Do I really need CO2 for my 200l tank? & if so how much?

[Jafooli]

Cheers for the reply,

I can see exactly where your coming from about the NO3 and I do apologise, I have no idea why I fear it, even though I trust exactly what your saying, just before purchasing my first ever tank I got a little bit into keeping Koi in my pond, and all I ever heard being repeated was remove as much Nitrate as you can even if you can get it 10-20ppm which was impossible for me to achieve in my pond, obviously I now know my test kit is inaccurate, but its just annoying, I don't know, its stupid really like you say. I can only presume it is fear and that's another reason I had to ask you how high does have to be to become toxic. I am running low on K2SO4 and I will take your advice and I will add the full amount of KNO3 to my mix. Sorry if it sounds like I wasn't listening, but I am taking in everything, and I guess its annoying especially for me when I hear how people control there nitrates as if its life or death, for example Koi keepers, and say shrimp keepers. I know shrimp may be a different story, but Koi are surely more hardier than tropical fish, and then again these test kits are totally wrong in the first place, I guess its harder for me when I'm the guy with the high readings and not the low readings that 9/10 people seem to get when I look at there results and I can't get my head around the calibrating thing. I will listen though and I will add the KNO3, the full amount as I know I am cleaning my filters, tank, so the readings have to be wrong.

I can only presume the GSA is because of low PO4 as you mentioned it can be combination of low PO4 and low co2, but I would more say its due to low PO4 which the CO2 exposed.

Cheers for the tip on the Glosso, I will be honest and say I have no idea what I am doing with it, I look at the plant in Google images, it seems to grow low, and spreads a nice carpet, I know mine will grow up towards the light, but how do I plant or spread this plant, I see hardly no roots, I can't really identify any runners. I will do some research on it and see how to propagate it.

I will have a browse around and see how I take the PH approach to measuring CO2 stability, once again I'm still learning, I could ask you 1000's of questions but I don't want to annoy you lol. I know my PH has dropped about 1 by the CO2, I presume I just monitor it through out the day for any changes to get an idea of the consistency of the CO2, then again PH is not easiest thing to tell by the API colour chart.

 

[ceg4048]

I can see exactly where your coming from about the NO3 and I do apologise, I have no idea why I fear it, even though I trust exactly what your saying,

I know exactly what you mean. A long time ago I also felt the same way. The fact is that just like Neo, we were all born into bondage. Programmed by The Matrix and placed in a prison that we cannot taste or touch or see.....a prison for our minds.

Pond owners have more trouble with algae than anyone else, and they fear NO3 the most. That should tell you something. As you've realized, fear of NO3 is what created your problems and is what started this thread in the first place.

PO4 is easy to fix. Just add double and forget about it.

The fact that you are having nutrient issues as well as leggy growth on your glosso is also a strong indicator of poor flow/distribution.

All you have to do is measure the pH at 30 minute or 1 hour intervals from just before the gas comes on until lights off. The we look at the data and see where we can improve if needed.

I never bother with the liquid pH indicators any more. Instead of wasting money of NO3/PO4 test kits, which are useless, it would be better to spend it on a digital pH probe which is easy to use and which gives instant and more accurate results.

Cheers,

 

[Jafooli]

Cheers Clive for understanding, well the good news is I don't care to much about it now so I will add the full dose of KNO3, and then I won't even need K2SO4. I've read a lot of people in the London areas use K2SO4 because of high NO3, I guess them people are still in the Matrix lol and believe what there test kit say. Don't get me wrong I would still like to know my exact nitrate level, If I knew a way to find out exactly 100% what my nitrate is, It would be nice to know even though I guess it would have no importance, but would be handy for my girlfriend who keeps shrimp, and I now know there inaccurate so If people ask about her shrimp water I can't give them a correct ppm.

I'm the kind of person that wants to try and understand everything, aka how things work, how there made etc, but I have to accept I'm just not that intelligent which is annoying especially as 2 years ago when I looked at a fish tank, I would never have thought there is so much going on which you just can't see, I bet thousands of people have no idea, a bit like me lol, but curiosity has opened this all up to me and the fact I want to understand what's best for plants, fish etc, so yeah I should of listened in science.

When I first learnt about EI dosing I wanted to know well how much of this and that should I be using, I know the point of EI is to provide more than enough, but how much is to much etc and how are people making there calculations, and I never really found them answers, only that there are dosing calculators and ppm ranges you should aim for. Now I just try to study the plants and see what I'm missing from learning or looking at plant deficiency diagrams as I believe I'm in the ppm ranges. For example when I first started EI dosing someone said they understood it all when they looked here: Concentrations of Stuff vs Time and Plant Uptake using The Estimative Index I have no idea what to even do on that page, graphs ain't my strong point and I don't get how that figures out nutrient uptakes, it's not even calculating a certain nutrient and surely we now know each tank will be different, as light, co2, flow has to be put in the calculation.

Anyway back on topic I hope you can just clear these last quick questions up then I think you've pretty much answered my questions on this particular thread, and I really do appreciate the time you have taken to help me, it takes me about an hour to reply lol.

You say:

you are putting in extra K, which can make the plant demand even more PO4.

Can I ask why would putting extra K in then make the plant want more PO4? would this pattern be the same with other nutrients? I presume there is a link somewhere which leads me on to my next question.

Nitrogen is the Number 2 most important element and Potassium is down at Number 4

Where can I find the order for this? it would be interesting to know.

Also you say:

As you've realized, fear of NO3 is what created your problems and is what started this thread in the first place.

I just want to be honest and say I'm not sure if I've 100% realized why that's what made me start the thread, because I presumed the issue was I injected to much CO2, which then exposed some deficiencies mainly PO4 because of the GSA, but in the first pictures I posted was the plants showing a NO3 deficiency then? sorry If I've totally missed something, I now know NO3 is the 2nd most important element, but I presumed I had some in my tank already from the tap water, I now know Its not as high as what my test kit says hence why I will add the full amount from now on, but do you think my tank was suffering from the NO3 then? if so how would I notice this? This is what I use as a reference to detect any issues: http://i476.photobucket.com/albums/rr121/CRSFan/PlantDeficiencyDiagram.jpg

Thanks again Clive, and also if you could give me an idea how much a digital PH probe would cost? I had a quick look on Ebay, and they seemed quite expensive, but it said they connect to a PH meter, so I'm totally lost, but will do some research, but for now I'm have to hope I've fixed the main issues, and hopefully what you taught me can give me a better chance achieving healthy growth.

I will also sort out my Glosso, and other plants and try make it so the flow can work around the plants better, I presume when a carpet is achieved properly the flow can go across the top and the leafs then take in what they need, in my case, there growing up and everywhere in a panic to find that nice flow combined with the fact they probably would like some higher par.

Can I also ask why does algae grow on the plants when they lack a nutrient I know there are various algae's so I can understand its different for each one and there are other factors for different algae's rather than just nutrients but take GSA for example, is it like a illness to the plant? It's strange how a plant can be healthy growing, but then get algae to grow on it's old leafs and not the new leafs etc. does the nutrient kill the algae? or when a plant is at full health it can combat the algae? I know the algae is always present, but for example does the lack of PO4 somehow make the algae conditions right to grow on the leaf? that would make sense why a healthy plant which has plenty of access to PO4 can combat it but our tank glass cant as its not an organism so it still grows on the glass even if there is a good amount PO4 in our water? sorry if that's another dumb question. I confused my self on this one as-well lol.

Thanks again.

 

[ceg4048]

Can I also ask why does algae grow on the plants when they lack a nutrient

Poor nutrition means that the chemical products that plants use to stay healthy, to resist environmental stresses and to defend themselves against parasites and predators, will not be available. Nitrogen is used in almost every enzyme or protein. So if it's in short supply then the plant cannot produce a variety of proteins and enzymes. Whatever job these proteins and enzymes perform is accomplished less effectively under a low Nitrogen condition, if the plant manages to accomplish the job at all.

Also, structure breaks down, especially in the case of Carbon malnutrition. So cells rupture and they leach out their contents into the water column. Fats, sugars, even nutrients. Algal spores are always sitting right on top of the plant. Spore are everywhere in the tank and if they can sense the failing condition of the leaf by processing this information about the movement of chemicals across the leaf then they know it's time to attack the weakened leaf.

So, for example the cuticle of the leaf is a waxy material that moves and grows across the leaf. This prevents algae from adhering to the surface. Under nutrient or CO2 deprivation the cuticle material is lost and the leaf cell membrane is exposed to direct attack.

It's not clear what all the factors are, but there is a general correlation between the missing nutrient and the type of algae that is able to take advantage and establish a foothold. It might be that the composition of the contents being spilled out of the leaf tissue is different under different nutrient failure.

For pH probes, at the higher end of the budget are products like Hanna HI-98127 Ph probe. This might go for about £80.

For an additional £50 I would spring for their pH/TDS/Temperature probe, the HI-98129. This is what I have.

I did look at Amazon and there are some less expensive units like Hanna Instruments HI-99104 Educational pH Tester, 0.00 to 14.00 pH Measuring Range, +/-0.02 pH Accuracy, 0.01 pH Resolution: Amazon.co.uk: DIY & Tools
You also have to buy the calibration solutions, which does add to the cost slightly but these are still of great value. No more mixing stupid vials or running out of indicator solutions, or trying to read zany color charts.

but do you think my tank was suffering from the NO3 then? if so how would I notice this? This is what I use as a reference to detect any issues: http://i476.photobucket.com/albums/rr121/CRSFan/PlantDeficiencyDiagram.jpg

Well, mate, you're looking at a troubleshooting list for terrestrial plants. That has nothing to do with aquatic plants, although some symptoms are similar. Also, different species show different symptoms under the same conditions. We just have some general rules of thumb based on what we observe in aquariums, not based on what an apple farmer, for example would observe.

If a plant has multiple deficiencies then it will typically show only one limitation at a time and it's not easy to predict. I can predict though that if you had been dosing the correct EI values and not paying attention to NO3 test kit readings then you might not have encountered a problem when you increased the CO2, or the symptoms would not have been as severe.

That's why I'm saying that the root cause of peoples problems in a planted tank fundamentally is born in fear of nutrients. It was because of this fear of what it might do to fish that you restricted the Nitrogen levels. This made the tank susceptible to nutrient shortfalls when the CO2 was increased, because increased CO2 increased the need for more nutrients and they were unavailable at the time they were needed.

Cheers,

 

[Jafooli]

Thanks Clive again for the information, definitely is interesting to learn, I'm glad I asked now... also regarding the digital PH readers there a bit out my price range for now, so may have to wait till later in the year, I hope its not going to be a make or break decision regarding my tank and CO2 stability. Hopefully we have fixed the worst, and now I can continue to improve in other areas as-well.

Cheers again for all your help, I've been reading numerous threads you've posted in, so am learning a bit of this and that, and will make another thread sometime if I can't solve any other problems I may have in the future, I know I am also having a hard time regarding flow, I've seen how you do your tank with the spray bars and how you have recommended other people, I see most advice is to go from the back to the front of the tank and then the flow goes down the glass and over the substrate, I sadly have 2x internal u4's my flow has to go long ways, which you did say is also ideal but one would need more power in there output's etc, the only issue I have with going long ways is all my stem plants at the back are getting bent from where the flow is hitting them, there's not much I can do about it, where with your tank and other members the flow is hitting the front of your tanks then going down, with mine its just bending every plant at the back, how ever I do get good flow distribution around the tank, but its not very natural looking. I cant position the filters at the front either so I can't go front to back long ways, so yeah I could not find much advice out there for internal filters, only spray bar positioning. I will keep doing some research, and if not I can always go ahead and make a new thread, other wise this one would go on for ever, and I don't know the thread rules so I don't want to go off topic here.

Thanks again, I've learnt a lot in this thread

 

[Maximum]

Thank you for this thread, I have only lurked but have learnt a great deal. I am thinking of pressurised CO2 later this year so all the information has been very useful.

 

[Jafooli]

Looks like I'm back again, I think I've already found the problem even though we did briefly mention about immature tanks at the beginning which I was convinced was not the issue but I have noticed the return of this brown algae diatom mess which so far is only infecting the glass, now I thought about it, and the only thing left which it could be is if my tank somehow had Ammonia, as we covered everything else, I never thought my tank would of had Ammonia, my fish have been fine, even my most sensitive fish, but either way .....

I did an Ammonia test and to my surprise my Ammonia was 0.25, my tank should be more than able to cope with my stocking level, and I know it can, because it has been fine, but I do know I've changed my routine in the last month or so, and that's that I now clean all my sponges each week to try keep the tank as clean as possible as I read a clean tank, filter keeps algae away as-well. I can only presume this has been lowering my beneficial bacteria levels to much as I don't overfeed.

Can you please advise on what's the best method for me to clean my filter sponges, I have 4 sponges in total , 2 in each filter, and I have 4 Poly carbon filter cartridges, once again 2 in each filter, these are the most dirty each week, and seem to attract most of the mulm. I probably only use to clean 2 sponges every 2 weeks and would rotate which 2 I cleaned.

My normal cleaning routine on all the sponges/poly carbon is to remove them from the filter, stick them in a bucket of aquarium water I've just removed, and with my thumb gentle clean as much dirt off, and with the sponges I also give them a gentle squeeze. I can only presume doing all of this on all the sponges etc is lowering my beneficial bacteria to low.

I hope you can help, as I don't want to be in a no win situation aka if I don't clean them as much I will get some other algae.

So maybe I should just clean 2 sponges and 2 poly carbon pads each week? even more gentle than what I already do? I would be interested to know what you do and what you recommend I should do. My tank is pretty inhabited, so I'm pretty stuck, or I am just cleaning them to good / often.

I feel stupid for asking in a way, but I know I've upped my cleaning on the filters, and maybe I'm being to precise with it all, but how does everyone else on here do there filters and how often and do they do all there sponges, as I don't think my biomax alone can handle my tank's bioload.

Thanks in advance.

 

[ceg4048]

Hi,
I keep trying to convince you to stop testing because test kits cannot help you. It's probable that you are not even aware of what the number is actually telling you, even if it were accurate, which is a lottery. If the NH3 level in the tank was 0.25ppm then the fish would not have survived even for a week. When you have a problem in a tank, the very last thing you need to do is to whip out a test kit. Nitrogen testing is a very difficult thing to do, and at the hobby grade level, the data returned by the kit are useless.

So the test kit lies to you, you then misinterpret the lie and then contemplate changes to your procedures that may be completely irrelevant. This results in "serial misinterpretations" as you will jump from one conclusion to the next, all based on an original lie. Your filter cleaning procedure was never an issue. Why should it be a problem all of a sudden?

Depending on pressures and temperatures, aqueous ammonia exists in different phases, such as vapor phase and liquid phase as well as having various ratios of NH3/NH4+. The fact that CO2 is also in the water at the time complicates things even further because there are some indirect reactions between the two. Depending on the maturation of the tank and the various enzymes available in water or sediment, NH3/NH4+ combine with different products to form some stable and unstable compounds, so it's very difficult for the test reagents to record accurately what is in the water at any one moment.

Look at the data presented in the post http://ukaps.org/forum/threads/your...scale-ammonia-and-nitrites.21965/#post-224903 and see that the numbers reported by the kit, or by your interpretation just don't make any sense.

Just continue to do large water changes, use lots of elbow grease to clean all surfaces, dose nutrients immediately afterwards and reduce the lighting intensity if possible. You can also do what I call a "soft blackout" by not turning on the lights in the tank for a few days. After a while it will not return.

Cheers,

 

[Jafooli]

Dam I just got my head around inaccurate nitrate test kits, and now I'm being told its even the ammonia test kit's lol, so I can presume all of the test kits are pretty useless, what about the PH kits? is that why you recommended I get a digiital ph reader for more accuracy, rather than the silly colour charts which are hard to match anyway at the best of times, regarding PH.

I don't think I'm ever going to understand or learn all of this, but I just hope that won't make me a failure in achieving a healthy planted tank.

While I now fully respect all these test kits are now wrong, I guess they can still be used as a reference? aka when I've cycled both my tanks they did read high Ammonia levels, now I know from that thread well the bits I could understand, is that the test kit was probably reading higher than the real value and other things are going on, but I guess its safe to say for people who do use the kits, when they get around the 0.25 there tank is pretty much ready to go or even at higher levels as mentioned in the thread different things are going on and different things effect the reading, but I guess it can help people through the cycle period?

I hope you can appreciate its hard for me to dicept all of this information mainly because I now know the tests are wrong and I'm a person who wants to know my water parameters lol, for example, I am currently cycling my girlfriend's tank as I just put some Ebi Gold in there, now people on here who look after shrimp would probably go crazy if they had a reading of 0.25 ammonia, so if I said that to people on the shrimp section I had ammonia they would be like you need fix that etc, same as Koi keepers.. I guess its best to just use your eyes and let the fish/shrimp do the talking, I guess I can now safely say its 0ppm unless everything starts dying regarding my tank.

I guess the best test I can do is go with my own experience on regarding the fish behaviour.

As mentioned art the beginning of the thread I presumed my tank was fine with 0 ammonia as all fish look in great health, there is no erratic swimming, flashing, darting, anything, I did the test got that result, and I'm glad my question didn't turn out to be that stupid in the end lol, I now know the result was false.

I've bookmarked the thread and will go over it a couple more times to take in as much as I can, looks like I will up my water changes and will try a soft black out, I cant reduce light intensity as the lights are built in on a hood which sits on the fluval roma tank, would reducing the photoperiod help at all? my photoperiod is 9 hours at the moment, should I go down to about 7 hours for couple of weeks after I've done a soft black out for few days or will that not help at all?

I guess I can still be worried if the Ammonia does keep climbing though, but like I said I will just use my experience with my fish and they can let me know if problems do appear rather than a test that can't be trusted, and I will continue my normal filter cleaning routine.

Thanks again.

Also to add quickly you say:

dose nutrients immediately afterwards

I thought I would ask, you mean after the water change just dose my Macro nutrients ? or do you mean dose my Macro and Micro together?

The reason I ask is because it sounds like you mean add them all in at once, I normally dose the Macro, Micro on alternative days, and Saturday is the rest day. I always presumed they cant be added at once?

 

[ceg4048]

Just follow you normal routine for dosing. I mentioned that so that you wouldn't forget to dose after the extra water changes.

Any of the nutrient test kits are flawed. This includes Iron, ANY Nitrogen kit and especially PO4 kits (which no one actually knows what they measure). Kits that measure things like KH/GH/pH are OK, but again, most people have no idea what these parameters mean. They are just hypnotized into attempting to keep some arbitrary number which someone assumes is good. I suggested the probe because they are easier to read and are more accurate, assuming you calibrate them regularly. If a £40 probe is out of your budget, then how do justify spending all that money for the test kits that you have and will continue to spend money on. Just add up how much you have spent on NH3/NO3/NO2/GH/Ph/KH and compare that to the price of the probe.

You're fooling yourself when you decide to follow the policy of "...the kit is inaccurate but their readings are useful as a reference...". That idea has no value because the "reference" is a fantasy as explained in ferts causing high nitrate! | UK Aquatic Plant Society

You really need to forget about controlling parameters because that's really not what determines success. Keeping your tank clean and free of organic waste is the best policy generally. If you intend to breed then numbers like TDS, GH and so forth are relevant.

The water changes reduce the level of toxins in the water. It's as simple as that. You don't need to measure anything. Just change as much water as possible. People only think they are in control. They focus on the wrong things and they make life more complicated for themselves. Then they have problems and they blame the problems on nitrates.

When you stop worrying and stop testing, do the basic things like keeping the tank meticulously clean, you will find that you enjoy your tank more and it will be less stressful and more successful.

Cheers,

 

[Jafooli]

Cheers Clive,

I get the message clear and loud now, I just thought it was the Nitrate tests and didn't realize it's all of them, I will also purchase a PH probe in the future when I get some spare cash, I hardly use the test kits so they do last me a long time, they were mainly for the pond and cycling my tanks, but now I know there all false anyway so yeah no chance of a refund is there lol.

I will stop testing and I will keep things clean and will concentrate on enjoying my tank!, just hate this diatom mess, but hopefully it will just disappear soon like you said. I also mentioned how I cant lower my light intensity, I see diatom issues can be due to light as-well but I presumed this wouldn't be my case as my par values are not even in the low light section of the graph that you have linked me before, I'm running 2x T8's at 18inches, my par was just on the graph its self just under the low light section. So I would be shocked if the light was the cause but I'm not the expert. Would reducing my light period an hour or 2 help speed up the process of removing the diatoms if somehow the light is the cause. I will also be doing a soft black out as you recommended.

I also just wanted to ask you some questions which I hope you will have the time to answer for me or put me in the right direction, also if you can still keep it simple for me to understand that would be great as-well.

1.

If you intend to breed then numbers like TDS, GH and so forth are relevant.

I don't want to become a hobbyist focused in breeding, as I've not got the room for numerous amount of tanks to separate fish species and set tanks up with the correct conditions.
However when selecting my fish I chose fish which have been bred in a planted aquarium, without human intervention.

I've asked you before and I know GH/KH, TDS is nothing to worry about, that's fine, but I have read articles on here, such as "All about Water Hardness | UK Aquatic Plant Society"
I understand some of it, and while I cant boil buckets of water worth, or go down the RO route for now, how else can someone reduce there GH/KH TDS?
Am I correct in saying the ferts we dose in the aquarium can raise GH? I also know our ferts can raise TDS.
KH I'm not sure about out.

So these fish I selected, is it more challenging for people to breed when they dose fertilizers if the fish requires softer water?

If it helps the fish I am going to use in my tank for example is Trigonostigma espei – Lambchop Rasbora — Seriously Fish

I've seen these fish courtship with one another, but have never seen them lay eggs under any leafs or do any practice runs.

Other fishes I've picked, Panda Cory, Zebra Danio, Rummy Nose

Zebra danio: Apparently one of the easiest, while I have also seen these spawning around the tank in the morning light, I've yet to see eggs for my self, and I'm thinking maybe if there is eggs there not fertile from my water hardness.

2. In the same house my girlfriends tank, has a GH and KH much lower than mine, her TDS use to be 300, no ferts in this tank could explain why, its a Shrmp tank which we have had no success with.
In the invert section we have gotten great help, and we have purchased some Ebi Gold substrate, its already reduced the TDS to 180 and getting lower, I have not tested the GH and KH as of yet, but we are expecting them to very low, as the substrate apparently buffers them values along with PH. Her GH and KH in her old substrate was 12GH, 6 KH, hopefully we will aim to half them values, even so 12GH and 6KH is way lower than my tank and yet in the same house, once again ferts? eco complete? raising mine.

How does a substrate lower GH, KH? I have not read that in the article above I posted, we also said maybe my Eco Complete has raised mine, so maybe its not the ferts in my tank and its the Eco Complete.

I just thought it would be interesting if you could explain some of that to me, and I think I would learn another good chunk of information, also to mention I'm still getting my head around
(A multivalent cation is a positively charged ion with two or more positive charges, ie, Ca++, Mg++, Al+++, Fe+++) so I am still learning some of that, as some have more + then others, and some have - , science wasn't my best friend that's why I said I hope you can keep it simple lol. I get the concept of the equation, just have no clue what's happening in my tank water.

Sorry for the long essay, I hope these questions don't bore you, last final question quickly about these silly test kits:

3. My girlfriends tank read 1 Ammonia, I did the test after substrate was in for few hours, but don't worry I now know there pointless and inaccurate, but I need some advice on this one, how can I know when the tank is safe for inhabitants ?

I have 3 otto's and 1 Cherry shrimp in there, they would be dead this morning if it was 1ppm or 0.25 as you said, I presume 0.25 they would be dead, especially a shrimp, while he was a bit on deaths door after the first couple hours he has perked up now, so what is this kit reading? I will go back through the article you linked me which does explain it reads numerous things, and acidic and alkaline conditions all play apart, but how does one know when a tank is cycled ? or in my case when will it be safe to add shrimp, I did keep the filter alive so that should help.

4. How long can a filter survive a power cut? I've been lucky so far and not had one in the 2 years of owning my tank unless I missed one.

Thanks again, and sorry for the extra questions (essay) but as you said GH/KH are fairly important for breeding, and I did read lots of articles so I did try, but just couldn't find the answers, some of it did get complicated.
I see the article you mention about fish being played the hand they were dealt, and soft water fish can live in hard water, like plants can adapt. But how come they do not adapt to breeding as-well as adapting to the water conditions? I do think my water is to hard in my tank. So hope your answers can help me a bit, but If it came down to it I would rather have hard water and healthy plants rather than no dosing, soft water and breeding fish. Unless I had 2 tanks.

 

[ceg4048]

I understand some of it, and while I cant boil buckets of water worth, or go down the RO route for now, how else can someone reduce there GH/KH TDS?

Hi mate,
Really, there are only a few ways to remove these dissolved ions, RO, an exchange resin such as what household water softeners use, and boiling.

Am I correct in saying the ferts we dose in the aquarium can raise GH? I also know our ferts can raise TDS. KH I'm not sure about out.

GH is just the water's content of Calcium and Magnesium. If you add these as part of your dosing then you will raise GH. KH is the water's content of carbonate and bicarbonate. If you are not adding any of these the the KH will not increase, however, KH test kits do not measure carbonate hardness, they measure the alkalinity of the water, which is a much more generic, and is just the water's content of those anions which can buffer any acid in the water. Anions are molecules or atoms which have a negative charge. Bicarbonate (HCO3-) has a negative 1 (-1) charge.

Anything that's dissolved in the water raises the TDS. That includes liquids even though the acronym means Total Dissolved Solids. So adding nutrients, food or hardscape that dissolves will raise the TDS.

So these fish I selected, is it more challenging for people to breed when they dose fertilizers if the fish requires softer water?

But it's also a lot harder to breed when the fish are not well fed with plenty of live food, when the water is not clean, when the lighting is too high, when the temperature is not right. I mean, there are a lot of things which contribute to fish breeding. Breeding has nothing to do with NO3 levels or ferts generally. There are plenty of people out there who are not able to breed their fish and they have neither plants nor do they add ferts. I've bred dwarf chiclids in an EI fed tank. Look at this post (this is the fellow who invented EI) EI dosing impact on fish breeding and Fry | UK Aquatic Plant Society

How does a substrate lower GH, KH? I have not read that in the article above I posted, we also said maybe my Eco Complete has raised mine, so maybe its not the ferts in my tank and its the Eco Complete.

Do you have any of those little magnets that you use to post notes on your refrigerator? Well, just think of the substrate as the fridge door and the ions as the magnets. The substrate attracts and holds the charged particles. At some point, maybe a few months, there are as many magnets on the door as it can hold and the TDS starts to rise again because they remain in the water instead of being trapped on the surface of the sediment particles.

3. My girlfriends tank read 1 Ammonia, I did the test after substrate was in for few hours, but don't worry I now know there pointless and inaccurate, but I need some advice on this one, how can I know when the tank is safe for inhabitants ?

Depending on what's in the tank, that material may or may not attract these charged particles. On the other side of the ledger, if you have hardscape in the tank that is made of a soluble material, then the material dissolves, especially if there is CO2 in the water which generates acid. The dissolved material raises the TDS. If the material contains Calcium/Magnesium the GH will rise. If the material contains Carbonate or other alkaline substance then the KH will rise.

I just thought it would be interesting if you could explain some of that to me, and I think I would learn another good chunk of information, also to mention I'm still getting my head around
(A multivalent cation is a positively charged ion with two or more positive charges, ie, Ca++, Mg++, Al+++, Fe+++) so I am still learning some of that, as some have more + then others, and some have - , science wasn't my best friend that's why I said I hope you can keep it simple lol. I get the concept of the equation, just have no clue what's happening in my tank water.

Here's a short primer about atoms:
Atoms are constructed of a nucleus which contains positively (+) charged particles called Protons. The value we ascribe to the proton charge is just +1, so, if there are two protons together then they have a combined net charge of +2. The protons also are made of smaller pieces (quarks) which have another property called the "color" charge. The color charge is about 1000X stronger than the electric charge we're talking about but it is only active out to about 0.000000000000001 of a meter, so as long as the protons aren't pulled apart then they are held tightly, and the electric charge, that wants to repel away from the other proton is too weak. That's why protons are squished together inside the nucleus. If you smash those protons with a tiny billiard ball, the protons will go flying off away from each other and in so doing will release a lot of energy. That's how atomic bombs work.

On the other hand, although the protons are locked together, the electrons are free to move about, and they have plenty of energy, but they have a -1 electric charge and so they are attracted to the positive charge of the protons in the nucleus. They also repel each other so they are in constant motion trying to get away and being attracted at the same time.

In this picture above can you see that there are 2 protons in the center and 2 electrons on the periphery? If you sum up all the charges you'll get -2 and +2, so the net charge is zero and the atom as a whole is considered neutral. If some force were to pull one of those electrons away then the atom would have a net positive charge (+1) because there would be -1 and +2. This atom will then be called an ION, and since it is a positive charge it would then be called a "catION".

So now this ion becomes an active agent and it would roam around with it's +1 electric charge looking to attract any electron. In this particular case, the atom with 2 protons is Helium. In that orbital circuit there can exist only 2 electrons. As a result Helium is not a very active atom and it's not easy at all to pull any of the electrons from their orbit. Helium therefore is considered inert.

Lets look at Hydrogen. It is the first element ever to exist and it's the most abundant in the universe. All that you are started with this little atom. As you can see it has only one electron and one proton. However, that orbital "shell" that the electron inhabits can hold two electrons, so even though the atom is neutral, it is very easy to fill that shell with a second electron, and, conversely it turns out that it's very easy to pull that single electron away. When that happens there will be this single proton floating about, again, with a powerful attraction and on the look out for electrons. This is called acid. Don't play with it!

More often than not, two hydrogen atoms find each other and share electrons.
As I mentioned, that first "shell" can hold 2 electrons so in the figure below, if we could animate the image, we would see both electrons (blue) circling around in a figure 8 around one proton then another. These shells, or orbital locations, being the outermost from the nucleus are called the "valence" shell and perhaps the name valence comes from the outermost visible valence of a curtain or drapery. When the electrons move around BOTH centers in this figure 8 pattern, the bond between the two atoms is referred to as "co-valent".

As more and more protons are forced together they capture more electrons and the situation becomes more complicated.
There are more electrons and they have to space themselves so that they avoid each other. This creates more "shells". Check this image out:

On the right you can see Carbon. It has 6 protons in the center, and, of course, as a neutral atom, it has 6 electrons flying around it. You can see that there is a second shell. The first, inner shell has all the electrons it can hold (2) but the second shell, the outermost "valence" shell, having much more space and being much further away from the center, can hold 8 electrons. So it doesn't mind sharing an additional 4 electrons. So now look at what happens. In each of the five atoms, the maximum of 2 electrons fills the first shell. On the Carbon atom you can see that the maximum of 8 electrons fills this outer shell.

So, chemical reactions are all about the movement of electrons because the electrons carry energy and can satisfy the attractive properties of charged ions.
Look at Calcium, but avoid hypnosis: The inner shell is filled with 2, the second and third shell are both filled with 8 and there are two electrons on the perimeter. When Calcium becomes ionized, it loses these two electrons and therefore will have a +2 charge. This is a similar story with all metals. They have a very low population of electrons in the valence shells and those electrons are so far away from the center that they are not held very tightly, plus they have a lot of energy. The movement of electrons in metals is therefore VERY easy and that's why metals are great conductors of electricity.

3. My girlfriends tank read 1 Ammonia, I did the test after substrate was in for few hours, but don't worry I now know there pointless and inaccurate, but I need some advice on this one, how can I know when the tank is safe for inhabitants ?

I just take care of the tank, feed the plants and do frequent (2X-3X per week) water changes. Wait 6-8 weeks. Add critters. It's so simple, it's automatic. People fret and go through a lot of hand wring for something that is so simple. That's hw long it takes to mature a tank.

4. How long can a filter survive a power cut? I've been lucky so far and not had one in the 2 years of owning my tank unless I missed one.

If you have a power cut just disconnect you filter and open the top. Maybe lift out a tray every now and again to get some air in there. I don't have any trouble when there is a power cut. Again, it's much ado about nothing.

Cheers,

 

[Jafooli]

Hey Clive,

Thanks for all the information, especially the "short primer about atoms" still seems a lot to take in lol, but I can see you've tried to make it simple for me, I definitely understand some of it, but will have to keep reading it over and over till its stored away. I really appreciate that.

You definitely covered everything there for me so cheers, I still need to read the breeding thread you linked so I will be sure to give that a good read.

Also if I remember correctly I do add a lot of Magnesium sulphate, when compared to a EI dosing calculator. To be honest I just stuck to the paper sent from APF one of the forums sponsors about the EI starter kit, but when I tried to learn how much of things I was dosing which I did learn, the Magnesium sulphate was on the high side but still in the PPM ranges, but I would like to make my own dosing tbh, but my scales went bust, I realized they was not accurate. I'm half hearted on my dosing mix, I trust APF guidelines would be accurate enough, but when I do get some scales I will probably try make my own mix, even though its EI which is meant to be easy so I'm sure any persons mix is just as good as the next persons.

I was going to make my own mix at one time, until I noticed my scales were inaccurate, I saw on this site Yet Another Nutrient Calculator when you hit DIY mix, it says "The estimative index" or "EI Daily", once again if I remember correct because this was like last year both of them options still put me in the ppm ranges, but the EI daily would not put me in the ppm ranges until the end of the week, where as the ""The estimative index" put me in the ppm ranges straight away.

Example KNO3

EI daily gives you 3.20ppm Nitrate with your fist dose, that's not in the range with the first dose.
The estimative index will put you at 7.50 on the first dose!!! so yeah its a bit complicated there, but the way I see its EI and either one would work. But yeah which option is best as you mentioned a while back adding more of something then makes the plant want more of something else, so that got me thinking a bit, and now especially as Magnesium can raise GH.

I don't want to drive you crazy with my EI mix, as its EI, and the point of it is to just provide excess nutrients, but the benefit of my own mix is I know exactly what I am adding, rather than using a bit of paper saying add 10ml to every 50 litre's and telling me how many teaspoons of KNO3 to add to 500ml of water etc. This also may lower my GH if I do my own mix, as mentioned above about the Magnesium sulphate, they say add 6tsp, I can't remember exact now but when my scales worked I weighed the grams, put them in the calculator and I was at the high end off the PPM range on the first dose, so some of this could be the underlining problem to my GH/KH, but I'm not sure what works best. (I'm also not sure if I'm adding any carbonate and bicarbonate)

I'm also looking into getting some extra cash and purchasing this PH meter, It has good reviews and the calibration solutions 4&7 can be purchased with it, I hope its not that hard to calibrate it etc.
High Quality Waterproof pH+Temperature Meter Tester: Amazon.co.uk: Electronics

At some point, maybe a few months, there are as many magnets on the door as it can hold and the TDS starts to rise again because they remain in the water instead of being trapped on the surface of the sediment particles.

I hope the Ebi Gold substrate lasts a bit longer than a few months, or I hope the TDS don't rise to much then the GH/KH/PH etc will probably rise as-well if it don't buffer for a long period.

Thanks again for your information! I will definitely try to absorb it all into my brain lol.

 

[ceg4048]

The pH meter you linked to should be fine. As I mentioned, you should also buy the calibration fluid.

EI is meant to be interactive. There are no laws against using your own numbers. If you are using tap water and if the municipal supplier has a report that shows Mg then you do not need to add any more Epsom salt. All you have to do is to monitor the tank to check for deficiencies.

Cheers,

 

[Jafooli]

Thanks Clive for all your help, I've definitely learnt a lot and will need to re-read some things just to make sure I take it all in.

I also do think I need to make my own Macro mix, if I can get the GH down it would be nice even though its not needed, but why keep it that high when I can bring it down without effecting the plants and It would also bring down TDS etc which all in all may or may not benefit my fish with there breeding attempts, the thread you posted about breeding fish in EI, even there his GH,KH was way lower than mine.

If I do make my own mix like you said above, deficiencies will be the key to getting it right, but hopefully I will get it right first go. I'm also not sure if anything I'm adding contains carbonate and bicarbonate I need to do some research there.

When I do get some scales I plan to use the dosing calculator I linked above, and will probably just start the lower dose "EI daily" and see how my plants respond over a couple of weeks and if any decencies appear I will know what to add etc or I could then just make a new mix with the higher ""The estimative index" on the calculator.

I also can't tell you my Mg numbers I'm afraid, I've just spent about an hour searching everywhere for my water report, all though I have found it its not very detailed, they decided to not list Calcium and Magnesium, its just a "no limit set" apparently there "Non regulatory parameters" or something, so I may email them.

I live in the South East of England, in Kent, and we're pretty much covered with chalk and limestone not literally lol, just behind me I have a chalk quarry, our water is real hard, if the calcium is coming from the chalk could explain my high GH, but then again it was lower in my girlfriends tank, "same house" so could be high magnesium dosing.

In there words:
Calcium no limit set
Occurs naturally and comes from chalk and limestone rocks that form a large
part of our area. Calcium is one of the main substances that contributes to the
hardness of water.

Actually the more I read, everything I dose in my Macro they give the "no limit set" apart from Nitrate they give me 50 mg NO3/I
"http://www.southeastwater.co.uk/media/116347/Water_Quality_Explained_SEW.pdf"

Can I just ask when I do email them and ask for the magnesium level, if they said it was like 0.5mgl, I did 0.5 x 200 litres, gives 100ppm lol, now I know that ain't right,
Somewhere I've gone totally wrong, as even "50 mg NO3/I" would be 50 x 200 = 10000ppm, I hope you don't fall of your seat , as I know that's ridiculous, but how do I work out the ppm in my tank of something shown on the water report so I don't look stupid, the key they gave was this:

The main chemical measurements:
1 mg/l (one milligram per litre) represents one part per million.
1 µg/l (one microgram per litre) represents one part per thousand million.

Hope you can just clear that up for me, then I can leave you in peace lol, thanks again for all the above help, now I just need to wait for the diatoms to go.

 

[Jafooli]

Oh wait maybe the 50x200 is actually 50 milligram's per litre like it says lol, BUT its 10000 milligrams of NO3 not 10000ppm so 10000 milligrams of NO3 in my tank gives me 30.66ppm of NO3 in a 200 litre tank.
I feel so dumb so all along ppm is just the milligram per litre of nutrient's/chemicals in our tanks. I have so much to learn =\ but I think I learnt that one my self. I hope I'm correct there.

So if they told me I have 0.5mgl of Magnesium in my tap water that would be 0.05 ppm which sound's to low, so maybe my estimate of 0.5 is not correct. But I think I understand it now.

I just x the milligrams per litre by 200, then on the dosing calculator input my milligrams on a 200 litre tank, and that will tell me the result of my dose.

If I am correct, then that just shows how all along before I knew nitrate kits were inaccurate I generally believed I had night nitrate, but this method is just more prove of how inaccurate they are.
My tank wields 30.66ppm of nitrate. I just used my pond for example as-well 4546 litres x 50mgl of NO3 = 227300 milligrams, that gives me a nitrate of 30.66ppm as-well.

Well I think I answered my own question, probably easier ways to do it, but please let me know If I am totally wrong. I think I'm wrong a bit through, as why would my water company put epsom salt in there water supply lol, so the caculator is using epsom salt rather than the magnesium my water company use or the rocks its coming from, so that's the flaw =\ dam.

 

[ceg4048]

Hi mate,
I guess I'm really not sure why all the calculations. A mg/L is exactly the same as a ppm. They explained all that in the first line: There is no need to calculate any further.

The main chemical measurements:
1 mg/l (one milligram per litre) represents one part per million.
1 µg/l (one microgram per litre) represents one part per thousand million.

This is exactly what I mean by people misunderstanding basic facts and becoming hysterical.

The European limit for NO3 in municipal water supply is 50ppm. There are no Euro limits for some of the other elements such as Calcium so maybe they don't measure it.

Kent water is high in Calcium, that's true, but it's worth asking them what the Mg level is.

Cheers,

 

[Jafooli]

Hmm its real confusing to me I have no idea, 50mg/l says my water report for NO3, that would mean 50mg/l x 200 litres = 10000ppm which is impossible.
But if I use the "one milligram per litre" like they also say in the same sentence, it gives me 10000 milligrams.

10000 milligrams here Yet Another Nutrient Calculator gives me 30.66 nitrate, sounds more correct to me, so that's where I'm confused... how can milligram and ppm be the same then?

If the facts are right, then what am I doing wrong, my tank is 200 litres, so surely the sum is 50x200 as its 50ppm per litre? how else can I work it out.

I need to know because if they tell me the Mg level, how am I going to determine how much my tank has.

I can see the fact, just cant see how to take the results, and then put them results into context of my tank.

Its either 10000ppm or 10000 milligrams = 30.66ppm. I have no idea how I'm misinterpreting this.
Unless the 50ppm just stays 50ppm across any given volume of water, 2 litres would then share the same NO3, still resulting in 50ppm.

 

[Jafooli]

Maybe I need to stop looking at that calculator, as KNO3 contains potassium NO3 alone is different, its probably the calculator that's drove my mind around the bend.

I guess I can just presume that 50mg/l / 50ppm of NO3 is in my water supply, and 2 or even 10 litres is going to share the same NO3 as one litre would, so the result would just keep to 50ppm over any volume of water.
I hope the Mg in my water supply is a bit higher then 0.5ppm then =\

 

[ceg4048]

Hmm its real confusing to me I have no idea, 50mg/l says my water report for NO3, that would mean 50mg/l x 200 litres = 10000ppm which is impossible.

No, somewhere along the line you have fallen off the wagon. 50mg/l x 200 litres = 10,000mg. 50mg/L is the same as 50ppm.

Did you ever play marbles as a kid? Way back when we'd all be on the lookout for a true "tiger eye" marble which was always prized. They were assumed to be one in a million.
That means if you had 1 million marbles, then 999,999 of them were ordinary, and only one was a true tiger eye. That's what 1ppm means - one part in every million parts.
This is how we measure concentration. It's a ratio of the item that you are interested in to the number of items that you are NOT interested in. So when we state the concentration of NO3 or any other compound that is dissolved in the water we are stating the ratio of number of those molecules compared to the number of water molecules. 50ppm NO3 means that for every million molecules in the tap, or in the tank, 50 of them are NO3 and 999, 950 of them are water molecules. The calculations that you are doing, as far as I can see, will tell you the total number of NO3 or whatever is in a given volume of water - and that is a meaningless calculation because the number of NO3 molecules in that volume has to be considered within the context of how many water molecules there are in the tank. So now do the same calculation for 999,950ppm of water molecules and you'll see that the answer is very nearly 200 kilograms which is just about what 200L of water weighs.
So all 50ppm means is that there are 50miligrams of NO3 dissolved in every kilogram of water. Each and every one of those 200 kilograms of the water will have 50mg of NO3 dissolved in it. 1mg is one millionth the weight of a kilogram. One liter of water weighs 1 kilogram.

Cheers,