• 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

Ongoing, consistent, plant growth problems and deficiencies

isonychia

Seedling
Joined
1 Nov 2019
Messages
15
Location
NJ
I am coming from another planted tank site in search of help.

I have done just about everything and I am still no further in figuring out my tanks problems. This has been an ongoing problem for probably 2/3 years.

I was hoping a new set of enthusiasts can help.

My tank has been set up for at least 3 years. In those years I have had consistent problems with certain plants. The problems are very similar. Slow growth, older leaves either falling off or browning leaf tips and edges, general chlorosis of mainly older growth. It mostly affects the following plants: Limnophila Aromatica, S. Repens, Rotala Sp green, (other fine leaves rotalas), possibly a few more that I have tried growing.

Here are some stats on the tank
This is a 17 gallon tank.

EI dosing
I alternate the following with a rest day on Saturday and water change on Sunday at about 30%.
Micros
1/32 tsp Plantex CSM+B
1/32 tsp Iron Chelate

Macros
1/8 tsp KNO3
1/32 tsp KH2PO4
1/32 tsp K2SO4

PH: 7-7.5
GH 25
KH 9

I also had a water test done if it's of use I can provide it.
Meanwhile here are a whole list of stats from my water company.
https://www9.state.nj.us/DEP_WaterWatch_public/JSP/WSDetail.jsp?tinwsys=72

Light
Current Sat Plus Pro. Par is set at 50. I verified this with a par meter.

Lights on at 1pm off at 8pm

Co2 injection with a cerges reactor
on at 11am off at 9pm.

Temperature: 78F

I have my CO2 set high enough that any more creates fish distress. So I cannot go any higher with my CO2. I have tried this multiple times and every time I get fish gasping at the surface. I also have a powerhead that creates slight surface agitation. I even tried creating more surface agitation to be able to bump up the CO2 but it was too risky.

I have pretty much tried everything and I cannot get the plants to speed up growth or stop the poor plant health. I could give a long list of what I tried if it helps???

One main situation that keeps occuring: No matter what I do, I can never get my stem plants to grow fast enough so I can create a grove so to speak of a certain plant. They grow so slow and the lower leaves either fall off or get brown tips, ratty looking and chlorosis, that they don't sustain themselves long enough to increase their mass. Its the same process. I let them grow, get a certain height, then trim the tops and replant. If I leave the lower portion, it takes forever to get shoots and grow taller. Meanwhile the lower portion is in poor health anyway. So it's not worth leaving it.

My main algae is GSA on the glass, maybe some is BBA dust type. My anubias nana petite gets it really bad, and diatoms. The diatoms started when I added a sand section last Nov. and it has never gone away. I get this mostly on the glass.

Here are some pictures. Some from when it had more plant mass but still the same problems and some thats more recent but less plant mass in terms of the stems. I don't have some of the plants anymore, I gave up on the LA and the finer leaves rotalas. I still have rotala sp green and a few others that I mentioned as problematic.

Thanks,
iso
IMG_6309.jpg
user118234_pic105345_1519916084.jpg
user118234_pic109211_1571149849.jpg
user118234_pic105258_1519406600.jpg
user118234_pic109215_1571149849.jpg
 
Hi all,
Welcome to UKAPS. That is an interesting user name, are you a fresh-water biologist and/or a fly-fisher?
Macros
1/8 tsp KNO3
1/32 tsp KH2PO4
1/32 tsp K2SO4
I can't see your water stats from the link, but it would be worth looking at magnesium (Mg). It is mobile within the plant, so older leaves show <"deficiency symptoms"> first.

If you have soft water (I know they do in New York) you are unlikely to have any magnesium in your tap water. If you have hard water, you may have some, it would depend on the type of <"depositional basin"> that the limestone was laid down in.

Adding magnesium doesn't really have a down-side, it is cheap to buy (as "Epsom Salts" (MgSO4.7H2O)). These are ~10% Mg, and I'd aim for <"5 - 10 ppm Mg"> and see what happens. If magnesium was deficient, you should see a rapid improvement in plant health and growth.

cheers Darrel
 
More questions of course ;)

Tank dimensions
Filter details
Substrate - current and past attempts

Can you post a FTS?

What are your most successful plants?

Do you observe any livestock effects?
What sort of livestock do you keep?
 
Hi and welcome to the forum

GH 25
KH 9

Sounds like hard water to me - but would be nice to see water report.' hard water does make it harder to grow plants'.

Iron Chelate

which one ? Fe DTPA or Fe EDDHA pics dont show that water being slightly pink which suggests Fe DTPA IMO

You haven't mentioned what filter your using ? and any power heads! - flow/tank turnover? flow is KING in the high tech planted tank without decent/adequate flow/tank turnover your plants will suffer

Lights on at 1pm off at 8pm

Co2 injection with a cerges reactor
on at 11am off at 9pm.

7 hrs is a longish photoperiod - plus why do you have your CO2 on longer than the photoperiod ?

pH profile ?

PH: 7-7.5

when was this taken?
Mid photo period ? which suggests very hard water !
pre CO2 on ? which suggests hard water again !
 
Hi all,

Welcome to UKAPS. That is an interesting user name, are you a fresh-water biologist and/or a fly-fisher?I can't see your water stats from the link, but it would be worth looking at magnesium (Mg). It is mobile within the plant, so older leaves show <"deficiency symptoms"> first.


If you have soft water (I know they do in New York) you are unlikely to have any magnesium in your tap water. If you have hard water, you may have some, it would depend on the type of <"depositional basin"> that the limestone was laid down in.


Adding magnesium doesn't really have a down-side, it is cheap to buy (as "Epsom Salts" (MgSO4.7H2O)). These are ~10% Mg, and I'd aim for <"5 - 10 ppm Mg"> and see what happens. If magnesium was deficient, you should see a rapid improvement in plant health and growth.


cheers Darrel


Hi Darrel,


I wish I was a biologist, lol. But you are right I am a fly fisherman.


I am in NJ so I don't have the privilege of the soft water NY City has, which ironically comes from the reservoirs that feed the river system I fly fish at.


My water is from wells. It has a GH of 25 and a KH of 9. (approximate from test kits). GH seems to move more than the KH when I have done the tests.

In my research and calling of the water dept I estimated my CA is 120ppm and my MG at 75ppm. I also had a water test done using a service that tests for saltwater aquariums and here are the results. The chemist at the service said the numbers are pretty accurate even though some of their tests don’t measure down to the lower levels needed for freshwater planted tanks.

The chemist said the only value that is really off is Chlorine and Sulphur.


They suggest that Chlorine is probably 0.


The rest should be good. Here are the results.
TANK RESULTS
user118234_pic108919_1565642510.jpg


TAP RESULTS
user118234_pic108921_1565642510.jpg



As you can see from their test results the MG is 45ppm and the CA is 76 out of the tap. Tank is higher. So my estimate was probably on the high side.

I tried adding Equilibrium (as suggested by a member) before I did this test and that didn’t help. They too suspected an MG deficiency. I think it just made the water higher in CA and MG.

In terms of the link I provider, I’m not sure why it doesn’t work.

Maybe you need to go to the home page and search my town. Lets try it again.
Go to this link and in the "Water system name" type in "Waldwick".
https://www9.state.nj.us/DEP_WaterWatch_public/index.jsp

In terms of my water (possibly) being too hard or having too much CA and MG, I came here because I found posts from ceg4048 and his experience with
Limnophila Aromatica and how they flourish in his tank with hard water. It was this post: https://www.ukaps.org/forum/threads/whats-the-importance-of-kh.31225/

Just figured I would put that out there.

Thanks,
isonychia
 
More questions of course ;)

Tank dimensions
Filter details
Substrate - current and past attempts

Can you post a FTS?

What are your most successful plants?

Do you observe any livestock effects?
What sort of livestock do you keep?

Hi alto,

Here is the info.
17 gallon Mr Aqua. (60p)
23.6" x 11.8" x 14.2"
Filter: Eheim 2215
Substrate: eco-complete Tank has been setup since 2015. Wow so like 4 years.
Had problems since the beginning.
I have a video I took. I will post that asap.
Most successful plants: mini pellia, monte carlo, fissidens fontanus, ludwigia (maybe repens), star grass, anacaris, lobelia cardinalis, anubia nana petite (except that it gets GSA or the dust BBA type algae), Micranthemum umbrosum thats all I can think of now.

I keep 4 Neon Tetras currently. I do not notice any problems with the fish. They only have problems if I try and increase the CO2.

Thanks,
isonychia
 
Can you post a vid? So we can see flow?
Possible to do a pH profile ( hourly measurements from before CO2 starts till lights out?)

The only way I can test PH is through the API test kit. I do not own a pen as I was told they are not really much better. Maybe thats incorrect??
Per my towns water report my PH is about 7.5. Per the API test I get 7.5 in the tank before CO2 on and out of the tap. I don't remember doing a test with the water sitting out and degassing. I tested my PH yesterday. About 2 hours after CO2 (1pm) on I got about 6.6 on the card. At 6pm I tested it again and its at about 6.4. It's hard to tell based on the color charts. But it definitely looked lower than 6.6.

Video to come shortly.

isonychia
 
Have you tried increasing your water change to minimum of 50% weekly?
You don't mention what filter turnover you are using but try to improve your flow by using a power head or circulation pump.
Cheers
John
 
Hi and welcome to the forum



Sounds like hard water to me - but would be nice to see water report.' hard water does make it harder to grow plants'.



which one ? Fe DTPA or Fe EDDHA pics dont show that water being slightly pink which suggests Fe DTPA IMO

You haven't mentioned what filter your using ? and any power heads! - flow/tank turnover? flow is KING in the high tech planted tank without decent/adequate flow/tank turnover your plants will suffer



7 hrs is a longish photoperiod - plus why do you have your CO2 on longer than the photoperiod ?

pH profile ?



when was this taken?
Mid photo period ? which suggests very hard water !
pre CO2 on ? which suggests hard water again !

Thanks for the welcome.

I'm using DTPA chelated iron from GLA. I tried Flourish iron, (Ferrous gluconate) but that didn't help.
I recently switched my micros to GLA EDTA+DTPA MICROMIX from GLA-CSM+B. So far no benefits have been noticed.
I also was adding 1/64th tsp Mn with the micros, still adding it, but no benefit has been noticed.

I will post the video and it should help with the flow/powerhead quaestions. Filter is Eheim 2215.

I think I HAD set the CO2 to go off when the lights go off but then I changed the photo period at one point and didn't change the CO2 off time. Not sure why. I just changed it to go off the same time the lights go off. No sense in wasting CO2.

PH profile posted above.

isonychia
 
Here is the video.

Please ignore the fact that there is no visually pleasing scape.
It's impossible to have a scape plan when I cant get the plants I want to grow.
 
I think the problem is mainly not enough K and massive amount of Mg (which leads to probably blocked K and Ca uptake). With Ca of 120 ppm you shouldn't keep more that 25-30 Mg (and that means that with 25-30 Mg there should be at least 60ppm of K in the water - but these are generally massive amounts, especially for Aromatica (not to mention that ph of 7-7.5 is too high for Fe chelates - assuming Plantex is using EDTA).

If you look at my ICP test results they report my CA 93ppm and MG 56ppm.

I did tons of research and I still don't know if the excess CA/MG does actually prevent uptake of other nutrients. I also did searches on "high GH/KH" affects etc and could never get a definitive answer. Thats what lead me to posts like this: https://www.ukaps.org/forum/threads/whats-the-importance-of-kh.31225/

I tried cutting my tank water with distilled 50/50 for about a month but didn't see positive results. Maybe it was not long enough. I was hoping a definitive answer would tell me if I should go the RO route or just choose different plants. At this point I am hoping for some answers before I proceed.
 
I do not own a pen as I was told they are not really much better.
A good pen is better and faster. Doing a pH profile will tell a lot about your CO2 delivery.
I would improve the flow: have the output of the spraybar horizontal just below the surface, if you need to use the powerhead point it in the same direction so the flows enhance ( you can't bounce flow in a tank)
 
A good pen is better and faster. Doing a pH profile will tell a lot about your CO2 delivery.
I would improve the flow: have the output of the spraybar horizontal just below the surface, if you need to use the powerhead point it in the same direction so the flows enhance ( you can't bounce flow in a tank)

Can you suggest a PH pen?
The spraybar holes are angled about 45 degrees down. That powerhead is pointed up. It is there to simply create some surface agitation.
I didn't want to have the spraybar holes pointing horizontal as the CO2 is via a cerges reactor and thus I was concerned with off gassing too much CO2. So I use the powerhead for surface agitation instead of the spraybar.

Do you still think it's a bad setup?

iso
 
Spraybar and power head should be working together as the flow in the Vid looks poor IMO. Working together they would help stabilize the [CO2] thoughout the tank from top to bottom of tank. Number one problem in CO2 injected tanks is poor CO2 implementation with fluctuating [CO2]

Clives word below worth a read
We have a fairly well grounded, basic understanding of the photosynthetic processes.
A. We understand that Rubisco's job is to capture CO2 molecules and to deliver the molecules to the Calvin Cycle reaction centers. We know that Rubisco is hugely expensive and consumes a lot of resources to produce and to maintain. In low tech tanks, where the CO2 concentration is low there is a much higher density of Rubisco in the leaf because you need more of the protein to capture the small amounts of CO2. In gas injected tanks, the Rubisco density in the leaf is lower.

B. We also know that during Calvin Cycle, the fixing of Carbon involves some intermediate carbohydrate products until the final product is a type of glucose.

So, for item A. we know that when the plant senses that high concentrations of CO2 is available, it responds by reducing the production of expensive Rubisco. When it senses a lower CO2 concentration it must increase Rubisco production, however because this protein is so complicated and heavy, the increased production requires 2-3 weeks in order to change the density in the leaf to match the new gas concentration level. So it is much easier to reduce production than it is to increase production. When increasing gas injection therefore, it hardly takes any time to see an improvement in health. When lowering the concentration, the plant will suffer because it must now ramp up Rubisco production to account for the loss of CO2 availability.

When increasing the light, the plant must reallocate resources from Rubisco production/maintenance in order to deal with the increased radiation. This may entail new pigment production for protection. When the light is reduced, the plant then reallocates the light gathering proteins and can devote them to Rubisco production/maintenance.

So when we mess around with light and gas, we have some degree of predictability.

So stable [CO2] helps stabilize Rubisco production hence why a pH profile done every 30mins shows how stable the [CO2] is much better than 3 times ;)

What I mean is that if you are struggling with CO2 stability, or are having difficulty keeping high concentrations, then it's best to focus efforts on the first half of the photoperiod and not worry so much about the second half. If you are running very strong lighting then you are really pushing the plants and it's necessary to have the CO2 going. After 4 hours, if you turn the gas off, the water stays saturated for a couple of hours after the valve closes and the concentration trails off. So if you have an 8 hour photoperiod and you turn the gas on 2 hours before lights on, you can turn the gas off after 6 hours. So the gas is still running for 8 hours but it's on-off cycle is offset by the amount of time you turn it on prior to lights on.

There is no need to run the gas for 10 hours therefore.

Plants don't really run their photosynthetic machinery for the full day anyway. Under normal conditions, after 4 hours or so they start to shut down, so that's why CO2 isn't really needed for the full photoperiod.

Long photoperiods benefit algae more than they do plants, especially if it is high intensity.
The long photoperiod is more or less for our enjoyment.

So you can cut down the CO2 period a bit more too
 
If you keep the holes subsurface and pointing horizontal it should improve flow, surface agitation will increase gassing of, doesn't matter if it is through spraybar or powerhead. I would start by putting the powerhead central jusst under the spraybar, also pointing horizontal.
Pen: Milwaukee are solid. Just learn how to store and calibrate it, if you are a CO2 user you will use it more often.
 
Hi all,
I'm not sure at all.Could be, a quick look at the water results suggests a lot of sodium (Na) as well. I think you can safely discount magnesium deficiency.Was this recently? Looking at the video the new growth looks a bit pale, and ferric gluconate wouldn't supply any available iron in your hard water.

cheers Darrel

I used the Flourish a while ago. I stopped using it a long time ago when it wasn't showing any benefits and went back to the DTPA iron from GLA.

I would like to hear more about the excess of "X" affecting the uptake of "X" premise. I searched repeatedly for it when I saw it mentioned a long time ago (in my searches for "HIGH GH/KH/PH causing problems" ) but I could never find an extensive study on it that made it a definitive fact. I searched Tom Barr's site and EI and was not able to find any mention of it. What I did find was the repeated premise that as long as you have ENOUGH you are fine and no mention of having too much of any element.
Like I said those searches, besides Barr's site also brought me to this site and ceg4048 posts repeating that people chase their water too much and plants don't care about HIGH gh/kh/ph etc etc.

But I still see it mentioned randomly and was hoping for clarification on it and is it indeed the source of my problem.

Thanks,
iso
 
If you keep the holes subsurface and pointing horizontal it should improve flow, surface agitation will increase gassing of, doesn't matter if it is through spraybar or powerhead. I would start by putting the powerhead central jusst under the spraybar, also pointing horizontal.
Pen: Milwaukee are solid. Just learn how to store and calibrate it, if you are a CO2 user you will use it more often.

Hi Edvet,

I had the flow setup as you describe months ago. My spraybar HOLES pushing water horizontal instead of 45 degrees down and the spray bar mounted underneath also pushing water horizontal.

I assumed my spraybar pointing 45 degrees downward was better to get CO2 to the lower levels and then use the powerhead to create some surface agitation.
I thought the CO2 rich water running horizontal from my spraybar across the surface would off gas MORE CO2. It just seemed logical to me. Maybe thats wrong.

Either way I put it back the way you suggested. It didn't help before, but I did it anyway.

Remember. This is a tiny tank. The plants are getting the CO2 they need. I cant imagine there are any dead spots. But either way, ALL plants suffer. Even the stems that were directly in the path of the spraybar when I had it 45 degrees.

Any other thoughts as to what I should try? Any reading material that outlines the premise "Excess of X prevents uptake of Y"

isonychia
 
Back
Top