Plant and Lighting question - help needed!

[Martin Fletcher]

Ok, so I've finally come round to the fact that 'kelvin' ratings and colour spectrum's are not important as far as the plants are concerned, it's only for the way we view the tank and if we like the colour or not. I've spent years working within these two parameters on what was conceived to be the best options!

This is what finally persuaded, it's quote from this forum:...

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------​

ceg4048, - 21 Jul 2012
This is not true at all. Who cares whether you have a bulb in the 6000-6500K range at all? The Kelvin rating of a bulb is the most useless and ridiculous parameter in the history of botany, and has absolutely nothing to do with plant health or growth. Buy your bulb from wherever you like. The only thing you need to worry about if you buy from a hardware shop is whether or not you will like the color it produces in your tank. See Thread: #mce_temp_url#

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------​

I have a 5ft (470 ltr) tank which is 2ft deep. it has a plant substrate capped with sand and medium to heavily planted.Injected Co2 and a daily dose of EasyCarbo. The tank has been running since June and so far I've not been adding any ferts, although thats about to change, as soon as it arrives I'll be using TNC Complete, the tank is a Discus tank,see the photo.

I've always had great success with my planted tanks, my avatar is a tank I broke down recently but this one is proving a little more difficult. I have an overhead light unit that will take 4x 80w tubes. At the moment I have 2x Daylight 1000k tubes and a Blue Actinic because I like the color of the tank and it really picks out the colours in the fish.The question is, does the Actinic count toward 'watts per gallon' as the way I understand it is - the plants neither use it or mind it.

Without the Actinic my wpg is only about 1.5, with it, it comes up to about 2.5wpg. I could add a 5000k tube I have, which would bring the wpg up to 2.5 if the Actinic doesn't count or about 3.5 if it does count.Which would be the best option and does the Actinic actually count towards wpg if the plants ignore it.

I've had some brown algae since setting up, that is reducing now but not completely gone. I know brown algae might suggest insufficient light and this is why I was thinking about adding the extra tube to bring the wpg up to about 3.5. The tank gets a 50% water change weekly, stats are: ammonia 0ppm / nitrite 0ppm / phosphate 0.25 / nitrate 20ppm. The phosphate is a little on the low side.

I'm hoping the TNC Complete will pick things up a bit, in all my other tanks I would see the plants happily pearling by the afternoon but as yet that has not happened in the bigger tank. The Co2 dropchecker is a nice lime green and there is lots of extra circulation round the tank, see the video.

Hoping you can help, thanks in advance.

This is the one I recently broke down which was going really well even without ferts!

 

[ceg4048]

I've had some brown algae since setting up, that is reducing now but not completely gone. I know brown algae might suggest insufficient light and this is why I was thinking about adding the extra tube to bring the wpg up to about 3.5.

Yeah, well this is also totally wrong and you are going to be in it deep if you have diatoms and then add more light. The individual stating that diatoms prefer low light could only have been a Klingon. If you have diatoms, then it's a sure fire sign that you have more light than you know what to do with. You need to be reducing your light intensity.

Actinic is just a marketing name. Any light that you can see produces PAR, to a greater or lesser extent, depending on the bulb technology. Tungsten lighting has only from about 10%-15% of it's energy output as PAR, fluorescent bulbs are somewhere around 25%. It doesn't matter what the bulbs are called.

Also, you need to discard your test kits because they are giving you fantasy numbers.

Cheers,

 

[Martin Fletcher]

Thanks for the reply.

So, I won't bother adding the extra tube then and perhaps I should cut back the photo period, currently 10 hours? I'm not convinced the brown algae I have been getting is simply diatoms, they don't usually last for 5 months, but after wiping it off at every water change and leaving one of the externals running that has a 36w UV connected to it it is now reducing. With the current tube configuration of 2 Daylite and an Actinic the actual wpg is 2.1, do you think I should maybe crank up the Co2 a little, will that help?

If I discard the API test kits, not that I use them much anyway, as I know by looking if something is wrong, what should I do to check? I've always had great success when the phosphate and nitrate levels have been in a 1:10 ratio and never had to add ferts of any kind so long as this ratio remained, which thankfully it did, so it's nice to have a rough idea of these levels. In some of the EI dosing information you have written in the past you talk about measuring the amount of nutrients the plants have taken up to work out the correct dosage, so how do you measure these values and what with if we are to throw away all our test kits? How can you be sure the figures I quoted earlier are 'fantasy numbers' - of course they can only be a rough guide but that's all we need to know - isn't it? I check the phosphate and nitrate weekly before doing the 50% water change.

Bottom line is I just want to see my plants pearling again!

Cheers.

 

[Martin Fletcher]

Incidently, when you view the photo and the video in my first post you will see the algae I'm referring to is almost none existent but I do also get some green algae on the glass, usually where a jet of water hits it at the back and on one end.

 

[ceg4048]

So, I won't bother adding the extra tube then and perhaps I should cut back the photo period, currently 10 hours?

Yes, but more important than photoperiod is intensity. Reduce the intensity, at least temporarily.

do you think I should maybe crank up the Co2 a little, will that help?

Yes, adding more CO2 always is a good thing is the fish can deal with it.

what should I do to check?

Do this=>

know by looking if something is wrong

I've always had great success when the phosphate and nitrate levels have been in a 1:10 ratio

Ratios are irrelevant. Forget about that because that had nothing to do with your previous success. Strictly coincidence.

never had to add ferts of any kind

That's because you would have had any combination of less light, nutrients in tap water, nutrient in sediment.

so it's nice to have a rough idea of these levels.

No it's not. It doesn't help you at all. It only gives you a false sense of security. I dose and forget. I never check and I never have a problem. Your problems lie with the hypnosis associated with your kits and the luck you have had in the past. Because you were lucky and things worked out, you automatically assumed that your technique was correct, that ratio was responsible for your success, and that you needed to measure things. That was just a house of cards. Now you have less luck because the scenario is different. Now you have to rely on the truth of how plants grow, not luck, and definitely not ratios.

In some of the EI dosing information you have written in the past you talk about measuring the amount of nutrients the plants have taken up to work out the correct dosage, so how do you measure these values and what with if we are to throw away all our test kits?

Easy. I don't measure them and I don't worry about them. I only talked about it in order to give context to the rest of the article. Plants uptake nutrients at some rate. As long as you provide a higher amount than the uptake rate you will be fine. Dosing the values provided in the article ensures that you will accomplish that. Therefore, you do not need to measure uptake rates. Even if you did need to measure, the last thing I would suggest to use would be a test kit, which is not capable of telling you anything, least of all what the nutrient uptake rate is.

How can you be sure the figures I quoted earlier are 'fantasy numbers'

Because hobby grade nutrient test kits are notoriously inaccurate and ridiculously inconsistent. A complete waste of money. Here is a typical example of how bizarre this love affair with test kits is. This scenario is repeated thousands of times daily in The Matrix => ferts causing high nitrate! | UK Aquatic Plant Society

I check the phosphate and nitrate weekly before doing the 50% water change.

Yes, and you learn nothing from reading the results. There is a strong likelihood that people's reliance on test kit readings are in no small part a contributor to their problems in the tank.

of course they can only be a rough guide but that's all we need to know - isn't it?

No, they are not even capable of being a rough guide.

Incidently, when you view the photo and the video in my first post you will see the algae I'm referring to is almost none existent but I do also get some green algae on the glass, usually where a jet of water hits it at the back and on one end.

Well, big or small, it still means that there is a problem in the tank and that the plants are in less than tip top health. So if there is a lot of algae then there is a big problem and if there is only a little algae then it's a small problem that can become big if you continue to follow the path of the the wpg lover. I suggest that you avoid becoming too concerned with pearling. There are plenty of unhealthy tanks out there which are pearling, in fact I've seen lots of tanks where the algae pearls more than the plants, so pearling should not be considered a sign of success, although it does sometime accompany a successful tank.

Cheers,

 

[Martin Fletcher]

Thanks for the time you have taken to help me with this, I feel I have to agree with what you have said, it all makes perfect sense - I'll put it into practice and see what happens.

Watch this space for the next post saying how good things are going!

Thanks again, appreciated.

Martin.

 

[Jack12]

It doesn't matter what the bulbs are called.


Cheers,

Just thought I would share with you guys. The other day I was watching BBC, can't recall the title, there is now evidence and a lot of research been conducted about impact of light spectrum on plan growth (in the show they talk about non aquatic plants). Researchers were playing with LED lights.

 

[ceg4048]

Hi,
That's all very fine and well, but WE won't see a difference using the bulbs we have available to us. Fix your CO2, flow and nutrition and that will show 1000X more difference than what color your bulb is. When people have difficulty growing plants in their tank the problems are never solved by changing the type of light or the color. Problems are only ever fixed when you solve the fundamental issues related to nutrition and gas exchange, never spectrum.

Cheers,

 

[Martin Fletcher]

Just wanted to say thank you ceg4048 after following your advice in this thread it's completely turned my tank round and now 6 weeks later I have 0 algae or diatroms and the plants are really growing well and flourishing.

I've reduced the lights as we discussed, I have one daylight tube and one actinic, both 80w so the wpg is only around 1.5, much lower than I had been trying to work with. I'm using an 'all in one fert' TMC Complete, it's a weekly feed but I split the dose and dose it twice weekly, I'm also adding a double dose of liquid carbon and I've cranked the Co2 up a little bit more.

I have to say the result is astonishing, I'm very pleased with the results, a photo is attached taken today approx 6 weeks after your advice was given, it can be compared to the first photo in this thread.

Thanks very much.

Martin

 

[roadmaster]

Handsome tank,,fishes too!

 

[Andy Thurston]

Tank looks good, very green and healthy

I use tnc complete to dose my nano
I spoke to nigel at tnc and he told me that if you use the weekly dose 3x per week it is equivalent to EI dosing levels.

 

[ceg4048]

Yeah, I agree. The tank is in top shape and those are seriously beautiful fish, which are also in top shape. Nitrate haters please take note.
Continue to be vigilant. The next problem in a fuel injected tank is always just around the corner .

Cheers,

 

[Martin Fletcher]

Thanks for that reply, much appreciated and thanks again for your help in this.

 

[Martin Fletcher]

Hi Clive,
The tank - or more importantly the plants have have been doing really well since my last post in October thanks to your advice. However, yesterday when I did the weekly 50% water change I realised some of the plants, mainly the 'Hygrophila corymbosa Angustifolia' (back of tank on right hand side in above photo) were not really looking as green and fresh as in the photo a few posts above. It looks like they are lacking in something but I'm not sure what.

I'm still dosing the TNC Complete, the weekly dose 3x per week which is equivalent to EI dosing levels and I have the Co2 turned up as much as I dare. Some of the leaves are beginning to yellow slightly and a few have a trace of algae on them, the first time algae has reappeared since October, only a very small amount and only on a few of these leaves.

As I said, I get the impression they are lacking in something and wondered if I needed to either increase the TNC ferts or start adding a separate micro fert on the alternate days to the TNC. It does seem that only the 'Hygrophila corymbosa Angustifolia' is affected. It has spread and been replanted throughout the tank but I did remove about 20% of it at yesterdays water change.

Any help and suggestions appreciated.

Thanks,
Martin

 

[ceg4048]

Hi Martin,
H. agustifolia is a fast growing weed so it generally will show signs of deficiency first, especially since the leaves will sit at the very top in the highest light intensity. Yellowing is primarily a sign of Nitrogen deficiency, however, it can easily be due to an Iron or Magnesium shortfall. You'll need to identify they type of algae that you are seeing because the type of algae that appears is a direct indicator of the specific fault, generally.

If the yellowing occurs in older leaves then it's a high probability that the fault is with lack of Nitrogen, but if it occurs in new growth then that typically indicates a problem with the micronutrients Mg or Fe.

Cheers,

 

[Paul Butler]

Martin those discus are a credit to you, they look extremely healthy. The tank is great too Did you add the discus as adults?

 

[Martin Fletcher]

Hi Paul, thanks, yes they were all bought as adults - here's a video thats a little more up to date.....

 

[Martin Fletcher]

Thanks for your rapid response Clive, it really is a fast growing weed!

I would say it is the older leaves thats yellowing but none of the other plants are showing signs of yellowing, they are all nice and green and growing well. So you think it could be a Nitrogen deficiency then? Whats the easiest way to remedy this?

Thanks.

 

[ceg4048]

Well, I usually just add twice as much of everything to keep life simple, but I realize some people will freak out over TDS rise and so forth because nutrients do have a strong effect on conductivity. I really don't like to troubleshoot nutrient deficiencies due to tedium, so just adding double of everything solves that problem right away. So you can just increase the NO3 dosing by any arbitrary amount such as 20% or 40% first just to see if it has an effect.

But you also need to identify the algae that you mentioned. For example, if it's GSA then that could tell you that the Hygrofila is also running short on PO4 or that it has issues with CO2 as well. Fast growth requires fast uptake of nutrition.

Cheers,

Cheers,

 

[Martin Fletcher]

Thanks very much, its not GSA or BBA or anything like that, its just a small amount of brown algae.

I'm not overly concerned about TDS, its already quite high at 430 but its not causing the Discus any problems. I'll try increasing the TNC ferts as it does contain nitrate and phosphate and see what happens, I like your approach to keeping life simple!

Thanks as always for your help.