Toxicity of CSM+B - Page 2 - The Planted Tank Forum
 151Likes
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #16 of 203 (permalink) Old 11-25-2015, 01:51 PM
Planted Tank Obsessed
 
PTrader: (3/100%)
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Florida
Posts: 315
I think there is a significant amount of people out there who are experiencing issues with this and do not recognize it. They either think of that's how the plant is supposed to grow or blame some other issue. Try stopping dosing and do a few water changes and see how the plants react. Depending on your substrate there could be a large amount of traces that have been absorbed.
bcarl_10gal is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #17 of 203 (permalink) Old 07-19-2016, 02:24 AM
Algae Grower
 
PTrader: (0/0%)
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: South Korea
Posts: 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by bcarl_10gal View Post
I think there is a significant amount of people out there who are experiencing issues with this and do not recognize it. They either think of that's how the plant is supposed to grow or blame some other issue. Try stopping dosing and do a few water changes and see how the plants react. Depending on your substrate there could be a large amount of traces that have been absorbed.
​​
I have been literally reading all the posts regarding CSM+B toxicity over the last few days and I am also experiencing similar problems.

I have been dosing full EI since setup with ADA AS, and seems like the toxicity is still there despite the fact that I have stopped dosing micros.

Read that substrate like ADA AS could have absorbed a lot of the nutrients thus it might be leaching back into the water column.

Let's assume someone like me made the mistake of over-dosing micros...what do you guys suggest we do to resolve the problem?

Continuous water changes? Should we dial back on the other macros as well or just continue with the normal dose?
Soulstar is offline  
post #18 of 203 (permalink) Old 07-19-2016, 03:25 AM
Banned
 
PTrader: (15/100%)
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 3,261
Replace the substrate; the substrate is probably toxic.
Or soak the substrate in a strong HCl acid solution which will replace the metals with H+. Then rinse the substrate to remove the metals from the solution. This method is not practical on clay substrates since the clay will disentigrate.
Solcielo lawrencia is offline  
 
post #19 of 203 (permalink) Old 07-19-2016, 05:05 AM
Algae Grower
 
PTrader: (0/0%)
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: South Korea
Posts: 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by Solcielo lawrencia View Post
Replace the substrate; the substrate is probably toxic.
Or soak the substrate in a strong HCl acid solution which will replace the metals with H+. Then rinse the substrate to remove the metals from the solution. This method is not practical on clay substrates since the clay will disentigrate.
Wow serious? No way the toxins will be released over time and I can slowly decrease the levels?

Quite shocking since I just set up my tanks 3 months ago..
Soulstar is offline  
post #20 of 203 (permalink) Old 07-19-2016, 05:40 AM
Planted Tanker
 
burr740's Avatar
 
PTrader: (125/100%)
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Bama
Posts: 5,684
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulstar View Post
Wow serious? No way the toxins will be released over time and I can slowly decrease the levels?

Quite shocking since I just set up my tanks 3 months ago..
I dont think there's a need to anything that drastic with such a new tank. What I would do is a couple back to back 70-80% water changes two days in a row, with no dosing in between. This will help reset the nutrient levels in the water column.

Then skip micros for a week, maybe two. (Keep dosing macros as usual) If you have a legit toxicity...there should be an immediate improvement after just a few days.

Then after a week or so you can start back csmb at reduced levels. I would recommend somewhere between .01-.05 ppm using Fe as the proxy nutrient.

It is common for people to see an immediate improvement, followed by a severe downturn as deficiencies set in, usually it's Fe that becomes the nutrient in short supply. Watch closely for signs of Fe deficiency, and be prepared to add additional Fe by itself so it doesnt all have to come from csmb.

With new aquasoil, you may find that you dont even need to dose micros for a while, or that you need very very little. But you'll almost certainly need some Fe.


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




burr740 is offline  
post #21 of 203 (permalink) Old 07-19-2016, 05:55 AM
Algae Grower
 
PTrader: (0/0%)
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: South Korea
Posts: 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by burr740 View Post
I dont think there's a need to anything that drastic with such a new tank. What I would do is a couple back to back 70-80% water changes two days in a row, with no dosing in between. This will help reset the nutrient levels in the water column.

Then skip micros for a week, maybe two. (Keep dosing macros as usual) If you have a legit toxicity...there should be an immediate improvement after just a few days.

Then after a week or so you can start back csmb at reduced levels. I would recommend somewhere between .01-.05 ppm using Fe as the proxy nutrient.

It is common for people to see an immediate improvement, followed by a severe downturn as deficiencies set in, usually it's Fe that becomes the nutrient in short supply. Watch closely for signs of Fe deficiency, and be prepared to add additional Fe by itself so it doesnt all have to come from csmb.

With new aquasoil, you may find that you dont even need to dose micros for a while, or that you need very very little. But you'll almost certainly need some Fe.
Hi Burr40,

Thank you for your thorough response.

You are right, i started seeing immediate improvements followed by another downturn, which is why i suspect the micros are being released back into the water.

Anyways I will do as you suggested and see how it goes. Thanks again for your help!

Sent from my SM-N910S using Tapatalk
Soulstar is offline  
post #22 of 203 (permalink) Old 07-19-2016, 06:16 AM
Planted Tanker
 
burr740's Avatar
 
PTrader: (125/100%)
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Bama
Posts: 5,684
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulstar View Post
You are right, i started seeing immediate improvements followed by another downturn, which is why i suspect the micros are being released back into the water.
Could be that, but imo it's more likely that you now have a Fe deficiency after cutting csmb down so much. That's what I was getting at above, to watch the plants for signs of Fe deficiency. Which unfortunately can look eerily similar to toxicity symptoms, so it can be hard to tell sometimes.


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




burr740 is offline  
post #23 of 203 (permalink) Old 07-19-2016, 06:54 AM
Banned
 
PTrader: (15/100%)
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 3,261
Some people report good growth with AS dosing EI levels of CSM but 6 months in, once the adsorption capacity has been reached, tox starts. The time before tox varies, some report up to a year, which gives people the false sense that EI is safe and causes no issues. It really depends on what you consider an EI dose. Is it 0.2mg/L of Fe as proxy or is it 0.5mg/L? Either is beyond excessive as submerged aquatic plants can't use that much. Regardless, AS should allow you to not dose trace elements for quite some time.

That downturn after ceasing traces is not a genuine deficiency even if it appears like it must be. Also, the importance of iron is way overstated and misunderstood to the point of ludicrous dosing of iron. I currently do not recommend CSM or any other comprehensive trace fertilizer until the nutrient ratios are determined through trial and error experimentation and tested across a multitude of species. Almost everything most people believe are wrong and unsupported in the scientific literature (e.g. EI, CO2, light, fertilization, toxicity and deficiency, etc.), even if some literature appears to support these ideas. A scientist never considers the conclusions of one paper in a vacuum; it's always considered in context of the body of research which can help explain why certain things happen.
Solcielo lawrencia is offline  
post #24 of 203 (permalink) Old 07-19-2016, 03:23 PM
OVT
Carpe Diem
 
OVT's Avatar
 
PTrader: (144/100%)
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: NorCal
Posts: 7,441
Quote:
Originally Posted by Solcielo lawrencia View Post
... Almost everything most people believe are wrong and unsupported in the scientific literature (e.g. EI, CO2, light, fertilization, toxicity and deficiency, etc.) ...
That implies that other beliefs are right. What are they?
TaylorTurner and TaylorTurner like this.
OVT is offline  
post #25 of 203 (permalink) Old 07-19-2016, 04:11 PM
Planted Member
 
PTrader: (1/100%)
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 180
Quote:
Originally Posted by Solcielo lawrencia View Post
Almost everything most people believe are wrong and unsupported in the scientific literature (e.g. EI, CO2, light, fertilization, toxicity and deficiency, etc.), even if some literature appears to support these ideas.
I feel that it would be helpful to provide citation to the evidence on which you base your conclusions. It seems like I read a lot of your posts where you firmly state that toxicity is occurring, that current common practices are hazardous, and that what you're proposing is based not just on your experience, but on extrapolations from scientific findings. While I feel that hobbyists should do their best to research and gather information themselves, when you are putting forth ideas that are contrary to common practices the onus is on you to provide the evidence.

You speak firmly, as though you are an expert on the matter of aquatic plant micronutrient toxicities, but provide little in the way of actual substance to defend your stance. If you do in fact have a comprehensive understanding of the matter and sufficient evidence that you can provide to others, doing so will be more helpful in advancing aquatic plant care than routinely writing somewhat condescending and vague posts telling everyone what they believe and practice is wrong. I am neither defending EI, etc., nor opposing your thoughts about toxicities; I am asking for evidence that will be useful in generating conversation (rather than emotionally-charged, ego-driven debate) about these toxicities and perhaps help establish new best horticultural practices.

Last edited by TaylorTurner; 07-19-2016 at 04:23 PM. Reason: Adding
TaylorTurner is offline  
post #26 of 203 (permalink) Old 07-19-2016, 08:07 PM
Planted Tank Enthusiast
 
PTrader: (0/0%)
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Maine
Posts: 521
There is a plethora of information regarding metal ion toxicity. I started my delve into the subject with Diana Walstad's "Ecology of the planted Aquarium" It has an excellent chapter on metal toxicity with an abundance of citations.

"Metal uptake may have little to do with the plant's nutrient requirements, as plants take up metals like Pb (lead) that they do not use. Uptake of metals (required or not) increasees proportionally with the water's metal concentration [40] and can easily exceed the amount required. For example, Hydrilla verticilata did not become iron-saturated until water levels of chelated iron reaches 6 mg/l and its tissues contained over 21,000 mg/kg iron [50]. [Note: aquatic plants require about 60 mg/kg in their tissues (see pages 104-105)]. "

There is tons of great research on this stuff, and Diana combined some good research into her book that makes it easier for hobbyists to digest material. Following and preceding this paragraph are delicious graphs and extrapolations. After reading the book you should be able to decide for yourself if you have a problem or not. The research cited by Diana is still pretty readily available, but some of it is behind paywalls.
TaylorTurner and TaylorTurner like this.
Positron is offline  
post #27 of 203 (permalink) Old 07-19-2016, 08:48 PM
Planted Member
 
PTrader: (1/100%)
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 180
I have read and enjoyed Diana's book and don't feel that I have issues with toxicity in my system. I am challenging Solcielo to provide a more cohesive and convincing argument for his repeated claims made on multiple threads on the forum.
TaylorTurner is offline  
post #28 of 203 (permalink) Old 07-20-2016, 12:49 AM
Planted Tank Guru
 
PTrader: (73/100%)
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 5,942
Quote:
Originally Posted by TaylorTurner View Post
I have read and enjoyed Diana's book and don't feel that I have issues with toxicity in my system. I am challenging Solcielo to provide a more cohesive and convincing argument for his repeated claims made on multiple threads on the forum.
+1

Surely you have relevant research, case studies to support the number of posts claiming toxicity.
TaylorTurner and TaylorTurner like this.
houseofcards is offline  
post #29 of 203 (permalink) Old 07-20-2016, 01:52 AM
Planted Tank Guru
 
Greggz's Avatar
 
PTrader: (2/100%)
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Novi, MI
Posts: 4,753
Quote:
Originally Posted by houseofcards View Post
+1

Surely you have relevant research, case studies to support the number of posts claiming toxicity.
Don't you know by now, if he says it enough times it's true!!

But in all seriousness, the part I'm really not fond of is the dismissive attitude for anyone with an opposing idea.

In my opinion, planted tanks are a mix of art and science. In the end, I have seen beautiful tanks and healthy plants with folks here using a wide variety of methodology. And I appreciate reading about their theories. The trick is finding out what works in YOUR tank.

One thing I am pretty certain of. Toxicity is not the single cause of every problem ever experienced in a planted tank, regardless of his 1,000 posts to the contrary.
TaylorTurner and TaylorTurner 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.
---
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 is offline  
post #30 of 203 (permalink) Old 07-20-2016, 02:34 AM
Planted Member
 
PTrader: (1/100%)
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 180
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greggz View Post
In my opinion, planted tanks are a mix of art and science. In the end, I have seen beautiful tanks and healthy plants with folks here using a wide variety of methodology. And I appreciate reading about their theories. The trick is finding out what works in YOUR tank.
I completely agree with this. There is also a definite limit to how scientific the vast majority of hobbyists are able to get, so suggesting that you have a concrete conclusion based on observational study is being either naive, or specious. However, that is certainly not to say that at home "experiments" have no merit---they do! I also love reading about other's methodologies and theories, but I most enjoy reading those presented with a pleasant and discursive tone.
OVT and OVT like this.

Last edited by TaylorTurner; 07-22-2016 at 07:00 AM. Reason: Syntax
TaylorTurner is offline  
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