# pps pro and high nitrates in tap water



## wayne17 (8 May 2013)

hi i am fairly new to the hobby got my first tank last july, for the last couple of months i have been dosing ferts to my tank using the pps pro method. everything seems ok in the tank but when i tested for nitrates they were about 80ppm, so i tested my tap water and this came out at over 40ppm using api master kit.
i thought perhaps my soloutions were off so bought another api nitrate test kit and got the same results.
my question is should i stop adding the potassium nitrate that is in the pps pro formula?. should i add more potassium sulphate to compenste for not putting in the potassium nitrate or just add the formula without the nitrate?
any help much appreciated
wayne


----------



## ceg4048 (8 May 2013)

Hello,
		 You need to stop using nitrate test kits because they cannot give you accurate or consistent information.

Cheers,


----------



## wayne17 (8 May 2013)

Hi and thanks for you reply
I take it that you would recommend just to carry on with the pps pro dosing. Like I said earlier I am new to this and trying to learn as much as I can but if you can't trust the api nitrate test how do you know if your nitrates are high? Don't want to harm the fish
Thanks wayne


----------



## ceg4048 (9 May 2013)

Well, I'm not really a fan of PPS, primarily because that system is founded on three basic principles that have proven to be totally false:
The first false principle is:
That nutrients cause algae. Algae really do not care what the nutrient levels of the tank are. When both plants and algae are in a tank the algae respond to the health of the plants. If the plants are healthy then algae do not interfere. If the plants are unhealthy then this triggers algal blooms.

The second false principle is:
That NO3/PO4 are toxic to fish. The level of toxicity for NO3 is a very high number that we never reach in our dosing. What is much more toxic to fish is the organic pollution that we exacerbate when we fail to keep the tank clean. Doing large frequent water changes rids the tank of pollution. Chronic levels of organic pollution results in bacterial action that produces toxic ammonia and Nitrite and robs the tank of Oxygen. This is what kills the fauna. The NO3 levels that result is simply the smoking gun. When we add the inorganic form of NO3, such as with KNO3 there is no bacterial action associated with it. The higher the NO3 levels the better the plant health. So high Nitrate actually helps to reduce the possibility of algal blooms.

The third false principle is:
That you can manage the nutrient levels using test kits.
There is no way this can be accomplished, because test kits are a grand illusion. Even with expensive ion probe devices. This happens because the test reagents respond to other chemicals in the water that have similar electrochemical signatures of NO3, or NH3 or PO4. Ion probes can be similarly fooled. So for example, if Chloride (Cl-) is in the water, it mimics NO3. The reagents or probes are unable to distinguish between Cl-, NO3- and a host of other ions, so measurements return a high value for NO3. Since you cannot control the level of Cl-, and since it varies daily, you can take readings on ten different occasions and get ten different readings - even if the NO3 levels have not changed during those ten samples.

So because of these factors, it becomes impossible to manage the dosing. It is completely unnecessary to keep nutrient values between some arbitrary set of values and what happens in most cases is that the test kit reads a false high value, the hobbyists takes action by reducing the dosing levels in response, the real nutrient values fall below the minimum required for those environmental conditions, the plant health fails and algal blooms are incurred. The hobbyist then blames high nutrient levels for this failure.

This scenario happens every day and has been happening for decades, until it was demonstrated that the three principles were false and that the situation was actually the reverse of what people thought. The idea should be therefore to prevent malnutrition and that is most effectively done by consistently dosing a prescribed amount.

Suggested reading:
Why dont nutrients cause algae? | UK Aquatic Plant Society
Do excess nutrients = algae? Is it possible to "know"? | UK Aquatic Plant Society

EI DOSING USING DRY SALTS | UK Aquatic Plant Society

ferts causing high nitrate! | UK Aquatic Plant Society

Cheers,


----------



## zanguli-ya-zamba (9 May 2013)

Hi mate 
switch to EI you will have less head hack and less  !!!!
you will have to do water change, but no more testing and you will not be alway on the edge of the algae problems lol !!

cheers


----------



## wayne17 (9 May 2013)

hi ceg4048
thank you very much for your detailed answer and you have convinced me that the nitrate tests are usless, i wish i would have found this site last july when i first got my tank it might have saved me a lot of hassle. dont know if this is the correct forum to ask this but i will give all my details and problems and hope that you or anyone else can help.
i have a aqua one ufo 880 305 litre corner tank, 105 watts of t8 light four juwel tubes 3x daylight 1x colour, fluval 406 external filter, eheim heater and airstone,
fish are 2x angelfish, 4x dwarf neon rainbowfish, 2x male black mollies, 3x false sae (wrongly labelled as sae at lfs), 2x bristlenose plecs, 12x platies (keep breeding), and 6x amano shrimps.
plants are 8x crypts, 1 very large java fern, 1 anubis , 2 x amazon swords, 8x hygrophila corymbosa, 3x hygrophila polsperma,3x hygrophila rosanervis

i bought the tank last july second hand with java fern and anubis and most of the fish already in it, i bought the lights and filter new and have bought the plecs, shrimp and false sae as i have gone along.
ever since the start i have had problems with bba (think it was on the bogwood and plants when i bought it) so after reading on net bought some excel which i dose 7ml daily to water coloumn,I turn off filter and air stone when i spot treat a bad area now and again this seems to keep the bba at bay most of the time but it keeps coming back every now and then, normaly on java fern, anubis, bogwood and older hygrophila corymbosa leaves. i thought that the excel would have stopped the bba by now so i am beginning yo think maybe its not carbon lacking but a low flow perhaps? should i swap airstone for powerhead?
I also get a bit of gda on tank glass which i wipe off weekly with 20% water change. I have no carbon in filter just sponges it came with and extra biomax. I rotate cleaning sponges every month in tank water never touch biomax. As you Know i dose ferts to the pps pro recipe plus i add extra potassium nitrate 30 grams mixed with 250ml distilled water, 11ml twice weekly as some of the leaves on my hygrophila corymbosa have small holes with yellow rings around them.
the reason i have not tried ei dosing as i do not want to do 50% weekly water changes, i find changing 50 litres a week bad enough.
my main questions are these i run my filter at full flow but swapped the output nozzle for a spray bar as it used to blow the plants about quite a bit, i run a airstone for the fish because of excel dosing should i swap this for a powerhead. would this help with bba ie extra flow?
as my tank is only low light should i stop dosing excel daily and just spot treat bba  now and again?
what fert regime would you recommend for a low light tank with and without excel with my 20% weekly water changes, i vaccum gravel before water change.
All i am trying to acheive is a tank for my fish to be happy in with a few healthy plants for them to enjoy swimming through. im not trying to acheive lots of lush growth.
many thanks for any help
wayne


----------



## ceg4048 (9 May 2013)

Hi Wayne,
			  Well, BBA is strictly a CO2 issue. It's your choice really, whether to stop dosing Excel altogether. Stopping the CO2 enrichment means less maintenance certainly but there is no guarantee that  you won't have issues. If you are dosing Excel and are getting BBA then it means you need to add more Excel, so try increasing the dosage, being careful to watch the fauna for negative reaction. I would definitely suggest to ditch the airstone and to increase flow via powerhead. The airstone actually out-gases the Oxygen the plants are producing so I see no point in using this except possibly at night.

It's not generally a good idea to use liquid carbon products exclusively on large tanks such as 300L. It takes a LOT of liquid carbon to serve that size. I assume you are dosing it daily in the morning? To rid the tank of the BBA you'll need to use 2X  or 3X the bottle recommended dosage until the BBA turns pink.

It might be easier in the long run to simply go low tech and slowly withdraw the Excel over a few weeks. Then you don't have to worry about PPS or EI or manic water changes. A tough call this one.

Not sure why 50L of water is considered a lot, unless you are still using buckets or have a physical limitation. You can use a cheap submersible pump attached to a long hose and have a cup of tea while the water is evacuated, then hook the hose up to your faucet to fill...

Cheers,


----------



## wayne17 (10 May 2013)

Hi and once again thanks for responding
What size power head do you recommend getting or does it not matter?
Think I will try going low tech for now, when you say slowly withdraw excel do you mean to lessen the amount I put in each day or slowly increase the days Inbetween dosing.
I take it I would just dose trace and NPK once a week. Any ideas on how much to put in?
Thanks wayne


----------



## plantbrain (10 May 2013)

I'll generally delete the KNO3 and switch to K2SO4 if the tap is high in NO3.
A lot of european tap water is pretty rich in NO3.

So a water change adds it free of charge. 
Call the local utility and see, say you have a baby and are concerned, they should tell you the range.


----------



## ceg4048 (10 May 2013)

Yeah, like plantbrain says, if the tap s high in NO3, and if you go non-CO2 enriched, then just add K2SO4 for the Potassium and some traces once a week or every two weeks (he's the guy who invented EI).
His standard non-CO2 dosing goes something like this:
Add about 1/8 teaspoon of KNO3 per 20USG once a week or two (again, substitute K2SO4) if it is determined that NO3 is high in the tap.)
Add about 1/32 teaspoon of KH2PO4 per 20USG once a week or two.
Add about 1/32 teaspoon Trace per 20USG once a week or two or, alternatively, about 1/4 teaspoon per 20USG of Seachem Equilibrium or other popular remineralizing agent once every week or two.

Excel counts as CO2 so it's not a good idea to dose it irregularly. It ought to be dosed daily. That's why I asked you to confirm that you were dosing it daily, because if you were only dosing a couple time per week then that might easily be the cause of the BBA. It's no good making the plants go "cold turkey" so it would be better to reduce the daily amounts gradually.

Cheers,


----------



## wayne17 (10 May 2013)

Thank you both for your replies, rang Anglian water and they said the average readings in my area are 21.01 ppm with the highest readings being 30.09 ppm. So I take it that I would not need to add any extra nitrate to my water?
I have been adding excel everyday without fail but it has not got rid of the bba and I don't want to put in anymore than the normal dose. I have also read that bba can be caused by poor flow that's why I thought I would try a power head.
Wayne


----------



## ceg4048 (12 May 2013)

To clarify, BBA is caused by poor CO2.
Poor CO2 can be caused by poor flow. Poor CO2 can also be caused by poor injection rate, inconsistent injection rate, insufficient addition of liquid carbon or inconsistent addition of liquid carbon.

Toxicity of any agent is a function of concentration level within the water column.
If Excel has been added every day and if it has not gotten rid of the BBA,  then it's because you haven't dosed a concentration level that is toxic to BBA.

Cheers,


----------



## wayne17 (12 May 2013)

I'm going to x2 the dose of excel to get rid of bba, then I will slowly stop using excel altogether. I have one more question for you can i make up a soloution of the k2s04 & kh2p04 in 500ml of distilled water, and how many Gramms of each would I need to put in the 500ml of water. And how many ml of the soloution would I add each week for a non c02 tank.
Thanks


----------



## ceg4048 (12 May 2013)

Well, there is an infinite variety of powder+water combinations. Using the guidelines in post #10 you only need about 1/2 teaspoon of K2SO4 (about 3 grams) +  1/8 teaspoon KH2PO4 (about 1 gram) each week.

So the amount you add to you 500ml bottle of water depends entirely on how many doses you want. If you want 5 week worth, then each dose will be 100ml and so you'll need to add 5*(3g K2SO4 + 1g KH2PO4) = 15g K2SO4 + 5g KH2PO4 which equates to roughly 2.5 teaspoons K2SO4 + about a teaspoon KH2PO4.

I mean, you really need to get over grams. There is no way you need to be accurate. That's why I specifically use teaspoons. When you start thinking in terms of accuracy you will lose the plot immediately and you'll be running on the little hamster wheel for the rest of your life, getting nowhere fast.

Also, it is absolutely pointless to use distilled water. Again, this is a PPS mindset and it does you no favors. I really wouldn't bother mixing solutions. Grab a teaspoon from the kitchen and  ESTIMATE. Do not complicate your life for little or no gain.

Cheers,


----------



## wayne17 (13 May 2013)

Many thanks for all of your help and advice
Wayne


----------



## roundasapound (16 May 2016)

Hello

Please advise, do you think my tap water is naturally high in nitrates? Thames Water report attached.
Currently, I am EI dosing the tank with 1ml of liquid carbon per day and 1ml of Fe supplement.

EI macro made as follows: 600ml water, 6 tsp MgSO4, 2.75 tsp KNO3, 0.75 tsp KH2PO4.  I dose 50ml 3x per week (Mon/Wed/Fri)
EI micro made as follows: 400ml water, 1 tsp chelated trace.  I dose 3 days per week (Tues/Thur/Sat)

My question is, do you think I should switch to using K2SO4 instead of KNO3 with my nitrate tap water levels?
How much K2SO4 should I use instead?

The fauna are fine, despite the Pets at Home telling me my nitrate levels are too high (160ppm with their tests).
I don't bother using test kits at home and go by the fish. The reason for the question is more for efficiency as the fauna are showing no negative side effects from current nitrate levels.

Advice would be much appreciated.  The tank has been up and running since Feb 2014.


----------



## dw1305 (16 May 2016)

Hi all, 


roundasapound said:


> The fauna are fine, despite the Pets at Home telling me my nitrate levels are too high (160ppm with their tests).


They can't tell, but normally test kits would read low rather than high. 

Because the max., min and mean values in the water report are all in the range of 22 - 27ppm NO3, you could reduce the KNO3 value. The water report doesn't give values for potassium (K) or phosphorus (P), but they are likely to be present in reasonable amounts as well. 

If you want to substitute one potassium containing compound for another, you just need to know the % K in each. You get this from the RMM of the compound and RAM of its constituent elements. 

K has a RAM = 39, N = 14, O = 16, S = 32, H = 1 so KNO3 = 39 + 14 + 48 = 101 and ~ 39% K.    

Personally I would try dosing at 1/2 EI levels for a while, others will disagree.  

cheers Darrel


----------



## roundasapound (16 May 2016)

dw1305 said:


> Personally I would try dosing at 1/2 EI levels for a while, others will disagree.
> 
> cheers Darrel



Hi Darrel

Thanks for your reply.

You would suggest 1/2 EI levels.  Is that halving macro nutrients only and keeping the micro nutrients dosage unchanged?


----------



## dw1305 (16 May 2016)

Hi all,





roundasapound said:


> You would suggest 1/2 EI levels. Is that halving macro nutrients only and keeping the micro nutrients dosage unchanged?


Probably, but you could try 1/2 micro-nutrients. I'd leave the Fe doisng the same, because you have very hard tap water.

cheers Darrel


----------



## roundasapound (16 May 2016)

dw1305 said:


> Probably, but you could try 1/2 micro-nutrients. I'd leave the Fe doisng the same, because you have very hard tap water.
> 
> cheers Darrel



ok.. I'm using Seachem Flourish Iron because it is Fe+2 rather than Fe+3 and I thought it would be easier for the plants to take up Fe+2 iron form.  Since adding iron Fe two weeks ago, the leaves are now a richer green and the ruben ludwiga is retaining more red colours.
Is the dry powder Fe as effective?  I couldn't find any info as to whether its Fe+2 or Fe+3 and the plants were showing deficiencies with just the trace.  I'd prefer to use dry powder for cost as 250ml of Flourish Iron is £11


----------



## dw1305 (16 May 2016)

Hi all, 





roundasapound said:


> I'm using Seachem Flourish Iron because it is Fe+2 rather than Fe+3 and I thought it would be easier for the plants to take up Fe+2 iron form.


It doesn't really make any difference whether the iron is ferrous (Fe++) or ferric (Fe+++). Technically the ferrous iron ion (Fe++) is more easily taken up by plants than the ferric (Fe+++) ion. In practice as soon as you are above pH7, and in an oxidising environment, then any Fe++ rapidly becomes Fe+++ and then an insoluble Iron III oxide or hydroxide. Iron II compounds are green in colour and iron III compounds rust red. 

A chelator works by binding the iron ion in a stable compound, it would remain unavailable (Fe+++ is the most tightly bound ion) but the EDTA etc is photo-degraded by sun-light and the iron ion becomes plant available briefly before forming an insoluble compound. Some chelators are better than others at high pH, and I would suggest <"FeDTPA"> might be a better option for you. <"FeEDTA"> would be cheaper, and I use it if I need a chelator for hydroponics etc even at higher pH levels.




 


roundasapound said:


> Since adding iron Fe two weeks ago, the leaves are now a richer green and the ruben ludwiga is retaining more red colours.


If the new leaves are pale, and you have hard water, iron deficiency is an option. Iron is non-mobile in the plant, and nearly all the other nutrient deficiencies (N, K, (P), Mg) that cause <"chlorosis"> are mobile elements so effect the older leaves first.  

cheers Darrel


----------

