# Plant Leaves Curling - Lack of Specific Ferts?



## LindaC

I'm curious as to why the leaves on my Ammania gracilis are starting to grow in curled and stunted, is this a lack of a specific fert? Also in the same tank I have some Weeping Moss on driftwood and the moss is turning brown. It was growing very nicely at one point. 

Any ideas?


----------



## kekon

The problem you've described is mainly caused by calcium deficiency. Even there is plenty of Ca in the water column (say 40..50 ppm) some plants may show lack of calcium. One of such factors is Mg excess, K or nitrogen excess. I know many folks would not agree with me that N excess can induce Ca deficiency but i had evidences of that. I've been always told that curled leaves and stundted tips are caused by low NO3, CO2, PO4 - but i can honestlyu say that it was not the case. Some day i dosed much more NO3 - about 10 ppm. The target was 20 ppm NO3. In 3 days after dosing some plants nearly died. It was a clear sign that high NO3 (with "cooperation" of high K) cause terrible stunting. So i stopped doing NO3. When NO3 dropped below 5 ppm affected plants were "resurrected" 
However, some other plants showed N deficiency.


----------



## Intros

I believe that the Boron deficiency also causes curled leaves apparency.


----------



## kekon

Intros said:


> I believe that the Boron deficiency also causes curled leaves apparency.


It does, but we must know what doses and what fert is used to confirm that. 
Anyway boron deficiency appears very seldom.


----------



## pbohart

*Two threads on plantedtank.net*

both starated by me - both coming to the same conclusion (although my problems were with A. Senegalensis and R. Macranda)

Problem = too much light. In fact, in one of the threads 4 or 5 people chimed in about A.S. - all having burned or curled tips due to WPG exceeding 3.

In the other thread - one of the Sr. members talked of 3 identical tanks - only separated due to GH/KH. From that experimetn it was deduced that MG/CA have no effect on red/sensitive plants whatsoever.

FWIW.


----------



## AaronT

You all could be correct. Leaves curling are usually a mineral defficiency of some sort; calcium, magnesium or potassium are the most likely culprits. How soft is your water?


----------



## Yukilovesfish

I had a similar experience with my ludgwigia last week but I thinking the cause could have been due to a calcium deficiency. I recently set up my tank with ada aquasoil and power sand so I have been doing 50-60% water changes twice a week. Last week I only added the Equilibrium and MGSO4 once during my Sunday water change and by the end of the week the new growth was all curled up and stunted.

Yesterday I added both back in for my second water change of the week and I noticed by the end of the night they were coming around. Could the effects be that quick? I'm not sure but I'm hopeful they're coming around.


----------



## HeyPK

If it doesn't turn out to be calcium deficiency, the next likely suspect is iron deficiency.


----------



## Wö£fëñxXx1

Come on people, all the guessing that goes on is getting stupid.

Where do you suppose all these "so called" deficiency's come from??

To much light!
Do the math.

:biggrin:


----------



## pbohart

what is your WPG? My A. Senegalensis is suffering the same fate under 3.5WPG.


----------



## defdac

Too fast growth rates. It seems to be quite easy to drive for example A. reineckii and L. glandulosa too fast with high CO2, light and non-limiting high nutrient levels.

I was thinking this might have something to do with different kind of light modifies Ca2+ flux across the membranes. For example a high ratio of blue light seems to be necessary to trigger this behaviour (or some kind of weirdness with the red to far-red ratio). Shaded plants never shows this behaviour and they modtly get far-red light, but they also have much lower growth rates.

It also seems this is a low KH problem in combination with high nitrates and/or phosphates and high light. My father has very low KH and he have overdosed KNO3 quite some time but never doses KH2PO4. His A. reineckii grows very slow due to phosphate limiting but it grows nice without curly symptoms.

I tried to limit phosphates too and managed to get nice new growth. I also tried limit nitrates and that worked too, as did limiting light/shading light.

I think Jeff Ludwig have mention too high CO2-levels regarding the L. glandulosa...


----------



## LindaC

Sorry it's taken me so long to answer some of these questions. I don't think that my plant leaves stunting and leaves curling is due to too much light as I am only running 65 watts over my 29 gallon. I do have a Current dual satelitte with 2 x 65 watts, however, I'm not running both lights, in fact the second light is 50/50 with a sunpag daylight 10,000k and an atinic bulb, but I haven't been using the second bulb. 

My water is soft, KH is at 80 because I buffer my water with baking soda and my GH is 40. The amount of CO2 I am getting if hard for my to decipher. Tests tell me that my PH is around 6.4 so that would give me about 54 ppms of CO2 and yet my fish aren't even close to gasping at the top. I'm thinking of investing in a drop checkers in order to get a more accurate measurement of CO2 in my tank.

I do not buffer the water in my 10 gallon tank and my ph and kh are very low in that tank due to the ADA Aquasoil. I dose nutrients EI in both tanks doing a 50% water change once a week. 

My plant leaves aren't curling any longer but I'm still getting stunted growth on my Rotala pink. The new growth seems to keep growing out smaller and smaller and I'd love to know why.


----------



## Wö£fëñxXx1

Linda,

How long is your photoperiod?
Does the 65w light sit directly on the tank?
How are you diffusing the C02?

65w on a 29g tank is in fact a lot of light, the wpg rule does not work on the 29g, I have had one for almost 5 years now, and it has been trixy at times to figure out.
I burn a single 65w fixture with a good reflector over a 29, but I have it hanging so I can adjust the hight of it, plants grow best with it 4" to 6" above the tank for 2/3 of the photoperiod.

Most folks are in fact burning to much light over their tank, which can be okay if all you have is a bunch of fast growing stem plants, but when you add slow/er growing plants like Ammania sp., L. Glandulosa, Tonina's, Eriocaulon etc then you enter into a different relm, light needs to be a little more "regulated" or I like to call it "light management".

Growing some of the slower growing plants takes a little more awareness of the plants ability and limits.

I have found that these plants stunt when we try to "make" them grow faster than they want to. I have a few different scenario's I use for growing these type plants, and all of them evolve around light management.

A "drop checker" is just another gimmick to detract one's attention from the real issue, the plants needs, they (the plants) will tell you everything you need to know, if one simply learns to read them, focus on growing healthy plants, which does not take more gadgets in the tank or massive amounts of electric sunshine, reduce intensity for slower-healthier growth. NPK TE Carbon.

Couple of things off top of my head to help you trouble shoot this:

Dose:
20~40gal
50%H20 change-weekly
+/-1/4Tsp-KN03 3x a week
+/-1/16+Tsp-KH2P04 3x aweek
+/-1/16+Tsp K2S04 3x a week
+/-5ml Trace 3x a week
+/-1-2ml Fe/Iron 3x a week

I dose my 29g just like this except I add 10ml Trace.

1. If you have a single strip light that came with the tank like a 30w tube, burn it for the first and last 2 hours for a week or so, that will cut out 4 hours of intensity which is very much okay to do, while continuing to give the plants plenty of C02 and ferts during full photoperiod of 8hrs, no more than 10hrs. Unless you are around 1wpg.

2. Burn the 65w for 8 hrs and add Flouish Excel to your dosing regime for a week at recommended doses, if plants show good signs of "vigor" which you should see in a matter of a couple days, then that will in fact tell you that your C02 is not as good as you think it may be for the amount of light being burned. Which I have found to be very true.

Glass diffusers will give much better results especially at higher light levels than a reactor any day, any PVC reactor is, well simply put, just so DIY. Lots of folks start out with DIY gas, then upgrade the light, then upgrade to pressurized, but they don't upgrade their method of diffusion, which is another mistake.

2~2.5 wpg is "highlight". 3+wpg is to much light for most folks, they may get away with it for a while, but if the understanding is not there, then it will catch up to them, I have noticed that a lot of folks are more concerned about their new massive light fixture than actually growing nice plants. haha

Buffering the water is another thing I find very unnecessary, soft water is king for growing plants. I did a test and challenge any one else to do the same that can and are willing.

So I did a test with 3 tanks using only the necessities, KN03, KH2P04, K2S04, TE, C02, one tank w/ RO/DI water only, another w/50/50 tap-RO/DI, and lastly, straight tap 3 different tanks, I am still running them that way. I live with these three tanks. I have 7 in total, all planted.
I have yet to see a need for any Sodium Bicarb, Ca, Mg, GH Booster or Seachem EQ...
The results were the same in all cases, dosing the Sticky/ EI levels to a Tee, with good C02, it is light management and Carbon

Then use a little Excel when you think you are "getting a deficientcy" and you will see it is light/carbon, then adjust light, carbon or both.

Each tank has peat in the substrate, Eheim filters from bottom up, noodles, course pad, efi sub, and fine pad or floss, with good flow and proper surface agitation.

Something else I need to toss out there:
When dosing the sticky/EI levels for highlight one should add K+ to there dosing.
_Dosing Regime's_ - The Planted Tank Forum
The sticky on this forum (APC) excludes added K+ which is fine for a tank with around 2wpg, when you get above that the minutus amount dosed from K/N03 and K/H2P04 is not enough for a highlight tank.

It also does not take 8 years of college to know how to grow some nice plants.
I could keep going, but I am late for work now, the advantages of being self employed


----------



## kekon

There is another micronutrient which proved to have beneficial effects on plants - titanium. It'll be probably added to micronutrients list soon. Some fertilizers contain titanium. Titanium is used for growing vegetables and fruits when they are fertilized; it speeds 2x plants growth and greatly increases micro and macro uptake. In the past i was using such a fertilizer with titanium and plants grew like crazy despite low NO3, PO4 and CO2 (however, K and other micros were at high levels - a few times more that it accumulates using 100% TMG doses). I've just ordered some TiCl3 (titanium chloride) to examine what effect it will have on my plants


----------



## Laith

Wö£fëñxXx said:


> ...
> 
> So I did a test with 3 tanks using only the necessities, KN03, KH2P04, K2S04, TE, C02, one tank w/ RO/DI water only, another w/50/50 tap-RO/DI, and lastly, straight tap 3 different tanks, I am still running them that way. I live with these three tanks. I have 7 in total, all planted.
> I have yet to see a need for any Sodium Bicarb, Ca, Mg, GH Booster or Seachem EQ...
> 
> ...


Not to go off topic... (well, yes, a bit off topic  )

Are you saying that plants don't need any Ca and/or Mg to grow well? (I'm referring to the tank with 100% RO/DI water...).

I'd like to hear more about this as I'd always thought that Ca and Mg were part of the "necessities" that plants require. There has been much debate on the amounts of Ca and Mg required and ratios but this is the first I've heard that neither is necessary at all.


----------



## Laith

A sudden, thundering silence...


----------



## LindaC

Craig, thank you so much for all the great information, I truly appreciate it. I do have a couple of questions regarding the buffering of my water by adding baking soda. When I first went over to pressurized CO2, a lot of people on another board, told me that I needed to add the baking soda because my KH was too low, it's been a while but if I remember correctly, it was the same as my GH, 40 ppms or maybe a little lower. Seeing that I've been buffering the water for almost a year now, would it be okay for the fish if I just stop adding the baking soda? I just want to be sure that my PH doesn't crash and my fish don't get totally stressed out if I stop buffering.

My photo period is 10 hours, my lights are on a timer, along with my CO2. My lights sit directly over my tank and are about 2 - 3 inhces away from the water. I have a dual 2x65 watt satelitte but as I stated earlier, I only use one of the bulbs, the one that is 6700k/10,000k. The other bulb is a 50/50, have 10,000k daylight and the other half is actinic. Would it be a good idea to run the the 50/50 bulb for 2 hours at the beginning and then 2 hours at the end? I tried running both bulbs for a short period of time but my plants didn't appear to be very happy until I stopped running the 2nd bulb, that could have been due to my not dosing more ferts.


One more question on the fert regimine you stated above. I dose Fleet for my phosphates, can you give me a ratio of just how much would equal to 1/16 of a tsp of KH2P04?

Thanks again!


----------



## Wö£fëñxXx1

Laith said:


> A sudden, thundering silence...
> 
> Are you saying that plants don't need any Ca and/or Mg to grow well? (I'm referring to the tank with 100% RO/DI water...).


Hi Laith, sorry been busy 

That is exactly what I am saying, plants grow very nice in acidic water.
In the three tanks I test, the RO tank grows most plants better, for instance Downoi, grows fat, stays compact and looks 10x healthier than it does in the 50/50 or straight tap tank, in those it wants to grow to tall to fast, gets leggy/er looking.
The 50/50 & tap tank both have aqua soil w/PS

The parameters of the RO tank,
Tahitan moon sand mixed with ground peat, dusted with iron chelate and K+ then capped with 3.5" Red Sea Flora Base...

Last time I test KH 0~2 ph 6, as low the kit would go. I've not touched a test kit in about a year.

I use RO/DI water on this tank with an occasional shot of tap.
Dosed to the sticky for a 20/40g, 65w pc 8 hours with good C02. Aeration with pipe throughout the night.

I keep Cardinals and Cherrie shrimp in this tank with no problem at all. never a glitch.

In the 50/50 RO/Tap tank, I just started using pure RO also, and plants look even better than they did.

As long as I have been into aquatic's, all my life, then seriously for the last 5yr. I have "never" yet to see a need to add anything to the water that was not necessary for the plant's. KN03, KH2P04, K2S04, TE, Fe, C02.

Never a need for Sadium bicarb (Baking Soda) Ca, Mg, GH Booster or Seachem EQ, never in any tank.

Dosing to the sticky, thats easy, knowing how to use C02 and light can be a little tricky, and using the spray bar or lily pipe to aerate the water in offpeek hours, which is very important in any tank, the reasons are twofold:

1.Aeration of the water is an advantage to plants and fish.
2. Clean surface.
You can even aerate during photoperiod, periodically if you choose.

Most folks are burning to much light for to long which in turn makes the plants grow fast or to fast, severly increasing the need for nutrient's creating a very large margin for error. dosing the sticky levels is for 2 to 3/ishwpg, burning 3 plus wpg all day everyday is overkill. wanna burn more light? reduce the photoperiod length.

Folks are over complicating it! NPK TE C02 Light. and then knowing what to do with just that :biggrin:

I burn 8 to 9 hours on all of my tanks with about 2 to 2.5wpg for 2/3 of the photoperiod and then 3+wpg for the other 1/3, some days a little less some/more. I do know how to grow plants, that is my main focus, I can see them and how they respond to change and what they like and dislike... That is the ultimate test kit.

Adding ingredients for KH/GH does not helped a thing in my experience.

All my tank's purrr, no algae issues at all, I keep my filtration in top condition and tanks clean.

So if I can grow plants very well without ever having to add those using RO/DI, does that mean that the plant's need it?

Thanks
-------------------------------------------------------------------------


> Craig, thank you so much for all the great information, I truly appreciate it. I do have a couple of questions regarding the buffering of my water by adding baking soda. When I first went over to pressurized CO2, a lot of people on another board, told me that I needed to add the baking soda because my KH was too low, it's been a while but if I remember correctly, it was the same as my GH, 40 ppms or maybe a little lower. Seeing that I've been buffering the water for almost a year now, would it be okay for the fish if I just stop adding the baking soda? I just want to be sure that my PH doesn't crash and my fish don't get totally stressed out if I stop buffering.


Your welcome,
If you ever want bad advice, just got to the forums, you can find it..lol
Yes stop adding that mess, the fish will be fine, aeration of the water is much more important than adding baking soda anyday of the week.
ph crash would be turning the water to battery acid, we can't do that with C02, that is a myth, just like buffering the water is myth. Think aeration instead of sodium bicarb.



> My photo period is 10 hours, my lights are on a timer, along with my CO2. My lights sit directly over my tank and are about 2 - 3 inhces away from the water. I have a dual 2x65 watt satelitte but as I stated earlier, I only use one of the bulbs, the one that is 6700k/10,000k. The other bulb is a 50/50, have 10,000k daylight and the other half is actinic. Would it be a good idea to run the the 50/50 bulb for 2 hours at the beginning and then 2 hours at the end? I tried running both bulbs for a short period of time but my plants didn't appear to be very happy until I stopped running the 2nd bulb, that could have been due to my not dosing more ferts.


Dose the sticky levels, don't be affraid of it  burn the 65w for 8 hours, you can add the other 50/50 bulb (not the best bulb for growing plants) for two or three hours midway or close to the end of photoperiod, if plant response is good, then good, if not, add Excel to your regime for a week, if that helps them, then that tells you C02 is not as good as you think. Need better diffusion not better desolution of the gas.



> One more question on the fert regimine you stated above. I dose Fleet for my phosphates, can you give me a ratio of just how much would equal to 1/16 of a tsp of KH2P04?


If you are using Fleet enema, change 1/32 teaspoon Phosphate to 1/2 mL Fleet.
So 1ml 3x weekly, if you are dosing more than that, its fine. I would add a little more than 1ml anyway.


----------



## LindaC

Good, I am dosing 1 ml of Fleet every other day, or 3 times a week and before dosing the sticky you posted, I was adding 3/8ths tsp of KNO3, 1/16th of K2SO4, 5 ml of Seachem Flourish and 1ml of Seachem iron. and with this regimine and 10 hours under 65watts with CO2 being diffused via Rhinox 2000, I was seeing stunting on my Rotala pink.

I have turned my CO2 up a little more and also turned my spraybar (FilstarXP2) so the hole faces a little more toward the top. Will this help with the airation? I would like to look into purchasing a Lily Pipe or even one of the knock offs, how do they work? Would it have to be hooked up to a power head?

Once again, thanks for the advice and answers to my questions.

Linda


----------



## Edward

I have to agree with Craig. Most plants do grow better in lower to no KH and there is no pH crash. Using baking soda is unnecessary and makes situation worse. I've posted about it some time ago. Dissolved CO2 can lower pH as low as 5.65 which is preferred by most fish and plants. CO2 forms a very mild acid Carbonic acid H2CO3. Coke and Pepsi have a pH ~ 2.4, Cheers.

Another issue is aeration. There is tons of gasses dissolved in the water column. If we don't lower the saturation there won't be free space for more CO2 and O2. Large underwater power head can free the extra gasses and an air stone add O2. 

For Ca and Mg we can use Hi quality RO and Ca dissolving substrate or inert substrate with a dose of Discus Mix post #3. Another option is to use High-Flow RO that removes around 70% of minerals. The remaining 30% is the perfect water with small amounts of needed Ca. 

Edward


----------



## Laith

But what Craig is saying is that plants have no need for either Ca or Mg as they grow perfectly fine in 100% RO water with no added Ca or Mg:



> Never a need for Sadium bicarb (Baking Soda) Ca, Mg, GH Booster or Seachem EQ, never in any tank.


and



> So if I can grow plants very well without ever having to add those using RO/DI, does that mean that the plant's need it?


The Discus Mix is adding Ca and Mg. Craig is saying there is no need for this even in 100% RO water. Therefore plants do not need Ca or Mg.

I have always heard/read that Calcium (and Magnesium) is an essential plant nutrient. A simple Google search shows lots of references that affirm this (for example: A&L Canada Laboratories Inc.| Calcium Nutrition In Plants). I assume that aquatic plants are no different?

I'm not trying to be difficult here; I just want to avoid giving anyone the impression that Ca and Mg is *not* required by plants at all...

Or am I missing something here? 

Sorry Linda, I didn't mean to hijack your thread but I think it's important...


----------



## Edward

Hi Laith
This is because Craig uses substrates containing Ca and Mg therefore he doesn't need to add any GH (Ca/Mg). Plants do need Ca and Mg there is no way around it. So if we use good quality RO like Hi-S or DI removing 99% of minerals and inert substrate the Discus Mix is necessary. But if we use High Flow RO removing 70% of minerals then there is a good chance having enough Ca in the produced water even with inert substrate. The Ca and Mg must come from somewhere in order to grow plants.

Edward


----------



## Edward

What Craig is saying and I support it, is that people are dumping too much stuff in aquariums making it worse. The advice here is keep it simple! 
And for us here on APC is to encourage advanced hobbyists to do more experimenting, finding better ways, busting myths and wrong theories. 

Edward


----------



## Laith

Edward said:


> Hi Laith
> This is because Craig uses substrates containing Ca and Mg therefore he doesn't need to add any GH (Ca/Mg). Plants do need Ca and Mg there is no way around it. ...
> 
> ... The Ca and Mg must come from somewhere in order to grow plants.


That's what I thought. I just wanted it made clear that you *cannot* expect to grow healthy plants without a source of Ca and Mg, along with the other nutrients.

Did not want another myth or wrong theory started!


----------



## LindaC

Then I should purchase some form of Ca and Mg, correct? I have a 95% Flourite subtrate in my 29 gallon and ADA AquaSoil in my 10 gallon. I do not buffer the water in my 10 gallon, never have and I will stop adding the baking soda to my 29 gallon. I just wonder how I will know if I need Ca and Mg, I believe there is some in the tap water here. No, I'm wrong, I just called the chemist at my water company and he told me that my tap water has 0.5 ppm calcium and 1,050 ppm magnesium. So it looks like I may need to add calcium but not magnesium is this correct? Any suggestions on the best source if I just want to add calcium? 

Many thanks for all this great advice!
Linda


----------



## Satirica

If it were me I'd buy CaSO4 from Greg Watson and use that. Alternatively I'd go with CaCl or a mixture of the two.


----------



## Wö£fëñxXx1

Edward said:


> Hi Laith
> This is because Craig uses substrates containing Ca and Mg therefore he doesn't need to add any GH (Ca/Mg). Plants do need Ca and Mg there is no way around it. So if we use good quality RO like Hi-S or DI removing 99% of minerals and inert substrate the Discus Mix is necessary. But if we use High Flow RO removing 70% of minerals then there is a good chance having enough Ca in the produced water even with inert substrate. The Ca and Mg must come from somewhere in order to grow plants.
> 
> Edward


Hmmm, so what substrates do not contain Ca and Mg Edward? I have used them all and I still never had a need to add Ca/Mg.
If one guy can do it, yet another cannot, what does that mean? or what does that tell you?
I also think that most folks around use the same subs I use and vise versa, so "if" I have it in mine they too should have it.
There is a fine line between where art meets science...no?



> And for us here on APC is to encourage advanced hobbyists to do more experimenting, finding better ways, busting myths and wrong theories.


You as moderator(s) should be the first to step up to the plate and bust your own myth's instead of just simply stating that it can not be done, I see the myth, you say it is needed yet I have not had a need for it....
Therefore we do not agree. :biggrin:

Thanks


----------



## LindaC

Oh my, I sure didn't mean to open a can of worms, I just wanted to know If anyone could tell me why my plants were stunting. I have learned a lot from this post and I do appreciate everyone's advice. I am going to try to move ahead using Craig's advice and not any calcium and see what happens. I mean after all, Craigs tanks speak for themselves.


----------



## russell

i got a dollar saying it's his lights....... but that's just me. i will be the 1st to say that i think it's too little light....again, just me.


----------



## Edward

Wö£fëñxXx said:


> Hmmm, so what substrates do not contain Ca and Mg Edward?


 Inert substrates, like silica quartz, garnet and many more. 

Craig, are you saying plants do not need Ca and Mg?


----------



## Troy McClure

I love this thread and I completely, 100% agree with Craig. I'm not a biologist or anything, but wouldn't the necessary Ca/Mg be supplied through a TE formula like Flourish even if you are using straight RO water?


----------



## Laith

Troy McClure said:


> I love this thread and I completely, 100% agree with Craig. I'm not a biologist or anything, but wouldn't the necessary Ca/Mg be supplied through a TE formula like Flourish even if you are using straight RO water?


Though Flourish does have very small amounts of Ca and Mg, I don't think it is anywhere near enough. See the Flourish ingredients here: Flourish.

Last I heard, Ca and Mg are *macronutrients*...


----------



## Troy McClure

When did they get moved into the macronutrient group? I thought NPK and C were the macros, just like carbs/fat/protein are the macros for humans.


----------



## Laith

Macronutrients

Plant Nutrients

Plant nutrition, Botany Course, Master Gardener Training, Extension Service, Oregon State University

Something to Grow On

The Growing Edge Hydroponic Basics - Beginner's Growing Tips

Amendments: healthy soil - Plants' nutrient requirements (The Green Pages) [Montréal Botanical Garden]


----------



## Troy McClure

Great links, Laith! That'll keep me busy at work tomorrow.

I see that Ca and Mg are part of the secondary macros, maybe that's why I thought they weren't in the macro group at all. But enough of that, I dont' want to distract too much from the question Edward posed to Craig.


----------



## Wö£fëñxXx1

Edward said:


> Craig, are you saying plants do not need Ca and Mg?


Edward, I'm saying I can grow them without ever having to add Ca and Mg or sodium bicarb, GH booster or EQ, I do not alter my GH/KH, I want those low.

Some plants will stunt from being grown in water with more GH/KH than it prefer's, and some grow better in a moderate GH/KH.
Most grow best in acidic water. In a tank with 20/30 even 10 different sp. plant's, once in awhile there may be one or two plants that just freak out and do weird stuff.

Which plant's are harder to grow? a tank full of moss, anubias, fern, hygro and combomba, or L. glandulosa, L. pantanal, A. gracilas, R. macrandra, erio's, tonina's etc?

It's one thing to have a tank fully of hygro, throw the juice to it and in two weeks, it is growing out of the tank, the scheme of thing's begins to change when you toss in some plant that are a little more complicated to grow.

Think about it!? adding baking soda, Ca, Mg, booster, eq, is all that good for the plants, fish and the small enclosed eco system we are trying to maintain?

I have found that the plant's "prefer" the water as clean as possible, low TDS.
Give the plant's NPK TE and learn how to use the light/C02... they grow beautifully.


----------



## defdac

> Edward, I'm saying I can grow them without ever having to add Ca and Mg or sodium bicarb, GH booster or EQ, I do not alter my GH/KH, I want those low.


With ADA Aquasoil or inert substrate?


----------



## azfishguy

Just to chip in to the thread. I have to agree with Craig. I use 100% RO and add nothing to it. No discus mix (eventhough I keep discus) no Seachem stuff and definitely NO baking soda. I burn 220W over 120G for 8 hours a day and let me tell you, I only now am able to grow R. wallichii along with L.cuba and other delicate plants. I add no Mg and no Ca whatsoever. In fact I don't even add much NO3 and K. I add a lot of iron and TE and that's all. All reds are fat and red and all greens are lush killer green. The growth is slow but it's a quality growth and since I don't care much for weekly prunning this setup is the best I've ever had. I've been through countless testing then EI high light suffocating fish with CO2 and other methods before. The plants grew but, how should I put it, it was fast and it was ugly. Only now I really enjoy this hobby without the stress of trying to figure out what defficiency or overdosing I am dealing with today. Just my two cents


----------



## defdac

> I use 100% RO and add nothing to it


Not even a substrate?


----------



## azfishguy

No no substrate...it's a new aquascape...everything is floating freely.


----------



## defdac

Ahh.. Sarchasm, so you admit that the plants get Ca from the substrate? =)


----------



## azfishguy

Well yeah sarcasm. How else can I respond to a somewhat smart butt remark? And no I didn't admit that my plants are getting Ca from the substrate. I have plain Eco Complete. I don't know what's the composition of this stuff so I'm not going to argue where the CA and Mg comes from. Maybe from the substrate, maybe from Flourish, maybe from fish food or maybe from everything altogether. What I'm saying is the fact that since I stopped dumping stuff into my RO and reduced the light intensity, I've had much better results in plant growth.


----------



## defdac

> How else can I respond to a somewhat smart butt remark?


That was uncalled for and I resent that.

You say that your plants doesn't get any Ca (RO-water) and yet they grow, hence I thought the only way they would get Ca was from the substrate.

Don't you agree that is what probably is happening in any case where RO-water is used?


----------



## azfishguy

I agree that the plants need and get Ca from somewhere. Like I said before there are other minute sources of Ca such as TE and fish food (I feed quality food because of discus). Maybe there are traces of Ca and Mg in Eco. That I do not know. What comes to mind however, is our estimate or should I say overestimate of how much Ca and Mg plants really need to grow. Like I also said, the growth in my tank is rather slow due to lean ferts and short photoperiod but the quality is great plus no algae and no snails. Hey it works for me and as long as it works, I'm not going to spend energy and time trying to figure out where the plants get the calcium. I'm just not that curious


----------



## defdac

Thanks for clarifying.


----------



## jeff5614

This is one of the most interesting threads I've read. I too have very soft water our of the tap - approx 0 KH and GH. When I first got into planted tanks I was adding baking soda to up the KH and and Seachem EQ to up the GH as recommended by everything I read. Somewhere along the way I read a post about low KH tanks and stopped adding baking soda and cut down my use of EQ to 25% of what it had been. Admittedly, I don't have very hard plants - hygro's, cabomba, riccia, l aromatica, anubias, swords, vals, downoi, ferns, but they all grow like weeds without adding baking soda or the directed amount of EQ. I dose, EI for macros and traces, with 2.3 wpg on 12 hours a day with some nuisance GSA. The only difference I noticed is the vals grow more slowly with the lower amount of EQ which is actually a blessing since I was tossing out new runners every week.


----------



## Laith

jeff5614 said:


> This is one of the most interesting threads I've read. I too have very soft water our of the tap - approx 0 KH and GH. When I first got into planted tanks I was adding baking soda to up the KH and and Seachem EQ to up the GH as recommended by everything I read. Somewhere along the way I read a post about low KH tanks and stopped adding baking soda and cut down my use of EQ to 25% of what it had been. Admittedly, I don't have very hard plants - hygro's, cabomba, riccia, l aromatica, anubias, swords, vals, downoi, ferns, but they all grow like weeds without adding baking soda or the directed amount of EQ. I dose, EI for macros and traces, with 2.3 wpg on 12 hours a day with some nuisance GSA. The only difference I noticed is the vals grow more slowly with the lower amount of EQ which is actually a blessing since I was tossing out new runners every week.


I don't think that high levels of either Ca or Mg are required. However these elements *are* required to be present for plants to survive. So your plants still doing fine on lower amounts of EQ doesn't surprise me.

The point I was trying to make in my original comment on this thread was that it would be a mistake to think that plants could do fine without *any* Ca or Mg. Like I said, the amounts/ratios required are debatable but...


----------



## jeff5614

I agree Laith. It wasn't my intention to say Ca and Mg aren't necessary I was just posting my experience on the topic. EQ also contains a fair amount of K so I'm curious as far as necessary levels of it and how it affects growth. I guess dosing individually would answer that but it seems like too much work, lol.


----------



## azfishguy

I add a flat teaspoon of K after a 50% water change and don't have any issues with not enough K. If you don't add Equilibrium you probably would need to add some K but it really doesn't take much. The only reason I add it is because I don't dose any KNO3. I have 5 big discus and they provide all the N my plants need. Like Craig said the less TDS in the water column the better. I find all this dumping of SO4 salts by truck loads completely absurd. People dump all this stuff in their tank then get all the weird stuff going on with their plants only to assume they have a defficiency of some sort. Next thing they do is dump even more chemicals in there. Been there, done that.


----------



## BryceM

As I read through this thread again a few things come to mind.

First, the "fertilization equation" is incredibly complex. There are simply too many variables to make generalizations. Just because one person or even a group of people have success with a certain technique does not imply that it will work for everyone, or even that they've discovered a "true principle". Just because azfishguy finds that fish food adds enough nitrogen does not mean that NO3 isn't required in other setups.

Second, there are many roads to Rome. I'm absolutely intrigued by the concept of low KH/GH tanks. I think there is a large interplay between the various "nutrient" solutes in water and the way they interact with plant physiology. I do agree with Laith, however, that Ca & Mg are macro-nutrients that are certainly required for growth. For the record, they are present in many substrates, especially Eco-complete, Onyx, and to a lesser extent, Flourite.

Third, nutrient deficiencies do exist. I'm still convinced that the sin of under-dosing is more frequent than the sin of over-dosing. Specific deficiencies are often quite difficult, if not impossible, to figure out. What looks like a Ca or Mg deficiency is often something else.

Does EI (providing an excess of all nutrients) work? It certainly does for many, many people. Is it equally applicable to all setups? No. Full-throttle, mega-light, high ferts, high CO2 is only one way to do things. For this it works quite well. In these situations a sudden deficiency can really zap everything hard. If you want robust, healthy plants with good coloration and modest growth, there may be "improved techniques", which is what I believe Craig is talking about. Slow things down with short, but intense light, provide "enough" CO2 to support moderate growth, supply a good but not excessive qty of macros & micros and tanks that are "in the zone" will purr right along.


----------



## Robert Arnold

azfishguy said:


> Maybe there are traces of Ca and Mg in Eco. That I do not know. What comes to mind however, is our estimate or should I say overestimate of how much Ca and Mg plants really need to grow. ...


I would be very surprised if there are not calcium carbonates in Eco. Ever seen Eco with white chunks in it? I have had Eco which had to of been contaminated with calcium carbonates. I suppose Flourite may well be inert, but we know Aqua Soil isn't and Eco certainly is not, despite what is stated.

And maybe the foods and such do add some of these essentials. They certainly carry in some traces.

This is a very interesting thread, BTW. There seems to be a trend developing to back down the WPG and/or photoperiod.


----------



## azfishguy

Robert Arnold said:


> This is a very interesting thread, BTW. There seems to be a trend developing to back down the WPG and/or photoperiod.


Maybe it has something to do with going back to where it started - Dutch tanks.


----------



## jeff5614

As far as how much Ca and Mg plants need, both are contained in Flourish in very small amounts, along with small amounts of K, which of course leaves me wondering are these small amounts enough?


----------



## Troy McClure

I'm wondering how much is really necessary. Aren't plants mostly carbon and water?


----------



## Revan

Troy McClure said:


> I'm wondering how much is really necessary. Aren't plants mostly carbon and water?


Plants's Composition: (Minerals Necessary for Optimal Plant Growth*)

Macronutrients
Carbon (C) 43 percent
Nitrogen (N) 1 to 3 percent
Potassium (K) 0.3 to 6 percent
Calcium (Ca) 0.1 to 3.5 percent
Phosphorus (P) 0.05 to 1 percent
Magnesium (Mg) 0.05 to 0.7 percent
Sulfur (S) 0.05 to 1.5 percent
Micronutrients
Iron (Fe) 10 to 1500 ppm
Chlorine (Cl) 100 to 300 ppm
Manganese (Mn) 5 to 1500 ppm
Zinc (Zn) 3 to 150 ppm
Copper (Cu) 2 to 75 ppm
Boron (B) 2 to 75 ppm
Molybdenum (Mo) Trace

*These values are based on the dry weight in entire plant (plants contain also H2O)

Source: Aquarium Frontiers On-Line: October 1997: Aquatic Horticulture

Optimal plants's composition: 








source: AQUAGARDEN | Lo straordinario mondo dell'acquario di piante (in Italian language)

According to the Liebig's law of the minimum plants can't growth if they can't uptake all necessary elements.
Liebig's law of the minimum - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Best Regards


----------



## Troy McClure

So by looking at that information, the most important thing is to provide carbon via dissolved CO2 and oxygen through nightly aeration (one possible method.) Well, the most important thing is to provide all required nutrients, but everything else on the list is required in such small quantities that separate dosing (at least in the amounts that most fert regimes call for) seems excessive. Is high dosage of nutrients causing a bottleneck in uptake? I know there are problems with certain minerals blocking the uptake of others, but do we know if high concentrations of everything else is causing other problems?


----------



## kekon

I did many experiments with single micronutrients. Plants growth can be stunted very quickly (typically in 2..3 says) if you overdose for example boron or zinc. Too much boron causes chlorosis on young leaves which can look like iron deficiency despite high Fe level in the water. Adding even more iron doesn't imrove anything. Boron levels above 0.04 ppm can cause problems. TMG has very little zinc and it contributed to zinc deficiency in my tank. Adding 0.02 ppm Zn EDTA solved the problem in 4 days.
I also added too much cobalt (0.03 ppm) which stopped the growth completely and only 50% water change helped. The only way to determine which deficiency really occurs in the tank is to take water sample to a laboratory.


----------



## Wö£fëñxXx1

Welp... You can dose Ca and Mg all you want that is fine, the plants do require a smidge of it which I believe there to be enough in trace mineral and or H20. I have used substates from sand to ADA, I still prefer Flora Base over any other sub, but thats just me. 

I wasn't trying to be an ass, (my wife says it just comes natural..lol) I'm only trying to help people grow better plants, while stepping on the toes of those that just guess. grrrr... what does aggrivate me is seeing pointless posts guessing at what someones problem may be when it is clear by the assumer's post, they don't have a clue.

Bottom line, if you don't skimp on the NPK TE FE the rest is light and C02, C02 being most everyones stunting issue, while ya'll figure it out, I will continue to sell some healthy plants and make a buck to put back into my tanks. I have bought an ADA tank, ADA HQI MH, ADA Soil, glass pipes for all my tanks inflow and outflow, glass diffusers filters, C02 tanks and regulators, and much much more just from selling plants.

My whole point being, it really is not as hard as it seems to figure out but can be decieving.
Instead of playing make believe chemist, examine the C02 again and again.

If I could handle your tank for a few days I would show you (whomever that may be) but it is hard to show you in text.

I really only want to help :biggrin:


----------



## Catch and Release

I'll add some more fuel to the fire here.

I have an ozelot sword that is suffering from curved leaves. I have other sword species in the same tank that are not suffering from this condition (red special, amazon, x barthii). 

It's a 125g tank with 216W of T5-HO (2x54W @ 6400k, 2x54W @ 10000k), all 4 bulbs are on for a 10 hour photo period. I'm running a pressurized CO2 system and with a KH of ~15 degrees, the tank's pH fluctuates between 7.1-7.3. I'm dosing 1tsp KNO3, 1/4tsp KH2PO4 and 1/2tsp CSM+B 3x a week. One 50% water change weekly.

I use water that runs through a KCl based water softener and according to a calcium test kit, I still have 20-30ppm of calcium in the tank.

My substrate is 100% fluorite and the water temperature is a steady 82.5 degrees.

Any ideas?


----------



## HeyPK

20 to 30 ppm calcium is a tad low for aquarium plants that don't come from soft, acid water habitats. Calcium is not an element that plants can pull down to extrememly low levels the way they can with nitrate or phosphate. I recommend getting the calcium up to 50-100 ppm. If the sword doesn't get better, then it is back to square one. A KH of 15 seems unnecessarily high.


----------



## Catch and Release

HeyPK said:


> 20 to 30 ppm calcium is a tad low for aquarium plants that don't come from soft, acid water habitats. Calcium is not an element that plants can pull down to extrememly low levels the way they can with nitrate or phosphate. I recommend getting the calcium up to 50-100 ppm. If the sword doesn't get better, then it is back to square one. A KH of 15 seems unnecessarily high.


I guess I have what some would call "liquid rock". So the 15 KH is natural out of the tap.

The 20-30ppm of calcium might even be closer to 40-50, but even so, is it even possible to raise the calcium level without increasing my hardness even more?

And if infact it is a calcium deficiency I'm experiencing, why is the ozelot the only sword suffering from it?


----------



## ap1492

Interesting thread. 

I think I have a related situation right now. I have a 29g tank, my first tank, with which I've been very happy. Everything grows like crazy, which at this point still seems to be the goal. 

Everything except alternanthera reineckii which survives but the leaves are twisted, curled, small and brownish in color. I had the same problem with ammania gracillis before I yanked out of the tank because it was becoming grotesquely large. The rest are mostly easy growers and are thriving--rotala indica, elatine triandra, hm, glossostigma, hygrophila polysperma, cabomba, didiplis diandra.

My assumption is that the problem with the alternanthera is related to either the low gh (dH 1) or (less likely) low kh (dH 0-1). I'm dosing NPK and flourish, with diy c02, and 4.5 wpg x 12 hrs. 50% weekly water change.

I just ordered Mg and Ca from Greg Watson. I'll add one or the other first and see what happens.

I'm placing my bet it's a calcium deficiency-- just a hunch.
What does anyone else think?


----------



## BryceM

I think 12 hrs/day of 4.5 wpg over a 29g tank is asking for trouble. I'm still of the opinion that you can have success over a tank like that, but only with high CO2, abundant macros, abundant micros, and careful attention to detail to prevent deficiencies. But that's just my $0.02.


----------



## azfishguy

I agree. 12 hours of 4.5wpg is a lot of light. If you insist on having such brightly lit tank then cut the photoperiod. Let those plants rest. Your problem with A. reineckii could be anything. It, however, is not related to your low kh.


----------



## ap1492

I'm not actually insisting on the bright light, it's the lamp I got when I decided to grow the plants. I guess I was asking for trouble by stating the wattage of my tank. 

Anyway thanks for the input. I'm relatively new at this and have had my problems with algae though now the tank is nearly algae-free. Presumably after the excitement of growing all these plants so quickly (the hygrophila literally grows inches per day) I'll decrease the light and possibly co2/ferts.

I don't think the light has anything to do with the curling leaves mostly because the alternanthera has the same problem whether growing in deep shade, semi-bright light or under the full wattage of the lights. 

I still think it's calcium or magnesium. Why? No particular reason


----------



## ap1492

...but I will take your advice and decrease the number of hours.


----------



## Amphiprion

I had been having the same issue with Proserpinaca palustris and Nesaea pedicillata. I decreased photoperiod (~4.8 wpg) to about 8.5 hours. After a few weeks, still no good. I then decreased the total amount of ferts--just enough to prevent deficiencies and guess what...still nothing. Upon using straight, unaltered tapwater (mine is extremely soft), the curling leaves stopped. I have no clue as to why unless the EcoComplete had been worsening the situation somehow with the added hardness. It still could have been a combination of reduced ferts in the water column and the water hardness, though.


----------



## defdac

I have similar experience as you Amphiprion.

I tried decreasing the number of hours also from 11 to 9, but A. reineckii still curls up. New good circulation from a new Eheim 2222 in a 60-litres (yes that's pretty much over-kill =) and it dissolves 1-2 CO2 bubbles/sec easily. So it's not CO2. The CO2-dropchecker is pee-yellow and I manage fish gasping by directing the spray bar up above the surface so the water breaks the surface.

It didn't curl when I only dosed macros one time after wc, 5 ppm NO3 and 0.5 ppm PO4, 20 ppm Ca from CaCl2, 5 ppm Mg. Traces from TMG every day 6 mls + 6 drops Ferrogan.

As soon as I started dosing 2 ppm NO3 + 0.5 ppm PO4 every day new leaves curled up. Good root growth, shaded placing with good flow. Didn't move it around.

My tap water:
pH: 8,5
Konduktivitet: 18,2 mS/m
TH: 3,6 dH
Alkalinitet, HCO3: 55 mg/l
COD Mn: 1 mg/l
Fluorid, F: 0,13 mg/l
Klorid Cl: 11 mg/l
Sulfat, SO4: 25 mg/l
Fosfatfosfor, PO4-P: 0,010 mg/l
NH4-N: 0,010 mg/l
Nitrate nitrogen, NO3-N: 0,53 mg/l
Nitrite nitrogen, NO2-N 0,005 mg/l
Iron, Fe 0,0070 mg/l
Mangan, Mn:0,030 mg/l
Koppar, Cu: 1,0ug 
Marmoraggresiv kolsyra, CO2 1 mg/l
Cyanid, total 0,01 mg/l
Destillerbara fenoler, låga 0,005 mg/l
Silver, Ag: 0.0028 mg/l
Aluminium, Al: 0.0028 mg/l
Arsenik, As: 0.00026 mg/l
Borium, Bo: 0,014 mg/l
Bor, B: 0.014 mg/l
Kadmium, Cd: 0.00002 mg/l
Krom, Cr: 0.00002 mg/l
Kvicksilver, Hg: 0.0001 mg/l
Kalium, K: 1,5 mg/l
Magnesium, Mg: 2.3 mg/l
Natrium, Na: 19 mg/l
Nickel, Ni: 0.00057 mg/l
Bly, Pb: 0.00005 mg/l
Antimon, Sb: 0.001
Selen, Se: 0.0005 mg/l
Zink, Zn: 0.0015 mg/l

Substrate: Kittylitter (bentonite) with black 1-2 mm sand ontop
Lighting: 15 watt Aquarelle, 15 watt Economy lamps


----------



## TimboJones

Wow what a thread. I just threw my bicarb solution over the balcony!


----------



## Satish B

LindaC said:


> I'm curious as to why the leaves on my Ammania gracilis are starting to grow in curled and stunted, is this a lack of a specific fert? Also in the same tank I have some Weeping Moss on driftwood and the moss is turning brown. It was growing very nicely at one point.
> 
> Any ideas?


LindaC
Did you find solution to the leaves curling in ammania. I have recently reset my tank. Used Amazonia 2 as always. But installed new lights of 45w over my 2 feet tank. And 6 days later I experienced leave curl in ammania that too the topmost leaves.
Pls guide me with your experience.


----------



## Michael

Satish B said:


> LindaC
> Did you find solution to the leaves curling in ammania. I have recently reset my tank. Used Amazonia 2 as always. But installed new lights of 45w over my 2 feet tank. And 6 days later I experienced leave curl in ammania that too the topmost leaves.
> Pls guide me with your experience.


Satish, welcome to APC! Unfortunately this discussion is 13 years old, so you aren't likely to hear from any of the participants. I suggest you start a new discussion with your question.


----------

