Struggling with a few plants

[GraemeVW]

I set my tank up maybe 4 months ago.
The Amazon sword, hydrocotyle verticillata, limnophilia and frogbit grow very well.

The cabomba aquatica initially grew very well but then started to fall apart. It has darkened, is leggy, and has very stunted small growths of leaves.

I also have some Brazilian micro sword. This was a mess when I got it. Alot melted. What didn't melt is still there, but it's not growing. Just does nothing and floats often.

There are 3 nymphaea rubra bulbs too. They have all shot up a stem about 7" long but have done nothing else for the last few months.

Oh, and there is some valis that also isn't really doing much.

I have aquatic compost under sand. I have variable light from 20w to 100w (200l tank), but more light just grown green algae on things without the plants doing any better. I have no algae issues with less light.

No c02, lots of flow, 20%weekly water changes, weekly 20ml dose of the complete.

Any help appreciated! Thanks.

 

[GraemeVW]

Some pics, with 20w of lighting at the moment. The branch being high means if I also have the center light on, it just grows algae on the branch. I don't mind a bit of algae, looks natural, but don't want to end up swamped if the extra light isn't even solving the issue.

 

[GraemeVW]

Oh, and if anyone has any thoughts on other South American plants that will look nice in here, and actually grow, I'm all ears!
I'd rather find stuff that works than try and force stuff that doesn't want to grow.
My plan was to plant all plants all over the tank. Just grow a complete jungle, let them grow in areas they like, and then prune back stuff from where I don't want it

 

[Witcher]

The cabomba aquatica initially grew very well but then started to fall apart. It has darkened, is leggy, and has very stunted small growths of leaves.

Cabomba aquatica is a very demanding plant when it comes to the light (like most cabombas) - that's why your seems to be quite leggy - it's trying to reach more light.

I also have some Brazilian micro sword.

Lilaeopsis brasiliensis also needs strong light and potentially supply of CO2 in some form.

Oh, and there is some valis that also isn't really doing much

This one requires rather hard water to flourish, not sure what water hardness is in your tank.

I have variable light from 20w to 100w (200l tank), but more light just grown green algae on things without the plants doing any better. I have no algae issues with less light.

In my opinion both Cabomba and Lilaeopsis brasiliensis require at least 0.8W per litre ("old style" measurement of Watts per l), with your light you reach around 0.5W/l (and that's where as I understand algae start to bloom, mainly due to low plant mass in general vs your fertilization).

All above don't mean you're in lost position, I'd concentrate on increasing plant mass in general (you want a jungle - the best style of planted tank I know haha) - bigger plant mass means bigger competition for algae when it comes to the nutrients.

If you want to keep them on rather low side of light, I'd ditch cabomba, lilaeopsis and add more less demanding South American plants, species like Bacopa, Echinodorus, Alternanthera, Egeria, Myriophyllum, Ludwigia, Potamogeton, Hygrophilia, Mayaca, Heteranthera and many others - possibilities are endless. Some of them may require stronger light but for most of them 0.5W/l will be sufficient and I'm pretty sure most of them can be kept without any additional CO2 supplied.

 

[MichaelJ]

Hi @GraemeVW, In addition to what @Witcher said above, I would say you should up your WC % ... 20% is definitely on the low side for an immature (only 4 mo) and somewhat scarcely planted tank such as this. I have a pair of Angles in one of my tanks and they are messy fish - I love them though. I would yank those struggling Cabomba's (likely not getting enough light) and add lots of additional plants... @Witchers list include many nice options - and you should up your dosage of Complete at the same time.

Cheers,
Michael

 

[GraemeVW]

Thanks to you both.
The plant was heavier planted, mostly with cabomba, but alot has fallen apart.
For the first few months it grew quickly, but no longer.

I was considering just pulling it all out as it's looking pretty grim.
I'll replace it with something else.

Up the fert dosage? I will look into that, the liquid I'm using was a stop gap to get things up and running, with a plan to getting more involved later on. Maybe now is the time.

This is how the cabomba did look, doubled in size quickly at first.

As for water changes, that will be increased. The angels have only been in this tank 2 weeks after their initial quarantine. Alot more food is going into the tank now! So water changes will be increased.

 

[GraemeVW]

Oh, and as for water hardness, I've never tested, but local authority say it's moderately soft with a ph of 8-8.5

 

[dw1305]

Hi all,

Some pics, with 20w of lighting at the moment.

Cabomba aquatica is a very demanding plant when it comes to the light (like most cabombas) - that's why your seems to be quite leggy - it's trying to reach more light.

Agreed, that looks like it definitely isn't enough light.

I know it is difficult at the moment, but I'd ignore the algae and just turn the light intensity up. At that point you will know there is enough light for <"your floating plants">, and as they aren't CO2 limited (they have access to <"415 ppm atmospheric CO2">), any growth deficiencies will be related to <"deficiencies in mineral nutrient">.

cheers Darrel

 

[GraemeVW]

Hi all,


Agreed, that looks like it definitely isn't enough light.

I know it is difficult at the moment, but I'd ignore the algae and just turn the light intensity up. At that point you will know there is enough light for <"your floating plants">, and as they aren't CO2 limited (they have access to <"415 ppm atmospheric CO2">), any growth deficiencies will be related to <"deficiencies in mineral nutrient">.

cheers Darrel

Doesn't look much different in this pic, but this is the tank with the main light on full too. That is 72w in the center and another 20w each side, so 112w total. I used the center light to grow coral in a dennerle 60L cube. I added the side lights as the spread wasn't enough.

As for the floating plants, they currently look like this

I'll run it with the lights on full for a while, as I say, I'm not too bothered about algae anyway (the angels eat it too).
The limnophilia has started to grow quickly and spread recently, but it too is starting to go a bit leggy.
I didn't really want many broad leaf plants if I can help it, but as I say, I'll work with what I can.

As for these nymphaea, and one any thoughts on what they are doing? It's been months now and only have this central stem. Light issue too?

Thanks everyone.

 

[dw1305]

Hi all,

As for the floating plants, they currently look like this

The Frogbit looks fine, the <"net pattern on the older leaves"> looks like they may have been iron (Fe) deficient, but aren't now, if that makes sense?

cheers Darrel

 

[GraemeVW]

Hi all,

The Frogbit looks fine, the <"net pattern on the older leaves"> looks like they may have been iron (Fe) deficient, but aren't now, if that makes sense?

cheers Darrel

Yes, makes sense. They have also been moved from tank to tank a couple of times. They always do better in this tank but have only been back in this one for a few weeks. They had to put up with having no fertilizer for a few weeks before I moved them back.

 

[_Maq_]

My impression is that this discussion is not very focused.

I have aquatic compost under sand

Why do you complicate matters? Do you know what that compost contains? Do you know what it releases into the water?
That piece of wood looks like it was pretty alive not long ago. Again - do you know what it discharges into water? God knows what, but nothing good, I can tell you.

Oh, and as for water hardness, I've never tested, but local authority say it's moderately soft with a ph of 8-8.5

Not many plants can live in such a high pH. Your Cabombas might have grown well until they depleted their stock of iron & other micronutrients. Fertilizing won't help much because many plants cannot take up micros in such a high pH.
By the way, your fish dislike pH above 7, too. Your water is possibly good for East-African cichlids.

Suggestion: Smash the compost, smash the living wood, get reverse osmosis. That's the start.

 

[GraemeVW]

My impression is that this discussion is not very focused.

Why do you complicate matters? Do you know what that compost contains? Do you know what it releases into the water?
That piece of wood looks like it was pretty alive not long ago. Again - do you know what it discharges into water? God knows what, but nothing good, I can tell you.

Not many plants can live in such a high pH. Your Cabombas might have grown well until they depleted their stock of iron & other micronutrients. Fertilizing won't help much because many plants cannot take up micros in such a high pH.
By the way, your fish dislike pH above 7, too. Your water is possibly good for East-African cichlids.

Suggestion: Smash the compost, smash the living wood, get reverse osmosis. That's the start.

Ok,
No, I don't know exactly what it contains. In the past I've just used soil from the garden. Did no harm even if it did no good.

The wood was last alive about 3 years ago. I cut it down. It's hard wood. It had been stored indoors for those years. It was then soaked for a couple of months. I'm pretty sure it's fine.

You may well be right about the cabomba. Something changed, that may well have been it.

As for the water, maybe tell that to all the thousands of other fish keepers around here.
As I said, I've not personally tested it. But the local shop even keeps wild altums in our local tap water. Pretty sure these angels were bred in this tap water.
One of the best shops in the country is also keeping wild rio nanay angels in this tap water.

The neons came from eastern Europe somewhere (Czech republic?) and are in FAR better condition now than when I got them, and within 2 weeks of being in this tank, the corydoras are spawning.
My cherry shrimp are also breeding like crazy.

I don't think it's a problem.

 

[MichaelJ]

Oh, and as for water hardness, I've never tested, but local authority say it's moderately soft with a ph of 8-8.5

Get hold of a pH and KH/GH measuring kit... don't only rely on a water report - measure what's in your tank. If moderately soft (KH wise) you should have success by starting to add some botanicals (Almond leaves) to get that pH down.. 8-8.5 that's too high for both plants and your particular livestock (although they may tolerate it, it’s not good in the long run). The wood (which is nice btw), having only “aged” for 3 years, is another good reason to start upping that WC % as well to get rid of whatever it might be leaching.

Cheers,
Michael

 

[dw1305]

Hi all,

Not many plants can live in such a high pH. Your Cabombas might have grown well until they depleted their stock of iron & other micronutrients. Fertilizing won't help much because many plants cannot take up micros in such a high pH.

The high pH value isn't something that @GraemeVW has any control over, it is because the water company <"add sodium hydroxide (NaOH)">, a strong base, to the water to ensure that lead (Pb) from old pipes doesn't go into solution. We have a few posts on <"control of plumbosolvency and phosphate induced metal stabilisation (PIMS)">.

cheers Darrel

 

[GraemeVW]

I'll look into the ph situation. I'll measure it (I only have high range test at the moment) and see what it actually is.
I'll no doubt have questions, but I'll start a new post in the relevant place if searches don't turn up the answers.

C02 lowers ph doesn't it. If I do end up trying to lower ph, maybe I'll just give in and go that route.

For the sake of stability, I was hoping to limit the amount of altering I needed to do, but it may not be possible.

For now, I'll run more light and up water changes.

Thanks everyone.

 

[dw1305]

Hi all,

I'll look into the ph situation. I'll measure it (I only have high range test at the moment) and see what it actually is.

It is a bit of a strange one, but I usually just ignore the pH value in <"soft tap water"> that has been treated with sodium hydroxide (NaOH).

It is back to the need for some interpretation with pH values, and <"some inorganic chemistry">. I used to <"really struggle with this">, but I think I know how all the bits slot together now.

Because NaOH is a <"strong base"> it dissolves entirely in solution to form Na+ and OH- ions . It is alkaline (that is the added OH- & Na+) ions but it doesn't have any reserve of buffer. The water company just injects enough to raise the pH above pH 7, but this is still a very small volume of NaOH.

If we could actually measure dGH and dKH, they won't have risen, because we haven't added any dGH - divalent cations (Ca++, Mg++ etc) or dKH - bicarbonate (2HCO3- anions). However if we measure dKH with a "dKH" test kit, dKH will apparently have gone up, because the test kit is <"actually measuring alkalinity"> and we now have more -OH ions, and these are <"proton (H+ ion) acceptors"> (H+ and OH- = H2O) and the pH will have risen.

The apparent rise in "dKH" will be fairly small, because we don't have a reserve of OH- ions, because there aren't very many of them and they are all in solution. Once we've neutralised them (by adding an equivalent amount of acids (H+ ion donors)) the pH is likely to fluctuate widely, because we are still really in the <"soft water, moveable feast"> scenario.

cheers Darrel

 

[GraemeVW]

I won't pretend to properly understand that.
But I get the impression you think it best I just leave it as it is.

 

[dw1305]

Hi all,

As for the water, maybe tell that to all the thousands of other fish keepers around here.
As I said, I've not personally tested it. But the local shop even keeps wild altums in our local tap water. Pretty sure these angels were bred in this tap water.
One of the best shops in the country is also keeping wild rio nanay angels in this tap water.

But I get the impression you think it best I just leave it as it is.

Yes.

A relatively small addition of, even a <"weak, acid"> (like <"humic, citric or fulvic acid"> from Alder (Alnus spp.) cones, Oak (Quercus spp.) etc) will add enough H+ ions to neutralise the OH- ions from the NaOH addition.

This is why your LFS can keep soft water fish successfully, the pH does relate to the alkalinity, but it doesn't relate to the dKH and you still have very low dKH.

The water company has added OH- ions, which are all in solution, but you don't have a weak acid carbonate buffer reserve that will keep on going into solution as you add more H+ ions and carry on neutralising them. This is why @_Maq_ preferred the "Acid Neutralising Capacity" (ANC) as a measure in <"Some handy facts about water">

The outcome of this is that our tap water (~17 dKH), although it has <"a lower pH (~pH 8)"> value, is capable of neutralising an order of magnitude more acids (H+) ions than your tap water, because our tap water has a much higher ANC value, via the carbonate buffer.

cheers Darrel

 

[MichaelJ]

the pH does relate to the alkalinity, but it doesn't relate to the dKH and you still have very low dKH.

Hi Darrel, I am trying to boil this down to terms and concepts that makes it easier to digest for the non-expert person not much familiar with chemistry (such as myself)... My take on putting this as simple as possible from a planted tank hobbyist perspective goes as follows: When we measure "KH" (such as with our API or other hobby test kits) we are in fact measuring Alkalinity or CO3 contents. That is, the waters degree of ability to neutralize acid. High alkalinity or high "KH" means a high degree of acid neutralizing potential, which in turn means it will be harder to lower our pH with say botanicals or acidifying compounds. Conversely, a low "KH" or low alkalinity means that we can easily impose downward change to pH to make it more acidic which is usually beneficial for the livestock we keep in our planted tanks (originating mostly from acidic waters) and furthermore increases our plants ability to digest fertilizers. Is this a sufficient way of putting it for the non-expert?

Cheers,
Michael