# Looking for help on mixing dry chems



## saulat (Aug 7, 2009)

Hi,

I posted looking for help on fertilizer not too long ago. I followed a suggestion and ordered KNO3, KH2PO4, and CSM+B. Looking at an email from Alan from aquariumfertilizer.com he talks about this

AquariumFertilizer.com's PMDD Formula:
1 Part KNO3 1 Part K2SO4
1 Part MgSO4 1 Part CSM+B

What am I supposed to do with the KH2PO4? Why didn't I order the K2SO4 and MgSO4? I don't think I need the GH booster, my tap reads at about 150 ppm GH, and about 40 ppm KH. Alan also states that the limiting factor is supposed to be phosphate (he put K2HPO4 next to the word, not sure if he meant KH2PO4 or not) when following the PMDD method, why would I be adding the KH2PO4 in this case? Can I mix these together or do I make one solution of KNO3 & CSM+B and then one solution of KH2PO4? Do I have what I need to cover fertilization for NPK and any other nutrients I may need?

I finally got my pressurized Co2 going yesterday and am almost out of my store bought liquid fertilizer. Thanks for any help. Oh and here is my previous post http://www.aquaticplantcentral.com/forumapc/fertilizing/64306-seachem-product-buy.html

Looking here it has a dosing suggestion. http://www.bestaquariumregulator.com/dosing.html
Do I need to dose the Iron even though I am dosing the Plantex CSM+B? Of course I don't like this as I like the idea of dosing daily amounts.


----------



## Seattle_Aquarist (Mar 7, 2008)

Hi saulat,

You have everything you need to do Estimative Index (EI) dosing. Why not give it a try, it has done wonders for my plants. BTW, MgSO4 = Epsom Salts available at your local pharmacy for about $4 per pound.


----------



## saulat (Aug 7, 2009)

Sorry, guess I should look at the stickies a little better next time. Think I have found what I need. Now if I can just get the Co2 set how I want it.

Thanks


----------



## Philosophos (Mar 1, 2009)

I do a lot of fert tinkering just for the love of it; usually I barely get through a batch before creating something new to play with. If you end up getting stuck, or hitting weird precipitates, let me know.

-Philosophos


----------



## saulat (Aug 7, 2009)

Sure, I do have a question. Is the MgSO4 for adding magnesium and might I need it when adding the Plantex CSM as it has 1.50% Magnesium? I think I will start adding the dry chemicals tomorrow, I am already in the habit of dosing 3x a week.


----------



## Philosophos (Mar 1, 2009)

CSM/CSM+B has so little Mg in it that I don't even account for it when I mix ferts. Lets say you do 10g/L as a solution for CSM; that's about 150mg of Mg. 150mg of Mg is about enough to dose a 5 gal for one week.

-Philosophos


----------



## saulat (Aug 7, 2009)

I was wondering would I still need to add Mg due with my GH and KH? Also, according to my test strips I have around 20ppm Nitrates from my fish population. Would adding the KNO3 pose a problem? It seems like without it I'll be lacking K but with it I risk pushing the limit with NO3. Here are my water readings.

Ammonia - 0
Nitrites - 0
Nitrates - ~20
KH - 80ppm or 4.5 dH (steady here for about 2 months)
GH - 200ppm or more (has always stayed this high from tap water)
PH - 7.2 (was steady at 7.4 until I began the pressurized Co2 two days ago)
Co2 - Unsure, still setting up how I want it and letting the system stabilize

I guess I have another question as well. By adding phosphates don't I invalidate the KH PH Co2 relationship. Do I use observation to estimate how much Co2 to inject into the tank?


----------



## Seattle_Aquarist (Mar 7, 2008)

Hi saulat,

I would not add KNO3 at this time, the I use a target level for nitrates of 10 - 20 PPM so you are currently at the high end of the range. As your plants grow, the PPM level with probably drop and you can start dosing your KNO3 at that time.

You may not need MgSO4 at this time either. I would probably wait and see how the plants grow, watch for deficiencies, and then dose Mg when it is needed. If you tap water comes out with a KH and GH like your tank tested, and you do 50% water changes weekly, you may not need to add Mg ever! I wish my soft water was more like yours!

As for CO2, I would invest in an inexpensive "drop checker" and mix of a 4.0 KH indicator solution to use in it. I find that it is the easiest way for me to monitor my CO2. I am not aware of phosphates affecting KH or PH readings.


----------



## Philosophos (Mar 1, 2009)

I guess I take the opposite approach. I load in the K2SO4 and MgSO4 right away into a liquid mix; I find my tanks pack out fast. The real questions would be plant density, light level and tap water; low light and a medium density tank don't require 20ppm NO3 dosing/wk. I usually just dose the same mix as in high light, but half as frequently.

Get a water quality report; it's always nice to know what's in the tap water that goes to your tank. I've got hard water, but Mg from tap is only 2.5ppm.

-Philosophos


----------



## deicide (Sep 1, 2009)

> I load in the K2SO4 and MgSO4


I suggest this approach as well; however, with one minor change. Since your GH is fairly high I woluld hold off on any additional Mg dose unless your start seeing Mg issues or until you get that water report which will either confirm no additional Mg or that you need to add. For the time being just rely on the little that CSM will be adding.

For K, add enough to give you 25~30ppm in the 'changed' water at WC.

You need to increase Co2 as well.


----------



## saulat (Aug 7, 2009)

Well I was wondering what to supplement my potassium with either the KCl or the K2CO3.

I obtained a water report however my test results do not line up with theirs, I found a different pH and Hardness. They also only listed hardness not GH or KH, or too much I found useful. I really wish I had gone with the High Output T-5 bulbs but I have four 48 inch T5 bulbs 28 watts a piece for 112 total for a 55 gallon with about 20-22 inches of depth. Most of my plants are mid to low light and I am going for a heavy density of plants. Maybe I'll hold off on the Magnesium but pick up the other and see how things go from there.

http://www.fairfield-city.org/utilities/pdf/FF_CCR09_FNL.pdf

Co2 I am still deciding on a reactor or method and trying to get the bubble rate stabilized. 2-3 bubbles per second turns into 1 bubble per second an hour later. I have no surface tension and just have the CO2 running through a powerhead. Is the KH pH method reliable to determine CO2 levels?


----------



## Philosophos (Mar 1, 2009)

112w of T5 over 55 gal? Do individual reflectors if you haven't and it'll be approaching overkill. My 48 gal runs 108w of T5HO and to be honest, I regret watting it that way without even having set it up. Too much light. At the light level you're talking about, I'd consider just putting in the K2SO4 and MgSO4 right off the start, given that you're doing heavy planting.

I've got no experience with KCl. I've heard it works, but that's about all I know.

I'm not sure why anyone would worry about high GH unless it's pretty insanely high... I dose mine up into the 20's when tap is accounted for, and I've got some very happy fish. Tom Barr has a tank sitting around with GH in the 20's and discus getting along fine. It's not GH that causes issues for fish, it's the KH. Some KH is GH, but not all GH is KH. It also doesn't matter what your GH isl if you don't have enough Mg, the plants will not be happy. 

KH/pH method has something like a 200% margin of error. Get a drop checker, use 4KH solution with it, and you'll have something more like a 50% margin of error, which can be meaningful.

-Philosophos


----------



## saulat (Aug 7, 2009)

Thanks, that sounds like a plan. I'll have to look into reflectors, I really know very little about them. Back when I was looking at lighting options I picked up a T5 HO and it kept shutting off on me. I ended up taking it back and found these regular T5 coralife fixtures and got twice as many for the same price. The lighting still does not seem as intense but the coloration seems better with the different bulbs. When the T5 HO was on I believe it was 108 watts and it was pretty intense, I can believe you regret it a little. After having people tell me my lighting is only ~moderate I was a little upset. I've even thought about selling these T5 and going for the HO.


----------



## Philosophos (Mar 1, 2009)

One inch per day of growth in some stems is just downright overkill. I don't like having to trim once or twice a week; the plants get disturbed, and the tank doesn't look as good compared to slow growth. I have to drive CO2 higher to keep the algae out, and that gets in to fish stressing zones quite frequently. If you're running the double tube coralife fixtures, then that's probably where you're losing some of your light; one reflector, two bulbs, high restrike. 

I'm not sure why people obsess over high light so much. More light does not create better looking plants; better spread does. Plants need all of 50mmol PAR at most; not 150, not 200. Dumping all the light down from one source does no favors to the plant; light from only one source only provides one angle for the light to come from. 

A well made LED system proves this theory; reef keepers dismissed LED systems at first thinking they weren't high enough light, when in actuality their coral was getting fried. 1-1.5wpg of LED is more like running 3-4wpg of more typical lighting sources, and it's not because of better spectrum. The better distribution of light points with individual reflectors over each creates more distributed lighting than anything else around.

-Philosophos


----------



## mrkookm (Oct 25, 2006)

I suggest not to add any MGSO4 to the water unless you start seeing any Mg issues. Even if his Mg is at a 2.5ppm that is still a enough for the type of plants he is planning on keeping and his light level. The most Mg anyone needs in their tank is 5ppm to grow any plants with super light level so there is no need to go crazy even if you had to add. 

Add K2SO4 at WC as suggested, leave Ca & Mg and increase your Co2.


----------



## Philosophos (Mar 1, 2009)

Looks like I forgot to post in reply to your nutrient levels. If you're hitting 120ppm of GH not from KH, odds are you won't need to add either. Get a water quality report though, if you can figure out your ppm of calcium and magnesium, you've got less to wonder about.

At the same time, Mg levels are better off in ratios lower than 4:1 K+:Mg. I believe this is stated in the American Journal of Botany. 2003;90:143-152, and if nothing else thebarrreport.com newsletter, Dec. 2005. There are also numerous other sources if you care to read on the subject of potassium lockouts in relation to magnesium.

For some of us, or in some of our tanks, this means 2.5ppm. In my case (and that of most doing EI), 10ppm assures that I won't end up with a lockout in my main tank, meanwhile some of the smaller ones only ever get what tap water provides.

-Philosophos


----------



## saulat (Aug 7, 2009)

I didn't realize you had added another post philosophos. I wish I knew my ratios but my water report omits that information. I put a link to it a few replies back. I think my LFS can test for calcium so maybe I can determine it from that. I am taking anatomy and physiology right now and the parallels are pretty interesting just between the main chemicals used in fertilizers and for our bodies and then the CO2 and H2O stuff. Also took chem last semester. Here are all or most of my plants

Flame Moss, Java Fern, Moneywort, Hornwort, Anacharis, some other stem plant, something that I think is star grass (it hitched a ride and took off like a weed), Amazon swords, Dwarf anubias nana, banana plant, Straight Vallis, a few others I think.

My 2 stem plants really don't do well. They may have some small vibrant green growth and then the rest of the plant withers and rots breaking off. They are really an inch high at most or just stem with no leaf.

Oh, and if I go the K2CO3 route would that provide sufficient K and would I need to worry about the CO3? I think I read that the CO3 would actually through hydrolysis become extra CO2 in the water.


----------



## Philosophos (Mar 1, 2009)

saulat said:


> I didn't realize you had added another post philosophos. I wish I knew my ratios but my water report omits that information.


Call them up. They do more research than what they publish; far more. If they don't parks and wildlife or a similar organization probably has.



saulat said:


> I think my LFS can test for calcium so maybe I can determine it from that.


Your LFS, unless it's uniquely good, will probably have a master test kit from API, Red Sea, Hagen, etc. I'm not sure how well those sources test for calcium. I'd expect something in the higher range (hatch/lamotte have a good reputation) would be more accurate, but that gets expensive. If you can't call any government group that has the research done, maybe you can convince some sort of drinking water related company to do it. I've stopped by a couple places that do RO/DI water that would stop at nothing to make a sale with me; might be the same where you are.



saulat said:


> I am taking anatomy and physiology right now and the parallels are pretty interesting just between the main chemicals used in fertilizers and for our bodies and then the CO2 and H2O stuff. Also took chem last semester. Here are all or most of my plants


You know, I've got a fair amount of family in medicine, so it's an interest for me on the side. What sort of similarities are you seeing?



saulat said:


> Oh, and if I go the K2CO3 route would that provide sufficient K and would I need to worry about the CO3? I think I read that the CO3 would actually through hydrolysis become extra CO2 in the water.


K2CO3? I'd opt out on that one unless you want to raise your alkalinity/KH by 15ppm+ depending on your target level. Personally I haven't had any problems with the SO4 from K2SO4; it's pretty established in its use as a K+ supplement for the part that the KNO3 and KH2PO4 doesn't take care of.

-Philosophos


----------



## saulat (Aug 7, 2009)

> Call them up. They do more research than what they publish


Yes I may do that. I spoke to someone and they told me the person to talk to was in the field and I never bothered to call back.



> Your LFS, unless it's uniquely good, will probably have a master test kit from API


-Exactly right. Should I invest in one of these like I am planning?



> You know, I've got a fair amount of family in medicine, so it's an interest for me on the side. What sort of similarities are you seeing?


About to go to bed but real quick the similarities I have been noticing are basically from the first few chapters on anatomy and physiology for this semester. We have talked about homeostasis and the regulation of pH in regards to the H+ and HO- compounds in the body as well as buffers in the form of electrolytes or ions. We also talked about CO2 in the lungs H2O and the formation of carbonic acid which is H2CO3 which breaks apart easily into H and CO3. The HCO3 soaks up the H+ ions acting as a buffer to prevent the body becoming too acidic. The body has something like 20x more HCO3 that it does H+. Exercise burns up CO2 from the HCO3 which causes quicker breathing in order to respirate the CO2. Still trying to get my needle valve working on my tank lol.

The other similarities I've been noticing are that the main biologically important molecules we have been studying are the lipids, proteins, carbohydrates, and nucleic acids. Carbs are composed of carbon, oxygen, and hydrogen. Lipids are also composed of carbon, oxygen, and hydrogen, however phospholipids have a phosphate group and a nitrogen compound on one end. Proteins have oxygen, hydrogen, carbon, and nitrogen. And last the nucleic acids have a sugar, nitrogenous base, and a phosphate group. I can't claim to know a whole lot more but seeing the similarities same chemicals used by the body ie the phosphate, nitrogen, co2, oxygen, ect is kind of neat. Also, been looking at the periodic table and the valence electrons, of course the fertilizers match up right with full outer shells. All the cellular stuff and chemical stuff is somewhat relevant. I am tired too so if any of this is wrong feel free to correct me.

I am trying to fix up the fish tank in the lab tomorrow they have 2 small 10 gallon tanks. One has an angel fish and one has some guppies, both completely empty aside from a cheap filter and airstone. The owner put 3 guppies in with the angel fish, the guppies died and she asked me my opinion. Not sure but I think she needs some gravel or something for bacteria to grow on, that and some hiding places. She complained of algae growth before with gravel but I'll figure it out for her lol.


----------



## Philosophos (Mar 1, 2009)

saulat said:


> I spoke to someone and they told me the person to talk to was in the field and I never bothered to call back.


Heh, seems like a common answer. At times I've had to resort to weird things like studies done by orthodontists on drinking water to get my answers because of all that, "time in the field."



saulat said:


> Exactly right. Should I invest in one of these like I am planning?


I buy individual tests with things like that. Co2, K+ and Fe tests from most of these places can usually go right in the trash. API impresses me as putting out decent test kits for the price; they've always calibrated well for me. I can't say I'm nuts about the stoppers for their test tubes though; you may want to grab a couple of your own if you're around lab equipment much. There's that or leaving your fingers stained from leaky caps that fit around the outside of the tube.

A lot of your biochem sounds like overlapping basics in organic chemistry. It's interesting how some reactions remain the same regardless of vast changes in the system surrounding them. I really need to hit the books again to bulk up on my chemistry; it's fascinating stuff.



saulat said:


> I am trying to fix up the fish tank in the lab tomorrow they have 2 small 10 gallon tanks. One has an angel fish and one has some guppies, both completely empty aside from a cheap filter and airstone. The owner put 3 guppies in with the angel fish, the guppies died and she asked me my opinion. Not sure but I think she needs some gravel or something for bacteria to grow on, that and some hiding places. She complained of algae growth before with gravel but I'll figure it out for her lol.


A substrate and/or (usually and) filter media, as well as either a very good commercial bacteria culture, seeding from another source, or 1-2 months of letting the bacteria cultures build up enough for NH4->NO2->NO3 to happen (careful with the NH4/NO2 toxicity levels). With enough plants you can ignore this issue somewhat and just pull more water changes until the plant biomass sucks up most of the NH4, the cycle kicks off, and the algae leves are kept down. It's not so easy when you don't have nutrient sponges around like in a heavily planted tank.

-Philosophos


----------



## Philosophos (Mar 1, 2009)

Looking over your water test, the Cu levels seem to be a bit high. I'm going to do some reading through my resources tomorrow to check what LC50's you're approaching. Maybe we can find an indicator species for you as an early warning sign.

124ppm is a decent bit of hardness. An alkalinity test may be of some help if you can't pull more out of the department. It won't be typical, but maybe I can figure out some info about your water, try to piece together likely tap water scenarios. If it's mostly from KH, we can rule out a certain amount of Mg, given the very low solubility of MgCO3 in relation to CaCO3. At worst we'll assume it's running through pure dolomite or something, then work out the appropriate ratios from solubility.

-Philosophos


----------



## saulat (Aug 7, 2009)

Leaving for school but I take back what I said about my stem plants. Apparently I fixed a deficiency by adding the CSM+B and the KH2PO4 because everything has added height and my stems are taller and have leaves again. 

Think my CO2 problem is solved as well. Having the tubing run into my powerhead apparently caused some back pressure and made the needle valve closed. Running the tube in the water only overnight and my bubble per second rate is the same. I also added teflon tape and shortened the tubing.


----------



## Philosophos (Mar 1, 2009)

Try a decent check valve, it should get rid of your problem with the pressure.

Why are you running CO2 only at night? Your plants need it in the day time.

The copper should be fine; neocaridina is about the most sensitive thing you can get, and their LC50 is up around .37ppm.

I'm glad to hear the ferts helped. Odds are it was mainly the KH2PO4 since K+ isn't just hanging around in the water, or in any significant levels in the food. If you end up with pinholes in your leaves, you may want to consider the K2SO4 later on.

-Philosophos


----------



## saulat (Aug 7, 2009)

I thought I saw a snail the other week but have not seen any others in the past 2 months or more. I am getting pinholes and thought it was from something eating them, my ghost snail. I am still trying to get the CO2 stabilized every time I set it the bubble rate would stop within a few hours. I would try another configuration before bed and wake up to no CO2, try another come home and no CO2, ect. Apparently the powerhead was stopping the bubble rate for some reason. The check valve I have is a brass check valve with pieces on the end to push the tubing into. I am not sure I could run the CO2 into the canister filter because of the air space in the intake tube that is used to prime the device. 

The fish tanks at school had pretty high/dangerous ammonia levels. There is a small heater and the smallest penguin filter you can buy and that is it. I am going to bring a cutting of hornwort and some spare gravel and plastic decor for her tomorrow. If not thing else it should give the bacteria a place to colonize and the fish a place to hide. My anatomy teacher suggested using some kind of bacteria to get rid of the ammonia pneummodia or something like that.


----------



## Philosophos (Mar 1, 2009)

I'm not sure how you're ending up with back pressure on the line while the CO2 and powerhead are running. The end of the CO2 line should be placed by the INTAKE of the impeller (which may require drilling a hole), not through the venturi intake on the output. If anything this should suck the CO2 out.

As for the other tank at school, do some reading on the nitrification process. Here's something to get you started: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nitrification

-Philosophos


----------



## saulat (Aug 7, 2009)

I have had it in the venturi intake the whole time lol. Not sure why it causes a problem but I hope it works the powerhead seems to do a decent job. I kind of told them how to fix the fish tank at school, Id have thought the science department would be more educated on their pet fish.


----------



## Philosophos (Mar 1, 2009)

To get a venturi effect going, you have to provide at least as much pressure pushing back against the flow. After the pressure is neutralized, THEN it'll start sucking out the CO2. Even then though, the idea is to get the CO2 feeding through the impeller so that it creates fine bubbles. Don't forget to score the impeller fins horizontally and bend them in opposite directions if you can.

-Philosophos


----------



## saulat (Aug 7, 2009)

The bubbles are even finer now that its going into the intake. So long as it is stable Ill have to check out the impeller tomorrow. I thought about taking a hot pin and poking some holes in it.


----------



## saulat (Aug 7, 2009)

Well this is what all I ended up ordering, whether I use it all or not is another question. I've been using the fertilator calculator to try and reach the correct levels minus the nitrates and pending my Mg and Ca levels. I still need to figure out which I can prepare in a solution together and which are only added after a water change. 

Can't say I understand the venturi effect but I am happy as long as the CO2 is working for now


----------



## Philosophos (Mar 1, 2009)

Pinholes in the impeller might work well. I haven't tried it my self; let me know how it goes.

For the ferts, I strongly recommend learning how to calculate them your self. I've been given very wrong answers by calculators before, and if it weren't for my own re-checking, I wouldn've never know until the plants started showing symptoms. Don't get me wrong, I re-check my work with fertilator as a fail-safe now and then, but I don't rely on it. If you want a hand figuring it out, I can do some of the work with you; private message me for it.

I dose 100% of my ferts from premixed bottles that I did up my self. I have a total of 3 bottles to take care of everything, plus excel when I use it.

-Philosophos


----------



## saulat (Aug 7, 2009)

Ill shoot you a PM soon hopefully. I had a few computer problems and a lot of school stuff. This is my routine until I can find and do some calculations. Hopefully I can get my water tested soon and have a little better idea of what I need. Just got the rest of my chemicals today, just waiting on my drop checker now.

50% water change on Sunday and regular maintenance.
Fertilize main chemicals Sunday, Tuesday, and Friday
Have water tested to check PO4, may no need to add any or as much. Keep checking nitrates as plants grow. Not adding KNO3 at the moment.

CaCl2 add 0.25 teaspoon 1 x per week after 50% water change
MgSO4 add 0.25 teaspoon 1 x per week after 50% water change
K2SO4 add 0.5 teaspoon 3 x per week
KH2PO4 add 0.125 teaspoon 3 x per week
CSM + B add 0.125 teaspoon 3 x per week


----------



## Philosophos (Mar 1, 2009)

How did you come about those dosing quantities? If you have a weight conversion ratio that you're using, I'd rather have that to re-check your solutions from rather than using my own presumptions. To be honest, most of my work is making my own liquid ferts by weight.

Why are you skipping on the PO4? There's no harm in adding it; I find it helps to get rid of GSA in proper doses.

-Philosophos


----------



## saulat (Aug 7, 2009)

Completely by the calculator, one of the stickies on this site, and reading a few sites online about recommended dosing. I confess it isnt' the best method but I've tried to apply it to my situation without any formal numbers laid out. I know I saw weight conversions on Rex Griggs site. I almost ordered a digital scale the other day so I could be more precise. I've noticed my measuring spoons vary and are not wholly accurate (I have 2 sets). I have one dash and one pinch that are 1/4 teaspoon and another dash that is 1/8 teaspoon and then a level scoop from one is slightly under a level scoop from the other set.

I was skipping on the PO4 because I thought excess levels would add to algae growth and I am not really sure what my levels are at now. Is this true? I'll probably either buy or have the LFS test for phosphates with the AQI master test kit in the next day or two. I still don't know if I need any Ca or Mg so I thought I would add a little until I figure out what I need.

I'd like to make some of the liquid ferts by weight but haven't had time to figure out what can mix together, how much to make of each, and no good scale right now. I should have some more free time later this week to dig into this a little more


----------



## Philosophos (Mar 1, 2009)

Go for the scale; I think there's some cheaper ones available around $40 accurate to .01 of a gram. Even something accurate to .1 of a gram will do. Premixed into liquid is a beautiful thing; my dosing is accurate to +/- 3% or so using a .1 gram scale.

Looking at your numbers, you're a little strange in the dosing. I'm presuming a 65 gal water column here.

The N you're not dosing... you need to. Nitrogen is one of the macros, and if your plants are going to be using the other nutrients up, they'll need a lot of nitrogen too. I've had tanks suck up 15-20ppm in a week on me in some situations.

As for PO4, you're putting in about 5-6ppm per week... remember that you're doing EI; your maximum possible nutrients (with no plant uptake) is 2x what you dose. PO4 could max out at 12ppm without plants, but with uptake more like 8 or 9ppm off the top of my head. Scale back; the plants don't need this much. Try something more around the 2-4ppm weekly dosing range and you shouldn't see any deficiencies, but you won't be wasting money either. Your PO4 isn't just non-limiting, it's pretty excessive.

Your Ca dosing is up in the air. If anything I'd believe your calcium is sufficient but perhaps not so hot on the bioavailability; if deficiencies for CO2 show while your fish are gassing, you've got your answer. If you want to be cautious for the sake of it to establish good growth, you could easily toss in 5ppm on top of it all, then pull it out later to see if there's any difference. You're better off assuring your self of non-limiting growth then pulling it out later; you don't know until you try.

the Mg might be nonexistent. I couldn't see any harm in pushing in 2.5ppm/wk, given how cheap epsom salts are until you know your tap water params. It's always easier to turn good growth into a new growth form that's equally as healthy than it is to recover from deficiencies and poor growth.

Your CSM+B dosing is low based on iron. It fulfills the typical .1ppm levels that can get decent growth, but you'll find healthier plants up around the .6-1ppm dosing range. I made the change to .6ppm, and have noticed the difference. Growth forms and health changed most noticeably in species of ludwigia and cryptocoryne with an increase of iron. You can wait on this one if you like; your plants aren't going to keel over for not having it. Try increasing it after your stable though, and let me know what sort of difference you see.

Of any of this, if there's 2 changes I'd really insist on the most, it'd be first increasing the NO3 dosing based on some fairly universal macronutrient demands. The redfield ratio sure holds nicely, even though some people hate to admit it. You'll find it's used in lots of other nutrient mixes that get very nice growth. Playing with nitrogen limitation still involves adding more NO3 than you are; it's in deficiency range.

After that, it'd be the PO4. I'd recommend it to you to save money; it really is excessive based on any uptake I've observed. Play with it when you like as a controlled variable, but it really isn't worth it now.

-Philosophos


----------



## saulat (Aug 7, 2009)

That makes sense, thanks. The NO3 I was holding back on due to having around 20ppm from fish waste. I was kind of monitoring it to see if a change in level happens now that I have better plant growth. Do you think it is safe to add now or should I continue to wait so I dont boost the nitrates up into stress level?

Ill definately scale the PO4 back. I remember my reasoning now, I was trying to supplement the K from the KH2PO4 but now that I have my K2SO4 it shouldnt be necessary.

I added some liquid fertilizer iron supplement I had left over as I was concerned about iron. I dont remember why I was keeping the CSM B at what I did. 

The Mg and Ca Ill follow your recommendation until I find out more about what I need. Think Ill order that scale today. My tank is actually 55 gallons. Do you usually make up 500 ml of fertilizer, or more?


----------



## Philosophos (Mar 1, 2009)

I wouldn't do any worrying until NO3 goes up to 60ppm, so long as you've greatly reduced your feeding, and your plant growth is improving. Even then, I suggest this level because it's hard for most to get an accurate test kit reading between 60ppm and 100ppm. NO3 tests suggest 20ppm max because NO3 correlates with other biological waste increases that will cause greater stresses on your fauna. NO3 on its own is something I've seen dosed to 45ppm or so in a very healthy discus tank. If you want to do a little reading, here's a great resource for LC50's:
http://cfpub.epa.gov/ecotox/quick_query.htm

For CSM+B it looks like you followed some classic ratios. Don't get me wrong, they'll still provide your plants with good growth, but higher iron levels do some nice things.

I wonder where I got the idea of a 75 gal with 65 column from then... Either way my advice wouldn't differ much. The target ppm levels would all be the same.

For fert batch sizes, I was previously making up 1L of ferts that I dose at a rate of 1ml/2L of column. Now I tinker so much that I'm doing 500ml batches. Be sure to pick up some HCL (even if it's just muriatic acid for pools) or use some excel to keep your micros from getting moldy. Opaque containers are a must-have, too. When it comes to mixing day, talk to me or someone else who rolls liquid; precipitates happen, and it can't all just go into one bottle in any order.

-Philosophos


----------



## saulat (Aug 7, 2009)

Well, I am pretty tired from school, probably going to take a nap. I hope to get to some mixing today though. I stopped at a pipe store on my way home and got a digital scale to 0.1 gram accuracy. I also ran back out to the LFS and had my tap and tank water tested with the API drops. Think I am going to check my NO3 again because my test strips are wrong or the API is wrong, or maybe I used it all up because it read 0.

Current Aquarium parameters

pH - 6.8
KH - 5-6 degrees = 89.5-107.4 ppm
NO3 - 0 ppm
Ca - 6-7 drops = 120 - 140 ppm
PO4 - ~1.5 ppm

Tapwater parameters

pH - 7.6
PO4 - 0
KH - 3-4 degrees = 53.7 - 71.6 ppm
Ca - 100 ppm


----------



## Philosophos (Mar 1, 2009)

Oh, good, you've got calcium results in. You can skip the CaCl2 most likely since 100ppm is pretty intense if that test is accurate. You could always try calibrating it with some CaCl2 solution; I'm not sure how the hobby-branded test kits do with calcium accuracy. 

-Philosophos


----------



## saulat (Aug 7, 2009)

A little confused...

Why is it recommended in this article to dose 1/8 teaspoon of KH2PO4 3x a week when that gives you a level of around 7 ppm a week, 5 ppm higher than the upper limit recommended?

http://www.barrreport.com/articles/42-ei-light-those-less-techy-folks.html

Ok, I am becoming a little daunted. I think I know what I want my levels to be at just by looking at the previous article. I know I can dry dose pretty easily. Trying to figure out the math is seeming like an awfully lot especially if it is as in depth as this site with finding atomic masses and such, it may take me a pretty long time, lol. So let me make sure I understand this EI, as you said the most I could have in my tank with no plant uptake is half of what I am dosing in a week with a 50% water change. So I am wanting to shoot for roughly half of my desired range in a week. The part throwing me now is turning the grams into liquid solution and how much of that to dose and then how that goes with the K in KNO3 and K2SO4. My head is kind of spinning.

Could you check out this site and let me know how it sounds to you? I think I'll just follow this guys guide step by step if I ever have the time to do it. I should be able to get the containers and HCl in the meantime.

http://www.aquariumslife.com/aquascaping/fertilizers-and-co2/fertilizer-calculatio/

Oh, I think what I am going to shoot for is this

20 ppm NO3
20 ppm K
1 ppm PO4
>0.2 ppm iron


----------



## Philosophos (Mar 1, 2009)

Because it doesn't 



> 10- 20 Gallon Aquariums
> +/- 1/8 tsp KNO3 (N) 3x a week
> +/- 1/32 tsp KH2PO4 (P) 3x a week
> +/- 1/32 tsp K2SO4 (K) 3x a week
> ...


1/32 3x a week would still be high by fertilator estimations, but I'm not sure where he gets his density estimations from. I know he also tends to advise dosing to definite excess without causing harm, and has stated that EI is designed to handle some abuse; that people can miss days, slack for a week, etc. I'd take the targets he speaks of aiming for rather than the math he does for you, if all the variables aren't out on the table. I'm sure you could ask him too, when he's back from Australia in a week.

Personally I wouldn't use that last article to determine what you want your ppm's at. If you want to follow Tom's advice, rather than doing heavy research to figure it out, here's what I find of his advice to be the most consistent with all of my reading from his sources:



From the official EI thread on thebarrreport.com said:


> CO2 range 25-35ppm
> NO3 range 5-30ppm
> K+ range 10-30ppm
> PO4 range 1.0-3.0 ppm
> ...


In every case, dosing from his advice tends to be designed to prevent limitation while hitting these targets, even if it means going above them. This may mean dosing in 20ppm of NO3, knowing that the fish waste will provide enough of the rest to prevent deficiency, or dosing 3ppm PO4 even though it goes outside of these ranges.

For EI, the level of ferts without plants can never be more than twice what you dose. So yes, you can dose for half your target, so long as the potential uptake won't bottom you out into limiting ranges. I tend to take the target I want to reach and subtract 30% as an easy starter dose, since going over won't hurt anything. Ratios may not be preached, but these plants are consistent enough in their dry weight analysis that even the above is scaled to something roughly looking like what they require.

The atomic mass thing takes time to get the hang of until you're doing it regularly; it's definitely high school algebra all over again. The site you gave seems to show the ratios correctly, but I tend to work directly from mass, using fractions and spreadsheets. I'll show you how to check KNO3 so that you can apply the same concepts to any other compounds you run into. This is taken from one of my fert calculation files:

First, here's how to create the percentages shown in the other file. Get your atomic masses for every type of element in the compound, multiply it by the number of atoms of that compound in the molecule, then get the sum of all of the weights of all of the atoms:

KNO3:

Potassium: 39.09831 x1 = 39.09831g/mol
Nitrogen: 14.00672 x1 = 14.00672g/mol
Oxygen: 15.99943 x3 = 47.99829g/mol
----------
101.10332

Next, figure out how much of that atom is made out of the elements you're calculating for:

NO3:

Nitrogen: 14.00672 x1 = 14.00672
Oxygen: 15.99943 x3 = 47.99829
----------
62.00501

From there, divide for your percentage:

62.00501/101.10332 = 0.61328361917294110618721521706706

or about what that site totals out at; 61.32%

Now personally, I handle the math a little differently:

101.10332/62.00501 = 1.6305669493481252563300933263296

With this number, I can calculate for any concentration I want by this means:

1.6305669493481252563300933263296*(desired quantity of NO3) = (required quantity KNO3)

From there, it's a matter of crunching the numbers to get it into bottles. If you need a hand with the K+ calculations, and accounting for the other compounds, I can go through that with you.

-Philosophos


----------



## saulat (Aug 7, 2009)

I think I probably will need some help with the K calculations. I am pretty sure I was just doing some mass calculations a few months ago for general chemistry. I am going to try to hunt down opaque bottles and muriatic acid over the weekend and to do some figures. Is an opaque bottle only necessary for the micros?


----------



## Philosophos (Mar 1, 2009)

Mostly for the micros, but I like them for the rest as well. Hydrogen peroxide bottles work best, Target has them cheap ($1 or less) right now.

Muriatic acid is something Home Depot caries at $15 for 2 gal of 14.5% HCl sitting in the outdoor part of the garden dept.

For K+, first work out the quantity of KH2PO4 and KNO3 that you're going to be adding, and how much K+ is in each. Here's KNO3 done as an example:

Potassium: 39.09831 x1 = 39.09831g/mol
Nitrogen: 14.00672 x1 = 14.00672g/mol
Oxygen: 15.99943 x3 = 47.99829g/mol
----------
101.10332g/mol

39.09831/101.10332g*(Quantity of KNO3 being added) = (Amount of K+)

From there, do the same with KH2PO4. After that, it's:
(Target K+) - [(K+ from KNO3) + (K+ from KH2PO4)] = (Needed K2SO4)

And the rest is just a matter of treating K2SO4 as any other nutrient target.

-Philosophos


----------



## saulat (Aug 7, 2009)

I picked up a gallon for just over $6 from a pool spa place. It is 31.45% Muriatic Acid. Probably hit target after school tomorrow or somewhere similar for the hydrogen peroxide. I think it will bother me not being able to see what I mix up, I'll probably go with a clear bottle for the macros unless I find out it is detrimental in some way. I'll let you know how my calculations go this weekend. 

Excited to find that my drop checker arrived today. There is a ph color strip that came with it. It says green is good which is pH 6.8. Is this just something that monitors pH? I thought it was a better indicator of CO2 than relying on the pH KH relationship. Oh wait, I guess that is what the solution is for.


----------



## saulat (Aug 7, 2009)

Ok, I have given up on the mass and calculations. I found 1 error on that guys website, he multiplied by 100 and only moved the decimal by 1 in step 5 not sure what the issue is. I have figured out the amount I want and subtracted 30% as you suggested as a weekly dose. I am guessing I can mix most stuff together, as in the 4 PMDD ingrediants. I think I will be making a solution of that and 1 of KH2PO4. I think I will add more Mg or Ca as needed. I am going to mix 250ml to start with and multiply the grams for target ppm from the fertilitor that I came up with. I will dose 10ml and should have 25 doses out of the solution. Does this sound right? I have read a drop and also a tsp of muriatic acid. Any idea how much I should add to prevent mold? I think I will be using an oral syringe to measure the 10ml every week. I also think I will do something like 5ml on water change day, 2.5 on the other two days to help even out the nutrients through the week. Oh, and is RO/DI water very important for my solution?

Per week to add and amount to make 250ml solution

KNO3 - 4.75g x 25 = 118.75g
KH2PO4 - 0.4g x 25 = 10g
K2SO4 - 3.8g x 25 = 95g
MgSO4 - 3.4g x 25 = 85g
CSM + B - 2.2g x 25 = 55g

Per week ppm added and desired target ppm (or close enough)

NO3 = 13.99ppm and 20ppm
PO4 = 1.34 and 2ppm
K = 17.56 and 25ppm
Mg = 1.76 and 1.75 ppm
Fe 0.69 and 1 ppm


----------



## Philosophos (Mar 1, 2009)

Your ratios look good, but I don't think you'll be able to get it all soluble in one solution that dense. Try backing it off to more like all of that in 1L, then dose 1ml/6L, 3x a week. Split the NPK from the Mg, and put the Mg with the CSM+B on its own. I'd back off on the quantity of CSM+B you're putting in; try something more like 3-5g/L with the same 1ml/6Lm 3x/wk.

RO/DI H2O is very important; hunt for it if you have to.

-FST


----------



## saulat (Aug 7, 2009)

Couldn't hold myself back, I am trying to mix some up now without the RO/DI H20. I'll have to make sure I have it next time. I cut the weight in half once I realized how much powder it was and then upped the water to 500ml. 

So I actually need 3 solutions, One for the Phosphate, One for NPK, and one for Mg and CSM + B. Is the PMDD formula have issues, why the split from Mg and NPK?


----------



## saulat (Aug 7, 2009)

Hit a wall I think. How do you account for the volume of the powder? Using half the previous weight, approximately 180 grams, and 750ml of water, my 750ml of water is closer to 850 or 900ml. I guess it doesn't matter due to the nature of EI and being able to overdose. Not something I had thought of ahead of time.

Oops, thats twice I have overdosed this week. Forgot the ml should be divided by 3x over the week, just put in the weeks worth and last time I did 2x for a few chemicals. Oh well, should be fine.

Oh, and I guess I am close to ready to start tweaking things and experimenting. Thanks so much for all the help, not sure how long it would have taken me if you hadn't helped guide me here.


----------



## Philosophos (Mar 1, 2009)

Just take the weight and divide by the density; any of these compounds should be on wikipedia, which sources to some very reliable places for their chemistry specs.

Be sure to add the Mg and THEN the CSM+B or ugly things will happen.

And it's no problem. If you figure out any improvements, let me know; I'm always tinkering with my ferts.

-Philosophos


----------



## FernMan (Jun 4, 2006)

Philosophos said:


> Just take the weight and divide by the density; any of these compounds should be on wikipedia, which sources to some very reliable places for their chemistry specs.
> 
> Be sure to add the Mg and THEN the CSM+B or ugly things will happen.
> 
> ...


Hi Philosophos... What do you mean by "ugly things will happen"? would you elaborate please.

Felix


----------



## Philosophos (Mar 1, 2009)

Precipitates that won't go away even if you bring the solution to a boil. Essentially you ruin your batch.

-Philosophos


----------



## JeffyFunk (Apr 6, 2006)

saulat said:


> Hit a wall I think. How do you account for the volume of the powder? Using half the previous weight, approximately 180 grams, and 750ml of water, my 750ml of water is closer to 850 or 900ml. I guess it doesn't matter due to the nature of EI and being able to overdose. Not something I had thought of ahead of time.


Solutions are made by adding the chemicals to a container and then diluting *TO* the desired (final) volume, not adding the desired (final) volume to the chemicals. Otherwise, as you correctly pointed out, you don't take the molar volume of the chemicals into consideration and end up w/ a total volume of solution greater than what you wanted.


----------



## saulat (Aug 7, 2009)

Thank you, that makes perfect sense. I keep subscribing to my thread here and yet my notifications for posts have stopped.


----------

