P. Helferi Albino

jonny_ftm

Guru Class Expert
Mar 5, 2009
821
2
16
Hi,

This only a functional deficiency probably, if you well read my above posts and Tom's ones. Immersion probably caused a dramatic change in CO2/O2/GH/moisture in ambiant for the plant. It probably obliged the plant to an adaptation. Meanwhile, its metabolism was blocked, simulating a deficiency. I won't increase any micro or dosing because every thing is turning green with healthy growth and no algae, without changing anything

Maybe this topic will show how people get exited about guessing the source element of a deficieny based on leafs aspect. In my expierience, it is quite impossible to guess such a thing from photos. Any deficiency will lead to a stop in plant metabolism and symtoms are largely similar between different deficieny sources. This is a good example.
 

Biollante

Lifetime Charter Member
Lifetime Member
Jun 21, 2009
3,210
2
36
Surprise, AZ
More Than One Way To Skin The proverbial Cat!

Hi Jonny,

Perhaps this exercise will simply demonstrate that while there may be different causes, the deficiencies themselves exist?

For many in particular those that wish to maximize growth the answer is to minimize stress, increase the fertilization to the water column, and allow the plants to adapt with a minimum amount of stress and fuss.

With plants often there is more than one correct answer. :)

My experience has led me to increase dosing three to five time EI, more on the order of hydroponics dosing when flooding plants and of course prior to adding critters.

Then that is just me. :eek:

Be well my friend. :)
Biollante
 

jonny_ftm

Guru Class Expert
Mar 5, 2009
821
2
16
I still prefer to go for the lowest dose to maintain the best growth in my eyes: begin with high dosing to avoid algae, once everything stable, begin decrease dosing every 3-6 weeks, so very slowly
 

DaBub

Guru Class Expert
Oct 18, 2009
102
0
16
A Penny For Your Thoughts

jonny_ftm;45111 said:
I still prefer to go for the lowest dose to maintain the best growth in my eyes: begin with high dosing to avoid algae, once everything stable, begin decrease dosing every 3-6 weeks, so very slowly

I have heard this line of thought (lowest possible dose) a number of times even that dreamy Tug.

After reading this thread and seeing those photos (great photos btw), which clearly (IMHO) indicate extreme nutrient deficiency and though brought back, the plants must have been highly stressed.

I wish to hear your thoughts and reasoning.

Thank you,
 

jonny_ftm

Guru Class Expert
Mar 5, 2009
821
2
16
Hi, I suggest you read the previous posts and Tom confirmations,

This is just a shock/stress due to immersion, nothing to do with any deficiency

Most would crancked up the dosing, I prefere observing the plants. Most albinos leaves are now green, new leaves are green and never saw a rotting leave on P. Helferi since immersion

Any deficiency will lead to a block in photosythesis with similar end results, despite the fantasy of the tables claiming the identification of a specific micro based on leave aspect
 

Tom Barr

Founder
Staff member
Administrator
Jan 23, 2005
18,696
747
113
Good job taking the advice. Many do not and chase the micros around. Also, good job reducing EI and not using it strictly, that was never the intent. While perhaps a little wasteful(the entire hobby is guilty of that, we hardly "need" aquariums after all), maintaining higher than needed dosing does no harm to fish, critters, plants etc.
I think some think more is bad when it comes to nutrients, but give a free pass to higher light waste, which if used wisely, ends up using far less nutrients, so waste is not just a function of nutrients alone, light plays a large role as does CO2.

Critics do not wish to address the waste issue holistically(light, CO2 or not and nutrients). Funny how that works, guess it's "an agenda" after all, not really about "reducing waste" or water changes.

Regards,
Tom Barr
 

DaBub

Guru Class Expert
Oct 18, 2009
102
0
16
Enjoy Your Life

sorry there was no intention to be 'critical' or to 'critize'.

I did read the entire thread including the part where Tom Barr said it was not confirmation, but advice.

never suggested only one way to do anything

nevermind, it was more a matter of personal curiosity, a number of folks used the term, the pictures speak volumes

have a nice life
 

jonny_ftm

Guru Class Expert
Mar 5, 2009
821
2
16
Hi DaBub

No need to ironise, I didn't mean to be rude

I just really have nothing to add on what was already said

Many like to think it is micro and we have to crack dosing, I don't. Time showed I was right. Neverless, increasing the micro wouldn't have caused issues neither. But at least, I know it is not a micro issue, just adaptation

@Tom,

Yes, EI and your insistance on CO2 is the best discovery of my last year. My aquariums never looked so good, I never spent so few time on them and spared a lot of money and time since I fogot about testing water parameters all the time. I just prefer a lower light/lower EI approach, as you also recommended: much slower growth and less maintenance
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Tom Barr

Founder
Staff member
Administrator
Jan 23, 2005
18,696
747
113
If that is your goal, then it's good advice, if that is not your goal, then nope:)

Some really like to mess with high light and think themselves "experts".
Someone promoting PPS suggested that "experts" can use light at 5watt/gal etc.
I had to laugh.

A real "expert" would know better and do the nice tank or any species at 2 watt/gal.

Even there, I test light and do not fall for that monkey business with watt/gal, rather use a PAR meter.

Testing light is much simpler and easier once done and drives everything else.
That's a good thing to test, not so much the nutrients, but there's nothing wrong with testing nutrients either, just as long as you realize the other issues.
Why argue to test nutrients but not light?
Why assume that CO2 test are accurate when you have no way to reference such test methods?

Never understood that one.

Basic logic and Science flew right out the door.

Still, a little time and patience goes a long long way, bothj as seeing what causes issues and no to rush to judgement, and also to compare the observations of others.
I've heard of white tip Downoi, but never seen it, but then again, never used emergent downoi either.

Regards,
Tom Barr
 

jonny_ftm

Guru Class Expert
Mar 5, 2009
821
2
16
Sadely a PAR meter is too expensive. But hopefully, learning to observe the plants can replace it when some one doesn't have many aquariums to deal with.

With the nano in my signature, I'm growing Rotala Wallichii with red tips, Downoi and trying to carpet glosso with 0.9wpg PLL (1.5wpg if only real volume is considered). Growth is great, no rotting even on lower crowded P. Helferi leaves. Glosso is in the corner opposite to light, so very low light. It isn't rotting, but growing very slowly. CO2 mist is directly going on the glosso. I'll keep you informed with a pic of the downoi when it backs completely green and how glosso carpets if it does

Thank you again Tom for all the help you give us on this forum
 

Philosophos

Lifetime Charter Member
Lifetime Member
Mar 12, 2009
1,346
0
36
If not a par meter, perhaps try a more simple light meter. You may not know your PAR, but if nothing there's the availability to compare what you were at to what you're at now. It's handy for adjustments.
 

jonny_ftm

Guru Class Expert
Mar 5, 2009
821
2
16
I'm sure it can be handy to experiment and improve knowledge and control over your aquariums

However, in my case, I'm ok now with observation and adjusting light/plant location depending on plants growth

It takes time though
 

Philosophos

Lifetime Charter Member
Lifetime Member
Mar 12, 2009
1,346
0
36
Ya, that's the way I'm doing it right now. Most of the time consistency and CO2 seem to matter more than the level of light. Staurogyne and P. helferi have been anal about overshadowing plants and trimmings in my tanks.
 

jonny_ftm

Guru Class Expert
Mar 5, 2009
821
2
16
I agree with the CO2
Increasing it when something is wrong, while going the EI way, quiet always solves any issue, be it plant growth or algae

Now, I'm carpetting glosso with 0.9wpg (1.5wpg real volume), PC light at circa 4 inches above surface, glosso being on the opposite side of light, so really very low light. Increasing CO2 makes it still perl. It is gowing so slowly, but so healthy. I'm really impatient to see how it does in few weeks/months. Will let you know.

With that light, P. Helferi now is growing crazely, also the R. Wallichii with a nice red tint

I'm more and more convinced that minimum light is way lower than most think, as Tom suggests
 

Tom Barr

Founder
Staff member
Administrator
Jan 23, 2005
18,696
747
113
Tropica suggest that combination as well as the best method.

Not just myself.
See Biology of water plants on their site, read all 4 pages.


Regards,
Tom Barr
 

Philosophos

Lifetime Charter Member
Lifetime Member
Mar 12, 2009
1,346
0
36
Low light and compressed CO2 (or even stable CO2) feels like cheating sometimes. While I'm left fighting distribution issues, leaf shed, etc. in high light tanks, a little 10 gal off in the corner grows perfect plants without trying. Minimum light is amazingly low; I've got plants surviving (spindly, but surviving) with stock T8 lighting and a bunch of extra plants floating over them; no CO2. Just good nutrients and an air pump.

If only manufacturers of fixtures would make tank lights with multiple low-watt fixtures, nice ballasts, and maybe diffusers. I have a feeling that they'll keep plugging wattage in tiny places just the same way sports cars are sold with horsepower though.
 

jonny_ftm

Guru Class Expert
Mar 5, 2009
821
2
16
Many thanks Tom, again, for the link to this reading

It gives me a completely new view on plant demands. Also, CO2/light interaction seems much more complex then I ever thought
Really passionating and pushes me to the ultimate I still didn't try: the low tech approach: low light / no CO2