120 Gal Dutchy Freestyle - Now with 35% less water volume! - Page 89 - The Planted Tank Forum
 3700Likes
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #1321 of 1667 (permalink) Old 12-29-2018, 03:42 PM
Algae Grower
 
PTrader: (0/0%)
Join Date: Jan 2018
Posts: 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by natemcnutty View Post
Flourish comp uses gluconate to complex the Iron which is not as strong (or arguably as harmful) as chelating agents. This form is technically easier for plants to consume and less pH dependent, but it has a very short lifespan (less than a day) before unbinding. Depending on conditions, it could be less than your lighting period.

Flourish Trace is an option. Lots of things like MicroLife out there, but no experience with them. Still waiting for "microBurr" retail packaging


“microBurr”
I like “Burr’s miracle micro mix”.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
fablau, burr740, MCFC and 1 others like this.
Uncle_R is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #1322 of 1667 (permalink) Old 12-29-2018, 06:05 PM
Planted Tank Guru
 
natemcnutty's Avatar
 
PTrader: (9/100%)
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 2,417
Quote:
Originally Posted by Uncle_R View Post
“microBurr”
I like “Burr’s miracle micro mix”.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Hmm, BM³
Greggz, chayos00, burr740 and 4 others like this.
natemcnutty is offline  
post #1323 of 1667 (permalink) Old 12-29-2018, 08:06 PM
Algae Grower
 
AgMa's Avatar
 
PTrader: (0/0%)
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Greece
Posts: 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by burr740 View Post

Its 24x12x16 inches

Does your light have one reflector for all four bulbs? That sounds like a lot of PAR, especially if we have the same bulbs

Could be your PAR meter is better than mine. PAR meters begin to struggle with extreme red and blue spectrums. A 660 red will be giving the plants a lot more than what the meter reads.

My par meter is a converted lux meter with a different sensor and calibrated to read PAR. Its probably ball park at best, esp when it comes to extreme sides of the spectrum.

But all par meters fall short in that regard so Im not sure how much difference a better meter would actually make.

I just measured it again, last time the bulbs were only a day or two old, thought they may not've been burned in yet. Yep, mid 90s

Bulbs are front to back: 3000K, 420 actinic, powerveg 633, Giesemann flora
Yes it has one reflector for all four bulbs. It's exactly the same as yours.
My par meter is an apogee sq-120 par sensor connected to a multimeter.
Bulbs are front to back:
3000k, blue actinic, flora, flora.
The third flora is there because I'm still waiting for osram red. I don't think that this flora one makes such a huge difference in readings, it's not powerful (sylvania grolux).
I lifted the light 6" above tank, just by bending it's legs. I will post a photo tomorrow to see.
Now it's 90par at front and 50par at center. Don't know why it's too low at center, maybe because there are the flora tubes over there?
Edit:
Ok here are the photos:



Last edited by AgMa; 12-30-2018 at 05:31 PM. Reason: Photos
AgMa is offline  
 
post #1324 of 1667 (permalink) Old 01-01-2019, 07:10 PM Thread Starter
Planted Tanker
 
burr740's Avatar
 
PTrader: (125/100%)
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Bama
Posts: 5,683
Quote:
Originally Posted by AgMa View Post
Yes it has one reflector for all four bulbs. It's exactly the same as yours.
My par meter is an apogee sq-120 par sensor connected to a multimeter.
Bulbs are front to back:
3000k, blue actinic, flora, flora.
The third flora is there because I'm still waiting for osram red. I don't think that this flora one makes such a huge difference in readings, it's not powerful (sylvania grolux).
I lifted the light 6" above tank, just by bending it's legs. I will post a photo tomorrow to see.
Now it's 90par at front and 50par at center. Don't know why it's too low at center, maybe because there are the flora tubes over there?
Edit:
Ok here are the photos:
]
OK I was wondering how you raised the light by "bending the legs" LOL. Great idea btw

Your light is what I have on the 20Ls, except the two bulb versions. The four bulb Odyssea on the 20H has plastic legs, it sits about 5" above the tank

AgMa likes this.


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




burr740 is offline  
post #1325 of 1667 (permalink) Old 01-01-2019, 07:45 PM Thread Starter
Planted Tanker
 
burr740's Avatar
 
PTrader: (125/100%)
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Bama
Posts: 5,683
Happy New Year Guys and Gals!

50 gal un-manicured



Got some things cookin in the Dutch. Took out the moss sides about a month ago. Think Im going without those this time. Just have to cover any bare spots with plants.

Then I decided to try an all Buce background. The goal obviously (and biggest challenge) is to not have the mesh showing. Gonna have to cut off the 3/4" lip all around because it catches too much light. Its uh...work in progress



Ignore the plants. Everything is a chopped up mess atm. Have somewhat of a plan and will be changing a lot over the next few weeks. Gonna do a big street of Lobelia somewhere. Cant decide whether to go with the Hadi Pearl sword as a focal point or keep the Lagenandras. Probably put the sword over there. That thing is pretty freakin sweet, plus it'll be something different than last year
Greggz, fablau, LRJ and 9 others like this.


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




burr740 is offline  
post #1326 of 1667 (permalink) Old 01-01-2019, 09:35 PM
Planted Tank Guru
 
natemcnutty's Avatar
 
PTrader: (9/100%)
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 2,417
Joe, when you do a big trim or rescape like this, do you tend to pull all plants out, clean up the substrate, then replant, or do you just kind of move everything around and let the filter clean up?

I ask because I have difficulties keeping everything separated regardless of how I do it, and you keep a lot of varieties in your tank as well
natemcnutty is offline  
post #1327 of 1667 (permalink) Old 01-01-2019, 10:41 PM
Planted Tank Guru
 
Greggz's Avatar
 
PTrader: (2/100%)
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Novi, MI
Posts: 4,739
Good to see some pics Joe, and Happy New Year to you as well.

Why did you remove the moss walls? Too much to keep up with?

And it looks like completely covering that mesh will take a LOT of buce. Looks like about two boatloads to me!

But if anyone can pull it off, I am sure it is you.

Is that Hyptis in the back left corner left to grow tall? If so looks like the tops get very nice color close to the light. I am keeping mine really short as foreground for now. Might have to let a couple grow out to see what it looks like.

And is that AR Var. in the 50? Haven't heard you talk about that one in a while, and wonder how it is doing?

Anything new on the dosing front??


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.

Last edited by Greggz; 01-02-2019 at 12:31 AM. Reason: typo
Greggz is online now  
post #1328 of 1667 (permalink) Old 01-02-2019, 12:14 AM
Wannabe Guru
 
Nigel95's Avatar
 
PTrader: (0/0%)
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 1,052
Any idea how fast brownie ghost grows in. your tank? Like how many leaves per month per rhizome?

Sent from my LYA-L29 using Tapatalk

My Tanks
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.

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

Follow me on
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.
Nigel95 is offline  
post #1329 of 1667 (permalink) Old 01-02-2019, 10:23 PM Thread Starter
Planted Tanker
 
burr740's Avatar
 
PTrader: (125/100%)
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Bama
Posts: 5,683
Quote:
Originally Posted by natemcnutty View Post
Joe, when you do a big trim or rescape like this, do you tend to pull all plants out, clean up the substrate, then replant, or do you just kind of move everything around and let the filter clean up?

I ask because I have difficulties keeping everything separated regardless of how I do it, and you keep a lot of varieties in your tank as well
Usually Im only doing 3-4 groups at a time, whatever needs it. But its the same routine doing more.

For stems that need the tops replanted and the bottoms moved or tossed: Pinch off all the good tops and put them aside. Gently pull all the stumps. Level the substrate back out. Skim the surface with a siphon hose to get any collected mulm. Sometimes there's a lot and sometimes hardly none. Then an immediate large water change

Im not a fan of deep vacuuming. Seems to throw the system off somehow. Ive gotten stem melt at the bottom a few times after doing it. So idk, think that bottom half where the anaerobic stuff lives takes a while to establish and best left alone. But I'll go down an inch or so sometimes.

As for keeping things separated, you really have to exaggerate the space you begin with. It's like scaping a Dutch tank. If you want it to look like there's an inch of space between something, better leave 2 or 3. Same with height contrasts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Greggz View Post
Good to see some pics Joe, and Happy New Year to you as well.

Why did you remove the moss walls? Too much to keep up with?

And it looks like completely covering that mesh will take a LOT of buce. Looks like about two boatloads to me!

But if anyone can pull it off, I am sure it is you.

Is that Hyptis in the back left corner left to grow tall? If so looks like the tops get very nice color close to the light. I am keeping mine really short as foreground for now. Might have to let a couple grow out to see what it looks like.

And is that AR Var. in the 50? Haven't heard you talk about that one in a while, and wonder how it is doing?

Anything new on the dosing front??
The Moss walls: It was either the moss or the buces. This Xmas grows so fast it kinda takes over through the Buces. The Buces are OK just stuck on there for looks for a couple of weeks but it gets messy long term.If the buces dont work out I'll put the moss back.

Yeah its going to take a lot of buces, but there's a lot more here than it looks like. Some of those clumps down low can be split into 5-6 plants. Then its just a matter of placement. They actually grow pretty fast under all that light.

Hyptis in back left, its about to come out. Gonna do a big row of L rugosa front to back right there. Hyptis looks best when viewed at least partially from the top. Its best feature is the purple top so its not really a good side profile plant. These were stuck back there for lack of room anywhere else mainly.

AR mini variegated has been stuck for the past year. Horribly twisted new growth just doing enough to stay alive. Over the last 5-6 weeks it's finally started growing again. Still a lot of older twisted growth here, need to pull it all up and replant the good stuff. Have a few in the 75 doing the same thing, aquasoil is no saving grace



Reducing micros is what did it. Currently in the .15-.2 range 3x per week. Remember a couple of years ago when micros were extremely low, it used to grow pretty well. The regular version doesnt seem to mind. They've stayed flat and big the whole time dosing higher levels. But not the variegated.

So after a year of higher and higher levels, Im working back down in the hopes of finding a sweeter spot for everything. Several species are really loving the lower levels. Acmella repens, for just one example that didnt seem to mind the higher levels, has doubled in size

Macros are currently 25/5/25 per week.

Pantanals we talked about I think are going to be OK too. They just freaked in the beginning. I cut the mature tops off to let new ones come in from the stumps. So far they are doing fine

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nigel95 View Post
Any idea how fast brownie ghost grows in. your tank? Like how many leaves per month per rhizome?

Sent from my LYA-L29 using Tapatalk
Im no Buce expert but pretty sure these arent Brownie Ghost. According to Dennis Brownie ghosts are naturally purple. These only look a little purple under the lights. They are actually dark olive green, and the leaves a little wider than BGs Ive seen.

They grow pretty fast, 3-4 leaves per month easy. The rhizomes expand pretty fast too


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




burr740 is offline  
post #1330 of 1667 (permalink) Old 01-03-2019, 12:40 AM
Planted Tank Guru
 
natemcnutty's Avatar
 
PTrader: (9/100%)
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 2,417
Any chance they are buce hades? Mine is a dark green but throws purple leaves for a bit under good light. It's a little bigger variety, fairly common, and grows decently quick.
natemcnutty is offline  
post #1331 of 1667 (permalink) Old 01-03-2019, 01:18 AM
Planted Tank Guru
 
Greggz's Avatar
 
PTrader: (2/100%)
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Novi, MI
Posts: 4,739
Quote:
Originally Posted by burr740 View Post
AR mini variegated has been stuck for the past year. Horribly twisted new growth just doing enough to stay alive. Over the last 5-6 weeks it's finally started growing again. Still a lot of older twisted growth here, need to pull it all up and replant the good stuff. Have a few in the 75 doing the same thing, aquasoil is no saving grace



Reducing micros is what did it. Currently in the .15-.2 range 3x per week. Remember a couple of years ago when micros were extremely low, it used to grow pretty well. The regular version doesnt seem to mind. They've stayed flat and big the whole time dosing higher levels. But not the variegated.

So after a year of higher and higher levels, Im working back down in the hopes of finding a sweeter spot for everything. Several species are really loving the lower levels. Acmella repens, for just one example that didnt seem to mind the higher levels, has doubled in size

Macros are currently 25/5/25 per week.
Thanks Joe interesting stuff. FWIW, that AR Var. looks pretty darn good to me. Funny about the aquasoil, getting the impression it isn't the magic elixir some say it is. You need to update that story sometime too.

I've also seen a positive response lowering micros. However, I went from .15 Fe daily to .1125, so still more than you, and lowered macros too. Going to keep it here for probably another few weeks at least, then try dialing it back just slightly more. You just never how things react from tank to tank or what levels will be best.

And interesting the size change of the Acmella. One thing I have been finding is that when you change a parameter like that, there can be winners and losers. Seems like that sweet spot is when you can keep them ALL pretty happy, if that makes sense.

Quote:
Originally Posted by burr740 View Post
Pantanals we talked about I think are going to be OK too. They just freaked in the beginning. I cut the mature tops off to let new ones come in from the stumps. So far they are doing fine
Yeah mine freaked out too. I bumped up N just a bit, and they seemed to perk back up. Now I wonder if they would have anyway just given more time? Funny thing is the ones that stunted popped out 3 or 4 new tops, and those are growing into new stems now. New way to propagate!
burr740 likes 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 online now  
post #1332 of 1667 (permalink) Old 01-03-2019, 03:30 AM
Planted Tank Enthusiast
 
SingAlongWithTsing's Avatar
 
PTrader: (1/100%)
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: SoCal - IE
Posts: 656
lemme know if you ever get bored of those buces lmao

I think I might end up lowering my micros (1.0 ~1.14 Fe up take but dosing 1.5) too but maybe in a few weeks, I'm bumping my K up from 22.5 ppm weekly to 26.5.

Previously you were at 30/5/30 for macros right?
Greggz likes 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.
SingAlongWithTsing is offline  
post #1333 of 1667 (permalink) Old 01-03-2019, 03:54 PM Thread Starter
Planted Tanker
 
burr740's Avatar
 
PTrader: (125/100%)
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Bama
Posts: 5,683
Quote:
Originally Posted by natemcnutty View Post
Any chance they are buce hades? Mine is a dark green but throws purple leaves for a bit under good light. It's a little bigger variety, fairly common, and grows decently quick.
Think you may be right. I have 3 different varieties and no idea what any of them are. One is a tiny green I think mini coin leaf or something like that.

Ive been meaning to try to nail down what each one is. Doesnt help that these are all hobby names, not based on any sort of taxonomy. Some places are more consistent with names than others.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SingAlongWithTsing View Post
lemme know if you ever get bored of those buces lmao

I think I might end up lowering my micros (1.0 ~1.14 Fe up take but dosing 1.5) too but maybe in a few weeks, I'm bumping my K up from 22.5 ppm weekly to 26.5.

Previously you were at 30/5/30 for macros right?
Well one thing to keep in mind is just because plants are drinking that much Fe (assuming thats whats shappening) doesnt necessarily mean its a good thing. Plants cant always shut the door when they have enough of something. (hence toxicity) Roots can do a better job of deciding what gets in than submerged leaves.

Idk if you were around for Marcels experiments, but one of the most interesting things to me was the tissue analysis done when it was all over, on both the good plants and the sucky ones.

The interesting thing was, the sucky plants that stunted at higher dosing levels, had higher amounts of certain nutrients in their tissues than the plants that did best. A lot higher, think 150-200%. Which is a clear sign that plants even in a poor state do not (or cannot) stop absorbing nutrients. Also blows the doors off current dogma that says plants only uptake what they need

If I remember correctly the nutrients that were higher included P, Ca, Mn, Fe and Mo, possibly something else, Id have to go back and find it. So those appear to be nutrients that plants are unable to "shut the door" on. At least Rotalla wallichii cant. Something to think about....


Yes, previously at 30/5/30-something (always 5-7 ppm higher than NO3), but I'd also spent a couple months at 35/6-8/40-ish

Started seeing bad results from so much PO4. Mainly new growth symptoms, stunting in a few things and undersized new growth. This would seem to indicate that it was interfering with immobile nutrients like micros/Fe

So I dropped it down to 3 for a couple of weeks, which made a huge positive difference...initially. But after a couple of weeks as the levels evened out, a different set of old growth symptoms appeared in some things, as you would expect with a straightforward deficiency. So I inched back up to 4 for a couple of weeks, and then to 5, which seems to be a pretty sweet spot going on a month now

Most recently Ive dropped K down closer to NO3 in the hopes of improving Ca efficiency, and possibly a few other things it has an antagonistic relationship with. (Mulder's Chart) 5-7 ppm lower per week doesnt sound like much, but it is when you factor accumulation. Could be a water column difference of 10-14 ppm. Too soon to tell if its gonna make any difference.

I would expect a minor difference if anything really, but no point larding it on if it isnt necessary. Too many possible interactions involved
Greggz, fablau, rhiro 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 burr740; 01-03-2019 at 04:12 PM. Reason: .
burr740 is offline  
post #1334 of 1667 (permalink) Old 01-04-2019, 05:39 AM
Planted Tank Enthusiast
 
SingAlongWithTsing's Avatar
 
PTrader: (1/100%)
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: SoCal - IE
Posts: 656
Quote:
Originally Posted by burr740 View Post
Well one thing to keep in mind is just because plants are drinking that much Fe (assuming thats whats shappening) doesnt necessarily mean its a good thing. Plants cant always shut the door when they have enough of something. (hence toxicity) Roots can do a better job of deciding what gets in than submerged leaves.
oh, might explain why some people are so adamant about staying with a certain ratios or a range of ratios.

tbh, I also have my doubts about my plants fully taking up the 1~1.14 ppm Fe weekly. I wouldnt be surprised if some of it was taken up by algae or bacteria, not sure how I would go about testing that though.

Quote:
Idk if you were around for Marcels experiments, but one of the most interesting things to me was the tissue analysis done when it was all over, on both the good plants and the sucky ones.

The interesting thing was, the sucky plants that stunted at higher dosing levels, had higher amounts of certain nutrients in their tissues than the plants that did best. A lot higher, think 150-200%. Which is a clear sign that plants even in a poor state do not (or cannot) stop absorbing nutrients. Also blows the doors off current dogma that says plants only uptake what they need

If I remember correctly the nutrients that were higher included P, Ca, Mn, Fe and Mo, possibly something else, Id have to go back and find it. So those appear to be nutrients that plants are unable to "shut the door" on. At least Rotalla wallichii cant. Something to think about....


Yes, previously at 30/5/30-something (always 5-7 ppm higher than NO3), but I'd also spent a couple months at 35/6-8/40-ish

Started seeing bad results from so much PO4. Mainly new growth symptoms, stunting in a few things and undersized new growth. This would seem to indicate that it was interfering with immobile nutrients like micros/Fe

So I dropped it down to 3 for a couple of weeks, which made a huge positive difference...initially. But after a couple of weeks as the levels evened out, a different set of old growth symptoms appeared in some things, as you would expect with a straightforward deficiency. So I inched back up to 4 for a couple of weeks, and then to 5, which seems to be a pretty sweet spot going on a month now

Most recently Ive dropped K down closer to NO3 in the hopes of improving Ca efficiency, and possibly a few other things it has an antagonistic relationship with. (Mulder's Chart) 5-7 ppm lower per week doesnt sound like much, but it is when you factor accumulation. Could be a water column difference of 10-14 ppm. Too soon to tell if its gonna make any difference.

I would expect a minor difference if anything really, but no point larding it on if it isnt necessary. Too many possible interactions involved
Nah I wasn't around for Marcel's experiments.

This is his website right? https://golias.net/akvaristika/ found the website a couple of months back but didnt go through everything yet except something about Ludwigia Sp Red maxing out growth near 30+ ppm NO3?

Have you tweaked with your B levels for further Ca efficiency?
Greggz, fablau and Immortal1 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.
SingAlongWithTsing is offline  
post #1335 of 1667 (permalink) Old 01-04-2019, 01:18 PM Thread Starter
Planted Tanker
 
burr740's Avatar
 
PTrader: (125/100%)
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Bama
Posts: 5,683
Quote:
Originally Posted by SingAlongWithTsing View Post
tbh, I also have my doubts about my plants fully taking up the 1~1.14 ppm Fe weekly. I wouldnt be surprised if some of it was taken up by algae or bacteria, not sure how I would go about testing that though.
It might be precipitating out and just winding up as dust in the filter? Idk either, but Im pretty sure the plants themselves are not using 1 ppm per week. At least not willingly!


Quote:
Originally Posted by SingAlongWithTsing View Post
Nah I wasn't around for Marcel's experiments.

This is his website right? https://golias.net/akvaristika/ found the website a couple of months back but didnt go through everything yet except something about Ludwigia Sp Red maxing out growth near 30+ ppm NO3?
Yeah that's his site. Those wallichii experiments are there somewhere. Its a lot of interesting stuff but unfortunately doesnt translate well to a fully functioning aquarium. Specifically the ratio he chose to go with. It's based on Marshner's book which found in terrestrial plants, that nutrients should be dosed at the same ratio as whats inside their tissues.

The book makes a compelling case but everyone I know who tried the same ratios failed. I tried it. Vin matched it exactly with RO water, every single thing down to Cl, S, etc. It failed horribly.

But this is the approximate ratio that was used in the wallichii experiments. Using five or six separate tanks, each one getting a higher level. Usually the middle one did best and the last couple with higher and higher levels did progressively worse.

The problem is taking that middle tank parameters, where the plants did best, and proclaiming to the world those are ideal parameters for Rotalas everywhere. And anyone who doses more NO3 that that is foolish.

Well there are an incredible number of flaws in that logic. The biggest one is assuming that's the ideal nutrient ratio to begin with. Because unless it is (it aint) you cannot extrapolate the ideal level for any one thing, such as NO3. On the contrary, all you can truly say is that's what happened in this particular experiment, with 9 stems of wallichii in one particular tank.

I'll stop right here not to sound too critical. I have a tremendous amount of respect for the time and effort he put into all that, the attention to detail and precision of everything. And his willingness to publish it in detail. He's a very smart guy and I learned a lot just following a long.

I only said all that so folks reading here, after I mentioned what he proved one time, wouldnt get the wrong idea and take every word over there as gospel. But there's a lot of good food for thought if you have the time... and a browser that translates.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SingAlongWithTsing View Post
Have you tweaked with your B levels for further Ca efficiency?
Over the past year and a half I'd gone up and up and up with B and Zn, until negative effects showed up. Then back down again into the ranges that produced the best results. This was not really done with regards to Ca, other than keeping it in mind along with other possible interferences.

Of course thats a big thing to keep in mind because everything affects everything to some degree. But you just cant nail down exact reasons for every little thing that happens. When B and Zn were too high, induced Ca deficiency could very well be why a few things went south. It could also be 100 other reasons

Im currently focused on Ca because it seems like a few species just never get enough of that one thing specifically. Yet the tap has 35-40 which, strictly speaking should be plenty.

And lets not overthink it. Im talking about three or four stubborn plants out of 70 something that are doing fine. Nailing it down to Ca is pure speculation on my part, just based on personal observations compared to everything else that's been ruled out.
Greggz, fablau, LRJ and 4 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; 01-04-2019 at 02:47 PM. Reason: .
burr740 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