The Planted Tank Forum banner

61 - 79 of 79 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,176 Posts
Discussion Starter #61

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,176 Posts
Discussion Starter #62
LMAO yeah, unless I had a really good reason, this is craziness. I only ask because I'm not using RO water, and have no idea how much K is in my well water. I suppose it would be useful to send a sample of well water out to a lab.

Side question, but will mineral content of well water change over time, or is it somewhat consistent? I know that city water can change by the day, but I don't know about well water.
sorry man, I never used a well water before, so I cannot be sure how much K would be in your well water, l have been using RO water for decade now. I think you could easily get a water report from your water company, unless you have your own well in the backyard which you might have to send in the sample to get it tested.

usually well water is very rich in Minerals, calcium, Sulfur, Iron and many trace minerals. you will find very high amount of Sulfur in the well water, TDS also high in 300-500 ranges in most cases.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,538 Posts
LMAO yeah, unless I had a really good reason, this is craziness. I only ask because I'm not using RO water, and have no idea how much K is in my well water. I suppose it would be useful to send a sample of well water out to a lab.

Side question, but will mineral content of well water change over time, or is it somewhat consistent? I know that city water can change by the day, but I don't know about well water.
Well water can change seasonally.

Years ago when I was using softened well water my KH could vary from 13 to 18. It's one of the reasons I went to RO.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,538 Posts
I have the PDF files, which I am forbidden to share. I do not have the link to the Article or the published Magazine. but here is the link to one of the website which seems to talk about this similar ratio

https://www.aquasabi.com/aquascaping-wiki_nutrients_the-corellation-between-calcium-and-magnesium
Yes now that I see that article I am familiar with this theory.

They focus on Ca:Mg:K ratio at 2:1:0.5 always keeping K lower than Mg.

Myself and several people you would know including Joe Harvey explored this a while back. For our particular tanks, it was not optimal. However, it did lead to something good as many lowered their K dosing which was a positive. But keeping it too low long term resulted in poor overall plant growth, particularly weak root systems.

But as always, that is in relation to every single other thing going on in the tank, most importantly the mix of plants and density of plant mass.

And not discounting that they may have success at those levels, but myself and others did not.

What would be interesting is to examine every single aspect of those tanks. IMO, nutrients play a small role in a successful planted tank in relation to everything else. That is the right "recipe" is simply one aspect of a tank. A well run tank can do well at a variety of dosing strategies, but a poorly managed tank has no chance even with the most perfect dosing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,176 Posts
Discussion Starter #65
Yes now that I see that article I am familiar with this theory.

They focus on Ca:Mg:K ratio at 2:1:0.5 always keeping K lower than Mg.

Myself and several people you would know including Joe Harvey explored this a while back. For our particular tanks, it was not optimal. However, it did lead to something good as many lowered their K dosing which was a positive. But keeping it too low long term resulted in poor overall plant growth, particularly weak root systems.

But as always, that is in relation to every single other thing going on in the tank, most importantly the mix of plants and density of plant mass.

And not discounting that they may have success at those levels, but myself and others did not.

What would be interesting is to examine every single aspect of those tanks. IMO, nutrients play a small role in a successful planted tank in relation to everything else. That is the right "recipe" is simply one aspect of a tank. A well run tank can do well at a variety of dosing strategies, but a poorly managed tank has no chance even with the most perfect dosing.
sorry I do not recall or seeing Joe, you or anyone here in this forum try these ratios. the link you are seeing to that website is fairly new or not that old. it was also posted year later after I had a discussion about these ratio with those who were testing them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,538 Posts
sorry I do not recall or seeing Joe, you or anyone here in this forum try these ratios. the link you are seeing to that website is fairly new or not that old. it was also posted year later after I had a discussion about these ratio with those who were testing them.
I can't remember who exactly sent the information over, but we were discussing this about a year ago.

Here is a link to my journal where I switch from KNO3 to MgNO3 in an effort to drop my K values even further. The reference to my conversation with Joe was about the very topic you linked to. And we had several detailed conversations not posted in our journals regarding this via PM as well.

https://www.plantedtank.net/forums/12-tank-journals/1020497-greggz-120g-rainbow-fish-tank-saturday-maintenance-11-21-2020-a-139.html#post11164365
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,176 Posts
Discussion Starter #67
I can't remember who exactly sent the information over, but we were discussing this about a year ago.

Here is a link to my journal where I switch from KNO3 to MgNO3 in an effort to drop my K values even further. The reference to my conversation with Joe was about the very topic you linked to. And we had several detailed conversations not posted in our journals regarding this via PM as well.

https://www.plantedtank.net/forums/12-tank-journals/1020497-greggz-120g-rainbow-fish-tank-saturday-maintenance-11-21-2020-a-139.html#post11164365
this looks like something more related to lowering the K, nothing to do with the ratio we are talking about here. this has been discussed for some decade now, Tropica for example use lower K than N, i have covered it for some time as well.

the lower K was also covered by Tobi https://www.ukaps.org/forum/threads/spezial-n-nitrogen-fertilizer.14594/

adding MgNo3, Cano3, KNO3 to lower the K has been covered by Tobi in 2011, almost 10 years ago.
but again nothing to do with the ratio am talking about.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,538 Posts
this looks like something more related to lowering the K, nothing to do with the ratio we are talking about here. this has been discussed for some decade now, Tropica for example use lower K than N, i have covered it for some time as well.
No this was very specifically some Czech's who were focusing on Cq:Mg:K ratios. The biggest thing they insisted on was that K must be lower than Mg. Myself, Joe, and others you would know discussed this quite a bit at the time.

Was not all related to the other lower K theories that are widely known that you cite. This was very specific and tied to ratios.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,176 Posts
Discussion Starter #69
No this was very specifically some Czech's who were focusing on Cq:Mg:K ratios. The biggest thing they insisted on was that K must be lower than Mg. Myself, Joe, and others you would know discussed this quite a bit at the time.

Was not all related to the other lower K theories that are widely known that you cite. This was very specific and tied to ratios.
sorry am not finding this to be relevant to what am talking out. I will let others to continue to read up on this thread, as Recipes being the primary target.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,538 Posts
sorry am not finding this to be relevant to what am talking out. I will let others to continue to read up on this thread, as Recipes being the primary target.
I only commented because you brought it up and suggested folks in the US should try that specific method/recipe. I thought you were inviting discussion about the Ca:Mg:K ratio theory that you cited.

I was pointing out several did experiment with that method over a year ago and it did not go well.
 

·
Captain
75g, 40g, 20g
Joined
·
3,617 Posts
Yes now that I see that article I am familiar with this theory.

They focus on Ca:Mg:K ratio at 2:1:0.5 always keeping K lower than Mg.

Myself and several people you would know including Joe Harvey explored this a while back. For our particular tanks, it was not optimal. However, it did lead to something good as many lowered their K dosing which was a positive. But keeping it too low long term resulted in poor overall plant growth, particularly weak root systems.

But as always, that is in relation to every single other thing going on in the tank, most importantly the mix of plants and density of plant mass.

And not discounting that they may have success at those levels, but myself and others did not.

What would be interesting is to examine every single aspect of those tanks. IMO, nutrients play a small role in a successful planted tank in relation to everything else. That is the right "recipe" is simply one aspect of a tank. A well run tank can do well at a variety of dosing strategies, but a poorly managed tank has no chance even with the most perfect dosing.

Interesting article. Knowing all the variables in my tank I think it would have a hard time staying happy with a K level of 1/2 of the Mg level which is 1/2 of the Ca level.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,176 Posts
Discussion Starter #72
I only commented because you brought it up and suggested folks in the US should try that specific method/recipe. I thought you were inviting discussion about the Ca:Mg:K ratio theory that you cited.

I was pointing out several did experiment with that method over a year ago and it did not go well.
post #56 I have updated it. the reason I didn't find your post to be relevant because you guys were still adding lower Mg compared to the K and this is the complete opposite.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,538 Posts
post #56 I have updated it. the reason I didn't find your post to be relevant because you guys were still adding lower Mg compared to the K and this is the complete opposite.
No in fact several did try raising Mg to keep it higher than K, myself included. Like I said, this was widely discussed a while back. Myself and others don't show every single dosing change we make until we have some time to understand it's effects.

And this is not the first time some magic "ratio" has been experimented with. The best keepers of planted tanks in the world that I know mostly dismiss ratios. Yet others have success and swear by them.

In the end, there are far more important aspects to keeping a successful tank than dosing. That's why I am not surprised when people report success with a wide variety of schemes. If you pay attention to the best tanks in the world, you begin to understand that it's everything else, not the dosing that makes them successful.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,176 Posts
Discussion Starter #74
No in fact several did try raising Mg to keep it higher than K, myself included. Like I said, this was widely discussed a while back. Myself and others don't show every single dosing change we make until we have some time to understand it's effects.

And this is not the first time some magic "ratio" has been experimented with. The best keepers of planted tanks in the world that I know mostly dismiss ratios. Yet others have success and swear by them.

In the end, there are far more important aspects to keeping a successful tank than dosing. That's why I am not surprised when people report success with a wide variety of schemes. If you pay attention to the best tanks in the world, you begin to understand that it's everything else, not the dosing that makes them successful.
"not the dosing that makes them successful"

we can have a long separate thread on this one and go from there. Currently we are going bit off topic and am back to being more focused on the Micro/Macro Recipes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7 Posts
Hello happi, thank you for this very detailed post!

I was wondering about the K dose, you said plants use almost 3-4x less K than N, so why is the reference 0.66 and not 0.25-0.33? Is it just to enhance plant growth? And if so, would it be viable to lower the K to 0.25-0.33 to keep healthy plants with slower growrate? For less pruning :)

Also, the Fulvic acid, is that a 100% pure? I can only find solutions with about 6% Fulvic acid, where do you buy yours? (I'm from EU though)

Thanks!
next one is Potassium, we should never add so much potassium, those who add so much potassium are likely to see pale looking plants and plant don't really use much as what most people has been adding for many years now, plant use almost 3-4x less potassium than Nitrogen, however extra potassium will enhance the plant growth by increasing the uptake of other nutrients.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,176 Posts
Discussion Starter #78
Hello happi, thank you for this very detailed post!

I was wondering about the K dose, you said plants use almost 3-4x less K than N, so why is the reference 0.66 and not 0.25-0.33? Is it just to enhance plant growth? And if so, would it be viable to lower the K to 0.25-0.33 to keep healthy plants with slower growrate? For less pruning :)

Also, the Fulvic acid, is that a 100% pure? I can only find solutions with about 6% Fulvic acid, where do you buy yours? (I'm from EU though)

Thanks!
looks like an error that i forgot to correct. people are use to the term NO3, PO4 rather than N and the P.

"plants use almost 3-4x less K than N"

this suppose to be "plants use almost 3-4x less K than NO3"

thanks for bringing this up, i will correct it. far as the Fulvic acid goes, i bought it online in powder form here in the USA, the quality or being pure is unknown. i have no idea where or what would be the best place in UK to buy Fulvic acid.

far as keeping the K levels, like i have mentioned, i usually keep them low. lets assume if your tank water naturally produces 4 ppm N weekly which is equal to 17.68 ppm NO3, you only really need 3-5 ppm K, not much. the ultimate goal is to keep the K lower than the overall N.
 
61 - 79 of 79 Posts
Top