• 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
  • You can now follow UKAPS on Instagram.

Low Tech Fertiliser Dosing. Whats your technique?

MichaelJ

Member
Joined
9 Feb 2021
Messages
1,690
Location
Minnesota, USA
Without wishing to speak for him, I believe Darrel uses the 'pinch or dip' technique with dry salts

This is hilarious...well @Wookii, lets see what Darrel says here:

At the moment my fertiliser regime is <"pretty ad hoc."> for both magnesium (Mg) and iron (Fe), and consists of a small slosh of <"very pale blue Miracle-Gro">

A small slosh ... I love this :) A slosh is similar to a slop which is close to a splash which is widely recognized to be just about 5.91 ml. I suppose a small slosh would be around 3 ml... - hard to say if thats a lot for a 70 L low-tech tank, but we do not have enough information to work out the ppm's.

When I run out of "Miracle Gro" I've bought a kilo of <"Solufeed 2 : 1 : 4 mix">. When I start with the <"Solufeed"> I'll work out what gives me 10 ppm nitrogen (N) (and ~44.3 ppm NO3 equivalent)
Now, 10 ppm of N, that was worked out fairly painstakingly... Again, a lot for a low-tech! I am curious about the rationale for that high level of Nitrogen, but I suppose that the occasional dosing will have to make up for a pretty long run.

and dilute that <"in a milk carton (6 pints of water)"> to see how blue that looks.
So the blue color comes from a dye that is used in terrestrial fertilizers to enable the user (applicator) to see what has and hasn't been fertilized and how even the distribution is. It can also be used to gauge the concentration of the fertilizer when diluted into a liquid - see below:

Then I just need to ensure that the water I add to the tank is always less blue than my trial run.
Sounds pretty slipshod, but in reality its probably accurate enough if your memory for color is good :)

Also I haven't tested conductivity recently, I've just observed <"the snail shells">.
An here comes... wait for it... The Snail Shell index...!

:lol:

Without wishing to speak for him, I believe Darrel uses the 'pinch or dip' technique with dry salts using complex mammalian opposable digits - not a gram scale in sight!
Perhaps the message here is that we too often waste our time getting too caught up in measuring things out to the last digit on our microgram scales? ;)

Cheers,
Michael

This is the best forum ever. You could spend days here reading there is just so much to digest. I have so many bookmarked posts the list now runs into pages. I think I need a computer just dedicated to these articles.

Dirk
I very much agree... What sets UKAPS apart is the excellent signal to noise ratio... While other forums may have a lot more members, and thus posts, you will have to dig through a lot more less relevant posts (noise) to find the good information (signal).

Cheers,
Michael
 
Last edited:

dw1305

Expert
UKAPS Team
Joined
7 Apr 2008
Messages
13,863
Location
nr Bath
Hi all,
Now, 10 ppm of N, that was worked out fairly painstakingly... Again, a lot for a low-tech! I am curious about the rationale for that high level of Nitrogen, but I suppose that the occasional dosing will have to make up for a pretty long run.
I don't pour in the whole six pints, just an amount (again unspecified) and it is occasional dosing.

For the home tanks on Saturday morning, when I'm watering / feeding the house plants (and containerised Blueberries, Azaleas etc) I'll look a the tanks, if the Frogbit looks a bit pale the tank gets a slosh of fertiliser, if it looks hale and hearty? It doesn't.
Perhaps the message here is that we too often waste our time getting too caught up in measuring things out to the last digit on our microgram scales?
Agreed, but it is slightly different for me. I've kept tanks for a long time, I have no interest in optimal growth (or aesthetics or "rare" plants) and plants have been both my day job (and my amateur interest) since I was in my teens.

cheers Darrel
 

kayjo

Member
Joined
3 Nov 2021
Messages
79
Location
New England, US
What does the "Duckweed index" indicate when the floating plans are thriving, but all the submerged plants still are unhealthy and dying?
 

si walker

Member
Thread starter
Joined
30 Mar 2020
Messages
217
Location
uk
Wow. This has been my best post so far!
I new that there would be many hidden tips that people do daily and others can learn from. The idea of reading the plants, duckweed or stems is really fascinating.
Keeping a LT tank in a LTech way is whats interesting.
I now need to start looking into those other plants that can be used as floaters and also TDS Meter.
AMAZING replies.
Keep em coming if its helpful.
Thanks all.
Simon
 

MichaelJ

Member
Joined
9 Feb 2021
Messages
1,690
Location
Minnesota, USA
I don't pour in the whole six pints, just an amount (again unspecified) and it is occasional dosing.
Yes, I got that part wrong. Sorry.

What does the "Duckweed index" indicate when the floating plans are thriving, but all the submerged plants still are unhealthy and dying?
Hi @kayjo, I have not experienced this myself, but in my case I used it only in low-tech tanks with easy plants. I suppose it depends on what type of plants we are talking about, and if this a low- or high tech tank, what the state your tank is in etc.. If this is a current problem in your tank, I suggest you post the issue in the Plant Help section and post some pictures with additional tank details, so we can see what the situation is.

Cheers,
Michael
 

John q

Member
Joined
6 Jan 2021
Messages
1,227
Location
Lancashire
What does the "Duckweed index" indicate when the floating plans are thriving, but all the submerged plants still are unhealthy and dying?
For me it would indicate that the issues aren't nutrient related, at least not lack of nutrients.
I used this method when reducing my dosing and when a noticed issues with the frogbit I knew I'd reduced the fertiliser to much.

Frogbits a good canary for "nutrient" deduction, it isn't starved of C02, so that can be ruled out, and it gets first dibs of any light, again taking lack of light out of the equation.
 
Joined
12 Mar 2022
Messages
168
Location
England
It could be the nutrients are borderline sufficient so the frogbit, having access to plenty of CO2, is using most of them & starving the plants beneath it. Also shading them too much if the light is low.

As @MichaelJ said, put the question in Plant Help & you'll get a load of help.
 

Tim Harrison

Administrator
UKAPS Team
Joined
5 Nov 2011
Messages
8,978
Location
UK
It could be the nutrients are borderline sufficient so the frogbit, having access to plenty of CO2, is using most of them & starving the plants beneath it. Also shading them too much if the light is low.
I don’t think it works that way. Having access to atmospheric CO2 means floating plants react quicker to changing nutrient status. Thus observing leaf colour and dosing when appropriate means any potential deficiency is avoided before it becomes an issue for submersed plants
 

MichaelJ

Member
Joined
9 Feb 2021
Messages
1,690
Location
Minnesota, USA
I don’t think it works that way. Having access to atmospheric CO2 means floating plants react quicker to changing nutrient status. Thus any potential deficiency is avoided before it becomes an issue for submersed plants

Hi Tim, Generally I would say it works, but I am torn on the corner-cases. I could see the floaters being unlimited on CO2/light, as they are, potentially could be starving off the plants underneath if the tank is tethering on nutrient deficiencies. Some reports that Frogbit are quite greedy when it comes to Nitrogen especially - so if you have a lot of floating plants that could be an issue. Again, I think the type of submerged plants have to be factored in as well. You might think you are adding enough nutrients, but the submerged plants might have a hard time with uptake due to other water parameters / conditions.

Cheers,
Michael
 
Last edited:

jaypeecee

Member
Joined
21 Jan 2015
Messages
2,700
Location
Bracknell
Hi @dw1305

Having never used the Duckweed Index to any meaningful extent, what are the implications for submersed plants as regards lighting intensity? Floating plants will obviously receive more light than submersed plants and floating plants receive the same spectrum as that being emitted by the light(s). But, underwater plants will see things differently. Or, am I missing a trick?

JPC
 

dw1305

Expert
UKAPS Team
Joined
7 Apr 2008
Messages
13,863
Location
nr Bath
Hi all,
Floating plants will obviously receive more light than submersed plants and floating plants receive the same spectrum as that being emitted by the light(s). But, underwater plants will see things differently. Or, am I missing a trick?
I assume it is just a PAR effect. The bottoms of all my tanks are pretty gloomy, and just tend to have Aroids, ferns and mosses.

cheers Darrel
 
Top