I thought I share it here as well so people of this forum can benefit from it as well,
It’s great to see someone like @Marcel who has been conducting scientific experiments for a very long time. I highly appreciate the knowledge, research and the skills you have accumulated over the years. Most hobbyists, including myself, rely on observation due to our limitation with scientific tools. While observation can be useful, it doesn’t always answer all the questions. When you put the observation and scientific data together, you can get better answers.
For example, I have been growing so-called difficult plants for over 10+ years or even longer, including the ones listed below, except for Ammannia. The list of challenging plants is very long, but I will focus on Pogostemon deccanensis, Rotala wallichii, and Ammannia pedicellata 'Golden'. I agree that Ammannia pedicellata 'Golden' and other species from this family are difficult and challenging to grow. However, in my experiments, I found that if you can successfully grow any plant from this family, you are one step closer to growing most of them from that family.
I am always doing some sort of experiment whenever I have free time. When I was ready and felt more confident about whatever I had gathered from my experiments, I tested my hypothesis by selecting some members from various forums and social media. I greatly appreciate the contributions from the community. For instance, @plantnoobdude was struggling with some of these plants when we met, and we tested one of my hypotheses together. The results can be seen in his tank journal, where most of these plants were growing well under the same conditions. Despite previously having unlimited nutrients and the correct chelate (Fe EDTA for his pH, adding up to 1 ppm Fe), he had struggled. We purposely selected some of the most difficult plants that people normally fail with or are known to fail with and put them under the same settings/setup. In some scenarios, we even implemented Marcel and Maq’s findings, a kind of Mix/Hybrid. We had some members @macek.g who also tried similar recipes with some modifications by choosing different chemicals and the outcome was very similar.
Sometimes, minor factors that may seem insignificant can have a significant impact on plant growth. For example, something as simple as adding 0.5 ppm N from urea or 0.04 ppm Mn can make a big difference. In another case with @Hufsa, we conducted similar experiments, and the Fe/Mn ratios made a notable difference. Her water parameters were quite different from @Plantnoobdude’s, and consequently, the results differed as well. The same hypothesis did not fully work for @Hufsa as it did for @plantnoobdude or Me. @Hufsa was no longer active on that forum/thread, so there were no further updates. Other than the Fe/Mn Ratio, one of my hypothesis was that since Mn can block Potassium to some extent, the good results in her case could have been due to potassium being blocked to some degree and letting the Fe/Mn/Mg work properly in the leaves. This was just my hypothesis and should be taken with a grain of salt.
@KirstyF, another member of the forum, conducted experiments with iron (Fe) and observed significant differences when using different chelates (such as EDTA, DTPA, etc.) and non-chelate forms (like Fe Gluconate). Despite meeting the pH requirements with DTPA, she found that Fe Gluconate worked better for her plants, even though it did not meet the pH requirements as well. The plants thrived under Fe Gluconate, and Fe deficiency was corrected, whereas they did not perform as well under DTPA. Several other members, not listed here, have also conducted similar experiments and reported comparable results. Was this the result of easily available Fe in case of @KirstyF ? Could be and most likely but how do you explain the same good results by me and @plantnoobdude who used DTPA Fe only? And how do you explain @plantnoobdude struggle with EDTA Fe and Fe related deficiency symptoms while using 1 ppm Fe, even though he met that PH requirement for EDTA Fe? How would you explain @Husfa Results who simply changed the Fe/Mn ratios?
As you can see, each case was unique. However, in the cases of @plantnoobdude and me, our results were similar due to our comparable water parameters, dosing methods, and other factors. On the other hand, @plantnoobdude achieved better results in some cases, which I believe was likely due to his choice of inert sand. This choice may have promoted better or different types of bacteria growth, as similar to what @Sudipta has explained in some of his posts. While my belief is totally based on my hypothesis and I could be incorrect, it is the best explanation that I have been able to formulate. Even though these experiments are not related to @Sudipta in any way or form but I appreciate @Sudipta for using his skills and knowledge to explore sediment and bacteria. We truly needed someone to investigate this area and share their findings, as this kind of expertise is lacking in the hobby. sometime In the future, I would like to combine @Sudipta’s finding into some of my experiments.
Most hobbyists are now returning to lean dosing combined with rich substrates. Some people are switching over to Urea/NH4 dosing in some way or another, weather in liquid form or in the substrate. But These approaches were standard for many decades but had fallen out of favor as hobbyists explored other methods. One of these systems, were highly promoted by Takashi Amano and is well-known for its effectiveness. Furthermore, several brands added Urea/NH4 in their fertilizers for decade now, including ADA. Additionally, many hobbyists are revisiting the Diana Walstad system (organics/NH4), which reminds me of what @Sudipta is currently working on. While there are similarities, we may gain further insights into bacteria and other important factors from @Sudipta’s research, primarily about the substrate and bacteria. Urea/NH4 dosing has been my standard for decade because I was fully aware of its effectiveness, when properly implemented into liquid dosing, you may never have to change your soil/substrate, especially if its Clay/ADA based or high in CEC, most of these soils will attract the NH4+ and constantly recharge the soil.
I have used Urea for over a decade now, incorporating it into my high dosing regimen (even exceeding EI levels) during that time, and the results have been flawless for many difficult species, including those listed above. However, Ammannia pedicellata 'Golden', for example, never properly thrived under this dosing method. I began exploring other options, including Chelated, non-chelated micros/Fe, Macros, different kinds of chemicals etc. but Ammannia pedicellata 'Golden' still did not achieve the results I was seeking. Then I met Marcel, and I’m grateful I did. Marcel has been an excellent mentor to me ever since. Marcel shared some recipes with me which were based on Marschner's Mineral Nutrition of Higher Plants and I put the hypothesis to test, He already confirmed that it worked for him, the results can be seen on his website. It also worked for me, even Ammannia pedicellata 'Golden' grew great, but I combined this experiment with my old aqua soil during that time (no Fe deficiency). When I combined it with Silicia sand, the results were similar with some minor issues, the most common one appeared to be Fe deficiency related. My hypotheses were that this could be related to potassium because in this experiment K was much higher than Ca/Mg and may have had played some roles, since I was using Silicia sand, K has nowhere to go other than stay in the water, unlike in the previous setup where the aqua soil would have absorbed it. A few years later I met Maq and he was highly focused on the Ca/Mg/K ratios, I used the same setup/setting from the previous experiment and implemented it with Maq’s Ca/Mg/K ratio and Fe deficiency disappeared in Silica sand. The hypothesis was that Ca/Mg/K ratio likely made the differences, at least we could possibly say that the Fe deficiency was not really an Fe deficiency, but it was rather Mg deficiency caused by Excess/blocked by potassium. Some may argue that they add lot of potassium without issues, but they are either adding lot of Ca/Mg or either are adding lot of Micro/Fe to bring things in balance, or they use soils that are rich in CEC. I would also argue that I added lot of potassium too in my excess dosed tank with Urea 10+ years ago with great results, But that is not the point.
After conducting several experiments, I was able to grow Ammannia pedicellata 'Golden' and most of the plants from its family. Although I haven’t achieved the perfect growth, I am also working with it in inert silica sand, which presents an even greater challenge. In Aquasoil or acidic soil, this plant is relatively easy to grow; I had success with it using my recipes while using acidic soil. The same recipes were used by @plantnoobdude when he was using aquasoil, and these can be found in his journal.
I was able to grow these plants under both lean and high dosing regimes, using either chelated or non-chelated nutrients. However, it became clear that several factors influenced the results. The most significant factor appeared to be pH, along with the acidity of the water/soil, nutrient ratios, and the chemical composition of the nutrients. Particularly, altering the ratios and chemical composition of the nutrients alone led to varying responses from the plant. For example, @plantnoobdude used the exact same recipes under similar parameters, yet he achieved far superior results compared to mine. One hypothesis was that he used a different type of inert sand, which may have been accumulating detritus over time and allowing it to penetrate deeper into the substrate. In contrast, detritus in my setup tended to settle on the surface and did not reach deep into the substrate and I would suction them out.
Some may argue that Ammannia pedicellata 'Golden' only thrives in low KH, acidic water/soil, and with lean dosing. While this holds true for many plants, it's not overly complicated; most plants generally do well in acidic conditions. There is a common belief that Ammannia pedicellata 'Golden' only flourishes with lean dosing and not in high dosing and that it requires a rich substrate. However, this perspective doesn't fully capture the underlying reasons. The critical factors such as nutrient ratios and the chemical composition of the nutrients are usually ignored, when in fact they play crucial roles. For instance, dosing 5-10 ppm N from "Tropica Specialised Nutrition" typically will not cause Ammannia pedicellata 'Golden' to stunt. You can test this yourself. On the other hand, using simple salts like KNO3 to achieve the same 5-10 ppm N can present issues. KNO3 not only introduces a significant amount of NO3 but also a considerable amount of potassium, which can disrupt the nutrient ratios. Many people counteract this by lowering their KNO3 dosage (i.e., dosing lean), which helps mitigate these negative effects. When nutrient ratios are further reduced/adjusted by using a rich substrate and with minimal water column dosing, success with this plant or many others becomes more likely. If one chooses to rely heavily on the Soil/Substrate for the nutrients, I will still recommend mineralizing the water with Ca/Mg if you are using RO water and add some Micros/Fe in the water column.
Take @erwin123, for example. Inspired by @plantnoobdude, he believed that the success he experienced was due to using a lower dose of potassium from "Tropica Specialised Nutrition," whereas he found the potassium levels in "APT Complete" to be too high. While this observation is useful, it's important for him to also recognize the broader differences between the two products beyond just potassium content.
Through various experiments comparing lean versus high dosing for Ammannia pedicellata 'Golden' and other challenging plant species, I am confident that nutrient ratios and the chemical composition of nutrients play a crucial role under certain conditions. You should be able to grow most aquatic plants, including Ammannia pedicellata 'Golden,' in high doses. If you face difficulties, consider revising the nutrient ratios and the chemical composition of your dosing regimen. On the other hand, if unlimited nutrients and the correct chelate were the answer, growing plants would be straightforward for everyone. Some people claim that nutrient ratios don’t matter, yet they frequently adjust these ratios themselves without recognizing the potential impact. If these changes truly had no effect, why make them? If I were to revisit my approach from over 10+ years ago, it would be considered very rich dosing, exceeding EI levels. During that time, I successfully grew the most difficult plants (except for Ammannia). The primary change I made was adding Urea to my dosing, while everything else remained the same and consistent during that time. Should I conclude that this method of dosing is the best approach, given that it allowed me to grow most plants effectively?
Some members have suggested that just have a rich acidic soil and dose lean and Ammannia pedicellata 'Golden' will thrive. First of all, this plant can grow/thrive under both Lean or High dosing depending on the listed reasons above. Secondly, even if you met that low 5-6 PH, 0-1 KH requirements, this plant could still fail due to the listed reasons above. Just For example:
Tropica Specialised Nutrition dosed at 8 ppm N (35.4 ppm NO3 Equivalent) with following parameters:
PH 5.5
KH 0
GH 5
VS
KNO3/along with other needed nutrients dosed at 8 ppm N (35.4 ppm NO3 Equivalent) with following parameters:
PH 5.5
KH 0
GH 5
Ammannia pedicellata 'Golden' will not stunt with Tropica Specialised Nutrition dosed at 8 ppm N, but it will certainly stunt with KNO3/along with other needed nutrients dosed at 8 ppm N. not just Ammannia pedicellata 'Golden' but other difficult plant will show similar symptoms. Let’s say if you replace the KNO3 with KNO3+MgNO3+CaNO3 and the K is signifyingly lowered, the results start to get better, let’s say if you further replaced the KNO3+MgNO3+CaNO3+Urea/NH4 the results might be even more superior. Let’s say you still want to add KNO3 only but added lot of Ca/Mg in the water, the results will be much better, but not because you are dosing less KNO3 now, but because you are reducing the K to significant levels or it’s at the level where it is within close relationship with Ca and Mg. furthermore, you are also increasing the plants to Utilize the naturally produced NH4 in the aquarium.
Some argue that my good results are due to lean dosing, that’s when I realize that they are not truly reading everything that I post. The primary reason people may see it this way is because I usually advise using the lean approach. I usually recommend it because it already satisfies the plant needs and it’s also less work/hassle for the hobbyist, take @MichaelJ low tech for example.
My point is that I want to continue to dig further and deeper into aquatic plants, nutrients and this hobby, I don’t want to just settle at whatever I have learned and found so far, I know there is lot more to learn and more to explore. If I were to just dose few ppm of this or that, Chelated or Non chelated and call it good, then am not actually learning much from it even though it may grow most plants. I Would like to further explore why and which ppm are making a differences? Which chemicals are making the difference? What happens if I reduce or increase this or that ppm? What happens if I add CO3/HCO3? what happens if add Rich soil? What happens if I remove the rich soil? What happens if I use inert sand/gravel? What happens to bacteria under certain conditions and what role they play etc.? what happens if I use higher or lower PAR? I truly believe that is what Marcel is trying to highlight if I understand him correctly? I don’t think he is asking if you can grow Ammannia pedicellata 'Golden' in lean dosing.
Some might argue that many issues are related to pH, KH, or hard water. While it's true that these factors can affect nutrient availability, precipitation, and the effectiveness of chemicals and chelates, lowering the pH to 5.5 or reducing the KH to 0 isn't a universal solution either.
You can still grow plants with random nutrients or random guess work (similar to EI Method), but it will not provide anything useful other than that it can grow plants but will fail to highlight whatever I said above. If you fail with certain plant species, stunted plants, Nutrients related issues, fish/shrimp related issues etc. you can just ignore that and move on because you probably don’t care, have time to think about it or look for the reasons behind it. You cannot blame KH/PH for your plant issues either because the CO3/HCO3 in the water is at its lowest level if not 0. You can dose the following below and plant will grow, if not Ammannia species or other species but others will. You can even ignore ppm, numbers, or whatever from the nutrient perspective. You can use Chelated, Non chelated or whatever you could think of as long as it provides nutrients to the plants. for example:
PH 5-6 (use acids HCL, Sulfuric acid, phosphoric acid etc.)
KH 0-1 (KHCO3)
GH 2-5
Ca 10-30 (CaSO4, CaCl etc.)
Mg 4-10 (MgSo4, Mgcl etc.)
NO3 5-30 (KNO3, CaNO3, MgNO3 etc.)
K 5-30 (KNO3, KHCO3, K2SO4 etc.)
PO4 1-5 (Kh2PO4, phosphoric acid etc.)
Fe 0.1-0.5 (Fe Gluconate, Fe EDTA, Fe DTPA etc.)
Mn 0.02- 0.1 (Mn EDTA, MnSO4 etc.)
B 0.01 - 0.06 (Boric Acid, Borax etc.)
Zn 0.01 - 0.06 (Zn EDTA, ZnSO4 etc.)
Cu 0.002 – 0.02 (Cu EDTA, CuSO4 etc.)
Mo 0.001 -0.01 (Na2MoO4*2H2O, MoO3 etc.)
Ni 0.0001 - 0.001 (NiSo4, NiCl etc.)
Many people post recipes, including myself, but if you are that person who doesn’t really care too much about the nutrients or other related things. I don’t think its going to matter whether you dose 0.1 ppm Fe or 0.5 ppm Fe or 10 ppm NO3 or 30 ppm NO3. You don’t even have to copy or clone anyone’s Micros/Macro, otherwise you will be just copying their ratios. It’s easy to make fertilizers at home nowadays, tons of calculators out there, easy to buy dry chemicals, chelated or non-chelated. Easy to add 0.1 ppm Fe or 0.5 ppm Fe, 0.003 ppm Copper or 0.01 ppm copper etc. am always available if someone ever needs help with anything. If am free and have time, I will do my best to help. I usually get lots of messages and may not be able to reach out to everyone on time, So I apologize in advance. also, I have mentioned few Names/ID here, if I have made any errors please correct me. Thank you for reading this very long post, it almost felt like I was writing an article.
References:
90P High Light (Plants are happy, Algae are happy too)
Diorama - "Dutch style" (Mg>K experiment) Lean dosing
My 60p soft water
Plant deficiencies and the Fe Experiment
Consistency Deficiency
It’s great to see someone like @Marcel who has been conducting scientific experiments for a very long time. I highly appreciate the knowledge, research and the skills you have accumulated over the years. Most hobbyists, including myself, rely on observation due to our limitation with scientific tools. While observation can be useful, it doesn’t always answer all the questions. When you put the observation and scientific data together, you can get better answers.
For example, I have been growing so-called difficult plants for over 10+ years or even longer, including the ones listed below, except for Ammannia. The list of challenging plants is very long, but I will focus on Pogostemon deccanensis, Rotala wallichii, and Ammannia pedicellata 'Golden'. I agree that Ammannia pedicellata 'Golden' and other species from this family are difficult and challenging to grow. However, in my experiments, I found that if you can successfully grow any plant from this family, you are one step closer to growing most of them from that family.
I am always doing some sort of experiment whenever I have free time. When I was ready and felt more confident about whatever I had gathered from my experiments, I tested my hypothesis by selecting some members from various forums and social media. I greatly appreciate the contributions from the community. For instance, @plantnoobdude was struggling with some of these plants when we met, and we tested one of my hypotheses together. The results can be seen in his tank journal, where most of these plants were growing well under the same conditions. Despite previously having unlimited nutrients and the correct chelate (Fe EDTA for his pH, adding up to 1 ppm Fe), he had struggled. We purposely selected some of the most difficult plants that people normally fail with or are known to fail with and put them under the same settings/setup. In some scenarios, we even implemented Marcel and Maq’s findings, a kind of Mix/Hybrid. We had some members @macek.g who also tried similar recipes with some modifications by choosing different chemicals and the outcome was very similar.
Sometimes, minor factors that may seem insignificant can have a significant impact on plant growth. For example, something as simple as adding 0.5 ppm N from urea or 0.04 ppm Mn can make a big difference. In another case with @Hufsa, we conducted similar experiments, and the Fe/Mn ratios made a notable difference. Her water parameters were quite different from @Plantnoobdude’s, and consequently, the results differed as well. The same hypothesis did not fully work for @Hufsa as it did for @plantnoobdude or Me. @Hufsa was no longer active on that forum/thread, so there were no further updates. Other than the Fe/Mn Ratio, one of my hypothesis was that since Mn can block Potassium to some extent, the good results in her case could have been due to potassium being blocked to some degree and letting the Fe/Mn/Mg work properly in the leaves. This was just my hypothesis and should be taken with a grain of salt.
@KirstyF, another member of the forum, conducted experiments with iron (Fe) and observed significant differences when using different chelates (such as EDTA, DTPA, etc.) and non-chelate forms (like Fe Gluconate). Despite meeting the pH requirements with DTPA, she found that Fe Gluconate worked better for her plants, even though it did not meet the pH requirements as well. The plants thrived under Fe Gluconate, and Fe deficiency was corrected, whereas they did not perform as well under DTPA. Several other members, not listed here, have also conducted similar experiments and reported comparable results. Was this the result of easily available Fe in case of @KirstyF ? Could be and most likely but how do you explain the same good results by me and @plantnoobdude who used DTPA Fe only? And how do you explain @plantnoobdude struggle with EDTA Fe and Fe related deficiency symptoms while using 1 ppm Fe, even though he met that PH requirement for EDTA Fe? How would you explain @Husfa Results who simply changed the Fe/Mn ratios?
As you can see, each case was unique. However, in the cases of @plantnoobdude and me, our results were similar due to our comparable water parameters, dosing methods, and other factors. On the other hand, @plantnoobdude achieved better results in some cases, which I believe was likely due to his choice of inert sand. This choice may have promoted better or different types of bacteria growth, as similar to what @Sudipta has explained in some of his posts. While my belief is totally based on my hypothesis and I could be incorrect, it is the best explanation that I have been able to formulate. Even though these experiments are not related to @Sudipta in any way or form but I appreciate @Sudipta for using his skills and knowledge to explore sediment and bacteria. We truly needed someone to investigate this area and share their findings, as this kind of expertise is lacking in the hobby. sometime In the future, I would like to combine @Sudipta’s finding into some of my experiments.
Most hobbyists are now returning to lean dosing combined with rich substrates. Some people are switching over to Urea/NH4 dosing in some way or another, weather in liquid form or in the substrate. But These approaches were standard for many decades but had fallen out of favor as hobbyists explored other methods. One of these systems, were highly promoted by Takashi Amano and is well-known for its effectiveness. Furthermore, several brands added Urea/NH4 in their fertilizers for decade now, including ADA. Additionally, many hobbyists are revisiting the Diana Walstad system (organics/NH4), which reminds me of what @Sudipta is currently working on. While there are similarities, we may gain further insights into bacteria and other important factors from @Sudipta’s research, primarily about the substrate and bacteria. Urea/NH4 dosing has been my standard for decade because I was fully aware of its effectiveness, when properly implemented into liquid dosing, you may never have to change your soil/substrate, especially if its Clay/ADA based or high in CEC, most of these soils will attract the NH4+ and constantly recharge the soil.
I have used Urea for over a decade now, incorporating it into my high dosing regimen (even exceeding EI levels) during that time, and the results have been flawless for many difficult species, including those listed above. However, Ammannia pedicellata 'Golden', for example, never properly thrived under this dosing method. I began exploring other options, including Chelated, non-chelated micros/Fe, Macros, different kinds of chemicals etc. but Ammannia pedicellata 'Golden' still did not achieve the results I was seeking. Then I met Marcel, and I’m grateful I did. Marcel has been an excellent mentor to me ever since. Marcel shared some recipes with me which were based on Marschner's Mineral Nutrition of Higher Plants and I put the hypothesis to test, He already confirmed that it worked for him, the results can be seen on his website. It also worked for me, even Ammannia pedicellata 'Golden' grew great, but I combined this experiment with my old aqua soil during that time (no Fe deficiency). When I combined it with Silicia sand, the results were similar with some minor issues, the most common one appeared to be Fe deficiency related. My hypotheses were that this could be related to potassium because in this experiment K was much higher than Ca/Mg and may have had played some roles, since I was using Silicia sand, K has nowhere to go other than stay in the water, unlike in the previous setup where the aqua soil would have absorbed it. A few years later I met Maq and he was highly focused on the Ca/Mg/K ratios, I used the same setup/setting from the previous experiment and implemented it with Maq’s Ca/Mg/K ratio and Fe deficiency disappeared in Silica sand. The hypothesis was that Ca/Mg/K ratio likely made the differences, at least we could possibly say that the Fe deficiency was not really an Fe deficiency, but it was rather Mg deficiency caused by Excess/blocked by potassium. Some may argue that they add lot of potassium without issues, but they are either adding lot of Ca/Mg or either are adding lot of Micro/Fe to bring things in balance, or they use soils that are rich in CEC. I would also argue that I added lot of potassium too in my excess dosed tank with Urea 10+ years ago with great results, But that is not the point.
After conducting several experiments, I was able to grow Ammannia pedicellata 'Golden' and most of the plants from its family. Although I haven’t achieved the perfect growth, I am also working with it in inert silica sand, which presents an even greater challenge. In Aquasoil or acidic soil, this plant is relatively easy to grow; I had success with it using my recipes while using acidic soil. The same recipes were used by @plantnoobdude when he was using aquasoil, and these can be found in his journal.
I was able to grow these plants under both lean and high dosing regimes, using either chelated or non-chelated nutrients. However, it became clear that several factors influenced the results. The most significant factor appeared to be pH, along with the acidity of the water/soil, nutrient ratios, and the chemical composition of the nutrients. Particularly, altering the ratios and chemical composition of the nutrients alone led to varying responses from the plant. For example, @plantnoobdude used the exact same recipes under similar parameters, yet he achieved far superior results compared to mine. One hypothesis was that he used a different type of inert sand, which may have been accumulating detritus over time and allowing it to penetrate deeper into the substrate. In contrast, detritus in my setup tended to settle on the surface and did not reach deep into the substrate and I would suction them out.
Some may argue that Ammannia pedicellata 'Golden' only thrives in low KH, acidic water/soil, and with lean dosing. While this holds true for many plants, it's not overly complicated; most plants generally do well in acidic conditions. There is a common belief that Ammannia pedicellata 'Golden' only flourishes with lean dosing and not in high dosing and that it requires a rich substrate. However, this perspective doesn't fully capture the underlying reasons. The critical factors such as nutrient ratios and the chemical composition of the nutrients are usually ignored, when in fact they play crucial roles. For instance, dosing 5-10 ppm N from "Tropica Specialised Nutrition" typically will not cause Ammannia pedicellata 'Golden' to stunt. You can test this yourself. On the other hand, using simple salts like KNO3 to achieve the same 5-10 ppm N can present issues. KNO3 not only introduces a significant amount of NO3 but also a considerable amount of potassium, which can disrupt the nutrient ratios. Many people counteract this by lowering their KNO3 dosage (i.e., dosing lean), which helps mitigate these negative effects. When nutrient ratios are further reduced/adjusted by using a rich substrate and with minimal water column dosing, success with this plant or many others becomes more likely. If one chooses to rely heavily on the Soil/Substrate for the nutrients, I will still recommend mineralizing the water with Ca/Mg if you are using RO water and add some Micros/Fe in the water column.
Take @erwin123, for example. Inspired by @plantnoobdude, he believed that the success he experienced was due to using a lower dose of potassium from "Tropica Specialised Nutrition," whereas he found the potassium levels in "APT Complete" to be too high. While this observation is useful, it's important for him to also recognize the broader differences between the two products beyond just potassium content.
Through various experiments comparing lean versus high dosing for Ammannia pedicellata 'Golden' and other challenging plant species, I am confident that nutrient ratios and the chemical composition of nutrients play a crucial role under certain conditions. You should be able to grow most aquatic plants, including Ammannia pedicellata 'Golden,' in high doses. If you face difficulties, consider revising the nutrient ratios and the chemical composition of your dosing regimen. On the other hand, if unlimited nutrients and the correct chelate were the answer, growing plants would be straightforward for everyone. Some people claim that nutrient ratios don’t matter, yet they frequently adjust these ratios themselves without recognizing the potential impact. If these changes truly had no effect, why make them? If I were to revisit my approach from over 10+ years ago, it would be considered very rich dosing, exceeding EI levels. During that time, I successfully grew the most difficult plants (except for Ammannia). The primary change I made was adding Urea to my dosing, while everything else remained the same and consistent during that time. Should I conclude that this method of dosing is the best approach, given that it allowed me to grow most plants effectively?
Some members have suggested that just have a rich acidic soil and dose lean and Ammannia pedicellata 'Golden' will thrive. First of all, this plant can grow/thrive under both Lean or High dosing depending on the listed reasons above. Secondly, even if you met that low 5-6 PH, 0-1 KH requirements, this plant could still fail due to the listed reasons above. Just For example:
Tropica Specialised Nutrition dosed at 8 ppm N (35.4 ppm NO3 Equivalent) with following parameters:
PH 5.5
KH 0
GH 5
VS
KNO3/along with other needed nutrients dosed at 8 ppm N (35.4 ppm NO3 Equivalent) with following parameters:
PH 5.5
KH 0
GH 5
Ammannia pedicellata 'Golden' will not stunt with Tropica Specialised Nutrition dosed at 8 ppm N, but it will certainly stunt with KNO3/along with other needed nutrients dosed at 8 ppm N. not just Ammannia pedicellata 'Golden' but other difficult plant will show similar symptoms. Let’s say if you replace the KNO3 with KNO3+MgNO3+CaNO3 and the K is signifyingly lowered, the results start to get better, let’s say if you further replaced the KNO3+MgNO3+CaNO3+Urea/NH4 the results might be even more superior. Let’s say you still want to add KNO3 only but added lot of Ca/Mg in the water, the results will be much better, but not because you are dosing less KNO3 now, but because you are reducing the K to significant levels or it’s at the level where it is within close relationship with Ca and Mg. furthermore, you are also increasing the plants to Utilize the naturally produced NH4 in the aquarium.
Some argue that my good results are due to lean dosing, that’s when I realize that they are not truly reading everything that I post. The primary reason people may see it this way is because I usually advise using the lean approach. I usually recommend it because it already satisfies the plant needs and it’s also less work/hassle for the hobbyist, take @MichaelJ low tech for example.
My point is that I want to continue to dig further and deeper into aquatic plants, nutrients and this hobby, I don’t want to just settle at whatever I have learned and found so far, I know there is lot more to learn and more to explore. If I were to just dose few ppm of this or that, Chelated or Non chelated and call it good, then am not actually learning much from it even though it may grow most plants. I Would like to further explore why and which ppm are making a differences? Which chemicals are making the difference? What happens if I reduce or increase this or that ppm? What happens if I add CO3/HCO3? what happens if add Rich soil? What happens if I remove the rich soil? What happens if I use inert sand/gravel? What happens to bacteria under certain conditions and what role they play etc.? what happens if I use higher or lower PAR? I truly believe that is what Marcel is trying to highlight if I understand him correctly? I don’t think he is asking if you can grow Ammannia pedicellata 'Golden' in lean dosing.
Some might argue that many issues are related to pH, KH, or hard water. While it's true that these factors can affect nutrient availability, precipitation, and the effectiveness of chemicals and chelates, lowering the pH to 5.5 or reducing the KH to 0 isn't a universal solution either.
You can still grow plants with random nutrients or random guess work (similar to EI Method), but it will not provide anything useful other than that it can grow plants but will fail to highlight whatever I said above. If you fail with certain plant species, stunted plants, Nutrients related issues, fish/shrimp related issues etc. you can just ignore that and move on because you probably don’t care, have time to think about it or look for the reasons behind it. You cannot blame KH/PH for your plant issues either because the CO3/HCO3 in the water is at its lowest level if not 0. You can dose the following below and plant will grow, if not Ammannia species or other species but others will. You can even ignore ppm, numbers, or whatever from the nutrient perspective. You can use Chelated, Non chelated or whatever you could think of as long as it provides nutrients to the plants. for example:
PH 5-6 (use acids HCL, Sulfuric acid, phosphoric acid etc.)
KH 0-1 (KHCO3)
GH 2-5
Ca 10-30 (CaSO4, CaCl etc.)
Mg 4-10 (MgSo4, Mgcl etc.)
NO3 5-30 (KNO3, CaNO3, MgNO3 etc.)
K 5-30 (KNO3, KHCO3, K2SO4 etc.)
PO4 1-5 (Kh2PO4, phosphoric acid etc.)
Fe 0.1-0.5 (Fe Gluconate, Fe EDTA, Fe DTPA etc.)
Mn 0.02- 0.1 (Mn EDTA, MnSO4 etc.)
B 0.01 - 0.06 (Boric Acid, Borax etc.)
Zn 0.01 - 0.06 (Zn EDTA, ZnSO4 etc.)
Cu 0.002 – 0.02 (Cu EDTA, CuSO4 etc.)
Mo 0.001 -0.01 (Na2MoO4*2H2O, MoO3 etc.)
Ni 0.0001 - 0.001 (NiSo4, NiCl etc.)
Many people post recipes, including myself, but if you are that person who doesn’t really care too much about the nutrients or other related things. I don’t think its going to matter whether you dose 0.1 ppm Fe or 0.5 ppm Fe or 10 ppm NO3 or 30 ppm NO3. You don’t even have to copy or clone anyone’s Micros/Macro, otherwise you will be just copying their ratios. It’s easy to make fertilizers at home nowadays, tons of calculators out there, easy to buy dry chemicals, chelated or non-chelated. Easy to add 0.1 ppm Fe or 0.5 ppm Fe, 0.003 ppm Copper or 0.01 ppm copper etc. am always available if someone ever needs help with anything. If am free and have time, I will do my best to help. I usually get lots of messages and may not be able to reach out to everyone on time, So I apologize in advance. also, I have mentioned few Names/ID here, if I have made any errors please correct me. Thank you for reading this very long post, it almost felt like I was writing an article.
References:
90P High Light (Plants are happy, Algae are happy too)
Diorama - "Dutch style" (Mg>K experiment) Lean dosing
My 60p soft water
Plant deficiencies and the Fe Experiment
Consistency Deficiency
