymore. There is something that definitely burnt up my rotala rotundifolia hi red.. its either high nitrates or micros. This is one of the last pieces of the puzzle i am yet to solve. its not co2 def because currently this plant resides right next to the co2 diffuser and gets max co2.
2. Regarding the duckweed index: Massive massive help. If any of u have any doubts whether u have issues either due to co2 or nutrient def.. this is a life saver. the reason for my frogbits to die off earlier was not due to high surface flow. It was insufficient phosphate. Looks like phosphate at EI recommended dosage isnt sufficient in my tank. I almost dose 10 ppm per week. And you can see those results in the pics attached here. 

 



You can see that the frogbits look good now. So definitely a big help.. all those gaping holes in the submerged plants also disappeared.
3. Things I havent changed:
 - I still have two co2 cylinders with two in tank diffusers placed at opposite ends of the tank with the same circular motion at the peripheries. So you can see that the water flow is almost the same. But where I was once going gung ho at 8 bps on both, I now only use 2-3 bps. Lime green indicators placed at two ends of the tank. pH drop is around 0.7 to 0.8.. 
 - Lights : same 8 hrs photoperiod with 54 w T5HO. 2 x 6500 kelvin for 6hrs and all four (2x 6500k, 1x 10000K, 1 x 3500k) for 2 hours.
 - filters : one eheim 2217 and one sunsun. cleaning once in 3 months. i know its  a bit long but with the job and kids, thats the max i can do for now.

4. What I did change: 
 - I abandoned flourish and all other commercial products. Now I make up my own micros using guidance from two guys from TPT Greg and Burr. Dosing is limited as I am not sure whether the substrate is still leaching. Iron in this mixture is Fe DTPA. 
 - being liberal with Phosphate is one of the major differences and its made a lot of difference. Cut back on the nitrate and potassium (dont think that made any difference). And since my water is RO i am now being very liberal on magnesium (was using equilbrium earlier but my hardscape includes limestone rocks so guessing that it shud be giving out clalcium).

Unresolved issues:
Although most plants are growing now, staurogyne and rotala hi red arent doing well. other plants are still showing slightly unhealthy older leaves. so i am gradually increasing co2. if that doesnt work i am gonna increase my micros gradually as i have maxed out my macros already. 

Anyway looking forwards to your comments and suggestions. Will keep you all posted.


----------



## dw1305

Hi all,





rusticdr said:


> Specially limnophila aromatica which was my nemesis


Plant health looks really good in the images, they look like (a more colourful version of) the plants that @ceg4048 <"Clive owned">.






rusticdr said:


> You can see that the frogbits look good now.





rusticdr said:


> Regarding the duckweed index: Massive massive help. If any of u have any doubts whether u have issues either due to co2 or nutrient def.. this is a life saver.


I'm really pleased the Duckweed Index has worked for you. <I'm biased>, but the great advantage of it is that you've taken CO2 and light availability out of the equation.

If it isn't too much hard work I'd pinch the old yellow leaves off the Frogbit. Once the leaves are yellow, and shaded, they aren't offering the plant anything. Usually in my tanks the snails clean them up as they start to decay, but in the tank, where the water is too soft for snails, I pick them off myself.

cheers Darrel


----------



## HiNtZ

Thanks for the update! That's what I like about this site - people seem to hang around.

I have just one question....

Since you use RO what are you doing about Cl?

I too use RO and reconstitute with GH booster from TNC (CaSO4/MgSO4/K2SO4) and had been adding chloride with ill effects (MgCl2 and CaCl2).

It seems that adding anything over 5ppm and I experience problems stunting and veiny leaves.

My parameters are 6GH, 2KH, 6PH.

Not saying that's the problem but I made a correlation through observation.

I'm sure there's something else at play here and I'm pretty sure now it's not a trace toxicity issue as if I stop dosing trace I show terrible deficiency after just a few days.

You're not the first I've heard has had better success with higher P doses. It's something I was going to try next.

Nitrogen was always on my mind, I've tried low medium and high doses. From 0ppm to 10ppm a day just to see what happens.

So basically if I dose N and trace at EI levels without dosing Cl, my N plummets while P remains quite stable.

This week and onward I am completely cutting out Cl. I'm thinking that there should be enough in the trace as impurities.

Also tried supplemental Ni, Zn and Mn with no changes.


----------



## rusticdr

HiNtZ said:


> Thanks for the update! That's what I like about this site - people seem to hang around.
> 
> I have just one question....
> 
> Since you use RO what are you doing about Cl?
> 
> I too use RO and reconstitute with GH booster from TNC (CaSO4/MgSO4/K2SO4) and had been adding chloride with ill effects (MgCl2 and CaCl2).
> 
> It seems that adding anything over 5ppm and I experience problems stunting and veiny leaves.
> 
> My parameters are 6GH, 2KH, 6PH.
> 
> Not saying that's the problem but I made a correlation through observation.
> 
> I'm sure there's something else at play here and I'm pretty sure now it's not a trace toxicity issue as if I stop dosing trace I show terrible deficiency after just a few days.
> 
> You're not the first I've heard has had better success with higher P doses. It's something I was going to try next.
> 
> Nitrogen was always on my mind, I've tried low medium and high doses. From 0ppm to 10ppm a day just to see what happens.
> 
> So basically if I dose N and trace at EI levels without dosing Cl, my N plummets while P remains quite stable.
> 
> This week and onward I am completely cutting out Cl. I'm thinking that there should be enough in the trace as impurities.
> 
> Also tried supplemental Ni, Zn and Mn with no changes.


Hi.. thanks for your comment. True regarding the feedback of people who have faced issues so that we can get an idea on how to resolve similar issues which we may be having.. 
Anyway.. although I do use RO I have not replaced chloride at all. All my compounds were sulphate based. Checked my micro mix too.. not there. Hmm. Interesting. Will read up about the necessity of chloride. Maybe that's the missing link in my tank. 
  As of now.. it's just mgso4 that goes for the GH boost. 
  As far as dosing goes.. I am going sort of for a lean dosing which actually looks like it's working. When I started dosing my micros as per EI recommended levels using Burr's guide for micromix, I could immediately see the plants suffer. So everything is lean now except for phosphate which is higher than EI recommended levels around 5 ppm per week (lesser than my initial 10ppm per week). 
   I am still figuring it all out but as of now I am getting healthy growth with only a few niggles on the older leaves. Rotala rotundifolia recovering but staurogyne repens did not. 
  Will post pics soon. 

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk


----------



## rusticdr

dw1305 said:


> Hi all,Plant health looks really good in the images, they look like (a more colourful version of) the plants that @ceg4048 <"Clive owned">.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm really pleased the Duckweed Index has worked for you. <I'm biased>, but the great advantage of it is that you've taken CO2 and light availability out of the equation.
> 
> If it isn't too much hard work I'd pinch the old yellow leaves off the Frogbit. Once the leaves are yellow, and shaded, they aren't offering the plant anything. Usually in my tanks the snails clean them up as they start to decay, but in the tank, where the water is too soft for snails, I pick them off myself.
> 
> cheers Darrel


Thanks Darrel.. always good to hear from you. I do love the limnophila aromatica and when it comes out well its awesome to look at. 
  I continue to use the frogbits to judge nutrient balance cos of 2 reasons.. 
1. As u said it takes co2 of the equation because of the exposure to air 
2. As its directly under the lights with only air inbetween the frogbits get max undiluted light. So any changes in nutrient levels which is not good to plant health will reflect first in the frogbits and then submerged fast growing stems and then on slower growing crypts.. i recently set up my part DIY PAR meter.. light at the surface is nearly 250 where as at the substrate its 50. So that's the amount of acceleration the frogbits face for photosynthesis. 

   And as for the old leaves.. you r right. I could nip them off. But seeing the damaged leaves drives me to alter my dosing in order to get the perfect plant health.   

Tc

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk


----------



## GHNelson

rusticdr said:


> Regarding micronutrient toxicity: Not sure about this anymore. There is something that definitely burnt up my rotala rotundifolia hi red.. its either high nitrates or micros. This is one of the last pieces of the puzzle i am yet to solve. its not co2 def because currently this plant resides right next to the co2 diffuser and gets max co2.


I think this could be a consequence of how you dose the fertilizer!
Not how much
hoggie


----------



## rusticdr

hogan53 said:


> I think this could be a consequence of how you dose the fertilizer!
> Not how much
> hoggie


Hi.. been a while.. anyway thanks for the reply. But before I go on to what has happened after this thread I would like to understand what u mean by how u dose ur fert? Is that like whether I premix or directly add them to the tank? Not very clear. 
Anyway I am going out on a limb to say that what I experienced was def nutrient toxicity. In the beginning it was micro and later on the rotala burn was due to high nitrate. I have even had high phosphates killing off a few plants although not as bad as nitrates.. and I am a pathologist by profession (MD).. what I am trying to say is that I have observed these changes in unbiased scientific manner as possible and have concluded thus. 
Now.. I have completely torn down the scape and have rescaped it. I have started with a very restricted macro and micro dosing. And with the same or albeit lesser amt of co2 the plants are thriving. Ludwigia senegalensis used to die a gruesome death in my previous 5 or so attempts.. shooting off leaves now. Walichi s tip just burnt away earlier and now its pink and lush. All the plants look healthy..
I am not denying that co2 is a key key factor.. but I am also convinced that the plants need very little ferts to do really well. Have subsequently planted more densely yesterday with a mc carpet and staurogyne repens at one corner. Will update as and when they grow bigger. 








Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk


----------



## GHNelson

Hi
I think this could be a consequence of how you dose the fertilizer!
Not how much

On occasions if I dose Liquid Micro fertilizers too near certain plants...they tend to get burnt shrunken leaves!
Especially Rotala sp rotundifiola!
hoggie


----------



## rusticdr

Ok.. got your point. Its a 100 gallon tank with 21 inches height. So the ferts are delivered on the water surface and there is now way of directly hitting one specific plant. And I observed these changes at various positions in the tank, that's how I concluded that co2 was not the cause. I understand that there will be a lot of opposition to my findings.. but this was just my experience. And I use dry ferts for macros and flourish for micros. After a long time I saw pearling today even at the corners where light was not that strong. So I am really looking forward to growing these plants in a healthy manner..

Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk


----------



## GHNelson

Ludwigia senegalensis a difficult plant to cultivate needs soft water parameters.
Ludwigia senegalensis - Senegal-Ludwigie - Flowgrow Wasserpflanzen-Datenbank
hoggie


----------



## rusticdr

That post was in german..  but anyways my point is that not only senegalensis, several other plants like aromatica and even rotala had the same fate in my tank earlier. But I may be counting my chicks before they have hatched. Let my plants grow well and then I will show u before and after pics. Then probably I can justify better what I am trying to say. Not saying that this is the absolute truth.. its what I experienced.. it took me 4 yrs to figure this out. And I almost gave up at one point. But now with this new hope I keep looking at my tank any moment I am in the house which is actually driving the missus mad. Will keep this page posted. 

Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk


----------



## rusticdr

Some snaps I took yest. 
Rotala h ra.. emerged form 
Myriophyllum mattogrossense and Hygrophila difformis 
Hydrocotyle tripartita honda and Lobelia cardinalis 
Full tank shot with MC carpet just planted. 











Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk


----------



## sparkyweasel

rusticdr said:


> That post was in german


If you click the little Union Flag at the top left corner of the page, it will change to English.


----------

