# Ratio comparison



## Jeff Kropp (Apr 25, 2004)

I've been using the following supplementation ratio with reasonable but not ideal success. How does it compare to what others find effective. 

1/4 tsp stump remover
1/4 tsp enema solution
10 ml TMG

every 3 days, in a light fish load 60g tank, at 3wpg

thanks, Jeff


----------



## Sir_BlackhOle (Jan 25, 2004)

Heres what I have been using in my 75 with DIY co2, laterite substrate, and 2 watts/gallon NO fl's. 

Twice a week:
3/4 tsp KNO3
2mL Fleet type enema
15mL Flourish

Plant growth is good but I cant seem to get rid of the algae...all kinds... I was thinking if I had pressurized co2 that would probably help, but untill then I dont know.


----------



## Jeff Kropp (Apr 25, 2004)

2ml = 1/2 tsp 

So you use roughly double my macros but use a, 3 parts KNO3 / 2 parts enema, ratio. From looking at your plant mass in the photo dated 4/12/04 I would guess you could cut back some if algae is problematic. Do you measure N, P and Fe?

Does anyone know how TMG compares to Flourish in volumes needed to produce say... X concentration of iron in a given volume of water?

We could assume from these amounts that I would be more prone to N shortages while you would perhaps be more prone to K short falls? Of course this would depend in large part on stocking levels and feeding practices.

I am relatively algae free, knock on wood, but have some deficiency problems with Hygro Kompact.

DIY Co2 on such a large tank must take a bit of effort.

Jeff


----------



## Sir_BlackhOle (Jan 25, 2004)

Yes the DIY co2 is a hassle. I cant wait to get a pressurized system. I am thinking that once I get that going then the plants will be able to outcompete the algae, or at least keep it manageable. I havent noticed any plants showing deficiencies, but I think if growth was better then the algae might not be so bad. I think I am going to try two 2 liter bottles in sync and see what happens. Maybe that will give me enough co2 for now.


----------



## gpodio (Feb 4, 2004)

Jeff Kropp said:


> Does anyone know how TMG compares to Flourish in volumes needed to produce say... X concentration of iron in a given volume of water?
> 
> Jeff


Here's a comparison:
http://www.gpodio.com/fert_table.asp

And same figures based on FE contents:
http://www.gpodio.com/fert_table_st.asp

Hope that helps
Giancarlo Podio


----------



## Jeff Kropp (Apr 25, 2004)

Thanks for the comparison charts. 

Do I read them correctly? It seems Sir BlackHole would then have 7 times more Fe than me. I'm using just under the recomended .007 lvl and he is using 7 times more?

Jeff


----------



## gpodio (Feb 4, 2004)

That sounds right, considering Flourish is more concentrated than TMG and sir blackhole is dosing more ml of Flourish than you are TMG. But it's hard to make such comparisons because there are other things that make your tank different and therefore require more or less of any one element. Testing your FE level is probably a better way to compare.

Giancarlo Podio


----------



## Jeff Kropp (Apr 25, 2004)

gpodio,

I must admit to not being a big proponent of testing. That is why comparing supplementation amounts and subjective observations is interesting to me. Although I do agree that each tank acheives a unique balance, I do not consider tests of ppm concentrations to be particularly indicative of a tank's balance. Measured concentrations only indicate conditions at a particular point in time and as such are only useful as a guidelines. 

It is very popular right now to maintain the concentrations promulgated by Tom Barr. While I have no quarrel with the basis for these numbers I think many people mistakingly cling to them as a sort of gospel according to Tom. I know it is easy to get caught up in faux scientific thinking or to place ones faith in a guru but I think its more important to discuss how much one supplements, how often, and what is observed. This reveals indications of a tanks momentum and husbandry style that is, to my mind, far more usefull than ppm measurements.

How about you? Can you estimate the ratios of macro and micro supplementation that provide your greatest long term success so that others can compare and develop their observational skills?

Jeff


----------



## gpodio (Feb 4, 2004)

Jeff, while I agree with your statement regarding testing, infact I hardly ever test my water other than KH and GH now. I did however spend 6 months last year doing countless tests with the various nutrient levels to find the balance that best suited my tank. If you are having problems, knowing the nutrient concentration is your first step. After having witnessed the various problems or changes due to nutrient levels, it will then become easier for you to "eye" things out and "guess" what is needed. However, the moment that fails, it's back to test kits to figure out the cause. Knowing what you put into a tank is fine, but knowing what is consumed, lost or added from other sources such as food, poop or substrate, requires a test kit.

Tom's numbers are not to be taken as the ideal figures for any tank, Tom himself will tell you this. His figures are a base where people who are having problems should start from. It's like having something to fall back upon should things go bad. When I first moved to high light tanks after 12 years of low light tanks, I had the usual problems everyone runs into. Tom's suggestions got me out of the problem area and allowed me to get a feeling for what my tank now required with so much lighting. It was then up to me to tailor the dosing based on each individual tank.

In the end I found that the best results for my tanks was to incorporate something that I was very used to doing with my low light tanks. That is have a very fertile substrate, this has given me the best results so far. BUT as Tom and I have discussed in the past, having a fertile substrate can be dangerous! If you overdose it's not easy to remove the nutrients like it is if they are in the water column. Also, when planting and pruning, special care must be take to not disturb the fertile layers. Take Tom's suggestions as the quick and easy way to get things rolling without great problems.

If you have the patience, try to modify each element one by one every 2-3 weeks, this will give you a better feel for your tank's requirements. If you end up with a green pea soup, fall back to the values you know are working right now. AND KEEP A LOG! Such an important thing!!

In the water, my high light tanks are close to Tom's recommendations, I keep around 5ppm NO3, 0.1 FE, 0.2-0.5 PO4, KH4, GH6, CO2 20ppm, K approx 10-15ppm. But it's been a while since I tested these, I have it down to a regular schedule now and just repeat the doses that worked out the best for me. I only test things if I'm trying to make changes or running into problems. Substrate is Flourish with a little peat to get the ball rolling when the substrate is new and Flourish Tabs as directed every 2-3 months.

Hope that helps
Giancarlo Podio


----------



## AV8TOR (Mar 28, 2004)

Jeff Kropp said:


> 1/4 tsp stump remover
> 1/4 tsp enema solution


If someone just wanders to the forum they would certainly wonder what the heck this is about, stump remover and enema solution!!!


----------



## gpodio (Feb 4, 2004)

Well.... trees get old and bowels need to move... :wink:


----------

