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

Maq's low-tech troubles

Hi Maq great idea having all those small tanks for testing. I have to get a similar set up going soon.
Im sure your crypts would produce better growth with a soil substrate.
I’ve been growing all my plants in pots lately and the higher soil/clay to sand mixes are producing better growth for longer.
E878CE6D-7856-45CD-9286-E8457AD145E8.jpeg
 
Hufsa said:
its not unlikely to me they needed more time to catch up to speed.
Click to expand...
I guess you're very correct.
Hufsa said:
Sometimes I have thought that the length of some of your experiments is not long enough to account for the relative slowness of a low tech system.
Click to expand...
I agree. There are three things that make me doing short experiments in Micurins:
(1) I'm hungry for knowledge, impatient. There's so many things I'd like to test and elucidate, and I've got only one (poor) Maq and four tanks of which one is usually 'Control'.
(2) Some species get overgrown pretty quickly and shade the others. I'd have to choose only slow growers. But then again, see point (1).
(3) For medium-term experiments, my Portugals are designed. The very tanks we discuss within this thread. So, I think I'll do as you suggest: Make one of the tanks (probably Branco) more mineralized/fertilized. Last time I've measured 102 µS/cm conductivity, that's about 50-60 TDS. Not exactly 'hard' water, still the hardest of them all.:lol:
Well, I speak about hardness, but to keep my beloved ratios, when I dose more N & P, I must add K, and therefore I must add Mg & Ca as well. In short, adding nutrients in the narrow sense means increasing total mineralization.
Yes, I'll give it a try. (Also curious what my Ammannias would say, that's another disaster of mine.)
 
_Maq_ said:
My permanent problem looks differently. They don't melt, they grow, but they create smaller and smaller leaves. In the end, they get so small that you could not see them without knowing that they are indeed there.
Click to expand...

Hufsa said:
That suggests watercolumn to me 🤔
Click to expand...

I am actually with Hufsa on this point. Plants try to adapt to the conditions they find themselves in. Growing tiny leaves suggest a macronutrient shortage (N, P, K and C) whether due to insufficient dosage or the plants unable to access them for some reason.

I suspect that the 'small leaves' problem is not only affecting your Crypts and Buces. Would it be right to say that your L. Pantanal, L.Senegelansis and A.Pedicatella are also "smaller" than what is observed in other hobbyists' tanks? (from your other thread, the A. Pedicatella was so small that it made the Rotala Orange juice look like a monster plant).

If increasing macronutrient (NPK) dosing doesn't work, then the other possibility would be a C shortage due to non-optimal circulation of CO2 to the substrate level
 
erwin123 said:
I suspect that the 'small leaves' problem is not only affecting your Crypts and Buces. Would it be right to say that your L. Pantanal, L.Senegelansis and A.Pedicatella are also "smaller" than what is observed in other hobbyists' tanks? (from your other thread, the A. Pedicatella was so small that it made the Rotala Orange juice look like a monster plant).
Click to expand...
Thats a great point.
Its conspicuous how "well formed" those plants are, they are just really small compared to what is expected.
Which makes me wonder about expertly balanced nutrition that is simply a bit too ... lean 🤭
Not really seeing any obvious deformity or abnormality of the growth, but the scale of them is unusual.

erwin123 said:
If increasing macronutrient (NPK) dosing doesn't work, then the other possibility would be a C shortage due to non-optimal circulation of CO2 to the substrate level
Click to expand...
This ☝️
 
Last edited:
_Maq_ said:
A possibility. Crypts are supposed to get much nutrients through their roots. What if the crust hinders penetration of nutrients into the deep and crypts build their beautiful root system largely in vain?
Click to expand...
There is definitely uncertainty here. Tom Barr doesn't seem to think that the roots are essential for functioning and that their primary function in aquatic plants is to anchor. However, he has always noted that it's best to feed in both substrate and water column.

I guess this could be pretty easily tested with root tabs? They can usually be picked up cheaply too.
 
Last edited:
erwin123 said:
Would it be right to say that your L. Pantanal, L.Senegelansis and A.Pedicatella are also "smaller" than what is observed in other hobbyists' tanks? (from your other thread, the A. Pedicatella was so small that it made the Rotala Orange juice look like a monster plant).
Click to expand...
Give me a couple of days, I'll post some pics. Ammannia is an exception, what you've seen were side-shoots taken from stunted plants. A. pedicellata Gold simply does not grow for me, but this problem is specific. Other stem plants aren't deformed, but may well be smaller, less robust compared to hi-tech tanks. I think it's inevitable and no source of inconvenience to me.
But then, we're talking about Crypts! Beginners' plants decades before anyone built first hi-tech facility.
Hufsa said:
Which makes me wonder about expertly balanced nutrition that is simply a bit too ... lean
Click to expand...
There's no way but to try - expertly balanced nutrition which is a bit richer.
xZaiox said:
I guess this could be pretty easily tested with root tabs?
Click to expand...
I'm hesitant to use them. Firstly, I like to (think that I'm) in full control over nutrients' load. Root tabs will end it. Secondly, I'm of the opinion that nutrients travel where their heart is no matter what. I mean, those which adsorb at detritus and iron compounds, always remain in substrate. And those which do not adsorb, spread indiscriminately both in the substrate and water column.
Yes, in general, I should not guess but rather properly test everything, one after another. ... If only I could live that long...:lol:
 
Speaking of which, this is the current mineralization of Branco:
1682360022384.png

What are your thoughts, suggestions?
 
_Maq_ said:
Speaking of which, this is the current mineralization of Branco:
View attachment 204468

What are your thoughts, suggestions?
Click to expand...
Could you raise NO3 up to something like 5 ppm, and bring the rest of your nutrients/minerals up in the ratios you prefer to match that?
I think that would be a good starting point for a low tech tank.
Thats not exactly high by our standards, but it might be high by Maq-standards? 😁
If not already "uber rich by Maq standards" then 10 ppm (proxy) would be another reasonable target. That is what my quarantine tank (low tech) is currently getting (based on actual water volume).
There is no reason it has to be raised up to this level all at once though, you could take several weeks/months to ramp it up, depending on your patience.
 
_Maq_ said:
What are your thoughts, suggestions?
Click to expand...
I think the idea by @NOWIS to put 1 of the crypts in a pot is ingenious, if the soil was capped with gravel there shouldn't be too much of a nutrient leach, so maq can still control the overall water parameters. I would also add another crypt into a pot with plain old gravel and compare how the plants in each pot perform compared to the sand.

If nothing else the gravel alone test would rule in, or rule out the sand being the problem, and the soil test with richer nutrients would give a direct comparison to the inert gravel with regards to nutrients being the issue.
 
John q said:
I think the idea by @NOWIS to put 1 of the crypts in a pot is ingenious,
Click to expand...
Agreed.


Hufsa said:
In other words, could they be losing the competition for nutrients with all the other plants? Stem plants grow a lot faster. So they might uptake nutrients faster as well, or?
Click to expand...
Along those lines... did anyone ever hear about Crypts struggling due to being planted near certain other plants sp. or even other sp. of crypts? ... I've been searching for posts here by informed people making that claim. Anyway, might be an old wives' tale...


Witcher said:
Maybe they are getting old, who knows 😉
Click to expand...

Secondly, inspired by @Witcher thought... Could it be possible that the Crypts that are struggling are just a bad stock or strain? Anyone who owns a planted garden know the experience of planting flowers etc. where some are just not doing well and same flowers sp. just adjacent are doing great... My own experience with crypts certainly resembles that experience to some extent.

In general, crypts are supposedly "undemanding" except that they don't like "change".... which could be replanting, inconsistent availability of nutrients, inconsistent water parameters, light etc. Well, this makes them sound kind of fuzzy actually when I think about 😉

Cheers,
Michael
 
Last edited:
Hufsa said:
Could you raise NO3 up to something like 5 ppm,
Click to expand...
Did you notice that currently I dose 3.5 ppm? Half nitrates, half ammonium.
What if I increase 'both' nitrogens three times? 5.2 ppm NO3 plus 1.5 ammonium?

1682409191639.png
 
Last edited:
_Maq_ said:
Did you notice that currently I dose 3.5 ppm? Half nitrates, half ammonium.
Click to expand...
Ohh I did not account for the ammonium, my bad. Your way of presenting the dosing is a bit different to what is usual 😄

Then I would definitely go higher, to something like 10 ppm "if expressed as NO3" (2.25 N), so in total from whatever division of sources you like.
 
When I disassembled my tank, I added a bunch of plants that I didn't know if I would use or not to an improvised tank with inert rough sand from the previous tank.

This improvised tank just stayed there, without dedicated light, nor ferts or water changes. Some of the plants I used, others I gave away, some of them melted and a few just stayed there. Months later, when the water was almost all gone due to evaporation, I saw a small shrunk crypto and rescued it, moving it to a plant nursery / fish quarantine where conditions are much more favorable. It has been there for a couple of months now, but it is still pretty small, not a single larger leaf has sprouted. It looks healthy otherwise.

Maybe when these plants enter this radical nutrients saving mode, they can't snap out of it that easily.
 
I find that bucephalandra grow fine planted in fine sand without co2 in my tank. They root quite vigorously as well. I use a high level of calcium and magnesium (GH 6)
 

Attachments

  • IMG_20230425_214606.jpg
    IMG_20230425_214606.jpg
    4.3 MB · Views: 108
  • IMG_20230425_214946.jpg
    IMG_20230425_214946.jpg
    3 MB · Views: 138
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top