Consistency Deficiency

[Wookii]

ALL our tanks are eutrophic by OECD standards

Not arguing against you, and I have no real knowledge on this area, but how can our tanks be considered eutrophic whilst the water column spends most of it's time fully saturated with dissolved oxygen? I thought to be eutrophic the BOD from decomposing matter had to be so high that it consumed all oxygen in the water column?

Also with regards to the depth at which dissolved oxygen can penetrate the substrate will surely vary dependent on the substrate type; for example I can see that very fine silver sand might impede the flow of DO enriched water through it, however larger grain aquasoil, and even more so coarser gravel will have much higher water exchange?

We also have to factor in that the substrate in our tanks have a very shallow depth compared to natural bodies of water. We also hold them in a glass box with water temperatures typically higher than room ambient. The glass box will therefore constantly cooling the base of the substrate presumably creating natural convection of water through and out of the substrate that would be much greater than any substrate in a natural body of water where the temperatures remain fairly constant?

 

[_Maq_]

Influence of submerged macrophytes, temperature, and nutrient loading on the development of redox potential around the sediment–water interface in lakes
This paper is significant in that it revealed that positive effects of macrophytes on redox potential can be suppressed by their negative effects in case of 80–100% coverage and total inhabitation of the water column. It shows that in densely planted areas the limit 200 mV (below that limit oxygen is not detectable) is actually ABOVE the water-sediment interface, in some instances. Graphs included.

 

[_Maq_]

how can our tanks be considered eutrophic whilst the water column spends most of it's time fully saturated with dissolved oxygen? I thought to be eutrophic the BOD from decomposing matter had to be so high that it consumed all oxygen in the water column?

The pics are taken from Wetzel - Limnology. This is one of the most authoritative resources of our science. There is some development in classification of waters as "good" or "bad", oligotrophic or eutrophic. But the numbers shown in these examples will not change substantially. Note that nitrogen content is given in mg per cubic meter, that's equal to µg per liter (or ppb):

Now, you can classify your tank by yourself.

Also with regards to the depth at which dissolved oxygen can penetrate the substrate will surely vary dependent on the substrate type; for example I can see that very fine silver sand might impede the flow of DO enriched water through it, however larger grain aquasoil, and even more so coarser gravel will have much higher water exchange?

Yes, fine silver sand can impede the flow. But there's no flow from water column to the sediment unless there's some force. Par example, temperature differential. But that's usually of lesser importance. What matters is diffusion. The water does not move. It's dissolved substances which move according to concentration gradient. That's diffusion.

 

[dw1305]

Hi all,
@_Maq_ thank-you, that is an interesting paper.

but how can our tanks be considered eutrophic whilst the water column spends most of it's time fully saturated with dissolved oxygen? I thought to be eutrophic the BOD from decomposing matter had to be so high that is consumed all oxygen in the water column?

That would be <"hypertrophic">, but you can get pearling and temporary oxygen saturation even in <"hypertrophic water">.

I've been surveying, and doing some water quality work, on some of <"Bristol's pond and rivers"> over the last couple of weeks.

I had an interesting one today. I won't tell you the location, or context, but it was a pond and the water sample had a dissolved oxygen level of 180% (~20oC, 18mg/L DO) and a pH value of pH 10.5........

I like BOD as a measurement, because it gives you a <"nice numerical scale"> for pollution.

........ The prime metric in nitrification isn't actually the ammonia concentration, it is the dissolved oxygen level. As you have water with greater amounts of organic pollution its Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) increases, BOD values range from clean water at below 5 mg/l dissolved oxygen up to about 600 mg/L in raw sewage. Water is fully saturated with oxygen at about 10 mg/L, so you can see that you would need to continually add oxygen for nitrification to occur.......

In terms of sediment dynamics, we just don't know what is happening in our tanks and I would guess it is the whole gamut of different options from fairly fully oxygenated through to <"Winogradsky column territory">. I like to run a <"low nutrient system">, but I don't have any figures to quantify exactly what that means.

Low oxygen levels were also one of the reasons why I wasn't keen on <"Diana Walstad's original premise"> that if you:

• don't have water movement,
• have a siesta period and
• have heavy planting

that the C02, from the oxidation of organic matter in the substrate, would accumulate and provide extra CO2 for the plants.

This paper is significant in that it revealed that positive effects of macrophytes on redox potential can be suppressed by their negative effects in case of 80–100% coverage and total inhabitation of the water column.

The uncertainty about what is happening in the sediment was one of the reasons for mainly talking about what might be happening in the <"rhizosphere"> the zone of fluctuating REDOX values, where exudates from the root will be altering the physical, chemical and microbial composition of the substrate.

In the <"Influence of submerged macrophytes, temperature, and nutrient loading on the development of redox potential around the sediment–water interface in lakes"> it mentions that their experimental plants didn't have much radial oxygen loss.

.......Radial oxygen release by submerged macrophytes is considered as an important factor in elevating sediment redox potential (Christensen & Andersen,1996; Wigand et al., 1997); however, it seems that in our simulated ecosystems potential oxygen losses from the roots of E. canadensis and P. crispus were not able to counteract the restricted water mixing and shading effect, probably due to their poorly developed root systems and limited capacity to transport oxygen into the sediment (Aldridge &Ganf, 2003)......

I'd guess that if they had used Cyperus spp, <"Phragmites australis">, Nelumbo sp. or an <"Amazon Sword"> (Echinodorus spp) etc. that their findings may have been slightly different.

cheers Darrel

 

[_Maq_]

Is it accurate then for you to say that its "only millimeters"? No matter the substrate?
I understand not having every source memorized, but the burden of proof is on the person making the claim. If you say "x is always the case" then you should expect and be ready for people to question you on it

Lake Malawi. Oligotrophic, well oxygenated water, non-stagnant. Temperature similar to our tanks. Sandy and rocky sediment. Please, read:
1998 Hydrobiologia Oxygen in sediment

 

[Hufsa]

My apologies for the late reply @_Maq_ , I havent had time to look at the papers until now.
I think it could be good to have a clear definition of what you mean when you say "only millimeters". Because a lot of things can technically be measured in millimeters, I am 1840mm tall for instance, but I would not refer to myself in millimeters. I assume when you say "only millimeters" you mean below 1cm, is this correct?

Lake Malawi. Oligotrophic, well oxygenated water, non-stagnant. Temperature similar to our tanks. Sandy and rocky sediment. Please, read:
1998 Hydrobiologia Oxygen in sediment

This one seems the most relevant of the papers you have linked, but still I find we disagree in how applicable this is to our tanks.
Most of our tanks are below 1m depth, I think we will agree on that?
Most of our tanks have a certain amount of flow directed at and passing over the substrate, especially high tech planted tanks where good flow considered necessary to distribute nutrients effectively.
Most of our tanks also have a very specific grain size of substrate, a narrow range of sizes with no smaller particles to fill the gaps, which is intentional to increase the depth of oxygenated layer.
The actual size of the grains vary quite a lot, with one end of the spectrum being for example a river loach or goldfish tank with large gravel. The other end of the spectrum would be the very fine sands like I am using.
If you add the factor of flow over that, for example my tank with fine sand and a lot of flow vs another tank with fine sand and very gentle water movement, it seems pretty obvious there will be variations.
The paper linked by @ElleDee does support this, with substrate makeup, flow, and bioturbation being stated as big factors.
Your sources allow for this variation, and if my assumption of your definition of "only millimeters" is correct, that it means above 1cm, then your sources include findings above this depth.
This one maybe most notably;

I dont know exactly how intense of "wave action" we are talking about here (I assume it was fairly significant), but this is 1 meter depth which is most applicable to our tanks, has more flow than the other sampled locations and now we suddenly see a big jump in oxygenated zone size. If I had to guess then 2,5cm is somewhere in the larger end of the scale in an aquarium, but that would just be guessing so its not really relevant.

Science. Scientific papers. Water does not flow in the substrate. Only dissolved substances diffuse.
Yes bioturbation, and other factors may influence it, but not in the orders; it's still millimeters.

2,5cm or 25mm from above is the same thing, one is millimeters one is not, but I got the distinct impression that you were not talking about 25mm when you originally posted.

I found this paper that goes into some details about the different factors that influence that depth in sections 2.1 and 2.2. My read is that if oxygen flux into the soil is largely through molecular diffusion the oxic layer will be very shallow (though sediment porosity is still a factor here, as is noted in 2.2). However, in our aquariums we generally have a constant flow of oxygen rich water at the sediment level, light that penetrates to the substrate to support photosynthesis, and we may have significant bioturbation from livestock. We also regularly remove organic matter whose decomposition would deplete oxygen, and of course we may have a significant network of plant roots. All of these things work to increase the depth of the oxic layer in ways that are not present in a typical eutrophic lake.

ElleDee sums it up better than me (as usual ). In my case I also have a large amount of sand dwelling snails that make their way through the upper substrate layer on a daily basis.

I don't think any of this is in conflict with the source you posted, btw, this is a disagreement in interpretation.

Do I know how deep Hufsa's oxic layer is? I don't, and I don't particularly care. (I also don't care about the answer in my own tanks absent any particular problems, and obviously I wish Hufsa great success in all her endeavors.) But I don't think we have good evidence that it's extremely shallow in every tank, period.

I am wondering if we will not be able to reach an agreement on this subject @_Maq_ , which would be okay with me 😊
Just like ElleDee I am not certain how deep the layer in my particular tank is and since I dont have any problems I dont really care about it either.
My main issue is with you placing all aquariums (substrate makeup, flow, bioturbation ++) in one narrow band of oxygenation without seemingly taking into account the factors mentioned.
It could seem that we disagree on how big the influence of said factors would be, where I and some others believe it plays a significant part, and you may (?) believe it plays little enough part to still fall within your definition of "only millimeters".
I think many of us would like more science to rely on, specific to aquariums would be ideal but because there is no money in it, that might be wishful thinking.
My opinion is not all science can directly be applied to our aquariums without taking into account the differences in an artificial system vs a natural one.

I have pretty much said what I wanted to say, so while I welcome the discussion to play out in my journal I will focus mainly on journal updates again if that is alright with everyone

 

[erwin123]

Just like ElleDee I am not certain how deep the layer in my particular tank is and since I dont have any problems I dont really care about it either.

My previous tank had 12cm substrate that was 10 years old and it also never caused me any problems, despite the fact that I am constantly uprooting plants to trim and replant, inserting osmocote, and EDDHA-Fe ice cubes.

When I decommissioned the tank and removed the substrate, I didn't notice any rotten egg smell or other strong odour either. I would of course prefer to post this in a separate discussion thread that maybe Maq could start to share his theories on substrate but it seems like its not happening... sorry Hufsa!

 

[_Maq_]

@Hufsa, I'd like to specify that "in millimeters" does not mean up to 1 cm, as I understand it. Let's say up to 3 to 4 cm... Perhaps a cultural difference?
No matter. I think I'll open a thread dedicated to this question. But first, I'll find some more articles on this topic.
Correct, your thread should be dedicated to your tank. And you have apparently no problems with your substrate, be it oxic or anoxic.

 

[ElleDee]

FWIW @_Maq_, this discussion and the readings has deepened my understanding on the topic. I can talk more about that if you start a new thread, but it's been an interesting exchange. I would definitely say that up to 3 or 4 cm is way deeper than I thought you meant, especially given that many substrates aren't that much deeper to begin with, so that alone brings our thinking much closer together.

Looking forward to your next updates as always, @Hufsa!

 

[dw1305]

Hi all,

I'd guess that if they had used Cyperus spp, <"Phragmites australis">, Nelumbo sp. or an <"Amazon Sword"> (Echinodorus spp) etc. that their findings may have been slightly different.

This was a thread with a Phragmites paper. <"Can a canister filter 'stall'">.

This is from: Toyama et al. (2016) <"Effects of planting Phragmites...."> Environmental technology", 37(4), pp.478-485.

We examined the effect of planting an emergent aquatic plant (Phragmites australis) on nitrogen removal from sediments using a 42-d pot experiment. The experimental pot systems comprised two types of sediments planted with and without young P. australis. Total nitrogen (total N), total dissolved N, and NH4–N in the sediments decreased markedly after planting. In contrast, those levels decreased only slightly in the unplanted sediments. The decrease in total N in the P. australis-planted sediments was 7–20 times those in the unplanted sediments. Abundances of bacterial 16S rRNA, archaeal 16S rRNA, ammonia-oxidizing bacterial ammonia monooxygenase (amoA), ammonia-oxidizing archaeal amoA, and denitrifying bacterial nitrite reductase (nirK) genes increased significantly in sediments after planting. Phragmites australis appears to have released oxygen and created a repeating cycle of oxidizing and reducing conditions in the sediments. These conditions should promote mineralization of organic N, nitrification, and denitrification in the sediments.

This demonstrates the synergistic plant / microbe effect and also quantifies why it so important.

cheers Darrel

 

[Hufsa]

Its not all algae outbreaks this summer, the cryptocoryne madness continues and today "Silver Queen" (EDIT: Yujii) opened its first spathe 😊
It has a second spathe on the way, and the smaller specimen of "Silver Queen" is also sending out a spathe.
I am convinced there must have been an environmental trigger to have this many crypts flower at the same time
The plant thought it was funny and opened towards the back wall, making the opening very hard to photograph. I had to reach in and rotate the whole plant a bit.





Will be back soon-ish with proper update

 

[Hufsa]

"Silver Queen" opened its first spathe

I couldnt really get my crypts spathe to match up with the spathe of Cryptocoryne regina, which I understand is the species name for the trade name "Silver Queen".
Ive asked around a bit for an ID and the consensus seems to be that my plant is Cryptocoryne yujii 😃 How exciting, I had hardly even heard this species name before!

I love having correct ID's on things so im very pleased that my cryptocorynes are being so cooperative 😄
Now if only the countless varieties of Bucephalandra would take note and get their act together.. 🙄🤭 Wouldnt it be so much more convenient if they also had visually different "flowers" instead of their generic and unhelpful warm white 🙃

@Wookii I hope you dont mind your-plant-to-be has turned out to be something else 😊 Whats one more shiny precious to add to the collection anyway 😅

 

[Wookii]

I couldnt really get my crypts spathe to match up with the spathe of Cryptocoryne regina, which I understand is the species name for the trade name "Silver Queen".
Ive asked around a bit for an ID and the consensus seems to be that my plant is Cryptocoryne yujii 😃 How exciting, I had hardly even heard this species name before!

That is strange, the leaves certainly don't look like images I have seen of Crypt Yujii, and certainly look closer to those of "Silver Queen", but I guess thats the issue of ID'ing by leaves, they can vary so much depending on prevailing conditions.

Yujii is a lot more commonly available that 'Silver Queen', as it's available commercially in tissue culture form, but it's certainly another nice 'precious' to add to the collection!

 

[Hufsa]

Alright so this will probably be a slightly confusing update, but im having a bit of trouble keeping track of what im writing in private messages and what is being written in my journal.
I'll try to get everything back up to date here, with the possible risk of repeating a few things, but ah well.
The majority of the details and background discussions around the lean dosing approach that im trying out for my tank has for a few reasons been moved to private messages.
I still think this is a shame and would like everything to be available for everyone to read, but I guess it wasnt meant to be at that point.
So being the way it is my journal gets sort of the end results of the discussions with what I actually end up trying for my tank.



The short of it going almost two months(?) back:

The plants were doing better and better on whatever the recipe was that I dosed before the latest micro with EDDHA. This was when I was adding Fe DTPA separately a couple of times a week in addition to ~whatever micro mix.
So basically it seemed like the plants were liking having the iron higher than everything else, and going over 0.1 Fe total that way.
The Super Red and Rotalas had unstunted / restarted tops on their own, and were growing normally again without any changes done by me.

A week into using the EDDHA mix I saw a decrease in the slimy green thread algae, and it remained only on Ludwigia Cuba and the Stargrass. It seems to particularly attack plants who are not doing so well.

Right after this I had an incident with the sand snails. I had been gradually trying out a Salicylic acid based algae remedy, and adding partial doses spread out over several days.
That week I was up to adding half a dose at a time, and with a few days apart I had dosed the full dose as per the bottle.
The very next morning the sand snail species that I have (I think its a Thiara sp.) were all laying motionless on top of the sand in the hundreds.
The cause was pretty obvious, so I fished out as many snails as I could get to and placed them in fresh water from the tap. I had the hope that they would recover in fresh water, but either way I didnt want hundreds of snails potentially dying in my tank causing a huge ammonia spike. I got out many of them but couldnt get to the ones in the back without ripping out all the plants.
I then changed a large amount of water to help the remaining snails in the tank hidden in the plants.
A change of water or two was apparently all that was needed, as the absolute majority of the snails recovered from the ordeal and went back to their usual business.

Parts of the snail population being returned to the tank;
Normally only a small fraction of the total population is visible in the tank at any one time.


No change in tank balance was detected, although I didnt test anything as I have mostly stopped testing my tank water in general.
None of the other species of snails (like small Planorbis sp. and Physa sp.) were affected at all, and newborn shrimp, adult shrimp and fish were totally normal in behavior.
Based on this I believe that sand snails or my particular species of sand snail may be particularly sensitive to Salicylic acid or this specific algae remedy (Happy Life Algin Regular).
I would strongly advise anyone whos starting use of such a treatment to pay very close attention to their sand dwelling snails.

I havent added any of this remedy since, but I would like to retry in the future with staying at a lower dose, to see if it can still help against the slimy thread algae.

At the same time I saw that results using only the new EDDHA micro mix and no additional iron was not good. The plants had gotten quite dramatically more chlorotic over just a few days.
I didnt take a ton of pictures as I was a bit busy with real life and a kitchen full of snails, but here are the few I took:

For once this washing out of the tops is not due to the light but actually chlorosis and pretty distinct.


Very pale beige Hygrophila polysperma and pure white Stargrass.






Pictures taken during a water change because this is apparently the only time I take photos any more 🤷‍♀️

Almost out of shot below is a stem of Pantanal, it was fairly happy less angry growing in the pot of some Aquasoil. Suggests it might be happier with slightly higher dosing, although me leaving it alone seems to be priority number one.
Interestingly the pedicellata Golden that grows in the same pot is just as unhappy and stunted as its brothers in the sand. Might suggest that something about my water column is not to its liking and adding Aquasoil at its roots is not enough to overcome this.
Also, beautiful sunset colored leaves on what I now know is Cryptocoryne yujii here in this picture 🥰


Tonina ironically quite happy despite all the other plants being sad. I think this plant is some sort of sadomasochist.


Very possible contributing factor to chlorosis, a bunch of emersed plants had moved into the tank in preparation for my vacation, to decrease the amount of plants the petsitter had to look after.
Speaking of possible contributing factors, I can not discount that earlier decrease in thread algae could have been influenced by the Salicylic acid.
Although I still believe plant health plays a major role in whether the slimy thread algae attaches to the plants or not, based on the patterns I have observed.


Due to the chlorosis I increased the overall dose of the EDDHA micro mix to 0.2 and left for my vacation.
When I got back I had a metric ton of slimy thread algae and pink water.

Partially unrelated; this picture turned out kinda cool with the unusual perspective, I was twisting around all over the place trying to get a photo of the C. yujii spathe, until I gave up and rotated the whole plant. Note the pink water.

0.2 Fe EDDHA per week is definitely too much for this setup. (For those not in the know, Fe EDDHA is strongly colored and will turn your water pink at higher doses)
So that was obviously not going to work. I reduced the dosing back to 0.1, pulled out about a solid liter of slimy thread algae, and performed a large water change.

Finally we are up to date with the latest pictures being these two from yesterday (of course also taken during a water change)




As you can see the plants have mostly improved again under the 0.2 EDDHA micro mix, although the slimy thread algae is pretty intense as well.
Im not sure whether I should interpret the increase in green thread algae as an overall improvement in growing conditions for plants, as green algae is closely related to plants,
OR if I should think the increase in green thread algae as a decrease in plant health, as the slimy kind of thread algae seems to directly attach to and go for plants who are struggling for whatever reason.
So far my mind is at least 2/3 with the latter.
Right now the green thread algae is growing from almost (but not quite) all of the plant species in the tank.

Super Red has stunted again and being unable to recover the main growing tip has sprouted two new sideshoots on every stem. Still unsure what is causing this.
Pantanal hit the surface, was cut in half and replanted, awaiting massive temper tantrum shortly.

Will see if I can grab a few more pics tomorrow.

Plan going forward is 0.1 Fe using the EDDHA micro mix, and then adding additional iron DTPA a few times a week on top of this, as the plants seemed to like it last time.
Going to try a total Fe of 0.2 weekly, but will try 0.3 shortly if it doesnt give me the results im looking for.
Also just getting back to regular maintenance of the tank, I have cleaned both filters which was overdue, and just get everything back in good shape and keep up with regular water changes.
I have evicted half of the emersed houseplants from the tank, so that should ease some of the nutrient demand.
I have reduced macro dose to 2 N (proxy) weekly because of this, and will monitor for nitrogen deficiency.

The big Crypt yujii has already got spathe number 2 and 3 on the way, and her little sister is working on her first spathe too.
Ill share photos of them when they open as I think they are quite beautiful with the white and purple, almost like having actual flowers underwater 🥰

Hope everyone is having a nice summer

 

[erwin123]

Almost out of shot below is a stem of Pantanal, it was fairly happy less angry growing in the pot of some Aquasoil. Suggests it might be happier with slightly higher dosing, although me leaving it alone seems to be priority number one.
Interestingly the pedicellata Golden that grows in the same pot is just as unhappy and stunted as its brothers in the sand. Might suggest that something about my water column is not to its liking and adding Aquasoil at its roots is not enough to overcome this.
Also, beautiful sunset colored leaves on what I now know is Cryptocoryne yujii here in this picture 🥰

As a member of the Patnanal and Pedicatella growers club, I would like to encourage you to keep trying! There is progress with the Pantanal in Aquasoil so thats great!

For Pedicatella, my working hypothesis, based on info from other local growers is that it doesn't like high K dosing. In addition, Plantnoobdude has stated in his journal that he is dosing 2ppm K so thats really lean where K is concerned....
Its entirely possible the K requirement is a myth that but thats what experiments are for. My weekly K dosing is now at about 3.5ppm per week (from APT EI/Tropica Specialised).

 

[Hufsa]

As a member of the Patnanal and Pedicatella growers club, I would like to encourage you to keep trying! There is progress with the Pantanal in Aquasoil so thats great!

Im definitely going to keep trying, im nothing if not stubborn 😁

For Pedicatella, my working hypothesis, based on info from other local growers is that it doesn't like high K dosing. In addition, Plantnoobdude has stated in his journal that he is dosing 2ppm K so thats really lean where K is concerned....
Its entirely possible the K requirement is a myth that but thats what experiments are for. My weekly K dosing is now at about 3.5ppm per week (from APT EI/Tropica Specialised).

Interesting!

Unfortunately, due to an accident with the "sun lazor beam blast" that comes through my kitchen window in the evening, I have ahem somewhat cooked my backup supply of Golden.
Its not entirely dead but its struggling to recover and even if it makes it, I wont be able to harvest new shoots from it for a while.
So for now I am depending on the stems I have in my tank, which arent growing much.

Once things settle down a little bit in my tank I could try "just" reducing K, or technically it would be increasing the Urea to Nitrate ratio, therefore lowering K from KNO3.

Ive also heard that it likes good levels of Mg, although how much was not specified.

I am curious about the fertilizer called Masterline All In One Golden, which was apparently formulated for difficult plants and therefore named after the pedicellata Golden (I dont remember where I read this).
It says they recommend dosing it daily, and that it contains elements in multiple forms, so I would guess that they contain a percentage of lightly chelated elements that are more easy to uptake.
I have worked the numbers a bit in my notes and this below should be what they recommend dosing weekly:

N 1.89 (NO3 8.4)
P 0.46 (PO4 1.4)
K 5.25
Mg 1.4

Fe 0.49
Mn 0.16
B 0.093
Zn 0.11
Cu 0.02
Mo 0.013

What stands out to me is relatively modest N, decent P, not super low K (higher than my current dose), and a decent addition of Mg (this may be for tap water users who dont remineralize).
Also note the high Fe (almost 0.5) coupled with not quite as high other micros

What do you make of it @erwin123 ?

 

[erwin123]

Im definitely going to keep trying, im nothing if not stubborn 😁


Interesting!

Unfortunately, due to an accident with the "sun lazor beam blast" that comes through my kitchen window in the evening, I have ahem somewhat cooked my backup supply of Golden.
Its not entirely dead but its struggling to recover and even if it makes it, I wont be able to harvest new shoots from it for a while.
So for now I am depending on the stems I have in my tank, which arent growing much.

Once things settle down a little bit in my tank I could try "just" reducing K, or technically it would be increasing the Urea to Nitrate ratio, therefore lowering K from KNO3.

Ive also heard that it likes good levels of Mg, although how much was not specified.

I am curious about the fertilizer called Masterline All In One Golden, which was apparently formulated for difficult plants and therefore named after the pedicellata Golden (I dont remember where I read this).
It says they recommend dosing it daily, and that it contains elements in multiple forms, so I would guess that they contain a percentage of lightly chelated elements that are more easy to uptake.
I have worked the numbers a bit in my notes and this below should be what they recommend dosing weekly:

N 1.89 (NO3 8.4)
P 0.46 (PO4 1.4)
K 5.25
Mg 1.4

Fe 0.49
Mn 0.16
B 0.093
Zn 0.11
Cu 0.02
Mo 0.013

What stands out to me is relatively modest N, decent P, not super low K (higher than my current dose), and a decent addition of Mg (this may be for tap water users who dont remineralize).
Also note the high Fe (almost 0.5) coupled with not quite as high other micros

What do you make of it @erwin123 ?

Ammannia Pedicatella is a one of a kind plant in terms of fert requirements it seems. The user above (if you check out his instagram you can see he's a follower of Dennis Wong, and even then, he is using "Tropica Levels" for this particular plant and not APT Complete "Levels"... heresy!

My current water parameters are also probably just marginal for Pedicatella, GH6, TDS 120.... but hey, my Macrandra seem relatively happy, and its reputedly a softwater plant...

 

[Hufsa]

I took lotsa photos for you guys today, hold on to your hats 🤠
It will be nice to have a proper baseline of plant photos to compare things to again, the past few months have been a little bit spotty in documentation 🤭 and that made it hard to get a good idea of what was going on. Its not like I can remember any of it 🥴

Ive done a fair bit of trimming since I came home, so things might not look super lush at the moment, but a few plants really needed it.
Also moved a few plants around, im slowly starting to regain some open space in the tank, and it feels really good, and looks so much better than having something in every single available area.

Ive brutally removed loads of huge leaves from the Spiralis Red, I sort of knew this was one of the bigger crypt species, but I guess I failed to realize exactly how big.
I want to see if I can make it slightly less happy by removing some leaves and see if it will put out some medium sized ones. Worth a try anyway eh.
This kind of thing is really a luxury problem of CO2-injected tanks, suddenly some plants are VERY happy and youre wondering if you could make them a little bit less happy/vigorous while still maintaining good form.

Im having a problem of the same sort with Sagittaria subulata, its very easy going and thinks conditions are pretty sweet regardless of the minor issues that bother some of the drama queen stems.
I have somehow triggered it to convert to the tall growing form, and in addition to growing leaves that are much longer than I would like, it sends naughty runners absolutely everywhere and its a fair bit of work sussing them out and removing them before the runners have already had runners of their own and suddenly Sag is appearing halfway across the tank and how did you even get there!?
I pulled out the whole bunch yesterday, kept only a few rosettes which I trimmed the roots short on (hoping they will be sad and stay there for just a little while), and im also hoping I can persuade them somehow to be short again. Ive seen two reasons cited as the cause of this change in length, one is crowding and one is light.
When they started putting out long leaves they were crammed in tightly on the left side of the tank and partially shaded by some epiphytes, so thats 2/2 I guess.
Having moved to the right side, they now get lots of light, but the long leaves continue to come.
So sparse group it is. If that doesnt work I will try replanting the group with only runners, and throw away the original rosettes, but I dont think it will work.
Its a really nice little plant though, it has a wide grassy texture which is a bit lacking in my tank, and a very nice solid lime green color that contrasts well with other green plants.
My SO likes it as well, which you all probably know gives the thing in question an automatic +1 bonus point
Maybe I can bury a small cup in the area and that will keep those pesky runners inside the group.. 🤔


The left hand crypt corner isnt quite as crazy as the right one, but the "Queen Vandom" has still been quite busy, as I now suddenly have three daughter plants.
She seems to be prioritizing propagation over growth, right now she only has three leaves but its possible I accidentally broke the fourth off the other day while I was pulling out Hydrocotyle verticillata I think the latter might do better on the right side of the tank, its a bit leggy due to the light and I constantly have to trim it back to make sure it doesnt infringe on my precious crypts.
In the center of the picture you can see Cryptocoryne ferruginea, I bought one plant but the leaves gradually wilted on the main plant and three shoots came up instead. The growth has been very slow so far, but the starting plant mass was super small and I think it is still establishing itself. Only time will tell if it will stay this slow.
Crypts are really starting to grow on me, I find it ironic as I shied away from this family for so many years thinking they wouldnt like me very much
But now theres babies and spathes and fruits all over the place 😄


Buce "corner", biggest leaf in the center is the Dark Achilles, which is really putting on mass. Many of the Buces sulked for a while back when I was trying to trim off leaves with BBA, but have slowly recovered now that I let them grow undisturbed. In the back left you can sort of see Silver Grey and Pearl Grey who has also put out some very large leaves.
My experience so far is that its not a good idea to trim Buce leaves unless youre really really sure that algae is no longer growing in the tank.
Otherwise your trimming will soon outpace the Buces growth and the plant will suffer for it.


Bolbitis Type B is doing really good, theres only two rhizomes left, the other ones didnt make it through my unkind welcoming treatment.
There were three rhizomes but I accidentally pulled one loose trying to grab some thread algae a while ago, and the third has been sitting forgotten in a cup in the kitchen somewhere, waiting forever for me to bother gluing it back on again
But the two in the tank are doing well and putting out leaves like champions

Bolbitis Type A still doing great;


As you can see the BBA is back again for now, I wonder what caused it to die off earlier?
Ill have a rummage through the journal, see if I can discern anything.


Second cup of Aquasoil, with five baby Pantanal stems from the windowsill.
Let the Anger Games begin


The stem that hit the surface and got replanted is, unsurprisingly to anyone, really angry now.
The plant width / leaf length is possibly the best width ive had on Pantanal so far, so that is pretty nice.
I feel like its slowly inching closer and closer to something decent.


Tonina is happier and decently green, the long stalk got divided today and got a few friends from the windowsill.
Not bothering with Aquasoil for this, Tonina doesnt seem to care much and hardly puts out roots anyway.


Second spathe of Yujii, not opened yet but seems like this also will open towards the back
The mossy rock in the background is the "Troll Moss" that I found in some local stream, and aside from a bit of BBA its growing really well.
I have a bunch more of it propagating in the kitchen, planning to send some over to the UK when I get the chance


The Cryptocoryne striolata "Tiger" is up to something, it has what looks like tiny offshoots around its base, theres two on this side in the picture and another one obscured by a leaf.
Call me crazy but I think it might be making a few more Tigers for me


Seed pods / fruits on Striolata Mini are still closed, and when I poked the oldest one it felt very firm and not dead still, so im just leaving them and seeing what happens.
They are the two dark blobs in the picture, the brighter thing between them is the remnant of an old spathe, I think ive lost count on how many it has put out now, the spathe its currently sending out might be number 5, and I see another tail coming up to the left


Stargrass is the greenest I think ive had it in a long time, I think we're really close to a chlorosis-free tank!


Cuba is a bit pale but it grows a lot slower than the Stargrass, so I think it will come around, might need just a touch more iron to make everyone happy.

Rotala rotundifolia "Orange Juice" is looking really beautiful, getting very close to how I want it to look now.
I have been gradually* increasing the light output of both Fluvals, and the OJ has responded in kind.
(*Hufsa-Gradually, not to be confused with ordinary gradually)

Is increasing the light a good idea when youre struggling with green thread algae? Absolutely not. Am I doing it anyway? You bet I am!
It reminds me of a doctor I used to go to, he had a sign hanging prominently in his office that looked like this;



Contrary to what you might believe he was actually a great doctor
So im increasing the light intensity because I have the irresistible urge to do stupid things faster with more energy 😁
Its like trying to repair your car engine while accelerating wildly down the highway

Yeehaw!

 

[erwin123]

I took lotsa photos for you guys today, hold on to your hats 🤠
It will be nice to have a proper baseline of plant photos to compare things to again, the past few months have been a little bit spotty in documentation 🤭 and that made it hard to get a good idea of what was going on. Its not like I can remember any of it 🥴

Overall the tank is looking good! I like the contrasts of shadow and light in your photo. The dark shadows on the left side remind me of:

 

[Hufsa]

I got a few new friends today 😊🦐



Ive been thinking about trying Caridina shrimp for a while, but havent pulled the trigger until now for various reasons.
I tried them years ago when I was young and didnt have success with them long term, but I would like to think my knowledge is slightly better now and my tank is definitely a more stable system compared to back then.
My water parameters teeter sort of on the edge between Neocaridina and Caridina water, and my thought was if a few initial scouts do well and breed then I could sell my population of Neocaridina and move to only Caridina. This would allow me to use less remineralizer / have a lower GH and they come in really neat patterns and colors that can be mixed without the population turning brown.

So when we were at the pet store today and I spotted some decently colored Bee shrimp for an ok-ish price, I took 5 little critters home with me 😊
The colors and price on privately bred Caridina are much better, but they are never sold in groups less than 10, and I didnt want to spend a lot of money on a trial group when im not sure if they will thrive.
I hope I managed to get one male, I found it a little bit hard to tell in the store, but we shall see.


This is the one I hope is a boy. It has a less curved belly than the others, but the top antennae arent super long so I might have goofed and gotten all girls.
Ah well, worst case I would have to go back and buy another.


Will do another round of plant pictures on sunday, that is the plan at least.
Hope I can get a few good shots of the new arrivals in the tank too, right now they are still getting acclimatized and I didnt want to stress them out with bright light
I found it super useful to have wifi plugs on my CO2 solenoid, because when I decided to buy the shrimp I could just pull up my phone and remotely turn the gas injection in my tank off.
Tested the ph when I got home and it had already risen almost back to baseline. Very handy
Wouldnt want to shock these guys with the CO2 😊