Seattle_Aquarist

Hi anhtu402,

Everyone has their own favorite "start-up plants", I like Hygrophilia, Rotala, Bacopa, Ceratophyllym demersum, and watersprite. These are just a few of the types of plants that will help keep your ammonia, nitrite, nitrate levels under control during the first several weeks.

Peter16

Back with another question.
My tank appears to have a kno3 deficiency and im dosing the pps-pro method, what ways can i increase this one macro ?

Can you make up a small liquid solution with just kno3? that lasts a couple of doses or something.

Thanks in advance.
Peter

Nevermore

Yes, you can add more KNO3. I was having problems with low potassium (as evidenced by holes in the leaves) and I made a separate soln of K2SO4 and I dose that with the original solns. http://www.aquaticplantcentral.com/f...-solution.html

Just curious, have you tested for NO3?

Supercoley1

Iwould suggest that a lot of defficiencies that look like nutrient defficiencies are actually CO2 defficiencies.

I don't mean that the ppm at DC is not good but the circulation can cause problems

I tried the PPS Pro a long time ago when my CO2 wasn't really up to scratch and went from regime to regime. It didn't work at that time but can openly admit that was more than likely due to the CO2 than the regime.

I currently use the EI method and will more than likely stay with it. I get a minute amount of GSA on 5% or less of my Anubias leaves that have another leaf very close above it so I don't think GSA can be attributed to EI . My main reason for sticking with EI these days since I got circulation and CO2 under control is that for me a 50% water change is much better than testing with hobby kits I don't trust!!! I don't intend on spending lots of money on quality test kits when EI is working.

A note to add to Jason's observations:

Whilst light is accepted as being the driver for growth the role of CO2 is often ignored where I think the two work hand in hand with the latter being the much more important. When reducing to 15ppm 24/7 then the growth is less than running 30ppm 24/7. Therefore less nutrients are required. Although many people reading my posts would think I am saying that light above 2WPG is 'silly' that isn't the case. I mean to say that it is unnecessary especially for the beginner or someone who hasn't got their CO2 circulation sorted out to near perfection

So under any light what the plants need is not 'high' CO2 but adequate and stable CO2. This can be at whatever level chosen but must remain pretty much at a stable level. Then the plants don't have to stop to adapt to a changing level and the algae doesn't step in.

Therefore I think we can use CO2 as a limiter without algae issues BUT this would mean we need to be pretty sure that our 'system' has the capability to make sure that a lower ppm at measured area (DC) does not let other areas reach 0 or move up or down all the time.

Personally I think high CO2 (30ppm average will mean closer to 100ppm at source) is an excess just as EI is dosing excess. The plants may not be growing faster under a very high injection than they would under a stable lower level but with it being an excess is it more 'forgiving' for people who haven't got the setup perfect and therefore areas that may be unstable within the tank may still be at an 'adequate' level under a high injection and excess in other areas whereas under lower injection these areas may be under an 'adequate' level. If this lower level is at an 'adequate' level in all areas this would of course mean less nutrient needed

Room for error therefore just like with EI.

My injection is high at above 30ppm run on solenoid (near yellow DCs) and I have a heavily stocked tank (33USG with 28 Rasboras, 6Corys, 2 Otos and uncountable amounts of shrimp (nearly 2"/USG + shrimp) but I keep it that way because I see no problems with the fish. However I do have very high turnover and a good water turbulence.

I should add that this was under what is considered 'low light' of 0.9 - 1.4WPG of T5HO so people will argue this is the factor. This is a different argument. lol I currently use 1.2WPG (max) of high power LEDs and Parwise this will be much higher than 'lowlight' which again is another argument

By max I mean the whole 1.2WPG is only used for the central 4 hours with the lighting staggering from 0.2WPG for the first hour to the max at 2½hours and then max for 4 hours before repeating the cycle in the opposite direction for the final 2½hours (total 9 hours photoperiod.) This means that although the PAR is very heavy at full lights the photoperiod being so small and staggering up and down through the cycle reduces the 'total' lighting and may push it back down to the 'lowlight' bracket. This tank only has slow growers in it (Anubias/Ferns/Crypts) and therefore should be susceptible to algae. It never has fast growers in even at startup without any algae issues

I guess its one of the trade offs really but I wouldn't suggest lean dosing/PPS to anyone who has highlight without high water turnover and good circulation as I think using the 15ppm (non excess) is what causes problems in these cases.

Interesting read of people's experiences. Good thread

AC

Peter16

thankyou for the replies.

I have not performed a test for no3, I was told by a different forum I had the deficiency when i inquired about roots sprouting out all over the full length of a plant.

zyyoll

1) I don't understand why it is necessary to dose with K2SO4 if Potassium is supplied with both KNO3 and K2HPO4...
2) I haven't noted any posts on this thread about testing. What testing besides CO2 is being done with the PPS pro system?
3) What test kits are recommended? There seem to be so many but I would like to have some kind of review or critique of the test kits for nitrate and Phosphate, and the pH paper that is best for aquariums.
4) Although there is a lot of cross talk about water changes, what percent change and how often are changes necessary or desirable when using PPS pro system?

Thanks for your comments which are greatly appreciated!

bradac56

Don't let Tom Barr here that, he's been going a bit crazy on the other forum *cough*plantedtank*cough* about how EI isn't an excuse to be lazy and that good regular testing is always a must no matter what system you use

- Brad

Veloth

I'm also in trouble then I don't remember the last time I tested any thing in my tanks

Jason Baliban

HAHA!! Two years ago he was swearing that testing isnt needed and "Folks just want to grow plants!!" HAHA Hilarious!

Tom's tune changes every year. And really there is nothing wrong with that, everyone has a right to learn and change their opinion. The thing that works against Tom is how hard he pushes his current beliefs. He always makes himself into a hypocrite every year or two. I guess that is the price you pay when you experiment as much as he does. I hope he continues to make himself a hypocrite, he bring a lot to the hobby.

In my opinion, EI is a wasteful approach to planted tanks and an extremely non green approach. Yes, lets throw 45 gallons of water down the drain every week with 50ppms of NO3 in there!! Nice!!

EI is certainly a great tool to get started and understand how things work, but its a very irresponsible long term approach.

Eventually we all lower our light levels, co2 levels, and nutrient levels, and still have super success!!

jB

bradac56

While I use PPS-Pro instead of EI I l pump my waste water into a holding tank and then up to my rose and flower beds which has been the best thing I could ever do for them. I think Tom has mentioned that as well.

The only time I ever dump it down the drain is during the hard winter months in MO and even then I bring the roses in for the winter which still get waste water.

- Brad