cousinkenni

You do have a point, but......

Tom correct me if I am wrong (as I often am). Isn't it easier to dose the water colomn? It seems way harder to keep fertilizing the substrate (That is without the special ADA stick injector).

Yes it is easier to dose the substrate upon set up, but how would you do this over the course of three to four year period?

Anyway I see no problems with my root development using a relatively nutrient-free substrate and dosing the water column.

Either way should and probably does work

Ken T.

AaronT

Oh it's definitely easier to dose the water column than to keep refertilizing the substrate. What I was posing is finding a way to make a substrate that lasts and lasts. You would still need to dose CO2, Nitrate, and Phosphate, but all the minerals could theoretically be provided by a good substrate. I know our tank's variables aren't the same as in nature, but it seems to work okay for it.

Happy Camper

I always thought that it was either or. Plants either take in nutrients via the foliage if nutrients are present in the water column, or if none they would take a few days to convert back to root feeding from the substrate? Have I misunderstood this concept? To me it makes no sense to have Macro's in the water column and Micro's in the substrate. So which is it?

plantbrain

Most substrates already add the micro's in there, and some Ca/Mg/SO4.

Other than these, all that's left and needed in larger amounts: N, P, K and CO2.

Measuing and monitoring is another issue with a substrate.
It will be reduced if you increase the water column dosing, bobbing back and forth will stress plants.

Many folks do that if they try to run their ferts down low.
The ADA products do work well and simply for initial set up, but compared to what ginen the amount oif nutrients present?

I can do an easy set up with soil as well and say many of the same things.
This might be a bit to DIY for many folks.

But few can argue the growth produced in the first few months of a soil tank either if you don't add much to the water column(many new folks don't).

But I'd use ADA products for my own tanks over soil given a choice.

I think our attitudes and habits play and much larger role here than the substrate itself.


Regards,
Tom Barr

cS

Are you sure that the nutrients in ADA's substrate are what account for the increased growth rate reported by some? If so, then it makes no sense why the same growth rate cannot be achieved through water column fertilization. After all, new plants have no roots. Ergo, acquisition of nutrients from the water column should be preferred during this period. There's something else we're (at least I'm) not seeing.

Has anyone measured what levels of macronutrients the substrate is producing per week? Tom. You noted the presence of NH4. Any quantitative data? Any NO3/NO2/PO4/etc.? How about where the nutrients are coming from: the Powersand or the Aquasoil underlayer?

If Powersand is the (macro?)nutrient storage, then it should leach a large amount of nutrients into the water column, since it is the top layer after all. To be able to be utilized by plants, the nutrients must first be in its ionic forms (i.e. "soluble"). If they are soluble, then they're in the water column. And if they're in the water column, then we should be able to detect them with our test kits.

dennis

I know much less about the deeper substrate chemistry of our tanks than I would like but:

Doesn't the water softening/redox potential of the ADA substrates, due to the high peat/organics content, contribute to the avaliability of the bound and insoluable nutrients the substrate may contain? ADA also has many additives as part of the whole substrate system, Tourmaline, Penac and some varoius bacterial additives that should also contribute to the Redox and breakdown of componds in the soil. In a sense, isn't the ADA substrate system like a well aged substrate from and established tank...one always gets much better growth from year old Flourite than they do from week old Eco-Complete.

How much of the growth from ADA substrates is a result of nutrients it contains verses the nutrients it makes available to the plants? Are there any additives of the ADA system that would affect root development?

I think we speculate alot about the ADA stuff simply because we do not know what is in it. Most of the fertalizer products are made to dose, just squirt it into the tank. The bottle does not say how much of varoius nutrients it contains, ratios of NO3:PO4, etc. There are squirt bottles for high light tanks, low light tanks, when the color of the plants is off, when the water seems dirty, for use after trimming, for use after a wc, etc. We don't know what is in them, although we can deduce alot based on the products use.

The substrate systems must contain nutrients though, often one does not start dosing the tanks for months (supposedly) and then the dosing is not like we are used to, with bags of powder and peroxide bottles of trace solutions. I think the bigger question is not if there are nutrients but rather what form the nutrients are in.

cS

Dennis, let's not talk about all ADA products. Let's simplify and discuss the substrate system since that is where the "potency" lies. And to simplify even further, we can ignore the bacteria, Penac, and all the other additives because they do not seem to contribute significantly to the "increased growth rate" since we have received reports of the same vigorous growth from hobbyists using ONLY the Powersand and Aquasoil. Therefore, we can deduce that the magic lies within one or both of these two components. The rest are negligible IMHO.

If we can agree that the Powersand and/or Aquasoil are responsible, then let's proceed.

In addition to light, plants require carbon, oxygen, hydrogen, nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, calcium, magnesium, sulfur, and 8 micronutrients in order to grow and complete its life cycle. (Aquatic) plants require them in the following ionic forms:

Carbon: CO2, HCO3-
Oxygen: CO2, HCO3-
Hydrogen: H2O
Nitrogen: NO3-, NH4+ (possibly NO2- as well?)
Phosphorus: H2PO4-, HPO4(2-)
Potassium: K+
Calcium: Ca2+
Magnesium: Mg2+
Sulfur: SO4 (2-)
Micronutrients: Fe2+, Fe3+ (served as the proxy ion for the others)

In other words, unless the nutrients are in these forms, plants are unable to uptake them. For example, plants cannot uptake CaCO3. The CaCO3 must first be dissolved into Ca2+ and CO3-. For simplicity, the CO3- is of no consequence to the plant so they ignore it. The free Ca2+ ion is now able to enter the plant's tissues and contribute to growth. The same goes for the rest of the other nutrients.

Given those usable nutrient forms, we see that the Powersand/Aquasoil is not offering anything different than what we can get from Greg Watson.

---

But if we insist on the nutrients to be the key players, then we can rule out C, O, H, and S since we know that they are absent from the Powersand/Aquasoil. We can further rule out the 8 micronutrients since they alone cannot possibly cause the dramatic growth reported. We can even remove Ca and Mg as the culprits since they too are absent from the P/A. Not only that, the Aquasoil removes Ca and Mg from the water column through the peat effect. Therefore, hobbyists must overcompensate by dosing more than the usual amount of these two nutrients. But whatever. That's irrelevant.

Ok, that leaves us with the 3 major macronutrients: N, P, and K. What then does Powersand/Aquasoil provide that we cannot provide through the water column? Logically, nothing because we provide the exact same forms of nutrients that the P/A provide. Therefore, it can't be the form of the nutrients that causes the difference in growth.

Furthermore, does P/A provide all three macronutrients or just N? It's obvious that the nutrient reserve, leaching rate, and/or the root's ability to uptake stored nutrients is not enough because we still have to supplement the water column. Amano, the Senkse brothers, and even the existence of external fertilization product line attests to this fact. When do they start fertilizing? I would need Jeff and other users of P/A to chime in because I don't own this substrate system. I also would love to hear from test kit users because they can offer data on the leaching rate of the macronutrients.

But from what data we do have, I hope that you can see why I do not believe how the nutrients can possibly be the cause for the vigorous growth reported. There's something else. What do you think Dennis? Did I overlook or miss something? You're the one going back to school to be a mad scientist*.

*Be a lawyer so you can team up with Art and ease the plants import laws so the rest of us can get some cool plants.

jsenske

I start dosing different layouts at different times- depending on species, density, observation, etc. There is no formula to it as every tank/layout is a little different. Even lighting, filtration, etc. can vary for me from tank to tank. It just takes time, experience, and intuition. Like anything in life, this will come more naturally to some than others. In the end, we all can get there, though. Regardless of the approach you take, substrate you use, etc., planted tanks will always require some fine tuning and the deployment of skills only acquired through experience and patience.
I am not myself as interested in chemistry lessons as I am creating aquascapes so for me it suffices to know that Amano could use/develop any substrate system in the world. If a version of something already on the market was truly the best way to go, he would simply do his own version of that. Why not just give it a try?

dennis

You are definitely smarter than me, especially in the chemistry department, but I will offer more of my opinions

I will agree with that since people talk about such amazing growth with only Powersand and Aquasoil. Those 2 components are the most important part, initially especially. However, my point in mentioning all the other products is that they are part of a system, not necessairly something hobbiests understand or know what they contain. In fact, how many of us follow the EI method without understanding it? Jeff has even mentioned somehting to the effect of, the color of the plants was off so I add a little (forget the product) and everything is great again. I just think we are trying to compare/anaylize something which we don't know the ingredients of. I do agree that msot of the sucess with the ADA products must come from either, or both, the Powersand and/or Aquasoil.

Very true. That is an excellent list, btw! Its nice to have something showing just what ions are most useable by plants!

---

Is it? If they are stripped from the water column by the peat/organics then they are still available to the plants via the substrate. I do wish I knew more (anything really) about the ph influence/ Redox activity that goes on in the substrate.

Maybe something as simple as the NH4 it contains? Tom Barr stated that he tested it to have NH4 (or was it NH3?). I belive that this is the most desirable form of N to plants. Just think about how well your plants grow when you have green water. Sometimes you can barely see the plants but once the GW is gone, or you do a wc, you notice that the plants seem to have grown faster and better that usual...Perhaps due to the elevated NH4/3 levels in the water?

I like how you are eliminating nutrients that are the least important. I would speculate that in setting up a new tank, as long as the plants are moderately healthy to start with(ie, come from an established, healthy tank) then the most important nutrient after C(O2) would be N. I believe that any healthy plant speciemen will have good stored reserve of P and the the Micronutrients. N is the nutrient that a healthy plant will depleat first, or should I say its the nutrient first to cause the plant to show deficiency symptoms, when thrown into less than desireable conditions.

As an avid terrestrial gardner as well, what do you fertalize with to increase root growth and encourage folier development? K right? Whats the first solution used in and ADA setup, Brighty K and their water conditioner even contains alot of K, I believe.

I totally agree with everything you have said cS, and in my humble opinion I think the initial sucess lies in the NH3/4 and peat/organics the substrate contains. Like I said, I wish I knew more about how pH and redox work/affect substrates and nutrient availibility.

I would also speculate that the "softness" and porosity of hte substrate really encourages root development, much like a loamy/airy soil will do for terrestrial plants.

I hesitate to speculate further as I have reached the limit of my knowledge and also we don't know just what is in the substrate. I would also really love to know just what nutrients and componds are in it and how much they leach into the water column. Maybe Jeff will send us each a small batch for testing and research I would split a bag with you...although honestly someone with better lab tools and techniques would find out alot more than me

Shhh! You will spoil my evil plan.

owengibson

Interesting thread!

Did you ever get your answer eriku! LOL

I think plants like ammonia, but fish dont lol, so make the water acid and ANY substrate will be better?

I had to say SOMETHING after reading ALL that!