Worsening algae after starting EI dosing

[JoshP12]

I personally aim for 22 degree Celsius after my visit to Green Aqua, obviously if you have livestock that needs it higher or in middle of a heatwave then that's another story.

It ultimately depends on the goal.
22 is fine. 25 is fine. 30 is fine. 20 is fine.

But if the temp is set due to a fear of growing algae, then this is the root issue.

Temp = metabolism and it simply allows the plants to use the fertilizer and grow and allows a comfortable temperature for your fish. If you want a stable system, temp allows a higher rate of nutrient consumption and if it’s all in check - boom super stable and no ammonia.

Green Aqua needs to reduce maintenance so it makes sense.

Amano ran it at 77 Fahrenheit for almost every tank.

 

[Zeus.]

Amano ran it at 77 Fahrenheit for almost every tank.

Wasn't aware of that 😉

Having been to both Takashi Amano Forests Underwatter at Oceanarium Lisbon and Green Aqua which was stunning the sear size of it, however 'Green Aquas' tanks on my visit was in a different league for healthy plants than any where else I have been.

 

[ceg4048]

I have been using EI dosing for 11 days now. I have followed all the instructions and made my macro and micro bottles and have been dosing according to the instructions.

I seem to be having a progressively worsening of this blue-green (my guess could be wrong) algae which is worst on my mosses but is also present on my aquarium glass. I've not had this type of algae before and it's starting to look unsightly as it's getting worse.

I have attached some pictures most of them are a week apart. The worst one if today and the others a week or 2 before.

The only other parameter I have changed apart from moving to EI dosing is that I increased my lighting duration from 6 hours to 6h 30 mins a day and that was 3 or 4 weeks ago now. When I did increase the lighting duration then I did notice some green film type algae on my crypts and red plants but these are going away now and have cleared off about 60% what they were before. The tank had such lush growth a few weeks ago it looks so different so fast.

I was just wondering what tweaking I should do next? I'm guessing there's more than enough nutrients if i'm using EI dosing and my CO2 checker is lime green throughout the photoperiod. Also not overfeeding the fishes. Just wondering if that only leaves tweaking with the light but i'm not sure.

Hello,
A rule of thumb is that if you are dosing EI level of nutrients and the tank experiences nutrient related algae then one must immediately suspect that flow/distribution is faulty.

It was difficult to see exactly how your distribution is configured, but it appears you have a small spraybar mounted at the upper left on the back wall and it also seems you have another filter outlet mounted on the left wall.

If the spraybars flow is pointed towards the front and if the side wall mounted outlet is pointed towards the right pane then this is a classic case of interfering flows. Both flow outputs essentially interfere and result in incoherence. This reduces the effectiveness of both flows and results in poor nutrient and CO2 distribution.

The most effective configuration is to place all filter outlet on the same wall, and of course the most effective wall will be the rear wall so that the distance the flow has to move is along the shortest distance. Sendin flow to the long distance of the tank is less effective, especially if it is being interfered with by flow from the perpendicular direction.

The best plan is to perform massive water changes frequently. Remove all affective leaves as they only spawn more algal spores.
Next, experiment with various combinations of the filter outlet mounting, ensuring that all outlets are mounted on the same wall pointing in the same direction. Water is heavy, weighing 8 lbs. per gallon. It s therefore very difficult to manipulate and so it requires as much energy you can muster to move it along. Use the energy of your pumps so that they work together, not at opposing angles.

Everybody thinks their flow/distribution and flow are OK, but everybody is wrong...

far as the OP question goes, you might want to cut the dosing in half and start from there, with that plant mass you might not need to dose the full EI doses.

Algae really do not care about the level of EI nutrients in the tank. PO4, NO3 and K are not the cause of algae.
Ammonia/Ammonium however is a completely different story. They can trigger algal blooms if used incompetently. The rate of NH3/NH4 concentration rise is one of the triggers. This, combined with possible oxygen depletion due to bacterial action can result in algal blooms - however, just because someone uses NH4/Urea and gets algae, this does not automatically mean that the algae is responding to the NH4/Urea. You have to determine what algal species is blooming. if the bloom being experienced is a CO2 related algae then that will have little to do with their NH4/Urea dosing. There are many ways to make mistakes and the OPs case is an example of that.

There is no need to reduce the nutrient loading. EI has NEVER advocated the use of NH4/Urea specifically because NH4/NH3 is a known algal trigger. When WE say nutrients don't cause algae NH3/NH4/Urea are excluded from our list of nutrients.
Having said that, NH4/Urea is a very effective means of Nitrogen uptake, and if used responsibly one can have success. Amano's ADA Aquasoil is very effective precisely because it soaks the clay particles with Ammonium Nitrate, however many experience algae at the sediment, so this is a risk. When new, Aquasoil leeches NH4 into the water column due to it's high concentration, so frequent water changes are advisable when using these types of enriched sediments in order to control the NH4 loading rate.

Cheers,

 

[Happi]

@ceg4048

"When WE say nutrients don't cause algae NH3/NH4/Urea are excluded from our list of nutrients"

Weather you include it in your list or not it doesn't change the fact that Urea and NH4 both are nutrients in term of nutrients and fertilizer. This sound like another excuse to defend the EI system. I wonder what else we are going to exclude as the hobby advance in the future?

Now we should see something like this all across the forums:
"Nutrients doesn't cause Algae, but Urea and NH4 excluded"

Plus IMO EI is outdated and quite old. Most experts and professionals use fertilizer like Tropica, ADA etc which contains both Urea and NH4 which are known to cause algae according to the new EI with urea/Nh4 excludeded version. But yet tank dosed with ADA or Tropica are award winners while where EI is most popular which is in the USA, the forum like TPT have the most active members in the Algae thread.

 

[erwin123]

Hi, in your other thread you mentioned that you were using Tropica Ferts, presumably following the manufacturer's recommended dose.

When you switched to EI, how did you do it? Did you gradually increase the dose, or did you go straight from Tropica to full EI dosing?

I'm currently dosing APT's version of EI (20ppm N instead of 30ppm) but I did a 1 week "transition" from APT Complete (7ppm N from 3m/daily) to APT EI (20ppm N from 3ml/daily). I have no idea if it helped, but it seemed a good idea to make gradual rather than sudden changes to water parameters?

 

[Animallover]

If the tank was stable before and algae free, try a total reset and take it from there. Dial back all the changes - the lighting duration and fertz regime. You might also consider reducing light intensity as well. Since you altered more than one parameter at once absolute cause and effect can not be determined with any degree of certainty. However, EI in a balanced system shouldn't cause algae issues.

Before you increase either again work on optimizing your CO2 flow and distribution. It's probably the weak link if it needs to come on 4/5 hours before lights on. If it's not on a timer, it needs to be.

Keep on top of water changes and filter maintenance. It will help to do several substantial water changes a week and to clean the filter once a week until the algae is under control. If it persists consider a blackout.

Thanks!

I wouldn’t say my tank was ever 100% algae free there’s always something that I observe but the majority of the times it’s so little that it doesn’t bother me. Only since these last 2 changes of increased duration of light and starting EI has it gone out of hand and looking unsightly now. Yes that’s what I’ll do just revert back to how it was initially but I’m doing it one by one just to see if there is any causal relationship.

yes the CO2 is on a timer as well as the lights.

how do I improve my flow/ distribution?

 

[Animallover]

Hi all,

To be honest, my advice above is flawed: @Animallover , what are your goals?

1) how the tank looks?
2) on maintenance/frequency?

these goals will determine what advice
(Ferts etc etc) should be for you.

Josh

haha your initial post sounded like you were manic 😂😂.

I just want my tank to look how it did a month ago and maintain that really.

I prefer once a week maintenance. I do enjoy maintenance but if it’s too often not as enjoyable.

 

[Animallover]

I personally aim for 22 degree Celsius after my visit to Green Aqua, obviously if you have livestock that needs it higher or in middle of a heatwave then that's another story.

Mines at 23 but British summer has raised that currently.

 

[Animallover]

Hello,
A rule of thumb is that if you are dosing EI level of nutrients and the tank experiences nutrient related algae then one must immediately suspect that flow/distribution is faulty.

It was difficult to see exactly how your distribution is configured, but it appears you have a small spraybar mounted at the upper left on the back wall and it also seems you have another filter outlet mounted on the left wall.

If the spraybars flow is pointed towards the front and if the side wall mounted outlet is pointed towards the right pane then this is a classic case of interfering flows. Both flow outputs essentially interfere and result in incoherence. This reduces the effectiveness of both flows and results in poor nutrient and CO2 distribution.

The most effective configuration is to place all filter outlet on the same wall, and of course the most effective wall will be the rear wall so that the distance the flow has to move is along the shortest distance. Sendin flow to the long distance of the tank is less effective, especially if it is being interfered with by flow from the perpendicular direction.

The best plan is to perform massive water changes frequently. Remove all affective leaves as they only spawn more algal spores.
Next, experiment with various combinations of the filter outlet mounting, ensuring that all outlets are mounted on the same wall pointing in the same direction. Water is heavy, weighing 8 lbs. per gallon. It s therefore very difficult to manipulate and so it requires as much energy you can muster to move it along. Use the energy of your pumps so that they work together, not at opposing angles.

Everybody thinks their flow/distribution and flow are OK, but everybody is wrong...

Algae really do not care about the level of EI nutrients in the tank. PO4, NO3 and K are not the cause of algae.
Ammonia/Ammonium however is a completely different story. They can trigger algal blooms if used incompetently. The rate of NH3/NH4 concentration rise is one of the triggers. This, combined with possible oxygen depletion due to bacterial action can result in algal blooms - however, just because someone uses NH4/Urea and gets algae, this does not automatically mean that the algae is responding to the NH4/Urea. You have to determine what algal species is blooming. if the bloom being experienced is a CO2 related algae then that will have little to do with their NH4/Urea dosing. There are many ways to make mistakes and the OPs case is an example of that.

There is no need to reduce the nutrient loading. EI has NEVER advocated the use of NH4/Urea specifically because NH4/NH3 is a known algal trigger. When WE say nutrients don't cause algae NH3/NH4/Urea are excluded from our list of nutrients.
Having said that, NH4/Urea is a very effective means of Nitrogen uptake, and if used responsibly one can have success. Amano's ADA Aquasoil is very effective precisely because it soaks the clay particles with Ammonium Nitrate, however many experience algae at the sediment, so this is a risk. When new, Aquasoil leeches NH4 into the water column due to it's high concentration, so frequent water changes are advisable when using these types of enriched sediments in order to control the NH4 loading rate.

Cheers,

Hi,

thanks for the reply. Below is an illustration of the flow in the tank (birds eye view). It’s literally demonstrating the surface agitation that I can see with my eyes. Sorry I’m at work so couldn’t take a picture of the tank. From what you’re saying with having the flow be in the shortest direction my issues with be nozzle 2 and the spray bar location 3 as that
The FX6 has 2 nozzles perpendicular to each other so it’s very hard to make them both point the same direction.

should I change the direction of the spray bar location labelled 3 so the holes are facing the same direction as the spray bar portion labelled 4? But surely the spray bar pointing the soil is still a short distance so there’ll be good flow?
how would I know if the flow issue is solved? If I change orientation of the outputs parts should I wait for a couple of weeks to see the change?
I do have ADA soil and done the very frequent water changes when the tank was starting up.

 

[Animallover]

Hi, in your other thread you mentioned that you were using Tropica Ferts, presumably following the manufacturer's recommended dose.

When you switched to EI, how did you do it? Did you gradually increase the dose, or did you go straight from Tropica to full EI dosing?

I'm currently dosing APT's version of EI (20ppm N instead of 30ppm) but I did a 1 week "transition" from APT Complete (7ppm N from 3m/daily) to APT EI (20ppm N from 3ml/daily). I have no idea if it helped, but it seemed a good idea to make gradual rather than sudden changes to water parameters?

Hi,
It completely slipped my mind when o switched from Tropica to EI regarding the baby gradual steps but I went from Tropica following the bottle instructions to full EI dosing in the space of 1 day do maybe that’s the problem

 

[JoshP12]

haha your initial post sounded like you were manic 😂😂.

Bahahah!

I just want my tank to look how it did a month ago and maintain that really.

If you want to run EI, optimize flow/co2 and maintenance.

Otherwise, you can reduce your ferts to ease the demand on co2, necessarily flow on your tank. This strategy should be paired with root tabs and rich substrate.

Josh

 

[JoshP12]

Hi,
It completely slipped my mind when o switched from Tropica to EI regarding the baby gradual steps but I went from Tropica following the bottle instructions to full EI dosing in the space of 1 day do maybe that’s the problem

Instant increase in nutrient demand, if the demand is not met: boom.

If you continue not to meet the demand, the tank will “struggle” … if you adapt and make it meet the demand, it will “flourish in line with our goals” in time (provided you stay consistent).

 

[Happi]

while we are talking about this topic especially about the EI excluding the Urea/NH2/NH4 as they were listed as not part of EI due to not qualified as Nutrients. I wonder if we are going to remove EDTA/DTPA Chelated based fertilizer from our EI list because EDTA/DTPA both contain Nitrogen that is not in the Form of NO3.

its probably best for the OP to explore the changes and then make the changes as needed and let him draw his own conclusion, none of us are going to win a gold medals based on whos advice is the best. I think all the advice should be considered from all the members otherwise it sounds or becomes like sugarcoating.

 

[Guest]

Yes that’s what I’ll do just revert back to how it was initially but I’m doing it one by one just to see if there is any causal relationship.

Perhaps not the best methodology, it'll probably prolong the agony. If you follow anyone's advice on this best to follow Clive's @ceg4048

 

[MichaelJ]

@ceg4048

"When WE say nutrients don't cause algae NH3/NH4/Urea are excluded from our list of nutrients"

Weather you include it in your list or not it doesn't change the fact that Urea and NH4 both are nutrients in term of nutrients and fertilizer. This sound like another excuse to defend the EI system. I wonder what else we are going to exclude as the hobby advance in the future?

Hi @Happi, I think this is a bit unfair ... there are no rules without exceptions... Just because NH3/NH4 may precipitate algae growth and some fertilizers (such as Tropica Specialized) include those compounds in tiny amounts, I see no reason why that should undercut the general notion and expert advice that fertilizer (NPK + trace) do not cause algae. This advice has really helped a lot of people, including myself... and I have absolutely no reason to believe otherwise (and anecdotally, I used to (over)-dose Tropica Specialized and still didn't have algae).

Cheers,
Michael

 

[ceg4048]

Hi,

thanks for the reply. Below is an illustration of the flow in the tank (birds eye view). It’s literally demonstrating the surface agitation that I can see with my eyes. Sorry I’m at work so couldn’t take a picture of the tank. From what you’re saying with having the flow be in the shortest direction my issues with be nozzle 2 and the spray bar location 3 as that
The FX6 has 2 nozzles perpendicular to each other so it’s very hard to make them both point the same direction.

should I change the direction of the spray bar location labelled 3 so the holes are facing the same direction as the spray bar portion labelled 4? But surely the spray bar pointing the soil is still a short distance so there’ll be good flow?
how would I know if the flow issue is solved? If I change orientation of the outputs parts should I wait for a couple of weeks to see the change?
I do have ADA soil and done the very frequent water changes when the tank was starting up.

Hi,
OK, that configuration is even less effective than I thought. If I read that diagram correctly you have the spraybar holes pointing down? That only then sends the flow to the back part of the sediment. Then there is the corner unit which is sending it's flow to the longest possible distance in the tank, which is the hypotenuse of the triangle formed by the two tank sides and the diagonal. The energy peters out and goes nowhere. This was OK when the plants were smaller and had less mass, but as they grow and demand more of everything this distribution method fails. This has nothing to do with your fertilization method and everything to do with flow/distribution. The fact that your algal blooms began 11 days after switching to EI is merely coincidence. In fact, it's possible that the plants grew more rapidly after you began dosing EI and that increased mass then blocked the flow. When switching to EI you never have to worry about gradual implementation. Just get on with it.

The problem you mention with the FX6 angled outlets is the most vexing and may require it to be modified. It it were up to me I would cut off the outlets and run the hose into a fabricated spraybar. This can be any rigid plastic tubing of the right size (25mm?) with holes drilled. It may be possible to block off one of the spuds and to point the open spud so that it's pointing towards the front glass, but I don't know if that increases the flow from that single open spud. It's worth a try though and you can then move it away from the corner and place it half way between the end of the spraybar and the left wall. In fact the spraybar assembly needs to be shifted more towards the center and away from the right wall. Both the section labeled "3" as well as the section labeled "4" should point forward towards the front glass. With the spraybar assembly moved over away from the wall and the single "duckbill" in operation (or a DIY spraybar fabricated) you'll be moving a lot more water in a coherent fashion. The water will move towards the front glass and then will naturally be deflected down towards the sediment. When it contacts the sediment it will then be deflected towards the rear when it will make contact with the plants . CO2 will remain in solution longer and the plants will have more contact time with the nutrients.

Weather you include it in your list or not it doesn't change the fact that Urea and NH4 both are nutrients in term of nutrients and fertilizer. This sound like another excuse to defend the EI system. I wonder what else we are going to exclude as the hobby advance in the future?

We will exclude anything that proves to be less fruitful. I don't get your argument: On the one hand you acknowledge that EI was developed long ago. The guy who developed it understood exactly that NH3/NH4 is problematic and can cause problems. This was never a hidden fact. This is exactly why he chose an innocuous Nitrogen compound KNO3 and specifically avoided Ammonium Nitrate and Urea, which has been in use in all commercial fertilizers for a hundred years. In fact, that's why we have environmental problems with fertilizer runoff from the land. Ammonium compounds get dumped into waterways at an uncontrolled rate and causes algal blooms. Barr chose wisely, knowing that you could not get into trouble dosing NO3, even knowing that NH3/NH4 deliver quadruple the amount of Nitrogen. HE CHOSE TO AVOID NH3/NH4.

This choice is not a result of being outdated or old fashion. It's actually just the reverse.
Your argument demonstrates your lack of general and historical knowledge. The fact that the fancy commercial products use NH3/NH4/Urea is not the result of some modern technology. It is a result of those brands maximizing their profits using an old and outdated chemical that has proven to be an environmental nightmare years ago. Ammonium salts are CHEAP and are therefore more effective than NO3 salts, but cause more problems when used by knuckleheads. You are a typical victim of propaganda and you do not study all the facts in order to gain perspective. You look at a pretty bottle with shiny liquids and immediately assume that it must be modern, when the product is actually 100 years old.

I wonder if we are going to remove EDTA/DTPA Chelated based fertilizer from our EI list because EDTA/DTPA both contain Nitrogen that is not in the Form of NO3.

Who cares? This is more argumentative nonsense. We know what we are referring to and why, as I have already explained. I don't even care about these chelators. I don't use them because they are more money sent down the drain. Use them to your hearts content if it makes you feel more "modern".

its probably best for the OP to explore the changes and then make the changes as needed and let him draw his own conclusion, none of us are going to win a gold medals based on whos advice is the best. I think all the advice should be considered from all the members otherwise it sounds or becomes like sugarcoating.

It might be better for the OP to follow the advice of folks that have been successfully giving advice that works for years - even though the advice is old and outdated the advice is still more pertinent than following the "modern" trends of putting lipstick on a pig.

Cheers,

 

[Happi]

@ceg4048
"Who cares? This is more argumentative nonsense. We know what we are referring to and why, as I have already explained. I don't even care about these chelators. I don't use them because they are more money sent down the drain. Use them to your hearts content if it makes you feel more "modern"."

Clive, I didn't understand this quote, so you are saying that you don't use any fertilizer such as CSM+B ? Which is made with EDTA chelate? I thought you have a sticky thread about this on the front page in the fertilizer dosing section. Again the argument is not even about or related to weather spending the money on chelate or not or weather spending the money on these are throwing the money in the drain. Am just curious now what you use now that is not made with chelation? Please answer so others can benefit from it.

The argument is not about what Barr thinks or you thinks. The argument was you guys believed and preached about "fertilizer doesn't cause algae" "nutrients doesn't cause Algae" for decade now and exclude anything that causes algae. Some people will laugh at this statement, only the naive will fall for this.

We can go back and forth with this argument with all kinds of excuses but the fact are not going to change that "fertilizer does cause algae" fact that urea/Nh4/NO3/Fe/Mn etc. are all nutrients and fertilizer.

I find several flaws when I see a advice like this, another good example is "increase the PO4 to combat GSA" this advice is quite common for Many EI users. The question is where does the GSA goes when tropica fertilizer is used? Which have a very low PO4 and much lower P to N ratio compared to EI. We can apply the same logic to "Increase nitrate to combat Cyano bacteria" then where is the cyano for those who has been running aquarium for decade with almost 0 nitrate.

Furthermore, "add bushy nose to combat GDA" these are not solutions to the problems, you don't see Tropica hiring a crew of bushy nose to combat these kind of problems.

Back to the argument regarding fertilizer, nutrients and algae. I can induce, reduce, increase or get rid of any kind of algae in a controlled setting with the right dose, amount and the chemical fertilizer. If I made a statement like "fertilizer doesn't cause algae" "nutrients doesn't cause algae" then I would be lying to my self and others. But my advice would be focus on increasing the plant mass and dose the tank as neededed, I don't see the logic behind dosing EI trying to grow some Java moss.

Honestly, if people start to apply logic. They will get answers to most of their questions without the need for any advice.

 

[MichaelJ]

The argument is not about what Barr thinks or you thinks. The argument was you guys believed and preached about "fertilizer doesn't cause algae" "nutrients doesn't cause Algae" for decade now and exclude anything that causes algae. Some people will laugh at this statement, only the naive will fall for this.

Honestly, if people start to apply logic. They will get answers to most of their questions without the need for any advice.

@Happi That would be a very tall order for most I guess. In order to apply meaningful logic in any given domain you need a sufficient amount of knowledge and experience in that particular domain. Most people (myself included) just don't have the time, resources or aptitude to experiment to gain that level of experience or study up on even a fraction of every convincible topic entailing this hobby. I don't believe anyone is right all the time, that's impossible, but provided sufficient and accurate information, there is a fairly high probability that the expert advice you get on this forum will work out. I don't see much evidence to the contrary. To put it mildly, to tell people that they can get answers to most of their questions just by applying logic without the need for any advice, is not a very beneficial thing to say on a discussion forum that purposely states that hobbyists are actively encouraged and will receive expert advice from more experienced plant growers and aquascapers. Fortunately, people are mostly here to educate themselves and exchange advice rather than wasting time on futile arguments - time that should have been spend helping fellow hobbyists solving real-world issues IMHO.
Cheers,
Michael

 

[Animallover]

Bahahah!

If you want to run EI, optimize flow/co2 and maintenance.

Otherwise, you can reduce your ferts to ease the demand on co2, necessarily flow on your tank. This strategy should be paired with root tabs and rich substrate.

Josh

Thanks I’m going to try and optimise flow based around what Ceg has said and see if it’s any better

 

[Animallover]

while we are talking about this topic especially about the EI excluding the Urea/NH2/NH4 as they were listed as not part of EI due to not qualified as Nutrients. I wonder if we are going to remove EDTA/DTPA Chelated based fertilizer from our EI list because EDTA/DTPA both contain Nitrogen that is not in the Form of NO3.

its probably best for the OP to explore the changes and then make the changes as needed and let him draw his own conclusion, none of us are going to win a gold medals based on whos advice is the best. I think all the advice should be considered from all the members otherwise it sounds or becomes like sugarcoating.

Yeah exactly I’m using all of these information to help guide my next steps and still I’m sure some things will work and others won’t so I’m using this as a whole learning experience