Recommended ppm??

[tel]

Thanks Clive, I just need to have a bit of time to formulate a response which should be later today. It is almost there but a little muddled up in my head at the moment.
cheers tel

 

[tel]

Sorry Clive, I am struggling a bit with EI and dosing at the moment.

The only thing I think I have learned from the reading and the comments from people like yourself is "dose till you get a result" be that a positive or negative result is irrelevant just a result, from there act.

As such I feel I am flying blind and slamming in ferts with no real understanding of the why's and wherefores etc. Possibly with where I am at it is too early for any results to be gained so I am a little stagnated with any further understanding of this method. I will get there but maybe patience is required for the interim

Apologies for not being able to add further to what I think has been a very interesting discussion.
cheers tel

 

[ceg4048]

Sorry Clive, I am struggling a bit with EI and dosing at the moment.

The only thing I think I have learned from the reading and the comments from people like yourself is "dose till you get a result" be that a positive or negative result is irrelevant just a result, from there act.

Hi tel,
Umm...well you mustn't be discouraged or feel lost so early mate. I mean, "dose till you get a result" is fairly profound. I wouldn't call the results irrelevant, because your future action depends on the result. Growing plants is an interactive procedure mediated by your long term goals. If I'm a farmer and my long term goal is to raise 100 kilos of sugar cane, I have to plant, water, fertilize, weed and some months later, harvest. I'll then weigh my harvest and the yield will determine my success. But that will be months from now, I'll not have my 100 kilos by tomorrow morning, that's for sure.

As such I feel I am flying blind and slamming in ferts with no real understanding of the why's and wherefores etc....

Not true mate. As I mentioned to Jack in the thread I mentioned, change your sentence by substituting the words "plants" to "person" and "ferts" to "food". If my goal is to gain muscle, how soon should I expect this extra food to turn itself into muscle? if you've been reading, then you know more than you realize. Take this quick quiz to test your understanding:
1. What if a week from now you look at the tank and a dark green slimy mat covers an area of the tank. What would be your corrective action?
2. What would you conclude if you saw filamentous algae attached to the edges of some leaves and how would that impact your dosing?
3. What would be your corrective action if you saw the emergence of small green circular spots on the glass and on leaves?
4. What would be your reaction of you saw new leaves turning yellow?
5. What would be your reaction if some plants starter getting holes or if stems turned soft/mushy? How does that impact the dosing?

Possibly with where I am at it is too early for any results to be gained so I am a little stagnated with any further understanding of this method. I will get there but maybe patience is required for the interim

Yep, definitely patience is needed. Our good friend Matt-Bull has a signature which reads something like "The only things that happen quickly in a planted tank are bad things..."

Plants typically either grow or die, there's hardly ever an in-between, so if your plants are not dying then you already have a result, it's a good result and it's most definitely relevant.

Cheers,

 

[tel]

A quarter to seven in the morning and I am taking an exam

if you've been reading, then you know more than you realize. Take this quick quiz to test your understanding:

I know that I could nip over to James' site as he has a page on algae/plant issues.
But without doing so and trying to work off what I have read( don't make me sit in the corner if I do badly),
so,

1. What if a week from now you look at the tank and a dark green slimy mat covers an area of the tank. What would be your corrective action?

With this I would say there is a balance issue between my dosing vs light, filter/flow, and Co2 distribution. Corrective action I would take is increase water changes and blackout on the tank for at least a week.

2. What would you conclude if you saw filamentous algae attached to the edges of some leaves and how would that impact your dosing?

Not really sure, my head keeps telling me that this is a flow issue

3. What would be your corrective action if you saw the emergence of small green circular spots on the glass and on leaves?

Look for dead spots of flow with in the tank, increase the flow.

4.What would be your reaction of you saw new leaves turning yellow?

New leaves turning yellow could be an iron issue, however from memory you have stated and I think the term used was for the record lack of Co2 is going to be the cause. So increase Co2 and check the distribution of.

5. What would be your reaction if some plants starter getting holes or if stems turned soft/mushy? How does that impact the dosing?

I would think it is suggestive of a lack of "food", so I would increase dosing of Nitrates and Phosphates.

that took a long time 😳

I am not feeling confident on this 😳
cheers,tel

 

[ceg4048]

Well, I'll give you partial credit on some of these. That way there's no need for sitting in the corner wearing the dunce cap (which always disturbed me greatly.) Go on and check James's page.

1. What if a week from now you look at the tank and a dark green slimy mat covers an area of the tank. What would be your corrective action?

With this I would say there is a balance issue between my dosing vs light, filter/flow, and Co2 distribution. Corrective action I would take is increase water changes and blackout on the tank for at least a week.

No need to worry about CO2 in this case. The dark slimy stuff is BGA and this will ostensibly tell you that you don't have enough KNO3 or flow. Following your blackout, action number 1 would be to immediately double your KNO3 dosing - that's the relevance. Step number two would be to improve flow at nearest opportunity. In real life, since you are already dosing EI levels of KNO3 more than likely you'd see what I call a "nibble" of BGA, some small patches starting to develop on the floor (not great big mats of the stuff) meaning that you would be just below the NO3/flow limit. In this case just add more KNO3 and remove the patches by hand. No need for a blackout when you get the "nibble"

2. What would you conclude if you saw filamentous algae attached to the edges of some leaves and how would that impact your dosing?

Not really sure, my head keeps telling me that this is a flow issue

OK, but remember that flow is a means to an end. At the very heart of the matter, filamentous algae arises due to poor CO2. As it turns out, better flow delivers more CO2, or you can deliver more CO2 by increasing the injection rate. We'd prefer to improve flow only because injection rate increase increases toxicity to the critters, whereas flow merely increases efficiency of uptake without the penalty of toxicity increase.

3. What would be your corrective action if you saw the emergence of small green circular spots on the glass and on leaves?

Look for dead spots of flow with in the tank, increase the flow.

Again, yes flow is the means to an end. In this case the end is to improve the efficiency of PO4 and CO2 uptake. The spots are GSA caused by poor PO4 and/or poor CO2. icreased flow will improve uptake of both of these or the other option is to increase the PO4 dosing level and/or increase the CO2 injection rate. Step number 1 therefore is to immediately double your PO4 dosing because that's the easiest thing to do. if that's only partially successful then up the CO2/flow.

4.What would be your reaction of you saw new leaves turning yellow?

New leaves turning yellow could be an iron issue, however from memory you have stated and I think the term used was for the record lack of Co2 is going to be the cause. So increase Co2 and check the distribution of.

Actually your first answer was right. If new leaves are yellow but old leaves are green the immediate suspicion is Fe. Iron is not very mobile so the plant cannot easily re-distribute from the old leaves which already have iron. The impact on your dosing should be to immediately double your trace dosing.

5. What would be your reaction if some plants starter getting holes or if stems turned soft/mushy? How does that impact the dosing?

I would think it is suggestive of a lack of "food", so I would increase dosing of Nitrates and Phosphates.

Hmmmm...no partial credit on this one mate. All structural failures or deformation should immediately arouse suspicion of CO2 failure, so action number one should be to look at CO2/flow. This should have zero impact on the dosing because Carbon makes structure. Carbon is what makes your wooden tables and chairs (and I guess chopsticks ) strong. So when you lose structure carbon is being lost.

I'll give you a a passing score of 65%, somewhat anemic, so I suggest you take a few Iron tablets....

Cheers,

 

[Always Broke]

This has been a great topic and explained some things I was totally unsure of. Thanks for putting it into simple words that even I can understand. I will bookmark this topic as I am sure some or all of these things will be coming my way soon

Simon

 

[tel]

Well, I'll give you partial credit on some of these. That way there's no need for sitting in the corner wearing the dunce cap (which always disturbed me greatly.) Go on and check James's page.

I'll give you a a passing score of 65%, somewhat anemic, so I suggest you take a few Iron tablets....

Cheers,

Thanks Clive, and I appreciate the passing score albeit a tad generous.
I must say it is a wee bit disconcerting exposing to a forum how little I know like this, but it has helped so that can only be good.
cheers, tel

 

[ceg4048]

I think it was Mohandas K. Gandhi who reasoned that humility is the beginning of wisdom. You get a passing score because;
1. You're a "thinking" hobbyist, concerned with plant health first - the very best kind there is.
2. You're not overly concerned with throwing Gigawatts of ego-busting light at the tank as your top priority.
3. You are aware of the issues of flow/distribution within the tank.

It's very difficult for people to believe and to focus on these things after being programmed by The Matrix since birth, so this gets a passing score in my book any day pal.

Cheers,

 

[LondonDragon]

What ppm should we be aiming at for Calcium? just to get an idea of what I should be aiming for, thanks

 

[ceg4048]

Hi Paulo,
Ca++ behavior is complicated and really not well understood and I've purposely dumped loads of GH booster into the tank to find upper limits but haven't really found a toxic level (it was only toxic to my wallet). Those folks using tap water rarely would even need to worry about it because most tap water has more Ca++ than needed. If the tap water is soft or if RO water is being used, then Barr typically suggests to add enough GH Booster , or other commercial re-mineralizer to get a GH of around 3 or 4. There are loads of different ways to increase the GH.

There's certainly no need to throw money away at a Calcium test kit and remember that GH is a measure of both Mg and Ca so lets say you measure your tap GH and it shows 10. We won't know the relative content. It could theoretically be all Mg and zero Ca or the reverse. Generally it's somewhere in between. An easy way to tell if you've got enough Ca is if you get hard water deposits on your kettle or kitchen/bathroom sinks.

I'm not actually sure I've ever seen a calcium deficiency in real life. One of the many roles of Calcium is to add structure, so the standard deficiency syndromes are described as being disintegration of cell walls and tissue collapse, however, 99.99% of the time, when this happens it's actually a Carbon deficiency because tissue collapse happens to be THE classic failure mode of Carbon limitation. Since many are in denial about CO2 they'll run away from it and look to Calcium for an explanation.

By process of elimination, if your GH is known to be nonexistent (i.e. using pure unadjusted RO or confirmed tap with zero GH) and if your CO2 is known to be excellent and if your flow/distribution is known to be outstanding and if you are still getting tissue collapse then yes, Ca deficiency would be a likely culprit.

I appreciate that this sounds vague, but for all intents and purposes, and to simplify life, I never ever measure Ca++ ppm and just consider the recommended ppm value anything higher than zero. And that's very easy to accomplish. Only those operating their tank in a fringe regime ever need to think about Ca++ ppm. 8)

Cheers,

 

[LondonDragon]

Many thanks Clive, I will not worry about it for now then haha thanks for your long explanation 😉

 

[Alastair]

Just had a re read of all this. Very indepth


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Diogo Reis]

Hi Paulo,
Ca++ behavior is complicated and really not well understood and I've purposely dumped loads of GH booster into the tank to find upper limits but haven't really found a toxic level (it was only toxic to my wallet). Those folks using tap water rarely would even need to worry about it because most tap water has more Ca++ than needed. If the tap water is soft or if RO water is being used, then Barr typically suggests to add enough GH Booster , or other commercial re-mineralizer to get a GH of around 3 or 4. There are loads of different ways to increase the GH.

There's certainly no need to throw money away at a Calcium test kit and remember that GH is a measure of both Mg and Ca so lets say you measure your tap GH and it shows 10. We won't know the relative content. It could theoretically be all Mg and zero Ca or the reverse. Generally it's somewhere in between. An easy way to tell if you've got enough Ca is if you get hard water deposits on your kettle or kitchen/bathroom sinks.

I'm not actually sure I've ever seen a calcium deficiency in real life. One of the many roles of Calcium is to add structure, so the standard deficiency syndromes are described as being disintegration of cell walls and tissue collapse, however, 99.99% of the time, when this happens it's actually a Carbon deficiency because tissue collapse happens to be THE classic failure mode of Carbon limitation. Since many are in denial about CO2 they'll run away from it and look to Calcium for an explanation.

By process of elimination, if your GH is known to be nonexistent (i.e. using pure unadjusted RO or confirmed tap with zero GH) and if your CO2 is known to be excellent and if your flow/distribution is known to be outstanding and if you are still getting tissue collapse then yes, Ca deficiency would be a likely culprit.

I appreciate that this sounds vague, but for all intents and purposes, and to simplify life, I never ever measure Ca++ ppm and just consider the recommended ppm value anything higher than zero. And that's very easy to accomplish. Only those operating their tank in a fringe regime ever need to think about Ca++ ppm. 8)

Cheers,

hi ppl..sorry to continue this post but i have a ca question.
i have 1.3mg/L of ca and 1.3mg/L of mg in my tap water. It is necessary to dose mg or ca?

thank you

 

[ian_m]

is necessary to dose mg or ca?

Yes always dose Mg as MgSO4 is cheap and extra in the water isn't a problem.

For Ca as Ceg says

Those folks using tap water rarely would even need to worry about it because most tap water has more Ca++ than needed

 

[Diogo Reis]

But its not suppost ca to be 4 times more than mg? I think that is 4(ca):1(mg)
If i dose just mg i will have much more mg than ca

 

[ian_m]

But its not supposed ca to be 4 times more than mg? I think that is 4(ca):1(mg)

Never heard of that before. Ca is normally never worried about as most tap water contains enough. So unless you have extremely soft water, are using rain water or using RO water then no need to worry.

As Ceg notes....

I'm not actually sure I've ever seen a calcium deficiency in real life

 

[GlassWalker]

Edit: sorry, posted in wrong thread!

 

[ceg4048]

But its not suppost ca to be 4 times more than mg?

No.

Cheers,

 

[Diogo Reis]

Okok. I will try not to add ca. With 1.30mg/l of magnesium in tap water. how much i addof extra magnesium?
Ceg, can you just give your opinion about this deficiency?

 

[ceg4048]

Ceg, can you just give your opinion about this deficiency?

Poor CO2 mate.
People always waste time and energy searching for exotic causes for their problems, when 95% of the time the answer is poor CO2.

Okok. I will try not to add ca. With 1.30mg/l of magnesium in tap water. how much i addof extra magnesium?

Just add a few teaspoons of Epsom Salts at water change time. This is a micronutrient. That means you only need microscopic amounts.

See what I mean? Spend you energy on solving the riddle of CO2 in your tank first and foremost.

Cheers,