JDowns;31562 said:
I guess what I'm trying to get at is what caused individuals to get "algae fear" from dosing with mineralized soils. Where is the flaw in the methodology / process.
Mostly from poor mineralization, if you leach the NH4 and excess OM, then there's no reason to be "fearful" about using it, some folks pull up their plants all the time and make a mess. Likely not a good method for them.
Then those same folks run around saying it's a bad method and gave them algae without ever knowing why they got it, and others did not.
This is true with every method, you can get algae with every method, and you can have good results. It's not the method, it's the user.
I understand the non-Co2 approach. Its been a great learning experience and probably my favorite tank.
Is it wise to cut the soil with a higher ratio of sand to limit the amount of OM (somewhat rhetorical question, since Tom has answered this numerous times on various sites over the years)? Or is the flaw in the mineralization process in not removing more OM, or the soil being used.
You can, I've suggested folks do this to reduce the messiness.
You still ahve the same total with or without the sand cut. Sand adds more weight and makes uprooting easier.
The mineralization is less to do with removing OM, as it is getting the NH4 out.
NH4 is the important one, OM will cause low O2 levels if you pull a bunch up all at once, and we really do not need that much really.
Bound N is good/best in clay layers, that's what is in ADA AS.
I see a correlation sorta. If you fail to keep up on filter maintanence and an excess buildup occurs. Are you likely to see an algae outbreak (been there ... done that. Cleaning the filter corrected the situation)? So more material has built up than bacteria can process, could this be the same in the soil?
Yes, that's why they mineralize it first, then add it later, the bacteria process the NH4 that's easily available and able to leach in large amounts into the water column, leaving the harder to leach N for long term root extraction.
You can do this with water and a shallo tray and say 2-4 weeks, or boil the sediment as suggested by several Brazilian folks years with good, the same results, Aaron is not the first person in any way to suggest or do this. Or you can bake the soil for about 1 hour. Earth worm castings where all the rage a few year back, they got boiled for say 10 min and then you'd use them, some folks used Cactus compost etc and do a similar thing in the UK etc.
I'm failing to see the process that is linked? Which is more or less my questioning. I understand nutrients aren't the underlying causation of an algae outbreak.
They are, but which nutrient is important, NH4? CO2? Or too much light?
Not the ones they seem to claim all the frigging time
: PO4 and NO3.
You are just limiting a necessary nutrient in the wc inhibiting the algae.
But which nutrient is really being limited in the Water column?
And does that really limit algae?
I have the same results when I dose nutrientsto the water column as Aaron does, or the folks in Brazil or ADA etc. If not better.......
So false assumptions are made, without correcting the underlying cause. Which is the lesson I'm trying to learn. Its one thing to have success following good advice, its another to understand why.
Here's a reason Amano told me to use Power sand and why I should use it: "It has power" Those are his words with a direct serious question, it was obvious it was nothing but a joke answer and he was not going to answer you, same for most questions anyone had.
Also with biohumus. Is the addition of clay, dolomite, and potash necessary? Most products already have a composition content including all the nutrients you would gather from their addition. I don't remember the exact %'s from the product I used. I would need to go buy another bag at the nursery.
No, these are not needed, required. They can help, clay is not a bad thing, I use delta mud/clay it works great and is pretty much like the ADA AS. ADA AS has more NH4 and bit more peat, it's not mineralized(takes about 1 month typically, and ADa tells you to wait till then add fish etc.)
Potash is just K2SO4...........now all plants take this nutrient via the leaves/from the water column, it has no organically bound forms. So you might as well add it to the water column, same for Ca,Mg etc, which is the source for Dolomite.
I think the important thing here is to see that nutrients can be added from the sediment, but also from the water column, with adding them in both locations is the best solution and benefits all plant types,gets the most out of each and every location.
We know, that both sources are able to supply nutrients to aquatic plants, we see both in natural systems.
Now when you discuss algae, this is another thing entirely.
Keep that discussion separate.
There's algae.
There's growing plants.
Unless you are able to test and grow algae, you cannot discuss the causes, only correlations. We also do not have light data for Aaron's tanks, nor many folks, we do not know what they did in the past, most folks get better with CO2, and dosing as they evolve, so they might had bad experiences in the past that might not be there if they went back and looked at it again.
I always get tickled when folks claim that not dosing prevents algae.
They really do not understand algae at all if they say such things.
Proving that algae is limited is extremely difficult, and something not one aquarists to date has ever shown with confidence.
I can show that nutrient dosing to the water colum, the typical things we dose, does not cause algae, nor "excess ferts". And that's all I need to do to make my case, they have to show a much harder claim.
None of them ever have bothered to do that.
But they seem to think correlation and dismissing the results allows them to argue what they believe, not what the results suggest
Regards,
Tom Barr