PPS-Pro Dosing - Opinions?

Hi Dave.

I think there's a several post about this.
The TPT thread is suitable though.

Basically: both add the same things, one leaner, one richer, ratios matter little.
One is in a liquid, one is in dry powder form.
Richer/leaner, liquid dry........these can be added or reduced, you can do either dry or either as liquid.........
You can also add more PPS, or less EI(Oh my! the horror!!)

There's several incarnations of EI, some get stuck with the rigid thinking, you must follow a method exactly.........
No, that was never the intent.

It's a myth to suggest it, so I come off fairly harsh when folks do this.

The larger picture here is that rich sediments, lower light and good CO2/current really help.
These play larger roles than nutrients, which tend to be really easy as well as water changes when these main drivers are done correctly.
So focus there, then once things are doing well, back up the dosing progressively and reduce the % water changes/frequency etc and pay attention to your aquarium.

You might also look at the DSM for carpet plants.
Applies very well to your goal. In either case, you can do more or less water changes with pretty much any method.

If daily dosing/liquids are more your thing:
Pmdd + PO4, there's several folks that have different EI type articles as well.

This is a far more accurate explanation for what PPS really is:
http://www.theplantedtank.co.uk/PMDD.htm

PMDD+PO4........

James gives credit where it is due, PPS does not.
PPS is amazingly similar to PMDD in target ppms etc.

Most methods suggested water changes, I still do for CO2 enriched systems, they do better and less issues occur with them.
Sediment based ferts are really helpful if reduced water changes are the goal.
These stomp all over any PPS baloney as far as a long term source of ppm's and no water changes after the initial break in.

Then you can cut the dosing down even lower.

Unlike many, I use holistic management to reduce growth rates/water changes etc, and use several methods to achieve A GIVEN GOAL.
I have far more tools to work with and I think aquarist should get a fair shake here regarding more management methods, than some slick sales pitch.
There also has to be some trade offs, and the goal the aquarist has.

With more tools, we can help the aquarists, rather than suggesting they follow our "one" method..........best to have many methods and know what controls the rates of plant growth, this way you can help a wider group of folks with the least amoutn of labor/work for the aquarium.

Regards,
Tom Barr

 

Well, new folks really do not have much wits about any of this..so they just follow a rigid method.
Then branch out from there.

Some try to prey on the new folks, maybe it's all they know, or they failed with EI(they failed, not the method, we know it works), or the new person get distracted and thinks, "oh, no water changes also"?
I think new folks are going to make a lot of errors, far more than say someone with 2-5 years experience don't you?
So they are better off doing more water changes and getting experience, then later, they can watch and dose less/reduce frequency of water changes etc.

Now many folks with some experience tell newbies they can get away, and "here's how etc yada yada....." but they cannot take into account CO2 issues, nor can they measure your light, which.......as you can likely already see, light=> CO2=> nutrients, makes a huge difference in the results.
There's horrible results with EI, ADA, PPS, PMDD, you name the method......... it's not the method that's saving folks or making their lives bad, it's much more the CO2/light issues.

If those are not considered, you are rolling the dice.
EI makes a few assumptions: very high light will not require more dosing, in other words, it's non limiting for most any light and CO2 rich combination.
Since it's the high target, any other aquarium with less light will be non limiting as well.

CO2 is all that is left, and it can be tricky.

With HC, It's really a weedy plant, I'd suggest lower light, even going excel and reduced inputs.
If you have ADA AS(looks like it?), then you will not need much dosing, I'd go about 1/4 EI dosing if so.
I'd do 2-3x a week water changes for the next 2 months.
Add lots of RCS or Amano's.

Crank CO2 initially.

Low light really is good for longer term HC lawns.
I'd suggest using a single T5 24 W bulb for this tank.
I have the same tank.
65W is too much really.

Maybe 2x 24W if you want to raise the light up 6-8".

No more.

Regards,
Tom Barr

 

Yes, many have this feeling for dosing, whatever gets the ferts in there, many add more PO4 to the solution, so is it now PMDD + PO4 and no longer PPS? I'm not sure what PPS really ever was other than PMDD with a small amount of PO4 added, the target ranges are the same etc.....
Still, many have said they get bad GSA if they stick to the PPS recipe. EI has no such issue, but added a lot more PO4.
So modifying the PO4 is wise, make it rich.

This can cause issues if you have poor CO2, so many that had BBA, blamed the PPS method erroroneously.

For smaller tanks, liquids are better, I'm positive PPS cannot lay no claim to using liquids vs dry, PMDD was the real method that was not given any credit by Edward.
I know Paul and Kevin and it really smacks of large scale BS to me personally when someone does this.

But as far EI............it came from folks not wanting to use liquids, and from PMDD.........I just took what we knew about PMDD and added PO4, more light and more CO2.
EI is simpler to tell folks what to do.
Folks also do not bother to test.

The rest is nothing more than adding more/less of a ferts, liquids or dry, whatever floats your boat, gets the ferts in the tank consistently.......
This is all I suggest if folks want to reduce the water changes down or add "just enough ferts", it is rather simple in either case.

Other tanks will not do as well at higher light with lean dosing, likewise, lower light tanks, sediment enrichment etc....these can go really low with water column ferts.
As the rates of growth increase, so does the demand for ferts.

I think some think that higher ppm's are somehow bad etc.........but we have just never seen evidence that there is.
I've long challeneged folks to come forth with any such evidence.
That's been going on for 15+ years now.

So even if there's error, there's still no worry or risk associated with it.

Still PMDD +PO4, PPS whatever you wanna call it, daily vs 2-3x a week, dry vs liquids, none of that matters a whle lot really, they both add the same things, and matter less if...........the light/CO2 are well balanced.
So simple is good, something folks can do that's easy etc.

I try my best!

You got the gas/light thingy, that's the biggie!!!
Then the rest is much easier.

Regards,
Tom Barr