# Dosing and fish health



## Mikeyd (16 Oct 2013)

Hi all,

I've been trying to see if there are any threads regarding dosing nutrients and fish health but with no luck. Can anyone point me in the right direction please?
Bit of a noob question but I'm trying to find out if overdosing of npk or trace will affect fish? 

Many thanks


----------



## ceg4048 (16 Oct 2013)

Overdosing of npk or trace will not affect fish.

Cheers,


----------



## roadmaster (16 Oct 2013)

Will raise Total dissolved solid's, but unless fishes are wild caught,or one is wanting to breed same,,then I am with Ceg.
When I am too lazy to mix drt fertz ,and simply toss it in with measuring spoon,the fishes sometimes think it's food and try and eat  it ,but usually spit it back out. 
Been all over with dosing differing amount's of NPK while observing growth of plant's and can't say any fishes seemed harmed judging from activity.


----------



## Mikeyd (16 Oct 2013)

That's good to know, thanks for the answers.


----------



## plantbrain (16 Oct 2013)

Old myth, mostly rooted in fish only aquariums, not with plants as plants remove the nutrients and need a good supply.


----------



## roadmaster (16 Oct 2013)

plantbrain said:


> Old myth, mostly rooted in fish only aquariums, not with plants as plants remove the nutrients and need a good supply.


 
Would depend on plant uptake rate(low tech,high tech,and amount the OP is/was overdosing.
Is no myth that some  wild caught species do better with lower TDS considering they may never have expierienced water with Higher level's.


----------



## Mikeyd (16 Oct 2013)

I've not tried upping my dosing yet as I wanted to make sure it was safe to do so first
It's a low tech tank, currently just dosing 5ml of npk and 5ml trace weekly using the apf starter kit dosing.


----------



## plantbrain (17 Oct 2013)

roadmaster said:


> Would depend on plant uptake rate(low tech,high tech,and amount the OP is/was overdosing.
> Is no myth that some wild caught species do better with lower TDS considering they may never have expierienced water with Higher level's.


 

Under your claim, TDS.......which is a general measure of ions/conductivity, are the main factors,* not fertilizers per se.*
I can have low TDS and fertilizers.

So perhaps we should say that high TDS kills fish/bad for them also?
Generalizations get you in trouble. 

Which wild caught fish?
I've kept altums and Discus that are wild caught, not noticed any issues.
Or is it much more an issue of poor acclimation? 
TDS can cause many issues if the wild caught species who have been stressed a long time and not feed due to shipping.... are suddenly placed in a rich high TDS, I think that might be more the issue, not ferts.
Low vs high tech is more an issue of CO2 vs non CO2, so that's not an issue as far as the ferts. Overdosing, you need a specific ppm and ionic species to target to test or see if the hypothesis is true/false as well as specific livestock.
Near as I can tell, Altums are tolerant to CO2, but large wild species of discus max at about 40-45 ppm CO2.
I've never noted any issues with ferts for either wild caught species over several years for clients.

Which specific wild caught species are you referring to?


----------



## roadmaster (17 Oct 2013)

Apistogramma,Mikrogeophagus Ramireiz (sp),otocinclus, are a few that do better,longer, in my expieriences with lower tds .
I did not say TDS kill's fish ,only that some species do better with lower level's.
I did not say fertz was issue, but only contributer to TDS as is everything organic/inorganic we add to the tank.
Some may wish to google/bing,"effect's of total dissolved solid's on aquatic organisim's" (American journal of enviornmental science's) for more understanding.
All I said ,and still believe,is some wild caught species do better with lower TDS .
Do you dispute this?


----------



## NatureBoy (17 Oct 2013)

Has anyone had reason to be concerned about trace element dosing, what concentration of copper say would be considered hazardous for aquatic life?


----------



## ceg4048 (17 Oct 2013)

I've never had a problem with Ottos in high TDS water, so I'd remove them from that list.
There is no reason to be concerned with trace dosing either. My fish do fine in 5X EI dosing and Paulo has done up to 10X EI dosing without any issues. I'd worry more about how much food I was adding to the tank, not how much trace. That causes loads more damage. The toxic metal concentrations in micronutrient mixes are miniscule.

Cheers,


----------



## terry82517 (17 Oct 2013)

Sorry to hijack but been thinking for a while, if we are dosing above what our plants need with EI, even with weekly water changes, won't the total ppm of ferts rise sky high over a long period of time? 
Be grateful if someone could help me get my head around this.


----------



## ian_m (17 Oct 2013)

My pump failed to turn off one night and i dumped 1 litre of 1.5 strength EI mix macro into my 180 litre tank. This gives NO3 of over 300ppm.

Fish not bothered, apart from where is my food...

Found day or two later. Did 50% water change so down to 150ppm then couple of days later normal weekly 50% change. No fish died, no algae explosions, all very boring and annoying I had wasted 1 litre of macro mix.


----------



## ceg4048 (17 Oct 2013)

terry82517 said:


> Sorry to hijack but been thinking for a while, if we are dosing above what our plants need with EI, even with weekly water changes, won't the total ppm of ferts rise sky high over a long period of time?
> Be grateful if someone could help me get my head around this.


This will be impossible if you are changing the water regularly and frequently like you should be doing.
It's a very simple math, and is referred to as "serial dilution".

Cheers,


----------



## terry82517 (17 Oct 2013)

The way I was thinking (wrongly I very much suspect) is, for example, if I finish the week with 100ppm of say nitrate, when I do the 50% water change, I will start the week with 50ppm nitrate, so at the end of this week the nitrate ppm will be say 130ppm (or whatever) and will increase so on and so on! I know this cant be true and ppm increase forever, but I can't figure out why! I hope this makes sense.


----------



## ceg4048 (17 Oct 2013)

Well I understand your concern, but at the same time, the numbers that you are using as an example seem to be randomly generated and therefore is not mathematical.

The maximum allowable tap water NO3 concentration in the Euro-Zone is 50ppm. I'll have to assume that where you are.
EI dosing assumes a 20ppm weekly NO3 addition.
The tank produces some NO3 on it's own but this is mitigated by plant uptake, so, for ease we ignore these 2 variables.

So, at the end of the first week, based on the above assumption that there are no other NO3 sources (or sinks) the NO3 concentration is 70ppm

If a 50% water change is performed then the NO3 concentration will become the average of the 50% tap water and the 50% remaining tank water  (70ppm + 50ppm) / 2 = 60ppm.

Week 2
The follow week repeats with a 20ppm addition=> 60ppm (from the water change) + 20ppm (from dosing)
At the end of the second week the concentration is 80ppm
A 50% water change has a similar effect: (80ppm + 50ppm) / 2 = 65ppm

Week 3
Week 3 starts with 65ppm + 20ppm dosing = 85ppm by weeks end
the water change results in (85ppm + 50ppm) / 2 = 67.5ppm

Week 4
67.5ppm + 20ppm = 87.5ppm
Water change results in 87.5ppm + 50ppm = 68.5ppm

If you continue this pattern of NO3 addition and water change the value will approach and will never exceed 70ppm.
You can pick any combination of tap water ppm and the general formula will always be that the maximum NO3 concentration can only ever reach
(tap water ppm + dosing ppm) / 2

That's why the numbers that you imagine are not really valid, because the concentration profile must follow the rules of serial dilution.
We know that the plants remove both ammonia as well as NO3 so we can be confident that the tank will not produce more NO3 than can be accounted for in this exercise.

Cheers,


----------



## terry82517 (17 Oct 2013)

Brilliant. Thank you Clive, sorry for the made up numbers!  maths was never my strong point and I would have never come to this conclusion by myself.


----------



## plantbrain (18 Oct 2013)

roadmaster said:


> Apistogramma,Mikrogeophagus Ramireiz (sp),otocinclus, are a few that do better,longer, in my expieriences with lower tds .
> I did not say TDS kill's fish ,only that some species do better with lower level's.
> I did not say fertz was issue, but only contributer to TDS as is everything organic/inorganic we add to the tank.
> Some may wish to google/bing,"effect's of total dissolved solid's on aquatic organisim's" (American journal of enviornmental science's) for more understanding.
> ...


 

Otto cats most certainly.
Apistos often come in in batches, even with low KH water and peat, many importers and breeders lose the wild fish.
I agree they do better, but I'd argue that it's the KH that matters, not the TDS as much(but they will be related to some degree). 
I'm not a specialist and most people that buy wild apistos are going to be specialist. 

I stated you need a specific ppm. What is a high TDS? 100? 200? 300? 400 ppm?
What is a high level of ferts? Any idea? I'd suggest EI is the upper need for any aquarium pretty much. 
How much above the tap's background does EI add to the TDS?

Test it and see. I'm not going to answer this because you or someone else should do this, then they will know the TDS contribution from dosing.
Perhaps it's just the KH and not the Ca and Mg levels. I've found this to be the case with Discus, they colored up and did excellent with high GH additions.
Then several breeders here in the SF Bay area USA tried it after seeing a few of the fish. They reported similar results. the KH wa slow, but they raised the GH(and thus the TDS). 
I've breed 3 species of Apistos over the years, I have rams and a few others in client's tanks. These are not wild however. 
Perhaps they are radically different than the Altums and Discus?
Could be. But maybe not. 

If you have to use one of two genera of only wild caught specific fish that demand low KH water..........now you really are being specific, which is good, but then you lose the notion that's it's a generalized problem for fish keepers with adding ferts. It's only is a few very narrow specific cases and even those might be due to other issues than TDS.
Lots of possible issues. *You have to go down one by one and rule them out or see if you can. Sometimes you cannot, sometimes you honestly do not care, the advice works based on correlation and that's good enough for many hobbyists(I've done it as most of us have at some point).* Maybe it's tannins vs none? I've seen this also. Can I say much about it? Same as you with the TDS. But I have to say it's correlation but I'm unwilling to test with fish as much as with Shrimp culls. Driftwood laden quarantine tanks always seemed to do best for me. These have higher TDS than the other tanks. I've brought in a lot of wild cardinals/Tetras over the years, the addition of GH seems to help, the tannins seems to help also. Been on both sides of this fence. 

Still, the questions I pose are valid and informative questions, questions that would help aquarist later in the future to define what are the best management practices for livestock, plants etc.
Guessing does little to help further the knowledge base. Myths do outright damage. Good TDS reading ranges may help and give a nice base line so that others can compare and see if the results are similar.
Same with ferts, shrimp, other wild species, breeding, coloration etc. They have tannins testing kits, but few measure it. KH and GH test are easy, same with TDS/EC.
I suppose I should see about the tannins, I've always wondered about it.

After the fish have fattened up, done with quarantine and been doing well, then the TDS is adjusted up, is this an issue?
Might be transport, weakened state of the fish etc. While I have not brought it Apistos from the wild, I have brought in many fish from the same/similar locations.
TDS from ferts have not been correlative to poor health for me with any of the species I've had, Discus, catfish and all the way down small tetras. 
I quarantine them however.

Then once fat and happy, then I add them to the client or my own tank.
My tap has a KH of 18-20 ppm, and rises to 35-37 ppm seasonally.
So it's pretty good.


----------



## Mikeyd (18 Oct 2013)

Some interesting information, thanks all. 



ceg4048 said:


> I'd worry more about how much food I was adding to the tank, not how much trace. That causes loads more damage.



Reference this Clive, could you elaborate a little please? 

Many thanks


----------



## ceg4048 (18 Oct 2013)

Well, I mean adding food to a tank causes pollution. It results in ammonia whether the food get eaten or not. Then, the bacteria have to steal Oxygen from the tank to Oxidize ammonia to nitrite and nitrite to NO3. In a planted tank that's not too much of an issue unless overfeeding occurs. Toxic Nitrogen and loss of Oxygen are THE main cause of fish illness and death - and in fish only tanks overfeeding is the main culprit. Toxicity due to metal poisoning in trace mixes is so unlikely it's virtually impossible.

Cheers,


----------



## Mikeyd (18 Oct 2013)

Thanks for the reply. I was thinking along the right lines then due to creating excess pollution. I wasn't sure if there was something more to it that I hadn't thought of.


----------

