# Dutch in yo' face



## niko

Here:
http://translate.google.com/transla...ent&view=article&id=131&Itemid=134&edit-text=

I think after the first two pictures you will be as speechless as I got. Then when you get to the close ups of plants you will see that you can get even more speechless.

One interesting thing that I learned is that apparently the judging is neither by looking at a photograph nor a single impression of the tank. It is an actual, trained, person that comes to see the tank a few times during the year. Apparently the rules and requirements are so strict that the membership to the Dutch aquascaping society has dropped 10 times in the last decade or so.

It almost feels like what we have in the rest of the world is the opposite - contests based on single photographs, often photoshopped, with plants added in a timed manner just for the shot, no strict rules (other than "follow the Leader" if you are going to have any chance at placing high up in the ADA contest (and never among the first for very obvious reasons)), and disregard of what is the overall impression of the tank in the space it is placed.

Long story short - I hope that the Dutch style and way of looking at a planted tank do not get lost.

But wait, there is more! Here's more eye candy that short circuits the mind:
http://translate.googleusercontent....id=156&usg=ALkJrhgm8UoO0hM-46GXINSXz6SM1K5U1g

In the link above, in the section "Soil yes or no?", I really liked the line "...The biological balance is much more critical [_than fertilization_] and algae problems lie with disturbance of this balance is always lurking...". On some other pages you can find pictures of algae problems but not a clear cut information how to deal with them.

And here it is - a page showing a real Dutch tank in tip-top shape while waiting for the judges to come on a specific day. Length of the leaves has been timed etc. This is how the real thing looks like:
http://translate.googleusercontent....mid=27&usg=ALkJrhhxjN0i03SV4jRsJVy97opnf_RZog

More judging pictures:
http://translate.googleusercontent....id=148&usg=ALkJrhigFVh0NWKp8wQRvuDqei6QUmJ8gg

From all that beauty and good information I started to get the feeling that just like us, the real Duch aquascapers play these masterpieces a lot by ear. I have the feeling that that's why I cannot find concrete information how to setup a Dutch aquarium other than the aquascaping rules. What seems to surface is that they are much more stringent on the ranges of parameters. For example in one place the water hardness was suggested to be kept at 3.5-4 - not like the usual 3-6 range that we are all used to. Also CO2 is not a panacea and does no to be as high as possible. Same rule seems to apply to the light (although for us it is hard to understand how all these plants will look the way they look with medium-level light). And finally there is definitely more of a "big picture" mindset - it is not mainly about a few "special" things (substrate, light, CO2, ferts) but more about... everything, including the electric cords sticking out from the back of the tank.


----------



## Tugg

Eye candy is right. Thanks for sharing your find. Probably my favorite part was the caption under a photo.... "Here is the fish I've been looking for for years."

Thats when you know you have a nice full, lush, and healthy scape. When you can't find a fish for YEARS. Not a few days or weeks... but whole years.


----------



## acitydweller

i agree with many points here. It seems this hobby has evolved a bit and deviated away from an art form. Guys who really appreciate the various species, the work to help them reach their prime have tanks that are quite different from the mainstream. I have to revisit those photos to id those plants. Loving finding stuff like this. thanks Niko!


----------



## Zapins

Dutch aquariums are code for "collectoritis." I approve! They have an extremely large tank there in that link.

I'm working on my own collecto-Dutch aquarium. It makes deficiency testing easy (27 species all showing one deficiency - Zapins' plant heaven).


----------



## Michael

Eye candy indeed! And I learned an interesting new term that Google did not translate: pimplepaarse. From context, I think this is the Dutch word for clown puke!


----------



## niko

Did you all visit the page where the guy shows this same astonishing tank covered with algae? Did you catch the drift when he was talking about some kind of approach that relied on nothing ever being missing and 50% water changes? I hope he never tries it because he will learn a whole lot about instability and monumental efforts to balance things on the edge.



To me these guys do a lot of observation. Seems that they are of a completely different mindset. I mean it looks like they too do not have all the answers but I really like their whole approach - it is truly about appreciation of the underwater world in the glass box. No hurry, no fads.



Imagine running the same size tank the way most folk here do it. That would be an endless race to beat issues with a small lead and a whole lot of equipment and effort. 



I will write to some of the Dutch folk that I find on the net asking about the way a typical Dutch tank is setup and run. My hope is that they will be responsive to our interest in "their" hobby. I just have a feel that it will turn out to be like asking how to create art - few rules to be followed and lots of feel.


Sent from my RM-893_nam_att_206 using Tapatalk


----------



## Yo-han

Michael said:


> Eye candy indeed! And I learned an interesting new term that Google did not translate: pimplepaarse. From context, I think this is the Dutch word for clown puke!


Haha, in fact, it is a blueish bright purple color Paars=purple. Pimpelpaars is untranslatable



niko said:


> Did you all visit the page where the guy shows this same astonishing tank covered with algae? Did you catch the drift when he was talking about some kind of approach that relied on nothing ever being missing and 50% water changes? I hope he never tries it because he will learn a whole lot about instability and monumental efforts to balance things on the edge.


By accident I gave a nature style lecture at Paluzee, the aquarium club he joins. I spoke quite a while with Bart himself. Very nice guy, who loves to share info.

I don't know how google translate translates it but this is the original sentence: 
*Deze methodiek lijkt te werken en zonder dat ik kennis van deze methodiek had, ben ik eigenlijk ook tot een dergelijke werkwijze gekomen, met als verschil dat ik door meten eerst de behoefte van de bak heb geïnventariseerd, daar mijn voedingspatroon op heb afgestemd en daardoor de noodzaak van het verversen van 50% van het water heb geminimaliseerd.*

It basically states that they found a new method where you add all nutrients in excess and do 50% waterchanges to prevent accumulation. (EI - Barr). He than tells, he found this out himself (dosing nutrients in high concentrations) but does measure so he doesn't need to do the large water changes. So I'm sorry, but he's not on your site Niko


----------



## niko

Sit down, preferably on a chair with side support.

Warning: Viewing the following could be disturbing to individuals with a labile personality:

http://translate.googleusercontent....?cat=2&usg=ALkJrhgk8HGXHGsaXRpadq2Oh21PbK_CGQ

Although on a second glance it looks like it is all the same few folk with the same tanks. Apparently the picture of the tank with a guy sitting next to it staring at the tank is part of the judging too . I think we need to borrow that practice, I find it funny and pretty cool because it gives an idea of the tank size, placement, etc.

And the only article I found about "Dutch" substrate. Unwashed sand + Peat + Clay. Top with inert gravel (1/8" grains). Aquaria straight from the Middle Ages indeed. Who needs that when by mixing lots of internet with lots of dry chemicals you can have a way better tank?
http://translate.googleusercontent....g.html&usg=ALkJrhjh88SMjglqGvB5Cp_GtUBd3fEfpA

And I an article about light. Wow, it looks like them folk are stuck in the middle ages indeed! We are so way out in the future compared to them! We are about 2-3 internet posts short of figuring out everything there is to figure out and we will add another 100 miles to our lead in this race! Look at that article - Kelvins, fluorescent tubes, watts per volume... And then there are their tanks which make zero sense to the highly educated planted tank semi-professional enthusiast. That just does not make any sense indeed.

Enough sarcasm. What I found interesting is the amount of light they recommend. If you want to get confused try to figure out what is a "cubic decimeter". Apparently you need 2 to 4 Watts per cubic decimeter. Funny thing a decimeter can defined as a kilogram of water (because it is a cube measuring 10cm. per side which produces exactly 1 kilogram of water). So the advice basically says "You need 2 to 4 Watts of light for every 2 lbs. of water", haha. That's funny, allright. What is not funny is the recommendation to use ultra low light. You be the judge:
A good starting light for a tank that is 60'x 2' x 1-3/4' is 58 Watts of fluorescent bulbs!

If you are laughing right now here's a very funny picture to keep you going. The image is clickable. When enlarged it is even funnier. I promise:
http://www.paluzee.nl/album/displayimage.php?album=14&pid=892#top_display_media

And the full article about light:
http://translate.googleusercontent....m.html&usg=ALkJrhhnBHIbIWSULGOWIJWaB12s1nnbvQ


----------



## niko

Yo-han said:


> ...It basically states that they found a new method where you add all nutrients in excess and do 50% waterchanges to prevent accumulation. (EI - Barr). He than tells, he found this out himself (dosing nutrients in high concentrations) but does measure so he doesn't need to do the large water changes. So I'm sorry, but he's not on your site Niko


I think I spent enough hours trying to translate and read Dutch websites. These people have produced great looking tanks for many years. But it is obvious that they too rely on adjustments depending on whatever is going on in the tank except that everything is way slower than the American hyperactive way of running a planted tank. No clear rules. If I ask how to start and run a clean tank I will get the same blurry answers that I get from anywhere else.

After a trip to the past reading the Dutch websites I can see that the internet has really changed this hobby. Information and sharing experience is easily accessible. We have gotten a feeling that the planted tank hobby is progressing. But as many other things in life the internet has not allowed us to find much better answers to basic questions. Today a newbie gets the same answers that a newbie from 1980 got. With some modern phrases, but nevertheless the same answers.

What I am interested in is how to start and maintain a clean and healthy tank that makes use of natural interactions. A tank that is just fine with minimal care or even no care at all AND be scalable. A tank that is a true system of interacting parts. Not a box of water that is entirely dependent on constant interventions. That is the question that is not answered anywhere.

You see where my interest in El Natural and Dutch tanks come from.
So what can you tell us about the stability of a Dutch tank? What is the normal daily or weekly or monthly care? Can it be left by itself for some time without any care?


----------



## Rusty

Dutch is always pretty. but i can't imagine the maintenance involved!


----------



## Yo-han

niko said:


> So what can you tell us about the stability of a Dutch tank? What is the normal daily or weekly or monthly care? Can it be left by itself for some time without any care?


Well, let me state that Dutch style is a planting style. Not a fertilization method. You can use the entire ADA line (which is a method) and still do a Dutch style tank.

How are most Dutch tanks ran? The top of the Dutch competition uses mostly Redfield Ratio / EI style fertilization. Most people measure quite often, some judge by their plants. Most use PO4:NO3 from 1:10 tot 3:30, and almost all do use KNO3 and KH2PO4. Simply because most use only gravel, sometimes with clay/laterite (or something similar) below the gravel.

The only day they don't have these concentrations is when the judge comes by (doing a house visit to check your tank for the competition/contest). The day before, everybody does a 50-90% water change to get PO4 and NO3 as low as possible. This is because you will receive extra points when they're low, high NO3 and PO4 is still considered as fish waste. When the judge leaves, first thing they do is add NO3 and PO4 so the plants don't get covered in algae before the next round 3 months later.

As long as you make sure nothing gets low, these tanks are very stable. They need to be, because the competition involves 3 rounds. A club round, the best tanks enter the regionals, and the best regionals will go on to the nationals. Between each round is usually 3 months, so your tank needs to be in superb condition for at least 6 months and needs to peak at least 3 times when the judges make their house visits.

So these tanks are no low maintenance at all.

Here is the site from Willem van Wezel, multiple times national champion: http://www.willemvanwezel-aquariumadviseur.nl/

He uses lower concentrations than most people, but still no Amano values, and he makes sure they are never close to zero:
GH tussen de 8 en10
KH tussen de 5 en 6
pH zit rond de 6.8
NO3 tussen de 5 en 10 mg/l
PO4 rond de 0.25 mg/l

But his light rule (and commonly used in the Netherlands) is: 10W per 10cm (4 inch). So for 40cm high tanks, you need to use 40W bulbs, for 50cm high tanks, you need to use 50W bulbs (or as close as possible). And for every 10cm width you use one bulb. So for a 1.80x55x55 tank, he advises 5 x 58W bulbs. (About 2WPG for those who refuse to learn the metric system). I don't think this is low light, but not so insane as I usually see recommended at this site either (4WPG).


----------



## Yo-han

Rusty said:


> Dutch is always pretty. but i can't imagine the maintenance involved!


The same as any other style, the only thing more labour intensive is that plants aren't trimmed with a scissor, but instead are pulled up, the bottom half is cut away and the tips are replanted!


----------



## niko

Ah, turns out these Dutch are as normal as we are - like to present themselves in the best possible light. Chest up, stomach in, shoes polished. Exhale when everybody leaves.

So when did they start to "follow EI"? Before 2006 or after? How did they keep these tanks lush before figuring out that constant additions of N and P are good for your presentation?

I had my hopes up that Dutch tanks are actually stable. My hope comes from my first experiences with lush planted tanks. I've said that before - a neighbour had a bunch of tanks which needed zero maintenance. No heaters, no pumps, no CO2, no air stone, no water movement, no filtration, no fertilizer, no rich layer of soil, one incadescent bulb on top of each tank, fish ate only dry food and spawned on a regular basis (tetras, rasboras, danio, barbs, gouramies). The only 2 things that must have made those tanks work were the very clean tap water and the fact that the tanks where not disturbed every week doing maintenance. A variety of plants - rooted and stems. Very robust growth - cuttings every week, guaranteed. Long story short - I thought that that is how Dutch tanks were too. Little did I know.


----------



## niko

Something about the light. If a 6'x2'x2' Dutch tank uses five 58 watt fluorescent bulbs I can tell you with great certainty that the PAR on the bottom of that tank is no more than 30-40.

My experience is with T5HO bulbs with the best individual reflectors you can find. The beam of light is very narrow and still at 50 cm. the PAR is barely 35. It barely gets to 40 even if a direct the reflectors to shoot light overlapping each other's light footprint. So to me that is pretty much a mystery - how can the Dutch have such lush and healthy looking plants with so little light.


----------



## niko

Here. Read this very carefully without any rush. This is how high quality looks and feels like:

https://sites.google.com/site/skepticalverdure/home/what-s-all-this-then


----------



## Yo-han

niko said:


> Ah, turns out these Dutch are as normal as we are - like to present themselves in the best possible light. Chest up, stomach in, shoes polished. Exhale when everybody leaves.
> 
> So when did they start to "follow EI"? Before 2006 or after? How did they keep these tanks lush before figuring out that constant additions of N and P are good for your presentation?


I think EI doesn't mean unstable as long as you don't use tons of light. When using tons of light, anything running low means algae. With low light, this isn't an problem. I ran the 7 feet showtank at my work algae free for 1,5 year doing EI. Low PAR though.

About the Dutch using EI. Let me define my view of EI before answering this one. High NPK and everything, no testing, just 50% waterchanges to prevent accumulation. 
I think Bart mentioning it was about as early as people heard of it. But a lot of Dutch used high NPK as well. Redfield Ratio was very populair in the Netherlands decades before (and is still used). Lots of people used 0.5:5 or 1:10 PO4:NO3. But when they forgot it for a week, one of them dropped to zero and algae start appearing. So people experimented with higher Redfield Ratios 2:20 or 3:30. This way their tank was more stable, because things never dropped to zero (as long as CO2 was stable). Basically all water parameters were the same as with EI. The big difference is most Dutch tested the water a lot. Tom doesn't but does 50% water changes to prevent things running too high.

Long things short, the water is the same, the method a little different. But not all Dutch do it this was. I know a few who do Diana Walstad tanks, but gravel and water column dosing is most common.



niko said:


> I had my hopes up that Dutch tanks are actually stable. My hope comes from my first experiences with lush planted tanks. I've said that before - a neighbour had a bunch of tanks which needed zero maintenance. No heaters, no pumps, no CO2, no air stone, no water movement, no filtration, no fertilizer, no rich layer of soil, one incadescent bulb on top of each tank, fish ate only dry food and spawned on a regular basis (tetras, rasboras, danio, barbs, gouramies). The only 2 things that must have made those tanks work were the very clean tap water and the fact that the tanks where not disturbed every week doing maintenance. A variety of plants - rooted and stems. Very robust growth - cuttings every week, guaranteed. Long story short - I thought that that is how Dutch tanks were too. Little did I know.


I think you need to leave the idea that EI tanks or any tank with high nutrients, aren't stable. Check my 100G joural, it has at least 5 ppm PO4 and 25 ppm NO3 and is algae free for over a year! (some BBA excluded, which is gone for over 6 months now).


----------



## niko

I do not want to discuss this particular approach. It became popular for two reasons - 1. There wasn't anything else better and 2. Most people want "easy". Both of these come with a price - not everybody has a clean healthy tank following that approach. What gives?

Your clean tank is not clean because you use any particular approach. It is because you have the patience, the ability to notice trends, the knowledge, and you adjust things accordingly. Why can't most people do what you do? Because you can not write an article explaining how to run a clean tank every single time. You can not put your experience and observation abilities in any words. A planted tank is a system with many moving parts. That is "The Method" we should be talking about.

With lots of effort I can run a clean tank (and actually that is what I am doing in one tank right now). But I would not suggest to anyone to follow that approach. What I do is frequent water changes and all ferts available. As long as I am there to work the tank is going to look good. That sounds a lot like what you are describing about Dutch making their tanks pretty for the judge's visit which to me is a bad twist on any hobby. My tank can run without all this effort but I need to make a few major changes (get rid of big discus). What is my approach then? What made my tank successful? All I can say - the tank needs to be run as a system of interacting parts. Most people are not interested in anything like that.


----------



## Tugg

This article is giving me a sad face. The thought that Dutch tanks are filled with ferts and they do 90% water changes to appease a judge upsets me. They go through the trouble of checking organization and cleanliness under the stand, where the tank lies in the house, and other safety/aesthetics, but contestants need to basically lie about their water parameters?

If you're giving a false report on the tank, then perhaps taking a lame photo and calling it a day is just as good. Anyone can drain a tank and refill it just before a judge comes in with perfectly reconstituted RO water. It's stupid to penalize them for their levels, if those are the levels that are growing healthy plants and fish. This is the kind of backwards thinking I expect here in the states.

If they're regularly pulling bottoms and replanting tops, how does this affect their evaluation of the roots when 3 months pass and the plants have less root structure than they did on the previous visit? Nature doesn't replant, why are they?


----------



## JeffyFunk

A couple of comments...



Zapins said:


> Dutch aquariums are code for "collectoritis." I approve!


Dutch is *NOT* collectoritis! Dutch is a planting style with very specific rules about plant groupings and plant contrast. A lot of emphasis is put on how plants are arranged and pruned. Collectoritis is simply about growing a lot of different plants.



niko said:


> If you want to get confused try to figure out what is a "cubic decimeter". Apparently you need 2 to 4 Watts per cubic decimeter. Funny thing a decimeter can defined as a kilogram of water (because it is a cube measuring 10cm. per side which produces exactly 1 kilogram of water). So the advice basically says "You need 2 to 4 Watts of light for every 2 lbs. of water", haha.


1 cubic demimeter = 1 liter. (It's not that complicated...) I do agree that it's a lot of light however. (The definition of high light, however, i still believe is up in the air.)



Yo-han said:


> How are most Dutch tanks ran? The top of the Dutch competition uses mostly Redfield Ratio / EI style fertilization. Most people measure quite often, some judge by their plants. Most use PO4:NO3 from 1:10 tot 3:30, and almost all do use KNO3 and KH2PO4.


Yo-han - Question for you. What is the difference of 1:10 versus 3:30? Aren't they both the same ratio? Or are you saying that people typically add up to 3x the amount of fertilizers "recommended" in the 3:30 ratio?



niko said:


> Here. Read this very carefully without any rush. This is how high quality looks and feels like:
> 
> https://sites.google.com/site/skepticalverdure/home/what-s-all-this-then


I've read that article and i find it to be unrelated to the topic at hand of "dutch" style aquariums. From what i understand of the article, the author is advocating that the definition of an "aquarium" is a perfectly balanced ecosystem. Is that not the furthest thing from the topic of dutch style aquariums where plants and fish are maintained in order to highlight the contrasting colors and shapes of aquatic plants? It's an interesting point that the author brings up, but i just don't think it adds anything to the topic on hand of "dutch aquariums are cool".

Personally, i don't like dutch aquariums. It's not my aesthetic style. I don't like the high contrast that is emphasized in dutch style aquariums. That said, i do appreciate the fact that they represent planted aquariums with well grown plants and (hopefully) no algae (as that would obviously be a point deduction...).

If the intent of this thread was a thinly veiled attempt at saying 'i hate EI'... well, i think that's best left for another thread of 'how to grow aquatic plants - fertilization methods'... just saying...


----------



## Yo-han

Yes, there is no difference only less change to have one of the nutrients drop to zero. My point was that water parameters are the same as with EI. 

@Tugg: it makes me sad too. And all the contestants as well. In the first few years of CO2 this was the same. CO2 was dangerous and not allowed. People used it and had great tanks, so they removed them the night before the judge came. It took a couple of years before all got used to CO2 and didn't considered it as something bad. Now CO2 is allowed. The parameters allowed for N and P are getting higher and the judges know everybody does the same trick. The problem is that the judges are all over 60 years and quite conservative. In the old days if your NO3 was high, you fed your fish too much or didn't do your water changes. So NO3 was bad, who can blame them.

But they are getting around. I've been approached by one of the judges about nature style because they admit they disregarded it for too long and should be more progressive.


----------



## Michael

Niko, Niko, Niko, when are you going to see the light and become a true-believing Walstadian? We have what your soul seeks: stable, good looking planted aquaria with healthy fish and low maintenance.

I am being facetious of course, but only partly. As an example, lately I have been swamped with work, and my tanks are grossly neglected. No water changes for months, filters never cleaned, fish fed cheap dry food and nothing else. There is algae on the glass, and stems that need to be trimmed. But if I swipe a razor blade over the front glass, the tanks still look presentable, and the fish are spawning.

Come to the promised land! There will be no Kool-Aid.


----------



## Yo-han

Hahaha, facetious or not, it's true. Perhaps this forum isn't representive for the average American aquarist, but I feel Walstad tanks are quite popular in the USA compared to Europe. Is that right?

Perhaps a non CO2 ADA tank is the more something for Niko. Very stable (if lower light is used) and still the neat design I always missed with Walstad tanks.

Here another Dutch in yo' face, this time from a woman:


----------



## Michael

Yo-han said:


> Hahaha, facetious or not, it's true. Perhaps this forum isn't representive for the average American aquarist, but I feel Walstad tanks are quite popular in the USA compared to Europe. Is that right?


Honestly, I don't know. From my limited experience, most of what I call "serious beginners" drink the CO2 and high light Kool-Aid, with predictable results. Many other beginners are terrified of the idea of putting soil in an aquarium--it's dirty, it's messy, it's too much work, won't it bring horrible bugs into my aquarium?, won't it be muddy?, how do you keep it clean? Yes, terrified of soil, but perfectly fine with putting the toxic preservative and carcinogen gulteraldehyde into the water every day.

Sorry for the rant.


----------



## Yo-han

Although I'm more of the high tech side, I totally agree with you!

Ps. I bought 3 gallon glutaraldehyde in the same way once. I now only use it for cleaning diffusors etc.


----------



## Tugg

Michael said:


> Honestly, I don't know. From my limited experience, most of what I call "serious beginners" drink the CO2 and high light Kool-Aid, with predictable results. Many other beginners are terrified of the idea of putting soil in an aquarium--it's dirty, it's messy, it's too much work, won't it bring horrible bugs into my aquarium?, won't it be muddy?, how do you keep it clean? Yes, terrified of soil, but perfectly fine with putting the toxic preservative and carcinogen gulteraldehyde into the water every day.
> 
> Sorry for the rant.


I drank the **** out of that kool-aid. Drank it like a kid on a hot summer day in Texas. Everywhere I read said the same thing, out compete the algae. Now I can't wait to tear my tank apart and get topsoil and Malaysian snails in there.


----------



## niko

Jeffy,
Maybe you won't believe that but I too did not expect to see the words "EI" and "Dutch" in one topic. I did not start this thread to bash EI. This whole EI, dry start, and so on give me a headache so for some time now I avoid even thinking about all that.

I did not expect to hear that Dutch aquarists use EI. I hoped to dig out and hear interesting information about tank setup, maintenance, stability, plant health. Well, there isn't such thing. 

I did not understand one thing - how did they run good looking tanks before 2006 when EI was "invented". I guess they supplied everything needed but didn't know what to call it or maybe didn't know what they were doing. So virtually everybody around the world that had a good planted tank before 2006 was using EI because the plants had everything to grow well - nothing missing. EI existed before EI. See, only that is enough to give you a headache. And there is more but I'm not going to waste my time with any of it.

I had this ideal in my head that Dutch aquarists had 40+ years to figure out how to run the tank as a system. I thought there were clear cut guidelines for the setup and maintenance. Reality hit with Yo-han's matter-of-fact post about how things actually are. There is no Holy Grail in Holland either.

What the article that I linked to shows is that we can do anything we want with this hobby. And we have done what we, people, always do - take a good idea, chop it up into many separate pieces and get all passionate about it. Fans, products, emotions, contests - all the wonderful drama. I thought that in this hobby the highest level are the Dutch, then Amano, then El Natural, then everybody that loved to grow plants every which way. That imaginary scale is based on the understanding how a tank works. Well, right now it seems that Amano wins, hands down. But in the USA he is not god himself any more. Here we go again - divide and join camps. I bet you, Jeffy, think that I am in my own "I hate EI" camp. What if you try to see me as belonging to the camp "How can we make this better?". Look at all my posts - where have I not gone to make people ask questions?

But you know, a Mexican friend of mine once told me: Lock up a donkey in a barn with a piano. Twenty years later open the barn. Will the donkey play the piano? What do you think, Jeffy? I seem to think that yes, he/she will play the piano. Look at all my posts. No matter how I sound at the end of the day I believe in people.

Michael, 
That is exactly what I have been thinking lately - how to "enhance" a soil tank. The smart way, not for a show or a photograph. 

Yo-han,
So where is the Dutch hobby headed to? Picture contests?


----------



## Charlest

Yo-han said:


> Hahaha, facetious or not, it's true. Perhaps this forum isn't representive for the average American aquarist, but I feel Walstad tanks are quite popular in the USA compared to Europe. Is that right?
> 
> Perhaps a non CO2 ADA tank is the more something for Niko. Very stable (if lower light is used) and still the neat design I always missed with Walstad tanks.
> 
> Here another Dutch in yo' face, this time from a woman:


wow


----------



## Tugg

It actually sounds like Dutch and Amano do the same thing. They both carefully monitor their fert levels and adjust as the tank shows its needs.

Most peoples understanding of EI is "max the ferts, dont measure anything, and use 50% water changes to prevent poisoning the fish"

I see them as very different.


----------



## alexopolus

I'm a bit disappointed, but well "keep calm and move on". 
I was in the "Dutch" van, a way to grow nice plants without crazy fertilizing... I was wrong, and the information you find doesn't mention anything about their soil or any dosing. Reality is that Dutch combine two things that I really hate: high maintnance and plant trimming.

My way to think is that we should try to replicate nature instead of manipulate and accelerate it.
I try to replicate nature just a bit more high tech than el natural or walstad. 

I gave my wife's grandfather a 5 G fluval little tank, it has aquasoil and no dosing at all. My 92 years old grandfather takes care of it, all he does is top the tank with water and eventually clean the glass. 4 years with no problem.

I believe in CO2 and lights, but I hate high maintnance. I figured my own way to dose CO2 with high lights low fertilization and low maintnance. I will write about it as soon I get to a computer, typing on a cellphone is killing me.


----------



## Yo-han

niko said:


> I did not expect to hear that Dutch aquarists use EI. I hoped to dig out and hear interesting information about tank setup, maintenance, stability, plant health. Well, there isn't such thing.
> 
> I did not understand one thing - how did they run good looking tanks before 2006 when EI was "invented". I guess they supplied everything needed but didn't know what to call it or maybe didn't know what they were doing. So virtually everybody around the world that had a good planted tank before 2006 was using EI because the plants had everything to grow well - nothing missing. EI existed before EI. See, only that is enough to give you a headache. And there is more but I'm not going to waste my time with any of it.
> 
> I had this ideal in my head that Dutch aquarists had 40+ years to figure out how to run the tank as a system. I thought there were clear cut guidelines for the setup and maintenance. Reality hit with Yo-han's matter-of-fact post about how things actually are. There is no Holy Grail in Holland either.
> 
> Yo-han,
> So where is the Dutch hobby headed to? Picture contests?


First of, most people don't do EI, only a very small group. What I said was that most people use Redfield Ratio and often in high ratios. So what is different from EI. Dutch did this well before 2006 and even Tom Barr knows this and admits it. He never said he invented using high NPK. The only thing he 'invented' was the max dosage plants can use.

So I wouldn't want to say Dutch use EI. They use something similar with lots of measuring a usually smaller (and/or fewer) water changes. By testing every week you know how much your tank uses. After a while stability comes from knowing your tank. Second, most Dutch on the top, monitor their tanks very closely and dose a lot on experience. Yellow tips -> iron, yellow bottom leaves -> nitrate, etc. But the average Dutch tank you see is certainly no low maintenance

About the contest. This will remain the same for years. But there are getting more and more categories. There are a few biotope styles and even a reef category. The question is now, can they do all the extra house visits for a nature style category. And second, most nature style enthousiasts are probably no members of an aquarium club. So they are considering a photo contest indeed.



alexopolus said:


> I'm a bit disappointed, but well "keep calm and move on".
> I was in the "Dutch" van, a way to grow nice plants without crazy fertilizing... I was wrong, and the information you find doesn't mention anything about their soil or any dosing.


The reason why you find no information about how the tanks are kept is because Dutch style is a style, not a fertilization method. Some run it ADA style, with Amazonia soil, some use iron nails in the bottom with river clay, other use gravel with water column dosing (EI/RR or just by feel). But with the AGA Dutch style contest you'll get more info about the tanks in English


----------



## niko

alexopolus said:


> ...I believe in CO2 and lights, but I hate high maintnance. I figured my own way to dose CO2 with high lights low fertilization and low maintnance. I will write about it as soon I get to a computer, typing on a cellphone is killing me.


I am very interested to hear about that. Since yesterday I've been thinking of compiling all the observations and experiences that we all have had that can actually form a "best practices" document. Here it is, hopefully a beginning of something good. I typed everything using dashes so it is easy to add new items where they fit best:

======================================================================================================================================
- The tank needs to be gradually led to full establishment. This involves working with all factors - light, nutrients, filtration setup.

-The tank needs to receive the least possible interventions. The goal is to allow natural processes to develop, take over, and be replaced by others. Interference in this natural flow of processes prevents the tank from establishing itself as a stable system of many parts working together.

- The animals in the tank should be part of the processing of the substances in a smart way. Example: [Amano shrimp]+[dwarf shrimp]+[large snails]+[smaller snails]+[otos] make a visible difference in the mulm reduction compared to a tank that has them all but one.

- Exposure to air eradicates algae for many weeks. This does not happen every time but it is good practice to keep in mind (it was employed by ADG).

- The best, most stable way, to keep algae at bay or non-existent is with a lean water column. That does not mean that plants need to starve.

- Plants can adapt to process very high dosage of fertilizers extremely quickly IF they are gradually brought up to this point. That fast processing can assure optimal nutrition while keeping the water column lean and the tank algae free.

- Tap water is a big unknown in the modern world. Do not assume that your tap water is "ok". Tap water within a big metroplex area is very different in different neighbourhoods.

- The most practical,but wasteful and effort-requiring, method is to use reconstituted RO or DI water. This eliminates the introduction of substances that are in the tap water that can severely affect the tank's proper functioning. Example: dissolved organics, hormones, medications, pesticides.

- Light works best if it is very strong for a short period of time. A non-CO2 tank stays very healthy with 2-3 hours of extremely strong light (4-5 wpg) if the rest of the light period is low viewing light.

- Shading of plans (taller plants shade shorter ones) is a much bigger issue than it seems. A PAR meter shows that the plants get a bewildering array of light values within the same tank. Example: The tank's glass reflects light. Often the light is strong in the middle, less toward the glass, and strong very close to the glass.

- The need for big water changes introduces a lot of disturbance in the tank's processes. It indicates an unstable system.

- Seasons affect the plants in the tank. This could be as simple as the sun hitting the tank differently during this particular season. But keep in mind that all terrestrial house plants "know" when a bad weather is coming and stop taking in water 2 to 7 days earlier. This is not due to atmospheric pressure changes or any other obvious factor. The aquatic plants also have such mechanisms to respond to environment changes.

- Seasons affect the algae in the tank too.

- Algae have been on Earth way longer than plants. Algae are not an enemy but part of the ecosystem. Most natural bodies of water that have aquatic plants also have algae living in the same place. A planted tank tries to alter this state of affairs prevalent in Nature. The processes that take place in the tank determine the success and stability of that attempt.

- Fish food choice is a big factor in controlling the tank's well being. This is beyond Ammonia, Nitrate and Phosphate.

- The tank may look perfectly clean but it can house too many invisible, impossible to filter out mechanically, dissolved organics. It is only through proper processing that these substances are altered or eliminated. This processing is not something that can be forced or rushed.

- Unaccounted substances in the tank (example: dissolved organics, visible mulm) can act very unpredictably - bonding or releasing other substances (waste, nutrients). The goal should be to keep these "unknowns" to a minimum.

- The filter media needs to match the tank's development stage.

- The filter should be maintained in a state of continuous optimal operation. That does not mean frequent cleaning. It mean minimal maintenance because of smart setup, proper choice of medias, size, and flow.

- A biofilter removes many more substances than Ammonia.

- An external filter is not needed in a well established planted aquarium. But it acts as an insurance in case something sudden happens to the microorganisms in the tank.

- The microorganisms in the biofilter are not only bacteria.

- The microorganisms in the filter go through a period of active species and population changes in the beginning of the tank's life. That process should not be interfered with.

- The tank needs to be seen as an object of both visible and invisible creatures that all require very careful care. The microorganisms take first priority because their well being and the powerful processes they make happen determines the success, constant instability, or complete failure of the tank.

- Keeping parameters at certain values make sense only if the big picture is setup right. Example: Redfield ratio will not fix a dirty, algae ridden tank.

- Different fish species produce different amount and form of waste. Example: Cardinal tetras do not produce hard waste. The liquid waste they produce is relatively easier to process because it is liquid and reacts faster/easier.

- Plants can grow very well in both high and low light levels. It all depends on the combination of other factors.

- Certain plants are used as ongoing, reliable, indicators of the available nutrients and included in the aquascape for that purpose too.

- A rule to keep the plants fed and the algae starved in the most stable, predictable, and repairable way is "Hide the nutrients". This does not mean absence of nutrients. It means making them unavailable both physically (example: layer of soil under an inert gravel cap) and logistically (plants consume the nutrients before algae can get to them). The later is possible only if the tank has been established gradually and the plant's internal systems have adapted to process nutrients extremely efficiently.

- There are no "high" and "low" levels of nutrients for the algae. Both plants and algae can make use of minor concentrations of nutrients IF other factors are in place.

======================================================================================================================================

If we are to continue that list it would be best for it to be moved in it's own thread.


----------



## JeffyFunk

niko said:


> Jeffy,
> Maybe you won't believe that but I too did not expect to see the words "EI" and "Dutch" in one topic. I did not start this thread to bash EI. This whole EI, dry start, and so on give me a headache so for some time now I avoid even thinking about all that.
> 
> I did not expect to hear that Dutch aquarists use EI. I hoped to dig out and hear interesting information about tank setup, maintenance, stability, plant health. Well, there isn't such thing.
> 
> I did not understand one thing - how did they run good looking tanks before 2006 when EI was "invented". I guess they supplied everything needed but didn't know what to call it or maybe didn't know what they were doing. So virtually everybody around the world that had a good planted tank before 2006 was using EI because the plants had everything to grow well - nothing missing. EI existed before EI. See, only that is enough to give you a headache. And there is more but I'm not going to waste my time with any of it.
> 
> I had this ideal in my head that Dutch aquarists had 40+ years to figure out how to run the tank as a system. I thought there were clear cut guidelines for the setup and maintenance. Reality hit with Yo-han's matter-of-fact post about how things actually are. There is no Holy Grail in Holland either.


Although this topic has clearly deviated from the original intent of 'look at these cool dutch style planted aquariums!', the underlying question is very clear - how the hell do you grow great plants?

Here's my personal take on all of this, esp. as it relates to the dutch style of maintenance (which is clearly thought of here as the pinnacle of how to grow great plants since large, carefully arranged plant groupings is the goal of dutch style planted aquariums).

First of all, let's remember two things: (1) The potential growth rate of plants is controlled by the amount of light they receive and (2) If plants are deficient of anything, then they will only grow until they run out of the limiting nutrient. It doesn't matter what that nutrient is, whether it is K, Ca, Mg, C as CO2, N as NO3-, P as PO4---, Fe(++ or +++), etc. The concept of excess nutrients is irrelevant here.

Second of all, let's think about the concept of the two main fertilization methods - PPS-Pro & EI. I can't remember where i have this posted before, but here's what i remember off the top of my head... If we break down the numbers of PPS-Pro, it recommends we dose the following on a daily basis (i'm ignoring Mg):



Code:


1.0 ppm NO3-
0.1 ppm PO4---
1.3 ppm K
0.1 ppm Fe (or Trace)

If we break down the numbers for EI, it recommends we dose the following (roughly) on a daily basis:



Code:


~4 ppm NO3-
~1 ppm PO4---
~3 ppm K
~0.5 ppm Fe (or Trace)

If we look at the amount of nutrients dosed in the EI fertilization regime, do they not look like the values in the PPS-Pro formula if they were multiplied by ~3-4? One major difference is the NO3- to PO4--- ratio (10:1 vs 4:1). The ratio of NO3- to PO4--- is based roughly on the Redfield ratio. Seachem recommends dosing @ a ratio of 5:1. I think we need to remember that the Redfield ratio is a GUIDE and not set in stone. If you pay attention to your planted aquarium, you will find you need to adjust the ratio of NO3- to PO4--- accordingly (as in the formation of algae).

Here is what i'm getting at. If you measure the nutrients of your tank on two consecutive days (without adding fertilizer), then the difference between those values is the nutrient uptake. That's the amount of nutrients you should be adding on a daily basis since that's what the plants are using. THAT'S THE WAY YOU FERTILIZE YOUR TANK! In the dutch style of planted aquariums, you are making many measurements of the nutrients to determine if your fertilization regime is adequate for the nutrient demands of the tank AND ADJUST AS NECESSARY. This is what Yo-Han is saying - If the nutrient needs of PPS-Pro are inadequate (we're using PPS-Pro as the base nutrient dosing amount), they double or triple or quadruple the amount of fertilizer they need. If they find one of the components is being used faster than the others, they adjust accordingly (My experience is that the PO4--- is too low so i dose a 5:1 NO3-O4---).

In a similar vein, if we consider PPS-Pro to be the base fertilization regime, then EI can be considered the highest fertilization regime (highest as in amount of fertilizer added, not highest as in the 'best'). It has been shown that there is a point where you cannot get plants to grow any faster with the addition of more light (~150 par). If this is considered to have the fastest growth rate, then EI is designed to keep up with the nutrient demands of plants growing in this amount of light (which is entirely possible if you have a 4 or 6+ bulb T5HO light fixture on your aquarium). (The other thing about EI is that it is based off of the addition of nutrients in the solid state - that's my main gripe with the method... that and the people who don't think and blindly follow it because they don't know any better...)

This is probably the point that most people don't think about or understand: EI is an upgraded (or increased dosage) of PPS-Pro (with more PO4---). The only way to know EXACTLY how much nutrients you need to add (using the Redfield ratio as a basis or starting point) is the measure your nutrient uptake and adjust accordingly. That's (IMHO) the best way to fertilize your tank, but of course you can't write that up in a neat sticky and have a complete newbie understand that. Only by observing your plants and measuring your nutrient levels and adjusting accordingly can you have a world class tank - dutch style or otherwise.


----------



## Tugg

JeffyFunk said:


> Only by observing your plants and measuring your nutrient levels and adjusting accordingly can you have a world class tank - dutch style or otherwise.


:attention....... EI says you NEVER need to measure nutrients.:attention

If you're measureing... then you aren't using EI. Thats the whole reason you're maximizing the dosing, so you know without measureing that you have enough.


----------



## JeffyFunk

Tugg said:


> :attention....... EI says you NEVER need to measure nutrients.:attention
> 
> If you're measureing... then you aren't using EI. Thats the whole reason you're maximizing the dosing, so you know without measureing that you have enough.


The fact that you don't need to measure nutrients doesn't mean that you shouldn't. It simply says that you don't need to measure nutrient levels (which is also why you need to add the large weekly water changes into your routine as well).

That said, you do make a very important point. The point of this post was to show how Dutch Style aquariums are awesome and don't use EI. Those aquarists know better than to blindly follow some fertilization method by measuring nutrient values in their tanks and adjusting accordingly.

Here is a quote from Tom Barr's article in TAG (Vol 19, Issue 3 July-September 2006) "The Estimative Index - What is it?" (emphasis added):



Code:


The Estimative Index (EI) is a simple method of dosing nutrients for any tank without using 
test kits. The aquarist doses nutrients frequently to prevent any nutrient from running out (plant 
deficiency) and performs large weekly water changes to prevent buildup (plant inhibition).... 
[b]The aquarist may still test if desired, and add less or more fertilizers to suit an individual tank.[/b]
EI makes problem solving and experimentation fast and easy.

That last point is something that a lot of people miss. If you were to ask him in person, Tom Barr makes a point of stating that EI was developed to be flexible with regards to the amount of nutrients you add. Again, though, most people miss that point and follow it rigidly. Perhaps that's more of the problem than anything else? That people don't know how to think for themselves and solve their own aquarium problems? (Hmm... that never happens, now does it...)


----------



## niko

No. I started this thread to put whatever information I find about Dutch tanks' setup and maintenance. The thread went somewhere where I never thought it'd go.

If I knew that these lush Dutch tanks where run half blind I'd make some kind of joke about it in the very beginning. You know my style.


Sent from my RM-893_nam_att_206 using Tapatalk


----------



## Yo-han

Maybe another 'secret' or at least a great help is that the Dutch tapwater is probably the best in the world. Not to brag or something, but the entire country has 0 PO4, and between 0 - 5 ppm NO3. Organics almost undetectable. There is no chloramine or anything in the tap, and vritually no heavy metals or anything. The only 'problem' is the amount of limestone. With KH=4 as the lowest, but most area's are around KH=15. Still, you can use water straight from the tap. For example, I always run a hose.straight from the shower and never added anything (antichlor or something) to it. Plants and fish love it


----------



## niko

Ah, here we go again - clean water is important. And as we like to think lately - clean of dissolved organics, not just N or P. To me that is the main underlying reason why some people have a green aquatic plant thumb. Or they are more aware than most others of the importance of actually clean water. It must have been around 2004 when an extremely meticulous aquascaper told me half secretly he made sure organics do not pollute his tanks. To me that meant mechanical filtration and water changes. To someone else clean water may mean to not interfere with the tank every few days. Bottom line is - if we ever want any real insight on the setup and maintenance of a planted tank we better have clear, agreed upon views on the basics. It looks like the Dutch don't have much to say about it other than "just get in and drive". Only ADA has put out some kind of standard start up procedure, but you really got to be starry eyed to believe that if you buy all the recommended stuff they sell your tanks will be fine from the get go every time.

So where does one start? The water of course. It should not introduce any unknowns. At least not the unknowns we know about. Here's a funny: To start a tank full of lush vegetation it is best to start off with Dutch quality water. This is particularly relevant in our day and age and we can not deny it.


Sent from my RM-893_nam_att_206 using Tapatalk


----------



## niko

Jeffy, what is the problem with adding dry ferts to the tank? To me that is actually a good thing. In the process of solubilization the ions seem to somehow act a little different than old, worn out, tired ions of the same kind. In a way that is very beneficial to the.plants. Try putting some Dolomitic rocks in the tank and crank up the CO2. See what many plants do in the resulting opalescent broth. Then clear up the water and start adding Mg and Ca solutions in any ratio you like. Plant will not do what they did in the opalescent mess. That could be a result of the rocks' composition I had, but I could replicate similar insane growth only with stems, super clear water, and tons of light and ferts added daily. No explanation how the plants did what they did in water that was so white from the liquified rock that I could not see 3" beyond the front glass. Add a thick layer of greyish foam on top and you can see how much light was hitting the plants. A month later I took a big tub of clippings.to the store and they gave me $40 on the spot. the plants where not just a big pile but also amazing quality. Since then I believe that there is something about the process of solubilization, hence my question to you.


Sent from my RM-893_nam_att_206 using Tapatalk


----------



## niko

The water being clean may sound like a good starting point but truth is we all know that is not everything.

First off it is about the substances in that tap water. Some are ok as it seems. Some are not ok. But which is which is hard to say. And then we all know people that have clean health tanks and barely do anything to their tap water. I am far from believing their tap water is perfect. So to me it is all, once again, in HOW the tank's different parts operate together as a system.

This morning I got a brand new TDS meter. Stuck it in RO/DI water and showed a perfect 0.00. My RO/DI system is only a week old. The waste water that this system produces out of my tap water is 360.

So I go on to check TDS in all 3 of my tanks. 340, 440, and 670.

I also checked some fancy drinking water I have - imported from New Zealand, completely natural, totally hippie. TDS of 55. Could be because it was very cold, straight from the fridge. I will double check.

Tap water here is 270.

How is all that exciting? Well, guess which one is the cleanest, most stable tank. Guess which one receives basically zero maintenance and barely any flow going. Yes, you are right - the one that has TDS of 670. It is the ugliest of all 3 because of on going neglect. But it is the cleanest and most stable one. That makes me believe that letting the tank be and do its own thing is an important thing that most of us miss.


----------



## Chris Noto

niko said:


> So I go on to check TDS in all 3 of my tanks. 340, 440, and 670. [snip] Tap water here is 270. [snip] How is all that exciting? Well, guess which one is the cleanest, most stable tank. Guess which one receives basically zero maintenance and barely any flow going. Yes, you are right - the one that has TDS of 670. It is the ugliest of all 3 because of on going neglect. But it is the cleanest and most stable one. That makes me believe that letting the tank be and do its own thing is an important thing that most of us miss.


Pictures, niko! Remember, here on the Internet: "No pictures? It didn't happen!"


----------



## niko

No problem! Let me just finish photoshopping here and there and I will... make anything happen!


Sent from my RM-893_nam_att_206 using Tapatalk


----------



## Charrr89

I couldn't see the links


----------



## Yo-han

JeffyFunk said:


> The only way to know EXACTLY how much nutrients you need to add (using the Redfield ratio as a basis or starting point) is the measure your nutrient uptake and adjust accordingly. That's (IMHO) the best way to fertilize your tank, but of course you can't write that up in a neat sticky and have a complete newbie understand that. Only by observing your plants and measuring your nutrient levels and adjusting accordingly can you have a world class tank - dutch style or otherwise.


I think this is exactly how anybody should start the hobby. I know I didn't started that way, but I learned the most of the period I did this. I tried ADA style, EI, RR and I can show you my log, with daily measurements of all 3 methods. I knew exactly what my tank was using daily with each method (except for the amount I brought in by fish food, but this was constant as well). I'm setting up my new tank and will be doing this the first 3-4 months again (maybe not daily because I've learned to read my tanks a bit but you get the picture).

To come back on the Dutch in yo' face. This is the current Dutch style tank I setup and maintain in the lfs I work. It isn't 100% Dutch (try to find the elements that are not) but comes very close:










Remember it isn't finished yet, but what do you guys think?


----------



## Michael

It may not be 100% Dutch, but it is gorgeous! Here I display my ignorance. The only "non-Dutch" things I see are the un-planted background, and some of the plants are not arranged in strict streets.


----------



## niko

That's the ugliest, dirtiest tank I've ever seen! Geez, I lost my appetite! You should see the gorgeous planted tanks in every fish store across America.


To know how much food the plants need daily you can measure or you can skip the measuring. The idea is to know how much food to give them, right?

What if you started the tank by adding low fert dosages that do nothing and gradually increase them to where the plants grow wel? Start by measuring a small, discrete, amount of each chemical - 5 drops of solution X, and 1 ml. of solution Y. These discrete amounts would be something like adding 0.5 ppm N and 0.05ppm P with each dose. Nothing that will make the plants grow. But you build up gradually and then things start to get interesting:

Say you build up to adding 15 drops X and 3 ml. Y a day (1.5 ppm N + 0.15 ppm P a day). Plants do well. No testing, no measuring. Skip X and Y for a few days - plants' growth will slow down because you are so close to hitting concentrations that are too low for the plants to grow. That way you can adjust the plant grow rate to whatever you want. No more high speed tank that forces you to take care of it.

Ok, you can starve the tank at your will. That does not mean that algae will disappear. We have all heard that algae has such low nutrient requirements that you can not starve them. That is not true. Do 50% water changes in your tank every 3 days for 2 weeks and see what happens. Plant suffer, algae disappears.

So why am I typing all that? Because by gradually adding discrete amounts of fertilizer to the water you can know exactly how much food the plants eat daily without any testing. Your goal is to know how much food to give to the plants so they grow well. Your goal is not to know numbers and measure what not. 

Such a gradual progression to strong plant growth leads to adding A LOT of fertilizers daily, zero algae, an extremely stable tank, and a true reset that is 2-4 water changes away (2-4 days). Guess how the plants will look with lots of food? Guess how it will all work out if you also added rich substrate? How would you feel if all you had to do was to add some minor amounts of ferts every day and never worry about ANYthing else?

Sounds a lot like ADA's system. Except that they offer all of the above from a commercial perspective. Without understanding how it should work you can make a lot of mistakes even if you drive a Ferrari. Funny enough - at least in the USA ADA is not considered that big of a deal as it used to. Because of the lack of information people did what not with the ADA products. Adding your own twists to something you do not understand makes for a funny outcome. I am pretty sure you do not want to hear the opera that I composed last week, do you? But we all like to look at planted tanks made who knows how. You know, that kind of weirdness is fine in my book.


----------



## JeffyFunk

niko said:


> Jeffy, what is the problem with adding dry ferts to the tank?


The problem i have with EI is specifically the fact that it uses dry ferts. I don't like adding dry ferts to my tank because they don't dissolve right away and i don't like the fact that they can then sink into the tank and (possibly) not dissolve. This makes me wonder if you don't have distribution issues (and we all know how important good water circulation is).

But that's a minor quibble. The main issue i have with EI is that it uses neat nutrient volumes to dose, not a stock fertilizer volume to dose. PPS-Pro neatly states that we make up solutions of x grams of each nutrient and dose at y rate in order to provide a dose of z ppm. When the suggested dosages are listed as volume (and not as dosage rates in ppm), the connection to PPS-Pro (which i consider a good starting point), the Redfield Ratio (again, which i consider a good starting point) and overall nutrient uptake / demand (which can be directly measured by analyzing the differences in nutrient values over time) is obscured. Can you determine the concentrations used in EI? Yes. Can you adjust EI (or any dosing regime for that matter)? Yes. Are they obvious? Not unless you're good at chemistry (which I can tell you that a lot of people are not).



niko said:


> In the process of solubilization the ions seem to somehow act a little different than old, worn out, tired ions of the same kind. In a way that is very beneficial to the.plants.


Salts that are dissolved are, in fact, different than salts that are not dissolved because the dissolved salts are no longer in the salt matrix (or lattice) but now surrounded by layers of water molecules in spheres of hydration. Ions are not living; hence, they are not tired. Personally, i doubt that the exact matrix matters to the plants (since the exact intramolecular structure of the ions is probably changing as it is absorbed by the plants).



niko said:


> Try putting some Dolomitic rocks in the tank and crank up the CO2. See what many plants do in the resulting opalescent broth. Then clear up the water and start adding Mg and Ca solutions in any ratio you like. Plant will not do what they did in the opalescent mess. That could be a result of the rocks' composition I had, but I could replicate similar insane growth only with stems, super clear water, and tons of light and ferts added daily.


A few comments. First of all, the solubilization of dolomitic rock is different than that of the other fertilizers in EI for the simple fact that domomitic rock is primarily Ca & Mg (i think) and EI is everything but. We really need to be sure we're talking about the same elements and not talking about nutrient deficiencies.

Second of all, do you have any samples of those dolomitic rocks? I could digest them in my lab and determine the elemental composition for you if you would like... Related to that, if you think the Ca:Mg ratio is important, then you can't add any ratio you like. Also, how much you add is important. If the "opalescent mess" means that the amount of Ca & Mg is (essentially) non-limiting, how much is that? What is the nutrient demand for Ca:Mg? Only by adding enough Ca & Mg can we be sure that it is non-limiting.

I'm in no way disputing what you observed. I'm just trying to see if we can take those observations and use it to determine an exact nutrient demand that we can all use (without having to have opaque tanks and grey froth).


----------



## niko

Thank you!

Ok, I agree - some ions are not living and can't get tired but tell you - they do get weary.

Joke aside - the chemical that I have seen to be the hardest to dissolve in one tank is the Ca-Mg-K mix. But it does dissolve after a few minutes over leaves, rocks, and gravel. I am not convinced solubilization is a problem.

The dolomitic substrate I used was "chat". Around here it is used for building roads. It's the light grey pebbles that are evened out and compacted before gorgeous asphalt is poured. I am not sure if the chat is always the same - 

the tank that I describe was setup in 2003. I can get you a few of these rocks but I am not sure what we will be looking for. I think that back then I tested the GH, KH, and Ca. I saw all of them shoot up within a day. From about 3 to 15 or so for GH. I do not remember how high the KH got. And beats me how all these Swords and Rotalas loved that hard water. That's why I tend to animate ions - it seemed that there was something special about going about not being tied up together as a rock.


Sent from my RM-893_nam_att_206 using Tapatalk


----------

