# Soliciting input on a new way to make mineralized topsoil, please



## ukamikazu

I have been toying with an idea for producing MTS that may be a lot less effort and a lot faster, perhaps slightly more costly and more nutritious.

Today, we start with a good organic potting soil, sieve it, soak it, dry it, wash, rinse, repeat for about 6-8 weeks until we come up with good MTS and even then we need a few more additives to stabilize pH, prevent putrefaction and other obnoxious byproducts. I have had another thought about it. Please read on and tell me what you think.

Let's start with the basis of all good soil, humus, sometimes called peat humus or Michigan peat. Now I've been a terrestrial gardener a bit longer than an aquatic one but I know my soil and as a gardener you have to know humus. This is what makes your soil dark and carbon rich. Essentially this is as decomposed as any organic matter can possibly get. It is essentially carbon, inorganic acids, some mineral salts and a few proteins, waxes, oils, resins and other reduced matter. Humus can be described as already being mineralized as in all the ions present are oxidized and thus in a reduced state mostly as cations. This is good to know and from here I extrapolate.

You can by good quality sifted humus, sold as peat humus, that is already sufficiently reduced. From here, what if we were to go ahead and cut it with -

1. Laterite
2. Dolomitic Lime
3. Muriate of Potash
4. Peat granules
5. Horticultural Carbon (or Activated Carbon)
6. Azomite

Perhaps you'd want to dry out your humus a bit more, but I think working from it first, then cutting in the above six items, you would have a lot of something special and quick. Working out the proportions and actually trialing such a mix is something I can't do for about another 6 months until I replace and rebuild two more of my tanks (I'm exchanging my many smaller ones for a few large ones). The Azomite is especially intriguing to me as an additive for our applications. I feel good about a mix like and I'm willing to risk it with my next set-up.

The Azomite I first thought was so much New Age woo-woo, but it looks like there is really something to it. It is a mineral found in Utah that is straight up mined, crushed and powdered. That's it. It looks like there is sufficient agricultural data to back it up so I will say I believe their claims. I went ahead and lifted their analysis and have reproduced it below for your convenience. Looks pretty good to me though the presence of heavy metals like Arsenic and Lead is troubling but as long as it is oxidized and in low enough concentrations, I'm okay with that. Notice it is not a big source of Iron, Nitrogen, Phosphorous and Potassium. Now what you're going to do with 900 ppm of Fluorine is beyond me as well as a few others like Cerium, Lanthanum, Lithium and Rubidium. Still, it looks pretty good.










The idea is, working with humus, which is already mineralized and as reduced as anything can get, we maybe dry it out at most which would take probably several hours at worst depending on season and climate or, if you're brave enough and you have a really understanding significant other, a few hours in an oven then dope it with the above list all in one go, evenly mixing all of them throughout and end up with a massive reserve of nutrients and reduced carbon capped with something like arcillite or anything with a massive CEC and who knows, maybe even water column fertilizing would be unnecessary and you'd have a lot of truly high quality MTS whose content you absolutely control that would be virtually on demand all year 'round.

Naturally, the point of posting is to get reactions, tips, hints, guinea pigs and guidance, especially guidance on, if useful and practical, what proportions of ingredients to use without creating a noxious saline sludge. Perhaps even discuss viable sources of the materials themselves, prices, availability, chemistry, stoichiometry, studies already in existence, etc, etc.

Thank you for reading and please discuss and criticize, please, criticism is especially welcome.


----------



## Michael

What is the purpose of the peat granules and the horticultural carbon?

I've never heard of azomite, but I can see why you would add it for micronutrients.


----------



## ukamikazu

Michael said:


> What is the purpose of the peat granules and the horticultural carbon?
> 
> I've never heard of azomite, but I can see why you would add it for micronutrients.


In terrestrial gardening peat is a great way to create pockets of acidity that serve as little sites of ion exchange facilitating the oxidation/reduction process beyond what soil organisms can do. I cannot find an example of this in the hobby only the use of peat to add tannins in the water for blackwater biotopes and spawning the fish from such places as well as the tannins health tonic like properties.

I can see how in our aquariums perhaps having smaller distributed sites or acidity would help get more out of our MTS. It would almost be the same thing as adding the soil sweetener (dolomitic lime) in an MTS tank, a site of base chemistry that slowly liberates calcium and magnesium over time and like the peat pellets it's actually a very localized in effect.

The very mild reactions between the two would have, I predict, a very limited but stable buffering deeper and more consistently throughout the dirt layer as well as promote a more diverse ecosystems of microbes. The calcium and magnesium precipitants formed would be more bioavailable and there would be a more mobile economy of iron; The condensed tannin would not only not interfere with iron absorption but keep it nice and mobile for the roots.

As for the activated carbon, it would serve as another sink for nutrients, below the substrate. It actually releases what it has adsorbed over time once saturated and has an affinity for large organic molecules, like the ones that sometimes make a dirt tank smell boggy, not bad, just boggy. Personally, I like that smell; It's the smell of productive life but capturing some of those molecules for later use by microorganisms and plants would be even better. Given enough time it eventually turns to dust just adding to the soil profile. Another benefit is the fact that it is so chunky. It would create beneficial voids for improved circulation and oxygenation which is very important for plant roots. I would actually propose putting the charcoal between the MTS and the cap for precisely this reason. This is a great way to even get away with a thicker layer of MTS and still have a mature, though smaller, and easier to manage anoxic layer which will form and should in healthy tanks.

The anoxic layer is important and I feel poorly publicized and discussed. This is the nexus for the carbon cycle and the universe of the sulfur cycle which plays a very important part of the iron cycle. This ought to be given its own thread but it has been mentioned by other luminaries like Tom Barr and wetman (aka The Skeptical Aquarist) and is an important foundation piece of ecology in general.

I'm starting to digress badly so I'll stop typing for a few moments , forgive me. I got excited.


----------



## dstrong

Subscribed


----------



## ecotanker

Interesting concept! Do you have any recipe for us to try out?

I have many of the ingredient already for a substrate in line with Tom Barr' low tech method.
but I love to try something new. I will likely substitute some ingredient like monopotassium phosphate for muriate.


----------



## ukamikazu

ecotanker said:


> Interesting concept! Do you have any recipe for us to try out?
> 
> I have many of the ingredient already for a substrate in line with Tom Barr' low tech method.
> but I love to try something new. I will likely substitute some ingredient like monopotassium phosphate for muriate.


That's part of my problem is what proportions would we want to use and what I need guidance with. I also won't be able to try it on myself for another few months when I'll be setting up new tanks, probably just two more and then I'm done. If I had to hazard a guess, I would say it would be 70-80% humus, then perhaps equal parts of everything else. That feels right but since I have the luxury of essentially making it up as I go along, I would want to figure out what's the most amount of the other components you could put in there to get some really fertile soil.

Let's say:

1. Laterite 5%
2. Dolomitic Lime 5%
3. Muriate of Potash 5%
4. Peat granules 5%
5. Horticultural Carbon (or Activated Carbon) 10%
6. Azomite 10%
7. Humus 60%

This is just a guess. I would say more Azomite because of its nutritive properties and more carbon because it's a sink and I like the idea of sequestering nutrients away for later use by roots. That's just me. In fact, I would try this very mixture when the time comes to put up my next tank but that won't be for a little while.


----------



## Michael

My guess is that you could cut the potassium component (muriate of potash) way down, less than 1%. This is an intuition based on the amounts used in most MTS mixes.


----------



## ukamikazu

How about:

1. Laterite 6%
2. Dolomitic Lime 6%
3. Muriate of Potash 0.5%
4. Peat granules 6%
5. Horticultural Carbon (or Activated Carbon) 10%
6. Azomite 10%
7. Humus 61.5%

Now that you mention it, the lime seems high too. Let's cut that in half which gives us.

1. Laterite 7%
2. Dolomitic Lime 3%
3. Muriate of Potash 0.5%
4. Peat granules 7%
5. Horticultural Carbon (or Activated Carbon) 10%
6. Azomite 10%
7. Humus 62.5%


----------



## ecotanker

Just to make sure we are talking about the same thing. By humus do you mean mature compost or something else?


----------



## ukamikazu

Mature compost is one way of producing humus. As long as it fits the definition of being composed entirely of reduced carbon and inorganic acids then it qualifies. Peat humus would be a lot closer in mind to what I intend to use and is a lot less ambiguous than other definitions hence why I provided the link in my initial post back to Wikipedia's article on it because that definition is absolutely what I mean, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humus.


----------



## Reef2plants

I still think the percentage of lime is too high. Little bit of that goes a long way. Perhaps increase the laterite? Also, that azomite sounds like some good stuff. Im excited to see how this goes!


----------



## ukamikazu

Reef2plants said:


> I still think the percentage of lime is too high. Little bit of that goes a long way. Perhaps increase the laterite? Also, that azomite sounds like some good stuff. Im excited to see how this goes!


This is what I love about the Internet and forums like this: How quickly and efficiently you can collaborate and change things up .

How about:

1. Laterite 10%
2. Dolomitic Lime 1%
3. Muriate of Potash 0.5%
4. Peat granules 5%
5. Horticultural Carbon (or Activated Carbon) 10%
6. Azomite 10%
7. Humus 63.5%

I shaved a little more off the peat granules and added some to the humus.


----------



## ecotanker

Great to see progress! I got all the ingredients in one form or another. I will wait a few more weeks for more input before trying out any recipe.

Would people recommend using activated carbon in a powder form or will granules be good enough?


----------



## ukamikazu

ecotanker said:


> Great to see progress! I got all the ingredients in one form or another. I will wait a few more weeks for more input before trying out any recipe.
> 
> Would people recommend using activated carbon in a powder form or will granules be good enough?


Granules, I think. In fact, the carbon I'm used to amending terrestrial plants soils with comes in rather large nuggets. I would say chunks no smaller than a 1/4". I might even go as far as using some premium stuff, like that Seachem Matrix Carbon or even just sticking with the horticultural carbon you can get at the hardware store for cheap or from a greenhouse supply chain. It's up to personal preference but if it were me, I'd do something like this stuff, http://www.doitbest.com/Mulches+and...+Organics-model-17502-doitbest-sku-702715.dib.


----------



## ayetti

What should i look for in peat humus, and were would be a good place to get it?


----------



## ukamikazu

Something like this: http://www.denaligold.us/denaligold.html

Avoid anything that has manure in it so read those labels carefully ! Humus is the last stage of decomposition and in this state, ecologically speaking, it is fully mineralized. Having the word organic in the label or copy could mean anything so don't be drawn in by that alone.


----------



## D9Vin

I am considering doing a more natural soil type substrate to rescape my 75 gal and this thread is really interesting. I have pretty hard water at 11 dKh. Do you think it might be better to leave the dolomite out? And that azomite seems pretty sweet, but do you think those metal traces, ie copper, would have any negative effects on shrimp or other delicate fauna?


----------



## greenfish4

So, If I understand this the humus would not need to go through the 4-6 week process? That would be awesome, I am in the process of attempting the original recipe but a short cut is always welcome


----------



## ukamikazu

D9Vin said:


> I am considering doing a more natural soil type substrate to rescape my 75 gal and this thread is really interesting. I have pretty hard water at 11 dKh. Do you think it might be better to leave the dolomite out? And that azomite seems pretty sweet, but do you think those metal traces, ie copper, would have any negative effects on shrimp or other delicate fauna?


That's another thing that's hard to answer. Does it contain 12 ppm's of elemental copper or some salt? Probably a salt of copper but we know some of those are dangerous too. I do know that it takes less than .4 ppm to kill all the snails in a pond but it also is quickly accumulated in plant tissues, so this is something we'll need to think about.

Good catch, by the way !


----------



## ukamikazu

greenfish4 said:


> So, If I understand this the humus would not need to go through the 4-6 week process? That would be awesome, I am in the process of attempting the original recipe but a short cut is always welcome


That's actually half my point is saving us time, trouble and effort as well as figuring out a way to make it even more nutritious.


----------



## niko

I don't have an opinion on most of the ingredients but I do know that a lot of available Calcium really promotes the plant growth. 

One thing about an engineered substrate like that would be to try to make it with a tendency to hold the nutrients more than to release them in the water. I guess CEC is what needs to be tweaked just right. If we look at the ADA system using common sense that is exactly what they do - the liquid fertilizers are added to the water but are meant to feed the plants through the roots. They are not meant to float free in the water and they are not added in ungodly amounts (so to always provide a great environment for the algae). The properties of the substrate really make a difference if one uses it as intended.

Please don't give up on that project. I'd like to see more and more reasonable ideas/implementations like this one. So we all get out from the rut we have bogged in this hobby for a long time.

--Nikolay


----------



## wearsbunnyslippers

this has a very japanese feel, kinda ADA'ish almost. 

nice idea covering all the bases, some of the products will kinda cancel each other out in a good way, like the peat or humus staining the water and the charcoal sucking it up..


----------



## D9Vin

Dug a little deeper on the shrimp issue:
http://www.azomite.com/index.php?op...icle&id=77:shrimp-studies&catid=44&Itemid=152

This would definitely suggest that it would be quite alright, if not beneficial for shrimp. I am thinking that while it is 12 ppm copper in the azomite, that will be mixed with all the other stuff, and then it will still be mostly water in your tank, diluting it much further. Prolly shouldn't pose a threat I suppose. I am pretty sure CSM+b has some copper and I know that flourish does.


----------



## ukamikazu

...and if you cap with the substrate I mentioned earlier and that I have recently fallen in love with, as seen here, http://www.fosterandsmithaquatics.com/product/prod_display.cfm?c=5163+5178+14264&pcatid=14264, you'll have a ridiculous CEC that will sequester all those nutrients away for later, more efficient use. Maybe there is the potential to abandon water column dosing after all that? I don't know, but I consider that a personal goal of mine.

This stuff is the bomb, by the way. As near as I can figure it is 70% arcillite (highly calcined [fired] monmorillonite clay) and 30% zeolite. It's very light but doesn't get airborne the way Turface or Oil Dri does and holds down plants nicely. It's burrower friendly, the color leaves a lot to be desired but I can look past that and it is way cheaper than anything else I've run across. The stuff is so adsorptive that it sucked out the calcium from my tap water (in Texas, this is called liquid concrete) making it nice and soft and the silicic acid from a new tank so no diatoms. 24 hours after installing it I had to top up the tank a full inch of water because it drew that much into itself.

This will be the substrate of the future and this MTS recipe will hopefully be there under it.


----------



## ukamikazu

D9Vin said:


> Dug a little deeper on the shrimp issue:
> http://www.azomite.com/index.php?op...icle&id=77:shrimp-studies&catid=44&Itemid=152
> 
> This would definitely suggest that it would be quite alright, if not beneficial for shrimp. I am thinking that while it is 12 ppm copper in the azomite, that will be mixed with all the other stuff, and then it will still be mostly water in your tank, diluting it much further. Prolly shouldn't pose a threat I suppose. I am pretty sure CSM+b has some copper and I know that flourish does.


I would feel even better about this if I could find one more independent study or many more, even. I will trust this company and their work for the moment. Their numbers are believable but there's nothing wrong with wanting some gravy too, I think.


----------



## greenfish4

I really want to give this a try, I am currently setting a 240 planted tank and have already started the MTS process. I would love to find some humus to use instead, but all the stuff I seem to find here is still very organic. Would the substrate/cap that you listed in your last post be superior to eco complete? I have about 3 1/2 bags of eco left from a tank that I tore down and was gonna wash it and cap with that for the CEC property of it.


----------



## ukamikazu

greenfish4 said:


> I really want to give this a try, I am currently setting a 240 planted tank and have already started the MTS process. I would love to find some humus to use instead, but all the stuff I seem to find here is still very organic. Would the substrate/cap that you listed in your last post be superior to eco complete? I have about 3 1/2 bags of eco left from a tank that I tore down and was gonna wash it and cap with that for the CEC property of it.


I think it is, but don't take my word for it. There are a number of articles out there comparing the CEC of various materials and arcillite was the highest and most accessible. This section of this article is what started me on my quest, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cation-exchange_capacity#Standard_values. After that, some better understanding and some really gnarly googling, the choice became clear to me. A similar thing happened when I was looking into MTS after the fact and that's how I ended up here. I've probably been thinking about this for 2 years now and figured the time was coming to at the very least say something to someone and find out how right or wrong I am. So far, a few indicators look positive .


----------



## ukamikazu

Niko, your inbox is full...


----------



## greenfish4

any idea as to how much not using humus would effect your recipe? the only source I can find local for humus is indoor grow stores and they are selling it by the .5 cubic foot bag for a healthy price. also there is no way i can see whether there is anything organic left in it without buying one of each brand. I am interested in the recipe and willing to try it. my batch of dirt should be done fairly quickly since it is still warm here 85+ most days. what do you think is the fastest I could feel comfortable completing the mineralization of the soil? I was imagining 2-4 wetting and drying cycles?


----------



## ukamikazu

I follow Aaron Talbot's guide pretty closely doing 4-6 cycles. That's worked well for me so I stick to it. 

As far as the price of humus, a hardware store or gardening supply center will have your back, especially in the Autumn or Spring. Google is also your friend in finding good brands and deals and don't be afraid to call the distributor and ask questions. I have no problem doing that because I like to be sure of my sources.

If you have the soil about ready to go, try adding everything else sans the humus and see how it goes. I think there is probably more margin for error than I think. Ultimately, MTS made the traditional way shouldn't be that much different from good humus and vice versa. You're just speeding through the composting process is all at the end of the day.


----------



## ukamikazu

Here's what I think we needed: http://www.outdoorlivingbymrmulch.com/browse.cfm/organic-peat-humus-40-pound-bag/4,128.html.

The real stuff, proper peat humus and at $2.90 per 40 pound bag that's exactly right. They also have a handy calculator for figuring out how much you need, http://a.mrmulch.com/2011topsoilcalculator.shtml.

Look at the picture of the stuff. Look familiar? It's already MTS, MTS is humus to begin with so this makes logical sense. Making MTS is just speeding up the composting process.









They suggest 3.1 bags for 1.5" in a standard 120 (48x24). Since my proposed recipe calls for about 2/3 humus, we'll say 2 bags, that's 80 pounds for $5.80 plus shipping. All the other stuff can be easily sourced for cheap. I think I'll go ahead and start stocking up.

1. Laterite 10%
2. Dolomitic Lime 1%
3. Muriate of Potash 0.5%
4. Peat granules 5%
5. Horticultural Carbon (or Activated Carbon) 10%
6. Azomite 10%
7. Humus 63.5%


----------



## ecotanker

I was thinking of using black diamond peat pellets, but this is not so easy to get. Do have some thing in mind in term of peat granules?


----------



## ukamikazu

Not really though I am aware that Fluval makes some ready to use. I believe there is also a pond company that distributes some. I think Eheim also sells some.


----------



## Reef2plants

Any updates guys?


----------



## ukamikazu

I'm still amassing the materials myself to engineer the mix. I won't have another tank to try it on for sometime yet. Anyone who wants to take the plunge or even wait to do it with me has my full support.


----------



## dstrong

Post a formula and ill try it when I set up a new 20g hopefully in the next month.


----------



## BruceF

Just a little note on peat substitutes. 
http://flrec.ifas.ufl.edu/Hort/Environmental/Media_Nutrition/COIR potential.htm


----------



## Michael

I have heard of coir being used in aquarium substrate, but do not know how it performed.


----------



## ukamikazu

dstrong said:


> Post a formula and ill try it when I set up a new 20g hopefully in the next month.


It was hiding in post #31.

1. Laterite 10%
2. Dolomitic Lime 1%
3. Muriate of Potash 0.5%
4. Peat granules 5%
5. Horticultural Carbon (or Activated Carbon) 10%
6. Azomite 10%
7. Humus 63.5%

This is pretty much what we figured by group consensus. I personally believe in the power of crowdsourcing.


----------



## ukamikazu

BruceF said:


> Just a little note on peat substitutes.
> http://flrec.ifas.ufl.edu/Hort/Environmental/Media_Nutrition/COIR potential.htm


No, we're not using sphagnum moss, I'm talking actual peat, anaerobically and acidly preserved ancient plant material with lots and lots of tannins.


----------



## ukamikazu

Hang on a minute, everybody! I just got to thinking. This mix is kind of calcium poor, so I thought about it and on top of dolomitic lime which for the most part is equal in calcium and magnesium, CaMg(CO3)2, maybe we should tip the scales a bit in favor of that 4:1 calcium:magnesium ratio.

1. Laterite 10%
2. Dolomitic Lime 2%
3. Aragonite 8%
4. Muriate of Potash 0.5%
5. Peat granules 5%
6. Horticultural Carbon 10%
7. Azomite 10%
8. Humus 54.5%

BUT, why do we rely on a salt such as potassium chloride, the muriate of potash? I really don't like the extra chlorine hanging around, but we need potassium, no two ways about it but the amounts suggested seem really low when you think about it. Why not langbeinite, K2Mg2(SO4)3, instead? Less salty, way more potassium and it has extra sulfur and magnesium in one go. It is sometimes sold as sul-po-mag. It breaks down to 22% potassium, 11% sulfur and 22% magnesium, the remaining 55% is just oxygen.

So, let's rejigger some things:

1. Laterite 10%
2. Sul-Po-Mag 5%
3. Aragonite 5%
4. Peat granules 5%
5. Horticultural Carbon 10%
6. Azomite 10%
7. Humus 55%

Sorry about that guys, Niko really got me thinking about something this morning and one thing led to another. I'm sure you understand how it goes.

So, let's say you want to make 1 Kg of this stuff you'd do 550g humus, 100g azomite, 100g carbon, 50g peat granules, 50g aragonite, 50g sul-po-mag, 100g laterite and there you are.

We're really close guys, I can feel it...


----------



## ecotanker

I am not sure if this is a concern, but could adding sulphate lead to too much production of Hydrogen Sulfide?


----------



## ukamikazu

Hydrogen sulfide comes from bacteria in anaerobic conditions not necessarily the presence of just sulfur which is hard to get away from considering how much sulfur is in every living (and dead) thing so it is not a concern.


----------



## niko

Someting about Calcium in the substrate that is in a form that's very useful to the plants:

Here's a picture of a dolomitic kind of material - meaning it has Ca and Mg:









I've said that a few times before - I had a tank with a layer of "chat". This is a gravel used for underlayment of new asphalt roads. I guess it compacts well and it is cheap. It's light grey in color. I got it 10 years ago when I knew little about using CO2. I ran a lot of CO2 and the water in my brand new tank became milky overnight. You could see through it but it was opalescent. Also a thick bubbly film developed on the surface.

While trying to fight that film I kept the tank running with about 4 wpg of light. Upon removal of the film with newspapers and scooping it out it would return in about 10 minutes. During this period (about 4 weeks) I saw astonishing growth on plants that had roots (swords) but also on Rotala. After a month in this 55 gallon tank I took so much plant cuttings to the LFS that they gave me $40 cash (and you know how stingy all LFS owners are).

The tank was brand new. There was nothing very useful in the substrate yet. Supposedly. But the substrate was releasing so much "stuff" under the influence of the CO2 that the water was getting milky and flocculation was forming the thick film on the surface.

Now for the interesting observation: It was not unusual to see a 6 inch leaf at 5 PM on a plant that had no new leaf that same day at 8AM. In a brand new tank, without fertilization of the water, no fish to feed, and with a thick film + heavy opalescense blocking the light.

I fixed the tank substrate (threw it away) and replaced it with Fluorite. For the almost 30 days of the tank's milky life the gravel had become a mass of roots so long and strong that it was impossible to remove the plants without tearing up the roots.

With the Fluorite the amazing growth was gone forever. But hey, I got a "real" planted tank substrate, right? Soon I started dumping dry fertilizers in my water... Now, 10 years later I absolutely hate to see that we are doing the same darn thing.

Since then I tend to believe that it is not only the presense of nutrients that is mandatory. The nutrients also need to be forced into reactions that make them very, very available to the plants. And yes, the milky tank had zero algae. Till later that is - when I dripped fleet enema for P, added spoons of dry powdered "Tree Trunk Remover" for N, "No Salt" table salt substitute for K, and Epsom Salt for Mg...

How does all that have to do with the current discussion? 
The "chat" that I used as a substrate and got unbelievable growth is dolomitic. That's the moral of the long story.

And I'd really like to see this new substrate work!

--Nikolay


----------



## Reef2plants

What about us with hard water? Would the presence of Dolomite or Aragonite still be useful? Perhaps a totally different set of ratios? What do you guys think?


----------



## ukamikazu

The sul-po-mag isn't dolomitic but the aragonite is. The reason for this decision is to get more calcium in the soil while still having the ability to buffer. Notice also the relationship between magnesium and calcium if you look at them chemically. The idea is to get as close to the ideal 4:1 ratio of calcium to magnesium because too much magnesium will inhibit the uptake of calcium in plants and likewise too much calcium will inhibit the uptake of magnesium.

That's why I made that change. I also agree with Niko, a dolomitic substance of some kind is required and aragonite fits that bill while giving us more calcium and buffering the soil from too large of pH swings with a touch more magnesium than we are used to thanks to the sul-po-mag and its plethora of potassium. 

Two new ingredients gave given us a whole new universe of options, I think.


----------



## ukamikazu

Reef2plants said:


> What about us with hard water? Would the presence of Dolomite or Aragonite still be useful? Perhaps a totally different set of ratios? What do you guys think?


I say yes because calcium is a major macronutrient required for a number of life processes in plants, most importantly their cell walls and I too have liquid concrete coming out of my tap but it has been my observation that it is quickly ripped out of the water column and by your better quality, high CEC substrates (for a time) as well as the plants themselves. Having it available to the roots can only make consumption and translocation more efficient for the plants and seeing as it is part of the soil, it won't throw off your water chemistry and still makes for a much needed buffer in the form of aragonite while still being magnesium lean, which is important.


----------



## Reef2plants

Sounds good, thanks for clearing that up.


----------



## ukamikazu

Some new developments have occurred with a lot of outside help. At the behest of Silvering, I think a restatement of my purposes is in order. I was honestly not going to start evangelizing until after the new year, but an opportunity came.

Restatement:

The idea is to engineer the substrate for maximum nutrition and greatly increased service life. Using my own experiments, research and experience as a terrestrial gardener, I think I have something real here. One of my goals is to *end all water column dosing and substrate fertilization* which will, I think, help improve stability and better control algae. The idea is to *not* keep the tank teetering between starvation and apocalyptic pollution, our current most popular methods, but to introduce more of the natural cycles found in the world, namely, a full carbon cycle, an iron cycle and a sulfur cycle while engineering zones of anoxic and anaerobic activity that are vital in nature but small and controlled so that these processes cannot go on a runaway reaction by taking advantage of the natural processes and dynamics between plants and animals.

Some of the materials you may not have considered or heard of but they are available and cheap.

Here is the list and the suggested proportions.

1. Laterite 10%
2. Sul-Po-Mag 5%
3. Aragonite 5%
4. Peat granules 5%
5. Horticultural Carbon 10%
6. Azomite 10%
7. Humus 55%

*Humus*
Some of you recall how to make MTS, if some of you are new to it or need a refresher, check out the standard recipe here, How-To: Mineralized Soil Substrate, by Aaron Talbot - Library - Aquatic Plant Central by Aaron Talbot. Notice, it is a little time consuming and messy. There is another way. Start out with humus. No rinsing and drying. Humus is as reduced and mineralized as anything organic can get on this planet. This is the end result of all that effort already in a bag for less than $3/40 lbs. This is a big part of the problem solved. You can use this, Denali Gold or this, Organic Peat Humus, 40 Pound Bag. Remember, don't use anything with manure in it or extra chemicals. In short, the end product that people have been putting in their tanks is just another name for mature compost.

*Azomite*
This is the magic bullet. Reputable studies have been done on this incredible mineral on how it greatly enhances plants and shrimp. It contains a salt or oxide of nearly every element. Have a look at the guaranteed analysis below. I know what you're thinking, you're seeing some heavy metals on there, namely Copper and Arsenic and you have to be wondering what Dysprosium and Praseodymium could possibly do for you. Some of the more worrisome elements, again, are depleted (like the Uranium) or oxidized (everything else that looks troubling) and will thus be passed through an organism harmlessly or bioremediated by your plants' natural abilities. In fact, studies on shrimp show it to greatly improve them, Shrimp Studies. Horticultural questions and other concerns are addressed in this FAQ, Frequently Asked Questions.










*Horticultural Carbon*
This will serve as another sink for nutrients, below the substrate. It actually releases what it has adsorbed over time once saturated and has an affinity for large organic molecules, like the ones that sometimes make a dirt tank smell boggy, not bad, just boggy. Personally, I like that smell; It's the smell of productive life but capturing some of those molecules for later use by microorganisms and plants would be even better. Given enough time it eventually turns to dust just adding to the soil profile. Another benefit is the fact that it is so chunky. It would create beneficial voids for improved circulation and oxygenation which is very important for plant roots. I would actually propose putting the charcoal between the MTS and the cap for precisely this reason. This is a great way to even get away with a thicker layer of MTS and still have a mature, though smaller, and easier to manage anoxic layer which will form and should in healthy tanks. The anoxic layer is important and I feel poorly publicized and discussed. This is the nexus for the carbon cycle and the universe of the sulfur cycle which plays a very important part of the iron cycle. This ought to be given its own thread but it has been mentioned by other luminaries like Tom Barr and wetman (aka The Skeptical Aquarist) and is an important foundation piece of ecology in general.

*Peat Granules*
In terrestrial gardening peat is a great way to create pockets of acidity that serve as little sites of ion exchange facilitating the oxidation/reduction process beyond what soil organisms can do. I cannot find an example of this in the hobby only the use of peat to add tannins in the water for blackwater biotopes and spawning the fish from such places as well as the tannin's health tonic like properties. I can see how in our aquariums perhaps having smaller distributed sites of acidity would help get more out of our MTS. It would almost be the same thing as adding the traditional soil sweetener (dolomitic lime) in an MTS tank, a site of base chemistry that slowly liberates calcium and magnesium over time and like the peat pellets it's actually a very localized effect. The very mild reactions between the two would have, I predict, a very limited but stable buffering deeper and more consistently throughout the dirt layer as well as promote a more diverse ecosystems of microbes. The calcium and magnesium precipitants formed would be more bioavailable and there would be a more mobile economy of iron; The condensed tannin would not only *not* interfere with iron absorption but keep it nice and mobile for the roots.

*Aragonite & Sul-Po-Mag*
Notice this new MTS has no muriate of potash nor dolomitic lime. I have never been comfortable with the sizable amount of Chlorine in the potash but we need Potassium and the dolomite is mostly Magnesium. If Calcium is so important to plants, why is it conspicuous by its absence in traditional MTS? Also, there is something that not a lot of people are aware of when it comes to the relationship between Mg and Ca. Why not langbeinite, K2Mg2(SO4)3, instead? Less salty, way more K and it has extra Sulfur and Mg in one go. It is sometimes sold as sul-po-mag. It breaks down to 22% K, 11% S and 22% Mg, the remaining 55% is just Oxygen. The sul-po-mag isn't dolomitic but the Aragonite is. The reason for this decision is to get more Ca in the soil while still having the ability to buffer. Notice also the relationship between magnesium and calcium if you look at them chemically. The idea is to get as close to the ideal 4:1 ratio of calcium to magnesium because too much Mg will inhibit the uptake of Ca in plants and likewise too much Ca will inhibit the uptake of Mg. A dolomitic substance of some kind is required and aragonite fits that bill while giving us more Ca and buffering the soil from too large of pH swings with a touch more Mg than we are used to thanks to the sul-po-mag and its plethora of K. Ca is a major macronutrient required for a number of life processes in plants, most importantly their cell walls and it has been my observation that it is quickly ripped out of the water column by your better quality, high CEC substrates as well as the plants themselves. Having it available to the roots can only make consumption and translocation more efficient for the plants and seeing as it is part of the soil, it won't throw off your water chemistry and still makes for a much needed buffer in the form of aragonite while still being Mg lean, which is important.

*Laterite*
Sadly, I don't have a lot to say about Laterite that hasn't already been said. It's an enormous, stable store of Iron, the most consumed of the micronutrients. There isn't a whole lot to discuss on this one ingredient except that I propose using it in much higher concentrations than it is normally used to facilitate the natural Fe and S cycles found in nature and for its catalytic abilities in all living systems which I am trying to recreate, more or less.


----------



## ukamikazu

Now, with help of a fellow by the name of Madness, some very interesting substitutions and sources for them. Most importantly, they come from sources outside of the hobby meaning since they aren't marketed for aquarium use, the expense will be five times less.

For the Peat, Madness discovered something that brings a whole lot more functionality to the table and quite frankly, looks like it will kick out the peat altogether. Menefee Humates. Let's use Rocky Mountain Bio Products own words. It may seem naive, but because of the extraordinary tangle of federal regulations around fertilizers, soil additives and other related material, you have to be pretty truthful about the claims of your product or you get in some really big trouble. Let's take this as given.



> Guaranteed Product Analysis:
> 
> A natural trace mineral, carbon, and humic acid based granular soil conditioner that acts as an organic chelator and microbial stimulator. It has a unique carbon matrix incorporating a high concentration of trace minerals and organic acids, specifically humic acid, which improves the plant's ability to take in vital nutrients. For plant growth and development.
> 
> Listed by the Organic Materials Review Institute (OMRI) for use in production of organic food and fiber.
> 
> Humic Acids &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230; 50.00%
> Nitrogen (N) &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230; 1.00% Potassium (K2O) &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;.. <0.10
> Phosphate (P2O5) &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;. <0.10% Calcium (Ca) &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230; 1.04%
> Sulfur (S) &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;.. 0.18% Magnesium (Mg) &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;.. 0.14%
> Iron (Fe) &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230; 0.30% Manganese (Mn) &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230; 0.0004% Copper (Cu) &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;.. 0.0002%
> PH &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;. 3.4%


This can be confirmed through various sources and in literature so it isn't some snake oil or another and brings a little bit of nutrient to the process and especially those organic acids that make consuming nutrients so much easier for plants.


----------



## ukamikazu

A fascinating replacement for the aragonite is Aragonite Raw. Aragonite is aragonite, but finding large quantites of it for cheap is hard, again it's adding the word aquarium next to an everyday product that suddenly makes the price jump up by about a factor of 5. Aragonite Raw has some other things going for it, though. Again, we'll let the operation speak to us with their own copy.



> Raw Aragonite (a-rag-o-nite) is the purest Calcium Carbonate in the world; Whatever the application, nothing out-performs Raw Aragonite.
> 
> NITROGEN
> 
> Recent analytical testing of Raw Aragonite shows that there are 250,000 Aerobic bacteria per GRAM which is a very high amount. Aerobic bacteria is responsible for nitrogen fixation from the 70,000 pounds (35 tons) of raw nitrogen (in the form of N2) over each acre of soil. Aerobic bacteria ingests the N2 nitrogen and leaves nitrates in the soil when it dies. Nitrates are very stable in the soil. They do not disseminate into the air like chemical nitrogen and you do not need nitrogen preservation costs. For the same price of only nitrogen, you can use Raw Aragonite and get nitrogen, calcium, sea trace minerals and micro-nutrients.
> 
> Raw Aragonite also inhibits the ammonium loss by absorbing the nitrogen into the physical aragonite. THEREFORE, reducing the need of chemical nitrogen stabilizers.
> 
> At 250,000 bacteria per GRAM, that's 113,500,000 bacteria per pound of Raw Aragonite applied at 400 pounds per acre, it would be 45.4 billion nitrate producing bacteria per acre or over one million bacteria per square foot. Another great attribute of Raw Aragonite is that the bacteria is producing soil nitrates 24 hours per day, not just when the weather conditions dictates when plants can grow. The food source carbon for the bacteria is the aragonite or any organic matter in the field.
> 
> CALCIUM
> 
> When you purchase raw aragonite, you are receiving calcium that is soluble and can be spread in the Spring or Fall. Raw Aragonite goes to work the moment it comes in contact with the soil. Raw Aragonite has 37% calcium, less than 1% Magnesium with an array of micro-nutrients like boron, sulfur and zinc. Also, it has the rich, sea trace minerals.
> 
> Since Raw Aragonite is predigested by the sea creatures, it has a high absorbability to the plants. Aragonite in its raw state (not heat dried) brings to the soil some fantastic biological benefits. We have seen on countless farms that by appling the Raw Aragonite to the soil, we are able to limit the amount of fertilizer that is needed to grow a quality crop. Raw Aragonite can be used with any ROW CROP, VEGETABLE, PASTURE, HAY FIELD, LAWN OR GOLF COURSE.
> 
> Testimonial plant tissue results shows that the Raw Aragonite's calcium is absorbed into the plant within seven days. This is a faster accumulated rate than liquid calcium because this calcium, continually, comes up through the roots of the plants. With over FIVE years consecutive field applications, there has been no change in the soils Ph.
> 
> APPLICATION
> 
> The application of Raw Aragonite is with a lime spreader or fertilizer buggy. To encourage the continual reproduction of the Aerobic bacteria, it is delivered with a 3% to 5% moisture content. Application rate varies from 400#'s per acre for grasses and small grains; 500#'s for soybeans and corn is 650#'s per acre. If you are going back to back on corn, apply 750#'s per acre.
> 
> The Raw Aragonite calcium will be used before the soil calcium will be used because of the ease for plants to utilize it. Ag lime needs time to break down for plant utilization. If weather conditions are bad for optimum plant growth, it is common knowledge that one can apply either nitrogen or calcium to force a plant to grow. Raw Aragonite has both nitrates and calcium to provide continued growth during these periods. The plants will be more resistant to blights and fungus infections since they will be healthier. Insect pressure will be less due to the tighter cell structures of the plants.


Again, we have a little extra nutriment, a little more magnesium but not much and once more we find this is conducive to culturing soil bacteria. This is why the differentiation between this and mere aragonite at the LFS is important. Once more, I tip my hat to Madness for his searching.


----------



## ukamikazu

Another gentleman by the name of Traveller found a good substitution for the sul-po-mag and its other brand K-Mag called simply Min Plus. This substitution came about because it seems not everyone would have easy access to the sul-po-mag and looking at its analysis, it looks pretty good. It also buffers some but it is not dolomitic. This could be also used as an excellent substitute for the azomite if that is also hard to acquire.

Here's their copy.



> A soil enhancer and 100% remineralizer consisting of natural organic minerals,
> Minplus offers the benifits of rapid growth with reduced use of artificial chemicals.
> 
> Volcanic Rock
> In the form of a fine powder, volcanic rock dust contributes to soil friability and contains micro-nutrients not found in commercial NPK fertilisers. It also serves as a natural insect deterrent.
> 
> Silicates
> Silicates are necessary in building plant protein and in the synthesis of certain vitamins in plants. Silicates function as a vital element in protecting plants against insects and fungi attack, strengthening qualities and have been found to influence other minerals useful in plant metabolism.
> 
> Calcium
> Plants need calcium for normal cell division, as a component of cell walls, as a component of the salts inside the cells and as a part of the genetic coding materials.
> 
> Magnesium
> Magnesium is a key component of the chlorophylls, the green coloured cells in the plant. It is therefore vital as chlorophylls are the cells which perform photosynthesis. Also, plants need magnesium before thay can make use of phosphorous and magnesium also activates several different enzyme systems.
> 
> Iron
> Iron is a constitutent of many compounds in plants that regulates and promotes growth. It is especially important to the function of chloroplasts, the plant cells that contain chlorophyll, which are the particles that perform photosynthesis.
> 
> Potassium
> Potassium strengthens plant stalks and helps undo the stress induced by excess nitrogen.
> 
> Phosphorus
> Phosphorus is the "Go" food for plants.
> 
> Trace Minerals
> Minplus contains over 70 macro and micronutrients (such as copper, zinc, molybdenum, etc.) to replace depleted minerals and elements not supplied by commercial NPK fertilisers. Think of these as salt and pepper - you don't need a lot of it, but without them, plant growth would suffer.


----------



## Reef2plants

"The anoxic layer is important and I feel poorly publicized and discussed. This is the nexus for the carbon cycle and the universe of the sulfur cycle which plays a very important part of the iron cycle. This ought to be given its own thread but it has been mentioned by other luminaries like Tom Barr and wetman (aka The Skeptical Aquarist) and is an important foundation piece of ecology in general." 

Can we start a thread on this?!


----------



## ukamikazu

Sure! I'll put it on the to do list .


----------



## ecotanker

Glad to see more progress! I found a place in Maine that sells everything but the humus and the charcoal. They also sell online, http://www.fedcoseeds.com/ogs.htm.


----------



## ukamikazu

An updated ingredient list with recommended substitutions.

1. Laterite 10%
2. Sul-Po-Mag 5% Can be substituted with K-Mag or Min Plus (also known as Rock Dust).
3. Raw Aragonite 5% Effectively replaces aragonite.
4. Menefee Humates 5% Completely replaces the peat granules.
5. Horticultural Carbon 10% Bio Char looks like a good type/brand to use. 
6. Azomite 10% Can be substituted with Min Plus (also known as Rock Dust)
7. Humus 55%


----------



## D9Vin

So, one question I have is is there really any advantage of using laterite over any other high iron natural clay?


----------



## ukamikazu

Accessibility, relatively inexpensive and having it in an already powdered form where you can find it is just really convenient. If you have other suggestions I would love to explore them.


----------



## D9Vin

Well, I personally have a bunch of red clay underneath just about everything where I live. It takes a bit of refining, but that isn't too difficult. Also I have one lfs, and the lack of competition makes for some lousy prices. I haven't ever seen powdered laterite, where would I find it?


----------



## ukamikazu

Dupla sells it in powdered form and the old boxes of API First Layer. The old boxes look like this:










The new boxes look like this but they're pellets:


----------



## ecotanker

How about replacing laterite with red pottery clay? Some time it is even sold in a powder form.

I was wondering where the nitrogen will come from to feed the plant from the current list of ingredients?
Or will it be supplied by fish food and fish wastes?


----------



## ukamikazu

Most humus, especially that prepared on commercial scales, is pretty consistently at a 10:1 ratio of carbon to nitrogen. There is roughly 5% nitrogen in any given bag of humus so it could be said to be nitrogen poor. The reason for this is that too much nitrogen will off gas as ammonia which is nitrogen lost. So when composting (mineralizing) there is a balance that needs to be maintained or you're just wasting nutrients, or more specifically nitrogen. 

Staying nitrogen lean is probably the safest bet until we figure out more. However, nitrogen will build over time in these conditions from biological activity, fish waste and fish food. Overloading with nitrogen to only lose it in a cloud of ammonia later sounds too much to me like an invitation to catastrophe.


----------



## ukamikazu

I think I found something more raw and rich in organic acids and humates than the Menefee Humates, with more potential to form fulvic acids, straight leonardite. It looks like a very good substitute or rather it should probably be considered a primary, with the Menefee Humates as the substitute. It appears to be an impressive organic carbon source in and of itself. It's also rather reactive and a rich source of phosphorous and nitrogen.

Let's do this:

1. Laterite 10%
2. Sul-Po-Mag 5% Can be substituted with K-Mag or Min Plus (also known as Rock Dust).
3. Raw Aragonite 5% Can be substituted with regular aragonite.
4. Leonardite 10% Can be substituted with Menefee Humates (first choice) or peat pellets (second choice)
5. Horticultural Carbon 10% 
6. Azomite 10% Can be substituted with Min Plus (also known as Rock Dust)
7. Humus 50%

I think it's finished, now .....


----------



## NatCh

Micheal S. Montalbano said:


> You are much better off with no numbers than meaningless ones. The minute you believe numbers uncritically, that is, without understanding how they're calculated and how well they measure whatever they're supposed to measure, you will generate a breed of employee who will produce numbers and not results. Your data-processing system will then serve not to describe reality but to lie about it.


I've been reading this thread with great interest. One thing I seem to have missed in it, though, is whether the percentages are by volume, weight or something else. It'll be some time before I can re-substrate my tank, but that seems like a handy thing to know for mixing this stuff up.

Thank you, everyone, for the excellent thread!


----------



## ukamikazu

You're most welcome and it was intended to be done by mass, I stated that earlier in the thread because it would be easier to work with because you combine so many disparate materials that any calculation by volume would be a guess at best. If you can make a bunch of it, then fill it up to 1.5 to 2 inches then you could reasonably say that all these components together equals x number of gallons. 

Nope, do it by mass for now until we figure out volume. Much easier that way.


----------



## NatCh

As I suspected, I missed the mass. I figured it more or less had to be mass, but I didn't want to assume and ... well, you know. 

Thank you for restating, in any case.


Do you think there would be any issue with storing this mixture once it was made up?

I'm thinking that whatever happens, I'm likely to end up with (a fair bit) more of the ingredients than I'd need for a single tank, so I was contemplating the notion of mixing up as much as I could, and just storing it somewhere in plastic buckets. Logic tells me that the ingredients all, essentially, being dirt, that would be fine, but logic is often just a way to be wrong with confidence, so I figure it's a good idea to ask if anyone has any specific knowledge on the point. :shrug:

I don't know that I'd want to do that, but I'm wondering about it.


----------



## ukamikazu

The only concern I have is that the leonardite would invite some microbial activity but as long as it stays dry, then it can be stored indefinitely. Fulvic acids on their own are shelf stable for very long periods of time, this is most likely true with the leonardite so store away your excess by all means.


----------



## Silvering

Or if you don't want the extra additives sitting around in buckets in your house, you could always post on the FS/FT forum...


----------



## ukamikazu

Even better!


----------



## Reef2plants

Would this be ok Leonardite? 
http://www.amazon.com/General-Organ...3MMI/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1323216995&sr=8-1


----------



## ukamikazu

Actually, that's the very stuff I was looking at the other night ! I think it's perfect and exactly what we're looking for.


----------



## ecotanker

That black diamond is a liquid solution. Is this what we want? There is a solid pellet version, but it is harder to get a hold of.


----------



## ukamikazu

I would feel better with a solid, but it seems this is more accessible.

I did manage to find something by Tera Vita, 85% humic acids, http://www.organicgardengrower.com/leonardite-humic_acids. I believe I would gravitate towards the soluble powder but they want you to call for special pricing. Other than that they have liquid and granules.


----------



## Reef2plants

http://www.amazon.com/General-Hydro...9?s=home-garden&ie=UTF8&qid=1323236638&sr=1-9

Here is the granular by the same company. So granular over liquid?


----------



## ukamikazu

Ideally, yes if only because it is easier to deal with by mass.


----------



## DeChaoOrdo

I'm sorry if this has already been addressed, but where are the supplies of phosphorous and nitrogen going to come from in this mix? Seems a very good base of micros and potassium but as the only organic matter being added is humus I can't see where a steady source of N and P would come from. 

Additionally, is there a reason all of these soil recipes call for KCl rather than something like glauconite as a potassium source?


----------



## Reef2plants

I am under the assumption that we will be providing plenty of N and P from fish food, mulm, among other things. Ukamikazu stated earlier that he felt it was safer to stay lean in the N and P department. This is experimental at best and I think its wise for now. I am sure once more people have toyed with this substrate we will see ratios tweaked and possibly new ingredients and/or removed ingredients.


----------



## ukamikazu

DeChaoOrdo said:


> I'm sorry if this has already been addressed, but where are the supplies of phosphorous and nitrogen going to come from in this mix? Seems a very good base of micros and potassium but as the only organic matter being added is humus I can't see where a steady source of N and P would come from.
> 
> Additionally, is there a reason all of these soil recipes call for KCl rather than something like glauconite as a potassium source?


A more active thread at http://www.aquaticplantenthusiasts.com/substrate/4256-new-recipe-procedure-mineralized-topsoil.html has recorded our experimentation and glauconite is now part of the reformulation. Since then, reading many documents on wetland soils, they are high in organics and in reality can only contain very little P and N because they are wet but because they are wet, P and N are produced almost entirely through biological action.

Have a look at that thread and I'll update this one later tonight.


----------



## DeChaoOrdo

ukamikazu said:


> A more active thread at http://www.aquaticplantenthusiasts.com/substrate/4256-new-recipe-procedure-mineralized-topsoil.html has recorded our experimentation and glauconite is now part of the reformulation. Since then, reading many documents on wetland soils, they are high in organics and in reality can only contain very little P and N because they are wet but because they are wet, P and N are produced almost entirely through biological action.
> 
> Have a look at that thread and I'll update this one later tonight.


Thanks for the link that thread is a good read. I think I may be misunderstanding what you mean by humus as to include a humate fraction and a fulvate fraction, as my original contention was that humus is so thoroughly processed that it does little but provide a good bed for the organic processes to continue.

In your research have you come across any plants that grow full submersed and have a nitrogen fixing capacity? It seems like a system like this would need to draw more nitrogen in through N2 fixing in order to be able to replace the nitrogen lost to a completed cycle. Or do you intend to incorporate an aquaponic portion using legumes or some other nitrogen fixing plant?


----------



## ukamikazu

DeChaoOrdo said:


> Thanks for the link that thread is a good read. I think I may be misunderstanding what you mean by humus as to include a humate fraction and a fulvate fraction, as my original contention was that humus is so thoroughly processed that it does little but provide a good bed for the organic processes to continue.
> 
> In your research have you come across any plants that grow full submersed and have a nitrogen fixing capacity? It seems like a system like this would need to draw more nitrogen in through N2 fixing in order to be able to replace the nitrogen lost to a completed cycle. Or do you intend to incorporate an aquaponic portion using legumes or some other nitrogen fixing plant?


That I know of, there is no such aquatic plant that can do that. If there is, I'd be happy just to possess it.

The humus itself is a mere a sink for nutrients and is to host the very biological activity I'm describing and thus promote. I also comes with a few nutrients, though not many, can serve as an alternate, bio-available carbon source and triggers favorable hormonal responses from plants.

The same activity that will eventually create P and N. This ought to be easy after a tank is established in this fashion given the fact that it is a closed system and we do tend to overfeed and not vacuum our substrates hence my insistence on a capping material with a very high CEC. You hold N and P in the substrate from food and poop and the necessary bacterial activity will release it into a useful form provided you can meet or exceed chemical oxygen demand. This can be tricky.

There is wisdom in this. If you can PM me a reminder for tonight, I will share some of my source material where wetlands were studied and this material reveals, incredibly enough, that high P and N are actually lethal to wetlands, encouraging the production of some very caustic substances that are also anti-microbial as well as, surprise surprise, trigger massive algae blooms that do throw such habitats into tailspins.

On average, the typical bog receives less than 1 gram per square meter per year of N or P ,astonishingly enough, which is enough to replenish what is in reserve in the soil of the bog. Remember, the plants in that bog are getting what they need from the biological activity in their natural substrate is providing it almost on demand as it reduces all the poop, dead bodies, leaves, etc, which happens constantly, such that adding more throws the system into chaos. A bog is, after all, an organic soup so throwing that little extra in there is a bad thing.

This is what I intend to replicate. A completely biological solution that does not force us to essentially have our tanks teeter tottering on the brink of eutrophication or starvation. This is where I seek to find the balance. Ultimately, the system will be self feeding as long as you feed your fish and do a water change every now and again.

Almost naive the sentiment but I feel strongly that replicating the wetland ecosystem is the way to go and that means establishing several elemental cycles like iron and sulfur and the accompanying microorganisms. Granted, getting enough P and N in for the initial start up is still proving tricky but that's why it's a public discussion. Many minds are better than just one.


----------



## ukamikazu

Here ya'll go!

Wetland soils: genesis, hydrology, landscapes, and classification, 
Edited by J. L. Richardson and M. J. Vepraskas
2001 CRC Press LLC, ISBN# 1-56670-484-7
Chapter 4 "Redox Chemistry of Hydric Soils", page 85

This and many like it are what I've been consuming. I believe this one is available through Google Books for free. There are many like it all of them terribly insightful.


----------



## DeChaoOrdo

The more I read and think about this the more it seems like something I want to try out. However, I am still uneasy about not having at least some unstable organic matter for an initial load. I use perlite as a water polisher in all of my tanks with a powerhead in them, would dusting some of this filter material between the mix and the cap fall outside of the philosophy of this experiment? 

Is the aragonite supposed to be a sand sized aragonite or aragonite crystals? I ask because I am going to substitute calcite for aragonite since I have an easier source for calcite than aragonite and calcite would more likely stay in my substrate and out of my water column while aragonite would dissolve into my water column.


----------



## ukamikazu

DeChaoOrdo said:


> The more I read and think about this the more it seems like something I want to try out. However, I am still uneasy about not having at least some unstable organic matter for an initial load. I use perlite as a water polisher in all of my tanks with a powerhead in them, would dusting some of this filter material between the mix and the cap fall outside of the philosophy of this experiment?
> 
> Is the aragonite supposed to be a sand sized aragonite or aragonite crystals? I ask because I am going to substitute calcite for aragonite since I have an easier source for calcite than aragonite and calcite would more likely stay in my substrate and out of my water column while aragonite would dissolve into my water column.


It's flexible like that, sure enough! The thing that worries me is calcium, magnesium, iron, chlorine and sodium. The usual liming material are quite rich in sodium or chlorine which is undesirable though they are great buffers. Aragonite is somewhat dolomitic though it is mostly calcium. Add sul-po-mag and soft rock phosphate and you get your sweetener at about a ratio of 4:1 maybe 5:1 Ca to Mg without going overboard on any one thing and not have to sacrifice diversity and potassium. Potassium I feel cannot be overstated enough.

That ratio is the sweet spot where where Fe, Ca and Mg don't interfere with each other's uptake and you still get to buffer. It's all a balancing act.

To answer your question, yes, calcite is fine. If you want to add organic materials, I'd be careful because it does require a certain amount of oxygen and it's hard to control for the components as in one load of mulm has more P than another. Using organic stuff like that could have other consequences like making noxious gases. I haven't thought about that yet. It is an interesting proposition though.

Or, if your concern is ammonium to begin a cycle, I have found that upon initially filling a tank with this substrate that there is a flush of ammonium from the humus, up to 2 ppm's. A test tank pretty much cycled fully in 16 days with no other additions and only two water changes. Perhaps this was your concern?


----------



## DeChaoOrdo

ukamikazu said:


> It's flexible like that, sure enough! The thing that worries me is calcium, magnesium, iron, chlorine and sodium. The usual liming material are quite rich in sodium or chlorine which is undesirable though they are great buffers. Aragonite is somewhat dolomitic though it is mostly calcium. Add sul-po-mag and soft rock phosphate and you get your sweetener at about a ratio of 4:1 maybe 5:1 Ca to Mg without going overboard on any one thing and not have to sacrifice diversity and potassium. Potassium I feel cannot be overstated enough.
> 
> That ratio is the sweet spot where where Fe, Ca and Mg don't interfere with each other's uptake and you still get to buffer. It's all a balancing act.
> 
> To answer your question, yes, calcite is fine. If you want to add organic materials, I'd be careful because it does require a certain amount of oxygen and it's hard to control for the components as in one load of mulm has more P than another. Using organic stuff like that could have other consequences like making noxious gases. I haven't thought about that yet. It is an interesting proposition though.
> 
> Or, if your concern is ammonium to begin a cycle, I have found that upon initially filling a tank with this substrate that there is a flush of ammonium from the humus, up to 2 ppm's. A test tank pretty much cycled fully in 16 days with no other additions and only two water changes. Perhaps this was your concern?


I can certainly understand the concern with Cl and Na. What I have access to is pure calcite, which is CaCO3 and nothing else, as is aragonite. It's simply a more stable form. However, what I have are calcite crystals and if I don't have to run them through a ball mill I'd rather not, but if the consistency required is one of sand I will. Would the crystals work(the average size is around 5mm) or would a more even distribution be needed than the large size would allow be desirable?

Your contentions about gases and caustic substances make sense. My thoughts are adding the organic material(in the mulm trapped in the used perlite) high enough in the substrate that it would slowly settle into the bio-bed over time. Part of my concern is that my background is in hydro- and aeroponics which the predominant philosophy is to understand how nature works and try to make it more efficient(a fair amount of hubris I know, but even in planted aquariums we see higher rates of growth than is typical of plants in nature). Adding organic material that is partially stable but will still degrade steadily, especially around the oxygen rich established rootzones, seems like it would be a good middle ground for me while the humic soil matures. The flush of ammonia you mentioned makes it sound like this would be unnecessary and may lead to fertilizer burn. I'm curious precisely what the label on the humus read in this tank(since humus seems to be a bit of a term of art among soil manufacturers, with humate or humic acid being used for the scientific understanding of humus).

I'm still researching the potassium issue, but am thinking of adding a small amount of greensand( glauconite sand that is mostly potassium iron silicates) as well as the azomite and sul po mag to provide a long range source of potassium(and iron) though the amount of mineral potassium in azomite seems like it might make this addition unnecessary, though.

Thank you for your thorough replies, you've given me a lot to think about and I'm tempted to set up a proper controlled experiment using your recipe as close as I can get to it, my usual recipe, a couple of mixes similar to your recipe and a commercial substrate like ADA aquasoil. If I can figure out a few kinks to control exterior influences, that is.


----------



## ukamikazu

I'm glad I got your interest . And nothing has to be milled into a powder. Pellets, crystals, nuggets, whatever you got it's all good. I just suggest milled for convenience sake but it is not a requirement. Also, I'm getting in some more fresh humus this week. I'll check the label for you. You're absolutely right about a lot of stuff being more a term of art.


----------



## thefisherman

ukamikazu said:


> That I know of, there is no such aquatic plant that can do that. If there is, I'd be happy just to possess it.
> 
> The humus itself is a mere a sink for nutrients and is to host the very biological activity I'm describing and thus promote. I also comes with a few nutrients, though not many, can serve as an alternate, bio-available carbon source and triggers favorable hormonal responses from plants.
> 
> The same activity that will eventually create P and N. This ought to be easy after a tank is established in this fashion given the fact that it is a closed system and we do tend to overfeed and not vacuum our substrates hence my insistence on a capping material with a very high CEC. You hold N and P in the substrate from food and poop and the necessary bacterial activity will release it into a useful form provided you can meet or exceed chemical oxygen demand. This can be tricky.
> 
> There is wisdom in this. If you can PM me a reminder for tonight, I will share some of my source material where wetlands were studied and this material reveals, incredibly enough, that high P and N are actually lethal to wetlands, encouraging the production of some very caustic substances that are also anti-microbial as well as, surprise surprise, trigger massive algae blooms that do throw such habitats into tailspins.
> 
> On average, the typical bog receives less than 1 gram per square meter per year of N or P ,astonishingly enough, which is enough to replenish what is in reserve in the soil of the bog. Remember, the plants in that bog are getting what they need from the biological activity in their natural substrate is providing it almost on demand as it reduces all the poop, dead bodies, leaves, etc, which happens constantly, such that adding more throws the system into chaos. A bog is, after all, an organic soup so throwing that little extra in there is a bad thing.
> 
> This is what I intend to replicate. A completely biological solution that does not force us to essentially have our tanks teeter tottering on the brink of eutrophication or starvation. This is where I seek to find the balance. Ultimately, the system will be self feeding as long as you feed your fish and do a water change every now and again.
> 
> Almost naive the sentiment but I feel strongly that replicating the wetland ecosystem is the way to go and that means establishing several elemental cycles like iron and sulfur and the accompanying microorganisms. Granted, getting enough P and N in for the initial start up is still proving tricky but that's why it's a public discussion. Many minds are better than just one.


with all due respect, doesn't walstad outline this in her treatise, "Ecology of the planted Aquarium"? more importantly doesn't she practice this "biological solution" in the keeping and maintenance of her own tanks?

apologies if i missed the main idea of the thread. i will reread it again

Sent from my iPhone


----------



## ukamikazu

You are correct. She and Sean Murphy are the two folks I've drawn my inspiration from. But more importantly there is a garrulous fellow around here named Niko who has been trying to hammer home the same point as well. His use of the Socratic method really helped me.

No where I differ is that this is intended for use in a high tech tank, though it is just as good for a low tech one, and there is also the idea of engineering the substrate to suit your needs the way a farmer does. The proportions I state are merely suggestions. I'm trying to reformulate a new baseline right now but in the future anyone should be able to reformulate it to meet their own needs based on their current or targeted growing conditions. Traditional MTS and Walstad tanks are not really adjustable in this fashion. The use of humus as the entire basis is unique to this method and it is entirely because of it's stability and it's useful as a matrix/sink with a high CEC and all those stimulating humates and fulvates.


----------



## thefisherman

ahh i see thank you for clarifying, and again i meant no disrespect. regarding soil mixtures and/or "engineering" soil to perform in a specific fashion, I would research emergent growth formulations.

imo soil used in emergent growth setups is naturally the next step to a fully submersed soil. i believe emergent growth setups and/or DSM setups owe its success due to _highly localized_ biological processes (basically decomposition of any organic matter) in the soil.

Highly localized because the volume of water in emergent setups is usually only enough to saturate the soil; prevents the unwanted "dump" of nutrients into the water column causing all kinds of havoc algae bloom to name one. The other is, decomposition in highly enriched soils with lots of organic stuff (peat, humic substances, mulm, detritus etc.) is extremely acidic. Some of the best terrestrial soils out there boast water retention particles and reaching a pH of 5... this makes sense because it is through decomposition (biological processes you cited) that nutrients become bio-available to plants. This can be bad however as you know in an aquarium especially if it is to support fauna.

Because I believe the above to be true, then I have to accept the long term performance of the soil. It has been documented that MTS has a finite period of time before it has to be "recharged" with nutrients. This is probably why inert substrates like eco-complete perform well overtime with water column dosing and supplemental root tabs. The substrate is basically just the _media_ that hold the plant down and trap nutrients in the form of mulm, plant detritus, poop, etc. (Also why you shouldn't gravel vac eco complete). the other downfall of MTS is due to its natural decomposition over time (i.e. peat, humic substances as underlayment etc.), it eventually turns to a very tight almost non porous clay, which presents its own set of problems (ie. severely anaerobic substrate, lo redox etc.).

Long story short... there is no "magic soil" you can create that is an end all be all for a planted tank. There is only the understanding we have of conditions and parameters that will be met, with or without our aid, regardless if the tank thrives or crashes.

Perhaps there is soo much focus on the enigmatic "magic soil formula" because it happens at the most exciting part of our hobby...the beginning.

as for a recipe here's my two cents:
- sphagnum peat (serve as media and humic component)
- enriched potting soil (serve as media and fertilizer, usually osmocote pellets)
- crushed dolomite or seashells (GH booster, pH buffer)
- pool filter sand or blasting sand (serves as cap, inert media, promotes drainage when mixed to underlayment)

This is my (and probably many others before me) soil mix used for my emersed and submerged potted plants. So far with positive results.

i look forward to see what you come up with in your own search good luck!


----------



## ukamikazu

thefisherman said:


> Long story short... there is no "magic soil" you can create that is an end all be all for a planted tank. There is only the understanding we have of conditions and parameters that will be met, with or without our aid, regardless if the tank thrives or crashes.
> 
> Perhaps there is soo much focus on the enigmatic "magic soil formula" because it happens at the most exciting part of our hobby...the beginning.


No worries, I'm not a magician :slywink:. And I agree with all those sentiments. Engineering a substrate with more control over the inputs that will meet or exceed those parameters while not overloading on organics that could potentially turn into something awful seems very realistic to me, perhaps even a bit conservative. It's all about balance. No magic here.



thefisherman said:


> as for a recipe here's my two cents:
> - sphagnum peat (serve as media and humic component)
> - enriched potting soil (serve as media and fertilizer, usually osmocote pellets)
> - crushed dolomite or seashells (GH booster, pH buffer)
> - pool filter sand or blasting sand (serves as cap, inert media, promotes drainage when mixed to underlayment)
> 
> This is my (and probably many others before me) soil mix used for my emersed and submerged potted plants. So far with positive results.
> 
> i look forward to see what you come up with in your own search good luck!


Thank you and I did consider those choices but passed them over. I used something similar to that too in my emergent set-ups and it is great... for emergent set-ups. Submerged pots work well in these instances too but I don't want to see pots in a tank and compaction issues come into play too frequently for my tastes. I have had the occasional pot turn into a stink bomb despite my best efforts. I stopped submerging them altogether shortly after the first couple of times. Meh, it happens. You reevaluate and move on.

Sphagnum moss I discounted because it can over acidify, compact and it has some antibacterial properties (though not a lot) that I would rather avoid.

Enriched potting soil offers me no control about what I want to put in my substrate, I have to accept what Scott's (makers of Miracle Gro) thinks I should have, way too many organics that can still decompose and compaction is still a concern.

Aragonite is already included so no worries there and it is dolomitic so there is a little Mg.

I've never been a fan of sand but that's a personal choice for me. Just not into it.

You also have to remember, this mixture is meant to be used for fully immersed tanks so you'll have materials under water pressure far and away from an emergent set up and not nearly as much oxygen. For me it's about loading with minerals using a biological matrix that is already in a maximally reduced state that can feed the plants until the needed flora and fauna can establish themselves and the natural processes begin to take hold. From my reference material and from samples I've taken in local Texas waterways, what I'm proposing here is pretty close to those submerged systems just a lot less silty, rocky, better retention and certainly a lot less compacted.


----------



## thefisherman

i see. i totally share your concern about compaction; it is probably why potted plants turn into stink bombs. i can see this lead to super anaerobic fermentative breakdowns and
methanogenesis etc.

your goal is very intruiging, once you mixture is finalized at the start, how would you deal with the long term? wouldn't your soil eventually run out of juice (i.e after 12 months) and turn into comoacted clay regardless?

also i hear (i may be wrong) that TX and parts of SoCal have super hard water, also called liquid rock (ie. +1200ppm GH). how does this come into play with your soil mixture strategy? wouldn't this encourage you to use even more humic organic substances in your soil?




Sent from my iPhone


----------



## ukamikazu

You've got it one. I too have liquid concrete. Out of the tap, pH 9 and I run out of test solution before I can figure out the KH and GH. Our water comes from a limestone aquifer. This was a major concern for me and why I got a little happy on the acidic components and anything nutritious that could buffer at the same time. 

Of course the beauty of having a component system with lots of gradation is that if you live in New York or Oregon where the water is very soft, between pH 6.9-7.5, you can reduce the leonardite, add more aragonite or sul-po-mag, etc. And I suggest doing that because there is some seepage that will make it into the water column. A volunteer who got ahead of me noticed that his KH lowered, the pH changed by only .1 degrees but his GH rose up significantly, from 16 to 28. He also had 2 ppm's worth of ammonium so we know there's nitrogen in there. 

I do fully expect it to run out of juice and deplete significantly if it was a plant only aquarium. If I keep fish, feed them well and regardless of my water change schedule, the processes should be in place to continue recharging the humic portion, charcoal and the high CEC substrate. If however over the long term these processes can't be fed fast enough or depletion is too great I would naturally admit to this publicly but at that point, I would begin very mild water column dosing, say something like PPS Pro if only because I would be using the water column dosing to recharge the substrate. This is how Amano-san does it (and why he does it) and should be the point of water column dosing in the first place.


----------



## thefisherman

very kool man... i wish i had harder water lol. my KH is like 1 and pH likes to get low in my tank (6.0-6.4). i've been relying on EI GH boost at wc, and even then my KH doesn't budge. i'm afraid for my potted plants in my grow out 30breeder 

so for now just daily monitoring, add a powerhead... hope i get enough waterflow and surface agitation to keep from getting too acidic; both in the water column and top layer of my substrate.

its great chatting with you man, great exchange. pm me anytime if you wanna bounce ideas bro 


Sent from my iPhone


----------



## ukamikazu

I am happy to announce that we have a production recipe ready to go! It represents a baseline and because it is a component system, it can be adjusted to suit various needs. It even has a name. We took a vote at APE and the name *E*nriched *H*umic *S*ubstrate or EHS won.

Humus = Aquarium length x aquarium width x desired height (not to exceed 2 inches) / 231 = amount of humus needed in gallons
Horticultural Charcoal = 1/4 the volume of the Humus
Aragonite = 5 ml per gallon or 1/4 cup per 10 gallons 
Azomite = 15 ml per gallon or 2/3 cups per 10 gallons 
Colloidal Phosphate = 15 ml per gallon or 2/3 cups per 10 gallons - This is more commonly known as soft rock phosphate and is 18% bioavailable P. 
Glauconite = 5 ml per gallon or 1/4 cup per 10 gallons - This is more commonly known as green sand and is a rich source of K, Fe and Mg. 
Laterite =30 ml per gallon or 1 ounce per gallon
Leonardite = 30 ml per gallon or 1 ounce per gallon 
Sul-Po-Mag = 10 ml per gallon or 1/2 cups per 10 gallons

Here's some extended commentary.

Ferti-lome Charcoal
Based on two volunteers' experiences, I decided to relent and just incorporate the charcoal. I strongly recommend charcoal chips as opposed to finely milled powder like biochar. I found a charcoal I like by an outfit called Fert-Lome. They are in wide distribution. A Google search will find many sources and Google shopping will help you find the best deals.

Ancient Forest Humus
Using the same volunteers' feedback, I think I found an excellent source for humus. This outfit sells Ancient Forest brand Alaskan humus and it's pretty good. It required no sifting and has a little bit of clay in it. You can break it up more if you want, in fact the clods break up very easily. I found maybe a single small twig in the one gallon I used out of the 2.5 gallons I bought.

Leonardite appears to have a number of by names but those names seem to always have a little asterisk at the end noting that it is derived from leonardite. I've seen it called humate concentrate (technically correct which is the best kind of correct !) or concentrated fulvates (not technically correct but not a deal breaker either). This is another one where Google is your friend.

A cheap source of aragonite will be from organic supply places. They tend to call it powdered limestone and it is very finely milled and is 100% raw aragonite and a lot cheaper than what you'd get from various aquarium suppliers. See the credited sources after the next paragraph.

Everything else I found the best price/quantity/quality/shipping on eBay, believe it or not. It was that simple. None of this stuff is as rare as we thought it was in the beginning so even the previously recommended substitutions may not even be necessary though having alternatives is nice.

I would like to take a moment and plug eBay sellers kelp4less in Idaho who provided the aragonite, soft rock phosphate and leonardite. And greensensenatural who helped with the Sul-Po-Mag and glauconite.

Until I can make a pretty brochure or nice infographic, here's a simple guide in pictures. I'm not presenting this as a final work, I just want to get this out there for everyone. By the way, I would not mind painting my walls the color of the Sul-Po-Mag. It's really pretty!

1.









2.









3.









4.









5.









6.









7.









8.









9.









2.5 gallons of EHS ready to go! 









Here is a journal started by one of the members of my home forum with an EHS tank and an MTS tank side by side,
http://www.aquaticplantenthusiasts....l-twin-20-gallon-tall-mts-ehs-case-study.html.

Most importantly, I will be appearing with Glenn Mccreedy and Betty Harris to discuss EHS and Walstad aquariums on Robert Hudson's Aqua Botanic blog radio show on Saturday, 28th January, 2012 at noon CST. Glenn and I will come on the last half of the show. You can read more about it and tune in at http://www.blogtalkradio.com/aquabotanic/2012/01/28/aqua-botanic-radio-using-soil-in-the-aquarium. There's an 877 number so you can call in with your questions. Please join! The more the merrier. The show will also be archived as a podcast so you can listen later.

As ever, everyone is invited to follow along in the major research & testing thread at http://www.aquaticplantenthusiasts.com/substrate/4256-new-recipe-procedure-mineralized-topsoil.html.


----------



## moonlight7

Sounds good, thanks for the information guys


----------



## DogFish2.0

Very interesting read also a good reference thread for supplements.

I have to wonder at what point does this stop being MTS and 
becomes DIY ADA Substrate? Wouldn't this cocktail be rather expensive 
to mix-up? Can these ingredients be purchased in small portions
for one or two vendors to contain shipping costs?

I'm left thinking this is that classic struggle between theory
and practical/affordable application.


----------



## ukamikazu

That is a good point. Many budget minded hobbyists have brought that up and alternatives exist, many discovered by folks right here. As I mentioned in my initial post, this is horticulture for its own sake and, I think, a relevant if not a minor contributory evolutionary step on the way to that holy grail, the self sustaining tank.

I put this together without cost in mind. I decided if there was something worth discovering or if anything new or useful pops out if it then I will go whole hog and not cheap out. One of my criticisms of the hobby is that we do tend to be rather cheap, or at least North American hobbyists can be which is funny because this isn't a cheap hobby.

ADA does have it right for the most part. What I and others are especially interested in is how to break it down into a component system. ADA tanks don't last forever but they do last a long time. We know how they work for the most part, the ecology is sound, but what if you want to use just one component or you have everything else working out for you but there is one addition that gets you closer to a goal, just one component and you don't want to tear down just to have an entire ADA system. This is the other half of my efforts which are ongoing.

Right now, I'm seeing how long it takes to exhaust everything in my test platform. So far, potassium was the only thing to give out and that happened 6 months later.


----------



## DogFish2.0

I do appreciate the effort you've put into this project as I'm working toward the same goal



ukamikazu said:


> .... I think, a relevant if not a minor contributory evolutionary step on the way to that holy grail, the self sustaining tank.


I am taking a much more organic path http://www.plantedtank.net/forums/showthread.php?t=154884

Shock & entertainment value aside, the initial point was do not fear Organic material and anaerobic bacteria as they are an important part of the equation. After running that Ten gallon for over a year, which I feel validates my premise, I have plans for a 2nd tank to fine tune the concept and offer a less dramatic option. 

I was especially interested in your use of Horticultural Charcoal as a nutrient sink. My plans for the next tank include using hardwood ash as a potassium source. After reading your thread and doing some additional research I can see the benefit of incorporating some wood charcoal into my next mix.

BTW - I'm currently dosing with Azomite in my tanks and my Aquapoinc system and I feel the results are very positive for plants, fish and inverts.

The cheap mindset goes beyond the hobby in the USA it's part of the "New-Normal". What I find funny is someone complaining about a Hobbyist's Swap plant being $1 more than an online vendor and the post is sent from a $500 cell ph.


----------

