Yes, although The Grand Kahuna of the EI freedom fighters would object to the use of the expression "overfeeding". The objective of EI is not really to overfeed. It is to ensure the sufficient food is always available. Because we know that too little food causes direct starvation while too much has little impact we know that it is not necessary to worry about keeping the dosing levels within imaginary boundaries of "not having enough" and "having too much". Some dosing schemes worry about "staying between the lines" so to speak. However, in order to accomplish this kind of tightrope act it is necessary to know, to some degree of accuracy, what the nutrient levels are. This involves a lot of testing and a lot of calibration in order to monitor the nutrient levels.aaronnorth said:...so they start as spores who search for light + ammonia (but they cant feed of other nutrients), once they get these they turn into flagellates, who can feed of nutrients, so we overdose nutrients to stop them producing more flaggelates as they think the environment is unsuitable to bloom!
Since our theory is that algae flagellate triggers are completely independent of nutrient levels, EI allows you to exceed the minimum required concentration levels in order to ensure that you avoid breaching the lower concentration boundary. EI does not insist that you "overfeed". Many EI devotees reduce the nutrient concentration levels simply because it makes sense and is economically feasible. If flow is good, CO2 is good and lighting is not extreme then it's simply a waste of money to use the maximum dosing. It is really only necessary to avoid starvation, and lower levels which are higher than the minimum do just as good a job of suppressing the algae triggers as dosing to maximum levels.