This site is supported by the advertisements on it, please disable your AdBlocker so we can continue to provide you with the quality content you expect.
  1. We are after as many aquarium plant images that we can get, doing so will assist us in completing the aquarium plant database.

    https://barrreport.com/threads/aquatic-plant-images-wanted.14374/
    Dismiss Notice

120 Gal Dutchy Freestyle - Now with 50% more Dutch!

Discussion in 'Journals' started by burr740, Jan 10, 2017.

  1. burr740

    burr740 Micros Spiller
    Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2015
    Messages:
    1,398
    Likes Received:
    1,294
    Local Time:
    2:24 PM
    Tom Barr , thanks for all that, which lends further credence to the theory at hand.


    Yes similar to co2 and rubisco, which from what I understand is an expensive enzyme for plants to make. And why having stable co2 is just as important as how much, more so even..

    Thanks Dennis. No I will not ignore the suggestion. People used to think I was crazy too, so I understand being the only person around with a particular idea. :)


    When Ive said the problem cannot be co2, I mean having low or irregular levels, insufficient circulation, low o2, or an overloaded of bio-mass - all of which combine to equal "good co2".


    "Good co2" is about more than just dropping the pH or turning a drop checker lime green, as Im sure you know.


    Currently the PH drops a full point by the time lights come on, a couple hours later it's down almost 1.3, but not quite, and there it remains for the duration of the photo period.


    In the 50-60 ppm range according to the charts


    KH 5.5


    PH at peak co2 levels in the upper 6.4s


    PH degassed ~ 7.75 or so


    I would call that fairly high, but not exactly nosebleed levels.


    But you may be onto something and I will definitely keep it in mind. For now though, Im going to pursue the current line of thinking as see how that plays out.
     
    #161 burr740, Apr 19, 2017
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 19, 2017
  2. burr740

    burr740 Micros Spiller
    Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2015
    Messages:
    1,398
    Likes Received:
    1,294
    Local Time:
    2:24 PM
    Hey fab, my reasoning for increasing P has nothing to do with gsa. I rarely see any of that, even dosing .5 ppm 3x week.


    Personally I think the same things that cause every other kind of algae in a high tech tank also cause GSA - primarily unhappy plants, and to a lesser extent, dirty conditions, filters, etc.


    That's not to say really high levels of P wont kill GSA, that's pretty much accepted as true these days, but I dont believe the relationship is as strong as most folks think as it relates to the cause.


    The reason I want to get P dosing back up around 1 or 1.5 is that everything in general seems to do a little better. Greens are greener, very old leaves hold up better, that sort of thing. Subtle differences, but differences nonetheless.


    Keep in mind I have 4 high tech tanks to observe - the 120, 50, a 20 and a 10 (gallons).


    All set up the same, the only difference being light. The 50 gal has 15-20 less par than the 120, and the two smaller tanks are both in the 50 range.


    Most of the time they all get the same dosing too, not always, but eventually I wind up doing the same thing for all 4. This gives me the chance to watch 4 different environments with many different species react to a particular change.


    Mostly foreground and midground stuff in the smaller tanks, mostly stems in the 50.


    The point is 1-1.5 ppm 3x should NOT be a problem. It's been several months since I reduced P down from the 2-2.5 ppm range 3x. I still had the 75 going back then. So Ive had a good amount of time to see various things react.


    Another thing to consider is that concentration affects absorption. For example in a high light tank, the plants might only consume a couple ppms of NO3 per day, but that doesnt mean keeping the water column at 2 ppm will adequately feed everything. Tom's graph points to this as well (if Im seeing things right)


    So that's why I'd like to inch P back up closer to EI dosing level, nothing to do with algae. :)
     
    #162 burr740, Apr 19, 2017
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 19, 2017
    2 people like this.
  3. Pikez

    Pikez Rotala Killer!
    Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    May 12, 2013
    Messages:
    1,962
    Likes Received:
    1,470
    Local Time:
    8:24 PM
    Note that I ran the Kill Tank for 6 months at a full 2 point pH drop. It stayed that way 24/7 for half a year. Plants did well or poorly depending on the fert factors I was playing with.
     
  4. Dennis Singh

    Dennis Singh SynKing!

    Joined:
    May 5, 2013
    Messages:
    2,417
    Likes Received:
    639
    Local Time:
    12:24 PM
    Thanks for hearing me out. I am following. Kh 5.5, this is probably why the syngonanthus were melting on you. I see no other problems, not even substrate.


    Yeah I'd call that high myself, waiting on my pH meter myself, got my GH AND KH testers, so I'll see my drop, i think mines around the same...


    On a side note, I see stunting in my AR Opicus, People, you notice that A. Reneickiis' are more prone or sensitive to something?


    The rotala family seems to stunt easiest. I totally believe is a high co2 issue for this particular plant.


    Syngonanthus being higher co2 tolerant or absorption do not stunt at my current levels.


    I'm telling you i used to see this stuff a lot, flood of co2 coming in but the only reason why i lowered co2 in my setup was to see if i can add fish and still keep the syngonanthus alive and thrive at the same time.


    the normal hobbyist probably wouldn't even see this as stunting


    r mex red


    0m3vHqZ.jpg


    butterfly stunt


    gGjoCme.jpg


    ar opicus


    DfHtM7M.jpg


    5KG2ttZ.jpg


    Dyf2MS3.jpg
     
    #164 Dennis Singh, Apr 19, 2017
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 19, 2017
    Mário Martins likes this.
  5. rajkm

    rajkm Article Editor
    Staff Member Lifetime Member Article Editor

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2015
    Messages:
    670
    Likes Received:
    216
    Local Time:
    8:24 PM
    I am no expert in this but is it CO2 or PH that's causing the issue?


    in terrestrial plants and hydroponics there is a PH threshold beyond which plants cannot absorb certain nutrients effectively. Is there such limit for submerged plants. I have been told no, it does not since in nature there are plants growing at lower PH but I don't know in a small aquarium if it matters.
     
  6. Dennis Singh

    Dennis Singh SynKing!

    Joined:
    May 5, 2013
    Messages:
    2,417
    Likes Received:
    639
    Local Time:
    12:24 PM
    Be interesting to see if its pH. My pH buffers 5.5 degassed, i'm sure i'm over a one drop, Rio Uaupes has never done ever better for me. Will check tomorrow. GH 0-1, KH not tested yet. Rio uaupes region ph via Big Vin in 3's. So you definitely might be onto something there. Actually all my syngonanthus have never done better than this. Growth rate, i've gotten faster with the amazonia, but always torched my uaupes.


    Sorry burr if stray away or...I think you welcome it no? Like i welcome anything in my threads(no, not my sales thread!), love replies...


    right now i'm one of a kind, but what happens when i find


    that others will start growing what i'm growing..Anger?
     
  7. Tom Barr

    Tom Barr Founder
    Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2005
    Messages:
    18,691
    Likes Received:
    711
    Local Time:
    8:24 PM
    No, plants can easily handle more gas than any living livestock can.


    It is not about belief.


    Issues arise when things like, ohhh.......I do not know..........X, Y, and Z with the CO2 and O2 issues occur.


    Yea, I can grow plants without adding any CO2 also, so what?


    Many folks have had their CO2 gas tank run out and not catch it for a few days.


    My tanks have had that happen many times over the decades.


    It never ends well. Not once, ever.


    NO3? PO4? Traces? Meh.........


    Recently I neglected changing out the bag filters, they clogged and overflowed and degassed a fair amount of CO2. Curious, I measured the pH difference before and after, about 0.4 pH units, quite a bit. CO2 inflow was the same, but the rates of degassing changed significantly.


    As far as a ferts, the range shown in the garage vs the indoor tanks show a massive ferts range difference, plants do well in both cases. Light is similar and so is CO2.


    Degassing is much less an issue and the CO2 tank has about 3-5 days decline before it is 100% out. Easy to catch. So those tanks are more stable than my tanks indoor ironically.


    Even the non CO2 tank does best when there is a higher exchange rate and a some rippling from the filter vs just surface movement.


    You can say what you believe all day long, but the evidence is just not there.


    Folks have to be able to repeat and not falsify it for it to be correct.
     
  8. Tom Barr

    Tom Barr Founder
    Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2005
    Messages:
    18,691
    Likes Received:
    711
    Local Time:
    8:24 PM
    Along these lines, your plants are fine if you dosed this amount for several days, you can look at rapid pearling as a response for this post KH2PO4 dosing. Generally, about 30-45 minutes later, if the system is PO4 limited, you will see a rapid response.


    In other words, it is okay to drop the PO4 to zero, for a couple of days, as long as you "pulse" the PO4 here and there at least at the 0.2ppm ranges.


    We use to call this West Coast lean dosing.


    Back when folks were a bit more fear based about PO4.


    PMDD actually suggest 0.2ppm and not driven down to zero etc, many assume that it meant low as possible, but that is not the case.


    Paul was fairly specific.


    I dose about 5ppm 2x a week. Use to do about 1-2 ppm.


    Does it help? No, not really, we seem to assume the GSA, but it's not a big issue in other tanks where the PO4 is not dosed or is pretty low.
     
    2 people like this.
  9. Dennis Singh

    Dennis Singh SynKing!

    Joined:
    May 5, 2013
    Messages:
    2,417
    Likes Received:
    639
    Local Time:
    12:24 PM
    Belief sends me to hell, science i rest in peace.


    Do you know exactly what causes stunting? the biology behind it?


    especially the rotala genus genius?


    I don't see why if N is in excess, negative effects, why wouldn't co2 in excess haven't negative effects


    Yes plants can *handle* more gas, but at what point does it come into excess where it damages stunts the plant? exact ppm ranges I meaning


    They're both nutrients are they not?


    A lot of your science and reasonings i conclude that most all plants are all the same, and they're not.


    Im in no way disregarding the very importance of co2


    In regards to Phosphate, why is it labeled a macro when dosages are so low?


    I recently added 13.5ppm by the end of the week and i believe that did not cause any issues whatsoever, so if it is a macro, why not macro ppm numbers?
     
    #169 Dennis Singh, Apr 20, 2017
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 20, 2017
    Mário Martins likes this.
  10. Tom Barr

    Tom Barr Founder
    Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2005
    Messages:
    18,691
    Likes Received:
    711
    Local Time:
    8:24 PM
    Plants respond negatively to such changes generally, weeds can often out compete other plants that are slower growing, so they might not care.


    Another species that's slower growing or less weedy, might have a negative response.


    New growth is an allocation issue. If the plant has ample resources available..........then suddenly you remove them, then what do you think? Growth would slow, but the plant has time to response because it was healthy already.


    Now reverse this, a fairly limiting tank that suddenly adds a lot of ferts? Those enzymes HATS suddenly pack in a lot more ferts and this messes things up inside the cells for a bit.


    Weeds on the other hand can respond well to this and thrive. Slower plants, not so much.


    Look at the issue from both directions(2 different starting points and two different plant types), not just one.


    Same with most things you want to test, try both extremes and most things will fall somewhere in between those two points.
     
  11. Tom Barr

    Tom Barr Founder
    Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2005
    Messages:
    18,691
    Likes Received:
    711
    Local Time:
    8:24 PM
    I do not think the issues you have are CO2 related.


    Something else.


    But the figure gives you a working model to address everything from CO2 to NO3, to P, to traces.


    If all you are use to is the HATS at say 1 uM of K+, then suddenly you have 10,000 uM K+, the plant cells will get a huge salty shock of fertilizers.


    Some plants will respond well, some not so well.


    Some may stunt and then regrow nicely once those LATS enzymes kick in and new growth starts.


    Given many aquatic plants are CO2 limited, they have ample amounts of Rubisco, but are not generally limited for ferts other than maybe N as it's not found at high levels in the soils of wetlands. P can go either way, but generally, there's ample P in wetland soils.


    The soil link might make a large difference with some species that are pesky and less well adapted to submersed growth.


    Such plants that are pesky tend to do best in clay sandy loam: ADA AS or rice paddie soil.


    Peat can be used to reduce the KH and acidify the water also. Then you add some carbon to remove the tannins.


    The old days. You could try that also in lieu of RO.


    That's what new ADA AS or MTS does.


    You can also just add a 1/2 liter of the ADA AS in a bag in the filter also.


    Simple stuff.


    Same with using carbon for allelopathic chemical test.
     
  12. Tom Barr

    Tom Barr Founder
    Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2005
    Messages:
    18,691
    Likes Received:
    711
    Local Time:
    8:24 PM
    This is specific for salts, but CO2 itself is NOT a salt. Adding CO2 has no impact on KH. Thus the plant is simply exposed to more CO2 [aq], not a more true acid like HNO3.


    Carbonic acid is only present at 1 out of every 400 CO2 molecules. This assumes there's some KH, but even 0.5 ppm of KH is ample for the ranges of CO2 we might keep.


    If you have zero KH and add lots of CO2, the pH should stop about 3.4 to 3.7 if the CO2 is extremely high.


    HNO3 acids and tannins can easily drop the pH below that.


    Like many here, I've found plenty of weeds growing in low KH and low pH locations, CO2 from soil and tannins contribute to this.


    Those pH optima charts are great for SOME terrestrial plants..................but aquatic plants are a different critter.


    Blueberry, Cranberry are in the 4-6 pH range


    Rice, about 5.5 to 6.5, but there's ample KH in those cases.


    We are comparing crops that are much more aligned with aquatic plants now. They tend to be on the more acid side.


    Still, what makes most of the nutrients available or not, is really Redox in the soils, rather than pH per se. Hence the differences we see between ADA As vs plain old sand.


    Additionally, such studies add bases and acids to adjust pH, not CO2 gas. At least I've not seen any that have.


    If someone can find one, let me know.
     
  13. Tom Barr

    Tom Barr Founder
    Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2005
    Messages:
    18,691
    Likes Received:
    711
    Local Time:
    8:24 PM
    I grow plenty of Rotala, both in low and high nutrients.


    It is not the CO2.


    My minibutterfly took a hit, but rapidly recovered upon fixing the clogged bag filter. Even Buces, slow growing...they got a tinge of BBA on the oldest leaves and older roots, fixed the issue and cleaned the filters.


    Degassing changed things. Some might also say there was less O2, or an increase in BOD when a filter clogs, less CO2 going through the system. Depends on your tank and filter.


    In my set up, the degassing was the factor. Rotala species and Ludwigia ';red" even stunted some, but not entirely. It was noticeable.


    Recovery was rapid. Now this is correlation, but I tested my hypothesis this was a CO2 issue, and I run the gas pretty high, but..........I still keep healthy fish and shrimp.


    I've had this happen many times over the years. I know it's not the ferts, I can and have varied them over a wide range.


    You need to convince yourself, not me, I already know.


    If you cannot keep livestock, then that...............means your CO2 is too high I would argue, plants do not care as long as they have enough.


    I suppose you could gas the tank to the point where there's little O2 respiration possible for bacteria and micro inverts, thereby causing a break down of the biological sections in the soil and filter. But plants can handle a lot of CO2 gas. Still, dramatic changes that go from a lot of gas, to suddenly little? That's going to bad most every time. If you go from low CO2, to higher? That's not going to be negative. If you bob between high and low daily or over time, then that will be tough on plants. Such tanks have algae generally because of poor plant growth.


    CO2 responses are fast. N is often fairly low in most systems, so plants have a HATS for that, rarely, they get to use the LATS when the NO3 is high, but in our tanks, we keep things pretty high on NO3 and other ferts as a rule. So they use the fast higher ppm enzyme, LATS. It piles in more NO3 faster, but less efficient. It does not care because there's plenty around.


    So my tank in the garage will have the HATS(N limiting) and the 120 will have the LATS(N non limiting).


    Same plants in both tanks, and wide range of species, so the species differences are there, but there's no effect based on CO2. Some like more N than others it would seem.


    These are not rigid blanket statements, I've never said any of that so I am not clear why you decided to bring it up. Some species also may require more CO2 than others, or more light. Hydrilla really does fine without adding CO2, whereas Red erios will certainly need some.


    But Hydrilla does just fine at high CO2, same for any species of Rotala I've ever grown.


    Questions:


    What CO2 level stunts plants and what specific species? You lack that basic information. Without it, how can someone verify or refute the hypothesis?


    How is the CO2 measured? What other factors are included?


    Many.


    But all it takes is for someone to be able to grow the plant nicely, to falsify the claim.


    When you do not even try to falsify your own hypothesis....that is when we have a problem.
     
  14. Dennis Singh

    Dennis Singh SynKing!

    Joined:
    May 5, 2013
    Messages:
    2,417
    Likes Received:
    639
    Local Time:
    12:24 PM
     
    #174 Dennis Singh, Apr 20, 2017
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2017
  15. rajkm

    rajkm Article Editor
    Staff Member Lifetime Member Article Editor

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2015
    Messages:
    670
    Likes Received:
    216
    Local Time:
    8:24 PM
    Thanks for that explanation. That helps understand why I keep hearing no for that question .
     
  16. Dennis Singh

    Dennis Singh SynKing!

    Joined:
    May 5, 2013
    Messages:
    2,417
    Likes Received:
    639
    Local Time:
    12:24 PM
    So here I'd say I have "good co2" higher > lower


    Do u think so? Judging by the looks of the plants what is seen


    I see a bunch of syn thriving, others are growing not as nearly as fast, lots of stunting


    Loook closely


    sunset stunting, obvious


    limnophila stunting


    rotala same


    cuphea same


    ludwigia red nothing but ludwigia red stunts when theres just a change in water chem, no matter what it stunts, then comes back up, so this plant is irrelevant


    pantanal? this is your plant, color does not matter, seem enough co2 to get that type of structure?


    This suggest two things to me


    Either syngonanthus are higher tolerant of co2, rest co2 was too high


    Or things weren't supplemented enough to provide the plant


    but look at erios too, good and well


    closer to the surface BARR all these stunted stems tips are


    Tell me what does this tell u?


    see pics and comments below


    fts, not tell shit


    AMybXK8.jpg


    stunt, look closely and all the plants i described above, if you see em all, then you can decently observe


    PumzvSi.jpg


    more towards the center


    KmRrAeh.jpg


    left side


    =same amount par right side


    RPOZCYi.jpg


    stunting limnophila belem


    5IHTk2q.jpg


    high tolerant co2 plants


    gYiPoUN.jpg


    foreground, lower co2 etc


    UPgZmAH.jpg no stunting in goias


    erios in good health, co2 is there


    23ik9PD.jpg


    8kQt1an.jpg
     
  17. nicpapa

    nicpapa Guru Class Expert

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2012
    Messages:
    671
    Likes Received:
    441
    Local Time:
    8:24 PM
    Dennis Singh i know u overdose co2... you cannot keep fish or shrimp in those water...


    I believe that stunted stems , dont always to co2 or traces... its something else...


    i can see it on my tanks..


    I believe that microorgansim , and vacteria play a role for this...
     
  18. burr740

    burr740 Micros Spiller
    Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2015
    Messages:
    1,398
    Likes Received:
    1,294
    Local Time:
    2:24 PM
    Thats why I like a big bubble counter in plain sight, to always know what the CO2 is doing without digging under a cabinet to look.


    [​IMG]


    Those SunSun skimmers off-gas a ton of co2, one on each filter. They dont look like much.


    If I ever forget to turn them back on after a big trim, it's nothing for the PH to drop an additional 2 tenths after a few hours.


    Gotta believe they add some good O2 as well
     
    #178 burr740, Apr 20, 2017
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 20, 2017
  19. Dennis Singh

    Dennis Singh SynKing!

    Joined:
    May 5, 2013
    Messages:
    2,417
    Likes Received:
    639
    Local Time:
    12:24 PM
    etlgEU6.jpg


    iCFRdlw.jpg


    jSpasMY.jpg


    ?
     
  20. fablau

    fablau rotalabutterfly.com
    Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2008
    Messages:
    2,867
    Likes Received:
    623
    Local Time:
    12:24 PM
    Yes, sorry, I talked about GSA as if it can be caused only by the lack of P, whereas I wanted just to say that I don't think to miss P even though it's concentration is pretty low n my tank... But I perfectly understand what you mean now by giving plants more P or whatever, mostly after Tom's explanation above about plants adaptation to different ferts level (enlightening indeed!), so I am eager to se if this "step-by-step" strategy is going to actually give good results.


    When do you plan starting? Already started?
     
Loading...

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice