The Planted Tank Forum banner

Twisted, deformed growth

33K views 88 replies 9 participants last post by  clownplanted 
#1 ·
So according to the API gh and kh tests I have a dgh of 14 and a dkh of 6.5. I have noticed leaf curling, twisting and crinkling on my ludwigia super red and ovalis and occasionally on my ar mini. Seems to come and go and effects different leafs at different times. I have read these symptoms can be attributed to low calcium/magnesium levels. I wonder if this is the cause because I thought that the API gh test is mainly testing for calcium/magnesium? Here's the report: Green Yellow Text Colorfulness Line
could sodium be throwing off my test readings. The report seems to show low levels of calcium and magnesium. Thoughts? And thanks for any input.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
See less See more
1
#2 ·
Hi Willcooper,

Are the "leaf curling, twisting and crinkling on my ludwigia super red and ovalis and occasionally on my ar mini." on just newer growth? Ca deficiency is typically characterized as a 'hook' downward at the leaf tip. Twisted leaves are a symptom of a possible molybdenum deficiency. Yes, sometimes you may have high dKH and dGH and still be seeing signs of Ca or Mg deficiency. Sometimes there is a excess or Mg which can effect the uptake of Ca.
ammonium or magnesium excess may induce a calcium deficiency in plants
Although I don't believe I have experienced it I have read that lower levels of CO2 can cause the same issue of curled and twisting leaves, especially on new growth.
 
#3 ·
Co2 was my first thought. About a week ago I increased it from a 1.0 ph drop to a 1.2 ph drop. The new growth is the problem on the ludwigia red and prob on the ovalis too just more apparent on the red. Pics aren't great (cell phone). Leaf Botany Flowering plant Herb Annual plant
Leaf Botany Plant stem
Nature Leaf Peach Deciduous Annual plant
Nature Leaf Colorfulness Deciduous Peach


I dose;
50% water change then
1/4+1/8th+1/32 teaspoon kno3, 1/16th kh2po4, 1/2 k2so4 (three times a week)
1/8th csm+b (3 times a week)

Tap water starts out 2.5 ppm nitrate plus what I dose but I use an API nitrate test kit, which I don't trust, so total levels are uncertain.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
#4 ·
Hi Willcooper,

Actually, the pics are pretty good! The second picture, upper right hand corner, Hygrophila leaf shows the definite 'hook' of Ca deficiency, Same picture, the leaves look 'scorched' with interveinal chlorosis. Third picture, the Ludwigia has curled, deformed leaf development with leaf edges turning downward. Fourth picture same.

Will, I need a tank size for the dosing levels to be relevant.
 
#5 ·
Water quality report assistance

Hi Willcooper,



Actually, the pics are pretty good! The second picture, upper right hand corner, Hygrophila leaf shows the definite 'hook' of Ca deficiency, Same picture, the leaves look 'scorched' with interveinal chlorosis. Third picture, the Ludwigia has curled, deformed leaf development with leaf edges turning downward. Fourth picture same.



Will, I need a tank size for the dosing levels to be relevant.


Oh yeah duh. Tank size is a 40 breeder so 44 gallons. The leaf in the top right second picture is just another stem of ovalis. Funny I never thought calcium deficiency was a possibility with my water. I have a calcium test kit in my cart on amazon. Will have it soon. It looks like using ro water and a gh/kh booster will be the path forward. I used to do this when my 20 long was set up. Didn't like the hassle of going to get water every week but maybe it just needs to be done. I don't like the idea of my tap water having such high hardness readings and it not being from calcium/magnesium.

The ovalis looks pretty similar to this from above
Leaf Petal Terrestrial plant Flowering plant Artificial flower


Did quick research. It seems like seachem equilibrium is a good way to go as it contains a few more useful trace elements than barrs gh booster.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
#6 ·
Hi Willcooper,

Remember, "magnesium excess may induce a calcium deficiency in plants" so it may not be a lack of Ca but an excess of Mg. Sometimes, even with moderate dGH. it is a good idea to dose Equilibrium / GH Booster to insure there is sufficient Mg and Ca available for the plants.
 
#7 ·
Hi Willcooper,



Remember, "magnesium excess may induce a calcium deficiency in plants" so it may not be a lack of Ca but an excess of Mg. Sometimes, even with moderate dGH. it is a good idea to dose Equilibrium / GH Booster to insure there is sufficient Mg and Ca available for the plants.


Cool. You're looking for about a 5-1 ratio of ca/mg right? I think just using reconstituted ro water will eliminate the goofing around. Oh by the way, do you know how to test for mg? I've searched test kits for it but couldn't find anything.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
#8 ·
Hi Willcooper,

Based upon your 40 gallon tank (likely 32 gallon volume with 2" of substrate) you are dosing about 0.377ppm of Fe per dose; Tom Barr regularly doses 0.7+ppm of Fe 3X per week. Unless you have shrimp, I would suggest increasing your Fe dosing to maybe 3/16 tsp (0.566ppm) 3X per week. Wait a week or so and see if the new leaves exhibit the same problems as your current leaves - I would not expect to see much change in the existing leaves. Let us know how it goes!
 
#10 ·
Name that issue! Calcium or iron or carbon?

Ok I just got the calcium test kit and tested.

Parms:
Ca 100-120ppm
Mg unknown (my water report shows a 5-1 ratio of ca to mg)
Nitrate 20ppm
Phosphates unknown (I dose for 1ppm)
Dgh 14
Dkh 6.5
Ph 6.6 (degassed 7.8) I'm trying to get this to 6.4/6.2 because much of my problem could be this.

I just read about half of the 650 post thread on csm+b issues and targeting fe using it and no other iron source. I have as of Sunday stopped dosing csm+b and have been adding API leaf zone. My thinking was to dose like this for a couple of weeks and then resume csm+b dosing at a lower level. I already have 17ppm of copper in my tap water so it may be that other micro nutrients have been impeading iron absorption. My plan is to dose csm+b to about .2 ppm fe or less and add an edta iron source to achieve a total of .5-.75 fe like Tom Barr does and see if that helps.

Thoughts are def welcome.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
#14 ·
Definitely could be boron but so hard to tell because it seems that carbon, iron and calcium can all cause similar issues. For a long time I was dosing to reach .2ppm of fe through csm+b which yields .025 ppm of boron and recently began doubling that dose but saw no change so that's when I decided earlier this week to lower csm+b dosing and dose iron separately. Are you aware of a target range for boron? I know that can be difficult because so many factors can inhibit uptake. One of the main worries I have is that my tap water may be so rich in micros already and I have read a lot about those micros getting in the way of iron absorption. My copper is at 17ppm out of the tap, for example, which I'm to understand is quite high and can prevent iron and other mineral absorption.

I'm going to go with a lower csm+b dose with an added edta iron source while at the same time increasing co2 as much as is safe. My ludwigias plant still grow pretty quick (5" in ten days) so I should see some signs pretty soon.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
#16 ·
Neither -Fe, -Ca, or -C will result in such symptoms. -C just stops growth, not result in distorted leaves as certain ppl believe.

Ca:B 400 (+/-200). Too much B results in slowed growth and then -Ca. Tap will likely already have a lot but may not be sufficient to balance Ca.

Cu is not 17ppm, as this much will cause copper poisoning to humans and kill all of your plants and animals, but 17ugl, 0.017mgl.
 
#17 ·
Neither -Fe, -Ca, or -C will result in such symptoms. -C just stops growth, not result in distorted leaves as certain ppl believe.



Ca:B 400 (+/-200). Too much B results in slowed growth and then -Ca. Tap will likely already have a lot but may not be sufficient to balance Ca.



Cu is not 17ppm, as this much will cause copper poisoning to humans and kill all of your plants and animals, but 17ugl, 0.017mgl.


I typed wrong it was .17ppm of copper. So what would you do in this case? Add calcium and increase csm+b dosing? Thanks for your reply


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
#21 ·
Ca:B 400+/-200. Below 100 and B-induced -Ca may result. Ludwigias generally have higher B requirements than Rotala rotundifolias.

Ca 33-82mgl, Mg 2.4-17 which correlates with the tested GH of 14. So if Ca=80mgl: 80mgl÷400=0.2mgl of B.

The WQ report doesn't indicate B concentrations which is problematic for determining how much more B needs to be supplied. I suggest dosing 0.050mgl of B and observe.

As for 170ugl of Cu, that's very high. Are invertebrates healthy? If the copper doesn't complex with organic matter or bind to the substrate, then I do not recommend large water changes. Adding floating hyperaccumulators such as duckweed will absorb the excess copper.
 
#22 ·
Ca:B 400+/-200. Below 100 and B-induced -Ca may result. Ludwigias generally have higher B requirements than Rotala rotundifolias.



Ca 33-82mgl, Mg 2.4-17 which correlates with the tested GH of 14. So if Ca=80mgl: 80mgl÷400=0.2mgl of B.



The WQ report doesn't indicate B concentrations which is problematic for determining how much more B needs to be supplied. I suggest dosing 0.050mgl of B and observe.



As for 170ugl of Cu, that's very high. Are invertebrates healthy? If the copper doesn't complex with organic matter or bind to the substrate, then I do not recommend large water changes. Adding floating hyperaccumulators such as duckweed will absorb the excess copper.


Copper is .17ppm according to the water report but snails and Amano shrimp have all done well. Looks like I would be dosing 1/4 teaspoon of csmb to achieve that target of .05 ppm boron, which would also mean I'm dosing 1.78 ppm of fe, which I may do in about a month when I order more (I'm almost out). In the mean time I have elevated co2 injection and am playing around with ways to diffuse it better. I use a glass diffuser now and have a hard time coming close to diffusing it all. I have also just trimmed and replanted and the top 1/3 of the aquarium is open now with power heads creating a nice circle current. If that works I'll see it in 1-2 weeks. I'll update then.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
#24 ·
Ok I have borax at the house now which is great in not having do dose higher levels of csmb. Rotallabutterfly's calculator says to dose less than 1/64th teaspoon to reach a target of .025 ppm b (my current dose of csmb achieves .025 ppm b) for a total of .05 b. How much less of 1/64th does it really mean? The smallest teaspoon I have is 1/32nd so 1/64th isn't terribly hard but less than may be if it's a lot less.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
#25 ·
Back in 2014, Zapins along with other well respected members in the forum, recommended a weekly max of. .02ppm of Boron.

Not sure if this still holds true.

If so, using boron as a proxy when making a solution with CSM +B, you could aim for .067 ppm of B per dose 3x per week. However, this only provides .055ppm of Fe per dose.

Can more iron be supplemented via DTPA ?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
#28 ·
@Mathman I could target .2ppm from from csmb which gives me .025 ppm b and then dose borax to reach .025 b for a total boron level of .05 ppm. Then add an edta fe source to add another .3-.5ppm of fe.
@clownplanted the drop checker is a solid yellow with a ph drop of 1.4 with good water movement through out the tank. I just trimmed and replanted to optimize flow even more.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
#36 ·
@Seattle_Aquarist I am in San tan valley, Arizona.

It's been a week of adding additional boron via borax to a total b, including my csmb dose, of .07 ppm and the issue is the same based on 1.5" of growth. Leaves curl around and juvi leaves are "crunched" on ludwigia super red mini and the tips of ludwigia broad is curling down.

I'll ask for input on what to do next;
Continue at same level for a longer duration, increase borax dose, or switch to another nutrient strategy. I have cuttlebone and
which I didn't realize I had. Co2 is pushing ph from 7.8 to 6.6 and lights are 6.5 hrs at about 60 par. Thoughts?

Edit:

Did a quick search and it does really seem like calcium deficiency


That seems to be a common effect when looking at charts like that. I guess I'm still surprised if that's it with a dgh of 14. But if it is that and I have cuddlebone how much should I add? So I guess it still stands, thoughts?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
#39 ·
You'll need to check B:Zn. Too much B is antagonistic to Zn and vice versa. At the right proportion, they are synergistic and each helps the other be absorbed and utilized. There is likely a mild -Zn as is evidenced by the marginal chlorosis on Lobelia. L. red appears to need more Zn than Rotalas from my experiments as well as S. repens.
 
#41 ·
The Lobelia looks fine to me.

Calculated at 40 gal, your 1/8 tsp dose is adding .028 ppm B, and .013 Zn - 3x a week.

I strongly doubt either one is deficient.

My humble advice is when you get done with the B experiment, do an 80% water change and cut csmb by 1/3 for a week or two, or in half.

Ludwigia responds very fast, especially the red. You'll either see a rapid improvement, or else you can move on the the next idea.
 
#42 ·
You want to make sure your calcium and mg levels are in order at 3:1. Also keep in mind to much mg can block ca uptake making it seem like too little ca. Do you use gh booster? I think you are on right track but keep in mind it's usually more a mg deficiency than ca. But need to check both to make sure are in check.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
#43 ·
@burr740 thanks for the advise. I know it has worked for you and others and I will try it if more b doesn't work.
@clownplanted if I believe my water quality report it looks like I'm at a 5/1 ratio of ca/mg. I tested my calcium and it comes in at 100-120 ppm which puts my mg at 20-24ppm (strictly based on the report if the ratios are still accurate). So that means to get to 4-1 I would need to add 6-10ppm of mgso4 or more even to get to a 3-1 ratio. I see that that ratio is different based on people's opinions. And I know tank conditions can call for different things but does anyone really know what the proper ratio should be?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
#44 · (Edited)
To be honest it should not cause an issue but you can try to get the ration closer to at least 4:1. And doing more research as long as you are not limiting any of the trace nutrients it really is usually co2. High co2 fluctuations can cause issues. Its MUCH easier for co2 to fluctuate say 10 times than any other parameter in the tank stressing the plant causing issues. Are you sure your co2 is consistent? What is it at when lights come on? Does it stay consistent during the day? Notice any co2 swings? Does drop checker stay same color throughout diff locations in tank? Without looking further back in your post how are you diffusing? Is the flow good enough to evenly distribute the co2 equally. Reading a ton of Tom Barr's articles and threads he has proven many times that when many think its ca/mg/k its actually co2 that somehow or another is causing the issue making it look to be ca/mg/k.

Back to the ratio according to Tom Barr he said it was never really proven that being that far out of ratio causes a problem. Just make sure that neither ca or mg are limiting and you should be fine.

I would really look closely at your co2. Use a PH pen and get accurate before/after measurements throughout different locations in the tank. Test close to where co2 comes in at and on opposite side. Does drop checker stay consistent color ie green/yellow? I know drop checker is hard to use as its like a 2 hour delay. Again cannot stress enough really check your co2.

Also do you have lighting dead spots where the problem plants are at? Is it just one spot where the plants are having problems or spread out throughout the tank?

I will quote what Tom Barr had said in a few different posts about similar issues

"Mg is more common for issues, many suggested it was K+(Potassium), but CO2 and Mg will influence that more than Ca which tends to rarely an issue but an oft loved excuse for poor growth.

High levels of NH4+ and Mg++ will block K+ far more than K+ ever will.
And there is research to support that.

So do not go nuts with Mg.
You just need a little bit and the ratio itself is not going to cause much issue if the Ca is high. 10-20ppm is more than enough.

Regards,
Tom Barr"

"I'll give this a whirl.
I like the Rotala and it does grow back fast when happy.
What might be interesting is focusing on the KH vs Mg.

I know many folks that have rather high GH's, many from dosing SeaChem Eq and in a number of cases they have Mg over 10ppm but an associated higher level of Ca as well.

Ca/K/Mg/NH4 blocking all appears to need to be much higher concentrations typically found in pore water to start to get blocking. But species to species difference may play a larger role.

I have found the Luwigia cuba to stunt much like the R wallichii in the hard KH/GH's, but teasing apart which is causing what requires more grow out and then changes to the Mg, KH and Ca levels.

In general, if there is a GH issue, lower Mg is typically the reason if the GH is already high, it's virtually unheard of to find high Mg and low or limiting Ca levels if the Gh is 3-5 degrees or high.

Many folks have high GH's and does well with Rotalas and Ludwigia cuba.
It might be evidence of a ratio being important even at low concentrations.

Regards,
Tom Barr"

"but your new routine adding a little bit of SeaChem Eq each week will address the issue(which is Mg limitation), we found this out about 10 years ago in the Bay area using this product.

Many thought it is was all the K+, which was all the rage back then.
Some thought it was the Ca, Steve Dixon wondered if it was the Mg. He's alos the guy that found out I had such high PO4.

He had so many things right on looking back, too bad he's not active any longer.

I'm about ready to torture some wallichii also. Bring on the salts!

Regards,
Tom Barr"

"I tend to suggest a few degrees of GH for soft water, about 3-4 at least using SeaChem EQ or the Gh booster, folks with harder GH waters may need some Mg or Ca to balance things out so neither is limiting.

I think you can approach it that way, using just GH and adding a bit more with a balanced product or................you can analyze GH individually into the Ca and Mg sereprate nutrients.
Simply because you do not test, does not mean you need to know what the ppm of Ca/Mg, only that you have enough to prevent limiting conditions.
That's the real issue for 99% of aquarist, not confusing themselves with test kits/methods.

Why test unless there is a problem?
How do you avoid such problems to begin with?

Pretty straight forward.
If you suspect K+ is limiting, then add more K+ and see.
You do not need to test the K+, you can if you want, but you do not need to do so to know the K+ is limiting or in excess. Simple calculators will tell you that.

Regards,
Tom Barr"
 
#45 · (Edited)
I will bring out this quote again from Tom Barr since its pretty important in my mind and may show your issue.

"I have found the Luwigia cuba to stunt much like the R wallichii in the hard KH/GH's, but teasing apart which is causing what requires more grow out and then changes to the Mg, KH and Ca levels.

In general, if there is a GH issue, lower Mg is typically the reason if the GH is already high, it's virtually unheard of to find high Mg and low or limiting Ca levels if the Gh is 3-5 degrees or high.

Many folks have high GH's and does well with Rotalas and Ludwigia cuba.
It might be evidence of a ratio being important even at low concentrations.

Regards,
Tom Barr"

Since your GH is high it possibly could be a Mg issue as its stated that mg issue could play more of a role the higher your GH and the ratio could be more important. I would add some Mg to try and even out the ratio a bit more. This seems like the most logical and easiest thing to do at this point.

Also wanted to add that when I added co2 and switched over to EI dosing(NilocG) I am/was following the recommended dosing for both micros and macros. Now what it does is allows you to rule out nutrients as a deficiency or does it? It assumes that you will have good/correct calcium/mg levels. So by adding enough all othernutrients ca/mg could then be limiting factor. (assuming you are dosing correct levels of micros/macros)

In my case I noticed a tiny bit(not near as bad as your case) of ludwiga repens leaf some curling and more noticeably some holes in some of my amazon sword leaves. Again all pointing to either ca/mg def. I then immediately started adding GH booster(NilocG)(Magnesium Sulfate, Potassium Sulfate, Calcium Sulfate(1:3:3 ratio) and the problems went away almost immediately. So I do not know any of four possible things here. My GH from tap is 6. So I do not know if my ca was low, my mg was low, my k was low or if the ca/mg ratio was too far out of balance and possibly blocking Ca uptake. Without further testing I really have no way of knowing. But what I do know is that by adding the correct mg/k/ca from the Gh booster it fixed my issue and saw the results very fast. All new leaves were good and no new holes since 2 weeks ago. Again in my mind this is the easiest thing you can try at this point to rule out any ca/mg ratio issue.
 
#46 ·
Hi @Willcooper,

Are you on Johnson Utilities for your water or Queen Creek? Johnson Utilities supplies most of the water to San Tan Valley, AZ and they use several different wells to supply the needs of the community. Their water quality report does not give information on hardness, Ca, Mg, or levels of other nutrients that could help us. It is interesting to note that the utility got in trouble when they exceeded 10 ppm Nitrate levels in November and December. The Queen Creek information although dated 2011 for Ca and Mg implies a huge range for Ca (33-82ppm) and Mg (2.4-17ppm) likely due to time of year and rainfall.

So I downloaded your picture and enlarged it greatly. Depending upon the species it looks like mostly new growth is being effected. I see various problems including chlorosis (yellowing of new growth), veins lighter in color than the areas between the veins, leaf margins curling downward, I re-read this thread and I do not see how much micro-nutrients you are dosing....did it miss it?
 
#47 ·
Very interesting. That that is a very low level of Mg which could explain some things here. The higher the Gh the more factor a lower Mg level comes in causing issue. And I also second the notion how much/often are you dosing micros?
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top