Algae normally grows on the older leaves first, so that's what you would expect to see when there is an imbalance in the tank. There are 4 main things that are needed to be in balance in order to grow healthy plants, which in turn prevents algae growth. They are light (too much or too little), nutrients (too much or too little), co2 (too little), and tank maintenance. I don't know enough about your lights or fertilizers to know whether they are too much or too little.

The thing that jumps out to me based on the information you gave above is the co2. Bubbles per second is never a good way to measure co2. On very small tanks you might be able to get away with it, but on a big tank like yours, to get enough co2 it would be a constant stream of bubbles that would be impossible to count. You also don't know how much of that co2 is actually getting dissolved into the water to be used by the plants. So instead you should be measuring ph drop. When co2 is injected, it drops the ph of your water. By measuring the difference in ph between degassed water and the water a peak co2 injection, you can accurately determine how much co2 your plants are getting.

This is best done with a calibrated ph pen/probe, which I would highly recommend using. It can be done with a ph test kit, but it will not be as accurate. You want to first test the ph of your degassed tank water. So take a cup of water from your tank and then let it sit for 24-48 hours. This will allow all dissolved gasses (including co2) to exit the water. Measure the ph of this water. Then measure the ph of your tank water during the middle of your lighting period. You want at least a full point drop in ph, if not more. Most go into the 1.2-1.4 drop range. If you are under that, you need to tweak your co2. This will obviously involve turning up the co2. Often you will also find that you need to turn your co2 on an hour or two before your lights, and try to get to the full 1 point drop as the lights are coming on. It will take some time to get it right. Only make small changes each day, and then measure the ph several times throughout the lighting period to see how much drop you get. And pay close attention to your fish. If you see them all up at the top of the tank, then you know you've gone too far. You will also want to make sure you have good surface agitation using a powerhead or a good spray bar from your filter. Point them up to the top of the tank until you see a good ripple across the top. This will help get good gas exchange, which will allow more oxygen into the tank to help your fish.

I would also recommend reading through the information on this website: https://www.2hraquarist.com/ Dennis has a compiled a very good and comprehensive guide to planted tanks that everyone can learn something from.

 

Thanks for your explanation, specially regarding CO2, I'm gonna explain what I use to "measure" the CO2 in my tank.

I use one of those glasses that have liquid that when no CO2 turn blue and when have lots of CO2 turn yellow, visually they look almost yellow (lime green).

About the bps it it about 3 or 4 bubbles per second but I don't fill the bubble counter with water, I use glycerin instead so 1 bubble in glycerin is probably 3 or more bubles in water.

Now about water circulation, the Fluval FX4 is indented for tanks up to 200 gallons, mine is 75 so is way way overkill at least to my knowledge and also I have a Magnum polisher that runs in a contrary position so I think the water circulation is fine, at least in the GPH.

About putting the water stream pointing to the top, I tried it for increasing the gas exchange but if I do then the color of the pH reader gets greener (dark green) instead of getting (light green).

Thanks for the link you gave me, I'll read it for sure.

 

Those are called drop checkers. And while they are essentially doing the same thing by measuring the ph drop, they are not very accurate. It also takes an hour or two for the co2 level inside the bubble to be what it was in the tank. So you are actually seeing the co2 levels of several hours before. I started out using a drop checker to measure co2 and could never seem to get my levels right. It always seemed to be lime green for me, but my plants struggled. When I started to measure ph directly, I found I was actually only getting a .6 drop or so. And then I was finally able to get my co2 dialed in and get the good plant growth and health I wanted. So I will always recommend measuring co2 this way.

As far as flow goes, do you have a spray bar? I would recommend it if you don't. It allows for slower flows spread out over a larger area. It mixes the water better, which spreads the co2 around better. It will also allow you get that ripple on the top of the water without agitating it so much that you lose co2, which I'm guessing is what is happening in your case. You don't want the water to break, just undulate. And your filter is not overkill. You generally want 10x your tank size in gph, so at 700 gph, that is about right. My 2 filters give me about 650gph, but I also run two small powerheads pointed at the surface to help with gas exchange.

 

Interesting advice about CO2, just one question, do you used the blue regent that need to be filled with your tank water or do you used the one that was already mixed?

About the spray bar, I think my canister does a good job circulating water, my FX4 is an upgrade from Fluval 306, the FX4 has dual output so you can manually choose 2 independent water flows.

I also just bought an skimmer so maybe that will help too.

When I said the FX4 was overkill I was trying to say was that the capacity for filtration media is a huge upgrade than my previous Fluval 306.

About my ferts this is what I'm using with the exception of micros, because they don't sell CSM+B anymore, new ones comes with EDTA or EDTA+DTPA, so I'm not sure if I should try to use EDTA or EDTA+DTPA instead of CSM+B.

GLA PPS-Pro - Complete Nature Aquarium Fertilizer Kit - NPK, Mg & Micros - Jars

Green Leaf Aquariums PPS-Pro Fertilizer Kit provides precise daily dosing of NPK, magnesium, and chelated micros for planted tanks using CO2 injection.

greenleafaquariums.com

Ambient widow light is horrible for stability..

It just receives light from the right, a little bit, but what I don't know if I'm doing good or bad is to try to get the same "illumination", in other words I'm not sure if when I'm trying to illuminate the tank to not look pale, I'm over illuminating it.

 

Ambient widow light is horrible for stability..

 

+1 on everything @elusive77 said above.

Based on the pictures I would also focus on maintenance. I would get on a regular water change schedule. Those small water changes are not doing much, and that can lead to excess accumulation of organics. Better to perform large water changes at regular intervals. Also helps with keeping parameters stable.

Also focus on gravel vacs, filter cleanings, and removal of any dead/decaying plant matter. An uber clean tank is your friend.

Saying your dose PPS Pro 2 ml macros and CSM+B 0.7 ml micros daily means nothing to most people. Try to start thinking in terms of ppm of each fert you are dosing.

You have a mix of slow growing low light plants that need little in nutrients and a few faster growing stems that would prefer higher light and more nutrients. They can be difficult to keep together. You want to figure out what you want out of this tank. Do you want to grow more fast growing flowery stems? Or do you want to keep it simple with low light plants?

And like mentioned above 3 bps is almost nothing in a tank that size. It should be a steady stream too many bubbles to possibly count.

 

After almost a week of increasing the CO2, the Anubias and Cryptocorine are finally getting off the algae, the red plants and the Moneyworth still have algae on old leaves, so do you think I should still add more CO2 or those plants are lacking of something else?

By the way I added more glutaraldehyde as well and also more micros and macros.

 

After almost a week of increasing the CO2, the Anubias and Cryptocorine are finally getting off the algae, the red plants and the Moneyworth still have algae on old leaves, so do you think I should still add more CO2 or those plants are lacking of something else?

By the way I added more glutaraldehyde as well and also more micros and macros.

It sounds like turning it up helped but you probably still need more. You really need to test for it, or you'll never know for sure how much you're getting. Even if you just use the API ph test kit, that will give you a general idea.

And I wouldnt go adding more ferts just yet. Get the CO2 nailed down first. It's always a good idea to only change one thing at a time. Otherwise if the tank starts looking better (or worse) you won't know which thing you changed caused it.

Take some time while you're dialing in the CO2 to come up with a good plan for ferts. Again I suggest using the site I linked above to learn as much about fertilizers and the different methods for using them. Then pick one and go with it. If you have questions, ask and we'll help as much as we can.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

 

years ago, i went on vacation for 7 days. had lots of algae all over my tank , walls, plants, ornaments, etc. when i came back it was SO perfect, no algae. I asked my roommate what he did to it? did he add algaecide? he said "i know NOTHING about caring for fish, but you were SO adamant that i feed a tiny amount or only every other day, & so ADAMENT that i turn the lights off each night, well I barely fed them & only maybe twice, and I might have turned the light on once for a few hours" ....... all i had to do was leave, problems solved. I must have used too much light & too much food!

 

Yes, after all this years I have done lots of crazy things, for example a few months ago, one of my Radions died so I only had 1 light for about 1 month, yes from that side of the tank the plants were not getting much algae but the red plants were struggling to get good colors.

I also stopped dosing for months which had a pretty much low algae and clear water but the red plants looked so crap.

So maybe it worked for your tank but I don't think that's gonna work on tank.

It sounds like turning it up helped but you probably still need more. You really need to test for it, or you'll never know for sure how much you're getting. Even if you just use the API ph test kit, that will give you a general idea.

And I wouldnt go adding more ferts just yet. Get the CO2 nailed down first. It's always a good idea to only change one thing at a time. Otherwise if the tank starts looking better (or worse) you won't know which thing you changed caused it.

Take some time while you're dialing in the CO2 to come up with a good plan for ferts. Again I suggest using the site I linked above to learn as much about fertilizers and the different methods for using them. Then pick one and go with it. If you have questions, ask and we'll help as much as we can.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

Yes I've been reading the like you gave me, I'm still reading it, first I got into the algae section, but I'll start reading the ferts section as your suggestion.

What pH should I measure/have?

 

Hi, a little update, I don't have a pH probe yet but I've been adding more CO2 and glutaraldehyde, so the weird thing is that at first (a few weeks ago) the GSA on anubias were receding, but now they are getting covered again with GSA, I haven't change pretty much nothing, I just added seachem purigen to my canister and changed the activated carbon, the lights are about the same (just a tiny little bit more red), the only thing that changed was that the Micros and the Glutaraldehyde are now dosed with dosing pumps so instead of dumping 4 ml at midnight or macros, now I dump them from 5 AM to 6 PM in small amounts every 30 minutes, same for glutaraldehyde, 14 ml dumped from 5AM to 6PM every 30 minutes.

The rest is the same, same lights (a tiny bit more red) and micro doses instead of one or two big dosing for macros and glutaraldehyde.

I've been increasing the CO2, now the color is almost yellow, I'm not sure if I still have to add more co2.

So my only suspect is the seachem purigen but what else do you think is bringing back the GSA?

 

It could be the way you changed the application of the glutaraldehyde, since it is degraded by light. I'm assuming it is being added during your light cycle. The amounts that you are adding every 30 minutes could be broken down almost as rapidly as it enters that tank. If so, you would never reach a usefull level of it.

 

Before I automated the dosing, I was adding the glutaraldehyde twice a day about 7 ml (each dose) from a closed container that doesn't receives sun light and I got basically the same results.

Do you suggest using less doses but with more glutaraldehyde, for example instead of dosing 0.40 ml every 30 minutes, should I dose 4 or 5 ml 3 times a day?

 

An update, after testing the tank water for about 24 hours (after taking some sample for degassing) I got 7.8pH and my tank at the middle of the CO2 dosing is about 6.6pH so should I add more CO2 or should I use RO DI water instead of tap water?

 

Looks like a 75 gallon tall tank. With tall tanks, you have to watch for flow to the lower parts. This is one thing that helped my plants thrive when I was in a similar situation. Looking at your videos you can tell that flow is very uneven. You can see co2 bubble density in the top half of your tank, but almost nonexistent in the bottom half. Some spots near the top and middle have a lot of flow while bottom portions of the tank have very little flow. This could explain why the lower leaves of your tank have algae, look weak, or completely fall off. They aren't getting as much nutrients and co2. A quick fix would be to install a spraybar in the back the length of your tank. You don't want a jet-like spray from it, just a smooth flow without turning down the filters, that way you still have max turnover rate. This can be done by increasing the size of the holes in the spraybar so overall volume of turnover is high, but water isn't as turbulent. This will achieve great flow and elimiinate dead spots, and any dirt or debris will be picked up into the flow and into your filter. Your tank will look much cleaner as a result and plants will thrive.

 

The other guy also recommended me a spray bar, I was also thinking to add a circulation pump (Aqua Illumination nero 3) at the bottom of the tank, about 3 inches above the soil with variable speed.

Thanks for the advice, I'll check it out.

 

One thing I look at with good flow is that particles in the tank should follow the same pattern over and over. For example flow is not good if you don't know whether a co2 bubble will hit the outflow of your filter and get blasted to the middle of the tank, or turn and go down into a low flow area of your tank. I call that random flow, which is what you don't want in a planted tank since not all plants will get the same amount of nutrients and co2. You want more of a gentle circular flow, or a laminar flow. If this was my tank I would add a spray bar, then position the polishing powerhead in the right back corner facing the outflow towards the filter input. that way the spray bar will flow water towards the top front of the tank, then hit the glass and flow down to the substrate, and through the substrate to the back glass. then the polishing powerhead will push the flow towards your filter input.

 

One question, how the spray bar water should point? horizontal, 45 degrees, just a few degrees?

 

Position the spray bar 2-3 inches or so below the waterline and point it a few degrees towards the surface to create a little gentle surface ripple for o2 exchange. Not too much or Co2 will outgas.

 

A spray bar aimed up at the surface is a good thing. Creates oxygen which a healthy tank needs and creates a good flow pattern.

But I highly doubt your problems have anything to to with a lack of flow. Most of the best tanks in world have far less flow than folks would imagine. IMO adding a circulation pump will just create more problems. Too much flow is worse than too little.

Sounds like you are getting your CO2 dialed in, but that creates a greater need for fertilization.

Earlier you listed this as your dosing:

0.20ppm NO3
0.020ppm P04
0.266ppm K
0.020ppm Mg

This is pretty much the same as nothing. And a well run tank does not need any Glut. It's probably doing more harm than good.

Try to start thinking in terms of providing plants what they need not preventing algae. Healthy happy plants are easily the best defense.

 

A spray bar aimed up at the surface is a good thing. Creates oxygen which a healthy tank needs and creates a good flow pattern.

But I highly doubt your problems have anything to to with a lack of flow. Most of the best tanks in world have far less flow than folks would imagine. IMO adding a circulation pump will just create more problems. Too much flow is worse than too little.

Sounds like you are getting your CO2 dialed in, but that creates a greater need for fertilization.

Earlier you listed this as your dosing:

0.20ppm NO3
0.020ppm P04
0.266ppm K
0.020ppm Mg

This is pretty much the same as nothing. And a well run tank does not need any Glut. It's probably doing more harm than good.

Try to start thinking in terms of providing plants what they need not preventing algae. Healthy happy plants are easily the best defense.

Yes, that's what I was dosing before, but now I'm dosing much more, this is what I'm doing right now daily

NO3 1ppm
PO4 0.30 ppm
K 1.35 ppm
Mg 0.10 ppm

I was dosing twice that much but at the seventh day I got about 300 TDS, even after doing 80% water change, I just could reduce it to 200 TDS using tap water at 150 TDS, so I decided to reduce and dose the above instead.

As @Greggz mentioned, a high-tech tank (pressurized CO2) does not need glut (Excel) for plant growth purposes. It is effective, though, as an algaecide. However, it only affects red algae (hair types/BBA), not GSA. If you want to use an algaecide on the GSA, try a surfactant approach, such as API’s AlgaeFix. I think that the 2 Hour Aquarist also has a good product. Split the recommended dosing of these products in half and do the second dose a few hours after the first. This will help your fauna, as the surfactant can make gills less efficient.

Longer term, I’d look to your nutrient balance (keep organics under control, as well) as the current problem. You have experienced significant changes to the two most important aspects: light and CO2. Changes can take many weeks to manifest in cause and effect observations. You seem to have kicked your light and CO2 into high gear. This is going to accelerate uptake of fertilizers, assuming there is proper balance. If things are out of balance, you may run short of certain nutrients, which will stall growth and make plant leaves and other surfaces ripe for algae growth. If balance is maintained, you still may need more of all ferts due to increase growth.

I’d review your entire dosing, hopefully with measurements of all macros (including Mg and Ca). At a minimum, look at NO3 and PO4. Maintain a minimum 10:1 ratio. Many of us, with high-tech tanks insist upon a minimum of ~5ppm PO4. Sufficiently high PO4 does inhibit GSA.

As mentioned above I tried overdosing ferts but I decided to reduce them because after doing water changes for about 80% of water, I still got lots of nutrients left in the water, even using RO water (10 TDS), I was only able to reduce from 300+ TDS to 180 TDS.

 

As @Greggz mentioned, a high-tech tank (pressurized CO2) does not need glut (Excel) for plant growth purposes. It is effective, though, as an algaecide. However, it only affects red algae (hair types/BBA), not GSA. If you want to use an algaecide on the GSA, try a surfactant approach, such as API’s AlgaeFix. I think that the 2 Hour Aquarist also has a good product. Split the recommended dosing of these products in half and do the second dose a few hours after the first. This will help your fauna, as the surfactant can make gills less efficient.

Longer term, I’d look to your nutrient balance (keep organics under control, as well) as the current problem. You have experienced significant changes to the two most important aspects: light and CO2. Changes can take many weeks to manifest in cause and effect observations. You seem to have kicked your light and CO2 into high gear. This is going to accelerate uptake of fertilizers, assuming there is proper balance. If things are out of balance, you may run short of certain nutrients, which will stall growth and make plant leaves and other surfaces ripe for algae growth. If balance is maintained, you still may need more of all ferts due to increase growth.

I’d review your entire dosing, hopefully with measurements of all macros (including Mg and Ca). At a minimum, look at NO3 and PO4. Maintain a minimum 10:1 ratio. Many of us, with high-tech tanks insist upon a minimum of ~5ppm PO4. Sufficiently high PO4 does inhibit GSA.

 

300 ppm TDS isn't that high. As I mentioned, the balance is important. For example, much, if not most, of that 300 TDS could be water hardness, which could impact uptake of other nutrients, even if there are sufficient levels of those nutrients.

Is there any chance of getting test results on NO3, PO4, K, Ca and Mg? If not, can you, at least, report NO3, PO4, GH and KH values? Also, for each, what test kit are you using?

 

300 ppm maybe is not that high, but at that rate (I tried it for about 2 weeks), I would need to do 80% water changes twice a week, so that's why I decided to reduce the dosing by half.

For PO4 I could use Hanna, for NO3 and KH Salifert, for the rest, I don't have test kit yet, maybe for Calcium I could use the Hanna for salt water but I'm not sure if it works.

At what time should I test it?

 

50ppm NO3 is somewhat high, given your dosing, although it’s hard to tell how much is added by the root tabs. I prefer to avoid root tabs, as they provide inconsistent leaching of nutrients and the plants can get all they need from dosing the water column. Further, the PO4, although a good ppm level, is unexpectedly high, given the dosing (same qualifier, though, on the root tabs). I’m suspecting that the high NO3 and PO4 may be a reflection of high organics. This can occur with a lot of fish and/or overfeeding, decaying plants and general maintenance issues. You may want to look into these things, because high organics can exacerbate algae problems.

Another possible cause of the high NO3 and PO4 could be incorrect dosing calculations or pumps that aren’t doing what you think they are. Double-check those two possibilities. If you do determine the reason for these high levels, and can bring them down, do keep the PO4 in the current area, by increasing PO4 dosing, if necessary. Again, we are trying to find out why these nutrients are high at the moment.

CO2: as others have mentioned, you would, ideally, target a pH drop of ~1.0-1.5 to achieve ideal CO2 levels. I’m not sure how you are getting a pH reading of 7.8, as the Fluval Stratum, I believe, buffers ph to about 6.6. Are you sure about the Hanna marine checker being correct for freshwater? I have a Hanna alkalinity checker designed for fresh water. If your KH is actually a lot higher than your marine checker reads, then the high pH is possible (which would also burn out the Fluval Stratum quickly). You may want to get a KH test kit from API to check this.

Do a 50% water change weekly for a while, as opposed to the multiple changes with varying amounts. This will help establish some consistency, which may help.

 

50ppm NO3 is somewhat high, given your dosing, although it’s hard to tell how much is added by the root tabs. I prefer to avoid root tabs, as they provide inconsistent leaching of nutrients and the plants can get all they need from dosing the water column. Further, the PO4, although a good ppm level, is unexpectedly high, given the dosing (same qualifier, though, on the root tabs). I’m suspecting that the high NO3 and PO4 may be a reflection of high organics. This can occur with a lot of fish and/or overfeeding, decaying plants and general maintenance issues. You may want to look into these things, because high organics can exacerbate algae problems.

Another possible cause of the high NO3 and PO4 could be incorrect dosing calculations or pumps that aren’t doing what you think they are. Double-check those two possibilities. If you do determine the reason for these high levels, and can bring them down, do keep the PO4 in the current area, by increasing PO4 dosing, if necessary. Again, we are trying to find out why these nutrients are high at the moment.

CO2: as others have mentioned, you would, ideally, target a pH drop of ~1.0-1.5 to achieve ideal CO2 levels. I’m not sure how you are getting a pH reading of 7.8, as the Fluval Stratum, I believe, buffers ph to about 6.6. Are you sure about the Hanna marine checker being correct for freshwater? I have a Hanna alkalinity checker designed for fresh water. If your KH is actually a lot higher than your marine checker reads, then the high pH is possible (which would also burn out the Fluval Stratum quickly). You may want to get a KH test kit from API to check this.

Do a 50% water change weekly for a while, as opposed to the multiple changes with varying amounts. This will help establish some consistency, which may help.

Most of my fish died about a month ago, back then I was using tap water, one of the pumps got stuck releasing all the gluth at the same time so I had to do a 90% water change but that water had chlorine so almost all my fish died.

About the gravel, I've been excessively cleaning it with a turkey blaster so I don't think is anything related to that.

Maybe because I was using tap water, I exhausted the fluval stratum that is about 2 years old.

My guess as yours is that the seachem tabs are the ones excessively leaching minerals (I have about 30 tabs in the gravel).

My Hanna reagent is old so I'm gonna check for a new one too, this one for freshwater.

After all my fish died, I got a ro/di filter so now I'm using 10 tds water for my water changes but that was just 2 weeks ago, so now I got a few questions.

So what about now that I'm using low TDS water, what if my water pH is 6.5, should I buffer it with CO2 to 5.5?

If I do the 1 point test of CO2, the stratum buffer properties will be exhausted in 48 hours right, so my pH should be 7?

My pumps are new as well, but I'll check if they are dosing what they should, which I think so because they only dose a few drops every 30 minutes from 5 AM to 5 PM.

What nitrates, KH, GH, phosphates, pH values should I have?

 

Adding some re-enforcing and some mitigating comments to @Greggz well-considered response to your questions and issues;

CO2 - My personal preference, regarding these type of things is to know the numbers, as opposed to the “do it until it looks good” approach. Both approaches work to establish a healthy plant mass. This means that I like to know the pH drop for CO2 targeting. So, I understand your desire to do so. However, as @Greggz mentioned, to do this, the KH level must be identical in the two samples. This can be done by taking a pH measurement from your tank when fully gassed and then take a water sample at the same time. Let the sample sit for a day or two (can be accelerated with aeration). When it is fully de-gassed, take a pH reading and compare that to the initial tank reading.

TDS - You were, nominally, following the PPS Pro system (initial dosing method mentioned), which is designed to minimize maintenance (mainly water changes) and nutrient measurement activity However, in a contradictory way, you were doing the opposite of PPS Pro with the extremely frequent and variable water changes. Additionally, most of the advice you were getting has not been with PPS Pro in mind. I think that the PPS Pro method is fine, but it should be observed if that is the chosen path. In that case, the TDS measurements are mainly what you rely upon to keep things consistent and with minimal effort.

From my observations, most members seem to prefer a more active involvement in maintenance, measurements and other aspects of a planted tank, which is why the guidance has been along the lines of such things, which includes focusing upon ppm measurements as opposed to TDS measurements. I happen to prefer this more active involvement, as well. As @Greggz also mentioned, nutrient consistency is important. I also use an auto-dosser, but this is to maintain targeted nutrient levels (measured as ppm) between water changes. However, following a water change, I front-load nutrients to the targeted level, in recognition of the 50% loss of these nutrients due to the water change.

As mentioned by several of us, I believe that much of the distortions you are seeing are due to the leeching effect of the root tabs and substrate. So, if you use those, you will have to gain a feel for what they are doing by taking measurements of nutrients, pH, and TDS, perhaps weekly, and try to gauge their impact by observing changes in these values over time. This also means that any dosing and water changes must be kept consistent during this observation period. It won’t be precise, but it will show, somewhat, the total effect of the leeching as the sources decay and the effect if you replenish them.

As previously mentioned, the glut will add nearly nothing, if anything, to plant health in a sufficiently dosed CO2 system. Regarding algae, it will not inhibit GSA. If red algae is being targeted, it is better to hit it with a one-time dose of 1-1.5 ml / gal of glut for a quick knock-down, rather than continuos dosing that is designed as a carbon supplement in a low-tech tank.Is it possible that Green Aqua is addressing a low-tech tank situation?

 

So for example, lets say that a specific plant needs 2.4 ppm nitrates daily, so for example at your highest co2+lights moment, this plant will need 0.4 ppm nitrates, but at night could only need 0.01, so if somehow you could provide the exact amounts the plant needs at specific time, you could in theory have your water with 1 ppm all the time. In practice, that's impossible, but taking into account that you are not over exceeding (>50ppm), then you just need some nutrients, in fact, some people try to keep nitrates very low to get red coloration, the same is applied in reef tanks, where low phosphates (0.02 ppm) and nitrates (0.25) give better coloration, the problem is that current test kits are not precise enough to check low values, so most people keep 0.10 ppm phosphates and 2 ppm nitrates.

That's in theory the idea behind PPS-Pro, the other method that most people use is Estimated Index, which is based on giving more nutrients than plants are going to need.

The Caveats that I don't like about EI are:

1) EI is limited to NPK, the other macros are not taking into account.
2) EI needs more water changes than any other method due to over dosing
3) Lots of nutrients means happy plants, but also means happy algae.

In my opinion EI would be the holy grail if somehow we could inject those high nutrients to plants roots directly without adding them to the water column, hence my root tabs but unfortunately they are leaching minerals to the water column.

 

None of the best tanks I follow dose EI levels. The hobby has evolved.

Lot's of nutrients does not mean happy algae. I have helped more people overcome algae by dosing more, not less. People make the mistake of thinking you can starve algae. You can't.

And limiting NO3 to bring out reds only works on a very small subset of plants. About 80% of the plants get red from high light and good health. NO3 levels makes no difference. It's also very tricky, as the red is a stress reaction. It's a fine line from bringing out a brilliant red in a Rotala and having it stunt and die. And if you have some Ludwigia sitting next to it will likely die long before the Rotala turns red.

 

Ok, so lets start from scratch, what ppm levels you suggest from Nitrates, Phosphates, etc, I think CO2 I have nailed it.

By the way, not sure if this helps or not but I was able to measure GH, the water never went red with each drop of the reagent, it started as light green, then a little bit more green and so on, so I don't know which drop was the one to check at, but my guess is that my GH was about 2 or 3.

I also had a green water algae bloom on Monday (I did 60% water change on Sunday night), the algae bloom is receding but I've seen this randomly on other occasions, I'm not sure if is exactly after I do a water change as this one, what intrigues me is that I did the water change with ro water (5 TDS) and at the end of the water change I added about 2 tps of seachem equilibrium.

 

@Greggz I know you mentioned it somewhere but what is the difference between the total weekly ppm target dose and the ei 50% wc equivalent dose?

 

Oh boy you had to ask!

There are two ways to look at dosing.

The first way is looking at it as dosing the entire tank, which is the most common.

Here's the problem with that. It can mean a lot of different things depending on the water change percentage. This has do with accumulation over time.

So let's say someone says I am dosing my tank at 15 ppm NO3 weekly. There is a formula to calculate the eventual maximum theoretical accumulation. It is the ppm divided by the water change percentage.

So at 15 ppm NO3 weekly your max accumulation could be significantly different depending on your water change percentage.

15 ppm NO3 at 50% water change is (15/0.5) is 30 ppm max accumulation.
15 ppm NO3 at 75% water change is (15/0.75) is 20 ppm max accumulation.
15 ppm NO3 at 25% water change is (15/0.25) is 60 ppm max accumulation.

So years ago I went on a crusade to change the way we report ppm dosing. I prefer to look at it as dosing the amount of water removed during a water change. I call it "target" dosing. So if I remove 50 gallons of water, I dose the new 50 gallons to my "target". This takes the water change percentage out of the calculation and relates the value to what we want to see in the water column.

So in my case above, I remove 70 gallons and then dose the new 70 gallons to 24 ppm NO3. That is the same as dosing 12 ppm to the entire tank assuming 50% water change (12/0.5 = 24 ppm).

Now by this point I can understand if you are sorry that you asked. That's why I spend lots of time lying down with a cold compress on my forehead!

 

Hi @enb141

Metricide 28 about 5ml (4 times a day)

The first thing I would do it discontinue the Metricide 28 dosing and do a 50% water change actually I'd do two 50% water changes 24 hours apart. Why? I know you are likely dosing the Metricide 28 as additional carbon molecules for growth and/or to inhibit the growth of algae and it is less expensive than Seachem Excel to use in your 75 gallon. Your 75 gallon tank likely has approximately 60 gallons of water, at least mine does the rest of the volume being substrate and hardscape.

Metricide 28 is a2.5% concentration of glutaraldehyde, while Seachem Excel is a 1.5% concentration of glut. Excel recommends a daily dose of 5 ml per 50 gallon (or 1 ml per 10 gallons) on a daily basis or 6 ml of 1.5% glut once a day for a tank with 60 gallon volume. The current dosing level going into your tank is 20 ml of 2.5% glut (based on 5 ml 4X per day) or roughly 550% more than the recommended daily dose. My experience several years ago when I started with planted tanks is that excessive dosing of glutaraldehyde actually inhibited the growth of plants to a noticeable level when I exceeded 2X the recommended Excel dosing level.

As for nutrients:

- Fertilizers used + Ratios.
PPS Pro 2 ml macros daily
CSM+B 0.7 ml micros daily

PPS Pro is a 'lean' method of dosing nutrients, I've used it. Are you really dosing only dosing a total of 2 ml in a 75 gallon tank daily?
-Roy

 

Hi @enb141



The first thing I would do it discontinue the Metricide 28 dosing and do a 50% water change actually I'd do two 50% water changes 24 hours apart. Why? I know you are likely dosing the Metricide 28 as additional carbon molecules for growth and/or to inhibit the growth of algae and it is less expensive than Seachem Excel to use in your 75 gallon. Your 75 gallon tank likely has approximately 60 gallons of water, at least mine does the rest of the volume being substrate and hardscape.

Metricide 28 is a2.5% concentration of glutaraldehyde, while Seachem Excel is a 1.5% concentration of glut. Excel recommends a daily dose of 5 ml per 50 gallon (or 1 ml per 10 gallons) on a daily basis or 6 ml of 1.5% glut once a day for a tank with 60 gallon volume. The current dosing level going into your tank is 20 ml of 2.5% glut (based on 5 ml 4X per day) or roughly 550% more than the recommended daily dose. My experience several years ago when I started with planted tanks is that excessive dosing of glutaraldehyde actually inhibited the growth of plants to a noticeable level when I exceeded 2X the recommended Excel dosing level.

Right now I'm dosing 7.6 ml of Metricide 28 daily.

As far as I know, the new Seachem Excel has the same 2.5%~2.6% as Metricide 28/14 and also, according to seachem instructions, for every water change, you should add 1 capful (5 mL) for every 40 L (10 US gallons), which I'm not extra dosing.

But as other people is suggesting, I'll either should stop using it or use it differently.

As for nutrients:


PPS Pro is a 'lean' method of dosing nutrients, I've used it. Are you really dosing only dosing a total of 2 ml in a 75 gallon tank daily?
-Roy

I'm currently dosing 6.13 ml macros and 3.06 ml micros daily.

Which means:
0.40 NO3
0.24 PO4
1.08 K
0.08 Mg

I somehow haven't checked out this thread before...



for the sake of clarity and comparability, this corresponds to 2.6ppm/wk NO3, 1.6ppm/wk PO4, and 5.8ppm/wk K assuming the full 75 gallons

Yes, something like
2.86 NO3
1.71 PO4
7.60 K
0.57 Mg

Which is basically a little more than nothing.

Even with those amounts, when I checked the nitrates and phosphates a few weeks ago, before doing a water change, I ended up with 4.8 phosphates and 50+ nitrates.

And also my TDS is slowly increasing so that means, whatever nutrients I'm dosing or the substrate is releasing is increasing the TDS, which means not everything.

So my guess (and greggs) is that my seachem root tabs are leaching those extra nutrients.