My Method of Dosing
- Thread starter daveguitarfish
- Start date
I like your fish choice!
Basically you use the Mineralize soil method, many others in the GWAPA group have used this method in the USA more recently and it's been around for a few decades. You can also do the same thing with ADA AS after the first 1-2 months.
I do a similar method by watching the plants and reducing the ferts down till you hit a critical point, then bring it back up to the last highest dose. My 70 Gallon is an example:
Then you can reduce water changes way down if desired, but I generally still do one a month just out good habit.
Water changes never do any harm to a planted tank, in fact, most would argue they are very beneficial.
I also reduced the lighting down to minimize the CO2 demand and the nutrient demand. This is a much more holistic approach to sustainability, not just focusing on ferts alone.
I've long argued that point, whether or not folks listen ....is quite another matter.
Your argument suggest ferts in excess is wasteful, however, you do not discuss CO2, which is also being wasted, nor lighting, which is the largest energy waste and the highest waste cost economically. If you are not getting the max growth out of the light intensity applied, then that is WASTE also.
You are going to waste something somewhere and/or limit growth. The real issue is whether that trade off is worth while. I have not suggested to keep larding on ferts for no good reason. Anyone with common sense can easily do the method I suggested above for the 70 Gallon.
Slow progressive reduction till you see a negative response. Many folks do that, but they do not call it their own method they invented or anything.
For some, it is economic, then less light and non limiting ferts/CO2 is the better option.
For some, it's water changes: less light will help here as well. Since light drives all growth demands and CO2 uptake and fet uptake, this is where you should consider any reduced labor approach.
That is a holistic approach, not just one that merely focuses on ferts and water changes.
Ferts are only 5% of all this, light and CO2 are really where most of the issues and success are found.
They are the main drivers
Ferts are pretty easy. With a slowed light limited growth based planted tank, now you have a method that has the max wiggle room.
Question is, can you grow nice plants at both low light and at high light?
Will one single method be all things to all people? Would one method meet every goal every aquarist has?
Clearly not. Common sense will quickly rule that out.
For some folks, MTS(Mineralize top soil, Clay loams, ADA AS) works great, I use ADA myself and have used delta clay loams extensively.
I suggest them.
And in conjunction with EI.
Doing EI with them does not imply that it is bad nor will cause issues.
But common sense will quickly tell you you do not need the max amount of ferts either.
EI is designed to be non limiting for all light intensities. So will less work on 99% of planted tanks? You bet!
If you add a good long term source of ferts in the sediment do you need the same dosing in the water column? Not likely.
Common sense again tells us that you can get away with less by adding sediment sources.
Sediment sources last a long time, decade perhaps. Except with respect to NH4, they do not bind any NO3 to speak of, which is why it ends up in rivers and lakes. Soil will bind NH4 and plants and bacteria will attack it leaving very little after about 1 year.
Adding some extra KNO3 after 6-12 months is a good idea.
I'm not sure many folks will get on board with the RO water thing. Added cost and hassle. But it taste good so you can use it for drinking water.
Not bad ideas, but the ideas and methods predate you by a few decades frankly.
Nor is EI my idea per se.
I've never made that claim. It's far more Paul and Kevin's. Using water changes, dosing and then using math to predict the build up is detailed in this:
http://www.thekrib.com/Plants/Fertilizer/sears-conlin.html
EI is about 90% that method. I just increased the Water changes being friends with Discus folks and all/fish breeder myself, they already did them, and then eliminated the test kit approaches.
Water change snever hurt any planted tank I've ever cared for, but it's understandable that many folks do not like them, but is that wise advice for newbies?
I think not. Intermediate folk looking to try something new etc, or think there magic or something, sure. Good to learn things. But many newer folks likely should do the water changes, they are simple and rule out more variables than you can shake a stick at.
I help folks no matter what their goals or method, but I also know for a newer person, not doing any water changes is not going to give them a higher degree of success.
You will figure this stuff out if you stick with this long enough.
Most methods are pretty similar.
They all add the same things and they all grow plants, the only difference is at different rates of growth.
CO2 and light factors there:
http://www.tropica.com/en/tropica-abc/basic-knowledge/co2-and-light.aspx
In all cases, the plants still grew. But almost a 20X difference in growth rates, obviously this will change the dosing routine and upkeep.
EI clearly works very well also.
My own 120 Gal tank with high light:
This is a different goal and takes different labor and approaches to maintain than say the 70 Gallon, or my 180 or or or.
Every tank is different.
Basically you use the Mineralize soil method, many others in the GWAPA group have used this method in the USA more recently and it's been around for a few decades. You can also do the same thing with ADA AS after the first 1-2 months.
I do a similar method by watching the plants and reducing the ferts down till you hit a critical point, then bring it back up to the last highest dose. My 70 Gallon is an example:
Then you can reduce water changes way down if desired, but I generally still do one a month just out good habit.
Water changes never do any harm to a planted tank, in fact, most would argue they are very beneficial.
I also reduced the lighting down to minimize the CO2 demand and the nutrient demand. This is a much more holistic approach to sustainability, not just focusing on ferts alone.
I've long argued that point, whether or not folks listen ....is quite another matter.
Your argument suggest ferts in excess is wasteful, however, you do not discuss CO2, which is also being wasted, nor lighting, which is the largest energy waste and the highest waste cost economically. If you are not getting the max growth out of the light intensity applied, then that is WASTE also.
You are going to waste something somewhere and/or limit growth. The real issue is whether that trade off is worth while. I have not suggested to keep larding on ferts for no good reason. Anyone with common sense can easily do the method I suggested above for the 70 Gallon.
Slow progressive reduction till you see a negative response. Many folks do that, but they do not call it their own method they invented or anything.
For some, it is economic, then less light and non limiting ferts/CO2 is the better option.
For some, it's water changes: less light will help here as well. Since light drives all growth demands and CO2 uptake and fet uptake, this is where you should consider any reduced labor approach.
That is a holistic approach, not just one that merely focuses on ferts and water changes.
Ferts are only 5% of all this, light and CO2 are really where most of the issues and success are found.
They are the main drivers
Ferts are pretty easy. With a slowed light limited growth based planted tank, now you have a method that has the max wiggle room.
Question is, can you grow nice plants at both low light and at high light?
Will one single method be all things to all people? Would one method meet every goal every aquarist has?
Clearly not. Common sense will quickly rule that out.
For some folks, MTS(Mineralize top soil, Clay loams, ADA AS) works great, I use ADA myself and have used delta clay loams extensively.
I suggest them.
And in conjunction with EI.
Doing EI with them does not imply that it is bad nor will cause issues.
But common sense will quickly tell you you do not need the max amount of ferts either.
EI is designed to be non limiting for all light intensities. So will less work on 99% of planted tanks? You bet!
If you add a good long term source of ferts in the sediment do you need the same dosing in the water column? Not likely.
Common sense again tells us that you can get away with less by adding sediment sources.
Sediment sources last a long time, decade perhaps. Except with respect to NH4, they do not bind any NO3 to speak of, which is why it ends up in rivers and lakes. Soil will bind NH4 and plants and bacteria will attack it leaving very little after about 1 year.
Adding some extra KNO3 after 6-12 months is a good idea.
I'm not sure many folks will get on board with the RO water thing. Added cost and hassle. But it taste good so you can use it for drinking water.
Not bad ideas, but the ideas and methods predate you by a few decades frankly.
Nor is EI my idea per se.
I've never made that claim. It's far more Paul and Kevin's. Using water changes, dosing and then using math to predict the build up is detailed in this:
http://www.thekrib.com/Plants/Fertilizer/sears-conlin.html
EI is about 90% that method. I just increased the Water changes being friends with Discus folks and all/fish breeder myself, they already did them, and then eliminated the test kit approaches.
Water change snever hurt any planted tank I've ever cared for, but it's understandable that many folks do not like them, but is that wise advice for newbies?
I think not. Intermediate folk looking to try something new etc, or think there magic or something, sure. Good to learn things. But many newer folks likely should do the water changes, they are simple and rule out more variables than you can shake a stick at.
I help folks no matter what their goals or method, but I also know for a newer person, not doing any water changes is not going to give them a higher degree of success.
You will figure this stuff out if you stick with this long enough.
Most methods are pretty similar.
They all add the same things and they all grow plants, the only difference is at different rates of growth.
CO2 and light factors there:
http://www.tropica.com/en/tropica-abc/basic-knowledge/co2-and-light.aspx
In all cases, the plants still grew. But almost a 20X difference in growth rates, obviously this will change the dosing routine and upkeep.
EI clearly works very well also.
My own 120 Gal tank with high light:
This is a different goal and takes different labor and approaches to maintain than say the 70 Gallon, or my 180 or or or.
Every tank is different.