Good EI discussion (split from Paul's 200L journal)

[JamesM]

Just to correct myself about the 'balance' - its more about the balance of light and co2. Ferts make no difference. I've double dosed EI from day 1 and not had issues. The problems arise when nutrients are simply too low.

 

[Fred Dulley]

Just to correct myself about the 'balance' - its more about the balance of light and co2. Ferts make no difference. I've double dosed EI from day 1 and not had issues. The problems arise when nutrients are simply too low.

Agreed.

 

[El Duderino]

I am totally new to the plant keeping side of this hobby and so far my understanding of EI is to load up on the ferts to the point of excess, then to do a water change at the end of the week to reduce that excess and start again the next week. That to me is not keeping a balance. It may be good for the plants and ensure that they never run short of nutrients but its not really a balance. Balanced would be having just enough nutrients to see the plants through the week and not having to do a water change.

I could be totally wrong in my understanding and to be honest I am struggling to get my head round a lot of what I have read on here. Rather than ask ridiculous questions that have been asked many times before, I keep on reading. I think I am getting there. I have gone low tech with my tank until I get a better understanding of what is going on.

 

[ceg4048]

...EI is to load up on the ferts to the point of excess, then to do a water change at the end of the week to reduce that excess and start again the next week. That to me is not keeping a balance...

This is what a lot of people assume and it's based on a superficial perspective. This often occurs because most can't quite interpret the function and purpose of the dry salts in the same terms as what's on our dinner plate. I mean, do you have a dog or a cat? Do you feed them? Is there a relationship between the amount of food your dog eats and his health? If you have fish in the tank then I'm pretty sure you feed them too. Would it ever occur to you that you should starve your fish of nutrients? As an example, what are you feeding your fish when the label on the food says "high protein"? What is a protein and why does it matter if it's high? Well, proteins are constructed of Carbon, Hydrogen, Oxygen, and Nitrogen - the very same stuff that's contained in the dry salts. Proteins have these elements arranged in certain patterns that enable them to perform functions. The dry salts are therefore the building blocks by which plants can fabricate proteins so that your fish, cat, dog, and even you can have access to.

The second part is this; If you feed your fish a lot, do they produce a lot of urine and poop? The answer is yes. Well, feeding plants a lot means that they produce a lot of waste that is neither healthy for them or for the fish. So the water change is to rid the tank of waste, not to rid the tank of excess nutrients. The principles of EI allows you to modulate the nutrient loading. You are not forced to use the standard numbers. You can use lower dosing numbers that approach zero dosing, however, as most agree, their must be a good reason, such as low light, low CO2, high tap nutrient content and so forth to justify the lower numbers, otherwise you risk malnutrition. When the nutrient loading is lowered, the organic waste production is also lowered and therefore the need to change a lot of water is lowered. So EI is not about "excess". It's about dosing as required for best health. Under extreme environmental conditions such, as super high lighting and super high CO2, you need super high nutrient levels. Under medium conditions the dosing is medium and under low conditions the dosing is low.

Everyone talks about this word "balance", yet few really have a sense of it. They'll have high lighting, poor flow, poor CO2. This combination triggers a bloom, regardless of what they are dosing. There is generally poor understanding of CO2. This has absolutely nothing to do with EI.

The more nutrients you feed your vegetables the stronger they grow and the better they are for you. Why is that such a crime?
This dosing system is based on two facts:
1. That more nutrition grows healthier plants.
2. That nutrients in the tank are not a causal factor for algae.

Time and time again we have demonstrated these facts in our tanks. We couldn't possibly get away with what we are doing if either or both of these statements were false.
Now lets look at the other side of the story:
1. If algal blooms are present in the tank a rich nutrient level accelerates the blooms.
2. Applying high nutrient levels can never cure algae that is related to poor CO2.

What these two statements tell us is that although nutrients are not a causal factor in our tanks their presence in the water column can exacerbate the situation. Now, lean dosers often argue that because these statements are true, then it makes sense to get rid of the nutrients in the water column to cure your algae. But this is a trap. Since nutrients cannot cause algae to appear, then getting rid of nutrients cannot cause the algae to go away. That will slow the bloom but not rid the tank of it. That brings up the fundamental truths:
1. One must address the fundamental cause that triggered the bloom.
2. If nutrient levels are completely withdrawn this increases the risk on unhealthy plants, which can trigger other forms of algae related to poor plant health.

In order to achieve this so-called balance, it's necessary to understand the effects of the various parameters we impose on the tank. Light, CO2, maintenance, flow/distribution and so forth. Nutrient dosing is only a part of the picture and even if there were no EI you'd still have to pay attention to these details.


Cheers,

 

[chris1004]

1. If algal blooms are present in the tank a rich nutrient level accelerates the blooms.

Cheers,

Hi all,

I was that newbie you guys have been been discussing 18 months ago and this single statement whilst the others are all undoubtedly true is the one which IMO should be hammered home time and again to anyone attempting EI for the first time.

In my mind its manifested itself as the biggest downfall of the EI method, because having unlimited ferts high co2 and limiting the light is so efficient at growing stuff it also benefits the algae once its triggered to such an extent that if your not 100% on top of your game you'll be over run in no time at all. After all isn't algae just another form, albeit a lower form, of plant life? and doesn't EI dosing give us ideal conditions for rapid plant life growth?

But the alternative methods of limiting ferts risk plant health and causing the exact same problem but from the other end so to speak by triggering algae spores to bloom when you get it wrong because of decaying plant matter producing ammonia.

So in summary no method is flawles and if we falter algae is with us whether we like it or not no matter what method of fert dosing we choose.

IMO we should all no matter what fert regime, lighting setup or amount of co2 used be pummeling away at the newbie about the control of AMMONIA.

This is the common enemy of all of us and the least understood by the newbie in its relevance to planted tanks .at least IMO.

Regards, Chris.

 

[El Duderino]

As I have said before, I am new to the plant keeping side of things. It never occurred to me that plants would produce waste, now that it has been mentioned it seems perfectly reasonable that if you put something in then you should be getting something out.

There are an awful lot of big gaps in my knowledge and I am really struggling to know how or what to bridge those gaps with.

 

[plantbrain]

I eat more than I need too🙂
I'm not balanced, so I have to go run and bike and exercise a lot to burn the excess fat off.
Aquariums are not really different.

In fish only aquariums, they have to do water changes to reduce the nutrient loading.
Are those balanced?

Are Discus over feed tanks worse?
There's a trade off there, they want big fat high brood production, fast rates of growth and do not mind doing more water changes.

EI can easily be balanced=> where balanced = input of nutrients = output of plant growth rate.
You start high(typical EI dosing, then slow and progressively reduce it till you have a negative plant response, then bump the dosing to the last slightly higher dosing rate.

Easy if you are patient.
This assumes that CO2/light are independent, which often is not the case.
Therein with light and CO2 lies the belly of the beast for most planted hobbyists.

I think if balance or better yet, "sustainability" is honestly the goal.........then go non CO2.
Non CO2 means the system grows slower, there is more recycling of nutrients, limitations do not manifest themselves severely, rates of growth and input, energy etc is reduced.

The inputs are greatly reduced, we only feed fish, maybe dose a sprinkle 2-4x a month, and/or chose a rich sediment as a backup or a primary nutrient source.

If we want higher rates of growth and more options for plant species and gardening ability, then CO2 is a good option with low light, rich sediments as well. This is a trade off however, we can still minimize the water changes and the dosing to add just enough for balance, but there's always some user error here and under dosing leads to more issues for most than over dosing a tad more and then just doing a quick water change once in awhile.
Tanks look nicer and cleaner after water changes.

It's quick and has less issues than testing NO3/PO4/Ca/Mg etc. No one has gotten into this hobby to measure ppm's of these things, the water change is a much easier thing to deal with and one we can use to our advantage. I think many put up their own barriers mentally about water changes, dosing NO3, PO4 etc, testing etc. These are often counter to what is often suggested in other parts of the aquarium hobby.

No method will meet all goals for a good method for management, so if you state and specific goal, say a sustainable planted tank..............from there, the advice can be tailored.

EI is not much more than a tool to rule out nutrient limitations, then you can focus more on reducing light, better use of CO2, or reduction from a known non limiting ppm nutrient dosing to just enough. There are other factors that are much more important than nutrient dosing for management and sustainable goals.

Mostly light => then CO2 would be next=> nutrients are last on the line, do not let the tail wag the dog.
I also encourage folks to try a non CO2 small tank out.

Regards,
Tom Barr

 

[plantbrain]

As I have said before, I am new to the plant keeping side of things. It never occurred to me that plants would produce waste, now that it has been mentioned it seems perfectly reasonable that if you put something in then you should be getting something out.

There are an awful lot of big gaps in my knowledge and I am really struggling to know how or what to bridge those gaps with.

Getting the big picture is the best way and then go to the details from there.
What is your goal?

Start there, and then proceed.
Folks will be much better able to help you.

Regards,
Tom Barr

 

[plantbrain]

1. If algal blooms are present in the tank a rich nutrient level accelerates the blooms.

Cheers,

I disagree with this, if anything, EI exposes where the weakness is and is better able to isolate it than any other method. We use this same principle in research.

See Tropica's article for interactions between CO2 and light on Riccia.
http://www.tropica.com/advising/technic ... light.aspx

If I wanted to test the effects of say just light, I'd have to ensure than the CO2/nutrients would be non limiting for all light levels. This way the CO2/nutrients would be independent. My dependent variables would be light and say growth, or O2 production, cm of growth per day, %biomass increase/cover etc.........

If CO2 was limiting at the upper ranges..........then my test method would not be able to detect the real relationship with just light intensity changes on plant growth. I would have confounding issues with my test and could not conclude much about lighting alone.

The same is true for EI, the issue with high ppms and algae, the algae are non limited in both cases, adding more should not do anything to algae because the algae are nutrient independent to begin with 😉 Folks who have algae already have something messed up and no independence, let alone any control over their methods. EI would simply rule out the nutrients as a potential dependence issue, then they could focus more on filtration, current, CO2, light reduction etc.......

Experimental approaches are designed to pick apart relationships that are complex and rule them out one by one.
EI simply rules out nutrients.

It does noit encourage algae any more than any dosing method.
Why do we see bad algae blooms with every type of dosing method?
Is it the method or other factors?
We also find most all dosing methods also have examples where they have no algae and decent plant growth also.
Those are the observations, so you should be able to draw a different conclusion based on those if you think about it.
You do not start with a conclusion, then go about looking for facts that might support it.

Chris stated:

Hi all,
I was that newbie you guys have been been discussing 18 months ago and this single statement whilst the others are all undoubtedly true is the one which IMO should be hammered home time and again to anyone attempting EI for the first time. In my mind its manifested itself as the biggest downfall of the EI method, because having unlimited ferts high co2 and limiting the light is so efficient at growing stuff it also benefits the algae once its triggered to such an extent that if your not 100% on top of your game you'll be over run in no time at all. After all isn't algae just another form, albeit a lower form, of plant life? and doesn't EI dosing give us ideal conditions for rapid plant life growth?
But the alternative methods of limiting ferts risk plant health and causing the exact same problem but from the other end so to speak by triggering algae spores to bloom when you get it wrong because of decaying plant matter producing ammonia. So in summary no method is flawles and if we falter algae is with us whether we like it or not no matter what method of fert dosing we choose.

Well, any method will have the humans messing it up and not looking at light/CO2 issues.
But we fail, not the methods so much.

IMO we should all no matter what fert regime, lighting setup or amount of co2 used be pummeling away at the newbie about the control of AMMONIA.

I'm not sure that NH4 is that critical, but light and CO2 are.
Non CO2 offers up a nice method as well.

This is the common enemy of all of us and the least understood by the newbie in its relevance to planted tanks .at least IMO.

Regards, Chris.

Yes, they tend to focus too much on ppm's and ferts, not enough on light and CO2.
EI rules out any co limitation with nutrients.

If you have strong limitations with say PO4, this affects the CO2 demand from plants(reduces the CO2 demand). So adding non limiting PO4 can shift a tank from a CO2 rich to a CO2 limited system once the PO4 limitation is lifted.
Still, the problem was CO2, not the nutrients, PO4 was an indirect effect.

Regards,
Tom Barr

 

[Anonymous]

Re: Paul's 200L, "Punishment of Luxury"

Removing this much plant biomass alone, regardless of the dosing can lead to algae.

Plan removing the plants a week ahead and clean the canister filter. Large biomass removal or trimming can lead to huge amounts of nutrients in the water column which the biological filtration cannot process and this leads to algae as simple as that, if you still get algae then your biological filtration needs to be adjusted. Of course if cannot be planned one can use Eichhornia crassipes for example which acts way better then a canister biological filtration, but the underneath plants (some of them) may "suffer" due to dim light. Of course the co2, flow etc. needs to be adjusted also to the biomass/tank size, hard-scape ...

Mike

 

[plantbrain]

Re: Paul's 200L, "Punishment of Luxury"

Removing this much plant biomass alone, regardless of the dosing can lead to algae.

Plan removing the plants a week ahead and clean the canister filter. Large biomass removal or trimming can lead to huge amounts of nutrients in the water column which the biological filtration cannot process and this leads to algae as simple as that, if you still get algae then your biological filtration needs to be adjusted. Of course if cannot be planned one can use Eichhornia crassipes for example which acts way better then a canister biological filtration, but the underneath plants (some of them) may "suffer" due to dim light. Of course the co2, flow etc. needs to be adjusted also to the biomass/tank size, hard-scape ...

Mike

No, I can easily remove the plants without much disturbance, I can also clean the tank after the trim etc, but still get algae. We have large tanks at the lab and we see this all the time, we use pots to grow plants.
We remove a % of the pots and then algae blooms when it gets below a critical % of coverage, the nutrients are less, not higher.

Yet we get algae when the plants are removed.

When I trim my 180 Gal tank too much, I also get mild algae, but I do not disturb the sediment at all.
Just mow the tops.

If you over trim, then you end up with algae/too little % plant biomass.
I think you can get more algae and worse algae if you also uproot, but even in cases where that is not done, we still see a similar relationship with plant biomass removal. I can easily trim some, a little etc, without any issues, but if you whack 50-80% of the plant biomass, and clean after, there's going to be some algae response. Algae "know" if there's not much plants there or not.

Nutrients are still independent.

CO2 changes, perhaps some chemical sensors etc. Newly available substrates for the algae spores to colonize that are not actively growing. A good sized water change would address any Biofiltering issues or Zeolite etc. I've done that and never found a lot of relationship there. No relationship with varying O2 levels either.'

As far as using a cover plant like Hyacinth, this limits light a great deal....... so the algae have little light/strong light competition, that's very different from nutrient competition. Aquatic plants mostly use fast rates of growth to grow faster than the algae can colonize and light mostly. Nutrients, not much.



Regards,
Tom Barr

 

[Anonymous]

Tom let me tell you about my observations:

I have 3 tanks (25l, 60l, 100l)

The first (25l) - 6 months old
Soil: JBL Aquabasis + some rocks (under the gravel) + Nano Shrimps Gravel Bed, Borneo brown - covers 40-50% of the water column so the actual volume is ~15l.
Plants: Glossostigma, Didiplis, Crypts, Rotala Indica, some snails
Fauna: 6 Pseudomugil Gertrude, Clithon corona/diadema and some RCS.
Light 26w 6500k Aquatic Nature Duo Boy.
No CO2 injection, no NPK dosing, dosing trace, scarce ~ 1-2 times a month (Easy Life Profito)
Water change 30% once a month
Filtration one small Eheim 2006 Pick up Internal Filter with Eheim Substrate Pro (~20 granules and a small particle pad).
The surface is covered 80% with Eichhornia crassipes, I used this plant as a last resort to get rid of Cladophora (the only algae in the tank) and it worked (I don't like to use chemicals to get rid of algae and I don't use EC/Excel in any tank).
Soil + gravel cover 40-50% of the water column so the actual volume is ~10-15l.

-------------------

The second (60l) - 1.2 year old
Soil: JBL Aquabasis + Nano Shrimps Gravel Bed, Borneo brown + Sulawesi black + Hobby Natalit + Sand
Decor: Petrified wood + some thin unidentified branches.
Plants: Cyperus Helferi, Ludwigia repens, Echinodorus Vesuvius, Bolbitis heudelotii some Crypts, Anubias nana, Rotala indica, Pogostemon Helferi etc.
Fauna: Hemmigramus bleheri x 8, Gasteropelecus sternicla x 3, Paraotocinclus Jumbo x 2, Corydoras Panda x 2, Corydoras Aeneus x 3, RCS hundreds.
Light Osram 865 T8 15W x 3
No CO2 injection, no NPK dosing, only trace weekly (Easy Life Profito).
Water change 15% twice a month .
Filtration JBL e700 with 1.5l of Eheim Subtrate Pro and the original sponges, ceramics tubes, a particle pad.

Algae: some BBA on a 1 year old petrified wood (100% it's not inert) that I plan to throw it away, and that's it. Last time I worked in the tank I pulled 80% of the biomass due to the lack of swimming space and still no algae.

-------------------

The third (100l) - 2 months old
Soil: JBL Aquabasis + Peat Moss + JBL Manado
Decor: Mangrove wood
Plants: Barclaya longifolia red, Crypts, Glossostigma, Hydrocotyle Verticillata, Lindernia rotundifolia 'Variegated', Pogostemon Helferi, Staurogyne sp., Didiplis Diandra, Rotala indica, Rotala macranda green, Ludwigia arcuata & brevipes, Nymphaea Rubra, Hygrophila pinnatifida.
Fish: Apistogramma cacatuoides x 5, Hemigrammus rodwayi x 9, Otocinclus affinis x 5, Corydoras aeneus x 5, Cardinia japonica x 18
Light: 4 Osram 965 T5 24w (2 working at the moment, I need to replace the ballast)
Yeast CO2 injection, dosing at water change NPK + Trace (Easy Life products) and between water changes Easy Life Ferro.
Water change 30% at 3-5 days.
Filtration JBL e900 with 2.5l of Eheim Subtrate Pro and the original sponges, ceramics tubes, particle pad + Sicce Voyager 1 (~1000l/h)

Algae some GSA/GDA on glass when I forgot to dose 🙂 and that's it. I can trim, pull, uproot as much as I want without any algae issues.

--------------------

My observations (I could be wrong of course):

- not having a good cleaning team in your tank leads to algae 🙂
- not having a very good water flow leads to algae
- dosing trace scarce or loads doesn't matter but you need good NP(K) levels, N>5 (best between 10-20 for some plants), P>0.3, K ? don't have a test kit yet.
- heavy non porous gravel leads to plant decay and algae issues
- sand, gravel and rocks with lime traces leads to BBA
- poor biological filtration leads to algae if you have an ammonia spike due to different reasons
- laziness leads to algae
- without you folks, Tom's articles and Diana Walstad's book I wouldn't be here writing you.

Mike

 

[plantbrain]

Tom let me tell you about my observations:
I have 3 tanks (25l, 60l, 100l)
My observations (I could be wrong of course):

- not having a good cleaning team in your tank leads to algae 🙂
- not having a very good water flow leads to algae
- dosing trace scarce or loads doesn't matter but you need good NP(K) levels, N>5 (best between 10-20 for some plants), P>0.3, K ? don't have a test kit yet.
- heavy non porous gravel leads to plant decay and algae issues
- sand, gravel and rocks with lime traces leads to BBA
- poor biological filtration leads to algae if you have an ammonia spike due to different reasons
- laziness leads to algae
- without you folks, Tom's articles and Diana Walstad's book I wouldn't be here writing you.

Mike

Hi Mike, I think a lot of the issues (they are somewhat minor) are due to CO2. Good algae eaters will help a lot in non CO2 planted tanks. Some of the minor algae issues you have can be addressed with spot treatment using Easy Carbo or H2O2 etc. If you have less light, you will have less CO2/nutrient demand. Good feeding of fish will help if you dose less rather than more. I'd argue that a good well feed fish load will help a well dosed tank also.

I have dolomite sand in 3 tanks, one of which is non CO2, I have little issues with it and algae.

I think the biggest Achilles Heel for your tank using CO2 is the DIY yeast.
A nice gas tank and regulator system would goa logn way to helping you and the tank do much better, with far more stability.

I think people should invest the time and energy into CO2 and not worry so much about nutrients.
No one I've met or heard of has ever killed their fish or gotten algae due to nutrients, but plenty have killed their fish with CO2, or had much worse algae when they started using CO2 gas. Non CO2 tanks can be all over the place as far as nutrients and still have nice growth.

This suggest that CO2, rather than nutrient is the real risk and problem area.
It also explains why folks can have a wide range of issues with all the other dosign methods for nutrients as well.

There are much larger factors than mere nutrients alone.
Aquarist want to blame nutrients because it's often the one area that they can test, light? Not much at all. CO2? poorly at best..........even nutrient testing is rarely done well for NO3 and PO4.

While many can tweak things with nutrients alone to suit their needs/goals, they could certainly improve their horticultural skill by a better focus and tweaking of CO2 and light. As you might notice, most of what I discuss is not about EI or nutrients 😀

The discussion with EI is one mostly of trying to help folks convince themselves that there's more to algae and plant growth than just nutrients, and that it's not nearly as evil or risky as long claimed. The real risk factors are high light, impatient CO2 usage.

But many do not want to talk about this, having already made their minds up about nutrients.
If you start off with a conclusion, then go about looking for facts to support it, this is not good and not how Science operates. This leaves you wide open to make mistakes.

I've made hypothesis, tried to falsify them some, but if someone else falsifies them well......I move on and let them go, accept the falsification,. Many in the hobby however do not do this. They want to believe in their conclusion even after falsification has been demonstrated.

This is bad, does not help the hobby, not a good attitude for the hobby in general.
It is not personal, it is simply what we learn about the relationships in aquariums, nothing more.
We all make mistakes and chose how to respond to them.

Try a gas tank CO2 system if you can. DIY the parts, if you have little $$, take your time and you should be able to put together a nice system.

Regards,
Tom Barr

 

[Anonymous]

I'll replace the yeast CO2 with a gas tank, I'm just waiting/searching for a good deal.

I've tested growing around 100+ plant species in different conditions, some thrive without co2 addition some don't, most of them don't, so yes, not having co2 addition is a big issue for people who aspire more than just raising some vallis. I don't care much about algae, I've learned how to avoid them or to resolve some algae issues before they are going to be a problem, but I just don't want to wait months for plants to grow ...

Regarding EI you are right, having good nutrients levels in the water column adjusted to the biomass is a must, not for algae's sake but for good plant growth, and a nice looking aquarium.

I have a question, I hope people don't mind posting it here:

How about adding to the EI scheme some growth stimulators like Dennerle Planta Gold 7 or ADA ECA, do they improve something or they are only placebo?

Cheers,
Mike

LE: Found a deal and ordered one 🙂 .. I'll write on it "Tom made me ..." so when my missy sees it she'll now who's responsible ..

 

[ceg4048]

Hi,
EI freedom fighters (AKA EI Fan Boys) maintain the position that you do not need placebos. We live in the real world. There is nothing that you cannot do with NPK + Traces + CO2. Occasionally there are issues with shortages of Ca, Mg and so forth, primarily with those using soft water, but these are easy fixes.

Cheers,

 

[Graeme Edwards]

Here is a simple question.... If you could answer this in non science speak, then we all might understand whats going on.

If you have perfect Co2, 10x tern over, a rich substrate, good light and ideal ranges of nutrients....
Why, if you remove 30% of your plants would that give you algae?

If ever I do any plant maintenance, I always drop my dosing down, never the light or Co2. I rarely have any problems.

Its interesting that you say, adding Co2 to a tank can give you algae blooms. That's going to worry the nube. They need to know that adding Co2 to a previously established aquarium will increase the demand of the plants.

Its been said that excess nutrients do no cause algae yet this has been said -

We have large tanks at the lab and we see this all the time, we use pots to grow plants.
We remove a % of the pots and then algae blooms when it gets below a critical % of coverage, the nutrients are less, not higher.

If all perimeters are adequate, then why would this be a problem?

If you over trim, then you end up with algae/too little % plant biomass.
I think you can get more algae and worse algae if you also uproot, but even in cases where that is not done, we still see a similar relationship with plant biomass removal. I can easily trim some, a little etc, without any issues, but if you whack 50-80% of the plant biomass, and clean after, there's going to be some algae response. Algae "know" if there's not much plants there or not.

I think, what is not being spoken about clearly enough is that its not so much the fertiliser levels, ie being high and having enough for the plants - I get that. What isnt hammered to people doing EI is what is being discussed in this thread.
Again, I come back to balance.

I always try and describe how a person should look at their plants and what kind of energy they might need. An all crypt and anubias tank does not need much energy. Too much energy, i.e light, then no matter what ferts and Co2 you put in, those plants just wont and cant use it up. You then have an excess, i.e the light. You get algae, then they feed of the excess nutrients.
I tank with hygrophila will and can use more energy. This means, you can have high light, you can add as much ferts as you want/need, and you do need high levels of Co2.

What needs to be spoken about is light balance, in fact, just balance. Getting the ratio of plant species-light-co2-ferts. Thats the balance people need to grasp. And this will be individual. A tank with some fast growing plants and some slow growing plants is a nice balance.

I agree fertilisers limit plant growth and that in tern can cause algae. But I still maintain, that it is more about trying to teach people about balance and not about throwing tones of fertilisers at plants. There is a bigger picture that is getting glossed over in written articles. Its fine on a forum, but it can get missed.
We need to spell it out, tell it like it is, not with complicated language and pomposity.

Cheers.

 

[Mark Evans]

We need to spell it out, tell it like it is, not with complicated language and pomposity.

correct. Simply put, EI works

I've never had issues after heavy pruning, whilst adding full EI dosing. The only issues I have, is when I don't dose....'Savannah dreaming'

 

[GreenNeedle]

I agree with Saintly, GE and Tom on most points here.

When I had CO2 and got the circulation right I could do any amount of pruning I liked with no fear of algae. before I got the circulation right whilst still the same rate of injection I got lots of algae issues especially after a mad pruning session.

I think the problem with many people is they don't complete the jigsaw. They either are missing a few pieces to complete the picture or they have all the pieces but can't put them together . lol

As Tom says CO2 is the main key. The cause to most problems but it is often a side issue. Not that the CO2 is the problem but that either the light is too high to be able to maintain a constant good level of CO2 or that the circulation is not good enough to 'deliver' the CO2 to all corners of the tank.

These 2 should really be addressed at the beginning, the setup stage. research of other similar setups. research as to what the 'top scapers' use or do and then setup your own. The main problem with most people is that they up their lighting as soon as they go planted and then attribute the algae problems to CO2 and nutrient. Whilst technically they are right it is more a failure to deliver the CO2/nutrient needed for the level of light supplied. Whether that be too high light or poor delivery is a conundrum for the user 🙂

Similarly the assumptions listed seem to me to be attributed as a problem when they in fact are more likely with other factors:

not having a good cleaning team in your tank leads to algae

There are far too many algae free scapes that have seen zero or minor algae problems without ever having any type of 'cleaning crew' in them. In fact there are far too many examples of algae free scapes that were free of any livestock through their creation and only towards their completion were any fish added. This seems to be something I used to read quite a lot. It is beneficial of course but it address the problem not the cause. We want to eliminate the cause of algae as much as we possibly can rather than have a 'cleaning crew' that hides the problem.

sand, gravel and rocks with lime traces leads to BBA

Not sure this is to do with Lime. Many people use Aquatic Compost meant for ponds as their substrate and Aquatic compost contains Lime 😉. I sem to remember a year or 2 back discussing with JamesC that it may be hard water that has a problem with BBA.

I have always had little traces of BBA. Before I got flow right which thus improved CO2 I had lots of BBA problems. When I went non CO2 I expected it to return but it didn't. I guess in the time I used CO2 I got the rest right alongside and then when the CO2 and nutrient was abandoned and the light lowered it wasn't a problem. That goes along with the statement above regarding 'balance'. I think balance isn't such an appropriate word really because it makes people think that if there is so much of X on one side then there needs to be so much of X on the other side to maintain the balance. In reality I think the only 'balance' is to put the light on one side of the scales and then everything else needs to be on the other side. However it doesn't need to be the right amount for the scales to be level. It just means that everything else on one side of the scale needs to be equal to or greater than light on the other side. I've not used a test kit for many years. When I was hi tec I followed EI. played with it a little every now and again if I saw some problems but algae was never caused by me 'spilling' too much fert in 🙂

poor biological filtration leads to algae if you have an ammonia spike due to different reasons

Plants ARE biological filtration!!! There are lots of planted tanks with minimal or no algae without using a filter at all!!! Flow/Circulation definately needed but this can be supplied by a circulation pump with no need for a filter. As long as the 'input' is correct (enough ferts added, enough CO2 added) and the circulation is adequate then you shouldn't have problems. In the main we do use filters for a few reasons. 1 - Some people would rather use a filter than have a pump in their tank. 2 - It is a back up in case of problems. 3 - It provides a reassurance for anyone who doubts their plants ability to safeguard their fishies 🙂

laziness leads to algae

I think you should be saying 'laziness at the setting up stage leads to algae'. I would say that as long as you get the system right at the beginning then you should be OK. Be lazy in the setup then you get problems until you sort them out. At the time of writing this my tank has had no water changes for 10 months. No substrate cleaning. The filter is cleaned every 2 months and other than throwing some fish food in that is the extent of my work 🙂

So I clean the filter every 2 months and then do nothing other than sit watching!!!

Even when I was CO2 I dosed macro and micro on the same day in the morning and then walked away!!!

The key to success is the setup. Get it right at the beginning and there are few or no issues from there on. Get it wrong and the fight is on. Once you get into a fight it can be very frustrating and more than a few have been lost to the hobby because of it.

Think of it this way: It is always better to talk and reason than have a fight. If you talk and reason the other guy may back down and it is a win win situation. If you fight then you can lose and take a battering. Even if you win you more likely than not have taken a fair amount of punishment. Thorough research, planning and care in your work at the beginning will nearly always mean that you can sit back and relax rather than have to solve equations.

I always try and describe how a person should look at their plants and what kind of energy they might need. An all crypt and anubias tank does not need much energy. Too much energy, i.e light, then no matter what ferts and Co2 you put in, those plants just wont and cant use it up. You then have an excess, i.e the light. You get algae, then they feed of the excess nutrients.
I tank with hygrophila will and can use more energy. This means, you can have high light, you can add as much ferts as you want/need, and you do need high levels of Co2.

I know what you are trying to put across here but I'm not overly sure I agree. I agree that a Crypt/Anubias setup doesn'tNEED as much energy as a faster growing setup BUT I don't agree that too much energy means algae due to excess light. I think you marry the nutrient and CO2 to the light level and then it shouldn't matter which plants are in there!!!. I think its more a case with light that different plants have a 'maximum' need and they grow to their full once this maximum is reached. Thats not to say if you only have plants that can take no more than (example) 1WPG that putting them under 2WPG is going to mean algae due to excess light. Maybe I'm misunderstanding the statement. lol

AC

 

[Anonymous]

There are far too many algae free scapes that have seen zero or minor algae problems without ever having any type of 'cleaning crew' in them.

Yes they are plenty scapes without algae problems and no fauna for sure. What I'm trying to say is that minor problems can be addressed with algae cleaners, that kind of problems that are annoying when you want to take a good photo.

Not sure this is to do with Lime. Many people use Aquatic Compost meant for ponds as their substrate and Aquatic compost contains Lime

This I can always prove 🙂.

Plants ARE biological filtration!!!

They are until you forgot fertilizing and they are decaying, what about than? I've seen this kind of failure way too many times.

There are lots of planted tanks with minimal or no algae without using a filter at all!!!

The same thing I can say about Italian cars, there are Italian cars that are working for years with minor maintenance or no maintenance at all, are they all like this? For sure no and for sure the percent of "ideal Italian cars" is around 0.000001% 😛.

I think you should be saying 'laziness at the setting up stage leads to algae'

That's not laziness that's rush 🙂 ... laziness comes when you have a good high tech aquarium that works fine, you've taken the final picture and after that you forgot about fertilizing and maintenance.

I don't want to turn this topic into a algae topic, 'cause it's about EI, but I want to make a final statement regarding this "issue" ...

... that's like a perfect fishing day around a lake, when you are sitting back and relax enjoying the sun and a good catch until that annoying kinds make their appearance with their splashing and screaming and playing and you have to decide to take your gear and start fishing elsewhere, smack the kids but beware of their angry parents or play with them and show them what fishing it's all about ... but ... you always forgot that your bait it's in the middle of the lake and this annoying kids are not doing any harm any of your fishing but only your tranquility, just put your headsets on and relax ... algae is just a part of your ecosystem.

Cheers,
Mike.

 

[Mark Evans]

you always forgot that your bait it's in the middle of the lake and this annoying kids are not doing any harm any of your fishing but only your tranquility,

true! Many fish, especially carp are greedy.

I used to do a lot of match fishing, did well to. I was once in a match and lost the top 3 kit off my £2000 pole...not impressed. The carp (which I landed) took off like a bolt of lighting, at one point in the motion I straightened the whole pole (something you shouldn't do) and the top kit came flying off.

the carp went into the reeds. I waded in to get it (could see it bobbing like a float) I went right into the reeds up to my chest, grabbed the section and landed the fish (lucky git eh? ) I thought my chances were over of winning, but within 5 minutes of fishing in the place where I was wading, I ended up catching another 130lb of fish and won the match 😀 I'd obviously stirred up the silt to produce more natural food for the fish.

oooops...off topic