# PPS TECHNICAL - Discussion Thread



## IUnknown

I think one good thing with this method is the information on Ca and mg. I've got the test kits coming in a couple of weeks, so I'm not sure its my problem, but at least the information has given me another place to look for answers to my leaf curling/stunting problem.


----------



## discus

IUnknown said:


> I think one good thing with this method is the information on Ca and mg. I've got the test kits coming in a couple of weeks, so I'm not sure its my problem, but at least the information has given me another place to look for answers to my leaf curling/stunting problem.


Nice to hear you found the articles useful. The purpose was to arm those who desired it with information required to make informed choices. Feel free to ask more questions and good luck.

regards


----------



## plantbrain

Greg's curly leaf issue............San Jose water is hard, both KH and GH, it' varies also depending on location.

Some plants will respond differently to KH, which plants are being addressed? 

Since I've grown most of the plant species to high level. If someone can grow it, find out what they did and repeat it and see if it works. Generally it does.

Greg, see Dave Gomberg's tank for a classic no water change CO2 tank long before this ever occured in the recent postings. The folks in sfbaaps tried this a long time ago as did I later. 

I can assure you, he does not test
The water is very soft.

But if you want to test things, crank up the light, which you do have a lot of on that tank.

Then uptake rates become higher and limitations occur quickly.

It is possible that some plants simply need more time to translocate the nutrients to the growth sites.

The new growth simply has not had time to produce the Ca/Mg uptake channels so the plant must translocate them from older, more developed areas.

Some plants might have issues there.

But I doubt it........

Tell me which plants you are dealing with.


Regards, 
Tom Barr


----------



## IUnknown

I haven't been paying a lot of attention to the tank recently. The intensity of the PC bulbs have gone down a lot, and a lot of the plants are getting ugly. I got the test kits this week, and plan to keep track of things next week. The problem I was having was with the Rotala "green", MM, and Ludwiga acruata. Its just weird, growth will be great and then stunt mid week.



> No3=5-10ppm
> Po4=1ppm
> Ca=waiting for test kit
> Mg=waiting for test kit
> KH=around 100 ppm (5.6 dH)
> pH=6.7 controlled by solenoid
> Co2=30ppm
> I dose 1/8 tsp of K weekly. I don't dose Ca or Mg.


----------



## defdac

plantbrain said:


> It is possible that some plants simply need more time to translocate the nutrients to the growth sites.
> 
> The new growth simply has not had time to produce the Ca/Mg uptake channels so the plant must translocate them from older, more developed areas.
> 
> Some plants might have issues there.
> 
> But I doubt it........


You told me this when I asked about this over at APD:
http://fins.actwin.com/aquatic-plants/month.200412/msg00004.html

"The above references are for terrestrial plants, which have no ionic Ca++ floating around their leaves(from water+ CaCl2 which disassociates into their ions Ca++ and Cl-)"

With very low circulation that would be a problem I guess?



> Add more traces, consider some better substrate material like Flourite etc.


Traces I have enough of. The substrate is another matter. Perhaps I should try shoving down some CaCl2 by the roots and see if things get better - but if the plant have to transport things from the roots/older parts I guess it would still get curly leaves?


----------



## bharada

Edward,
Do you have a conversion for using KCL instead of K2SO4 as the potassium source?

Thanks.

Bill


----------



## cousinkenni

Bill,

If you are looking for the 0.75 : 0.25 : 1.0 of the SS then I believe the Math is as follows. If you are looking for one of the other formulations then just subtitute in the equations:

KNO3:  20.38g used, 101.11g/mol 20.38/101.11 = 0.20156 (our multipier for KNO3)
Breakdown:
K: 39.10g/mol * 0.20156 = 7.88g of K used
NO3: 62.01g/mol * 0.20156 = 12.50g of NO3 used

KH2PO4:  5.97g used, 136.07g/mol 5.97/136.07 = 0.04387 (our multiplier for KH2PO4)
Breakdown:
K: 39.10g/mol * 0.04387 = 1.715g of K used
H2: 1.0g/mol * 0.04387 = 0.088g of H2 used
PO4 94.97g/mol * 0.04387 = 4.166g of PO4 used

K2SO4:  15.74g used 174.27g/mol 15.74/174.27 = 0.09032 (our multiplier for K2SO4)
Breakdown:
K2: 78.2g/mol * 0.09032 = 7.06g of K2 used
SO4: 96.07g/mol * 0.09032 = 8.68g of SO4 used

So here is How it adds up

NO3: 12.50g
PO4: 4.166g
K: 7.88g + 1.715g + 7.06g = 16.655g

If you substitute in KCL it has a lower Formula weight but it also has less K per molecule. You need to substitute KSO4's 7.06g of K for KCL's 7.06g of K:

KCl: Xg used 74.55g/mol X/74.55 = Y (Y is our multiplier for KCL)
Breakdown:
K: 39.10g/mol * Y = 7.06g of K used
Cl: 35.45g/mol * Y = Z

Solve for XY and Z

39.10 * Y = 7.06 Y= 0.18056
X/74.55 = Y (Y = 0.18056) so X = 13.46g of KCL

For fun solve for Z:

35.45 * Y = Z substitute in Y and Z = 6.40
there will be essentially 6.4g of Cl- floating around your tank (by the time you finish your fertilizing) so I don't know if this is a good idea

Dose the fertilizer exactly like Edward says: 1ml/10gal

P.S. if anybody finds a flaw with my math (such as Edward) please let me know 

Ken T.


----------



## bharada

Thanks Ken...that's way too much math and chemistry for me. 

With regards to the other solutions, can you just apply the same percentage of KCL:K2SO4 to determine the proper amount? E.g., in the SS, KCl mass is 86% of what would be added using K2SO4. So can you take 86% of the K2SO4 mass in the other solutions as the amount of KCl to add?


----------



## cousinkenni

Yes that should work.


----------



## bharada

Cool. Now all I have to do is crush 40# of KCl water softener pellets.


----------



## cousinkenni

Bill,

Remember:



cousinkenni said:


> there will be essentially 6.4g of Cl- floating around your tank (by the time you finish your fertilizing) so I don't know if this is a good idea
> 
> Ken T.


----------



## bharada

Ken,
Based on my dosing levels that'll take about 28 days. If I cut down to bi-weekly 20-30% changes I can add enough Prime to neutralize what Cl there is in the tank, don't you think?


----------



## bharada

Okay, in a moment of clarity I decided to plug in the SS component amount into the Fertilator with an arbitrarily set tank volume. In order to get the potassium ppm value to be equal using KCl it actually comes out to 14.2g rather than the 13.46g that Ken calculated using molar mass.

It would seem to me that these two amounts should be the same, so why aren't they?


----------



## Edward

Hi 
I have not tried KCl before, not sure how is it going to work. You can try and tell us you experience.

*Standard Solution SS*
_0.75:0.25:1.00 (NO3O4:K)_
KNO3 20.38 g
KH2PO4	5.97 g
KCl 13.48 g

*PO4-Free Solution PF*
_0.75:0.00:1.00 (NO3O4:K)_
KNO3 20.38 g
KH2PO4	0.00 g
KCl 16.75 g

*NO3-Free Solution NF*
_0.00:0.25:1.00 (NO3O4:K)_
KNO3 0.00 g
KH2PO4	5.97 g
KCl 28.51 g

Thank you
Edward


----------



## bharada

Edward said:


> Hi
> I have not tried KCl before, not sure how is it going to work. You can try and tell us you experience.


I'll try it on the next batch and let you know how it goes.


----------



## SAWALLACE

Has anyone tried upping the K in the solutions? I seem to have spot algae issues that i've read is caused by inadequate K. 

Just wondering if anyone else has had the same problem and if they tried this.


----------



## skids

I read through and understood the 6 articles ok, but seem to be missing the big picture. What would a typical daily dose be for say a 30 or 10g tank? What would it look like over a week? Ok, maybe you are proposing there is no typical tank. What is the dose schedule for one of your tanks?

I'm not planning on trying this since I'm barely taking care of my tanks as it is and while I have all the test kits needed except Ca, I find that I get real motivated at first but then slack too much to tune this to your suggested targets. I Drop 1/4 tsp of powdered KNO3, K2SO4, a few drops of Fleet and 8ml of TMG into my 75 long every other day. At this point I don't even dissolve it. I just dump near the filter outlet, while feeding fish at other end. I do 50% water changes on most but not all weekends. My tank isn't going to to win an AGA place, so I'm not advising anyone to follow my slacker lead. The fish have grown a lot. 

I did enjoy reading through the chem since I have a biochem background. 

I liked the excel spreadsheet too. Thinking of putting in a charting macro for us? I noticed aquabotanic's newsletter had a nice graph to show of an article based on the PPS.

I get the feeling that I am missing an overall intro article or maybe it is still in draft form?


----------



## Jeff Kropp

skids said:


> I read through and understood the 6 articles ok, but seem to be missing the big picture. What would a typical daily dose be for say a 30 or 10g tank? What would it look like over a week?


I think Edward is just now finding the words to describe the 'big picture'. Thats why you and others are having difficulties deciphering PPS. In the early days of PPS Edward did provide a fictional sample data set that illustrated its application. Look here: http://www.aquaticplantcentral.com/forumapc/showthread.php?t=2303&page=2&pp=10
His understanding has changed some since then and I think is due for a published update. Now that the PPS system has been around 4 months I would like to see some reportage and possibly examine .xls spreadsheets of people working with PPS. I know that Edward asks to see PPS users .xls data files when consulting in the APC chat room. It would be nice to hear a progress report.


----------



## gnatster

Here is a screen shot from my 120. Since starting PPS in Dec I have seen significant increases in growth rate. Overall tank is more stable then it's ever been.


----------



## discus

Hi Skids



skids said:


> What is the dose schedule for one of your tanks?


You should see the link Jeff Kropp provided as it is a great starting point.
Just want to add, that the idea is to begin dosing a small quantity say 3ml per day for about a week. Once the week is over you perform your tests and see whether the values you desire have been achieved. If they have you continue as is, if you desire higher you increase your dosage to lets say 5ml per day for one week and test again until the desired levels are reached, adjusting your drops on a weekly basis until you get to where you want to be. From that point on it will be fairly consistent until you make significant adjustments to your tank as in many more plants or fish or what have you, as this would affect your parameters so you would have to readjust your dosing accordingly. 
In addition Edward has provided phosphate free or nitrate free amongst others solutions for tanks that are abundant in these so that you are not forced to only dose SS (Standard Solution) but can dose a nitrate free or a phosphate free solution depending on your tank.

Hope this adds a little bit of clarity to your question.


----------



## cousinkenni

*Testing Calcium?*

Edward,

Using the Hagen test kit to test for Ca:

To measure the Ca in 10mL worth of H2O do you double the drops of reagents 1 and 2 going into the 10 mL of water or keep it at 7drops reagent 1 and 3 drops of reagent 2?

Thanks,

Ken T.


----------



## gnatster

You would keep it at the same as the directions advise. 7 of 1, 3 of 2 and count the # of 3 that is used to change from pink to purple.


----------



## TortoiseBoy

*Question about dosing amounts*

Edward (and others),
Kudos to you and the other folks who have worked on the PPS method. I am new to aquatic plants but have decided to try out your method after reviewing several. My question focuses on the dosing amounts involved in your method. I ordered dry ferts from www.gregwatson.com and mixed them to the specs that you provide in your article. I used volumetric measures calculated by using Chuck Gadd's calculator, but otherwise I followed your instructions to the letter (as far as I know). How much do you think that I should be dosing for a 90 gallon tank (2.44 wpg, pressurized CO2) that has been set up about 2 months? It seems like I have been dosing the heck out of the tank and not seen a great deal of results. It seems very difficult to get much movement in nitrate, especially. I am dosing over 20ml of the phosphate-free solution in a day sometimes and I don't think that I have ever seen nitrate go as high as 10ppm. I am also feeding the heck out of my fish (low-moderate load). Do you think there may be something wrong with my nitrate test kit (recently bought Aquarium Pharmaceuticals - it has a fish wearing a lab coat on the front of it - what more could you want?) My phosphate is running right at 1ppm (Hagen phosphate test kit) and, as I said, I am only dosing the phosphate-free mixture. Plant growth has been moderate, but the tank and I are new at this and I have little to gauge it against. I think that I may be missing something here, so if you can help me, I would be most appreciative.

Thanks so much,

TB
P.S. Edward, you are a great proponent of your methods. The fact that you were quiet rather than resorting to personal attacks and brow-beating to get your point across speaks volumes to me. Well done.


----------



## Jason Baliban

Let me say that I agree with tortoiseboy in regards to edwards way of conveying his point. I have a quick question about the methodology. I am about to try this method but I have made up the SS with just KNO3 and KH2PO4....i dont have any K2SO4. What is my SS going to lack because of this omitted ingrediant? I have Flourish K and was think of using that to fill in the blanks. Does anyone have any thoughts on this. I am looking forward to getting started with this method. Thanks!!!
jB


----------



## SAWALLACE

> It seems like I have been dosing the heck out of the tank and not seen a great deal of results. It seems very difficult to get much movement in nitrate, especially. I am dosing over 20ml of the phosphate-free solution in a day sometimes and I don't think that I have ever seen nitrate go as high as 10ppm.


I would calibrate/test your kits. http://ca.geocities.com/[email protected]/01.01.Test.NO3.PO4.pdf


----------



## SAWALLACE

Jeff Kropp said:


> How do you explain your accrual of a 25/1 N/P ratio while dosing a 3/1 ratio solution?





Edward said:


> Dosing once NO3O4 10:1 gives approximately 10:1 ratio in the tank on the end of the 10th day. But, dosing 10 days 1:0.1 gives usually 5:0 ratio after 10 days.


Since I do WCs every week (tank doesnt get to 10 day mark), should I adjust this ratio? It seems like PO4 isn't being consumed by the plants as fast as NO3.

Also, has anyone experimented with a ratio of DS to, perhaps, SS? I have a high bio-load and i've been adding 1mlDS:4mlSS. Since there is not a (affordable) test for K+, i don't know if i'm on the right track.
Thanks!


----------



## discus

Hi TortoiseBoy



TortoiseBoy said:


> How much do you think that I should be dosing for a 90 gallon tank (2.44 wpg, pressurized CO2) that has been set up about 2 months? It seems like I have been dosing the heck out of the tank and not seen a great deal of results. It seems very difficult to get much movement in nitrate, especially. I am dosing over 20ml of the phosphate-free solution in a day sometimes and I don't think that I have ever seen nitrate go as high as 10ppm.


90 gallons equates to approximately 340 litres accordingly I believe adding 20ml of PF solution is only adding approximately 1.3 ppm of NO3 to your tank. If you find after a week that 20ml is not increasing it then you should try perhaps 30ml the following week and 40ml the next until you are getting the reading of NO3 that you desire in your tank.



TortoiseBoy said:


> Do you think there may be something wrong with my nitrate test kit


The articles under the following link explain how to calibrate your test kits using the solutions.

http://www.aquaticplantcentral.com/forumapc/showthread.php?t=4241
in particular How to test for Nitrates and Phosphates

Your dosing regimen must be fine tuned by trial until you find your tanks sweet spot. as I said above start increasing to 30ml for a week and see what tests yield. if too low increase some more for a week. if too high decrease a bit for one week and so on until you get the appropriate reading.

I also recommend reading all the articles in the link provided it gives a great overview of the system in total which may help with some of your concerns.

Good luck and ask more questions


----------



## discus

Hi Jason



Jason Baliban said:


> I am about to try this method but I have made up the SS with just KNO3 and KH2PO4....i dont have any K2SO4. What is my SS going to lack because of this omitted ingrediant? I have Flourish K and was think of using that to fill in the blanks.


Firstly I think we all agree with TortoiseBoy with respect to the way Edward conveyed his point.

Secondly your SS is going to be missing K ( but you knew that already  )

Thirdly you would have to determine exactly what is in Flourish K so that you are not throwing off your dosing. Once you know exactly what is in Flourish K then you could adjust your dosing accordingly. I have heard (totally uninvestigated by me) that flourish contains small amounts of K. Thats why i say it is important to know. Once you know then you could dose Flourish K accordingly and keep the SS free as is.

Check out this thread with respect to Flourish K
http://www.aquaticplantcentral.com/forumapc/showthread.php?t=5220

Good luck and ask more questions
Discus


----------



## Edward

skids said:


> So the HM digital TDS meter from Air, water and Ice Co. reads in ppm . THe PPS worksheet expects micro Siemens. Is there a handy conversion? Come to think of it, is the TDS used at all in the worksheet's other calcs or in fine tuning the method? Seems to be just nice to know, but not used.
> 
> Did I miss something? Just montoring your resins from RO/DI to predict changeout. Maybe watching the overall TDS of aquarium to make sure it doesn't get too high and in need of a water change?
> 
> My tap is 124 ppm and my tank is 447 ppm.
> 
> Maybe this relates to Edward's unrelated quest to breed tetra by keeping water soft?


Hi
There are two ways to measure TDS. The  Siemens and [ppm] as NaCl equivalent. Both test equipments are identical except the calibration part. The two can be converted as follows

*uS = 2 x ppm
ppm = uS / 2*

In the PPS xls sheet, the TDS column is not used for any calculations. It is there only as an indicator of water column contamination. For example, your tap is 124 ppm and your tank is 447 ppm. There is almost 4 times more dissolved elements in your tank then in your tap. I see it as a high contamination. Something is not right, it needs to be corrected. 
The TDS can go little higher then the tap, but then it should get stabilized. If not, then you are either over fertilizing or your substrate is leaking.

Edward


----------



## skids

*high TDS*

I am not currently using PPS, just enjoy the worksheet and am seeing where my tank would be on your targets, I may try it later. I have a Ca kit on order, here are my current values from Hagen kit values:
446	6.8	8	3.0	5.4	4.7	unk	0.3 unk 24	22
TDS	pH	NO3	PO4	GH	KH	Ca	NO2 Ca2	Mg2	CO2

Note: I don't believe the PO4 value, I have always had an interference with something in my substrate, probably egg shells from worm castings used to enrichen the turface mvp I used. Mg is calculated by your worksheet not a test. NO3, GH and Kh values are from LaMotte kit.

This is a 75g discus tank, water change 50% weekly but I was skiing last week so 2 weeks since last change (maybe contributes to high TDS)

I dose 10ml TMG, 1/4 tsp KNO3, 1/8 tsp K2SO4 and 0.5 ml Fleet every 2 days. At water change I add 1tbs Seachem Equilibrium, 5 ml Kent Freshwater Essentials, 1 1/2 tsp baking soda, 1 tsp Epsom salt, 1/4 tsp KNO3 and K2SO4 and 1 ml Fleet , 10ml TMG.

I have a high fish and about 50% plant load (of what I could) . I get okay growth of plants but certainly not winning any awards. I slacked a few months back and things are on the mend to rebuild plant mass. Pressurized CO2 and 2 wpg.


----------



## Jason Baliban

Hey guys, 
I am starting to use this method. I stated before that I am not using k2so4, but substituting flourish K. Not for any reason other then i dont have k2so4 right now. My question is in the trace area. I am using flourish for trace. Has anyone used this? How does this fit into the equation. I have a 46 gallon tank with just over 3wpg. I am currently dosing 7ml of SS and 1ml of flourish a day. I have just started so I cannot comment on results. Also iron, I have fourish iron. Is anyone dosing extra iron.....and if so how much. Thanks guys. I am loooking forward to sharing my results as they surface.
jB


----------



## Edward

Hi TortoiseBoy
Using spoons to measure dry chemicals is very inaccurate. Please see _Tbs / tsp / Dash / Pinch / Smidgen / gram conversion_ in *FAQ*. Simple cheap digital post scales are available at Staples and elsewhere. 
For 90 gall aquarium at 2.44 Wpg I would start dosing daily 4ml SS, 10ml PF, 22dr Mg and 22dr TE. Test your water parameters after one week and post your results. 
Testing your test kits is highly recommended. You need to do this only one time to see how the kit product works. Additionally, test your tap parameters so we can see what is short and what is in excess.

Thank you for your kind words
Edward


----------



## Edward

Hi SAWALLACE
Doing WC changes nothing in regards to the daily dosing. If you can post your aquarium size and light amount I can give you detailed dosing volumes to start with. 

Thank you
Edward


----------



## Edward

Hi skids
There should be zero NO2 in your aquarium. Test your tap and if zero then check your aquarium. Something is wrong.
Your Mg level is incorrect without adding Ca level in the calculation. GH – Ca = Mg , therefore you don’t know your Mg level until you get your Ca level.
Turface is dissolving and changing the water parameters. You can put some in a glass and test TDS increase in few days. 

Edward


----------



## Edward

Hi Jason
Your situation with substituting the K is going to be extremely difficult. The K is locked into the solutions in certain ratio. It would be better to get the K2SO4 first and then experiment. 
People use Flourish with great success, it does contain complete balanced trace element mix. 
For 46 gall aquarium at 3Wpg I would start dosing daily 3ml SS, 6ml PF, 12dr Mg and 12dr TE. Test after one week and post your results.

Thank you
Edward


----------



## Edward

*Typical high light daily dosing Table*


----------



## MiamiAG

Hi,

Sorry if this has been asked before.

What would I do if I have to be away from home for a number of days? Do I dose a large amount up front or not dose for those days?


----------



## BigFoot

I have also started the pps system. I have a high light 75 gal. tank with co2 and controller. What would you recommed Edward to get me started ? I have read the above dont understand why you recommeded the pf i thought this was used when po4 is high. The plant load in my tank is high with a low fish load. I can post more stats if you like.


Thanks Brian


----------



## Edward

Hi BigFoot
This SS with PF combined dosage is saving you time. You won’t need to go through the process of alternating between the two solutions.

Edward


----------



## BigFoot

So should i dose to the chart that you supplied..
Which would be : SS. 4 ML. PF 8 ML. MG.18 DROPS TE. 18 DROPS.
Is this correct ?
(75 gal.)


----------



## Edward

Art_Giacosa said:


> Hi,
> 
> What would I do if I have to be away from home for a number of days? Do I dose a large amount up front or not dose for those days?


Hi Art
This is one important issue to talk about. People do get scared by the 'daily' dosing requirements, but on the other hand look at the other fertilizing systems. They recommend daily dosing as well.

As an example,
- The Nature Aquarium Beginner's Manual, first page says Fertilization / Green Brighty Series Step.1 3cc a day.
- The EI is recommending dosing on odd and even days of the week what means daily as well.
- Next is the Aquajournal, where Fertilization / Brighty K : 0.5 cc, Green Brighty Step 1 - 1 drop per day.

This daily dosing requirement is not PPS specific. Plants do well with daily additions of nutrients. The water column is not depleted or low on elements at any given time. There is room for a reserve, a buffer to keep plants from running out. We are bouncing between two factors here, concentration that can be dosed extra vs. uptake rate driven by the light intensity. There is no critical need to dose daily in low light aquariums, it is the high light tanks that are so picky to maintain.
Some posts are suggesting lowering temporarily the light intensity for the time.

Thank you
Edward


----------



## SAWALLACE

Edward said:


> Hi SAWALLACE
> Doing WC changes nothing in regards to the daily dosing. If you can post your aquarium size and light amount I can give you detailed dosing volumes to start with.
> 
> Thank you
> Edward


Hello Edward, 
Actually i've been dosing PPS for 3 months now. I'm still battling algae though, particularly spot and brown. I've been adding extra potassium to try and eliminate the spot algae, as you said that tanks with high bio-loads require it (if i remember correctly). It seems to be helping.

I actually dose way more than in your example, I know it's just a starting point, currently dosing 9ml SS,Mg, 2ml TE, DS per day for a 50gal tank with 4 WPG. I do weekly WC's of 25-30%.

I was wondering if anyone else had the same problem and dosed more or less DS successfully. Not having a test for K, i'm in the dark.


----------



## Jason Baliban

hey Edward,
You almost have us all there....hehe. Im looking at the chart you put up, which is a great help. My question is, we are adding so much extra PF....why dont we just revise SS to have more of a ratio of KNO3? I know the three different solutions offer quite a bit of diversity....but adding that much more PF is grounds for remaking the SS solution....at least with a bet more KNO3? Am I making sense, or am i missing the boat? Thanks for your time.
jB


----------



## Edward

Jason Baliban said:


> hey Edward,
> My question is, we are adding so much extra PF....why dont we just revise SS to have more of a ratio of KNO3? Am I making sense, or am i missing the boat?
> jB


Hi Jason
Actually the ratios of the solutions are the part of the regulation loop giving us the flexibility to fertilize variety of aquariums. There is nothing wrong with using two solutions. The K is locked in it to give us the right dose. In a long run you may encounter increased or decreased NO3 PO4 concentration in the aquarium. Only simple change in the SS PF solution will correct the slipped ratio while maintaining the same amount of total fertilization.
For example, 4ml SS with 8ml PF works well for few weeks, and then the NO3O4 water column ratio starts going the wrong way. What you do is change the dose to 6ml SS with 6ml PF or 8ml SS with 4ml PF, depending what way you want to move the ratio.

At this point you can see that the original dose of 
4 + 8 = *12*

And the later
6 + 6 = *12*
or
8 + 4 = *12*

The total quantity of the fertilizer as a whole (12ml) keeps NO3 and K at the same strength. It doesn't change. Only the PO4 does. This is how one of the regulation loops work.

Detail:
4ml SS with 8ml PF = *0.33* : 0.04 : *0.44* ppm (NO3 : PO4 : K)
6ml SS with 6ml PF = *0.33* : 0.06 : *0.44*
8ml SS with 4ml PF = *0.33* : 0.07 : *0.44*

Now back to your original question why not change the SS solution ratio. We don't want to change it because in a low light scenario the exact opposite is required. The SS with NF solutions are needed to dose properly.

Detail:
4ml SS with 8ml NF = 0.11 : *0.11* : *0.44* ppm (NO3 : PO4 : K)
6ml SS with 6ml NF = 0.17 : *0.11* : *0.44* 
8ml SS with 4ml NF = 0.22 : *0.11* : *0.44*

The total quantity of the fertilizer as a whole (12ml) keeps PO4 and K at the same strength. It doesn't change. Only the NO3 does.

See the beauty in the complex simplicity of the system?
We are now getting into the core of the PPS principles which I and Discus did not want to include in the original articles PPS 2005, not stretching them beyond acceptable size. I am glad you asked so we can discuss it here now.

Thank you
Edward


----------



## Jason Baliban

Super answer!!! I got you now!! How do you allot for Fe? Flourish and many other TE mixtures have a certain % of Fe. Have we tackled how to dose extra Fe? The beauty of the method is simplicty. How do we apply Fe doesing into this simplicity? Obviously this will vary from tank to tank, thus the nature of the method. How can we establish a baseline for this?
Thanks
jB


----------



## Jeff Kropp

Edward said:


> - The EI is recommending dosing on odd and even days of the week what means daily as well.


correction* the classic Estimative Index doses once after each weekly water change.

Some people have also added a midweek booster dose and this variation has evolved into the odd-even hybrid for others. These daily dosers are not practicing Estimative Index procedures; even tho they may be following EI ppm guidelines.


----------



## Edward

Jeff Kropp said:


> correction* the classic Estimative Index doses once after each weekly water change.
> 
> Some people have also added a midweek booster dose and this variation has evolved into the odd-even hybrid for others. These daily dosers are not practicing Estimative Index procedures; even tho they may be following EI ppm guidelines.


*Please see post #48*

Thank you
Edward


----------



## discus

Hi Bigfoot



BigFoot said:


> So should i dose to the chart that you supplied..
> Which would be : SS. 4 ML. PF 8 ML. MG.18 DROPS TE. 18 DROPS.
> Is this correct ?
> (75 gal.)


Yes thats exactly it. I also have a 75 gallon and that is what i dose also.
so far it has kept everything in balance and i haven't needed to make adjustments.

Thanks
Discus


----------



## BigFoot

Hi Dicus 
First off thanks for the reply. Second i was sitting just wondering how long has your 75 gal. has been up and running. And may i see a picture of it.


----------



## Edward

SAWALLACE said:


> Hello Edward,
> Actually i've been dosing PPS for 3 months now. I'm still battling algae though, particularly spot and brown. I've been adding extra potassium to try and eliminate the spot algae, as you said that tanks with high bio-loads require it (if i remember correctly). It seems to be helping.
> 
> I actually dose way more than in your example, I know it's just a starting point, currently dosing 9ml SS,Mg, 2ml TE, DS per day for a 50gal tank with 4 WPG. I do weekly WC's of 25-30%.
> 
> I was wondering if anyone else had the same problem and dosed more or less DS successfully. Not having a test for K, i'm in the dark.


Hi Sawallace
In you aquarium, I would try dosing 3ml SS, 6ml PF, and 1-2ml TE. The 9ml Mg you dose seems to be too much. Check your GH and Ca. Calculate the actual Mg and keep the level as low as you can but still measurable. You can do your WC to help with the bio overload. Is your tank 100% planted? Test in one week time and post results.

Thank you
Edward


----------



## SAWALLACE

Hello Edward,
Last 3 weeks have tested as:
Mg(ppm) Ca(ppm)
12 30
12 30
12 30

I guess Mg is a little high. I've been using RO for the past few months but will be switching back to tap next week. I should have to dose even less then.



Edward said:


> I would try dosing 3ml SS, 6ml PF


 Uh Oh.... Using multiple solutions eh? Does excess PO4 limit the uptake of something else? Why the PF solution? I believe my PO4 has been in the 1-2ppm range for the last few weeks. I though I was getting close, oh well  I'll try that.

My tank is not COMPLETELY planted, but getting there. I've added lots of hairgrass and a few more swords since the pic.
my tank
Thank you Edward


----------



## Edward

Hi SAWALLACE
Tell me, what is your NO3 before WC.

Edward


----------



## discus

Hey bigfoot



BigFoot said:


> Hi Dicus
> First off thanks for the reply. Second i was sitting just wondering how long has your 75 gal. has been up and running. And may i see a picture of it.


Tanks been up for a while now but only since August have i really started with live plants CO2 and high light etc. etc.
As for pictures still trying to learn how to take some. But ill put something up when I learn how to take a decent picture.

Good luck

Discus


----------



## BigFoot

Thanks Discus
I hope to get fertilizer dosing soon. I just needed the picture for inspiration.


----------



## BigFoot

Well its been almost a week since i started the pps. The sunset hygro looks
green and has almost lost all the red. I am thinking i might have to put more csm+b in i am adding daily 18 drops. I have not yet tested butt i will tonight and post my results for ya . My question is if i add more TE do i need to add more of other ferts. to the tank?


----------



## gregwatson

BigFoot said:


> Well its been almost a week since i started the pps. The sunset hygro looks
> green and has almost lost all the red. I am thinking i might have to put more csm+b in i am adding daily 18 drops. I have not yet tested butt i will tonight and post my results for ya . My question is if i add more TE do i need to add more of other ferts. to the tank?


If each of your "drops" is approximately equal to 1 ml ... then you are probably coming up a little short on traces ... if you were using Flourish, you should be dosing about 18.75 ml of traces ... however, since you are using Plantex CSM+B to make your own micro-nutrient solution, you will need to dose about 1.25 times that ... or about 24 ml ...

Why? Because the "typical" Plantex CSM+B micro nutrient solution is not quite as concentrated as Flourish is ...http://www.gregwatson.com/HowToDosePlantex.htm

Greg


----------



## BigFoot

This is what i am dosing :
SS: 4 ML.
PF: 8 ML.
MG: 18 DROPS
TE:18 DROPS

The drops are = to less than one ml. This done to the high light chart found in Edwards post.


Greg was 18.75 a daily dose or weekly dose ? My does are done daily.What does Discus and Edward think about this? I am very confused to the whole subject or fertilizing . I will post all test result as soon i get back from the doctors later this after noon.


----------



## Jason Baliban

Hey Bigfoot,
I just started dosing PPS myself. I kicked the whole drops thing. I think the conversion is 16-18 drops is a ml. I just do it by ml. Keep us posted!! I will post my parameters next weekend....along with a visual report.

my reg for 46 gallon 3wpg:

4ml SS
5ml PF
4/5ml flourish

jB


----------



## gnatster

20 drops = 1 ml or 1 cc when using a standardized drug store type dropper

As a reference point I dose 10 ml of Gregs CSM+B mixed as said in PPS xls in a 120.


----------



## Edward

Hi
I use TE 4 drops a day in 10 gall aquariums under 6Wpg PC. There are plants like Didiplis diandra, Glossostigma elatinoides, Hemianthus callitrichoides, Hemianthus micranthemoides, Hydrocotyle verticillata, Ludwigia arcuata, Ludwigia inclinata, Ludwigia repens, Nesaea crassicaulis, Proserpinaca palustris, Rotala macrandra, Rotala rotundifolia, Rotala Nanjenshan, Rotala wallichii, Vallisneria spiralis Tiger, and all are doing great.

Greg, can you post analysis of the Trace element mix CSM+B you selling?

Thank you,
Edward


----------



## MiamiAG

Edward,

I'll admit I haven't read the entire thread so slap me if this has been discussed.

I'm a little uncomfortable with traces in the PPS system. Again, it may be because I haven't read the entire thread(s).

As a past grower, I know that when a plant starts to show a deficiency, I've already inflicted damage to that plant. This damage may result in poor growth or limitation of any allelochemicals it may be releasing (defense mechanisms) and that algae may result. I much prefer to be on the preventative side. Heck, this is what we do with the EI method where we make sure the plant needs are met all the time.

I would feel more comfortable using a complete trace formula (like CSM) and use one element that I can test for as a monitor. Yes, this is Fe. We can debate what level of Fe we want to maintain and that may have some to do with the species we keep and certainly whether the tank is fast or slow growing. However, at least we understand what level of traces we are keeping in the aquarium.

Why don't you recommend testing for Fe in your process?

Thanks you're doing a great job/service with this.


----------



## Jeff Kropp

Art_Giacosa said:


> Why don't you recommend testing for Fe in your process?


His TE solution amounts are tested by subjective visual observations. Those observations are recorded in the notes area of one's PPS spread sheet. Guidelines for starting dosages are developed from the consensus of many users. Later adjustments are made after observing the performance of your tank. If you read Edwards comments in APC chat, you will notice that changes in TE solution are always recomended after all other parameters are met. If one feels more comfortable using Fe tests as a proxy for all trace elements by all means measure it. It won't throw off the PPS method if you don't stop making subjective observations.


----------



## niko

I'll jump before Edward and share why I personally don't think testing for Fe is practical.

Some time ago I tested for Fe and had a hard time getting a reading of 0.1 ppm with my brand new test kit:

I'd put X ml. of the Fe/Traces in a gallon jug and get a reading of 0.1 ppm. Then I'd add (X * Tank Volume) mls. of Fe/Traces to the tank and couldn't get a reading at all. I'd add more and more Fe/Traces trying to get a reading and after about 5 times extra fertilizer I just quit. All test where done from 5 to 10 minutes after fertilizing - supposedly the fertilizer was spread evenly by that time.

I tried fertilizing and testing like that 2-3 times in 2 different tanks. It never made sense. Since then I just observe the plants. 

I agree that "running" the plants "to the ground" and "resuscitating" them later is not the way to take care of them. The daily or every few days fertilizing seems best to me.

--Nikolay


----------



## BigFoot

Ok here are my test results for this week:
PO4 = .2
NO2 = 0.0
NO3 = 20 TO 30 X2 (I WILL EXPLAIN)
GH = 240
KH = 120 
CA = 80
PH = 6.9 TO 7.0 ON CONTROLLER
MG = 9.75
CO2 = 2O TO 25

What i dose is:
SS = 4 ML.
PF = 8 ML.
MG. = 18 DROPS
TE = 18 DROPS 

Ok the po4 and the no3 are tested with seachem and everything else with hagen. The no3 if i test it like seachem wants me to i get a color that is not on the chart. If i test it diluted by half i get the above test results. Also i done calibration test on the seachem because they supply it . Before i started this dose i did a 40 gallon water change. According to results SS and PF should be stop and NO3 free should replace them. Until the no3 comes to the proper level. What do u think i should and how much? This no longer my tank it is your tank please guide my hands in the right direction.


THANKS 
BIGFOOT


----------



## gregwatson

Edward said:


> Greg, can you post analysis of the Trace element mix CSM+B you selling?
> 
> Thank you,
> Edward


Plantex-CSM
--------------------
1.50% Magnesium
0.10% Copper
7.00% Iron
2.00% Manganese
0.06% Molybdenum
0.40% Zinc

to which I add about 0.50% Boron ...

Greg


----------



## MiamiAG

Jeff,

Thanks. I understand that the method suggested is the use of visual confirmation and the experiences of other hobbyists. I agree to the extent that this would establish a kind of general guideline. As you know, the parameters of aquariums can differ quite a bit so visual confirmation is used (after setting the other parameters) to control TE dosing. My point is that to the extent that the general guideline is off with ones particular set up, waiting to see a deficiency (assuming one recognizes the cause quickly) will lead to stunted plant growth.

I would prefer to measure Fe (the element I'm using to track TE availability) frequently at first to establish Fe demand. This is in the hopes of avoiding stunting my plant growth by allowing a deficiency to develop. Once I've established averafe Fe demand in the aquarium, I would test less frequently as a routine monitor to make sure things haven't changed.

Niko,

I agree that very good test kits are needed to monitor such small levels. I think it would be easy to recommend certain kits that have such sensitivity.


----------



## Edward

Hi BigFoot
There is no need to test for NO2 in planted tanks.
Next, I would suggest you test your NO3 and PO4 test kits first. It is easy. FAQ 
Once you know how to reliably test NO3 and PO4 then we can figure out the appropriate dosing program. Test your tap for NO3 and PO4 and if zero, then use the SS solution to premix your own calibration sample. Then use your test kits to see how 0, 10 and 20 NO3 and 0 and 1 PO4 looks like on the color chart.

Then check your GH and KH manual how to read degrees. The dGH and dKH in degrees is used in this hobby and in the xls sheet. This will make it easier as well.

Test your tap and your tank and post your results.

Thank you
Edward


----------



## BigFoot

Hi Edward
I have read and understand the info in FAQ and i will do. Just one problem my seachem test kit is about ready to run out so i order 2 new ones. I order the hagen no3,and po4 test kits this time from Big Als they should be here by next Friday. Until then i will use up the seachem as much as possible. In the mean time i did a 40 gallon water change and clean the filters just in case something was getting too high. Then dosed the tank to the high light chart.


----------



## Jeff Kropp

Art_Giacosa said:


> My point is that to the extent that the general guideline is off with ones particular set up, waiting to see a deficiency (assuming one recognizes the cause quickly) will lead to stunted plant growth.


At the risk of getting bumped to the notorious "discussion" thread I will attempt a more lengthy answer. Please correct and clarify as needed Edward.

As I understand this PPS method, its main goal is healthy plant growth that avoids deficiency symptoms. At its core is a theory of N/P/K ratio maintainance. Central to this theory are observations of the dynamic nature of N, P and K in the overall momentum of a planted tank. Since substanial contributions to N and P availability are a byproduct of animal husbandry PPS focuses its supplementation on bringing this nutrient contribution into line with the nutrient needs of aquatic plants. By measuring the accrual or loss of N and P an aquarist can estimate the natural generation rates of those nutrients and supplement to a targeted macro nutrient balance for long term stability.

For the most part TE are not generated in significant amounts from animal life proceses. In natural systems these nutrients are washed into streams from mineral sources while in our aquaria they are added by gardeners. Since PPS uses a TE solution of known concentrations, calculations can be made to estimate nutrient availability as a result of TE dosing. Due to this calculated ppm estimate, tests of measurable Fe become a secondary check on the calculated concentrations. If one implimented the PPS method without the contributions of other aquarist's experience then Fe testing could become an important part of anylizing one's dosage. Certainly there is useful information to gain from testing but when many people contibute their observations calculated ppm concentrations become more than adequate. This factor is reflected in Art_Giacosa's statement: "Once I've established average Fe demand in the aquarium, I would test less frequently as a routine monitor to make sure things haven't changed".

It is a common general assumtion that most Fe depletion in our aquariums results from oxidation rather than uptake. From my limited knowledge, I understand oxidation rates to be mostly influenced by the mechanisms of an aquarium. Factors such as light intensity, circulation and volume are much more easily standardized than the nutrient contributions of fauna. If this is true, then one can assume less varience of Fe oxidation rates than N/P/K ratios when one tank is compared to the next. This nature of oxidation makes measurements of Fe less important in monitoring changes to a particular aquarium, when you have the consensus of many aquariums to draw upon, because the general guideline used shows less variance from one tank to the next.

Certainly testing of Fe when using the PPS system will give useful data references but is it really required? ...perhaps not.

Thanks to the concensus developed by many users, the risks of inflicting damage to plants by errors of TE supplementation are greatly reduced. This aspect is shared by the Estimative Index (a concensus derived guide to suggested ppm values) where Fe availabilty is calculated from known additions and testing functions as a secondary confirmation of correct dosage. Testing Fe is not neccesary to EI users either; testing is only used to confirm calculated ppm values. I think the practice of frequent Fe testing is a holdover from the consensus evaluation phase of Sears/Conlin's pmdd approach whose results were adopted as initial EI recomended values. Fe testing today retains this evaluative role but has lost importance because concensus now determines min/max values.


----------



## MiamiAG

Jeff,

Thanks for such a well-thought out response. Karma to you for that!



Jeff Kropp said:


> If one implimented the PPS method without the contributions of other aquarist's experience then Fe testing could become an important part of anylizing one's dosage. Certainly there is useful information to gain from testing but when many people contibute their observations calculated ppm concentrations become more than adequate. This factor is reflected in Art_Giacosa's statement: "Once I've established average Fe demand in the aquarium, I would test less frequently as a routine monitor to make sure things haven't changed".


The difference here is that you suggest that we establish Fe demand based on general consensus versus actual testing of the particular aquarium.



Jeff Kropp said:


> It is a common general assumtion that most Fe depletion in our aquariums results from oxidation rather than uptake. From my limited knowledge, I understand oxidation rates to be mostly influenced by the mechanisms of an aquarium. Factors such as light intensity, circulation and volume are much more easily standardized than the nutrient contributions of fauna. If this is true, then one can assume less varience of Fe oxidation rates than N/P/K ratios when one tank is compared to the next. This nature of oxidation makes measurements of Fe less important in monitoring changes to a particular aquarium, when you have the consensus of many aquariums to draw upon, because the general guideline used shows less variance from one tank to the next.


It follows that if Fe levels vary less than other elements and such levels are mainly affected by light intensity, circulation, volume, etc., guidelines established by a consensus of hobbyists would yield results comparable to individual testing of Fe or, at the very least, good enough for our purposes.



Jeff Kropp said:


> Certainly testing of Fe when using the PPS system will give useful data references but is it really required? ...perhaps not. Thanks to the concensus developed by many users, the risks of inflicting damage to plants by errors of TE supplementation are greatly reduced.


The difference with the EI method is that it attempts to put sufficient trace elements into the aquarium on a consistent basis and tries to limit toxicities through the use of water changes. As a result, it is difficult to end up with a deficiency using the pure form of the EI method. On the other hand, the PPS method could result in a deficiency if the TE levels are too low.

The above notwithstanding, I agree with your comments that general guideliness can be established that would be sufficient for most average tanks. The obvious question becomes one of definition.

Do we now have a sufficient number of hobbyists reporting back such that we can say that we have guidelines established by consensus? Also, when using terms such as "light intensity" what do we mean (0-2 wpg=low)? Should we take the type of light fixture into account (FL v. Compact v. T5 v. MH)?

Please understand I am not questioning the PPS method. I myself use and agree with it. I am just trying to gain a better understanding of it through questioning.

Thanks.


----------



## Jeff Kropp

Art_Giacosa said:


> The difference here is that you suggest that we establish Fe demand based on general consensus versus actual testing of the particular aquarium.


Over time Fe testing has produced effective consensus values. As TE theory has evolved out of sears/conlin's early pmdd paper we have discovered consensus about micronutrient supplementation levels. Because this consensus was initialy varified by testing it has made further testing superfluous to common users of that consensus. If one is intrested in an evaluative critique of current consensus then further testing may become a necessary back-up to one's assertions.

Regarding definition, we now work to collate subjective observations into practical applications. This is a much more difficult task than establishing estimative index ppm values (the mysteries and inconsistancies of the curled/stunted growth problem is a good example of testing's inability to explain or produce conclusive results). I think PPS addresses this variability by trying to balance and stabilize momentum through supplementation. It assumes that consistent maintainance of particular nutrient relationships will reduce error in attributing subjective observations. It is really not very different from classic EI in this respect. Both methods promise that consistancy of supplementation will produce desirable results.


----------



## Administrator

Jeff,

Sounds great. Is there a formalized method for hobbyists to submit their results?

Also, I think TE theory was popularized by Dupla in their Optimum Aquarium where they used .1 Fe. I think the PMDD came afterwards as it was originally known as Poor Man's Dupla Drops. Nevertheless, it has evolved considerably since then.


----------



## Jeff Kropp

Administrator said:


> Is there a formalized method for hobbyists to submit their results?


Yes, post on APC!

Really, when it comes down to it, every request for advice is really fishing for consensus of opinion.

If my memory serves... Sears/Conlin adopted Dupla's Fe value and added observations which suggest that a P limited macronutrient balance is the best way to avoid algae problems. How did the Optimum Aquarium present its macronutrient theory?


----------



## MiamiAG

We are going way back! If I recall correctly, Dupla's method was based on extensive field tests coupled with the understanding of plant nutritional needs at the time. It was widely held that excess nutrients led to algae outbreaks so careful monitoring and dosing was key. Also, daily dosing of short-lived elements (Duplaplant 24) was used.

At the time, everyone thought that limiting nutrients to what plants took up was the way to avoid algae (i.e., starve it). Sears/Conlin's groundbreaking work focused on Liebig's Law of Minimumsin order to do just that. The use of PO4 limitation to cause algae to be PO4 deficient and, hence, not grow. Mind you! The point was NOT to starve plants of P! I remember having discussions with Karen Randall on the subject of ADDING PO4 back in 1995. 

I think it's important to point out that providing plants with the nutrients they need to grow is not a NEW school thought. It's OLD school thinking too (especially after Kaspar Horst invented the CO2 delivery system) . What NEW school thinking has done is to deepen our understanding of planted aquarium nutrient dynamics AND the fact that one need not focus on Liebig's Law of Minimums to avoid algae. The question that is YET to be answered is WHY NEW school does NOT result in algae outbreak! That's the paper I'm waiting for!


----------



## plantbrain

Art_Giacosa said:


> We are going way back! If I recall correctly, Dupla's method was based on extensive field tests coupled with the understanding of plant nutritional needs at the time. It was widely held that excess nutrients led to algae outbreaks so careful monitoring and dosing was key. Also, daily dosing of short-lived elements (Duplaplant 24) was used.
> 
> At the time, everyone thought that limiting nutrients to what plants took up was the way to avoid algae (i.e., starve it). Sears/Conlin's groundbreaking work focused on Liebig's Law of Minimumsin order to do just that. The use of PO4 limitation to cause algae to be PO4 deficient and, hence, not grow. Mind you! The point was NOT to starve plants of P! I remember having discussions with Karen Randall on the subject of ADDING PO4 back in 1995.
> 
> I think it's important to point out that providing plants with the nutrients they need to grow is not a NEW school thought. It's OLD school thinking too (especially after Kaspar Horst invented the CO2 delivery system) . What NEW school thinking has done is to deepen our understanding of planted aquarium nutrient dynamics AND the fact that one need not focus on Liebig's Law of Minimums to avoid algae. The question that is YET to be answered is WHY NEW school does NOT result in algae outbreak! That's the paper I'm waiting for!


Art, I've addressed this a few times.
Microphytes, those you refer to as algae are in an entirely different ecological *niche* than those of Macrophytes.
Macrophytes remove the NH4 fraction in sufficent biomass. NH4 is useful for inducing algae cultures wereas NO3 is not.
Macrophytes compete for light very well.

I've made these issue clear over the years on many boards.

PMDD and to a lesser degree Dupla addressed plant's needs and testing combined with dosing. I see little difference between PMDD methods and testing Fe, NO3 and PO4 and the so called new "PPS" methods. PO4, more Traces etc are often added these days since folks know the PO4, Fe, NO3 in excess does not cause algae.

Paul, Steve Dixon, myself yacked over testing and NO3/PO4 levels. I go more than week without water changes also, so I guess what the plants need and I am generally correct for 2-4 weeks, so that's PPS without testing, the plants can be used effectively as the "test".

Jeff is particularly good at that.

Even at 0.1-0.2ppm of PO4, that's still not limiting algae even at very high light levels. Few kits are good at this lower end range of PO4 as well to cause more issues back then and now. Calibration of test kits and their accuracy is at least discussed these days.

Light intensities have increase 2-4x in recent years as well.

A trace level of any measurable amount of Fe at 0.1ppm is certainly in excess in terms of algae. Trace test kits are an entire thread or two worth of uncertainly and issues. Considering folks use Fe as the proxy for traces, that's not without some serious issues if you want to be critical. Less so at lower light values as are all nutrients.

There are at least 2-3 ways around using test kits to measure traces.

Dupla did not focus on macro nutrients rather assuming based on some northern lake and limnology data that high N and P levels = algae based on things like Phillips paper from 1978 among others. That paper overlooked something very important when measuring PO4 and N levels: the plant's fraction in the water column as did some past literature. It selected for the N and P in the algae since that was part of the water sample. Re anaylzing the data from that paper with the plants added in, there is no correlation between higher nutrients and algae. See the site at UF for many papers on lakes or run through the database at the Aquatic weed center.

For any method to work, it must address the plant's needs, whether through the substrate/water column for a give rate of growth in balance with the light.

Stable nutrient levels are the key and a balance betweem the exports = the inputs. In this regard, all methods are the same and only the rate of growth changes.

Some other SAM's(plants) vs MAM's(algae), algae have an extremely high Surface area/Volume ratio. Think about this in terms of uptake and needs, how much does one cell need to live? Think about a million, billion, trillion celled plant.

The smaller the organism, the less concentration is needed to drive the uptake process, see ocean phytoplankton competition dynamics which also apply to these two groups in FW.

I've said for many years you cannot starve the algae without hurting the plants.

It's not merely one paper, it's a bunch of experiments that led to that.

If you'd like field and natural studies that also support the aquarium plant observations: there's a ton of them on shallow subtropical planted lakes in Florida, some with high CO2, some hard, some soft, some oligotrophic, some eutrophic, some rivers and springs with high CO2, 10-30ppm ranges, various depths, some constant chemistry and flow and temperatures etc.
Growth rates are different, there are seasonal differences, other variations.

There are few natural labs as suitable as Florida and there are many aquatic weeds there.

Regards, 
Tom Barr


----------



## MiamiAG

plantbrain said:


> Microphytes, those you refer to as algae are in an entirely different ecological *niche* than those of Macrophytes.
> Macrophytes remove the NH4 fraction in sufficent biomass. NH4 is useful for inducing algae cultures wereas NO3 is not.
> Macrophytes compete for light very well.


I agree completely, Tom. However, both macro and microphytes need very similar things, correct? They may need it in different ratios, levels, etc. and their ability to uptake these may be different, but in the end it's the same things.



plantbrain said:


> Considering folks use Fe as the proxy for traces, that's not without some serious issues if you want to be critical. Less so at lower light values as are all nutrients.
> 
> There are at least 2-3 ways around using test kits to measure traces.


I agree with you here but I don't think there's another way around it. What are the other ways to measure traces, calculations?



plantbrain said:


> The smaller the organism, the less concentration is needed to drive the uptake process, see ocean phytoplankton competition dynamics which also apply to these two groups in FW. I've said for many years you cannot starve the algae without hurting the plants.


Based on this, why would algae, that can take up nutrients at lower levels, not grow instead of the macrophytes?

PMDD stated that because macrophytes are more efficient at taking up PO4, by keeping that element limited to the needs of plants leaves nothing for algae and, hence, algae can't grow. I still don't understand why EI or PPS prevent algae growth, but maybe that's a topic for another thread.;-)


----------



## discus

Jeff Kropp said:


> At the risk of getting bumped to the notorious "discussion" thread I will attempt a more lengthy answer. Please correct and clarify as needed Edward.


hahahahaah Thanks Jeff I needed a laugh after haviing arrived at your post after reading all the ones that followed and trying to find wheres the PPS technical question in here. Only to arrive at yours last and realizing oh so thats what this is all about hahahahah. I owe you one. Should teach me not to stay away for extended periods of time.

Discus


----------



## Hatdance

*New to the Board*

Just wanted to introduce myself! I have been lurking for several months, gradually setting up my planted tank, getting the bells and whistles, including the PPS component elements! As of last weekend, I am up and running. I'll post my aquarium spec's at the end of this. I do have a couple of questions, though.

1) Edward... many thanks for all the work and advice you have put forth on this board and elsewhere. I now have all my little bottles set up with PPS, PF, NF, Mg, etc. One minor question... in preparing the Mg solution, the current version of the "recipe" calls for 169g in 500mL, whereas an earlier edition of the guide called for 16.9g. Is the 169g correct? Related, does epsom salt (with the "7H20" appendage) change the formula? Also, on the spreadsheet "typical high light daily dosing" I see that you do not call for the Ca/Discus mix. Is there a reason for that? I recall something about it being a 2-3x/month addition?

2) GregWatson... Thank you for shipping my order! Everything arrived quickly, and in great condition. Many thanks. Question for you... have you considered carrying the unique ingredients called for in Edward's Discus Mix (CaSO4, CaCl2.2H2O, MgSO4, NaHCO3)? I believe you carry some, but not all of these. Any chance you will add them to the inventory?

Thanks to you both, and others, for all the great information here.

Regards,

John

My tank:
90 gallon
3.7 wpg
6.9 pH
Ammonia: 0
Nitrite: 0.25
Nitrate: 20.0
GH: 8.9/160
KH: 3.6/65
Fe (chelated): 0.1
Calcium: 60
Phosphate: 0.1

Mg: can't calculate... get a negative number using the formula! Need to do some more research on this one.


----------



## discus

Hatdance said:


> 1) I now have all my little bottles set up with PPS, PF, NF, Mg, etc. One minor question... in preparing the Mg solution, the current version of the "recipe" calls for 169g in 500mL, whereas an earlier edition of the guide called for 16.9g. Is the 169g correct? Related, does epsom salt (with the "7H20" appendage) change the formula? Also, on the spreadsheet "typical high light daily dosing" I see that you do not call for the Ca/Discus mix. Is there a reason for that? I recall something about it being a 2-3x/month addition?


Hi Hatdance and welcome 
The appropriate amount of MgSO47H2O to add to 500 ml is 169 grams. What you see as 16.9g is in the 2004 PPS version which has been updated. 
The 7H2O component does not change anything as we have considered this in the formulation. 
The Discus formulation is for special situations and is not used very frequently. I personally had to use it at one point because of low K as all my other macros were sufficient.
If you are getting a negative value fro your Mg it means your Mg is at 0. and you need to dose some Mg solution.

Glad to see that you are on your way and remember to ask as many questions as you have.

Good luck and we look forward to hearing from you again with an update.

Discus


----------



## MiamiAG

Hi,

Finally tested my aquarium, here are the results. Can someone help me decipher. So far I've been dosing 8 ml of SS with 8ml of Mg and 2.5 ml of TS. 

65 g AGA with 196 watts of PC and yeast CO2.

pH: 7.1 probe
NO3: 0 ppm with Hagen test kit
PO4: 2 ppm with Salifert test kit
GH: 8 dH with Tetra test kit
KH: 3.5 dH with Salifer test kit
Ca: 40 ppm with Salifert test kit
K: ~2 mg/l Aquarium Landscapes kit

What should I do about this week's dosing?


----------



## Edward

Art_Giacosa said:


> Hi,
> 
> Finally tested my aquarium, here are the results. Can someone help me decipher. So far I've been dosing 8 ml of SS with 8ml of Mg and 2.5 ml of TS.
> 
> 65 g AGA with 196 watts of PC and yeast CO2.
> 
> pH: 7.1 probe
> NO3: 0 ppm with Hagen test kit
> PO4: 2 ppm with Salifert test kit
> GH: 8 dH with Tetra test kit
> KH: 3.5 dH with Salifer test kit
> Ca: 40 ppm with Salifert test kit
> K: ~2 mg/l Aquarium Landscapes kit
> 
> What should I do about this week's dosing?


_Reply moved here _

Thank you
Edward


----------



## AaronT

I'm not sure if this is the appropriate thread or not. I just wanted to say that I'm another PPS convert. I was growing healthy plants before and after trying it for a week they are all VERY healthy. Thanks for all the time and efforts that went into this. Oh, and I am doing it the lazy way with water changes.  Not because I feel they are necessary every week. My tank takes 75 feet of hose to reach so dragging it all out just to top off the tank every week doesn't make sense. Why not change a little water too?


----------



## discus

Hello Grandmasterofpool

Glad your enjoying the system and be sure to let us know of your progress. There is now an area where you can post your excel spreadsheet and get additional information / advice also. Would be nice to see and share your results with the rest of us.

http://www.aquaticplantcentral.com/forumapc/thread5931.html

Remember to ask questions

Discus


----------



## plantbrain

Art_Giacosa said:


> I agree completely, Tom. However, both macro and microphytes need very similar things, correct? They may need it in different ratios, levels, etc. and their ability to uptake these may be different, but in the end it's the same things.


Yes, they use the same things but their enzyme transporters are quite different and operate at their specific peak efficencies at far different concentrations of these nutrients.

A NH4+ cation is far more useful to a single celled spore than a large 10 billion celled plant with lots of reserves and storage organs(leaves, roots, etc). Plants can pick and chose.

Surface area ratios, response times, life expectancies are also radically different, algae are much more like annuals than aquatic plants(except a few like Ottelia species etc)

Plants main competition over algae: light.



> I agree with you here but I don't think there's another way around it. What are the other ways to measure traces, calculations?


 Yes, Atomic absorption, colorimeter testing, being fastitious and clean when using tiny amounts.

What specifically are you really wanting to test for also?
Plant health?
Plant uptake?

These are two entirely different things, something that test kits will not tell you entirely. Dry weights will tell you what is taken up, but does not address health.

Health is also something we are judging ourselves, it's an opinion and subjective, trying to quantatify health is a much more different test and more difficult for the hobbyists.

Our test kits do not test the nutrient levels within (inside) a plant either.

[quote
Based on this, why would algae, that can take up nutrients at lower levels, not grow instead of the macrophytes?

PMDD stated that because macrophytes are more efficient at taking up PO4, by keeping that element limited to the needs of plants leaves nothing for algae and, hence, algae can't grow. I still don't understand why EI or PPS prevent algae growth, but maybe that's a topic for another thread.;-)[/QUOTE]

Does an elephant require for plant material than a mouse?
Both are herbivores.

At lower levels Macrophytes are NOT more efficient, this is clearly incorrect(below 50ppb of SRP). At higher levels of PO4, macrophytes possess a higher rate of uptake.

There is also resource divisions among algae groups as well. Periphyton is good for 1-2ppb to about 50ppb, phytoplankton are even lower before limitation occurs.

We really don't know because few folks have the ability to test below 10ppb with reasonable accuracy(say +, - 2-3ppb), some research labs can with great care.

These are field studies, lab studies can tease apart a few things better.

The entire NO3 vs NH4 issue is one thing that was not addressed in the past, rather, it was assumed as part of the fish load and health, rather than NH4 inducing the algae.

On another note, I'm still trying to figure out how PPS is different than PMDD using test kits. With PMDD you target a certain range, dose to maintain that level for your individual tank, test to see how much you add back.
The only significant change is the addition of PO4 to PMDD and more flexibilty in the NO3/PO4/Trace/GH levels and higher CO2 levels, but given the low light levels back then, 10-15ppm was likely okay.

Ca/Mg/NO3/K/PO4/Traces were all added and tested for, adding back what 
was taken up by plants and by other elements within the tank.

Trouble shooting algae issues and asking folks to test/calibrate is a rather hard sell in it's use. I found this to be a problem with helping folks and figured out it was easy enough to dose based on a max uptake(EI) estimations and water changes.

PPS is suggested as an alternative, an alternative to what? PMDD?
This is what Paul suggested, test and maintain a range, note plant observations.

Jeff has done this for many years, not so much with critical testing, but with observations done over longer time frames.
That combined with testing is powerful.

I'm not trying to pick a hair out of my butt, I'm trying to see what is "new" vs PMDD which certainly suggested testing NO3/PO4/GH/traces etc. 
I've yet to get a critcal response(as opposed to a personal one) back here. PMDD also addresses all tank types, light levels, individual tank differences etc. Many folks go many weeks without water changes with success using PMDD. No absolute need or requirement there, just like PPS. So that issue is addressed also. What is new?

Calibrating the test kits(this was addressed every so often on the APD in the past), adding more PO4, assumptions about algae........... I suggested these issues about a decade ago and have for a very long time, doing most of the research. So did others as we discussed them back then. CO2 was suggested at several points to target 30ppm. Many went to 15ppm as their default as suggested by PMDD. But folks arrive at things often independently, CO2 for me was done that way, same for PO4 and algae. This was arrived at through consensus as well. We came up with a list of ranges and parameters and Steve and I placed these up on the sfbaaps site many years ago. I still was leary about trusting the test kits too much then rather focusing on the observations of the plants. They are the real issue we are focused on, not testing an dftest kits, those are just tools to answer specific questions.

Regards, 
Tom Barr


----------



## plantbrain

Art_Giacosa said:


> Hi,
> 
> Finally tested my aquarium, here are the results. Can someone help me decipher. So far I've been dosing 8 ml of SS with 8ml of Mg and 2.5 ml of TS.
> 
> 65 g AGA with 196 watts of PC and yeast CO2.
> 
> pH: 7.1 probe
> NO3: 0 ppm with Hagen test kit
> PO4: 2 ppm with Salifert test kit
> GH: 8 dH with Tetra test kit
> KH: 3.5 dH with Salifer test kit
> Ca: 40 ppm with Salifert test kit
> K: ~2 mg/l Aquarium Landscapes kit
> 
> What should I do about this week's dosing?


Umm how about the *CO2 level* and variation [DIY yeast CO2] for one if you wish to do _anything_ remotely critcal with the other nutrients?

Regards, 
Tom Barr


----------



## plantbrain

I've looked at the PPS discussion and many folks have algae issues. I would caution against rushing to judgement with algae's intitial appearance when you change a routine. Give the tank at least 3 weeks to stablize while keeping up on cleaning.

Keep up on pruning, manual removal till things settle down.
Don't wait to see if it goes away, kill it!

When setting a new tank, add mulm, add a little peat, add lots and lots of plants from the very start!
Then add herbivores.

You will have a great deal more success with any method by doing these things and be better able to judge the long term effects.

Regards, 
Tom Barr

3rd annual Plant Fest July 8-14th 2005!
[email protected] Get connected
www.BarrReport.com Get the information


----------



## mrmagnan

*Water Conservation & your Fert Regime*

Okay I am involved in water conservation professionally so I *HAVE* to say something here.

I think EI is a great/easy method and I use it to get healthy growth in my tank when all is looking dismal. Then I back off and test knowing my tank is reset.

*However, I feel a 50% water change on a large number of tanks is unneccesary and wasteful in the long term for a lot of people. *

Let's do a quick calculation. Let's assume our friend has a fish room and has decided to adopt the EI system. He currently maintains 4 large fish tanks for a total of 240US gal. This equates to throwing away:

120 USgals / week
480 USgals / month
5760 USgals / year

(and what if our imaginary friend were using a python system to siphon water???)

To put this in perspective. This is enough water to irrigate for 1 year (based on San Fransiscos climate, specifically ETo or evapotranspiration):

1. 175 sq ft. of turfgrass using a conventional automatic irrigation system.

2. 600 sq ft. of shrubs/trees using drip irrigation

This is for one theoretical person. What about 10? 100? 1000? Imagine all the water wasted for all the people using the EI method because they didn't bother testing their nutrient levels and applied nutrients in excess.

My point of this mental excersize:

*1. Think about water conservation, after all we all love fish & aquatic habitats.

2. Feed all that nutritious water to your lawn, it will love you too!

3. Consider the long-term impact of your hobby and think, maybe testing isn't so bad after all.*

Since I've never seen this point raised before, I thought it was prudent to mention.

Michael


----------



## plantbrain

You assume the water is wasted though..........many use it for irrigation/house plants(I do).

EI does *not demand 50% weekly water changes, it's just a suggestion, I go more than a week in many cases without water changes, but the range becomes increasingly wider.

If you desire a narrower range, do larger and/or more frequent water changes.

As anyone that's kept plants for awhile can tell, as a lull in growth appears, then it's time to do a water change and re set. If you have an issue, then stick with 50% weekly till things stabilize.

If you wish to discuss waste, you may also want to consider discussing the test kit reagents which many are very toxic and in up in the water supplies.
Tanks are a luxury item as it is and wasteful in terms of many aspects, not just water.

As far as water conservation in CA, I work for the Food and Ag dept, better agriculture usage, car washing, high water demand plants/lawns/landscaping will conserve far more. EI is a drop in the bucket and if you look at the water bill over a year compared to many other activities, it's not much. 240 gal on tank is fairly high volumes for most plant tank folks.

Still the point that 50% a week is not needed on many tanks is entirely correct. I don't suggest otherwise.

EI can be used with test kits for a double check and EI can be used with PPS to reset things. Folks have been doing both methods for many years perhaps under different names etc, but long before we started calling them PPS or EI or PMDD.

Regards, 
Tom Barr*


----------



## aquaverde

My garden and shrubs are looking better than they ever did before I started watering them with EI water changes.


----------



## mrmagnan

aquaverde said:


> My garden and shrubs are looking better than they ever did before I started watering them with EI water changes.


That's the kind of thing I like to hear. Tom, I agree it is a drop in the fishtank in the grand scheme of things, but I believe it is our responsibility to promote wise use of water through water reuse. Irrigation is one of the best uses I can think of for aquarium water.

I would like to see some people post DIY water change reuse techniques on another post and link it to this one.

A power head makes a great pump out to your shrub beds...



plantbrain said:


> Tanks are a luxury item as it is and wasteful in terms of many aspects, not just water.


Agreed. However, planted aquariums can also be integrated into the indoor environment as functional systems. This fall I am returning to study my Masters in Architecture and I will be designing water features / ponds used to treat building process water similiar to what is seen in the controversial "Living Machine" system. Anyone with a planted aquarium will understand the science. Do take a look everyone. Diana Walstad would surely approve.

http://www.rps.psu.edu/0009/machine.html

Regards,

Michael


----------



## plantbrain

So then why doesn't everyone go non CO2 then if water conservation and balance is key?

Non CO2 methods do not get any better based on your arguement. 
Most of my tanks are non CO2 and I can take this method to a very high level in terms of aquascaping and plant species kept.

I deal with large scaled private accounts that use huge ponds/lakes for dual or multi functions.

I suggest that the lake is used for temporary storage for irrigation for the landscape and use well water first, then city sources as needed.
This is cheaper, and provides some recharge to the wells aquifer.
It increases the flux in/out of the lake and provides better water quality for the lake. A tank or system can be used in a similar manner.

While conservation is certainly a good goal, we all are more pragmatic than this. The electric conservation person would argue we should use only outdoor ponds and not use any power for the ecosystems other than nature.

So are we being weasteful there with respect to Lighting????????
If you follow your logic, yep, we are.

So a reduction is power and electrical items to plug in is a personal goal of mine. I use three plugs for my systems or two.
The light is super efficient, the pumps/flows are low/small. 
I don't use heaters, house stays warm and I keep fish that can handle it.

I often suggest less lighting than most anyone on these boards.
Do I get credit for that?

I suggest things that save time.
I also suggest not needing nor using RO water systems for planted tanks.

Some using PPS do and claim it's utility.
Edward support's it's use.

So that's a huge waste right there.
It also cost more and requires maintenance(labor) and initial investments.

Should we go after those keeping soft water fish in hard water areas that say they need RO? How about reef folks using RO systems?
Folks with too much light and electrical goodies???

Waste reduction is achieved in simplicity. I think in terms of the hobby, non CO2 is the best solution for your argument.

It is the simplest method there is for aquatic plants.
I have less work to do on them and they look great.

Let me ask you folks one more question, do you drive to work or ride a bike or walk? Where do you want to stop with this mind set?

Water change reduction can be done with PPS, EI or Non CO2.
Then again, you can do many more water changes and still do all 3 methods also.

But PPS becomes less of a point when you do more frequent large water changes.

I'm still unclear on why PPS is new, folks test and add what's missing for each individual tank.

Folks have done that for decades.
PMDD did that as did Dupla and most every other companies selling plant related products.

We now know more of what the plants need, so that works better.......but that information is not new nor came from PPS. Uptake rates I measured and posted years ago. Calibration of cheap test kits I complained about years ago as well that folks relied on cheap inaccurate kits.

EI on the other hand was/is new and avoids these issues.

I'm not saying PPS is bad, I've done it(most folks did years ago), but it's easier to do EI for many folks as well as non CO2.
If you really hate water changes, heck, do non CO2.

If you really like testing water, do that and try to see how far and what range and uptake rates you get, ask a question that will be of use, not just for some routine. 
Do something with all that work and effort.
Push things and explore the limits.

Regards,

Tom Barr
www.BarrReport


----------



## mrmagnan

plantbrain said:


> So then why doesn't everyone go non CO2 then if water conservation and balance is key?
> 
> Non CO2 methods do not get any better based on your arguement.


I don't think I am trying to argue. I just like to hear that people use their "process" water wisely by not flushing it down the drain. My largest impression of EI, which I am obviously mistaken by, is that a weekly water change is the central point behind making it so easy.

I suppose I picked that up somewhere and missed the rest of the story because it my impression is the central point of EI is "weekly water change."

Please don't think I am trying to expose any hipocrisy in the lifestyle of a person who changes fish tank water, we all consume resources and I understand that. I do have a great deal of respect for individuals who make the effort to reduce or reuse "waste," by whatever means.

I have found that there is very little discussion in the aquarium community regarding conservation - water, electricity, habitat, invasive plant species, etc.

Where on any aquarium forum is there a section titled "Conservation?" Why is it so hard for the average person to find out if a particular species is bred or wild caught? What is the status of this species? Am I contributing to the exploitation of foreign natural capital, or am I supporting the local community where these fish come from? What is the best way to ensure you don't accidentally introduce an invasive plant into the local environment? Why have so few people heard of project Piaba, when most of us have kept Cardinals at some point? These things urk me a little because few people discuss this nor seem interested to.

To each her/his own. Raise sticklebacks and suckers. Stop bathing and do as many water changes as a person likes... Better yet, learn to make a mean algae & pond snail stir fry with mulm sauce. ummmm mulmy.

Michael


----------



## plantbrain

Hehe, I know what you are saying, many do use their water for lawn and garden. Many do suggest that. 

There are trade offs for many of the things we do, but captive ensalved fish might irk others, while some might have electrical consumption, water etc issues.

Still, conservation is a good goal, I think most everyone on these list are on the same page there.

It's not a personal arguement here for me, it's one based on the topic. Looking at the various sides and trades offs help's folks learn and address these things later when discussed with folks that are not so interested in conservation or using less resources.

It's also cheaper in the long run.

I bring up the issue of invasive weeds, I work on aquatic weeds professionally.
And I can assure you, there are many sides to the arguements the governmental agencies get entangled with form various interest groups.

Regards, 
Tom Barr


----------



## plantbrain

Dried mulm chips are quite tasty.

Regards, 
Tom Barr


----------



## Edward

Hi
Finally I had a chance to make the How to Start PPS FAQ so many people asked for. It can be downloaded in pdf and doc formats here. Please let me know if something is missing.
----------

*The Perpetual Preservation System (PPS)*
By Edward / Vic

The Perpetual Preservation System (PPS) took many years in the making and many years of experimentation to fine tune, to document and to understand why some aspects worked and why some didn't. I discovered that the reason why some of the systems I was experimenting with didn't work was because it was a standard fix all cure. Water, fish, plants, biology and ones individual ecosystem that are created in your rooms are not standard, they are not the same, and they are not generic. Each has a life of their own and each is unique in both design and water chemistry. Accordingly, the Perpetual Preservation System was born from this idea. The idea that your tank is different, the idea that your tank is unique and that it requires unique attention is what brings us to where we are today in terms of aquatic plant fertilization and maintenance. For more information read the PPS 2005 Thread 
http://www.aquaticplantcentral.com/forumapc/showthread.php?t=4241

*What Fertilizers do I need to Dose using the Perpetual Preservation System?*
K2SO4, KNO3, KH2PO4, MgSO4, TE (Trace Elements)

*How many solutions do I need?*
The program needs four solutions, the SS, PF, Mg and TE.

*How do I make the solutions?*
Find four 500ml bottles and mix the following solutions.

*Standard Solution (SS) *
KNO3 - 20 g 
KH2PO4 - 6 g 
K2SO4 - 16 g 
In 500ml of water

_*Phosphate Free (PF)* _
KNO3 - 20 g 
KH2PO4 - 0 g 
K2SO4 - 20 g 
In 500ml of water

*Mg Solution (Mg) *
MgSO4 - 169 g
In 500ml of water

*Trace Element Solution (TE) *
CSM+B - 24 g 
In 500ml of water
(Or any standard hydroponics, greenhouse or agricultural Chelated Micronutrient Mix, 2% Mn, 7% Fe, 0.4% Zn, 0.1 Cu, 1.3% B, 0.06% Mo)

*How to Dose using the Perpetual Preservation System?*
Test once your NO3 & PO4. Dose the same amount every day for one week. Then test your NO3 & PO4. Correct your SS and PF solution dosing amount. 
For more help see the Error Free Fertilization System Help Line at http://www.aquaticplantcentral.com/forumapc/forumdisplay.php?f=75

*How much fertilizer do I start dosing?*
This depends on your aquarium size.

( 2.5 gall / 10 liter ) 3 drops SS, 6 drops PF, 1 drop Mg, 1 drop TE
( 5 gall / 20 liter ) 5 drops SS, 11 drops PF, 1 drop Mg, 1 drop TE
( 10 gall / 40 liter ) 10 drops SS, 1 ml PF, 2 drops Mg, 2 drops TE
( 20 gall / 75 liter ) 1 ml SS, 2 ml PF, 5 drops Mg, 5 drops TE
( 25 gall / 100 liter ) 1 ml SS, 3 ml PF, 6 drops Mg, 6 drops TE
( 50 gall / 200 liter ) 3 ml SS, 6 ml PF, 12 drops Mg, 12 drops TE
( 75 gall / 300 liter ) 4 ml SS, 8 ml PF, 1 ml Mg, 1 ml TE
( 100 gall / 400 liter ) 5 ml SS, 11 ml PF, 1 ml Mg, 1 ml TE

*What are the recommended NO3 & PO4 levels?*
NO3 10 - 30 ppm
PO4 0.1 - 2 ppm

*How often do I have to do water changes?*
You do not need to do water changes unless your NO3 or PO4 gets out of control.

*What if I want to do regular water changes?*
No problem, dose as usual.

*Can water changes replace NO3 & PO4 testing?*
Yes. You can dose 4x the recommended daily amount and do large weekly water changes. No testing necessary.

*How long the fertilizer and the solutions last?*
Indefinitely

Thank you
Edward


----------



## mrmagnan

Edward said:


> Hi
> 
> *How long the fertilizer and the solutions last?*
> Indefinitely
> 
> Thank you
> Edward


Test your solutions once and a while because my NO3 dropped out after 3 months. I think I innoculated it w/ some denitrifying bacteria from my tank. Didn't notice and kept dosing and dosing and dosing (w/ 0 NO3!) and algae had a heyday thanks to the nutrient imbalance.


----------



## Edward

mrmagnan said:


> Test your solutions once and a while because my NO3 dropped out after 3 months.


Hi mrmagnan
What was the solution made of?

Edward


----------



## mrmagnan

Edward said:


> Hi mrmagnan
> What was the solution made of?
> 
> Edward


8 tbs KNO3 in 500ml H20


----------



## plantbrain

That's juicy.

PMDD would not last as long but that is mainly from the traces, some folks added acid to maintain it over long time peroids. Fungus is common. 
My containers last longer than 3 months with concentrated KNO3 with no issues, never pour things back into the containers, dip tips etc back in there, always pour out, then pipette etc or dab the pipette into H2O2, bleach dip etc before use then rinse with tap. 

See APD post on PMDD from that era on keeping it. This solution should have much less trouble. There are a number of ways to maintain it.

Regards, 
Tom Barr


----------



## andkoni

Hej people.
I seeking those people like You.
I need help.I want to prepare ro waterr.
Only Ro without tap water.
I will be add caco3, mgso4x7h2o, K2co3(not so4 because so4 can be so high).
Oh yes.Now i see the light ))
Thx You are very useful 

Ok i take 3ca to 1mg if this is ok? .
20ppm Ca (using caco3)divided by 20 = 1
7ppm Mg divided by 12 = 0.58
Sum = 1.58
1.58 * 50 = 79
79 divided by 17.9 = 4,4 degrees GH

and i want to add 20ppm of K(using K2co3) and my GH increase too about 1 Gh.That give me about 5,5-6Gh and ebout 4ca to 1mg.

When i add k2co3 to reach 20 ppm K I increase kh.
When i add 20 ppm ca using caco3 I increase too kh.
I dont now how big will be kh because i dont now atomic weight of co3 ..and i dont now the %amont of co3 in caco3 and k2co3.
Do you know this and can You count this ???
Thx
Sry for my englisch .

And i thin Kh will be aproximetley 5 KH..
Is this method to make ideal water for planrs ok???
I have ro maybe 3 days and i never prepare but i try to learn.


----------

