New planted tank - Struggling a little!

[Soilwork]

CJ,
BGA = poor NO3 uptake.
Increase KNO3 per EI dosing regimen, clean filter, and improve flow/distribution as necessary.

Cheers,

Thanks. Biofilm is very thick despite large water changes. Does cyano contribute to this along with plant waste? Some of the plants still have old emersed leaves too which are no doubt contributing but I think the main culprit is the organics in the Eco complete.

I wasn't running a filter for some time,, just a surface skimmer for flow so the substrate collected lots of brown powdery waste. Just touching the eco complete raises a cloud so even though my canister is new I think it could be gunked up already, even more so due to the fact I left the fine filter floss in there that came with it which I guess will in turn reduce flow.

I have been trying to vac areas of the substrate just to try and reset some of the waste but the eco complete tends to block the plastic grating on the siphon which reduces flow so that can be a pain.

I'm just waiting for a repair to my leaking stop tap before I can change anymore water which is frustrating.

The BGA is on the decline from water I can tell since I've been making its life hard with the glass magnet and siphon although i think a lot of it may have made its way in to the canister for further decomposition.

I'm getting there. The fact the plants are now actually throwing up new leaves is a give away. The algae that was collecting on the roots of the salvinia has disappeared leaving just the root hairs on display and my hygrophila carymbosa has recovered from its interveinal chlorosis is promising.

I've been making a case for micro toxicity for a good while here and in other places hence my experimentation (which if I'm honest hasn't given me the results I had hoped for) so now it's back to basics I guess.

Regards

CJ

 

[tayloss]

Just out of interest, how much does the TDS matter in terms of providing the rest of the nutrients needed from the water? I am adding enough power to bring the pure RO (0 TDS) to a TDS of 200. I know adding the fertiliser is adding an additional TDS, but am not sure of the relationship between the two in terms of giving everything the plant need and not over dosing the shrimps?

 

[AverageWhiteBloke]

TDS, is just that Total Dissolved Solids, anything that dissolves into liquid will be measured by the TDS meter including uneaten fish food, rockwork in the aquarium etc. If you evaporated away all the water the tds would be what was left. It doesn't really affect plant growth at all. When you add ferts which are salts the tds will rise as they are solids dissolved in the water same as everything else that's dissolved in there.

In your case, if you are concerned about high tds because of the species of fish or shrimp you want to keep you would be better off adjusting it with your RO mineralising agent to produce softer water from the start because even though ferts will raise tds you still need them in sufficient quantities that the plants need to feed because the RO agent wont be adding any of these KNP so they are still missing from the water make up.

The EI method we have been discussing is designed to add slightly more than you could possibly need and considering your lighting and plant mass probably isn't as high as the lighting it was tested under you will probably have some further excess of nutrients which will keep tds rising over time. I personally don't use RO water however the water out of my tap is very soft so might as well be. Since keeping softwater species I decided to try and keep the tds from rising which is where the duck weed index comes in. You start at EI levels of dosing which is more than you need and gradually over time slightly reduce your dosing while keeping an eye on the duck weed. As mentioned duck weed doesn't really suffer if your co2 isn't optimum because it gets most of its co2 from the atmosphere so if they are starting to show signs of issues generally speaking it's fertiliser that's causing it. With a bit of experience watching the duck weed and checking your tds at start of week and end you can sort of gauge if the tds isn’t rising dramatically and the plants are doing well how much your particular system actually needs but this is a moving target as you have more plant mass.

EI is belt and braces so if you don't care about tds because your inhabitants don't mind then its a safer bet. In you case though I think you said your GH was 8 so from 0 TDS to GH8 you could reduce that easily but the ferts need to go in no matter what. The two although both raise tds are totally different situations.

 

[dw1305]

Hi all,

Just out of interest, how much does the TDS matter in terms of providing the rest of the nutrients needed from the water? I am adding enough power to bring the pure RO (0 TDS) to a TDS of 200. I know adding the fertiliser is adding an additional TDS, but am not sure of the relationship between the two in terms of giving everything the plant need and not over dosing the shrimps?

When you get a reading for ppm TDS (Total Dissolved Solids) it is actually a conversion factor applied to the level of the ions in solution (the electrical conductivity in microS).

Usually 100 microS converts to 64ppm TDS. Conductivity just measures the ions in solution, it doesn't tell you anything about which ions they are. Pure RO is an insulator (doesn't conduct electricity) and it is then a linear scale all the way up to full strength sea water at 53,000 microS.

It depends a little bit what your powder contains, but normally it would be some combination (when dissolved) of calcium (Ca++), chloride (Cl-), magnesium (Mg++), sulphate (SO4++), bicarbonate (HCO3+) and possibly sodium (Na+) ions.

Plants only need small amounts of these ions, and don't require sodium at all.

Your fertiliser will contain the ions that plants need more of, principally nitrate (NO3-), potassium (K+) and orthophosphate (PO4---). All ions contribute to the TDS.

When you add a salt like potassium nitrate (KNO3), or potassium dihydrogen phosphate (KH2PO4), both cation (+) and anion (-) are ions you want, so you have less rise in TDS compared with adding the same amount of potassium and nitrate ions from potassium chloride (KCl) and sodium nitrate (NaNO3).

cheers Darrel

 

[AverageWhiteBloke]

If it were me, I would probably half the RO agent and come in at 4GH, adding the magnesium from the ferts will raise GH slightly more again then you don't have to worry too much about ferts raising the TDS as much. If you want to dial in the ferts crack on but saying you posted this because you were having issues I would keep the ferts as the are for now with your increased dose so you can concentrate on cleanliness and co2 which are the harder bits.

Maybe look at buying some kno3 as well, as previously mentioned your all-in-one is quite a high ratio of phosphate relative to nitrate, I can only assume that's because they expect fish in the tank and you would get the extra nitrate from there. By the time you've dosed high enough to hit the nitrate levels you po4 is quite high so maybe a pinch of kno3 means you don't have as much wasted po4. KNO3 also adds potassium so no worries there. What you don't want is low nitrate and potassium but high phosphate unless algae farming is your thing

 

[tayloss]

If it were me, I would probably half the RO agent and come in at 4GH, adding the magnesium from the ferts will raise GH slightly more again then you don't have to worry too much about ferts raising the TDS as much. If you want to dial in the ferts crack on but saying you posted this because you were having issues I would keep the ferts as the are for now with your increased dose so you can concentrate on cleanliness and co2 which are the harder bits.

Maybe look at buying some kno3 as well, as previously mentioned your all-in-one is quite a high ratio of phosphate relative to nitrate, I can only assume that's because they expect fish in the tank and you would get the extra nitrate from there. By the time you've dosed high enough to hit the nitrate levels you po4 is quite high so maybe a pinch of kno3 means you don't have as much wasted po4. KNO3 also adds potassium so no worries there. What you don't want is low nitrate and potassium but high phosphate unless algae farming is your thing

I like the sound of that.. may be thats why I seems to have stalled on the algae going? Its has cleared up and no where near as much as when it first started to grow, but looking today has seen some new growth... What can I use as a source of KNO3? Unless you have already mentioned it early on?

I guess I need to retest the RO water at the various TDS levels to find its GH value?

Another can of worms, when I thought a planted tank was easy..

 

[AverageWhiteBloke]

I like the sound of that.. may be thats why I seems to have stalled on the algae going? Its has cleared up and no where near as much as when it first started to grow, but looking today has seen some new growth... What can I use as a source of KNO3? Unless you have already mentioned it early on?

Source KNO3 (Potassium Nitrate)Check our sponsors, most sell it, you'll only need a small bag. With our sponsors you know what you're getting as they have a reputation to uphold unlike auction site sellers.

I guess I need to retest the RO water at the various TDS levels to find its GH value?

Yeah, I would assume halving TDS would be a simple case of halving what you usually put in. You would have to check with RO users as there might be other essential minerals added at the same ratio so unsure. That's why I can't workout how come you have 0 kh you would have thought RO agents raised this at the same time. GH is a total of the KH combined and usually people recommend levels of 4 KH to have sufficeint buffering capacity preventing ph fluctuations.

 

[tayloss]

Source KNO3 (Potassium Nitrate)Check our sponsors, most sell it, you'll only need a small bag. With our sponsors you know what you're getting as they have a reputation to uphold unlike auction site sellers.

I will have a look at that now

Yeah, I would assume halving TDS would be a simple case of halving what you usually put in. You would have to check with RO users as there might be other essential minerals added at the same ratio so unsure. That's why I can't workout how come you have 0 kh you would have thought RO agents raised this at the same time. GH is a total of the KH combined and usually people recommend levels of 4 KH to have sufficeint buffering capacity preventing ph fluctuations.

The substrate handles the KH from what I believe as it says on the packet it maintains a PH of 6-6.5 with 0 KH water? I can get GH/KH mix, but apparently it depletes the substrate buffering ability very quickly..

 

[AverageWhiteBloke]

Another can of worms, when I thought a planted tank was easy..

Haha, it sort of is, the science behind it all can at first make your head spin but all the spade work had been done for us by the people who did stick in at school so all we need to do give the plants what they need... Light, food,a source of carbon and clean water/filter and they'll do what they've done since time began, just grow. I've never came across a suicidal plant yet

Plants will grow under most lighting of any spectrum and within reason any brightness. How bright the lighting is dictates how fast the plants will grow. The faster the plants grow the more food they need and more carbon which we give them in the form of either carbon dioxide gas or liquid carbon. As for how much food they need that's the million dollar question which is where the brains have came up with EI. They've worked out how much they couldn't need or shouldn't with lights brighter than yours so your foods covered. Using a drop checker we can make sure we have the carbon we need with some level of accuracy. Then get that carbon and food flowing round your tank to all areas where plants are and that only leaves keeping things clean. If you can lift a bucket of water and wash out a filter the rest will take care of itself.

As for algae, this usually comes about when you don't have one of the above right and the plants suffer giving algae the upper hand, combined with dirty water and filters they take over in no time under high lighting, it's the perfect conditions for them to thrive. Imagine it like ingredients of a cake, miss one out and the cake is ruined, doesn't matter if your ferts are spot on but you have a dirty tank or you co2 isn't right, you don't end up with a cake like missing the flour or sugar out.

IME though the cleanliness of the tank is the foundation. Even with everything else right it will still cause algae. People just find it easier to alter or blame ferts or co2 because they get talked about a lot and it's something they can alter instantly. I find with ferts and co2 there's quite a broad range of tolerance with plants, they just want some and don't know what TDS/PPM are. A lot of people here have excellent low energy/lighting tanks who don't dose ferts or co2 at all relying on fish waste. The plants still grow just slowly, they will always adapt to the lighting over them.

 

[tayloss]

I have just placed an order with one of the forum sponsors for some KNO3 and they only had a 500g bag available, but if it helps to stabilise the tank, i'm not too worried

Now the other million dollar question is.... How much do I add

Just an edit to this post, I need to aim for 20ppm of NO3 per week according to a EI dosing article I've read

 

[AverageWhiteBloke]

Is this how you make your bottle now...

Instructions

• 30g 'All-in-One Complete Macros and Micros Fertiliser'
• 500ml of distilled water (or boiled then cooled water).
• Shake bottle to mix ingredients with the water.
• Dosing: 5ml of solution per 40 litres (daily).

 

[AverageWhiteBloke]

Had to get my maths face on there

Ok so adding 2.5ml daily with your all-in-one to 20ltrs gets you

1.5 ppm Nitrate x7 =10.5ppm
0.4 ppm Phosphate x7 =2.8ppm
1.6 ppm Potassium x7 =11.2ppm
0.2 ppm Magnesium x7 =1.4ppm

If you want an EI equivalent mix aiming for parameters below leaving magnesium and iron aside as I don't know if you get magnesium from the RO agent

Nitrate (NO3) 20ppm per week
Potassium (K) 30ppm per week
Phosphate (PO4) 3ppm per week

So using James Calculator to level out that phosphate you could add 14gram of kno3 in that 500ml bottle with your all-in-one or 2 teaspoons and that would give you based on 2.5ml dose daily...

3.22 ppm Nitrate x7 =22.54ppm Weekly
0.4 ppm Phosphate x7 =2.8ppm Weekly
2.53 ppm Potassium x7 =17.71ppm Weekly
0.2 ppm Magnesium x7 =1.4ppm Weekly

If you already have a bottle made up the same would apply if you just made a separate bottle up of 14 gram kno3 to 500ml and add 2.5ml daily alongside your existing ferts. I wouldn't worry too much about your tank being 25ltr as oppose to it being based on 20ltr allowing for your gravel and hardscape. It's not exact science any way and plants can't count, they just want fed.

 

[tayloss]

I’ve tried to look at the RO reagent and the only information on the website is:

Biologically balanced calcium-magnesium ratio

Not sure why they are not producing the levels on the packaging or documentation...?

For reference, it’s Dennerle GH+ remineralisation power is what I’m using for Bee shrimps, although I’m lacking the shrimp elements at the moment..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ceg4048]

The substrate handles the KH from what I believe as it says on the packet it maintains a PH of 6-6.5 with 0 KH water? I can get GH/KH mix, but apparently it depletes the substrate buffering ability very quickly..

I guess I need to retest the RO water at the various TDS levels to find its GH value?

Just out of interest, how much does the TDS matter in terms of providing the rest of the nutrients needed from the water? I am adding enough power to bring the pure RO (0 TDS) to a TDS of 200. I know adding the fertiliser is adding an additional TDS, but am not sure of the relationship between the two in terms of giving everything the plant need and not over dosing the shrimps?

Hello,
Please stop the madness. You have taken a left turn somewhere and have wound up on to the wrong path.
You should not even be thinking about TDS or KH or GH. You should not be testing. This ALWAYS it will lead you down the primrose path that dalliance treads because you do not yet understand the complexities associated with the chemistry - and, it actually doesn't matter.

Your only goal in terms of these parameters is to add a little Calcium and a little Magnesium to feed the plants. Epsom Salts adds the Magnesium and a little crushed coral, sold in any pet shop can be added to your filter to add the Calcium. These values should simply be non-Zero. That's all. End of worries.

Add a teaspoon or so of any carbonate or bicarbonate source, such as baking soda to make the KH non-Zero.
All this does is to ensure that your pH readings are valid. Forget about what the sediment does to KH because it's all hogwash and fretting about it it diverts you attention and energy away from the things that are 1000X more important, like CO2, water changes and flow/distribution.

Add your nutrients in the prescribed amounts and let the TDS fall where it may.

I see this every day where folks spend all their time worrying about things that do not matter and have no time left to worry about things that matter a LOT.
That's exactly how their tanks wind up turning into a can of worms.

The Matrix isn't real Neo.

Cheers,

 

[tayloss]

Fully understand, I was more worried about the shrimp element who have a special need in terms of TDS.. as I’m making water from RO, the measurement of TDS is important otherwise I’d add too much powered.

I’ve performed another 50% water change last night and noticed the DC was yellow, so will give the CO2 a tiny twist to turn it down a tad..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[AverageWhiteBloke]

Add your nutrients in the prescribed amounts and let the TDS fall where it may.

Just to clarify Clive for the OP are you suggesting "prescribed amounts" for the all-in-one or +extra nitrate. His tank seems quite bright and co2 injected so if he wants to use EI method it seems a waste of the other ferts to have to double up when it all needs to bring back into ratio is a bit more nitrogen. In a fishless system like he is running I suspect he might be burning the nitrogen off pretty quick.

As for RO, I don't do it but the guy is intending to make this friendly for fancy shrimp, from what I read in the shrimp section the one's he wants prefer a low TDS sub 200 and his RO agent is bringing him in above that already. I understand that the plants don't care about the tds and make up as long as the essentials are provided but do these RO agents not replace other essential minerals like the one's Darrel listed which would be beneficial to the well being of shrimp?

 

[ceg4048]

Just to clarify Clive for the OP are you suggesting "prescribed amounts" for the all-in-one or +extra nitrate.

Hi mate,
When I say "prescribed" in this context I'm always referring to the standard dosing listed in the EI Tutorial. I agree that there ought not to be a need for extra this or that, however, it also doesn't matter if the numbers the OP is using is derived from some other recipe that uses more this or more that.

As for RO, I don't do it but the guy is intending to make this friendly for fancy shrimp, from what I read in the shrimp section the one's he wants prefer a low TDS sub 200

Fully understand, I was more worried about the shrimp element who have a special need in terms of TDS.. as I’m making water from RO, the measurement of TDS is important otherwise I’d add too much powered.

Well, of course this is another case of someone spewing out a number and everyone automatically giving it biblical importance.

I'm pretty sure Darrel explained this before but it's not just a TDS number that is damaging to fauna. It's what comprises the TDS.
TDS due to nutrient salts is not a big problem, but TDS due to pollution such as fish and plant waste is a problem because it pulls Oxygen from the water column.

People have difficulty with this concept, so I don't really try to argue this point. In any case it's not really a big problem to reduce the dosing levels to accommodate TDS thresholds.

Cheers,

 

[AverageWhiteBloke]

I tend to monitor my TDS quite a lot, especially lately since having a go at spawning Rams. I also find it handy to check when I could do with a reset. Granted you should change as much water as possible but I have a very busy lifestyle and work away from home so 50% weekly is about as much as I can realistically fit in.

My TDS is v low in my tapwater around 39 so I set myself a limit of 200. Once I start getting to these numbers pre water change day I find the time to get two 75% back to back over a weekend. Obviously I don't know what this tds is made up of but I just assume it's not good.

Sent from my STH100-2 using Tapatalk

 

[ceg4048]

My TDS is v low in my tapwater around 39 so I set myself a limit of 200. Once I start getting to these numbers pre water change day I find the time to get two 75% back to back over a weekend. Obviously I don't know what this tds is made up of but I just assume it's not good.

OK, fair enough, I get that for spawning dwarf chiclids you'd want to stay as much as possible on the low side, but I remember long ago, when the same low TDS water was advocated for spawning discus. Every time someone would fail, high TDS and high pH were blamed. Then, some years later, breeders who were fed up with the hassle of chasing TDS and pH reported breeding discus in higher TDS and higher pH than anyone could imagine. Now, discus acclimated to higher TDS water are commonplace.

When I was keeping the more common dwarfs, such as Cockatoos, I did use RO but then the tank was dosed EI without restriction and the TDS was higher than pure RO, obviously. But the fish bred like rabbits without any encouragement from me - and this was in a community tank.
It was very easy to estimate how much was due to salts and how much was due to pollution. If you fill the tank with water at water change time and take a reading then that's the baseline. Then dose and take a reading after 15 minutes or so. The difference in the reading should be a fair estimate of how much was due to the salts. By the next water change, if you take a reading prior to dumping the water then that reading minus what you measured and calculate for added salts ought to be what due to everything other than the salts, more or less.

In any case, that number, 200 or whatever, is a good reference for you, for what it is that you are trying to accomplish. But a newbie may not be aware of this context - a context which may not apply to him/her.

So my approach would be to state that a lower TDS is generally better than a higher TDS, but that there ought not to be a hard and fast number, because that person inevitably will fret over that number. In an extreme case the person might even withold nutrients in an attempt to chase the number and will cause more problems than they solve.

That's why it better to give context as much as possible and to ensure that we understand the numbers as well as to understand the phenomenon instead of just handing out numbers. That's one reason test kits are notorious, because they are all about numbers, and hobbyists automatically assign pass/fail to the illusory numbers returned by the kits.

The OP should go to great lengths to keep his tank scrupulously clean with large and frequent water changes, but the water column should be dosed properly to ensure the plants health. Again, it's no problem to dose on the lean side. There is plenty of margin of error in the recipe if the hobbyists so chooses, but it's not something to fret over. The extra oxygen from the healthy plants, and all the other amazing things that plants do will more than make up for the increase in TDS.

Cheers,

 

[Soilwork]

In my experience I found that fish/inverts show an increase in spawning behaviour as TDS rises. I can’t comment on cichlids though.

I also find that TDS rise from salts doesn’t actually contribute as much as that from pollution. I wonder what of organic materials contribute to conductivity.

AWB my water is similar to yours.

Clive my issue is biofilm/surface film. Is this an indicator of pollution? My thoughts are that CO2 bubbles will exaggerate surface biofilm if the dissolved organic wastes adhere to the bubbles then carried to the surface? I have a surface skimmer but don’t want to use it if it is only going to mask a larger issue. The tank is also open top which could play a factor if particulates are falling on to the surface from above.

Thanks
CJ