• 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

Maq's experiment 23b

MichaelJ said:
Of course, way, way too early and premature to comment, so here goes.... :lol: .... I like where D is going overall... I am not too worried about the stunted Rotala's and Ammannia in the lean tanks (C and D) at this early stage.

Cheers,
Michael
Click to expand...
One issue I have with A. Pedicatella is that sometimes stunting is just bad luck, in the sense that you have 4 stems next to each other, 3 are fine and 1 stunts even though they supposedly have access to the same level of nutrients in the water column. So the question is whether :
(1) you still continue with the stunted A.P. , hoping that it sprout fresh sideshoots (i.e. the plant when stunted has never 'revived' for me, instead new sideshoots pop out which are trimmed and replanted once big enough). OR
(2) pop in an additional fresh stem of A. Pedicatella for reference as it may suddenly not stunt even though the first stem did.

Finally, which stem is the A.Pedicatella in the photos? I don't see any stem with a distinctive yellow colouration - or is the A. Pedicatella not the 'golden' but some green variant?
 
erwin123 said:
Finally, which stem is the A.Pedicatella in the photos?
Click to expand...
On the right side in the center. Partially hidden behind Rotala wallichii. Two short stems in each tank. And behind them are Rotala rotundifolia Orange Juice, which can be possibly mistaken for them.
I have similar observations concerning Ammannia pedicellata Gold. I haven't found yet what is the problem. Until then, I just keep it in as many tanks as possible, and keep observing them.
I will not add/replace anything. In fact, Rotala wallichii sometimes behaves similarly - one stem growing well, next one stunted. We'd have to make tests with many more samples. This is - again - a compromise. Whatever happens it won't be a definite proof - only a hint, a suggestion.
 
A Pedicatella low tech.JPG


What I've found is that if you have plant a big and healthy specimen of A. Pedicatella, there is a greater chance of it being able to adapt to new water conditions - the transition will look fairly obvious. Here is a photo of my zero maintenance minimal water change low-tech desktop window tank (28 degrees celsisus max temp in the afternoon) showing the transition of A. Pedicatella from high tech (large leaves at the bottom) to low tech (smaller leaves at the top).

The stems you have planted are pretty small (like you mentioned - so small that they could be mistaken for Rotala Orange Juice). so I wonder if they have enough 'internal reserves' to make the transition to new water parameters
 
dw1305 said:
When people have <"iron (Fe) deficiency">, and change their iron source, so that iron ions Fe++(+) become available, often the first sign is a <"sudden "flush" of green algae">.
Click to expand...
Actually, I have increased Fe dosing significantly (compared to dosing during previous experiment - there was no break between them, only 95 % water change).
You know, I wonder why a new kind of algae appeared in tanks B > A >> C.
 
1679475247589.png


It seems that nitrification in tank A has begun running, in the end. Maybe it took a while until a different strain of bacteria - tolerating higher concentration of ammonium - reproduced?
 
Hi all,
_Maq_ said:
Maybe it took a while until a different strain of bacteria - tolerating higher concentration of ammonium - reproduced?
Click to expand...
I think that is likely. Research suggests that the microbial assemblage is <"fine-tuned to the ammonia loading">. Some scientific papers are referenced in the link.

In the <"traditional view of cycling"> it takes a while for the cycle to kick in and for the numbers of ammonia oxidising bacteria (AOB), and subsequently nitrite (NO2-) oxidising bacteria (NOB), <"to build up">.

In your case there could also, potentially, be a lack of carbonate hardness (dKH)*.

*Edit: scrub that, I can see that there is plenty of HCO3- in the <"insane orange"> treatment.

cheers Darrel
 
Last edited:
dw1305 said:
a lack of carbonate hardness (dKH)*.

*Edit: scrub that, I can see that there is plenty of HCO3-
Click to expand...
Yes, I opted for ammonium carbonate (instead of chloride or sulfate) precisely for that reason. I even hoped that increasing bicarbonate content linearly with ammonium could result in close values of pH in all tanks. So far, I doesn't look like that, but there's still time to see.
 
Day 20 - photographing
Planktonic algae: They are always present, but Micurins make them more visible thanks to direct comparison. Water in B is slightly greenish, while water in D is the clearest.
Benthic algae: Green dust algae was and still is present in all tanks. With this test, another species of GDA evolved (B>A>>C>>>D), dark green and thus more visible. It looks like it's not very strongly attached to the glass and green "powder" settles on some plants, most of all on Rotala wallichii. That may kill the Rotalas, I'm afraid.

Tank A - insane:
Tonina fluviatilis - possible chlorosis.
Bacopa lanigera - strong chlorosis.
Hygrophila corymbosa - strong chlorosis, leaves slightly deformed.
Sagittaria platyphylla - chlorosis, possibly even necrosis of new leaves.
Ammannia pedicellata - not sure.

QUESTION: Am I to increase iron dosing in tank A?
A(20).jpg A(20)a.jpg A(20)b.jpg A(20)c.jpg A(20)d.jpg A(20)e.jpg

Tank B - orange:
Bacopa lanigera - chlorosis improved.
Rotala wallichii - suffering from dust algae, yet growing, so far.
Hygrophila corymbosa - leaves a bit deformed.
Ammannia pedicellata - newest leaves look better, perhaps.
B(20).jpg B(20)a.jpg B(20)b.jpg B(20)c.jpg B(20)d.jpg

Tank C - moderate:
Hygrophila corymbosa - leaves a bit deformed.
Rotala wallichii - struggling.
Ammannia pedicellata - some leaves deformed, others better.
C(20).jpg C(20)a.jpg C(20)b.jpg C(20)c.jpg C(20)d.jpg C(20)e.jpg

Tank D - lean:
Hygrophila lancea - best colours here.
Hygrophila corymbosa - best colours here (brownish hue), but deformed leaves.
Ammannia pedicellata - some leaves deformed, others better.
Rotala wallichii - tops seem stunted, creating side-shoots instead.
D(20).jpg D(20)a.jpg D(20)b.jpg D(20)c.jpg D(20)d.jpg D(20)e.jpg
 
John q said:
Vallisneria is looking good in B and D. I keep telling folks it can be grown in soft water
Click to expand...
Vallisneria is holding well in all tanks and quickly spreading through runners. Not only in soft water, but also in pretty acidic water. Mrs. Walstad, do you copy???
Also Egeria seems to like lean and acidic water.
 
Day 21 - micros.
The only change is that I've doubled the dose of iron in tank A. Too many plants there suffer from chlorosis.
1679742797035.png
 
@_Maq_ quick question if you don't mind regarding Fe:Mn ratio.
The pe q ratio is 2:1 whilst the mg/l ratio is approximately 4:1.
Can you explain to someone who's slightly less educated what the pe q is and is the mg/l ratio of 4:1 a fair assessment of the needed ratio that you've arrived at, presumably through running tests.

Cheers.
 
P eq. ratio.
I've never run tests to learn how much micros are needed to meet plants' demand. I take it for impossible in amateurish conditions, mainly because a large part of what we dose is not taken up by plants. Microbial consumption and precipitation play a big role.
"P eq." numbers are taken from Marschner solely. The number's meaning is this: If plant(s) consume 1 micromole of phosphorus, how many micromoles of boron, iron... etc. they take up at the same time to maintain a healthy growth? That is a P eq. unit. For iron, par example, it's 0.03 µM.
I've found this unit very useful for dosing and esp. preparing stock solutions of micros. Frankly, I'm a sclerotic and can't keep relevant milligrams or micrograms in my head. But while knowing (assuming) that I've presented my plants with 4 µM of phosphorus, I can estimate they would need 4 P eq. units of micros. Plus losses. The latter I estimate; losses are higher with higher doses of phosphates, higher content of bicarbonates, higher pH. Always much higher for iron than for other micros.
In any case, it helps me keeping micros in somewhat reasonable relation to phosphorus, and other macronutrients as well. As a rule, a tiny fraction of what most people dose is sufficient for me. Plus, I don't use chelates.
=
In present case, tank A features insane amount of phosphates, quite a lot of bicarbonates, and pH value around 7.0. No wonder iron deficiency occurred. Now, the question is whether increased doses of non-chelated iron can save the situation.
By the way, I consider decreasing dosing in tanks C and D. And I ask myself how long it takes for the symptoms of boron toxicity to appear in tank B. Because the amounts of micros you made me to dose are extreme, to my taste. But maybe I'm wrong, after all, many of you dose similar amounts for years...
 
The question you didn't answer... Fe:Mn ratio.

"Excessive Mn can prevent the uptake and translocation of other essential elements such as Ca, Mg, Fe, and P. "Reason why I'm asking" ..... spent 3 days down a rabbit hole 🙄

For us simple folks what would be an ideal Mn mg/l ratio to Fe. Is the 1.5 to 2.5 ratio in mg/l relevant, if not how does the simple lay person work this out.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top