• 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

40 Breeder Dutchy High Tech + Low Tech Tanks

With you siding with him too I’m leaning towards trying that next rather than raising levels
Well you are already on the high side I guess so not much you can add there ;)
if the lower micros don’t pan out :)
For you to be able to see the effects of different micros dosing, it can take multiple weeks, in fact months. Not sure where this idea I see around of changing micros often one will see quick and straight results. It's possible to see the effect on very deficient plants, else change can be hard to assess and pint-point.
Can you elaborate more on the K
If I'm not mistaken and in very quick words, K will increase elongation of plants. Less K would mean shorter internodes hence less trimming and a more bushy appearance.
And where does my substrate come into play?
I'm just more favorable of a rich substrate rather than a very rich water column and empty substrate. After all if you look at nature, most plants feed from the bottom not the top. I'm not saying plants can't feed from leaves, just saying that nature designed plants in a certain way so why screw with that? ;). I think plants have a preferential way of feeding, although that's just me assuming. So my hypothesis is that when planting a cutting in a depleated substrate, plants may have a harder time to recover. Now, it's possible that when plants adapt to a certain environment then they can preferentially feed from leaves, so don't quote me on that.
 
Well you are already on the high side I guess so not much you can add there ;)

For you to be able to see the effects of different micros dosing, it can take multiple weeks, in fact months. Not sure where this idea I see around of changing micros often one will see quick and straight results. It's possible to see the effect on very deficient plants, else change can be hard to assess and pint-point.

If I'm not mistaken and in very quick words, K will increase elongation of plants. Less K would mean shorter internodes hence less trimming and a more bushy appearance.

I'm just more favorable of a rich substrate rather than a very rich water column and empty substrate. After all if you look at nature, most plants feed from the bottom not the top. I'm not saying plants can't feed from leaves, just saying that nature designed plants in a certain way so why screw with that? ;). I think plants have a preferential way of feeding, although that's just me assuming. So my hypothesis is that when planting a cutting in a depleated substrate, plants may have a harder time to recover. Now, it's possible that when plants adapt to a certain environment then they can preferentially feed from leaves, so don't quote me on that.
Interesting, I don’t notice any difference in internode distance from my dosing now vs when I was dosing APT Complete on my Rotala blood red SG, but I’ll keep an eye on that. I always thought that internode distance is mainly a light-related thing.

Hmm there’s definitely some truth in what you say regarding how long some fert responses can take—for instance extreme deficiencies. However, I consider myself a pretty decent student of planted tanks at this point, and I have read various journals and planted tank sources where fert responses have been dramatic and quick, with a general time frame of 3 weeks in a high tech tank with high light and high CO2 enough time to gauge a fert response. Not for a plant like anubias, but for a plant like Meta or other medium to fast growers or “indicator plants.” Joe Harvey and Vin Kutty are two people for example who have documented such things in detail. @GreggZ is another.

I think in general, I am also more of a fan of a rich substrate over just a rich water column too. But I also like to explore, and I want to try pretty much all methods. I also probably have a mostly depleted substrate, so I figured it was a good time to try a high water column/EI method with a higher CEC substrate since I was going to a fully-planted dutch-style tank anyways.
 
Last edited:
and I have read various journals and planted tank sources where fert responses have been dramatic and quick, with a general time frame of 3 weeks in a high tech tank with high light and high CO2 enough time to gauge a fert response. Joe Harvey and Vin Kutty are two people who have documented such things in detail.
I am referring to traces, not NPK. Correcting NPK in a deficient environment you can actually see the difference in a matter of days.
 
I am referring to traces, not NPK. Correcting NPK in a deficient environment you can actually see the difference in a matter of days.
For sure. Yeah for traces @GreggZ, Joe Harvey, and Vin Kutty are just three people who have demonstrated in pretty great detail relatively rapid responses. They have been able to find that their tanks do best between a certain range of traces, say for example 0.3-0.8 Fe as proxy. Their efforts are part of what led to Rotala Butterfly’s CSM+B/Iron recommendations to be lowered for EI from 0.5 Fe/micros per dose for up to 1.5 Fe/micros per week to 0.2 Fe/micros per dose for up to 0.8 per week. FWIW in case it wasn’t clear, I’m giving every change I make to my tank at least 3 weeks to evaluate the response. I am also changing as few variables as possible.
 
Last edited:
I just ran across this thread and the first thing I have to say it is that you have a very nice tank!! Well done, lots going right there. And nice journal too.

A couple of thoughts. Since you are performing two water changes just a day apart, that affects your accumulation. You really aren’t dosing EI levels (which is fine).

If I understand your dosing is 7.33:1.66:7.33 per dose. You add one dose after a 60% water change, then the next day another 60% water change then add a triple dose. Without going into all the math your maximum accumulation with your dosing is roughly 30:7:30. Less than EI levels but very much in tune with many, many people that I know. For instance Joe’s max accumulation is 31:11:44. Mine is 24:8:30. And really anywhere in that general range is good for about 90% of the plants out there.

You might want to start spreading those water changes out a bit. Back to back is not much different than a larger one once a week. I usually do two a week, but they are 3-4 days apart. If I change 70 gallons, I dose 70 gallons to my water column targets. So all incoming water is dosed to the same levels. Helps keeps nutrient levels stable which is a good thing.

IMO I highly doubt the Meta curling has anything to do with Boron or micros in general. Most of the tanks I follow are in the 0.4 to 0.6 Fe range for micros. IME of all the micros Boron has the narrowest band where it is most effective. Put it this way, you need some but not too much. I know loads of people who grow Meta and Pantanal quite well with Joe’s mix and my mix is quite close to his.

One thing I did notice is that you mentioned that you stopped adding carbonates to your RO water. So now your dKH is very, very low. Same for me. I would be double checking my degassed pH. For reference my fully degassed pH is 6.25 and I drop to 4.85 via CO2 injection daily. In my experience that curling of leaves could be CO2 related. With your lower dKH your degassed pH should be lower as well.

One thing in general about Meta and Pantanal, they are quick to pout, but they are also quick to improve.

All that being said I would be changing only one thing at a time and in small increments. You have too much going right to rock the boat too hard. You should be looking to fine tune things and not change too much suddenly or drastically.

Once again great tank and I am very much looking forward to seeing where it goes from here. The next step might be getting a larger canvas to paint on. More tank = more plants!

Edit: Cooper I just realized this was your tank! Didn't put two and two together earlier. Nice job!
 
Last edited:
I just ran across this thread and the first thing I have to say it is that you have a very nice tank!! Well done, lots going right there. And nice journal too.

A couple of thoughts. Since you are performing two water changes just a day apart, that affects your accumulation. You really aren’t dosing EI levels (which is fine).

If I understand your dosing is 7.33:1.66:7.33 per dose. You add one dose after a 60% water change, then the next day another 60% water change then add a triple dose. Without going into all the math your maximum accumulation with your dosing is roughly 30:7:30. Less than EI levels but very much in tune with many, many people that I know. For instance Joe’s max accumulation is 31:11:44. Mine is 24:8:30. And really anywhere in that general range is good for about 90% of the plants out there.

You might want to start spreading those water changes out a bit. Back to back is not much different than a larger one once a week. I usually do two a week, but they are 3-4 days apart. If I change 70 gallons, I dose 70 gallons to my water column targets. So all incoming water is dosed to the same levels. Helps keeps nutrient levels stable which is a good thing.

IMO I highly doubt the Meta curling has anything to do with Boron or micros in general. Most of the tanks I follow are in the 0.4 to 0.6 Fe range for micros. IME of all the micros Boron has the narrowest band where it is most effective. Put it this way, you need some but not too much. I know loads of people who grow Meta and Pantanal quite well with Joe’s mix and my mix is quite close to his.

One thing I did notice is that you mentioned that you stopped adding carbonates to your RO water. So now your dKH is very, very low. Same for me. I would be double checking my degassed pH. For reference my fully degassed pH is 6.25 and I drop to 4.85 via CO2 injection daily. In my experience that curling of leaves could be CO2 related. With your lower dKH your degassed pH should be lower as well.

One thing in general about Meta and Pantanal, they are quick to pout, but they are also quick to improve.

All that being said I would be changing only one thing at a time and in small increments. You have too much going right to rock the boat too hard. You should be looking to fine tune things and not change too much suddenly or drastically.

Once again great tank and I am very much looking forward to seeing where it goes from here. The next step might be getting a larger canvas to paint on. More tank = more plants!

Edit: Cooper I just realized this was your tank! Didn't put two and two together earlier. Nice job!
Thanks a lot for chiming in, Gregg, and for the nice words. Yeah, you were a large motivating factor for me to start a journal here!

I do definitely plan on front loading again/trying to keep macro levels more stable throughout the week in the near future. I was experiencing some weird plant health issues when I first tried front loading, but I think they were most likely due to confounding factors (like possible CO2 issues, deteriorating substrate health, or maybe I didn't give it enough time to pan out) so I'm interested to see how it will work out when I get around to it.

Unfortunately my 40 gallon breeder is the largest tank I'll be able to work with for at least another year. When I do eventually upgrade, I have my eyes on a UNS 90U possibly--those dimensions seem really appealing to me. Not sure I'd want to deal with an extra foot lengthwise for a dutch-style tank. In the meantime, Raj seems to have done pretty well with a 40 breeder, so I think I can still create something pretty sweet with the slightly limited dimensions :).

Funny that you bring up KH and PH, because that is definitely not something I have ruled out and there is something interesting going on with my KH throughout the week that I've noticed and could possibly cause some issues. I'll explain in an update tomorrow, it's been a long day lol.
 
Last edited:
So I decided to check my CO2, because I hadn't messed with it in at least a month, and my PH drop wasn't as much as it normally is. Normally I drop it to 5.6-5.7, and it was only about 5.9, so either because of my increased plant mass it wasn't dropping as much, or (what I think is more likely) there was a bit of drift with my needle valve. Moving forward, I think I'll check my PH drop at least every 2 weeks to keep an eye on any possible drift.

tempImageyIEIjA.jpg


The limnophila vietnam needs to be trimmed, kind of taking over the middle of the tank too much. Probably going to mow it on Wednesday pretty brutally take away some of its width.

Replanted the Meta and Pantanal.

tempImageTFxep0.jpg


Restarted the lobelia cardinalis mini.

tempImage8aj2vU.jpg


Mowed the Rotala Blood Red SG--sloping it so that its cut lower in the front and taller toward the back. Looks a bit scraggly for a few days to a week but then grows in really nice and much easier than individually replanting. Very tolerant towards being mowed like other rotundifolia/h'ra rotala variants.

tempImageeFjTVS.jpg


Noticing signs of growth on the downoi :). Buying submerged from a reputable seller/hobbyist makes a huge difference when buying plants.

tempImagemtqzIH.jpg


As promised @plantnoobdude @_Maq_ , I got some new syngonanthus--lago grande. Replaced the penthorum sedoides with it. I think I have too many light green plants though and a darker green would go much better here, so I am leaning towards switching it out once it grows in with either a moss, blyxa japonica, or some other dark green plant (suggestions welcome). Already I can see some possible issues with contrast between it and the downoi too.

tempImageBFZh5T.jpg


Think I'm seeing some signs that the .3-.4 per week isn't enough for my tank, but probably still too early to conclude for sure. Still seeing some algae on some of the leaves of the Hygro 53b that I didn't see before lowering the micros. Also I think some of the newer tips of the Ludwigia Palustris were showing some unhappiness. Hard to say though because of the possible CO2 issue, so we’ll have to see how things go over the next 2ish weeks.

tempImagetHCdPK.png


In regards to what I've noticed with my KH @GreggZ--even though I do two 50-60% water changes per week with RODI water that I'm not adding any KH to, I've noticed my KH hangs out around 20-30ppm during the week. My theory was that my aquasoil had absorbed some carbonates during the 2 years that I only used tap water in my tank and was leaching some back into the water during the week, but I spoke to Vin and he said that's not possible. Vin said the only possibility is that my RODI isn't getting rid of all the carbonate from my tap water, so I'm going to test the KH of my reconstituted RODI water before doing my water change on Wednesday to see what the KH is. Otherwise, I have no idea why my KH isn't lower--there is nothing in the tank that could be raising the KH besides the 7-9ppm or so that is added from ferts per week. I thought that maybe the fluctuating KH could be the source of the Meta's fussiness, but Vin said a KH fluctuation of 1-2kh per week won't bother plants at all, so there goes that theory.

Right now my main theory for Meta's fussiness is that the aquasoil may have absorbed some funky stuff from the two years I was using just Los Angeles tap water that has built up over time and may be causing some minor issues.
 
Last edited:
In regards to what I've noticed with my KH @GreggZ--even though I do two 50-60% water changes per week with RODI water that I'm not adding any KH to, I've noticed my KH hangs out around 20-30ppm during the week. My theory was that my aquasoil had absorbed some carbonates during the 2 years that I only used tap water in my tank and was leaching some back into the water during the week, but I spoke to Vin and he said that's not possible. Vin said the only possibility is that my RODI isn't getting rid of all the carbonate from my tap water, so I'm going to test the KH of my reconstituted RODI water before doing my water change on Wednesday to see what the KH is. Otherwise, I have no idea why my KH isn't lower--there is nothing in the tank that could be raising the KH besides the 7-9ppm or so that is added from ferts per week. I thought that maybe the fluctuating KH could be the source of the Meta's fussiness, but Vin said a KH fluctuation of 1-2kh per week won't bother plants at all, so there goes that theory.

Right now my main theory for Meta's fussiness is that the aquasoil may have absorbed some funky stuff from the two years I was using just Los Angeles tap water that has built up over time and may be causing some minor issues.
Two things. 20 ppm is just slightly over 1 dKH. How are you measuring this to such accuracy?

You said you are not adding any carbonates, but you said "there is nothing in the tank that could be raising the KH besides the 7-9ppm or so that is added from ferts per week". What ferts are adding dKH?

If I were you I would completely degas a sample of your RO water and a sample of tank water. Let them sit for about three days, then start testing with a calibrated pH probe if possible. This will tell you if it's something you are adding or coming from the RO that way. But either way you should be measuring pH drop from fully degassed not the dKH level.

As to the Meta, could be issues with the substrate, but unlikey. Meta will grow well with no roots at all in the substrate. It's more likely tied to CO2 or macro fertilization. Micros at 0.3 to 0.4 should be plenty, but you could bump it up as high as 0.6 just to be sure.

Back to the substrate, have you deep cleaned it in the two years? If not, it's a good idea. Basically resetting the tank every so often can cure a lot of ills.

And nice update. Keep them coming I am enjoying following along.
 
Last edited:
So I decided to check my CO2, because I hadn't messed with it in at least a month, and my PH drop wasn't as much as it normally is. Normally I drop it to 5.6-5.7, and it was only about 5.9, so either because of my increased plant mass it wasn't dropping as much, or (what I think is more likely) there was a bit of drift with my needle valve. Moving forward, I think I'll check my PH drop at least every 2 weeks to keep an eye on any possible drift.
I would be inclined to think your needle valve is not the reason. However I see 3 other reasons for this: temperature, increased surface agitation or simply your PH Pen. The later being the most likely reason unless you are using a PH probe, but I don't see that in your tank.
Right now my main theory for Meta's fussiness is that the aquasoil may have absorbed some funky stuff from the two years I was using just Los Angeles tap water that has built up over time and may be causing some minor issues.
Pretty much the same assessment I have with Gregg. Co2 or macro instability will usually be the source of this type of behavior in these two plants. Pantanal shows more permanent issues than Meta. This is not a micro issue in my opinion unless you are seing other plants being affected by some sort of deficiency.
 
tempimagebfzh5t-jpg.jpg

My experience with Lago Grande and Macrocaulon is that they are not small plants... It would be interesting to see if you can keep them small and bushy by dense planting/ aggressive trimming. .. I've been thinking of adding them back to my tank as well!
 
In regards to what I've noticed with my KH @GreggZ--even though I do two 50-60% water changes per week with RODI water that I'm not adding any KH to, I've noticed my KH hangs out around 20-30ppm during the week.
In fact, you can never achieve true zero carbonates as long as your pH is above 4.5. Some CO2 will always react into HCO3- to maintain carbonate-equilibrium.
 
In fact, you can never achieve true zero carbonates as long as your pH is above 4.5. Some CO2 will always react into HCO3- to maintain carbonate-equilibrium.
Yes there are other forces at play when it comes to dKH and pH. We should more accurately say that we run a tank with pure RO rather than zero dKH.

For instance my fully degassed pure RO water is very steady at 6.25 pH. That would indicate about 0.2 dKH.

But in the end it matters little. Like many things in this hobby, it's not the absolute value but rather the relative value that matters. In this case I would forget trying to pinpoint absolute dKH and instead focus on relative pH drop.
 
Thanks for the input guys.
Two things. 20 ppm is just slightly over 1 dKH. How are you measuring this to such accuracy?

You said you are not adding any carbonates, but you said "there is nothing in the tank that could be raising the KH besides the 7-9ppm or so that is added from ferts per week". What ferts are adding dKH?

If I were you I would completely degas a sample of your RO water and a sample of tank water. Let them sit for about three days, then start testing with a calibrated pH probe if possible. This will tell you if it's something you are adding or coming from the RO that way. But either way you should be measuring pH drop from fully degassed not the dKH level.

As to the Meta, could be issues with the substrate, but unlikey. Meta will grow well with no roots at all in the substrate. It's more likely tied to CO2 or macro fertilization. Micros at 0.3 to 0.4 should be plenty, but you could bump it up as high as 0.6 just to be sure.

Back to the substrate, have you deep cleaned it in the two years? If not, it's a good idea. Basically resetting the tank every so often can cure a lot of ills.

And nice update. Keep them coming I am enjoying following along.
I may have misinterpreted this from the IFC calculator. I thought there was a bit of KH coming with some of my ferts based on the acquired hardness column. Even if there are some carbonates in my reconstituted RODI water, just injected CO2 wouldn't account for the ~10ppm rise per week I see in KH I see though right?
Screen Shot 2022-08-27 at 9.31.17 PM.png


I have a Hanna freshwater alkalinity colorimeter, so I'm pretty confident in it's accuracy. I mostly go by the relative PH drop method, and I typically have between a 1.2-1.5 PH drop. I've judged my PH drop using Dennis Wong's method of shaking/degassing a sample of water for three minutes right before CO2 comes on and by leaving tank water out for a few days. I took some water out before CO2 came on this morning, so I'll update with the results. In regards to the substrate, I have done and do decently deep vacuums, with one having been done where the Meta are about 6 weeks ago I think, when I started with the slightly modified EI regime before I lowered micros.

I would be inclined to think your needle valve is not the reason. However I see 3 other reasons for this: temperature, increased surface agitation or simply your PH Pen. The later being the most likely reason unless you are using a PH probe, but I don't see that in your tank.

Pretty much the same assessment I have with Gregg. Co2 or macro instability will usually be the source of this type of behavior in these two plants. Pantanal shows more permanent issues than Meta. This is not a micro issue in my opinion unless you are seing other plants being affected by some sort of deficiency.
Did not think of temperature being a factor, great call, will always consider this moving forward. However, I do not think it was a factor because I'm liberal with my air conditioning and my tank stays fairly stable between 75-77F (23-25C). I have a good quality PH Pen--Apera. Amazon product ASIN B01ENFOIQE and I am very good about calibrating it. Typically if it's been a week since my last measurement, I calibrate first. Sometimes more frequently just to be safe, but I never do not calibrate if it's been a week since my last measurement. I will also keep surface agitation in mind moving forward, but I'm also pretty darn good at keeping the water level fairly constant throughout the week, I have a lid on this tank so that helps a lot.

tempimagebfzh5t-jpg.jpg

My experience with Lago Grande and Macrocaulon is that they are not small plants... It would be interesting to see if you can keep them small and bushy by dense planting/ aggressive trimming. .. I've been thinking of adding them back to my tank as well!
The guy I got the Lago Grande from said they are definitely a midground Syn, so we'll see how they grow out. I got them from a really experienced hobbyist, whose favorite plants are Syns actually and who @GreggZ knows--Syn king Dennis (different guy than Dennis Wong).

I am definitely going to test keeping Macros more stable by doing some type of frontloading and increasing Macros in the future :).
 
Last edited:
I may have misinterpreted this from the IFC calculator. I thought there was a bit of KH coming with some of my ferts based on the acquired hardness column.
What you see at the very bottom right corner of that table is the dKH contributed by ADA Brighty K. You might ask why is it that Brighty has carbonates? The product composition, here below, will answer that question ;)
Screen Shot 2022-08-29 at 12.24.15.jpg

Those two last lines you see in the IFC calculator's table are just meant for you to compare your DIY fert to commercial ferts. We wanted people to be able to compare what they produce with what is available out there.
have a good quality PH Pen--Apera. and I am very good about calibrating it.
No matter the PH Pen you have, even the very expensive ones, they drift. It's just intrinsic to their design. My experience is that if you want consistent result to the 0.1 point you would need to calibrate the pen each time you use it. Not practical obviously, but PH pens are just a real PITA. Best option though is to get a proper double junction PH probe that stays permanently in the water.
Syn king Dennis
He is THE Syn expert out there. You got it from the right person!
 
No matter the PH Pen you have, even the very expensive ones, they drift. It's just intrinsic to their design. My experience is that if you want consistent result to the 0.1 point you would need to calibrate the pen each time you use it. Not practical obviously, but PH pens are just a real PITA. Best option though is to get a proper double junction PH probe that stays permanently in the water.

He is THE Syn expert out there. You got it from the right person!
Agreed. A BNC connected double junction higher quality probe that stays in the tank is a great investment. I calibrate my American Pinpoint Marine about once a month and it's never off by more than 0.05 or so. Usually needs no adjustment at all. And since it's always in the water you can see the pH at a glance. They also last much longer so you are not replacing them as quickly as the cheap ones. Once those ones dry out it's game over and time to order a new one.

Even when they are working they tend to be less accurate. At one time I had three "pen" type probes, calibrated them, and yet they still all gave different readings.

And yes Dennis Singh is known as the "Syn God". I've known him for years and he is a great guy and a really interesting character. Only person I have ever seen that keeps tanks that are 100% Syngo's.
 
@Hanuman @GreggZ. Great, I'm going to go ahead and bite the bullet and grab the higher quality PH meter. Any recommendations for one that is low key and not an eye sore in the tank? The Milwaukee looks great, but the lime green probe is a bit off-putting.

Dennis really was born to be the Syn God with that last name lol.

In other news, after leaving my tank water out for a day, I measured the PH after freshly calibrating my PH Pen and it read 6.97. Just before lights came on--5.62. Fish seem okay at this level, my angelfish is a bit lethargic but that's to be expected because he is a big boy. The water is only going to degass further, so my CO2 is definitely on point again. Ideally in the future I'd like to either find a lower level or rehome him and the pearl gouramis. The pearl gouramis are super healthy but I'm pretty sure I have more flow in the tank than they like--don't think they are the best choice for fish in my type of high tech tank because of the level of flow necessary to ensure CO2 doesn't become an issue.

I believe I'm seeing more signs that my micros and Fe aren't enough.

1) Ludwigia palustris/super red mini looks significantly worse than before lowering.

tempImageUpLQE3.jpg


2) Stunting going on with Rotala Macrandra Mini Green. (Notice a silver lining going on though--at least one rotala mini butterfly shoot coming in pretty nice).

tempImagee37JfP.jpg


3) Increased GSA on buce.

tempImageV8B66b.jpg


4) I believe Meta is looking worse. Pantanal has full on stunted with some pale patches and gone a bit darker red at the tips which experienced Pantanal growers always know is a bad sign.

tempImageiVgDZj.jpg


5) Mermaid Weed looks pretty good. 7.5 or 8/10. But it seems to me they also liked the higher levels of Fe and Micros more.

tempImagem5L5Cg.jpg


6) Possibly the most telling sign for me--The most algae I have had on a plant in my tank in more than a year on the Hygro 53b. Happy plants do not attract algae like this. None of this was on it before lowering micros and Fe. Hard to see in the picture but there is a decent amount in person.

tempImageINtWnq.jpg


At this point, I'm not going to lie, I'm starting to itch to raise the Micros back up to the previous 0.6/0.8 Fe levels. Although there was a period of adjustment when I started that dosing too, it was more like a speed bump and then smoooooooth sailing, whereas the way the tank has responded to lowering micros and Fe feels akin to hydroplaning and being close to losing full control lol.

Please feel free to chime in and let me know if you think I should just raise the micros and Fe immediately, or if I should continue at these levels for the last week of the 3 weeks.
 
Last edited:
@Hanuman @GreggZ. Great, I'm going to go ahead and bite the bullet and grab the higher quality PH meter. Any recommendations for one that is low key and not an eye sore in the tank?
Personally I think any double junction, no matter the brand is 10 folds better than a PH Pen.
Now, these types of probes alone are actually not that expensive unless you go for the big names. However a few months ago I was about to invest into a logger+probe which would allow me to have continuous PH curves without having to turn the probe on and off whenever I wanted to make a measurement. The product is catered for the hydroponic market but these are just probes so no reason not to work in a tank as well. I actually talked to them and the confirmed there is no issue. It also sends the data to the cloud and that is part of the service provided. I didn't buy it because of money issues but whenever I can I will buy it. Here is the device: Egrowr - Connected hydroponic measuring device
It also has a temp and TDS probe. I could not find any other product with all these features at that price. Mind you it is still around 400 USD so not that cheap.
The pearl gouramis are super healthy but I'm pretty sure I have more flow in the tank than they like--don't think they are the best choice for fish in my type of high tech tank because of the level of flow necessary to ensure CO2 doesn't become an issue.
I used to have pearl gouramis. After all, they are from where I live. Now, I have to say that these fish are better suited to more lower tech and covered environments with plenty of plants and floaters. Not for high tech or dutch scape. I ended up loosing them all. Two due to some infection and another jumped out. I believe all this was due to stress and confined space. These fish need space and cover to thrive. They were in my 90 cm tank. These were the first fish I ever had.
2) Stunting going on with Rotala Macrandra Mini Green. (Notice a silver lining going on though--at least one rotala mini butterfly shoot coming in pretty nice).
Possibly the most telling sign for me--The most algae I have had on a plant in my tank in more than a year on the Hygro 53b. Happy plants do not attract algae like this. None of this was on it before lowering micros and Fe. Hard to see in the picture but there is a decent amount in person.
I'd be you I would wait it out. But that is just MO. Trim what needs trimming and assess again in a few weeks. It's not because you have some algae on some plants and you see them behaving in an abnormal manner that the issue is your micro/Fe, specially when you adjusted those levels not long ago. It could very well be because plants are adjusting to the new levels. Micro deficiencies are really not that simple and straightforward to assess and can take months to be confirmed. I usually look at things in this order: light/Co2>soil>macros>micros. Remember, traces are what the name implies, traces. Your plants would probably benefit more from a richer substrate using some root tabs, but again that's just MO because I am not there and you know your tank better than anyone.
 
Last edited:
I also have an Apera pH but for our purposes, the ability to measure the "difference" between the pH of two samples seems more important than absolute readings.

So if i put the Apera pH into reference 4.0 / 7.0 solutions and I get back 4.20/ 7.20 (i.e. the pen is able to report a 3pH difference between the reference solution), it may be inaccurate on an absolute basis but in terms of checking a relative 1.0 pH drop between tank water and degassed water, it should be good enough?

Of course, if I put the pen into reference 4.0/7.0 and I get back 3.90/7.30 then the pen needs to be calibrated because it reports a 3pH drop as a 3.4pH drop.
 
Two more photos that I believe support my hypothesis that the current level of micros and Fe is inadequate. Took this in the water above the plants for a better view.

tempImageGk57xM.jpg


tempImageVYZhmm.jpg


If I do purchase a double junction PH probe, which I think I will just because I'll be able to use it forever pretty much, I'll do comparisons with my Apera Pen @erwin123. Is this the one you have too? - https://a.co/d/4beWyK0

@22802 Thanks for the input. I'm not personally interested in controlling the PH though, definitely seems to me that there is more that can go wrong than right with a PH controller. I'm team manual all the way.

@Hanuman I definitely agree about the Pearls. Very cool fish though, I like gouramis a lot in general. If they were severely stressed, I would definitely have gotten rid of them already, but I think because of how on top of maintenance I am and the fact that I feed them a very good and varied diet they have done pretty well despite not being in what would be an optimal set up for them. I've had the 4 females now for over a year and a half and the male for a year. Also my flow comes from a lily pipe and koralia, which create wider gentler flows, but I think it’s still a bit too much for them.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top