RynoParsons
Member
- Joined
- 22 Jan 2013
- Messages
- 205
will take a pic tonight and post
-
You are viewing the forum as a Guest, please login (you can use your Facebook, Twitter, Google or Microsoft account to login) or register using this link: Log in or Sign Up
Wonderful Proserpinaca palusstris cuba
- Thread starter H..
- Start date
Here is mine, from this sunday. I think it has developed fine this time.
I have lowered the light intencity to 48 watts 10 hours, and only 1 hour in the middle it is lighted with 96watts. I must have two different timers on two separate lights because the big root will throw an shadow down to the bottom else.
Heres what it looks like now. sunday 27th jauary 2013, i have taken some more pictures, and you can look at them on my blogg. The text is in Swedish, You could translate it with google if you wish to. But the pictures are international
Bloggplats H. | Istället för fejan
H
Hi H,
the tank is looking really nice, I like the unique use of Staurogyne up the branch too.
Did you alter your fert dosing at all or simply reduce your lighting?
Seems from what you have said that halving your lighting intensity has done the trick which suggests it was a co2 related issue.
Cheerio
Ady
the tank is looking really nice, I like the unique use of Staurogyne up the branch too.
Did you alter your fert dosing at all or simply reduce your lighting?
Seems from what you have said that halving your lighting intensity has done the trick which suggests it was a co2 related issue.
Cheerio
Ady
Thanks Ady, I have made light adjustments, (reduction to nearly the half).
But I was having an buildup of PO4 also in the tank, whatever it came from I dont know. (five waterchanges of more than 50% untill i got down to 1,0ppm. Would that possibly make an PO4 concentration of 32ppm?)
I was in to the redfieldratio at first. But have for now changed the fert to the listing below on a weekly base, but fertilizing dayli a seventh of the drypowder. Dosing micro tvice a week.
N 20 ppm
P 3 ppm
K 30 ppm
Magnesium 4 ppm, 4:1 ratio to Ca
Fe 0.1 ppm
This is not an permanent solution, but i will stay stictly to the amounts and later make adjustments just to see what differences it makes.
I find it very important to have good coloration on the red leafs.
But I was having an buildup of PO4 also in the tank, whatever it came from I dont know. (five waterchanges of more than 50% untill i got down to 1,0ppm. Would that possibly make an PO4 concentration of 32ppm?)
I was in to the redfieldratio at first. But have for now changed the fert to the listing below on a weekly base, but fertilizing dayli a seventh of the drypowder. Dosing micro tvice a week.
N 20 ppm
P 3 ppm
K 30 ppm
Magnesium 4 ppm, 4:1 ratio to Ca
Fe 0.1 ppm
This is not an permanent solution, but i will stay stictly to the amounts and later make adjustments just to see what differences it makes.
I find it very important to have good coloration on the red leafs.
Great I have one follower!
I took this picture on 02 february. And the plant has good structure in its leaves, wich was the goal. But they look pale, and more green than red.
I would like to have more of the copperred coloration on its leaves, but im not confidet of giving it much more light if I can not provide more CO2. Some amano chrimps have died due to high CO2 levels i think when i tried to give more C.
The growht is stil quite moderate i think, but it might gain more speed if the conditions are good. But I wish for more red coloration.
H.
I took this picture on 02 february. And the plant has good structure in its leaves, wich was the goal. But they look pale, and more green than red.
I would like to have more of the copperred coloration on its leaves, but im not confidet of giving it much more light if I can not provide more CO2. Some amano chrimps have died due to high CO2 levels i think when i tried to give more C.
The growht is stil quite moderate i think, but it might gain more speed if the conditions are good. But I wish for more red coloration.
H.
macek.g
Member
Hi,go down to:
N-12
P-2
Fe-0.4
and it should be better
N-12
P-2
Fe-0.4
and it should be better
Hi,go down to:
N-12
P-2
Fe-0.4
and it should be better
What about K and Mg, the same as i have now or null?
H.
Yes, and these are the wages of sin. You were warned against using test kits and ratios, but you continue to follow this path. They can not tell you the truth. Cyanobacterial blooms are a direct result of low NO3, especially in a high light tank. Cyanobacteria are not capable of lying, but test kits lie every day. Add more KNO3 and this problem will go away. I predict that your next problem will be issues directly resulting from PO4 shortages since you appear to suffer PO4 paranoia.
Cheers,
Cheers,
But I made an mix according to listing below on a weekly base, but fertilizing daily a seventh of the drypowder. Dosing micro tvice a week.
N 20 ppm
P 3 ppm
K 30 ppm
Magnesium 4 ppm, 4:1 ratio to Ca
Fe 0.1 ppm
Is this not what estimative index reccomend?
H.
Am I calculating wrong here? this is what I dose
1 week (4 week, or 28 doses)
Nitrate (NO3) 20ppm per week, KNO3 --- 1,85ml (7,4 ml)
Phosphate (PO4) 3ppm per week KH2PO4 --- 0,3 (1,2 ml)
Potassium (K) 30ppm per week, K2SO4 --- 1,87 (7,48 ml)
Magnesium (Mg) 10ppm per week, MgSO4 --- 2,35 (9,4 ml)
6,37 ml / 1 week. --- ( 25,48 ml / 28 days)
Iron (Fe) 0.5ppm --- 1,88 ml/ week --- (0,94 ml twise a week)
NPK mix and dose 6,37 ml/week --- ( or 0,91 ml per day)
H.
1 week (4 week, or 28 doses)
Nitrate (NO3) 20ppm per week, KNO3 --- 1,85ml (7,4 ml)
Phosphate (PO4) 3ppm per week KH2PO4 --- 0,3 (1,2 ml)
Potassium (K) 30ppm per week, K2SO4 --- 1,87 (7,48 ml)
Magnesium (Mg) 10ppm per week, MgSO4 --- 2,35 (9,4 ml)
6,37 ml / 1 week. --- ( 25,48 ml / 28 days)
Iron (Fe) 0.5ppm --- 1,88 ml/ week --- (0,94 ml twise a week)
NPK mix and dose 6,37 ml/week --- ( or 0,91 ml per day)
H.
Estimative index absolutely prohibits the actions listed in your post #34
EI does not tell you to manage your ppm. It tells you to dose the suggested amounts and specifically not to test. So if you are managing the nutrient loading by using test kits then you are in real trouble. The ppm values listed were calculated by molar analysis, based on the number of grams of powder added to the water column - NOT by using rubbish values from any delusional test kits. And believe me, NO3 test kits are completely delusional.
I'm assuming that you are using test kits to manage the nutrient concentration values based on the content of your posts such as the one I quoted above. That is the single worst procedure conceivable. Perhaps I assumed incorrectly, but in any case, the idea of EI, first and foremost, is to obtain unlimited levels of nutrients, NOT to strictly manage ppm. The dosing values are suggestions and are to be adjusted when needed. The appearance of BGA indicates that the NO3 levels are NOT unlimited so you need to make the simple adjustment and stop trying to micromanage ppm values, because that method only gets you into deeper trouble and is contrary to the methodology.
The thing is that it is so easy to make the adjustments. Just double the dosing. People get tunnel vision get totally wrapped around the axle with ppm numbers, almost as if adhering to the numbers were some kind of lifeline, and they don't pay attention to the basic principle of maximum nutrition.
I don't measure millilitres, I don't weigh powders on an electronic scale for accuracy and I never have a problem. All these Matrix induced Potassium haters, ratio lovers and PO4 haters enjoy advising people to limit the nutrients due to some fantasy toxicity. I do just the opposite and I only stop adding more nutrients when I run out of spendable income. I just stick the spoon in the bucket and chuck a bunch of powder into the tank. And I NEVER......EVER...even think about lowering PO4. It's the 3rd most important compound for living things in the entire Solar System. Even the bacteria in your filter will do a better job with lots of PO4, so obsessing over these numbers and trying to lower the values to maintain some idealistic number is insanity.
I mean, look at this. I took those numbers you listed and threw them out the window. I added (by weight of powders) weekly doses of 60ppm NO3, 90ppm K, 10ppm PO4. Algae was non-existent and the tank became choked with weeds. There were 70 species in the tank but this photo is of the fast growing bullies:
Cheers,
EI does not tell you to manage your ppm. It tells you to dose the suggested amounts and specifically not to test. So if you are managing the nutrient loading by using test kits then you are in real trouble. The ppm values listed were calculated by molar analysis, based on the number of grams of powder added to the water column - NOT by using rubbish values from any delusional test kits. And believe me, NO3 test kits are completely delusional.
I'm assuming that you are using test kits to manage the nutrient concentration values based on the content of your posts such as the one I quoted above. That is the single worst procedure conceivable. Perhaps I assumed incorrectly, but in any case, the idea of EI, first and foremost, is to obtain unlimited levels of nutrients, NOT to strictly manage ppm. The dosing values are suggestions and are to be adjusted when needed. The appearance of BGA indicates that the NO3 levels are NOT unlimited so you need to make the simple adjustment and stop trying to micromanage ppm values, because that method only gets you into deeper trouble and is contrary to the methodology.
The thing is that it is so easy to make the adjustments. Just double the dosing. People get tunnel vision get totally wrapped around the axle with ppm numbers, almost as if adhering to the numbers were some kind of lifeline, and they don't pay attention to the basic principle of maximum nutrition.
I don't measure millilitres, I don't weigh powders on an electronic scale for accuracy and I never have a problem. All these Matrix induced Potassium haters, ratio lovers and PO4 haters enjoy advising people to limit the nutrients due to some fantasy toxicity. I do just the opposite and I only stop adding more nutrients when I run out of spendable income. I just stick the spoon in the bucket and chuck a bunch of powder into the tank. And I NEVER......EVER...even think about lowering PO4. It's the 3rd most important compound for living things in the entire Solar System. Even the bacteria in your filter will do a better job with lots of PO4, so obsessing over these numbers and trying to lower the values to maintain some idealistic number is insanity.
I mean, look at this. I took those numbers you listed and threw them out the window. I added (by weight of powders) weekly doses of 60ppm NO3, 90ppm K, 10ppm PO4. Algae was non-existent and the tank became choked with weeds. There were 70 species in the tank but this photo is of the fast growing bullies:
Cheers,
Once I made a huge mistake in my calculations and was dosing 10X the recommend EI values for a couple of months, did not have any algae in the tank! lol
I was in to the redfield ratio thing before, but as I said later, I left the ratio thing and I am ferting 20ppm N, 3ppm P, and 30 ppm K, now. I thought this war enough and more than enough. Water changes on weekends and daily dosing.
I dont use test kits to measure N ore P anymore, I just did it in the beginning of this thread because I got readings of P unusually high, I guess it had built up from whatever I dont know.
I wrote the ml measurements of what I have been giving this week just to hear what you folks think of it, and to ask if they are correctly measured, or if I am doing wrong calculations here. Because of the cyano. Yesterday I gave one ml of dry KNO3 extra due to the cyano.
Of course I could dose the amounts of NPK just once and after the water change, but I chose to do it every day. good or bad, I dont know
And yes im having more troubles with mine PP.
I dont use test kits to measure N ore P anymore, I just did it in the beginning of this thread because I got readings of P unusually high, I guess it had built up from whatever I dont know.
I wrote the ml measurements of what I have been giving this week just to hear what you folks think of it, and to ask if they are correctly measured, or if I am doing wrong calculations here. Because of the cyano. Yesterday I gave one ml of dry KNO3 extra due to the cyano.
Of course I could dose the amounts of NPK just once and after the water change, but I chose to do it every day. good or bad, I dont know
And yes im having more troubles with mine PP.
Hi H,
From your photo this looks like it could be a simple case of hardscape obstructing good co2/nutrient distribution to these plants....one plant is right amongst some branches, the other behind a large rock. This will manifest itself in co2 related deficiencies as the light from above will be equally as strong yet the plants won't have good access to the levels of carbon and other ferts that the rest of the plants in the tank do. The effects will be worsened with a plant that is greedy for co2.
The specimen in the middle will no doubt be getting greater all around access as there is little obstruction other than at the very base. You could try temporarily moving the failing plants to a position in the tank with better distribution for a few weeks. If they improve then the problem will most likely be down to distribution issues.
Once you have the plant healthy again you could carry out a test. The plant showed some improvement from reducing the lighting intensity, so maybe with improved distribution you could increase the lighting intensity again to try and achieve the red colouration you desire....it will be a good way of finding out what makes it go red
Cheerio,
Ady
From your photo this looks like it could be a simple case of hardscape obstructing good co2/nutrient distribution to these plants....one plant is right amongst some branches, the other behind a large rock. This will manifest itself in co2 related deficiencies as the light from above will be equally as strong yet the plants won't have good access to the levels of carbon and other ferts that the rest of the plants in the tank do. The effects will be worsened with a plant that is greedy for co2.
The specimen in the middle will no doubt be getting greater all around access as there is little obstruction other than at the very base. You could try temporarily moving the failing plants to a position in the tank with better distribution for a few weeks. If they improve then the problem will most likely be down to distribution issues.
Once you have the plant healthy again you could carry out a test. The plant showed some improvement from reducing the lighting intensity, so maybe with improved distribution you could increase the lighting intensity again to try and achieve the red colouration you desire....it will be a good way of finding out what makes it go red
Cheerio,
Ady
Here is the setup from above
And it is filtered with unimax 500, slightly overkill. aproximtly 25 liter filtercannister. together with the aquarium it will be aprox 75 liters of water, all calculations are made to 75 liters of water, but it is still an 54 liter tank.
Iwould say that the circultion of water is not underestimated. The outlet is pointing towards the co2 outlet to try and make it give good resolutio, thats why the outlet is so long.
H.
And it is filtered with unimax 500, slightly overkill. aproximtly 25 liter filtercannister. together with the aquarium it will be aprox 75 liters of water, all calculations are made to 75 liters of water, but it is still an 54 liter tank.
Iwould say that the circultion of water is not underestimated. The outlet is pointing towards the co2 outlet to try and make it give good resolutio, thats why the outlet is so long.
H.
