ray-the-pilot

Has anyone had any long term experience using PPS Pro? If so can you post it?

I’ve been using PPS Pro for about 18 months. I still do 10 – 20 % water changes per week. I test regularly for KPN. Over 18 months I’ve noticed that TDS based on conductivity gradually increases requiring occasional more than 20% water changes. I’ve also noticed that K tends to build up and PO4 and NO3 decline requiring additions of Ca(NO3)2 and KHPO4.

I do have to say that I have been very successful growing every plant that I’ve tried to the point that I have thrown out way more plants than I ever bought (even some considered difficult like Cabomba Furcata). The problem is that without regular monitoring of KPN levels, these fertilizer elements eventually get out of control using a fixed once a day plan (without radical water changes).

It seems to me that any fixed once a day plan (without radical water changes) is doomed to failure since it doesn’t account for the individual nature of each tank.

What is your experience?

Andy Ritter

Very interesting that you should ask this question. I have just discovered that I'm having issues with PPS Pro as well.

I set up my tank (75 gal) in November 2008 right before the AGA convention and began using Seachem products (Flourish, Flourish Iron, Flourish Trace, & Flourish Excel). I was testing the water several times a week in order to find out how much my particular tank needed, and discovered that it was taking a ridiculous amount of these products to keep the nutrient levels where they should be. I started reading on APC about dry ferts, so I bought some and began using them with the Flourish products. Again, I was testing a lot, and I came up with a general idea of how much of each dry fert. that I needed to add. I was adding 3/8 tsp KNO3, 1/4 tsp KH2PO4, 10 mL Flourish Trace, 20 mL Flourish, 90 mL Flourish Iron, and 15 mL Flourish Excel every other day (I was very busy with work so I was trying to get away without having to dose every day). These amounts of fertilizers were keeping the tank at around 12 ppm NO3, .26 ppm PO4, and Fe barely detectable. The plants were growing super fast, with my Hygros getting out of control, and my Swords growing huge leaves. However, I was getting really tired of having to do all of those tests and dosing all of those products, so I started reading about alternatives. In March I decided to start using PPS Pro. I have been dosing it ever since, with about 7-8 mL of each solution every day. I do a 30-50% waterchange every 3-4 weeks, depending on my schedule. I basically stopped testing, since I was under the impression that I didn't need to. After switching fertilization styles, the plants slowed way down, but still seemed to be doing fine. The Hygros became more controllable, and the Swords grew to a more reasonable size. My Crypts and Anubias seemed to do about the same with either system. However, over the last few months I have noticed that my Hygros (polysperma and corymbosa) have started doing very poorly. They've been losing leaves, with their stems breaking and just looking like crap overall. The other plants seem to be okay. The other day I read the post by Diana Walstad about nitrates inhibiting growth on some plants, and began wondering if that may be the case. My nitrates were off the chart (Seachem test kit, only goes to 50 ppm)!! Iron was around .1 ppm, and PO4 was at .65 ppm. I did about a 50% water change, cleaned the gravel, and cleaned the canister filters. Then I checked it again a couple of days later, and the NO3 was still off the chart! This time Fe was .14 ppm, and PO4 .3 ppm. I guess the next step is to verify that the test kit is accurate, but that will have to wait until I have time. Otherwise, I'm not sure what to do, especially since I just mixed up a fresh batch of PPS Pro.

Andy

ray-the-pilot

While I cannot be 100% sure I'm fairly certain that your test kits are OK. I am very anal about accuracy in my testing and I always use a positive control and a blank when testing. I read the adsorbance of the solutions on my spectrophotomer. I have never met a test kit that was bad.

I think people say this because when adding or removing fertilizers the results are usually not linear in a tank. This leads people to believe that the test is bad. If you did that kind of recovery study in plain tank water, you would find that the results are linear.

ray-the-pilot

I'm sorry, I should have addressed this!

Mix up a batch of PPS Pro with no KNO3. Use this the same way you use the regular PPS Pro and do regular water changes. When then NO3 gets back to less than 10 ppm go back to normal PPS pro. BTW you might want to check your PPS pro formula to make sure you didn't make a mistake and are adding too much NO3.

wkndracer

Interesting thread but confusing to me as well.
Edwards statements as I understood them were that PPS required weekly testing but PPS pro was fine tuned to eliminate the need LOL. (wish he would resurface on the topics)
Opted to use PPS and downloaded all available information, excel spread sheets, calculators etc.
While not a user of PPS pro but the original PPS system my results are the same as Ray in that TDS and NO3 steadily climb while other readings decline. Based on testing PPS has included in the system spread sheet a Discus Solution that nowhere else is mentioned in the dosing guidelines.

My tanks slowly drift between BBA and GDA as the TDS readings steadily rise but never land stable for more than two weeks at a time.
Still fine tuning formula amounts other than trace solution that is applied by tank volume daily.

Andy Ritter

Hello again,

Time for an update. On Monday (Sept. 7), I tested the nitrate again just to get another base reading, and it was again way darker than the color chart, indicating to me that it was still way higher than 50 ppm. This time I also used the reference sample provided by Seachem with the test kit, and it tested correctly, so I also believe that the test kit is okay. I also checked my tap water (which is well water, by the way), and it showed 3-4 ppm NO3. I then did another large waterchange (40-50%). I mixed up a new batch of the macro solution, but this time without the KNO3, and have been using it to fertilize the tank since then at about 7.2 mL a day. I just finished checking the nitrates again, and it now appears to be around 40-50 ppm (so hard to tell when just looking at a color chart that goes from light to dark). Still not where it needs to be, but getting better somewhat.

Now to answer some questions.

ray-the-pilot: I also am very anal when it comes to measuring, so even though I am human and am capable of making a mistake, I'm pretty sure that the ferts. were mixed according to the recipe on the PPS pro thread. I have a digital scale that I have checked with calibration weights to ensure the accuracy, and try very hard to make sure that everything is measured correctly.

wkndracer: Actually, if you'll go back and look, ray-the-pilot is actually having problems with his K going up, and his PO4 and NO3 going down. I on the other hand, am having problems with the NO3 going up. I don't really know enough yet to determine what is happening with any of the other parameters, other than they look like they are what is considered acceptable right now (which after reading many more posts about fertilizing, appears that many different people have very different ideas about what is acceptable, even to the point of REALLY arguing about it - I'm just trying to grow plants that look nice so me and my fish will be happy).

I don't have a TDS meter yet (definitely plan to get one though), so I have no idea what that reading is.

I am also of the opinion that this "one fertilizer recipe for everyone" thing isn't looking like it is going to work out so good. It seems to me that if one tank has lots of nutrient "hogs" in it, and another tank has light feeders, then how can they both be okay with the same amount of fertilizer? I switched to PPS pro because I thought that it would be nice to not have to test all the time, and I also would rather not have to constantly be changing the water. I've often learned that if something sounds too good to be true, it probably is.

Thanks for the assistance, and I'll keep you updated.

Andy

Andy Ritter

Time for another update.

I just finished checking the NO3 again, and this time came up with approximately 18 ppm.

I decided to start easing back into the nitrate fertilization, so I took a bottle and mixed up a solution consisting of 75% macro without KNO3 and 25% macro, normal recipe. I'll continue fertilizing for the next few days and see if the NO3 continues to go down, stays the same, or goes back up.

Andy

ray-the-pilot

Have you been checking PO4 and K levels?

BTW I just purchased my first bad Nitrate kit!

I know that it is bad because I have a running data log for my 20 ppm reference standard. For the past 18 months the 20 ppm reference had an adsorbance of .3 - .4. With my new kit the adsorbance fell to 0.18. When I added additional developing reagent, the adsorbance increased back to .35.

I believe that the developing solution wasn't mixed properly during filling and my particular bottle has too little zinc (needed to reduce the nitrate to nitrite).

Andy Ritter

Just checked NO3 again, and this time found it to be around 23 to 24 ppm (assuming that my Seachem test kit could actually be that accurate).

Ray-the-pilot: I haven't been checking PO4 every time because honestly I thought that since the last few times that it had been checked it had been okay, so that maybe I didn't need to check it every time. However, I just checked it also and came up with about .3 to .4 ppm. I don't even own a potassium test kit. It seems to me that they are rather difficult to find. The only ones that I were able to find fairly quickly were one by Aquarium Landscapes (which it seems most people don't like too much) and one by LaMotte (which usually means expensive). Based on other posts that I've read by you, I'm guessing that you use the LaMotte one. Do you think that I should get a potassium kit, and if so, which one? Speaking of LaMotte kits, I bought nitrate and phosphate LaMotte test kits back in 2000, and then got out of the hobby until last November. Since I knew that they were old, I bought two new Seachem kits at the AGA convention auction. However, I still have the old LaMotte kits. The nitrate kit expired 12/10/00 (but was only used one time), and I can't find an expiration date on the phosphate kit (which was never even opened). In your experience with test kits, do you think that these would still be okay to use? If so, would they give better, more trustworthy results than the Seachem ones that I've been using?

By the way, although it is still early to tell, I believe that my Hygrophila polysperma is starting to grow like it should again. The jury is still out on the Hygrophila corymbosa. I noticed that many of the Crypt species leaves have melted, but I have experienced leaf melt from them over the years anytime something changes, so I'm not too worried yet. It definitely isn't that widespread, so I'm hoping that they are just acclimating themselves to the lower nitrate levels.

Thanks so much for your help.

Andy

ray-the-pilot

I have a LaMotte K test kit. It is a turbidometric test (the K causes a precipitate and the turbidity is related to the amount of K present). The test comes with a device that is used to measure the turbidity but I’ve never used it. I have a spectrophotometer and I measure the turbidity directly in it and compare that measure with a K reference standard. Measuring K this way I can find my tank values to +/- 1 ppm. I couldn’t get the device that came with the kit to agree very well with the spec method but then I wasn’t really trying.

The way I check my kits is with a spectrophotometer. I make several references say 0, 5, 10, 20, 40 and 80 ppm. Test each standard using the kit and measure the absorbance of each. If the absorbance of each is linear, when compared to the concentration, the kit is good.

Now that I think about it, you could make reference standards at the same points in the color chart. If the color you get with each reference standard agrees with the chart, your kit is good. After this first test I guess you could run your sample using a high and low reference standard. If your sample is between the high and low limits you can be fairly confident that your tank water is in range. I’ve never done this but it seems like it will work.