# High-Tech problems



## dwalstad (Apr 14, 2006)

Here's questions from a recent letter that I received:

"I am running a year-old 210 gallon on a high-tech scheme. I have come to suspect that my persistent mat algae issues, and stunted growth of the three E bleheri, is due largely to excessive autotrophic nitrification capacity and the continued introduction of ferrous glutonate to the water column. I have not paid due attention to provision of proper substrate for the bleheri, or the Ludwigia, and I am about to pot them in Eco-Complete.

I will cut back (or discontinue?) adding the chelated iron to the water column. An issue of concern is that I have luxuriant Microsorium pteropus with rhizomes well fixed to Mopani stretching all across the width of the tank - no substrate of course. It would be interesting (but hopefully not calamitous)to see what happens if I stop the iron altogether; any thoughts on this?

As a start, I have removed all biofilter media from the canisters (there are other biofilters in use which can also be gradually shut down once I can get some growth in the rooted plants). I will discontinue regular use of activated carbon, and focus more on phosphate removal (have to put something in those big canister filters!). I can't get (and don't want) zero phosphate, but a deliberate campaign to keep after it should help some with the algae issue.

Source water is RO/DI, reconstituted with reclaim electrolytes and plant trace formula. The pH is chemically equilibrated at 7.0 and I use a fully automated CO2 system with a 6.9 low set point. I keep South American tetras and do not want water harder than KH 6, but I have had the KH at 3-4 for a very long time and suspect that's just too low for the E bleheri. Do you think the swords will like KH 6 better?

I add potassium supplement to the water column. Plants take up potassium via stem and leaf, right? I have no way of testing potassium levels, but I pretty much follow Seachem's label directions.

Tank gets no sun. I am using just over 600 watts of Kelvin 8000 and 10000 full spectrum compact flourescents. The amount of light and the color rendition are pleasing for this deep tank. I had considered switching some of this output to T5 plant-grow spectrum, but some of your comments make me wonder if that's a waste of time."

_____________

Lot goin' on here!

Firstly, stunted growth of _E. blerheri_ (Amazon Swordplant) is a red flag. (That's the one plant that always does well for me.) Poor Amazon Swordplant growth in your setup with all that light, iron, CO2, potassium, etc suggests to me two possible problems:


You don't have enough calcium and magnesium the water. Note: KH and GH are not the same. KH reflects bicarbonates only, so it doesn't matter what your KH reading is. GH reflects calcium and maganesium. You need to have a GH of at least 4 (my book, p. 185), and for the Amazon Swordplant, the more the better! As to the fish, unless you're breeding them, a GH of 6 isn't going to hurt them.

The substrate isn't that good. I would pot your Swordplants in some real mineral soil (a loam topsoil from the garden), not Eco-Complete. (Or plant one in soil and one in Eco-Complete and make your own comparison.) I would add bone meal fertilizer to the soil; it will add slow-release calcium and phosphates for the Swordplant.

I don't think that the poor Swordplant growth is due to excessive filtration. Excessive nitrates is a minor problem for plants; calcium deficiency and poor substrate are _major_ ones.

As to the iron, you could cut back gradually and see what happens. However, I don't think this will solve the algae problem until you get better growth of Amazon Swordplants.


----------



## geeks_15 (Dec 9, 2006)

Wow! That letter sounds like an advertisement for NPT and your book. 

Don't get me wrong. I'm a fan of both NPT and high tech tanks, but I like to keep even my high tech tanks much more simple.


----------



## mudboots (Jun 24, 2009)

I've always been puzzled at how some aquarists will go through the trouble of using RO in an aquarium and spend so much energy and effort into adding so many different nutrient components when tap water, once dechlorinated (watch the metals too of course) already has most of what you need to begin with.

Perhaps I am just lucky enough to live in a place where the water is good for aquariums, but of all the plants I'm playing with, _Echinodorus blerheri_ is one I never even thought to be concerned with except that it gets a little carried away once in a while and needs a scissors-reminder of where it is and isn't allowed to out-compete certain other plants.

Very interesting post. I think I might take some water readings just to see what I've got.


----------



## Philosophos (Mar 1, 2009)

Phosphate limitation under otherwise nonlimiting conditions is a prime cause for some stunting, as is a lack of CO2 under high light. Plenty of us run PO4 at high levels, and if anything it gets rid of GSA rather than causing other sorts of algae.

Setting CO2 based off of a pH controller is going to wind up with unstable CO2. Electrode drifts, calibration issues, fluctuating PO4 or NH4, changes in flow dinamics, where a pleco chooses to poop etc. can all change how the controller responds. It's like using the KH-pH-Co2 method to control the level of CO2, based off of a single point in the tank and with a machine that lacks common sense.

Running RO/DI is a pretty dedicated thing. Calcium/magnesium could definitely become limiting. It'd be good to see the entire dosing regimen so that it can be checked over, once that's balanced then it's going to be CO2 and light issues. I don't bother running pure RO myself, but getting a pH drop in a tank that size would require doing some pretty ugly things. I could only imagine the cost of micron filters to keep the water clear from peat, and ADA AS has a reputation for clouding in big tanks.

Personally I'd get ready to drop off the lighting; once this tank goes nonlimiting the growth is going to be pretty explosive at that wattage and size.


----------



## PAUL GRAHAM (Dec 15, 2005)

Thanks for the reply.

My concern about the biofilration is not excessive nitrate, per se, but that the autotrophic nitrification is stealing ammonium on contact, making the plants work at getting nitrogen from nitrate only.

To be clear about this, I have been packing one chamber of three Rena Filstar XP3s with Siporax type biomedia and I run three Penguin 300 dual BioWheels, also with biomedia in the insert frames. Along with all the passive elements (stones, driftwood, etc) these mature enzyme reactors have to be nitrifying more or less instantly. (Digression: They also culture chemoheterotrophs, necessary for decomposition of organics, but I think perhaps the passive elements are sufficient media for this.) I also often let the granulated carbon changes go longer than the adsorption usefulness of the carbon, which, of course, adds still more biomedia.

Long an advocate that you can't have enough biofiltration, I have wondered ever since I started planting aquariums if it is wrong (or at least not optimal) to provide the plants with nitrogen from nitrate alone. The plants must expend considerable energy to reduce nitrate, and you confirm this in your work.

I may have misreported the hardness specs. The numbers I believe ARE GH (NOT KH), but I will test both.

After repotting the E bleheri and Ludwigia per your recommendations, I will reassess the next step. But it seems fairly certain that I will have to reduce the chelated iron significantly, and remove a lot of this autotrophic culture -- gradually.


----------



## PAUL GRAHAM (Dec 15, 2005)

The reason I use R/O is as follows:

Our municipal water supply derives from wells in an alluvial aquafer adjacent to the Missouri river. It percolates through calcareous rock which helps to account for its initial comparative purity - but also accounts for its extreme Ca/Mg hardness. It also tests variably for moderate levels of nitrate. It is not iron-rich.

I keep fish that want moderately soft, slightly acid water. I am particular about providing the type of water that at least approximates the native waters of the species' original home environment. I know that the softwater specimens in the tank are raised in, and acclimated to, something else, but that should not be a consideration if I can provide better.

Starting with R/O gives me a known quantity "clean slate". I can control what's in there by calculated addition of what's wanted, and I don't need to be concerned about removal of what's unwanted. Certainly, one can make do with more simple, less costly, and so on, but I do this because I can.

By the way, the carbonate hardness today is 2 dKH; the general hardness is 4 dGH. Conductivity is just over 400 microSem, but the discrepancy here is accounted for by considerable Na ions from a recent ion exchange operation I wish I had not done. Water changes will eventually get the sodium down.

The KH is not especially high, but I am getting very regular periodic (i.e. cyclical) CO2 injection, keeping the pH at approximately 6.9, with no sign of instability. I probably could save on CO2 supply if I weren't churning the water with those BioWheels, but I really don't worry much about it. A 20 lb bottle provides at least 150 hours of ON time, and I keep a 5 lb bottle ready for switch-outs.

I use a Neptune Systems AquaController, and I can data-log pH, temperature, and ORP. This goes back to the idea, as with the water source, of having controllable initial conditions with accurate progress monitoring. The high-tech aspect comes into it by way of making things convenient to execute, and easy to understand at a glance. It is not intended to represent the "best way" of doing this. I am not especially gadget-crazy; I prefer natural simplicity. The NPT method is surely simple - I understand it and I applaud it. I think the underlying principles (it all comes down to plant physiology in the end) are best comprehended from the 'el natural' point of view; it is the basic and applied science. The high-tech thing is just useful plumbing and wiring.


----------



## mudboots (Jun 24, 2009)

PAUL GRAHAM said:


> The reason I use R/O is as follows:
> 
> ....


Wow; I really am just plain lucky then. The water straight out the tap in Nac has just about the perfect conditions for what is recommended for raising and breeding Apistogramma and similar livestock (pretty soft, slightly acid, et cetera) with a little iron and various micromutrients in acceptable concentrations to both plant and animal alike. Hah! Now that I've said that I'll get a call soon and wind up having to move...I guess I'll just have to take a few thousand gallons with me!!!


----------



## El Exorcisto (Aug 10, 2006)

It just blows me away how complicated some people make the hobby. Whatever blows your skirt up I guess.


----------



## Dustymac (Apr 26, 2008)

El Exorcisto said:


> It just blows me away how complicated some people make the hobby. Whatever blows your skirt up I guess.


I couldn't have said it better. Further, the more complicated you make it, the less likely you'll be able to effectively pinpoint and mitigate problems as evidenced by a year-long algae outbreak and poor plant growth.

Give me an NPT every time. Dirt, light, fish food, GH 8+. It's pretty simple. Oh well...


----------



## Philosophos (Mar 1, 2009)

People make this hobby more complicated because simplicity doesn't always do the job. NPT and El Natural don't start off with the same goals, so they don't use identical methods. There are things you will accomplish with an NPT that you can't with high light and CO2, but the reverse is every bit as true. 

Honestly, once you've gotten used to working with compressed CO2 and higher light values, it's not that big of a deal. The same goes for the numbers behind it. Even then, some of us really enjoy the challenge of learning the fine details, the math and chemistry, of any sort of planted tank because we love to learn. At th same time, I would never say that I can't understand why someone would want an easy, simple tank when they could have precise control over more parameters.

If you're only seeing the point of one kind of tank and figuring because it does what you want that it's good for everyone, odds are you're not really considering the point of view that others have.


----------



## mudboots (Jun 24, 2009)

Good point Philosophos. Not to mention that even some of us who are sticking with El Natural can't help but wonder occasionally, "what if I added...?". I can't help but think that a lot of my plants could just about explode if I added a little CO2, which gets me to thinking about what else I'd need to compensate with for the growth boom. That Stauro.porto vehlo sure would look nice if it filled about 2/3 of my foreground...maybe in the pico tanks...one of these days.

But since things seem to be doing well I am content to leave it as-is, especially since I'm not fighting green water anymore. That was miserable, but it was funny to hear some of the members of APC who came over to see the mud offer their high-tech suggestions.

Like Philo said,


> If you're only seeing the point of one kind of tank and figuring because it does what you want that it's good for everyone, odds are you're not really considering the point of view that others have.


 I can't IMAGINE either of those guys being content with just waiting it out.


----------



## MoonFish (Feb 12, 2006)

I dare you to dose dry ferts and ditch RO and if you want to spend $, get automated water changes set up. Ditch the PH controller, crank CO2 and you'll grow plants like gangbusters or I'll eat my shoes. 

There's no reason to bother this nice lady. I think she shows restraint in not poking fun at you. 

I grow plants with a ph way over 8. I have tetras and they don't melt.


----------



## Philosophos (Mar 1, 2009)

You know, coming from the high tech end as my focus, all my low tech/NPT-ish tanks are "What can I remove?" at least so long as I can get the results I need to make the tank do what I want. I value efficient, low-cost tanks above all else when it comes to holding the plants I want for later. My prime show tanks may not be NPT's, but I have no quick access to good plants so I find myself keeping little libraries of low tech, pretty much NPT tanks (outside of the aquasoil for convenience) so that I can haul out one of a large number of simpler species as needed.

Oh, staurogyne can be done non-CO2; I've got some getting along nicely in a little beta tank for breeding RCS. Try the stuff out; you may have some luck with it. I do find it melts a bit like crypts.


----------



## mudboots (Jun 24, 2009)

Philosophos said:


> Oh, staurogyne can be done non-CO2; I've got some getting along nicely in a little beta tank for breeding RCS. Try the stuff out; you may have some luck with it. I do find it melts a bit like crypts.


Consider it done. Dang; I'm gonna need more aquariums. Davemonkey, talk me down man, talk me down...[-X


----------



## Phil Edwards (Jan 22, 2004)

DOWN BOY, DOWN! Actually, if you want to try Aquasoil, I'll share some of my older stuff with you. You'll just have to come get it.


----------

