• You are viewing the forum as a Guest, please login (you can use your Facebook, Twitter, Google or Microsoft account to login) or register using this link: Log in or Sign Up

Spezial N - Nitrogen Fertilizer

Hi,

in Germany it isn't allowed to sell oxidizing nitrates in powder form :(. Due to that I can only offer those stuff in liquid form. As mentioned earlier I do offer those stuff for people who do not want to mix it up by themself. I'm willing to give all people from Ukaps intersted in this fertilizer a 20% discount to test it out and compensate a little bit for the high shipping costs. Drop me a pm.

http://www.aquasabi.de/Fluessigduenger/Aqua-Rebell/Makro-Spezial:::43_60_120.html

It's the Spezial N fertilizer.

http://www.aquasabi.de/Fluessigduenger/Aqua-Rebell/Makro-Spezial/Makro-Spezial-N-500-ml::1512.html

Best regards
Tobi
 
Hi all,
Maybe you guys should get K+ test kits to get an idea how much K+ you have in your tanks. I for myself am not the "water testing" guy... I look at my plants. But many in my community do tests with very precise testkits. They were all measuring skyhigh K+ levels when adding just KNO3. As I've said earlier... could all be correlations...

I'm not sure about hobbiest kits, but there is no problem with testing accurately for K. It is not like PO4, NO3 or NH3. You can do this very accurately in a lab. just using simple flame photometry directly on the sample of tank water, you don't need an Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometer, or to use colorimetry or to run a 4 day BOD etc.

in Germany it isn't allowed to sell oxidizing nitrates in powder form
We have very tight H&S guidelines now as well. It makes me laugh, if I want to get 50g of any nitrate out of the locked chemical store, I need to sign and date a record sheet and unlock the internal "flam vault" where we keep all the oxidising agents. This time of year, outside the local farmer will have piled up 50 x 25kg sacks (or a 1 tonne "builder bag") of ammonium nitrate fertiliser prills ready for the spring sowing season, but every-body ignores this.

cheers Darrel
 
Hi Darrel,

here in Germany many water test enthusiasts use this test kits (including photometer)

http://www.wasserpantscher.at/

It's very cheap and those tests are very accurate.

With that you can measure K+ easily. A DIY K+ test was introduced at flowgrow.de some time ago:

http://www.flowgrow.de/bastelanleitunge ... 13809.html

Natriumtetraphenylborat is used for measuring K+. It's cheap and easy too. You cannot measure very accurately but will do it for the aquarium.

Regarding the nitrates I do not understand it as well. We had major house raids in a hobby chemical forum and one guy from flowgrow.de was also raided during that time because he bought some stuff for his ferts (KNO3) at a chemistry shop. They came to his workplace and asked around for "a person suspicious of bomb building and maybe with terroristic background". Absolutely insane.
Since that time it got very strict regarding regulations. But if you want to get 25 kg sacks of KNO3 you just need to go to the next farmer's shop and buy one bag KNO3. You will get it. But nearly no chance in getting it from a pharmacy or in a chemnistry shop. Near all shops do not want to have the trouble with all the paperwork needed for selling that stuff.

Best regards
Tobi
 
Hi all,
here in Germany many water test enthusiasts use this test kits (including photometer)
Thank you Tobi, now that is very interesting, I never seen anything like it in the UK, although I know that the hobby is much more scientifically advanced in Europe, and especially Germany. Lots of things you take for granted (like Poret foam and HMF scaffolds) are difficult to source in the UK.

Natriumtetraphenylborat - C24H20BNa?

Cheers Darrel
 
Actually this photometer looks interesting - NPK, Mg, Ca. ok its pricey @£450. Are these accurate and useful?http://www.hannainst.co.uk/product_info.php?cPath=1207_1263&products_id=1863

HI83225.jpg


HI83225b.jpg
 
Tobi said:
Hi Clive,

sorry mate... I think you are not reading what I'm typing.

It's not the Urea part in the fertilizer. As I've said in Germany alot of people are dosing with NH4 or Urea or with a commercially available fert containing no3nh4, kno3 and urea (which is available for SOME years now... ) and they all do not get the same results as with using this recipe. Maybe here only James made some tests but in Germany we are aware of the positive effects of organic nitrogen for quite some years (decades) ;).
So please read what I'm telling. It's not the less energetic uptake approach that is working here.
You are getting quite a little bit to theoretically here. Theory is one thing... praxis the other. I cannot explain it scientificly beacause I do not understand why this fertilizer works that good. A plant should not care which NO3 form it's getting. As you've told the less energetic part of using NH4 for a plant should be considered, but not in this case. We only have very little Urea in this solution.
Well I'm pretty sure I've read what you've written. And although you think that you're only using a small amount of Urea, you may be interested in the theoretical analysis that in fact, that's actually a significant amount of Urea.

I'm pretty sure you wrote something like this:
_________________________________________
25,9 g KNO3 [61.3% NO3]
29,5 g Ca(NO3)2 [(anhydrous) 75.6% NO3]
17,6 g Mg(NO3)2 [(anhydrous) 83.6% NO3]
5 g urea (NH2)2CO

That will add 1 ppm NO3, 0,2 ppm K, 0,1 ppm Ca and 0,033 ppm Mg using 1 ml per 50 l tankwater.
__________________________________________

If in fact you are using the anhydrous forms as noted above, then in actuality, you will be adding somewhere around 1.4 milligram of NH3 for every 50L by the time the Urea is converted. Even though only about 6% of the recipe is urea, 10% of the total N is contributed by the NH3 due to urea conversion.

But the story doesn't end there. It's likely that you are not using the anhydrous form, as these powders are generally sold as hydrated, meaning that the crystalline structure of the powder has water in it. So there would be less NO3 contribution per gram from Calcium Nitrate (Tetrahydrate) and Magnesium Nitrate (Hexahydrate) than what you calculated.

If that is true then that means approximately 20% of the total Nitrogen from that recipe is actually coming from your small amount of urea. You might have mentioned it before, but what happens when you delete the urea from the recipe?

This is why you should not just ignore theory just because practice is more convenient or more comfortable. Because what you think might be happening may be an illusion. The reason something works must make sense. There may be an unknown factor or some unknown synergy. If you haven't actually confirmed why something works or why it doesn't work then there is no point claiming a supposed reason as being fact.

Tobi said:
And regarding the GH Booster part... please do the math ;). When adding 3 ppm daily of NO3 with this fertilizer you are only adding 2 ppm Ca and 0,7 ppm Mg per week. I do not see the big GH boosting part of this fertilizer. You are adding around 0,44°dGH per week with a higher (EI like) NO3 dosage. If you fertilize only around 1 ppm NO3 per day you will only get ~0,15 °dGH. Sorry ... I really do not see the essential GH boosting part of this fert.
50% water changes are always made by the majority of people in my community, so you will not get a build up of the GH too.
The amount of GH that you add is a function of the amount of the fertilizer you are adding. GH Booster is added in exactly the same way. I didn't say the amount you were increasing was big. The hard water your tanks have are a big enough GH and this adds more. GH Booster works the same way. You can add a lot or a little to raise the GH. My point was that your tanks have hard water and yet are spectacular, therefore the claim that soft water is necessary is not correct in all cases.

Tobi said:
Besides... I did not test it in an experimental setup, and I know how to setup experimental tests from university..., but for example if someone using this fert is again dosing high amounts of K+ to a tank formely running great he will again get exact those problems and this is repeatable again and again. All other variables kept unlimited only changing this one variable.
If K+ gets much higher than NO3 you can (you do not need to) get problems. If it's the K+ itself or something else interfering with. I really do not care and could of course be some correlation.
Yes that's fine but I care. The reason I care is because it's very easy to see something work and then use any explanation for why it works. The fact that it works cannot validate the explanation.

Tobi said:
Botanists and plant experts from Germany (and I know quite some, all have the same idea regarding K+ and NO3). If K+ gets way higher than NO3 it could lead to problems. Maybe you guys should get K+ test kits to get an idea how much K+ you have in your tanks. I for myself am not the "water testing" guy... I look at my plants. But many in my community do tests with very precise testkits. They were all measuring skyhigh K+ levels when adding just KNO3.
As I've said earlier... could all be correlations...
I'm not a test kit guy either, but I also don't have any problems with sky high K+ so again, before just assuming that K+ is a problem it would be better for these Botanists to actually do the experiments, to confirm their ideas, and to present the information for review.

In any case, it's difficult to get K+ content much higher than NO3 when only dosing KNO3 and KH2PO4 unless the tap water is high in K+. I suppose fish food might have K in it. Many Botanist draw the conclusion about aquatic plants from what they know to be true in terrestrial plants and these conclusions are often incorrect.

There are just too many inconsistencies to automatically draw this conclusion that K+ is problematic, just because someone suspects it. It may well turn out to be true but there is insufficient evidence.

Cheers,
 
Hi Clive,

thanks for your reply. But at all... I've dosed my tanks before with alot more Urea and I've dosed with alot more NH4 fertilizer too. Adding just 3-5 ppm of NO3 coming from Urea or NH4. There wasn't that growth. And I've started with low Urea and NH4 dosages and have risen the level higher and higher to see at what level the growth would be better and better.

So Urea would not do the magic in this case. And many of my fellow hobbyists here in Germany can see the same in their tanks. Just adding Urea or NH4 isn't the trick.

And I'm not using the anhydrous forms of the salts and do not know why you assume that. I've clearly written that I'm using the hydrates and others should be aware of that when buying the salts. I'm using calcium-tetrahydrate and magnesium-hexahydrate. When we assume that all Urea will be mineralized (which will not happen, but to see it more clearly) we dose 0,2 ppm NO3 from Urea coming when adding 1 ml to 50 l tank water. 0,8 ppm NO3 are coming from calciumnitrate, magnesiumnitrate and potassiumnitrate.
So you are right... about 20% of the NO3 is coming from the Urea part. But if you just toss the Urea out of the recipe it will still be better than using just KNO3. The Urea of course gives an additional nitrogen source. And when just using Urea it will be better than just using KNO3 but put those two together and it will somehow be even better.

In Germany it is very normal to dose NH4 or Urea for example. For us it's no secret approach that maybe one guy here and there tries and the plant geeks chitchat about it in one thread. Especially in the German "normal" aquarium scene it's common to use nh4hco3 for nitrogen fertilizing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baker's_ammonia

You can get that stuff in nearly all supermarkets (especially during winter time). Many want to DIY and go cheap ... that's why it's so common. The majority has good results with it. But somehow not as good as this recipe. I've fertilized too a long time with NH4HCO3.

And I do not have hard water in my tanks. I do have in ONE tank, my others have very soft water (KH ~1°dKH and 4-5° dGH).

Regarding your conclusion about K+ and NO3 uptake you are totally wrong. Please get good test kits. Alot of people test K+ here in Germany very precise. We've always read that K+ would not accumulate, but this is not true. You have more an uptake of 5 parts NO3 to 1 part K and not around 1:1. If you dose only with KNO3 and KH2PO4 you will end up with skyhigh K+ levels. No matter what.
And besides we in Germany do have nearly nothing of K+ in our tapwater (1-3 ppm is normal).

I think you have to get out of your books and get into some real testing ;). I wasn't believing it myself that K+ will accumulate just with KNO3 but many hobbyists here showed me how wrong I was. So we learn and consider that in our new approaches.

Yes that's fine but I care. The reason I care is because it's very easy to see something work and then use any explanation for why it works. The fact that it works cannot validate the explanation.

That's right, but due to that I've told before that when you change ONE variable in the same setup you will again see the exact SAME results. And not in only one tank.
During the time we chitchat about this I think around 100+ persons are using this new fertilizer. They all have been using KNO3 before, some (~40%) have used Urea or NH4 or a combination of NH4, Urea and KNO3 before. But all have not had this growth.
That's the funny part ;). And the other commercially available nitrogen fertilizer which adds: 0,20 ppm Urea, 0,07 ppm NH4, 1,36 ppm NO3, 0,4 ppm K+ and 0,1 ppm Mg with 1 ml to 50 l does not work the same. Both recipes seem to be very similar. But he uses no magnesiumnitrate nor calciumnitrate. He just uses magnesiumsufate, nh4no3, urea and kno3.

And at all ... I've not said that K+ is the problem. I said K+ can possibly lead to problems. But I've also said that other nitrogen ferts with less K+ do not work the same as this fert. So I for myself am not sure that K+ is the problematic part. I know for sure that K+ accumulates when dosing just KNO3. Even in the best growing tanks.
And I know that when adding alot more K2SO4 to my tanks when using this fertilizer I'll again have some grow problems. No other variables changed again.
I wanted to falsify those people nagging about K+ be the problem, just added 30 ppm of K+ and *bam* ... same problems like before with just KNO3.
Nitrates, PO4, CO2, micronutrients all unlimited during that time. Maybe even K+ was never limited in that tank... but after adding much more the problems occured again.

And when talking about botanists I mean those who are big into waterplants. Those who write books about waterplants and water chemnistry and whatever else. We have one meeting for example here in Göttingen, Germany, where some waterplant enthusiasts come together once a year and meet in the botanic garden of Göttingen. Claus Christensen from tropica for example is also attending this meeting regularly.
For example some people coming or came to that meeting are Dr. Gerd Kassebeer (chemnist, invented the Dupla water tests for example), Hans-Georg Kramer (very well known waterplant enthusiast in Germany), Dr. Helmut Mühlberg (very well known botanist), Dr. Andreas Kremser (chemnist and also producer of waterplantfertilizer) and I can go on and on...
Very intersting speeches you can hear there and besides that you can chitchat after the presentations with a beer in a pub with them.

But ... I've made some preperations that some of you in the UK can test that fert and report back ;). So stay tuned. Even if I cannot say exactly why this fert works that well, I can show it repeatedly and many users of that fertilizer report back the same.

Best regards
Tobi
 
Hi Darrel,

it's http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodium_tetraphenylborate.

@all interested in that photmeter with testkits
I can ask Anton Gabriel (he is the inventer of the cheap photometer) if it's possible to send out testkits+photometer to the UK. Of course you can ask him too. He is a fellow hobbyist too with much knowledge in this sector.
The testkit with photometet and NO3, PO4, K+, Fe and chloride tests cost 153 €. If you consider the accuracy of those tests it's really cheap.

I do not own one by myself, because I'm not the testing guy, but many in my community flowgrow.de own this thing and are very happy about it. Especially regarding K+ this tests opened our eyes. But of course you can use other testkits for K+ to see those false ideas we had in the past about the K+ uptake.

Best regards
Tobi
 
Hi all,
I'm not sure at all they are a reputable company and I'm sure it will be a good bit of kit. In the lab. we have expensive analytical kit, but my suspicion would be that this meter wouldn't have the fine scale readings that we would want. The problem with kit designed for hydroponics is that they are working with solutions that are typically c. x10 more concentrated than we are. According to the advert it will go down to 0ppm and has a low range for P etc., but you could try contacting the suppliers and asking what the low range is for each parameter it measures. In any case it would almost certainly be a lot more accurate than the test kits.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodium_tetraphenylborate.
Thanks Tobi, that's what I thought and it would make sense. I'm not quite as sceptical as Clive, and I am really interested in your "magic mix", I don't think that it is impossible that there might be some synergistic effect of the varied nitrogen sources, although I'd need to be convinced.

But I still can't quite see why the K+ ions should build up to very high levels, they are entirely soluble so there isn't any buffering effect. Even if you have a substrate with a very high CEC, K+ ions will be preferentially exchanged for nearly all other cations:
Multivalent ions on the right displace the monovalent ions to the left: +>Al+++>Ca++>Mg++>K+>NH4+>Na+>Li+)

I can't see why the 50% EI water change doesn't keep removing 1/2 of any excess, add this to "luxury absorption" by the plants and surely it must take a very long time for K levels to build up?

cheers Darrel
 
Tobi said:
And I do not have hard water in my tanks. I do have in ONE tank, my others have very soft water (KH ~1°dKH and 4-5° dGH).
Well didn't you write in a previous post how hard the water in Germany was? That was the basis for my original argument that in a soft water tank, it's entirely possible to have either an Mg or Ca shortfall and therefore it would make sense that adding your Ca/Mg recipe would help. That may explain why some people, as you have said, do not see much of an improvement when using this mix. It's entirely possible that those using water already rich in Ca/Mg do not see improvements over their existing EI dosing.

Tobi said:
Regarding your conclusion about K+ and NO3 uptake you are totally wrong. Please get good test kits.
Yeah, right. I'm sure Germany has really good test kits and that the test kits always give accurate readings.

Tobi said:
I think you have to get out of your books and get into some real testing ;). I wasn't believing it myself that K+ will accumulate just with KNO3 but many hobbyists here showed me how wrong I was. So we learn and consider that in our new approaches.
Mate, listen to me. Getting out of books is never a good idea. You still have to explain WHY I don't have problems even with sky high K+.

Here is the result of my testing of sky high K+:
Do you see the plant (P. stelleta) in the foreground? It's over 20 centimeters across.
2747096520038170470S600x600Q85.jpg


I can confirm that neither Echinodorous nor L. aromatica have a problem with sky high K+.
2999682900038170470S600x600Q85.jpg


I also confirm, based on analysis and testing, that Althernanthera has no issues with sky high K+:
2476333400038170470S600x600Q85.jpg


Here is a tank in the very early stages of development 4 months after first planting. Analysis confirms HC has absolutely no issues with sky high K+:
2028458540038170470S600x600Q85.jpg


2081463940038170470S600x600Q85.jpg


HC actually became a nuisance, requiring too much trimming. It was replaced with P. helferi, which also became a nuisance. P. helferi demonstrated absolutely no inhibitions due to sky high K+:
2866173250038170470S600x600Q85.jpg


Now, these are not aquascaping contest worthy. The majority of people who dose high K+ have no reasons for telling you about it. They simply don't see it as an issue. Of the thousands of folks dosing high K+, very few of these users are worthy scapers, so you only hear about an issue if someone has a problem.

Far from "getting out of books" i suggest that you read more books until you find a reason why some have difficulties while others don't. No matter how much K I add I never have a problem. The growth rates in the tank simply accelerate. Therefore, based on these results the problem cannot be due to K+ alone but may involve some other factor.

So whether you think that K+ is a problem or think that K+ may lead to a problem, this is not corroborated in my tank. That's all I'm saying. I don't dose urea or any ammonia product. Strictly KNO3/KH2PO4. Whether the uptake rate of K+ low, medium or high, none of that can explain why neither I nor Mark Evans have problems.

So we'll just have to agree to disagree, and actually I'm not even sure what we disagree about. I think there is enough information for folks to make up their own minds that if they have difficulty using standard high K+ EI dosing, then they can try the low K+ recipe which I'm absolutely sure will give excellent performance. No doubt whatsoever. :geek:

Cheers,
 
Hi Darrel,

I do not get it either regarding the upbuild with 50% waterchanges. When we at flowgrow.de tell somebody the principles of a planted tank we always tell the people to do 50% water changes per week.
Of course somebody will always be out there only changing once a month, but those aren't the ones who have tested the K+ concentrations.

It could be possible that due to the uptake of the plants and the input of K+ you will settle down at a very high K+ level. Those "hobby photometer K+ testkit" does not measure very high levels. I think it stops around 30 or 40 ppm. After that it's guessing. But even after a 50% water change those people were still be able to max their testkits. NO3 was always very low under those circumstances. The problem was too, that those people suffered some kind of nitrogen shortage even if they dosed very high amounts of KNO3 (EI like amounts). NO3 was always not rising as wished. In Germany we also do big dosages of certain nutrients like NO3 or for example PO4 after the water change, that the plants will get enough from the start of the "new week".
Even if adding 20+ ppm NO3 at once those people had problems with their plants .... looking a little bit like NO3 shortage or some other weird problem.

Hi Clive,

Well didn't you write in a previous post how hard the water in Germany was?

ehm... no?! I've said that I have one Iwagumi tank with hard water (coming from the minilandscape rocks) and that the growth in that tank is very nice even when adding solely KNO3.

that in a soft water tank, it's entirely possible to have either an Mg or Ca shortfall and therefore it would make sense that adding your Ca/Mg recipe would help.

Would make sense, but than it should be no problem to remove those shortages with epsom salt and gypsum (MgSO4x7H2O and CaSO4). But adding those even to a higher GH does not change anything. That's the problematic part.

Getting out of books is never a good idea. You still have to explain WHY I don't have problems even with sky high K+

I really do not need to tell you why you had no problems... really I don't because I even do not know your K+ levels at that time ;). And as I've said in all previous posts. I do not doubt that higher K+ levels can work. I just said higher K+ levels could lead to problems under some situations. I do not generalize anything. And believe me... I've read some books and papers about nutrient uptake at my university library etc. But they only give hints and the theoretical background. They do not give real answers for us people in the aquarium hobby for every problem we have. Would be awesome if reading a book can solve all our problems. Really...
And would be awesome too, if there would be one system which fits all. Just put this and that in and enjoy your tank. I would love it... but it's not the easy thing, that the user always fails and the system not. There are always some individual circumstances that will maybe jeopardize your luck with the system. And somehow the nitrogen uptake of plants is somehow a little bit more tricky.

When looking at so many different tanks I've learned one thing. One is not like the other and all systems will fail in one particular tank. No matter what you do, you will not have success. That is why it's so great that there are so many approaches out there. One will fit your tank and you can enjoy the hobby.

Therefore, based on these results the problem cannot be due to K+ alone but may involve some other factor.

As I've said earlier too... K+ maybe even not the problem. I just know that switching the fert works very good in many tanks. And all those tanks used mainly KNO3 before. Some used Urea, NH4 KNO3 combinations too.

I can only repeat myself. Lights were good, CO2 & PO4 was good, micronutrients good and often substrate very good (with aquasoil) and even than switching to the other fert was working nicely.

To make a cut ;). We can discuss all night about this and that. And even with all the discussion we are very near to each other regarding our opinion. I do not doubt any system. It can work, but as told before... some still struggle and they need some more options. I had great looking tanks with skyhigh K+ too ;). Thus I'm sceptical regarding the whole K+ thing too. So it's only a hunch, but as explained earlier. Ca, Mg and only organic nitrogen could not be the solution to why it's working.

image.php?album_id=429&image_id=1017.jpg


image.php?album_id=429&image_id=6548.jpg



I think it's more that some of you need to test it by themself and make their own decision. ;). I'm excited about it.

Best regards
Tobi
 
First off, I appreciate you posting up your new recipe Tobi. I think it is great that you are making the effort to share this information with hobbyists outside of your social circle. Thank you.

Clive and Tobi's lively discussion touched on Tobi's recipe helping those with soft water because of it's GH raising properties. I think anyone interested in experimenting with ferts could look to this area. I have found improvements in my plants by adding equal amounts of Mg and Ca to my tank (epsom salts and gypsum). Ca is not in any of the EI recipes I have read, so I wonder if some people are suffering from a shortage. I also wonder if simply adding higher levels of Mg and Ca will help some people. (I won't go into the details of how GH is mad eup, possible imbalances, etc. as Clive has covered that plenty of times before to more depth and far more eloquently than I could).

Just some more (plant)food for thought.
Hopefully it has not strayed too far offtopic from Tobi's ferts.
 
Good points, Matt. :thumbup:

I've often wondered about Mg and Ca qtys. / ratios and their effects on plant growth.

The hard vs. soft water still really interests me.

I have to say the best plant growth I've ever had was when I used 50:50 RO/tap (giving me KH 3.5, GH 7). Of course, there's so many other factors at play, simply correlating softer water with better plant growth is silly!

I'm not a scientist by any stretch but I really do believe there's so much more to growing plants than simply bombarding them with too much of everything. 'Regular' EI works, no doubt, but perhaps it can be improved upon, as Tobi has alluded to.

I think different plants have different preferences in different conditions, and like Tobi says, there is no one simple method for all due to the almost infinite variables at play.

Sorry I can't back that up with any hard evidence - only lots of different set-up with lots of different plants! :oops:
 
Hi all,
I also wonder if simply adding higher levels of Mg and Ca will help some people
It is possible, but it is unlikely that calcium is limiting unless you have very soft water, you are more likely to get magnesium / calcium problems when the ratio of Ca:Mg rise above about 30:1, at this point calcium interferes with the uptake of magnesium in the majority of plants.
I think different plants have different preferences in different conditions, and like Tobi says, there is no one simple method for all due to the almost infinite variables at play.
I'm not sure about in fresh water, but in the soil it is possible to have soils which are both alkaline, and calcium poor, in the UK you get them on the Lizard Peninsula in Cornwall where they are derived from the volcanic rock "Serpentine". You get very strange arrangements of plants with calcicoles like Filipendula vulgaris (Drop-wort) that you normally see on the Chalk downs growing with heathland calcifuges like Calluna vulgaris (Ling heather). Some plants are naturally confined to the base rich, but calcium poor soils of the Lizard, Cornish Heath Erica vagans being the most famous example. <http://www.english-nature.org.uk/citation/citation_photo/1003305.pdf>

I'm really interested in the outcome of this, I definitely think Tobi's mix will work very well, finding out whether it provides the synergistic effect will be trickier, but I don't think you can just discount it.

cheers Darrel
 
Thanks, Darrell.

I have some questions for you clever folk, please.

At the moment I'm using TPN+ exclusively, so the N is purely in the form of Ammonia Nitrate. If I want high light, high CO2 etc. then the danger is too much toxic NH3/4 to deal with such high growth without risking deficiencies.

However, I do wonder how quickly my oversized filter and aquarium itself converts NH3/4 > NO2 > NO3.

I aways dose first thing in the morning; 4 to 6hrs before the photoperiod starts.

I assume that in the absence of plant growth, the filter and aquarium bacteria quickly converts the NH3/4 to NO3?

I wonder if dosing during the photoperiod would improve matters at all, as the plants will perhaps utitilise the NH3/4 before its converted to NO3.

Cheers,
George
 
Hi George,

one thing in Germany we do also is that we do not "overfilter" our planted tanks. Many of us plant folks do not use hightech biofilter media (for example sinterglass etc.) for our planted tanks. We just use our tank itself as a filter. If you stock your tank "normally" and not like a fish tank it is not neccessary at all to use those hightech bio filter media. You often get into more trouble when using those filtermedia regarding NO3 or iron/po4.

Esepcially when someone has problems in our community flowgrow.de we look what he has in his canister filter. Often those people already dose alot of NO3 or fe to their tanks without luck. They still cannot get any higher no3 / fe readings from their tests and the plants show bad signs of nitrogen or fe deficiency.

When removing some (or all) of those hightech biofiltermedia problems often resolve by itself. Most use blue sponge filters in the canister. Some even to not use those and go total filterless, just using the canister for flow or just use a powerhead.

Even in those setups dosing NH4 or Urea is no problem at all. You need to have very hard water with nearly none co2 supply and a pH of >7 to have big problems with NH4/urea. In a planted tank in most cases this will not be the case.

Regarding your question.
When having a mild acid water like a pH of <7 you should not have big problems with adding NH4. Nearly all NH4 should be converted in a matter of hours to NO3. Never showing any buildup of NO2. If you can see a spike of NO2 you maybe have to reconsider a better filtration. But as told before... with "overfilterd" tanks... you should not see those spikes.

Best regards
Tobi
 
I usually get bored of reading stuff like this, but I've got to say, i'm really intrigued by whats being said here. 8)
 
Hi Toby

Thanks for the info.

That's very interesting and I have observed that many very good aquascapes are not overfiltered.

We tend to take filtration and circulation very seriously over here.

viewtopic.php?f=21&t=11056

What is your opinion of circulation levels? Do any of the Germans use powerheads etc. to improve circulation? Many UK 'scapers use Koralia type powerheads to improve CO2 delivery etc.

What's the problem with NO3, PO4 and Fe with overfiltration?
 
Back
Top