The Custom Micro Mix Thread - Page 4 - The Planted Tank Forum
 1876Likes
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #46 of 1426 (permalink) Old 12-18-2017, 07:16 PM
Planted Tank Guru
 
happi's Avatar
 
PTrader: (21/100%)
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Posts: 3,143
Send a message via Yahoo to happi
Quote:
Originally Posted by dukydaf View Post
Great to see that the majority of the experienced people in the hobby realized that micros are needed and not the devil. You still see questions pop up here and there of something having read the old posts. Just like they do with Ca deficiency, Ca:Mg ration, K toxicity, PO4=algae etc.

But why did the whole thing happened. Well the need to blame something other than ourselves is one. The other is random observations, no matter how honest should not be regarded as strong evidence for anything. I hope that people that wasted a year or so in struggling with low micros will be able to learn from this. It is also good that we tried a new thing, and now we know better how micronutrient deficiency looks like.



Maybe. The question is why? What other factors make the data not applicable ... see, now the fun stuff starts to happen.




I have to say I am puzzled by your decision not to share due to fear of people making money, with all due respect to your knowledge and contribution. Knowledge is useless if not put into practice. It is great that you invest time and effort into developing a perfect nutritional plan. And I respect that you do not want to share that knowledge for some sort of monetary gain. This is after all capitalism. So make a bottle and sell it. I would like to test your formulas. Tropica did this, Aqua Rebell (Tobias) did this etc.

Don't want to get commercial, that is also fine. Share it so the hobby can benefit just like it benefited from PMDD, PPS, EI etc. There are some like NilocG that sell the ready made mixed. People pay money for convenience and ease of use. I don't really find fault in that.

What if Burr or countless others were to say, we do not post photos of our plants or journals because we are afraid people will learn from us , our experience and mistakes and make money or win competitions ahead of us.

If people make money by growing healthy plants I think this hobby won something.
i guess people did not understand what i meant, but anyways i dont mind sharing everything that i know, i have even shared the thread where i have posted something, i will post more when i have time. but like i said the recipe i use are similar to TPN
dukydaf, dukydaf, Greggz and 1 others like this.

DIY Trace/Micro/Macro Recipe
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


DIY Trace/Micro/Calculation Etc
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
happi is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #47 of 1426 (permalink) Old 12-18-2017, 08:18 PM
Wannabe Guru
 
dukydaf's Avatar
 
PTrader: (0/0%)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Rome
Posts: 1,273
Quote:
Originally Posted by happi View Post
i guess people did not understand what i meant, but anyways i dont mind sharing everything that i know, i have even shared the thread where i have posted something, i will post more when i have time. but like i said the recipe i use are similar to TPN
It can happen often with communication in written form unfortunately. I for one am glad to hear your clarification. I am looking forward to read your recent experience and see some more photos.

Until now I can only say that providing enough micros allowed unstunted growth of r. wallichii, whereas lack of micros in dosing resulted in the classical stunning. This is of course in high intensity aquariums. In low intensity ones what little comes with tap is enough. So quite the opposite behavior as reported by some.
Greggz and Greggz like this.

On hiatus till later this year
dukydaf is offline  
post #48 of 1426 (permalink) Old 12-18-2017, 09:05 PM
Planted Tank Obsessed
 
slipfinger's Avatar
 
PTrader: (0/0%)
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Burlington, Ontario Canada
Posts: 423
Can you guys list which substrate you used during your testing/experiments? @dukydaf @happi
Greggz and Greggz like this.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
slipfinger is offline  
 
post #49 of 1426 (permalink) Old 12-18-2017, 09:05 PM
Wannabe Guru
 
Edward's Avatar
 
PTrader: (0/0%)
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: at home
Posts: 1,383
Quote:
Originally Posted by burr740 View Post
when edta breaks loose from the original compound there are a couple of potential issues:

One is all that edta is now free to bind with other stuff. In addition to other micro elements it has a high affinity for ca, and other things too but im not sure exactly what all else. This additional binding may or may not be a problem.

Edta is also not biodegradable. It just sticks around building up like the macros we add, only removed by water changes.

The other potential issue, and perhaps the most significant, when the chelate breaks loose fe is in whatever raw state it was in before. At the very least precipitating out, and almost certainly binding with p and who knows what else
Hi
Since you mentioned EDTA biodegradability and remobilization;

Is EDTA biodegradable in the environment?

Yes, but slowly. EDTA is eliminated from the environment by biological and non-biological pathways.
Furthermore, in biological tests it can be demonstrated that EDTA is slowly biodegradable under aerobic conditions. However, the rate of biodegradation may vary strongly with the bacterial population present in the particular ecosystem.
EDTA, especially in the form of the EDTA-iron-chelate, is readily decomposed on exposure to sunlight and yields biodegradable products.
Both biodegradation and non-biological degradation ensure that EDTA does not persist in the environment.”

Does EDTA remobilize heavy metals in the environment?

No scientific evidence has been presented to date that the actual levels of EDTA in aqueous environment cause remobilization of heavy metals. Latest findings show that remobilization of heavy metals (zinc, nickel, copper) out of the sediments of river does not occur as long as the equivalent concentration of EDTA is below that of the heavy metals in solution. If we consider the usual concentrations of heavy metals in river waters, no remobilization would be expected to occur at the currently observed EDTA levels.”


Reference
http://www.cefic.org/Documents/Other...ch_EDTA_03.pdf
EDTA: the chelating agent under environmental scrutiny
happi, happi, burr740 and 3 others like this.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Last edited by Edward; 12-18-2017 at 10:20 PM. Reason: .
Edward is offline  
post #50 of 1426 (permalink) Old 12-18-2017, 09:14 PM
Captain
 
Immortal1's Avatar
 
PTrader: (1/100%)
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Iowa
Posts: 3,528
@Greggz - "And I can already see we need to add a field for the username and date. I can see myself wanting to save these spreadsheets for reference. "

Was thinking the same thing. Just printed Burr's out and realized I needed to hand write his name on it :-)


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
- GreggZ Tank Parameters
Immortal1 is offline  
post #51 of 1426 (permalink) Old 12-18-2017, 09:21 PM
Planted Tanker
 
burr740's Avatar
 
PTrader: (132/100%)
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Bama
Posts: 5,919
Quote:
Originally Posted by happi View Post
yes i understand what this thread is about and appreciate your and others effort, my goals are slightly different than your but if we could come up with better mix that is useful for everyone, then we are on the good journey here. Marcel data is quite interesting as we work closely sometime, am not going to say that we got 100% results but we were not that far from obtaining good results. in my own observation like i said before it would be almost impossible to make exact ratio for everyone to use unless they use pure RO water, water with 30 ppm Ca vs 10 ppm Ca might have different results using the same recipe for example. edta/dtpa isnt bad as you guys think, i understand its availability is bit slow, but its much safer than non chleated, i was able to melt my Tonnina plant simply by adding Znso4 and Boric acid individually, certain plant that looked Zn and B deficient did not recover simply by adding these two, they only recovered once i used the decent ratio and added all the other elements as well, this is clearly shown that ratio plays an very important role. the only thing i fear is buildup of certain things such as Boron if plant use all the other elements and some will get oxidized, as far as i know Boron doesn't oxidized. the reason i asked to show lower part of plants is that people are good at hiding it and only focus on what looks good on the top, normal healthy plant should look good from top to bottom, bottom part becoming deficient indicate something is either not available to plants or toxicity if you believe in that one.
The thing about ratios is it depends entirely on whats available to the plants, not what the mix contains.

For example using an edta based product in a high PH. Fe may quickly become unavailable while everything else stays intact. So much for the ratio...

Or with non-chelated compounds say the Zn is gone in a couple hours and some other stuff lasts a whole day. Whats the ratio now?

I suspect this is why Seachenm uses so much Zn (see my first post itt). Not because 10:1 Zn:B or 2:1 Zn:Mn is some magical ratio, but to compensate for the fact that Zn doesnt stick around very long.

In my opinion this is the problem when you derive optimum ratios based on tissue analysis of what inside the plants, which Marschner did, and what Marcel's latest is based on. It assumes everything is/remains available at the same concentrations being added in the first place, which as far as aquariums go is rarely is the case. Marcel is probably pulling it off with 247 CO2 and meticulously reconstituted RO water. But the avg aquarium just doesnt work like that.


Quote:
Originally Posted by happi View Post
i guess i can give your recipe a try, if it could help my rotala wallachi, then this will be considered very good recipe. is there anything you want to change to the current recipe that you think might be working even better? i could try that one instead. and i will try to post some pics for you guys when i have more time about my own experiments.
Ideally I'd say Fe could probably be dropped to 200 ppb, B down around 25-30 (if you're using H3BO3, Borax can stand a little higher) add 10 or 20 ppb more Zn. Ive gone as high as 120 ppb every two days with no ill effects. Speculation obviously, call it an educated hunch these amounts might work a little better.

Also if you've been using EDTA based Fe, be sure to do a couple large back to back water changed before starting the non-chelated stuff. You'll want to get as much EDTA out of the system as possible first. Otherwise the initial results will be skewed, could take a few weeks to see what's really going to happen

Walichii in the 50gal taken just now. Not perfect but doing fairly well using the current recipe



Greggz, Greggz, fablau and 7 others like this.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.





Last edited by burr740; 12-18-2017 at 09:41 PM. Reason: .
burr740 is online now  
post #52 of 1426 (permalink) Old 12-18-2017, 09:26 PM
Algae Grower
 
PTrader: (0/0%)
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by burr740 View Post
In my opinion this is the problem when you derive optimum ratios based on tissue analysis of what inside the plants, which Marschner did, and what Marcel's latest is based on. It assumes everything is/remains available at the same concentrations being added, which as far as aquariums go is rarely is the case.
Another problem is, I have seen several papers in which you could see the content of the elements in the dry plant mass varied with the composition of the water from which it was harvested. Taking this into consideration, it's nearly impossible to use dry plant mass contents for developing a magical ratio.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edward View Post
Since you mentioned EDTA biodegradability and remobilization;
http://www.cefic.org/Documents/Other...ch_EDTA_03.pdf
EDTA: the chelating agent under environmental scrutiny
"These studies show that the formation of the chelate-metal coordination compound, achieves a decrease in the toxicity of free heavy metals. On the contrary Guilhermino et al. found that Cd(II)-EDTA and Cu(II)-EDTA complexes were more toxic than their respective free metals in acute toxicity test in Daphnia magna."
burr740, burr740, zervan and 1 others like this.

Last edited by acino; 12-18-2017 at 10:32 PM. Reason: stuff
acino is offline  
post #53 of 1426 (permalink) Old 12-18-2017, 09:41 PM
Planted Tank Guru
 
Axelrodi202's Avatar
 
PTrader: (37/100%)
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Morris County, NJ
Posts: 3,328
@burr740: What spurred you to increase your Fe dose in subsequent versions, and to use DTPA form vs something like gluconate? Do you not have similar concerns with DTPA as you do with EDTA?


I will not post my full recipe, but I will say I do have tangerine tiger shrimp breeding with the following levels dosed daily (though split into 8 doses via autodoser over the photoperiod).

.015 ppm B
0.004 ppm Cu
0.013 ppm Zn

0.004 ppm Cu approaches toxic ranges for inverts based on papers studying Daphnia, but by splitting the dose so much during the day the acute concentration at any one time is limited.

I would love to hear from others breeding shrimp in tanks with higher micro doses. Shrimp toxicity, not plant toxicity, is what has me wary of using higher levels.
fablau and fablau like this.

O_o
/ /_______________________________
| BWAAAH IMA FIRIHN MA LAZER!!!!!!!!!
\_\
Axelrodi202 is offline  
post #54 of 1426 (permalink) Old 12-18-2017, 10:29 PM
Planted Tanker
 
burr740's Avatar
 
PTrader: (132/100%)
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Bama
Posts: 5,919
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greggz View Post
Burr I am really enjoying this thread if nothing else just to see information like this. It's really, really interesting stuff.

So it looks like you are dosing a little less than EI for N, and a little more than EI for P. Then you add what appears to be a very small amount of Urea.

So the N:P ratio for dosing EI is about 6:1, you are at about 3.5:1, and I am am closer to 2.5:1. You have giving me food for thought. I have been dosing EI level of N, and elevated P, which seems to work best for me. I am going to try reducing both but keeping the same ratio and see if there is any difference.

And I can already see we need to add a field for the username and date. I can see myself wanting to save these spreadsheets for reference.
I was actually dosing 2 ppm of P for a while. I dropped it a little when I started adding gluc to the mix. It probably didnt make much difference but you really dont want a lot of excess P along with precipitating Fe

NO3 is actually close to EI (7.5) counting the urea. .3 ppm from urea is roughly equal to 1.3 ppm NO3 (I'd have to look up the exact formula, the multiplier is 4.1 or 4.4 something I believe) So an additional 1.3 ppm daily, or 9 ppm per week.

I add the urea to both macros and micros to eliminate having a third bottle to fool with.

Yeah a couple more fields would be handy. Maybe something at the bottom to list other known compounds in the water for folks using tap, Ca, Mg, S, Na and Cl, or anything else that might be relevant.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edward View Post
Hi
Since you mentioned EDTA biodegradability and remobilization;

“Is EDTA biodegradable in the environment?

Yes, but slowly. EDTA is eliminated from the environment by biological and non-biological pathways.
Furthermore, in biological tests it can be demonstrated that EDTA is slowly biodegradable under aerobic conditions. However, the rate of biodegradation may vary strongly with the bacterial population present in the particular ecosystem.
EDTA, especially in the form of the EDTA-iron-chelate, is readily decomposed on exposure to sunlight and yields biodegradable products.
Both biodegradation and non-biological degradation ensure that EDTA does not persist in the environment.”

“Does EDTA remobilize heavy metals in the environment?

No scientific evidence has been presented to date that the actual levels of EDTA in aqueous environment cause remobilization of heavy metals. Latest findings show that remobilization of heavy metals (zinc, nickel, copper) out of the sediments of river does not occur as long as the equivalent concentration of EDTA is below that of the heavy metals in solution. If we consider the usual concentrations of heavy metals in river waters, no remobilization would be expected to occur at the currently observed EDTA levels.”

Reference
http://www.cefic.org/Documents/Other...ch_EDTA_03.pdf
EDTA: the chelating agent under environmental scrutiny
Yep. I didnt want to get into all that but it's one more reason why csmb might be utter garbage.

I wonder if free edta would be more toxic than if its bound to something?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Axelrodi202 View Post
@burr740: What spurred you to increase your Fe dose in subsequent versions, and to use DTPA form vs something like gluconate? Do you not have similar concerns with DTPA as you do with EDTA?
.
Because more Fe seemed to be needed. And I have given gluconate several tries, both by itself and with dtpa. It doesnt work very well in my parameters. There's some further discussion about this in the last couple pages of my journal if anyone cares to look, and more in the journal on Barr Report https://barrreport.com/threads/120-g....14072/page-33


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.





Last edited by burr740; 12-19-2017 at 11:02 AM. Reason: .
burr740 is online now  
post #55 of 1426 (permalink) Old 12-18-2017, 10:33 PM
Planted Tank Guru
 
Chlorophile's Avatar
 
PTrader: (6/100%)
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: State of Emergency
Posts: 2,060
I'm also on Burr's mix, have noticed some nice improvements in Rotala Green, its very bushy and lovely now. My AR Mini is also improving in texture and leaf size.


Glad this topic is coming up cause I was wondering how one might go about increasing the dosing if its needed?
I believe my mix was... 8.1? I forgot unfortunately.
But my new growth on Blyxa is very pale and my Ludwigia(not sure what kind) Is staying kinda yellowy and I can't get it back to the copper/red I had before.


Also of note, my water has been cloudy ever since I made the switch, I wonder if my Iron is precipitating out heavily?
Greggz, Greggz, burr740 and 1 others like this.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Chlorophile is offline  
post #56 of 1426 (permalink) Old 12-18-2017, 10:51 PM
Planted Tanker
 
burr740's Avatar
 
PTrader: (132/100%)
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Bama
Posts: 5,919
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chlorophile View Post

Also of note, my water has been cloudy ever since I made the switch, I wonder if my Iron is precipitating out heavily?
We made yours with some added gluconate, right? if your PH is much over 6.5 or say mid to upper 7s, the gluconate could be clouding the water as it precipitates (doesnt happen for everyone). It will be a distinct milky white cloudiness, not a green tint or dirty looking.

You could also be having a mild bacterial bloom if you disturbed the substrate much without doing a water change right after.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.




burr740 is online now  
post #57 of 1426 (permalink) Old 12-18-2017, 11:05 PM
Planted Tank Guru
 
Axelrodi202's Avatar
 
PTrader: (37/100%)
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Morris County, NJ
Posts: 3,328
@burr740 :

Thanks for sharing that Barr report link. Very interesting experience! Of course Fe and Mn are always hard to tease apart. But it does seem the 2:1 ratio is very common in various methods, from Marschner to Hoagland to NASA's recipe for growing plants in space.

A couple more questions:

1. What are your thoughts on using DTPA? As problematic as EDTA? Less so? Entirely benign?
2. Have you tested your water column PO4 levels?


In the past I noticed my plants did well with 0.5-1 ppm PO4 in the water, as tested by the Salifert kit. Lately I have not been able to get it above 0.3 or 0.4 ppm, despite dosing ~2 ppm daily. I space it 2 hours away from Fe dosing. ADA had a chart showing Fe2+ was mostly taken up within two hours. So I question if my plants are uptaking super high amounts, if my ADA Amazonia (1.5 years old) is suddenly binding it all despite having had higher water column levels in the past, or if it is precipitating metals.
Greggz and Greggz like this.

O_o
/ /_______________________________
| BWAAAH IMA FIRIHN MA LAZER!!!!!!!!!
\_\
Axelrodi202 is offline  
post #58 of 1426 (permalink) Old 12-18-2017, 11:19 PM
Planted Tank Guru
 
Chlorophile's Avatar
 
PTrader: (6/100%)
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: State of Emergency
Posts: 2,060
Quote:
Originally Posted by burr740 View Post
We made yours with some added gluconate, right? if your PH is much over 6.5 or say mid to upper 7s, the gluconate could be clouding the water as it precipitates (doesnt happen for everyone). It will be a distinct milky white cloudiness, not a green tint or dirty looking.

You could also be having a mild bacterial bloom if you disturbed the substrate much without doing a water change right after.

Hmm not sure if it had extra.
"Fe DTPA - .2 ppm
Fe Gluc - .1 ppm
Mn - .09 ppm
B - .035 ppm
Zn - .05 ppm
Mo - .0019 ppm
Cu - .0023 ppm"

Its definitely a white cloudiness, if you stare into the outflow with it right under the light you can kind of see like microscopic glitter like particles swirling around in the water with a white tint.

I've been having my co2 come on at 9AM and Lights at 1PM and by the time the light comes on my drop checker is yellow-amber... The Rummynose Tetras actually all swim at the substrate for a little bit, Cardinals apparently don't care about co2 at all because they dont ever act different or even seem to be short of breath (Maybe since they're used to lower o2 from being from warm waters) So I would assume my pH is low.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Chlorophile is offline  
post #59 of 1426 (permalink) Old 12-19-2017, 12:29 AM
Planted Tank Guru
 
happi's Avatar
 
PTrader: (21/100%)
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Posts: 3,143
Send a message via Yahoo to happi
@burr740 maybe i did not explain it correctly, ratio does matter especially while using EDTA/DTPA, with non chleated there will be precipitation and oxidization which can definitely result in lack of something, so adding little more Zn, B, Mn wont hurt much, i personally do believe in ratio to be important, otherwise we could just add 1 ppm of Fe, Mn, B, Zn, Cu etc and call it good and repeat the same. what you are doing today with Non cheleated nutrinets, i have already done it few years back and i have said that non cheleated will always produce a better results no matter what. but my main focus was exactly try to find the balanced ratio that plant use while eliminating many water changes to reset the nutrients again, for example if plant will only use 1 ppm, my goal was to provide 1.1 ppm, not 2 ppm. since non chleated produced better results, i moved forward to focus based on edta/dtpa chleated just to see if i could recreate the same results and i always got different results with different ratios, sometime good and sometime bad, but it was way more challenging working with edta trace vs non cheleated one. that link i posted to my thread, used TPN based ratio but i used Fedtpa and rest so4 based traces and results looks good on certain plants and tank looks clear as well, but there were still some flaws as you can see in the pics, but i did not dose very often, maybe thats where the problem was. i will now try your recipe, i hope i did not say too much and i hope tpt will allow me to post many pics as possible, because i have tons. i dont want to hijack the thread either, so i will save some pics to post it on new thread.

water paramaeter: 100% RO water, Old Aqua soil, ATI 6x 39w
pic #1, used TPN ratio, Fe DTPA, Traces from so4 based chemicals
pic #2 Marchner ratio, no soil/substrate, 100% RO water used, EDTA/DTPA Based Trace/Fe, Used high amount of NH4, resulting in green algae.
pic #3 results one week later after dosing one dose of Marchner ratio
pic #4 Tonnina Lotus, EDTA/DTPA Fe/Trace, additional Zn dose was added through ZnSo4, resulting in damage to lower part of the plant and eventually killing the plant further.
Pic #5 Microplex Miller was used, 0.05-0.1 ppm Fe proxy daily, only HC look decent, other plant grew weired. Urea was main source of N.
Pic #6 EDTA/DTPA based Fe/trace, this plant would grow normal and sometime grew weired
pic #7 same plant look decent with same dose which was TPN based
Pic #8 Rotala plant lower leaves damaged, half of upper growth appeared to look very good after 80% water change and eventually decline after day or 2 with or without dosing anything. No its not Co2 from changed water
Pic #9 single dose of 2 N resulted in following leaves on same day of dosing, these sympthoms also appeared from time to time on other similar rotola sp. as well.
Pic #10 rotala walachii, dtpa/edta based fe/traces and this plant wouldnt recover no matter if i dose more traces/fe
Pic #11 excess NH4 damage to leaves, at 2 ppm NH4 in single dose
pic #12 rotala wallachii sudently grew normal leaves on the very next day after 80% water change and eventually decline just like the other rotala. again its not due to co2 from changed water.

Bump:

Bump:
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	19866788_10154915274543666_1507416570_o.jpg
Views:	104
Size:	120.7 KB
ID:	812130  

Click image for larger version

Name:	20931096_10155029189418666_842237647_o.jpg
Views:	113
Size:	98.4 KB
ID:	812138  

Click image for larger version

Name:	21081885_10155047499493666_1397040700_o.jpg
Views:	97
Size:	85.9 KB
ID:	812146  

Click image for larger version

Name:	20526656_10154984324668666_1506849174_n.jpg
Views:	107
Size:	46.1 KB
ID:	812154  

Click image for larger version

Name:	22345463_10155165025938666_1030188290_o.jpg
Views:	99
Size:	134.0 KB
ID:	812162  

Click image for larger version

Name:	24956917_10155318015648666_1327445598_o.jpg
Views:	99
Size:	157.2 KB
ID:	812170  

Click image for larger version

Name:	24250828_10155300010373666_1760821385_o.jpg
Views:	99
Size:	98.1 KB
ID:	812178  

Click image for larger version

Name:	23874347_10155279102938666_1161370748_o.jpg
Views:	98
Size:	112.2 KB
ID:	812186  

Click image for larger version

Name:	23232144_10155239190763666_225506937_n.jpg
Views:	99
Size:	43.2 KB
ID:	812194  

Click image for larger version

Name:	24740426_10155318013413666_127129847_n.jpg
Views:	117
Size:	69.3 KB
ID:	812202  

Click image for larger version

Name:	25397878_10155335520193666_1504170257_o.jpg
Views:	115
Size:	74.7 KB
ID:	812210  

Click image for larger version

Name:	25394393_10155340729963666_936594735_n.jpg
Views:	135
Size:	54.3 KB
ID:	812218  

Greggz, Greggz, rzn7z7 and 7 others like this.

DIY Trace/Micro/Macro Recipe
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


DIY Trace/Micro/Calculation Etc
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
happi is offline  
post #60 of 1426 (permalink) Old 12-19-2017, 01:24 AM
Planted Tanker
 
burr740's Avatar
 
PTrader: (132/100%)
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Bama
Posts: 5,919
Quote:
Originally Posted by Axelrodi202 View Post
@burr740 :

Thanks for sharing that Barr report link. Very interesting experience! Of course Fe and Mn are always hard to tease apart. But it does seem the 2:1 ratio is very common in various methods, from Marschner to Hoagland to NASA's recipe for growing plants in space.

A couple more questions:

1. What are your thoughts on using DTPA? As problematic as EDTA? Less so? Entirely benign?
2. Have you tested your water column PO4 levels?
1. DTPA has a higher PH tolerance than EDTA, 7.5 vs 6.5. That is the benefit for PH levels much over 6.5, you dont get all that raw and free chelate. I believe it is also somewhat more biodegradable than EDTA

2. Stays in the 5-10 ppm range. No idea why macros disappear in your tanks like that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chlorophile View Post
Hmm not sure if it had extra.
"Fe DTPA - .2 ppm
Fe Gluc - .1 ppm
Mn - .09 ppm
B - .035 ppm
Zn - .05 ppm
Mo - .0019 ppm
Cu - .0023 ppm"

Its definitely a white cloudiness, if you stare into the outflow with it right under the light you can kind of see like microscopic glitter like particles swirling around in the water with a white tint.

I've been having my co2 come on at 9AM and Lights at 1PM and by the time the light comes on my drop checker is yellow-amber... The Rummynose Tetras actually all swim at the substrate for a little bit, Cardinals apparently don't care about co2 at all because they dont ever act different or even seem to be short of breath (Maybe since they're used to lower o2 from being from warm waters) So I would assume my pH is low.
Yeah by "added" I meant any. That mix would be better off with no gluc at all.

See if you can find our PM convo with all the back story and send it to me. It's buried several pages back in mine by now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dukydaf View Post
Maybe. The question is why? What other factors make the data not applicable ... see, now the fun stuff starts to happen.
Put in context the question was why Marcel's dosing may not translate well. (it doesnt from my own experience and also user Pikez on BR)

If I had to guess, possibly for a couple of reasons.

1. What I said earlier about the difference between the ratios we mix up and what's actually available to plants due to various reasons. He's running 247/co2 with a nice low PH that never changes. He uses RO water that is meticulously reconstituted including precise levels of things like Na, Cl, S etc.

Hard for the average aquarist to pull that off.

2. Concentration affecting absorption? His tanks are small with just a handful of stems growing in each one. 5-10 ppm NO3 per week might be enough for that.

But take my 120 for example. In reality it may only consume 2-3 ppm NO3 per day. But that doesnt mean it can operate with only that much in the water column. Not even close, it needs more like 30-40 or things go south in a hurry. Apparently, having 30-40 makes it easier for plants to get their 2-3.

Speculation obviously.
Greggz and Greggz like this.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.





Last edited by burr740; 12-19-2017 at 01:40 AM. Reason: .
burr740 is online now  
Reply

Tags
None

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the The Planted Tank Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may 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
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome