Lean dosing pros and cons

[erwin123]

I’m gonna throw in a little challenge here, if you’ll forgive me, and apologies for being controversial. 😊

I have no doubt this method would work, I feel the need, however, to highlight that it might not be best for all or at least to add a word of caution.

Best method for experienced and knowledgeable hobbyists, maybe.

Happi’s methods are what I would call ‘next level’ ferts.
EI is prescriptive and therefore simple -and it is fairly effective.
Dosing whatever it says on the bottle is also simple but possibly less effective.
Lean Dosing (or just dosing enough) is not simple but can be effective if properly implemented by knowledgable hobbyists.

"Lean dosing" does not necessarily mean going the DIY route. If you use Tropica all-in-one Fert at the manufacturer's recommended dose, you are lean dosing already - so thats the simplest way to do lean dosing.😅

My Lean(er) dosing experiment was conducted with APT EI. I started with the manufacturer recommendation at 2.5ml/day. Then I acquired some A. Pedicatella which stunted at that dosing level. I then slowly reduced the daily dose.

I switched to 2.3ml/day for 1 week, then 2.1ml/day for week, then 1.9ml/day for 1 week (and took a photograph every week for my reference) and eventually ended up with 0.9ml/day.

Some plants clearly preferred the richer 2.5ml/day (S. Macrocaulon and L. Pantanal)
A. Pedicatella prefers 0.9ml/day
The other plants don't really care.

 

[Hanuman]

Of cource I do, otherwise why would I use it to begin with? Just apply that number to whatever fertilizer % you are trying to convert into ppm and it will work everytime. That's why I said go do the homework by using Miller microplex or any other fertilizer and see if you get the correct ppm and compare it with calculator like rotalabutterfly.com and you will get your answer.

So what is 1.603? I am interested as well. Is that a factor? and how is it calculated? Could be very simple but I guess my brain is refusing to behave properly this morning. Been under quarantine for 2 weeks now and still got a week to go.

 

[Happi]

Millers Microplex ? This one. Do you recommend switching to this one for the lean-regime?

As for @Wookii 's homework here it goes:

As the label suggest, If you target 0.4 ppm of Fe

Mg 0.54 ppm
Cu 0.15 ppm
Mo 0.01 ppm
B 0.05 ppm
Mn 0.4 ppm
Zn 0.15 ppm
Co 0.005 ppm

It beats me as well where the 1.603 comes from...

Cheers,
Michael

no I do not recommend this fertilizer especially if you have shrimps.

far as how I got to 1.603, lets pretend I don't know how I got there but manage to crack the code at the same time. here's how I calculate my other work far as making my own micros if you are interested, its rather a simple straightforward formula that I shared there : Custom EDTA/DTPA Trace/Fe Recipe

now lets take a look at https://www.millerchemical.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Microplex-Huber-Logo-Specimen.pdf

Microplex Miller
GUARANTEED ANALYSIS
Iron (Fe) 4.0 %
Manganese (Mn) 4.0 %
Mg 5.43%
Boron (B) 0.5%
Cobalt (Co) 0.05%
Copper (Cu) 1.5 %
Molybdenum (Mo) 0.1 %
Zinc (Zn) 1.5 %

starting with Fe:
Fe 4.0% / 1.603 = 2.495
2.495 / 0.4 = 6.238
2.495/6.238 = 0.399

Zn 1.5% / 1.603 = 0.9357
0.9357/6.238= 0.15

B 0.5% / 1.603 = 0.312
0.312/6.238 = 0.05

Mo 0.1% / 1.603 = 0.06238
0.06238/6.238 = 0.01

Now lets compare this to rotala butterfly calculator:

Fe 0.4
Mn 0.4
Mg 0.54
Zn 0.14
Mo 0.01
B 0.05
Co 0.01
Cu 0.15

you can use that 1.603 code with any fertilizer

 

[Happi]

"Lean dosing" does not necessarily mean going the DIY route. If you use Tropica all-in-one Fert at the manufacturer's recommended dose, you are lean dosing already - so thats the simplest way to do lean dosing.😅

This is exactly what people need to understand. DIY is not for everyone if it's too much hassle, even though I strongly recommend it.

 

[Wookii]

It's interesting that you just told me I don't know how I derived that number

I didn’t, I ‘asked’ you, and originally ‘asked’ you how you derived it - something you still haven’t explained?

It's rather a simple math

Then explain it? I don’t understand why you’re making such a big deal about it? This thread, indeed this forum, is about sharing knowledge and experience, you have shared a lot of useful stuff already, so I don’t quite understand why you are being so precious and aloof about explaining a simple calculation?

Thanks for the compliment as well.

Which one? 🤷🏻‍♂️

 

[Hanuman]

@Wookii

 

[John q]

I don’t understand why you’re making such a big deal about it?

 

[Wookii]

you can use that 1.603 code with any fertilizer

OK @Happi, I've done my 'homework', and put a bit of time and effort into this, took it back to 'first principles', and the magic number of 1.603, it is in fact . . . . drum roll . . . . complete and utter . . .



In fact, I think the magic number should actually be 1.2345!! Lets try it . .

Microplex Miller
GUARANTEED ANALYSIS
Iron (Fe) 4.0 %
Manganese (Mn) 4.0 %
Mg 5.43%
Boron (B) 0.5%
Cobalt (Co) 0.05%
Copper (Cu) 1.5 %
Molybdenum (Mo) 0.1 %
Zinc (Zn) 1.5 %

Starting with Fe:
Fe 4.0% / 1.2345 = 3.240
3.2402 / 0.4 = 8.100
3.240 / 8.10 = 0.40 ppm

Zn 1.5% / 1.2345 = 1.215
1.215 / 8.100 = 0.15 ppm

B 0.5% / 1.2345 = 0.405
0.405 / 8.100 = 0.05 ppm

Mo 0.1% / 1.2345 = 0.081
0.0815 / 8.100 = 0.01 ppm

How am I doing? . . . . . Actually, you know what - I think I got the magic number wrong. I think it should actually have been 67.89!! Lets try it . . .

Starting with Fe:
Fe 4.0% / 67.89 = 0.0589
0.0589 / 0.4 = 0.1473
0.0589 / 0.1473 = 0.40 ppm

Zn 1.5% / 67.89 = 0.022
0.022 / 0.1473 = 0.15 ppm

B 0.5% / 67.89 = 0.007
0.007 / 0.1473 = 0.05 ppm

Mo 0.1% / 67.89 = 0.0015
0.0015 / 0.1473 = 0.01 ppm

Truth is the 'magic number' is as pointless as most of the extraneous calculations - all we are doing is normalising the relative ppm's of all the other elements to a random target Fe ppm using a scale factor - there can't be any 'real' ppm because we're stating neither the mix nor dose volumes. So the easy way to do the calculation, stripping out all the gumpf is:

Fe % / Target Fe ppm = Scale factor . . Then (Mineral)% / Scale factor = Relative ppm . . .

So one last time, doing it properly:

Starting with Fe:
Fe 4.0% / 0.4 = 10 (Scale factor)

Target ppm for Fe is already set at 0.4ppm - no need to calculate in a circle again. Therefore:

Zn 1.5% / 10 = 0.15 ppm
B 0.5% / 10 = 0.05 ppm
Mo 0.1% /10 = 0.01 ppm

Trying it for the APFUK micro mix:

Fe 8.2% (EDTA Chelated)
Mn 1.82% (EDTA Chelated)
Zn 1.16% (EDTA Chelated)
B 1.05%
Cu 0.23% (EDTA Chelated)
Mo 0.15%

Starting with Fe - target ppm = 0.1ppm:

Fe 8.2% / 0.1 = 82 (Scale factor)

Target ppm for Fe is already set at 0.1ppm - no need to calculate again. Therefore:

Zn 1.16% / 82 = 0.01415 ppm
Mn 1.82% / 82 = 0.02220 ppm
B 1.0% / 82 = 0.01220 ppm
Cu 0.23% / 82 = 0.00280 ppm
Mo 0.15% /82 = 0.00183 ppm

What do I win? 😀

 

[John q]

What do I win? 😀

Expulsion from the magic circle.
"indocilis privata loqui"

 

[Happi]

@Wookii​

am glad you put some effort into it and got it figured out. see it wasn't that complicated and it was just a simple math. and no "1.603" isn't a magic number, you can actually use any numbers, long as you calculate with the same formula. there are many way to do this weather you add 2+2 = 4, 1+3= 4, it will give you the same answer.

so how does these formula help others?
if someone is relying on Guaranteed Analysis and say they want to shoot the target of 0.1 ppm Fe based on the Guaranteed Analysis, this will help them get there, they can break down rest of the numbers once they get the Fe number going.

again am happy to see that you were able to use the given formula while using different numbers to get the same answer. I salute your effort.

 

[swyftfeet]

OOH I KNOW! RAISES HAND!

in Faraday constant: F = eNA electron charge e = 1.603 x10^-19 coulombs!

what do I win? and why is it important???

 

[MichaelJ]

OK @Happi, I've done my 'homework', and put a bit of time and effort into this, took it back to 'first principles', and the magic number of 1.603, it is in fact . . . . drum roll . . . . complete and utter . . .



In fact, I think the magic number should actually be 1.2345!! Lets try it . .

Microplex Miller
GUARANTEED ANALYSIS
Iron (Fe) 4.0 %
Manganese (Mn) 4.0 %
Mg 5.43%
Boron (B) 0.5%
Cobalt (Co) 0.05%
Copper (Cu) 1.5 %
Molybdenum (Mo) 0.1 %
Zinc (Zn) 1.5 %

Starting with Fe:
Fe 4.0% / 1.2345 = 3.240
3.2402 / 0.4 = 8.100
3.240 / 8.10 = 0.40 ppm

Zn 1.5% / 1.2345 = 1.215
1.215 / 8.100 = 0.15 ppm

B 0.5% / 1.2345 = 0.405
0.405 / 8.100 = 0.05 ppm

Mo 0.1% / 1.2345 = 0.081
0.0815 / 8.100 = 0.01 ppm

How am I doing? . . . . . Actually, you know what - I think I got the magic number wrong. I think it should actually have been 67.89!! Lets try it . . .

Starting with Fe:
Fe 4.0% / 67.89 = 0.0589
0.0589 / 0.4 = 0.1473
0.0589 / 0.1473 = 0.40 ppm

Zn 1.5% / 67.89 = 0.022
0.022 / 0.1473 = 0.15 ppm

B 0.5% / 67.89 = 0.007
0.007 / 0.1473 = 0.05 ppm

Mo 0.1% / 67.89 = 0.0015
0.0015 / 0.1473 = 0.01 ppm

Truth is the 'magic number' is as pointless as most of the extraneous calculations - all we are doing is normalising the relative ppm's of all the other elements to a random target Fe ppm using a scale factor - there can't be any 'real' ppm because we're stating neither the mix nor dose volumes. So the easy way to do the calculation, stripping out all the gumpf is:

Fe % / Target Fe ppm = Scale factor . . Then (Mineral)% / Scale factor = Relative ppm . . .

So one last time, doing it properly:

Starting with Fe:
Fe 4.0% / 0.4 = 10 (Scale factor)

Target ppm for Fe is already set at 0.4ppm - no need to calculate in a circle again. Therefore:

Zn 1.5% / 10 = 0.15 ppm
B 0.5% / 10 = 0.05 ppm
Mo 0.1% /10 = 0.01 ppm

Trying it for the APFUK micro mix:


Starting with Fe - target ppm = 0.1ppm:

Fe 8.2% / 0.1 = 82 (Scale factor)

Target ppm for Fe is already set at 0.1ppm - no need to calculate again. Therefore:

Zn 1.16% / 82 = 0.01415 ppm
Mn 1.82% / 82 = 0.02220 ppm
B 1.0% / 82 = 0.01220 ppm
Cu 0.23% / 82 = 0.00280 ppm
Mo 0.15% /82 = 0.00183 ppm

What do I win? 😀

Hi @Wookii Let's not take the mocking too far - not necessary. There is obviously no significance to the constant in the calculations above - as a matter of fact its superfluous like dividing or multiplying by 1. For any fixed amount of one of the elements its trivial to calculate the proportional amount you get from the other elements if their content are known. otherElementPct / (targetElementPct / targetElementPPM) = otherElementPPM

Cheers,
Michael

 

[swyftfeet]

Hi @Wookii Let's not take the mocking too far. There is obviously no significance to the constant in the calculations above - as a matter of fact its superfluous like dividing or multiplying by 1. For any fixed amount of one of the elements its trivial to calculate the proportional amount you get from the other elements if their content is known. otherElementPct / (targetElementPct / targetElementPPM) = otherElementPPM

Cheers,
Michael

in all seriousness, I think its in good fun, I think I would pay several thousand bucks (actual cost of flight, cab and hotel) just to be in the same pub as all these guys for an evening. I think the conversation would devolve into such bantering in a roughly calculated 42 minutes.

Im guessing @Happi is a chemist, physicist or electrical engineer who like 1.603 because reasons, I'm gathering he needed a constant and it won the lotto.

 

[MichaelJ]

OOH I KNOW! RAISES HAND!

in Faraday constant: F = eNA electron charge e = 1.603 x10^-19 coulombs!

what do I win? and why is it important???

At some point I thought about the golden ratio actually (1 + sqrt(5)) / 2 ~= 1.618... which is no joke! The golden ratio shows up in nature and biology all the time at various scales. Often when least expected.

Anyway, lets get back to talking about lean dosing.

Cheers,
Michael

 

[Wookii]

OOH I KNOW! RAISES HAND!

in Faraday constant: F = eNA electron charge e = 1.603 x10^-19 coulombs!

what do I win? and why is it important???

You get to be in “charge”! 😝

Hi @Wookii Let's not take the mocking too far - not necessary.

It’s all in good spirit @MichaelJ 😉

 

[KirstyF]

I feel you but then you have very often noobs adding 200/300 PAR of light with a green DC and wondering what's going wrong.... or adding ferts once a week, or changing water every 2/3 weeks. The CO2 advice is not just something you do and that's it. It requires adjustment of other parameters sometimes. People have a lot of expectations and hope things will work right out of the box just because they wish so. Ain't happening.

You’re absolutely right and learning all that stuff is part of the journey. You can mess with your ferts and your flow and ur light and ur biomass and worst case, you’ll get some algae and kill some plants and learn something along the way. Running high Co2, however, can be a whole lot more dangerous in inexperienced hands.

I think so long as we all remember that that box is in fact Pandora’s box and don’t get complacent, we’re all good! 😊

Or alternatively just run a plant only tank and blast that sucker with as much Co2 as you like. 😂

 

[MichaelJ]

It’s all in good spirit @MichaelJ 😉

Hi @Wookii I understand. Unfortunately, as we all know, all too often this media just doesn't lend itself well to irony and the implied spirit of a message. Even less so when interacting with people from different cultures, language backgrounds etc.

Cheers,
Michael

 

[KirstyF]

As for the rest of the thread since my earlier post, I’m voting for the golden ratio…mostly cos I have no idea what the Faraday thingy whatsit is……and P.S…..this thread is way better than watching evening TV you know. 😂

 

[Happi]

@KirstyF​

sorry I didn't get a chance to respond to some of your question about lean approach. but you do not need to go DIY to get there, but DIY gives you better overall control. now look at what we have discussed so far in this thread, we talked about the nutrients levels in the water in nature where most plant are originated from, we looked at Ratio, type of nutrients present in those water. we combined data from nature and those who have done real experiment, we combined what I have to offer and you can use this information for your reference and build your own dosing based on it and be more successful.

 

[medlight]

As the colleague commented, starting from adding 0.1 Fe of this contributing compound:
Zn 0.014146
Mn 0.022195
Bo 0.012805
Cu 0.002805
Mo 0.001829