strungout said:Socielo stopped posting as he didn't want to be affiliated here
Micro tox is serious business
strungout said:Socielo stopped posting as he didn't want to be affiliated here
Pikez said:One thing I know about myself is that I am a persistent SOB. I'll find a way.
Pikez said:Thanks. I don't think it has to be a compromise, because others can grow wallichii in medium to high fert tanks even though in controlled experiments, wallichii always struggles in high-fert situations.
People who can grow wallichii well in EI conditions cannot explain WHY this plant behaves well in their tanks but not in controlled experiments. There are things we do not know. Some of us fall into ideal growth conditions that suit this plant without aiming for it.
Until we are able to clearly and correctly explain al of this, I won't accept resignation or compromise. One thing I know about myself is that I am a persistent SOB. I'll find a way.
fablau said:Good point Vin, I think that's the right way to approach and I will try what you suggest for those plants I also have problems with. Please, keep us posted on the progress of your own experiments. Thank you!
Pikez said:Fablau - let's compare Tom's tank with mine. His is much better filtered with a wet-dry. Mine is somewhat under-filtered with two Rena canisters. He uses T5 and I use LEDs. I'd say PAR is comparable. Other than that, substrate, KH, ferts, and maintenance are somewhat comparable. I would dare to say that even CO2 is comparable. I've already explained my super-charged CO2 system before at length. Flow is comparable.
Could better filtration and lighting be the answer?
I'd say no. Because my buddy in Simi Valley uses super hard tap water and 75% topsoil + 25% sand substrate with very little filtration or water change. He has weak lighting and no CO2. He grows lots of super healthy wallichii and wonders why I 'can't grow an easy plant like wallichii!'
It's hard to compare tanks and arrive at actionable conclusions. The only true test is your own tank pre and post one single variable. Make one change for 3-4 weeks. If it does not improve growth, then toss that hypothesis and start new. This is a great way to learn about horticulture, but it takes time and sometimes there is no need to reinvent the wheel.
Let's start with ferts as one variable.
One simple way to go about this is to use an All-in-One fert like Thrive. For my tank size, I'd need 32 ml dosed 3X per week according to Colin. If I were to mimic Marcel's experiments, I'd stay at 32 ml every other day for a month. Then go down to 24 ml for a month. Then 16 ml for a month. I suspect that by the time you get to 16 ml, I will notice some pretty hungry looking plants. This may be doable if light is reduced to 50-75% of regular PAR, but then you have two variables.
You could do the same with CO2. Most people need to inch up dosing. I can't inch up a whole lot more without gassing fish.
In most well-maintainced EI tanks, reducing both light and ferts while keeping CO2 medium to high will solve a lot of growth issues. May be all I need to do is reduce light and ferts even more.
nicpapa said:I dont think that ferts is the problem .
Toms adds a lot of them.
Did you try to adjust the surface?
I add a hang on filter for this on my 180lt tank , co2 and ph is more stable.
I try now to make my 180lt tank like the shimps tanks.
Lower ferts , lower grown , lower light.,loewer mainteance.
Pikez said:Will do. FYI - Marcel Golias used 5 dosage levels. In ppm nitrate: 2, 4, 8, 16, 32. Most of us using EI are in the 32 ppm range + or -.
He began noticing wallichii having issues once the level increased above 4 ppm. No such issues with rotundifolia or sp. Magenta.
BUT! Didiplis diandra began having issues when nitrate got to 16 ppm and 32 ppm. Didiplis did better at 4 and 8 ppm nitrate. And sure enough, Didiplis belong the drama-queen Lythraceae family.
I could grow Didiplis amazingly well in my tank during the first month, when the AquaSoil was brand new and maturing. I was dosing nothing but a little potassium and tiny, tiny bits of trace. Now, the plant does OK. Not great, but just OK.
Fully documented results from Marcel's experiments with numbers and photos are on password-required website. Get in touch with him if you're interested. Don't expect to come away with all your questions answered. As with a lot of good research, it will raise more questions than you previously had.
burr740 said:I never really trusted marcel's results, too much agenda imho
Pikez said:Will do. FYI - Marcel Golias used 5 dosage levels. In ppm nitrate: 2, 4, 8, 16, 32. Most of us using EI are in the 32 ppm range + or -.
He began noticing wallichii having issues once the level increased above 4 ppm. No such issues with rotundifolia or sp. Magenta.
BUT! Didiplis diandra began having issues when nitrate got to 16 ppm and 32 ppm. Didiplis did better at 4 and 8 ppm nitrate. And sure enough, Didiplis belong the drama-queen Lythraceae family.
I could grow Didiplis amazingly well in my tank during the first month, when the AquaSoil was brand new and maturing. I was dosing nothing but a little potassium and tiny, tiny bits of trace. Now, the plant does OK. Not great, but just OK.
Fully documented results from Marcel's experiments with numbers and photos are on password-required website. Get in touch with him if you're interested. Don't expect to come away with all your questions answered. As with a lot of good research, it will raise more questions than you previously had.
burr740 said:I never really trusted marcel's results, too much agenda imho
brwaldbaum said:There are reports in the scientific literature for deleterious effects on macrophytes when the total nitrogen concentration exceeds 2 ppm.
http://www.aswcd.org/growth_nitrient_update_of_elodea.pdfPikez said:Aquatic macrophytes? Do you have any references? 2 ppm nitrogen allows us some wiggle room for nitrates. That's about 9 to 10 ppm nitrates.