Toxicity of CSM+B
Planted Tank Forums
Your Tanks Image Hosting *Tank Tracker * Plant Profiles Fish Profiles Planted Tank Guide Photo Gallery Articles

Go Back   The Planted Tank Forum > Specific Aspects of a Planted Tank > Fertilizers and Water Parameters


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-16-2013, 01:48 AM   #1
happi
Planted Tank Guru
 
happi's Avatar
 
PTrader: (20/100%)
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Posts: 2,766
Send a message via Yahoo to happi
Default

Toxicity of CSM+B


Toxicity of CSM+B


First of all let me start by saying that csm+b can become very toxic to plants when overdosed, the effect is so bad that it would burn your plants while making you believe that you are suffering from other deficiencies, however it is also true that some plants will respond to the toxicity more than the others and some might not respond to it at all, Plants like HC will show such an effect where leaves would start to suddenly disappear.
I would like to share a story about HC plant, every time I tried this plant it would suddenly start to disappear, I tried it so many time till now and I simply couldn’t grow it, on the other hand I can grow Erio which supposed to be harder to grow, the culprit was too much CSM+B, I had all the other nutrients, co2, lights at unlimited levels.

Many people here overdose the csm+b very easily while trying to keep the Fe level high, even too much Fe isn’t good either but we will talk about that later. Some people who think dosing more csm+b brings out more reds in their plants are only making things worse, if you are overdosing with Csm+b to get the Fe levels up then you will get a toxic levels which look exactly like Fe deficiency, that is because Fe toxicity seems to damage the sulfur uptake mechanism and sulfur deficiency looks similar to iron deficiency, it also depend on what kind of iron chelate you are using, iron gluconate doesn’t last in the water for long time and toxicity from this cheleate is less likely to occur even in high doses around 1 ppm, toxicity from other chelate iron such as EDTA, DTPA poses higher risk. Next time you dose CSM+b watch out for overdosing it.

Now I would like to thank my friend Zapins to support whatever I have written with his evidence, I have highlighted some of his words in a bold letter in this thread, the entire credit should be given to him because he have done more research on this topic and he have gathered all the data to support his evidence.


i also have had same issue when my plant looked Fe deficient when i was dosing lots of Fe and csm+b, Look at these pics of csm+b toxicity when it’s overdosed, my plant showed similar results, don't say its lack of that or this, co2, lights, fert etc, i have been there and i can support Zapins on this, the results are right in front of your own eyes. pics posted by thornomad and guatomallin





















__________________

Last edited by happi; 12-16-2013 at 02:03 AM.. Reason: NA
happi is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 12-16-2013, 04:44 AM   #2
plantbrain
Planted Tank Guru
 
plantbrain's Avatar
 
PTrader: (256/100%)
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: The swamp
Posts: 13,444
Default

There's a few issues with this post:

1#, no ppm's or dosing rates listed, the information is almost entirely useless with out dosing rates.
2. CMS+B and DTPA Fe have a very long history. It's been extremely widely used for growing plants for a good 18 years along with everyone else that's been using CMS, why are you folks only discovering this now?
3. DTPA is the other chelators that is in Tropica master grow, also, a product that's been used widely for decades.

I have some pretty nice HC rugs over the years, I lard the stuff in there.
Why you have issues, that's up to you, but it's not solely due to CMS+B.
I've seen way too many tanks in the local SFBAAPS clubs who dose heavy on traces if nothing else.

It also will take a lot more that anything we might dose to impact the sulfur cycling plants.

I'd challenge you to provide any support in any research paper for that.
There's hardly any thing out there on growth and Fe chelates and aquatic submersed plants. Let alone Fe chelates and Sulfur.
Give some dosing data so folks can see if the observations, not just a few that happen to have some correlation, match the hypothesis.
__________________
Regards,
Tom Barr
plantbrain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2013, 04:55 AM   #3
Zapins
Wannabe Guru
 
Zapins's Avatar
 
PTrader: (19/100%)
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Harrogate, TN
Posts: 1,679
Default

Toxicities are a fascinating topic and one which I have been doing a lot of research into lately.

First I'd like to start of by saying that toxicities of nitrogen, phosphorous and potassium (NPK) are much more difficult to get than toxicities of micro nutrients. Furthermore, you are unlikely to ever see any toxicities if you follow established dosing guidelines like those of PPS-pro or EI unless your water is naturally rich in a particularly harmful micro nutrient (see Cavan's thread below for Zn toxicity example).

After solving several plant health posts on this forum and on APC's forum over the last few months it has become clear to me that there is a definite and previously unknown risk of overdosing CSM+B when fertilizing our tanks. People don't know how toxic some of the necessary micro nutrients in CSM+B can be when dosed in larger than normal amounts.

For example, (unchelated) iron has been shown to become toxic in aquatic plants at above 1.1 ppm. An important detail to keep in mind is that chelated iron might be less toxic than unchelated iron, so iron toxicity levels are probably somewhat higher than 1.1 ppm if you use EDTA or DTPA chelated iron (possibly up to several times higher). I personally saw iron toxicity occur when I dosed at 1.6 ppm DTPA iron see my thread here: http://www.aquaticplantcentral.com/f...pot-algae.html. The level at which zinc (a micro nutrient in CSM+B) becomes toxic is somewhere in the 0.12-0.40 ppm range, so you should maintain a Zn level below 0.08 ppm to be on the safe side. Copper is toxic in the 0.10 - 0.15 ppm range. So your copper levels should be far below this, 0.03 ppm or lower to be on the safe side. See supporting research papers here: http://www.aquaticplantcentral.com/f...-research.html and an example of zinc toxicity in someone's plants along with detailed water analysis and resolution of the toxicity issue here:

Cavan's Example:
http://www.aquaticplantcentral.com/f...5&postcount=77

One place a person can experience a toxicity when using CSM+B is when they are trying to follow the old advice of "iron brings out the red in plants." In order to follow that advice it is only natural that a hobbyist would think "ah CSM+B has chelated iron it it - I'll use that to get 1+ ppm iron and get super red plants!" Unfortunately this line of thinking can often land you in toxicity trouble. Along with dosing iron, you are also dosing every other micro nutrient as well, which only need a fraction of a ppm to start interfering with plant growth and cause toxicity symptoms.

To give you an idea of what I mean, I had my tank water and tap water analyzed my a spectrophotometer when I added different amounts of CSM+B until I got the following concentrations of iron 1.64 ppm, 1.75 and 5.99 ppm. Even at 1.64 ppm iron I had reached the toxicity threshold for both copper and zinc (along with several other micros), scroll over to the right in the window below to see the zinc values. Correspondingly, the plants showed toxicity symptoms and failed to grow normally despite all other factors being in the normal ranges.

Code:
| Sample             | Al  |  B  | Ba   | Co  |  Cu  |  Fe  |  Mn  |  Mo  | Ni  |  Sr  | V |  Zn | 

| MT Tap 5/16/2006   | 0.3 | 0.08 |  0   |  0  | 0.04 | 0.03 | 0.08 |  0   |  0   | NA | NA | 0.02|
| MT Adm 1 5/16/2006 |  0  | 0.06 | 0.02 |  0  | 0.13 | 1.64 | 0.22 | 0.09 | 0.01 | NA | NA | 0.40|
| MT Adm 2 5/16/2006 |  0  | 0.05 | 0.01 |  0  | 0.24 | 1.75 | 0.26 | 0.12 | 0.01 | NA | NA | 0.41|
| MT Room 5/16/2006  |  0  | 0.09 | 0.03 | 0.01| 0.33 | 5.99 |  0   | 0.08 | 0.04 | NA | NA | 1.15|

| Sample             |   K   |  Ca  |  Mg  |  Na  |  TIC |  TOC |    Hardness(calc)   (dGH) |

| MT Tap 5/16/2006   |  0.22 | 9.14 | 1.78 | 5.84 |  NA  |  NA  |  NA ppm CaCO3 eq ( NA dGH)|
| MT Adm 1 5/16/2006 |  82.6 | 71.2 | 12.6 | 27.1 |  NA  |  NA  |  NA ppm CaCO3 eq ( NA dGH)|
| MT Adm 2 5/16/2006 |  169  | 44.3 | 9.27 | 18.4 |  NA  |  NA  |  NA ppm CaCO3 eq ( NA dGH)|
| MT Room 5/16/2006  |  497  | 88.4 | 16.5 | 0.61 |  NA  |  NA  |  NA ppm CaCO3 eq ( NA dGH)|
Results from:
http://www.aquaticplantcentral.com/f...&postcount=108

The actual symptoms of micro nutrient toxicities can look a lot like deficiency symptoms. But they appear as a confused conglomeration of several deficiency symptoms that do not match up with any one deficiency. This is because micro nutrients block certain enzymes and pathways in plants, and distrupt normal functioning of the cells. Often times this happens by blocking the use or uptake of another nutrient. So as happi mentioned above, an iron toxicity shows up as a pale looking plant because it blocks the use of sulfur in the photosynthetic system. The absence of sulfur from the enzymes causes the plant to look yellow (which is also a symptom of sulfur deficiency). Unfortunately this is often confused as iron deficiency because of the pale color of the plant. Hobbyists often see this pale color and think that they are not adding enough iron, so they add more iron or CSM+B and create a cycle that perpetuates the problem.

In the photographs below you see signs of several deficiencies all at the same time, which is the hallmark of a micro toxicity (CSM+B toxicity). Ordinarily you cannot see more than 1 deficiency symptom in a tank at one time so seeing virtually all of them tells you that something other than a deficiency is going on -- a toxicity. In the images below thornomad was dosing over 1 ppm CSM+B, along with extra flourish iron, all the stuff that leached out of the soil and who knows how much more from the tap water.

Potassium deficiency - holes in lower leaves, iron deficiency - pale new growth.


Potassium deficiency, iron deficiency, and phosphorous deficiency - dying edges of the lower leaves.


Iron deficiency and nitrogen deficiency (deterioration of older HC leaves).

From: http://www.plantedtank.net/forums/sh...d.php?t=476929

I mean this information to be eye opening for people who may be seeing some of these issues, and for people to be aware of the potential risks of overdosing micros. Sometimes more is not better.

Please feel free to ask questions, comment or bring up alternate conclusions, lines of evidence, etc and I'll be more than happy to answer each of your replies.
Zapins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2013, 07:30 AM   #4
DarkCobra
Planted Tank Guru
 
DarkCobra's Avatar
 
PTrader: (5/100%)
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Posts: 3,349
Default

I have no argument with the basic premise.

I've been finding more and more evidence that moderation without limitation is beneficial. Both in my tanks and the reports of others. [Zapins], I only lurk on APC, but I frequently read your threads and think, "YES! Thank you for spreading some sanity." (Especially "CO2 Deficiency Definition Discussion". But I digress.)

I really don't see why some dose so much iron. If you have a deficiency, then adding more will improve your reds and plant health. If you do not, then adding more produces rapidly diminishing returns at best.

And I've done some tweaking of my own micros. Though it's really fumbling in the dark, and difficult to tell what the end result is. I wish I had access to a spectrophotometer.

But what's with the weird test results?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zapins View Post
To give you an idea of what I mean, I had my tank water and tap water analyzed my a spectrophotometer when I added different amounts of CSM+B until I got the following concentrations of iron 1.64 ppm, 1.75 and 5.99 ppm. Even at 1.64 ppm iron I had reached the toxicity threshold for both copper and zinc (along with several other micros), scroll over to the right in the window below to see the zinc values. Correspondingly, the plants showed toxicity symptoms and failed to grow normally despite all other factors being in the normal ranges.
So if you were varying CSM+B to see the result, then why is potassium also varying from 82.6ppm, to a massive 497ppm? I would not consider those "normal ranges". Even the lowest value of 82.6ppm is above what typical EI trends towards.

Granted, excess potassium typically appears to be well tolerated, but I'm not sure that high levels are totally without consequence. Some fairly credible posts on APC suggest that too. Your plants may have been subjected to multiple stresses during this test.

So I wouldn't take the results too literally in establishing a quantitative threshold for iron toxicity. But fortunately, there is no good reason to dose anywhere near this heavy in the first place. Toxicity is easily avoided.

The only time it's actually been necessary for me to heavily dose CSM+B is in low-light tanks with high pH tapwater and no CO2. It required 3X the amount of CSM+B that would be required for a high-light tank to prevent iron deficiency, due to the pH breaking the EDTA chelation. I later fixed this by adding a bit of Fe DTPA, and dropping CSM+B back down. Which doesn't address the other EDTA-chelated elements, but they didn't cause any noticeable issues.
DarkCobra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2013, 11:13 AM   #5
happi
Planted Tank Guru
 
happi's Avatar
 
PTrader: (20/100%)
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Posts: 2,766
Send a message via Yahoo to happi
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by plantbrain View Post
There's a few issues with this post:

1#, no ppm's or dosing rates listed, the information is almost entirely useless with out dosing rates.
2. CMS+B and DTPA Fe have a very long history. It's been extremely widely used for growing plants for a good 18 years along with everyone else that's been using CMS, why are you folks only discovering this now?
3. DTPA is the other chelators that is in Tropica master grow, also, a product that's been used widely for decades.

I have some pretty nice HC rugs over the years, I lard the stuff in there.
Why you have issues, that's up to you, but it's not solely due to CMS+B.
I've seen way too many tanks in the local SFBAAPS clubs who dose heavy on traces if nothing else.

It also will take a lot more that anything we might dose to impact the sulfur cycling plants.

I'd challenge you to provide any support in any research paper for that.
There's hardly any thing out there on growth and Fe chelates and aquatic submersed plants. Let alone Fe chelates and Sulfur.
Give some dosing data so folks can see if the observations, not just a few that happen to have some correlation, match the hypothesis.
i wanted Zapins to provide all the evidence you wanted to see and my tank never lied when all these issue occur right in front of my own eyes, i simply cannot ignore the fact when the outcome of overdosing the csm+b can be seen in my tank and the others.
__________________
happi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2013, 02:27 PM   #6
Zorfox
Wannabe Guru
 
Zorfox's Avatar
 
PTrader: (5/100%)
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Gainesville, FL
Posts: 1,506
Default

In regards to the spectrophotometer report, why are the ratios of nutrients so far off compared to what CSM provides?

Example,

Using a nutrient calculator, calculate for a 10 gallon tank. If I add 950mg of CSM the result would raise Fe to 1.64ppm and Zn 0.09ppm. In your report raising Fe with CSM to 1.64 also raises Zn to 0.4ppm? If I add 3,470mg CSM to bring Fe up to the maximum level listed, 5.99, the Zn is still only at 0.34. Where is all this zinc coming from? The same holds true for other nutrients in the list. The ratios simply donít add up if youíre only using CSM to raise these nutrients. I donít understand.
Zorfox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2013, 06:50 PM   #7
Zapins
Wannabe Guru
 
Zapins's Avatar
 
PTrader: (19/100%)
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Harrogate, TN
Posts: 1,679
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkCobra View Post
But what's with the weird test results?

So if you were varying CSM+B to see the result, then why is potassium also varying from 82.6ppm, to a massive 497ppm? I would not consider those "normal ranges". Even the lowest value of 82.6ppm is above what typical EI trends towards.
The test results were done many years ago when I was still under the impression that more was better and I was unaware of toxicities and deficiencies. I do admit I was a bit slap-happy when dosing ferts and would often eye-ball doses without using spoons or measuring equipment. Oh how far I have come haha. Though the potassium readings are quite high and I have often wondered if that contributed to my plant health issues at the time that isn't really the point of posting the results. Potassium isn't included in CSM+B so it does not detract from my main point that by adding too much CSM+B you quickly reach the recorded literature values for heavy metal plant toxicity.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkCobra View Post
Granted, excess potassium typically appears to be well tolerated, but I'm not sure that high levels are totally without consequence. Some fairly credible posts on APC suggest that too. Your plants may have been subjected to multiple stresses during this test.

So I wouldn't take the results too literally in establishing a quantitative threshold for iron toxicity. But fortunately, there is no good reason to dose anywhere near this heavy in the first place. Toxicity is easily avoided.
Definitely a good point, but I wasn't using the results to definitively prove a specific relationship between the plant damage I saw and an excess of one specific nutrient. The results I posted were meant to illustrate the point that adding CSM+B to give you 1+ ppm of iron also gets you to toxic heavy metal concentrations. I have no idea which nutrient in CSM+B specifically caused the issues with my plants at the time, that is something that needs to be tested in a separate set of tests. I'll be working on that soon.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkCobra View Post
The only time it's actually been necessary for me to heavily dose CSM+B is in low-light tanks with high pH tapwater and no CO2. It required 3X the amount of CSM+B that would be required for a high-light tank to prevent iron deficiency, due to the pH breaking the EDTA chelation. I later fixed this by adding a bit of Fe DTPA, and dropping CSM+B back down. Which doesn't address the other EDTA-chelated elements, but they didn't cause any noticeable issues.
Interesting observation. Iron can certainly be removed from the water in many ways, bacterial decomposition, reactions with other chemicals (particularly with H2S), light, and of course plant use. Iron remains pretty soluble even at alkaline pH so I'm not convinced that it was the pH degraded the iron itself in your tank. It could have been another one of the processes I mentioned above. In any event, it is good that you switched to dosing Fe DTPA instead of using CSM+B to increase iron levels. After all you didn't need all the extra micros, only iron.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zorfox View Post
In regards to the spectrophotometer report, why are the ratios of nutrients so far off compared to what CSM provides?

Example,

Using a nutrient calculator, calculate for a 10 gallon tank. If I add 950mg of CSM the result would raise Fe to 1.64ppm and Zn 0.09ppm. In your report raising Fe with CSM to 1.64 also raises Zn to 0.4ppm? If I add 3,470mg CSM to bring Fe up to the maximum level listed, 5.99, the Zn is still only at 0.34. Where is all this zinc coming from? The same holds true for other nutrients in the list. The ratios simply don’t add up if you’re only using CSM to raise these nutrients. I don’t understand.
I had wondered about that as well, and I believe that the differences are probably due to individual tank parameters. One of the tanks was a soil tank (the one with 5.99 ppm), so perhaps certain micros were sequestered by organic compounds in the tank, or perhaps the differences in the species of plants I had in each tank absorbed different amounts of each nutrient which is why all three tanks aren't linear.

If I had used distilled water and mixed different amounts of CSM+B in each sample I believe you'd see a consistent linear relationship between each nutrient. The results simply show that under actual aquarium conditions you can reach toxic micro levels by dosing CSM+B to get higher Fe levels despite having different tank parameters in each tank.

If you want to figure out how much Zn or Cu there is in relation to Fe you can refer to the published CSM+B % composition.

According to the CSM+B website:
Plantex CSM + B is composed of:
7.0% chelated iron,
2.0% manganese,
1.50% magnesium,
0.40% zinc,
0.10% chelated copper,
0.06% molybdenum,
0.04% boron.
From: http://www.aquariumfertilizer.com
Using the % listed above you could figure out exactly how much of any one of the other micros you are adding in relation to the ppm of iron added if you were interested. I don't think you really need to though, the overarching point I am making with these posts is that if you use CSM+B to increase your iron levels above about 1 ppm then you start to approach the toxicity levels for several of the other micro levels and this can result in damage to your plants.

If you want to add lots of iron you should use a separate iron source and dose it on its own. Don't use CSM+B to increase iron levels.
Zapins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2013, 07:00 PM   #8
DarkCobra
Planted Tank Guru
 
DarkCobra's Avatar
 
PTrader: (5/100%)
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Posts: 3,349
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zorfox View Post
Using a nutrient calculator, calculate for a 10 gallon tank. If I add 950mg of CSM the result would raise Fe to 1.64ppm and Zn 0.09ppm. In your report raising Fe with CSM to 1.64 also raises Zn to 0.4ppm? If I add 3,470mg CSM to bring Fe up to the maximum level listed, 5.99, the Zn is still only at 0.34. Where is all this zinc coming from? The same holds true for other nutrients in the list. The ratios simply don’t add up if you’re only using CSM to raise these nutrients. I don’t understand.
Unlike the potassium, I gave the benefit of doubt on discrepancies for smaller trace elements.

A spectrophotometer works by exciting the elements to produce light. There is some overlap in the resulting spectral peaks for various elements. When weak peaks are partially obscured by much stronger ones, it has to make some "guesses".

It's also possible the substrates in some of the tanks are buffering increases of some elements more than others via their CEC. [edit: which I now see Zapins already covered]

So the inconsistent trace levels really aren't anything unexpected or suspicious to me.
DarkCobra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2013, 07:10 PM   #9
Zapins
Wannabe Guru
 
Zapins's Avatar
 
PTrader: (19/100%)
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Harrogate, TN
Posts: 1,679
Default

A good summary of spectrophotometers DarkCobra. It sounds like you have a chemistry background?

I also wish I had my own personal spectrophotometer, but they are quite expensive especially when you add in all the reagents, and standards/calibration fluids.

Yes, the list of things that could affect the ratio of the elements in the readings is quite long, substrate type is certainly one of them, along with bacterial loads, filter capacity, use of charcoal or not, lighting type, etc...

The important thing to take away from the results is that in actual every day aquarium life you can reach toxic levels of some micros by dosing CSM+B to raise your iron levels above ~1 ppm.
Zapins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2013, 07:46 PM   #10
DarkCobra
Planted Tank Guru
 
DarkCobra's Avatar
 
PTrader: (5/100%)
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Posts: 3,349
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zapins View Post
A good summary of spectrophotometers DarkCobra. It sounds like you have a chemistry background?
Not really. I just learn what I need to satisfy my own curiosity, or perform whatever odd task comes my way. I work with metallurgists, and in a more primitive time, I was required to write software to pick optimal sets of "standards" (metal samples of known composition), used to recalibrate a spectrometer for most accurate results with certain classes of alloys. So I know a lot about them, despite never having used one, and not being a metallurgist myself.
DarkCobra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2013, 11:30 AM   #11
Jack Gilvey
Planted Tank Obsessed
 
Jack Gilvey's Avatar
 
PTrader: (0/0%)
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Jersey, USA
Posts: 435
Default

It seems good common sense not to overdose everything else in a trace mix just to get Fe high. I add DTPA Fe to my CSM+B and dose a bit of Fe gluc with my excel daily.
__________________
For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
-Carl Sagan
Jack Gilvey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2013, 04:25 PM   #12
Zorfox
Wannabe Guru
 
Zorfox's Avatar
 
PTrader: (5/100%)
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Gainesville, FL
Posts: 1,506
Default

Thanks for the excellent explanation on the spectrophotometer Darkcobra. It makes complete sense now. Although the more I thought about the large ratio difference the more I think it's due to plant uptake. Plants have a greater appetite for iron than zinc as far as I know. Seems the simplest answer, Occam's razor. lol

@Zapin

I read several of the threads at APC. Using iron to kill algae is an interesting idea in the planted tank arena. Iron currently is considered an algaecide as is copper in other water management areas. I wonder what the minimum effective differences are between the plants and algae we grow.

Where did you see that unchealted iron is toxic at 1.1 ppm? Thatís a realistic iron level in many planted tanks without problems. However, iron toxicity is plant/algae specific.

Here are a couple of papers you might like.

DETOXIFYING TOXICANTS: INTERACTIONS BETWEEN SULFIDE AND IRON
TOXICITY IN FRESHWATER WETLANDS


The effect of iron addition on macrophytes

I think the zinc issue may be a result of irregular water changes. The ratio between zinc and iron in Plantex is such that iron would become toxic, based on your experience, before zinc. In the EI method water changes are a basic part of providing non limiting nutrients. It appeared to me that Calvinís problems resolved with water changes only to return without. I do however agree that using Plantex alone to increase iron levels far above target ranges could be detrimental.
Zorfox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2013, 07:07 PM   #13
DarkCobra
Planted Tank Guru
 
DarkCobra's Avatar
 
PTrader: (5/100%)
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Posts: 3,349
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zorfox View Post
It appeared to me that Calvinís problems resolved with water changes only to return without.
Water changes seem to be a good all-purpose test for toxicity. The last time I had a major issue, it was slow plant growth and rampant GSA/GDA. Little success solving it until I stepped up 50% water changes from once to twice weekly, and all problems went away.

Then it was just a matter of figuring out why, and of course I had to waste time "larding it on". Increasing CSM+B to replace whatever mystery trace the tapwater was supposedly replacing. Adding more macros. More GH Booster. Increasing CO2 past 30ppm because huge amounts of CO2 in the tapwater were supposedly responsible, even though it was undetectable with a pH test, and must be in the form of magical unicorn farts instead.

Finally I broke out some real tests and found NO3=100 and PO4=30, due to EI dosing on top of a heavy fish load. I couldn't believe it. To verify, I actually started weighing my fish food with a gram scale, calculated the N and P contribution and converted to NO3/PO4 equivalents, ran it all through Wet's calculator with some best-guess plant consumptions - and tank levels trended to the same values. So I stopped dosing N/P, returned all other dosages to normal, and again all problems went away.

Since then it's been pretty smooth sailing. I keep trimming back what is grossly unnecessary, while still leaving a decent margin to avoid deficiency. Including iron, which went on the chopping block again recently. My plants keep looking better, and tanks more stable.
DarkCobra is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:41 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Planted Tank LLC 2012