# EI dosing with NEW Amazonia II



## Antiquefloorman (Nov 8, 2011)

Hello,
Do I continue to dose the water column?? Anyone else have any experience with this?
Thanks,
Tim


----------



## niko (Jan 28, 2004)

EI and Amazonia could be used together. Like adding one wooden wheel to a Ferrari. People have done it and will tell you how well it works. These are the same people that don't know the first thing about the ADA method of running a planted tank.

Do some reading about the Redfield ratio and how exactly the water is kept void of nutrients and where do the plants get the nutrients from. Try to figure out why this is done that way and you will see that every other approach is doable if you are hellbent on it.


----------



## UltraBlue (Mar 8, 2011)

The Redfield ratio does not apply to planted tanks. Try Liebig's law of the minimum. EI, is easy, cheap, and rules out deficiencies leaving you to focus on light and CO2. dosing will help the soil last longer. The most important thing when starting a tank with aquasoil is frequent water changes for the first week or two.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2


----------



## h4n (Dec 23, 2005)

I think people still dose but not at first since the Aquasoil is still full of nutirents.

Good way tot check to see if you need to dose extra is to check the water parameters.


----------



## niko (Jan 28, 2004)

These two planted tank enthusiasts need to go out and read how ADA does things. Oh wait, I forgot that such information is not very well laid out in English anywhere. Bummer.

If the info was clearly available we would be clear how Redfield and the law of minimum make sense in an ADA tank and wreak havoc in a tank with water chock full of nutrients. Over the years we have learned to manage the chaos - we discuss defficiencies, fertilization calculations and administration regime, nutrient variations, causes of algae, algae remedies, etc. We talk about all that and it makes us feel like a community. And the owners of the forums make money. Everybody wins you could say.

Tim,

In a nutshell: ADA supplies certain nutrients in horrible excess through the Aquasoil. But the water is kept void of nutrients. This last part is a bit confusing. The water is not completely nutrient free at all times. Fertilizers are added daily to the water but in minor ammounts. They float free in the water for just a short time. This can be said in other words: "There are no missing nutrients.". But it is all in the way they are presented to the plants - both timing and quantity.

The beauty of what ADA has created is that they get to sell the ingredients for a successful, clean planted tank. And if you follow their method it is easy to take care of any algae problem because there isn't much to eat in the water. The algae have a hard time even showing up. And if they do they grow slow, very slow. It's easy to keep them invisible with a few Amano shrimp. Or nail them hard with a single water change that clears the water from whatever little food they find to eat in it.

A large role in all this Japanese thing of beauty is given to the filter. It is only a biofilter. There are no mechanical filtration pads. The water flow is kept at a constant, almost guaranteed rate at all times because of a variety of serious reasons. But note that the filter is only part of a system of parts that work together. Once again - it is easier to buy everything ADA than to try to understand how it works and assemble things yourself.

Your interest in fertilizing the water comes from the ubiquitous childish notion that it is you that needs to feed your plants. Tom Barr and Edward (EI and PPS) have come up with the odd ideas to supply the food in the water. Everything the plant needs is being dumped in the water. The water becomes a prime playground for all kinds of unsavory interactions. And when it goes down it all goes down fast, very fast. The two approaches do not mimic any natural body of water because a body of water loaded with nutrients would also be loaded with algae. EI and PPS try to get Nature to do what it does not do. As we all know with perseverance anything is possible so we do what we want to do, not what makes more sense. The two ideas emerged when we really didn't know anything about ADA other than it was cool as hell. And over the years both approaches have gotten closer and closer to the ADA method. Over the years PPS has become a version of EI by suggesting the same thing but in much lower dosages (low dossage like ADA). EI on the other hand has turned into what ADA did for more than a decade - using rich substrate as a storage for nutrients so they never get depleted (exactly what ADA does).

This is it in a nutshell. Now you know more than most people in this hobby.


----------



## bveister (Jan 26, 2012)

Wow thank you so much Niko for summarizing what years of experience and observational data have brought us! That was awesome! So if you don't mind me asking, what method(s) do you use?


----------



## Antiquefloorman (Nov 8, 2011)

I am anxious to hear that also. I appreciate Niko's input here. 
Thanks,
Tim


----------



## niko (Jan 28, 2004)

I do not keep aquariums. Never have. What I write is not even observational - it is a hear say.

Tom Barr and other people that dispense amazing information freely do have experience and observations. Ask them for more detailed information.


----------



## wet (Nov 24, 2008)

Hey niko,

What a depressing view of the state of our hobby.

If we agree that there are many methods to get to the same end -- and I think we do -- why does it matter if someone uses EI vs ADA? Are you suggesting that beginning gardeners have to front the cost of a full ADA setup to enter our hobby?

Hey Antiquefloorman,

Since EI is simply the philosophy that you not run out of nutrients and use water changes to lower the max threshold of nutrients, you can totally use EI with new (DIY, ADA, etc) soil. It's debatable you need to unless you are also willing to crank CO2 and light because you want to grow lots of plants quickly.

Here's an example. It's nothing special, but it is my current tank. Stats: >1 year old Amazonia powder and regular type + ~2 month old Red Sea Flora Base, rich EI dosing, lots of CO2, lots of water changes and gardening, no algae eaters (there's just that one Paradise fish ,no snails, no other fish, no shrimp, etc), about two months old this week:

Last month (~30 days ago):

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/252180403983630336Yesterday:

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/262675574475067393
No plants were added between pics, just trimmed and moved around. This bit is if niko is still reading, but notice vs how it started: UV and a CO2 reactor vs today: just a HOB filter, CO2 reactor, heater, and one of those cute wavemaker pumps. Cheap and easy. I have DIY'd a sump then refugium, owned Eheim and Rena canister filters with inline heaters and reactors, and these stick-in-tank things. Notice I like it easy and fast to clean on my current tank and grow not bad plants.

It would be way bushier, but last week I trimmed out this much Stargrass:

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/259747279253143552
Oh right, Antiquefloorman. It's more important to notice what all the good guidelines have in common, more than it is to focus on the things they do differently, at least until your tank and gardening matures. FWIW.


----------



## niko (Jan 28, 2004)

Trust me I don't talk about much more depressing thing in this hobby. One of them happened (predictably) just the other day, but who cares.

I do not even like ADA. ADA has "borrowed" both the methods of running a planted tank and the principles of arranging the plants. And it has gotten most people to believe in some kind of ADA genius and looking at whatever they sell as uber cool. It's all a carefully organized business, nothing else. Either way - it is beyond me why here in the US most of us refuse to follow what ADA does. Most of us don't even care to know how it's all done. The discussions are often about fertilization of the water because that is what most people do and are happy to dispense advice. As many other groups this hobby is also a social venue so talk and interaction take over knowledge and common sense. It's all good, except I believe that as a whole we have not learned much in the last 10 years. We still can't give sound advice to a newbie how to start a clean tank. 

And as in many other groups it is almost impossible to even say anything about that situation without sounding depressive or controversial. For a shot of common sense read a part of my post above again - the part where I say that there are no natural algae-free bodies of water containing the same amounts of fertilizers in the water as the amounts we dump in our tanks' water. Ignore my persona and see if that makes sense as a standalone statement. Then see if it makes sense to add fertilizers to your tank's water at levels that would be considered toxic by any water company. How vulnerable to algae is such a nutrient rich box of water? Why do we chase numbers if ADA, ADG, and every single professional out there don't even use test kits?

Hope you all see where I come from. To me the original question of this thread showed, once again, how little we care to know. It showed, once again, that we don't even have basic rules written black on white.That's all there is to my "depressive" response.


----------



## houseofcards (Feb 16, 2005)

I think it pathetic that you come on here and knock a method that thousands of planted hobbyists use and use quite well including myself. I've had AS-based setups using EI for years with incredibly healthy plants and fish. Some of my fish are 7 years old. So how can you say it doesn't work and causes algae and other issues. It's fantasy that ADA-based tanks are algae free. Amano and many of his publications talk about the algae to expect in various stages and they even admit that all tanks will eventually need to be completely reset. If algae isn't part of their system, why do they sell algaecide and algae removal tools? The fact that you don't even maintain thanks really just makes any of your posts irrelevant.


----------



## wet (Nov 24, 2008)

hey niko,

First, on this supposed American obsession with the water column: you're wrong. Folks all over the world are calculating DIY mixes or levels from commercial products.

Here's a graph of the traffic for my water column calculators for the past year. 








Your assumptions are clearly wrong:

1) *More* European folks than American folks use the calculator. Europeans spend *more* time on the calculators on each visit.

2) It's true that Asia currently lags behind in terms of the total number of folks calculating water column things. But notice folks from Asia who do use the calculator spend over 15 minutes on each visit. (Almost *twice* as much as Americans!) Asia also leads in growth for these apps across all continents.

Does this not indicate to you that Europe and Asia are in fact catching up to the innovations from the US? It sure does to me.

So, *why* would they fertilize in the water column? Folks are using water column fertilizers because they are effective and easily repeatable, just like plenty of other gardeners prefer hydroponics to soil. Folks use their plants to drive their fertilization, not necessarily levels in the tank or recreating conditions in nature, just like gardeners have done for years. Fertilization of the water column is effective. This is why it is popular. It's not as if we're doing some top secret super hard stuff here. We're just growing plants.

Second, I'm not sure where your perception of this state of the hobby and our failure with new comers is coming from. I can only assume it's from your time reading forums, and while I don't read every forum, I'd like to say what I see. My observation of APC since my last break is that the fertilization, equipment, etc forums move slower while the trade section stays relatively active. This suggests these methods are working.

Re levels of fertilizers: no one using EI says you can't put the fertilizers in the soil, just like ADA does. Remember that EI has changed: it's only been a few years where trully nutritious aquatic soil was sold commercially in the United States. Do you not remember this?

For folks uninterested in DIY soil, pure water column dosing was cheaper and easier than alternatives. EI, PPS, etc removed the magic/ridiculous upsell of magical ADA products (Bacter whatever, Stupid name whatever) and focussed on macros and micros.

If you are complaining that Americans tend to think, "more is better," I can sort of buy that. As we get a better understanding of a system, I do think lots of folks try to ride the bleeding edge of technology (in this case a planted aquarium as a system). I'm one of these gardeners. The bleeding edge is funner than the same old tank, and some folks sell their plants for hobby funds, and some of these things might be the American mindset, I guess.

I do think many beginners foolishly spend more time chasing tank parameters than understanding they're tending for a living and adapting garden. I can't say if that mental block exists in other countries. I can tell you other countries are clearly influenced by recent advancements by American aquarists.

Re complication with PPS, EI, etc vs commercial products like ADA: it takes much less time, effort, and money to DIY fertilize an aquarium than it does to tear it down every 3-6 months and regularly buy new AquaSoil (and you *have* to keep buying AquaSoil for the ADA method as you describe it to work). The person willing to experiment with their tank will have a greater understanding of their system than the gardener throwing money at their problems.

And all the above is just the fertilization bit. The easiest bit. But dismissing Hoppy's work on PAR or AaronT's work on soil and the many other American contributions just reads like bias.

You diss ADA but clearly subscribe to ADA and are buying into their brand and label and promotion of, well, magic. And you're the one suggesting we haven't gone anywhere in 10 years? Really?

(I am a fan of yours, the pics of your gardens and fish I've seen, and many of your posts on the Internet, by the way. I'm not attacking you. I'm just spreading some manure around with a fellow gardener and getting into some discussion. I really do think you're wrong with many of these assumptions though.  )


----------

