# Wanted: pictures of tanks. (KH related)



## Edvet (11 Feb 2015)

I would love some pics of longer existing tanks with either very hard or very low KH values.
I can point to them in the ever recurring discusions that you need a certain low or high value to have a nice planted tank.
I know some members have liquid rock coming from their faucet, while others have almost zero hardness. I would love some pics with the reigning KH value (doesn't have to be in decimals )


----------



## dw1305 (11 Feb 2015)

Hi all, 
This was about 80 microS and 2 dKH at the time the picture was taken. 



 

It has always been about the same values, but doesn't have as many plants now since the central _Anubias _now fills up 3/4 of the tank.

This was taken about a week ago, I've got a few sub-adult male _Apistogramma agassizii_ stored in it at the moment.


 

cheers Darrel


----------



## Andy D (11 Feb 2015)

kH of 2 also:


----------



## X3NiTH (11 Feb 2015)

0dKH





Used a Nutrafin KH test kit with a 5ml sample (count drops after first drop multiply by 10 to get PPM), first drop turns sample blue, second drop turns sample yellow so <10mg/L or 0.56dKH. I'm not purposely adding KH so it's much lower than this. Second try larger 3x sample volume of 15ml, first drop turns sample blue, second drop sample remains blue, third drop sample turns yellow.


----------



## Martin in Holland (12 Feb 2015)

I keep the KH of this tank at 5-6 just to be able to get a good pH reading.



 
This tank has a KH of 2


----------



## zanguli-ya-zamba (12 Feb 2015)

KH 3 








Envoyé de mon iPhone en utilisant Tapatalk


----------



## parotet (12 Feb 2015)

My lowest KHs measured during the year (tap water), can be up to 2 units more in summer

KH11 (low tech)


KH9 (high tech)


Jordi


----------



## Edvet (12 Feb 2015)

Good good Keep them coming


----------



## PARAGUAY (12 Feb 2015)

Sorry to off topic a little Edvet but really impressed with moss in X3NiTH tank


----------



## Stee61 (17 Feb 2015)

I hope to see some high KH's coming through on this thread. I've got Oxfordshires finest 'liquid rock' coming through the taps and a tank I hope to start in a months time (I erroneously promised I'd finish the bathroom before starting another tank!). Parotet's examples are giving me hope (although I still may cut my water with some frm the water butt outside!)


----------



## parotet (17 Feb 2015)

Stee61 said:


> I hope to see some high KH's coming through on this thread. I've got Oxfordshires finest 'liquid rock' coming through the taps and a tank I hope to start in a months time (I erroneously promised I'd finish the bathroom before starting another tank!). Parotet's examples are giving me hope (although I still may cut my water with some frm the water butt outside!)


Clive's tank (aka ceg4048) is one of the best examples I have seen of lush growth with liquid rock tap water. If I am not wrong it was around 15dKH.
I also miss more pictures of great planted tanks with high KH... Come on guys, I'm sure you have plenty of good examples to show

Jordi


----------



## ukjay (17 Feb 2015)

Hi,

May I ask if the photos being requested will also be correlated with full tank parameters, as I personally feel Kh is only part of the complex story of sustaining a vibrant planted aquarium, thus I am intrigued to know what other information will be considered when comparing the tanks with high and low Kh? 

Sorry for my questioning, but as I am venturing into my first planted tank setup - I felt it prudent to ask for the individuals in a similar position to myself.

Kind regds

Jay


----------



## dw1305 (17 Feb 2015)

Hi all,





ukjay said:


> May I ask if the photos being requested will also be correlated with full tank parameters, as I personally feel Kh is only part of the complex story of sustaining a vibrant planted aquarium, thus I am intrigued to know what other information will be considered when comparing the tanks with high and low Kh?


 I think you are right, and the point was that there isn't a single, or range of, carbonate hardness values that makes a planted tank successful. 

The majority of plants will grow equally successfully at high and low dKH values, if they get sufficient nutrients (including CO2).

I only keep low tech. tanks, and there are exceptions to this under those conditions. I find that _Vallisneria_ won't grow in my tanks (rain-water, low nutrients, no added CO2), but it does fine in our tap water (low nutrient, but about 18dKH). 

cheers Darrel


----------



## Edvet (17 Feb 2015)

Indeed the point of it is to counter people who claim you can only grow plants at a certain KH


----------



## ceg4048 (18 Feb 2015)

KH 15+, GH 25+
The Matrix isn't real Edvert...


 

Cheers,


----------



## parotet (18 Feb 2015)

ukjay said:


> May I ask if the photos being requested will also be correlated with full tank parameters, as I personally feel Kh is only part of the complex story of sustaining a vibrant planted aquarium


You will probably read that it is easier to keep a low-medium KH planted tank, and in most cases the explanation given behind this statement is that it is more difficult to get proper CO2 levels... something which is not true, as explained many times here. It is just a misconception due to the fact that a higher KH buffers the pH drop, but CO2 dissolution is independent of the water alkalinity. Another frequent argument is that the plants we use come from acidic waters but the truth is that plants most (probably 95%?) can adapt to new conditions (except for a few which are well known).

IME, and regarding C enriched tanks, fine-tuning the light intensity with CO2 levels and flow has been the key point... and it takes quite a lot of time and effort to do so. Water changes and in general tank husbandry are also important. Lately I have also learnt to manage properly plants: most of my plants didn't look nice (they were algae free, but not beautiful) because I simply learn which ones prefer to be trimmed, replanted, can be frequently moved or not, etc.

As mentioned, sometimes I still think about cutting my water with RO/DI, you know... probably thinking that my tank could look better. Still many aquascapers (I am not talking about "myth makers", so the same ones admitting that it is perfectly possible to keep a very nice planted tank with hard water) say that they find that medium-soft water make their plants look healthier.
But, each time I have this "temptation" I think about 3 things:

1. regarding WCs, managing RO/DI water is more difficult than tap water, therefore I will make my life easier
2. water is scarce where I live and it's becoming more expensive, even the most efficient systems throw 2 parts of water for each one produced (most times 3:1)
3. very healthy tanks/layouts can be produced with higher KHs than mine... once I can achieve what Clive does (for example, many other examples can be found here), if I am not at ease with the result, I will use RO... but for the moment I don't blame my water, it's me! 

Jordi


----------



## Edvet (18 Feb 2015)

I know Clive, I just want to be able to point people to this topic and show all is possible at all KH's


----------



## ukjay (18 Feb 2015)

With regards to the comment about plants not doing too well in rain water in a low tech set up without CO2, but do well in tap water - could this be due to the amount of pollutants within rain water now, afterall - it is not only CO2 affecting the rain nowadays, we have numerous pollutants that make their way into the atmosphere, so depending where we live - we have more to contend with.
Therefore, the plants that do not do so well in rain water may be more susceptible to these pollutants thus slowing their growth etc? 

kind regards

Jay


----------



## ukjay (18 Feb 2015)

Just a newbie question, am I correct in thinking Clive is ceg4048, and are we looking at his tank in the post above?
Apologies for being nosey!

Jay


----------



## dw1305 (19 Feb 2015)

Hi all,





ukjay said:


> With regards to the comment about plants not doing too well in rain water in a low tech set up without CO2, but do well in tap water - could this be due to the amount of pollutants within rain water now, afterall - it is not only CO2 affecting the rain nowadays, we have numerous pollutants that make their way into the atmosphere, so depending where we live - we have more to contend with.
> Therefore, the plants that do not do so well in rain water may be more susceptible to these pollutants thus slowing their growth etc?


 In the case of _Vallisneria_ I'm pretty sure it is carbonate hardness effect. 

I use rain-water in all the tanks, and the other plants are fine. I've also got a KISS method of testing the rain-water for agricultural pollutants etc, it is the <"Daphnia bioassay">. 

Our tap water also comes from a deep limestone aquifer, and is pretty devoid of solutes other than Ca++ and HCO3-, so it provides a reasonable control. A real control would be to saturate the rain water with calcium carbonate via an "oyster shell chick grit" or "shell sand"  (or similar) substrate, and then observe the growth of _Vallisneria._ 

I haven't done that,  but Diana Walstad reports on similar experiments in her book.  

cheers Darrel


----------



## Aristotelis (12 Apr 2015)

Where I live the tap water comes from water sources deep in mountains full of marble. As a matter of fact the place here has numerous marble excavations.
As you can imagine we're talking liquid rock hard water.
42GH measured in the tank today, before weekly water change
16KH measured in the tank today again before weekly water change

Tap water measurements
14KH.
Unfortunately I wasn't able to measure the GH today as I finished the drop reagent (easy when every measure is over 30 drops LOL). Usually I'm around 35+GH

I use tap water on this old and bought used RIO 125, badly scratched and with still an internal filter. I bought this tank to learn (I knew nothing about aquariums 3 years ago) and has been gone through various modifications and even a house move. As I said it has an internal filter with a 800l/h pump. I have added also a Tunze pump to enhance water circulation. 2*39W light T5 per 8 hours.
I use CO2 via a bazooka diffuser and use 2x Estimated Index, since the substrate was a tiny bit of JBL 2.5 years ago that has surely depleted by now. I don't use fertilizing tabs, hence the 2x Estimated Index dosage. Of course 50% weekly water changes

It also has plenty of stock. 9 Trigonostigma espei, 9 Cardinals, 6 Ottocinclus, 8 Amano scrimps, over 10 galaxy rasbora and 2 small true SAE. 


Positive things I have learned in 2.5 years?
- The more you let the aquarium alone, the better. Move too much stuff around and the algae gets back. But do move plants to clean them up, just don't pull up often.
- The more EI dosage the better. Every time I had doubts and started dosing less, there was an algae outbreak. Can't thank enough @ceg4048 and other great guys here, for insisting showing everybody in this forum that in a closed system as an aquarium, fertilizing is our friend.
- CO2 is king. I'm aware that I have bad circulation and bad CO2 distribution. But everytime I managed to make it better, everysingle time I had better response from plants and less algae. 
- No need to have big light. No need to have specific light color. Light is light, that's what the plants care about. I use 6500K but only because I like it.
- CO2 is not needed for planted tanks at all costs. I have another nano tank which is much nicer to look at and it is low tech. Proper fertilization, big plant mass. That's it. So either no CO2 at all, or PROPER CO2. Not in between situations. 
- I think some plants probably do not like the so much hard water conditions. But it could be because of my poor filter circulation. Not sure about it. 
I have moved said plants at a place where I was (maybe) sure there was enough CO2 but still no success. 

- One final think IMHO very important.If some plants don't work for you, don't become obsessive. Move on, find what it works and stick with it. The most ugly plant when it's lush, is always better to look at, than a great plant that suffers and melts. I might not have great and difficult plants and surely my tank is not what you can call proper aquascaping, but I love looking at a fully lush green window full of life in my room, not to talk about how amazed visitors are when they realize the plants are... real! 

Here are some screenshots of this "ugly" tank during the years. Right now is in "jungle" situation. Sorry for the bad smartphone photos and the ugly tank.

Again, thank you everybody in this forum. Best learning place in the net.


----------



## parotet (12 Apr 2015)

OMG Aristotelis, you're the king of hard water!! 

Jordi


----------



## Aristotelis (12 Apr 2015)

Ha! I knew i was good. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## zanguli-ya-zamba (17 Apr 2015)

ceg4048 said:


> KH 15+, GH 25+
> The Matrix isn't real Edvert...
> 
> 
> ...


Hi Clive,

What is the stem plant on the right on top of the Pogo please ? 
Fabulous health !!!


----------



## Jose (17 Apr 2015)

Hi Clive,
Do you have PAR readings for this tank?


----------



## zanguli-ya-zamba (17 Apr 2015)

Update of the tank. 








Cheers


Envoyé de mon iPhone en utilisant Tapatalk


----------



## Edvet (17 Apr 2015)

Any KH values on that tank Zanguli?


----------



## zanguli-ya-zamba (17 Apr 2015)

KH2 or KH3 
My tape water os kH0 and i add 1/2 tea spoon of mgso4 and 1/4 Ca. Once a week after water change. 
So KH must be 2 or 3 


Envoyé de mon iPhone en utilisant Tapatalk


----------



## zanguli-ya-zamba (17 Apr 2015)

I don't have any more test kit so can't be accurate. But as I change 80% of water this must be the good value 


Envoyé de mon iPhone en utilisant Tapatalk


----------



## Aristotelis (22 Apr 2015)

Did some hack 'n' slash during the weekend...


----------



## ceg4048 (26 Apr 2015)

zanguli-ya-zamba said:


> Hi Clive,
> 
> What is the stem plant on the right on top of the Pogo please ?


Hi Thomas,
                 If this is the one you mean it's Micranthemum umbrosum (MU). Hard water is hardly a problem.


 



Jose said:


> Hi Clive,
> Do you have PAR readings for this tank?


Hi Jose,
           Well I'm always careful when talking about "how much PAR" because I vary the lighting, not only as the tank matures, but also on a daily basis. At the time of the photo the max PAR at the substrate level was about 100 micromoles, which is a LOT. When the tank was first flooded the max level was about half of that. At the beginning of the photoperiod I use about 1/4th of the maximum and gradually increase to max levels within about 3 hours.

Cheers,


----------



## Jose (27 Apr 2015)

Thanks Clive, thats very interesting. Do you know the co2 levels you get in there?
Have you kept Althernanthera Reinecki mini? This one doesnt grow well for me at all in 18dkH water. Also Didiplis Diandra, or ludwigia sp red. I understand it might be my co2 but I changed half the water in my tank to RO and my Didiplis Diandra is growing back already. Cant say about the other plants yet, it might be too soon.


----------



## zanguli-ya-zamba (27 Apr 2015)

ceg4048 said:


> ,




Yes that's the one !! very nice.
If Hard water is a problem for this plant, it won't be a problem for me as I have soft water.
I'll order it one day when $$ permit it.

Best regards


----------



## ceg4048 (27 Apr 2015)

Jose said:


> Do you know the co2 levels you get in there?
> Have you kept Althernanthera Reinecki mini? This one doesnt grow well for me at all in 18dkH water. Also Didiplis Diandra, or ludwigia sp red. I understand it might be my co2 but I changed half the water in my tank to RO and my Didiplis Diandra is growing back already. Cant say about the other plants yet, it might be too soon.


Well, I mean, nobody knows their CO2 levels unless they have a £1000 CO2 meter. There is enough CO2 to avoid killing the plants and not  so much as to kill the fish. That's all I ever know about CO2 levels. The CO2 concentration is never homogeneous across the tank and at every point in the tank it varies from gas on time to gas off time. It varies with temperature and with barometric pressure. So anyone who thinks they know a number is fooling themselves.

I have A. reinickii mini growing well in KH 11 and TDS 400 micro-seimen water in a tupperware bucket and yet it struggles mightily in the same water inside a CO2 injected tank. This tells me all I need to know about flow/distribution and parameter tolerance.

Here is D. diandra on the far left in the same KH 15, GH 25+ water. So maybe it grows easier in soft water but it's certainly not impossible to grow in hard water.



Cheers,


----------



## Jose (28 Apr 2015)

ceg4048 said:


> I have A. reinickii mini growing well in KH 11 and TDS 400 micro-seimen water in a tupperware bucket and yet it struggles mightily in the same water inside a CO2 injected tank. This tells me all I need to know about flow/distribution and parameter tolerance.



Not sure what you mean here? Do you think it might not like higher flow?


----------



## Aristotelis (28 Apr 2015)

I think @ceg4048 means the opposite. In the tank, with all the scapes and more plants around it, it probably gets a different (worse) flow distribution and thus less nutrients/CO2. It's not the water, but the flow the problem. 

Correct me if I'm wrong


----------



## ceg4048 (28 Apr 2015)

Yes, that\s what I mean. In the plastic bucket, being only a few cm from the surface, gas exchange is not a problem for the leaves. The plant grows slowly but is otherwise healthy. If a leaf breaks the surface, even slightly, then it has easy access to CO2 in the same way that you would have access to air using a snorkel while swimming. When the plant is plunged deep under water the slow diffusion rate of gases suffocates the plant. Not only is CO2 in short supply if injection rate and distribution are not excellent, but Oxygen is even more critical because it has the same slow diffusion rate in water and it\s solubility is much poorer.

People are always hysterical about whether they have enough light, just because some website posts cheesy WPG requirement, when all the time the plants melt into oblivion because they are actually suffocating...

Cheers,


----------



## Aristotelis (28 Apr 2015)

So ideally and leaving out fish requirements, a shallow tank is better for plants that are not too high. Say something like 30-35cm height?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------

