Contradictory Plant Deficiencies And High Nutrient Readings

Tldr: plants showing classic signs of CO2, potassium, and nitrate deficiency despite ample availability of all of the above.

Affected plants:

H. compacta
Deficiency symptoms: classic pinholes in leaves (K deficiency), stark white undersides (CO2 or NO3 deficiency), inevitable transparency and leaf death. Only visible on old growth.

Water lily
Pinholes on both submerged leaves and lily pads, pinholes inevitably grow bigger and black at the edges, leaf death. Only visible on old growth.

Wisteria
Minor BBA on edges of old growth, stark white undersides on both new and old growth.

These are the most egregiously affected plants. Several other plant species consistently exhibit shrunken, unhealthy old growth despite healthy and vibrant new growth.

Some very important tank details and parameters:

TANK DETAILS

Size: 75 gallon community freshwater

Age: 3.5 months

Filtration: Fluval 406 and Fluval 306

CO2: Pressurized delivered via inline atomizer on the 406

Lighting: two 48inch Finnex 24/7 CC LEDs set to max intensity for 7 hour photo period. CO2 comes on two hours before lights, shuts off one hour before lights off.

Fertilization: EI method dry ferts.
- 3/4tsp KNO3, 3/16tsp KH2PO4, 1/4tsp K2SO4 on Mon, Wed, Fri
- 1/4tsp CSMB on Tues, Thurs, Sat
- 50% water change on Sun

Water Supply: RODI water remineralized with potassium bicarbonate for KH, and magnesium, calcium, and potassium sulphate for GH

Substrate: Eco-complete

WATER PARAMETERS

Temperature: 77.3f during lighting hours, drop to 75.6f during night hours (cold room)

dKH: 5

dGH: 7

Ammonia and Nitrite: 0ppm

Nitrate: 40ppm

Phosphate: 5ppm

Potassium: I do not own a test for this, but I can’t imagine it is low. I use potassium bicarbonate and potassium sulphate for RODI remineralization, plus dose EI method KNO3, KH2PO4, and K2SO4.

CO2 and pH: I prefer to measure CO2 with the pH drop method. The pH drops from 8.1 to 6.8 over the first two hours of CO2 saturation. pH stays below 7.0 for remainder of lighting period. This indicates CO2 levels at or above 30ppm for entirety of photo period. Fish do not show signs of distress during CO2 hours.

So basically, what the **** is going on here? Plants are showing signs of deficiency despite every reading indicating ample nutrients, CO2, and lighting.

I deal with consistent green hair algae, especially on the carpeting plants (marlisea and s. repens). Some minor BBA on plants, as well.

I’m just really lost here. Clearly NO3 or K uptake is being interfered with, but by what, and how?

Any and all help greatly appreciated.

 

-Mak- SeattleRoy bryangar

 

Tldr: plants showing classic signs of CO2, potassium, and nitrate deficiency despite ample availability of all of the above.

Affected plants:

H. compacta
Deficiency symptoms: classic pinholes in leaves (K deficiency), stark white undersides (CO2 or NO3 deficiency), inevitable transparency and leaf death. Only visible on old growth.

Water lily
Pinholes on both submerged leaves and lily pads, pinholes inevitably grow bigger and black at the edges, leaf death. Only visible on old growth.

Wisteria
Minor BBA on edges of old growth, stark white undersides on both new and old growth.

These are the most egregiously affected plants. Several other plant species consistently exhibit shrunken, unhealthy old growth despite healthy and vibrant new growth.

Some very important tank details and parameters:

TANK DETAILS

Size: 75 gallon community freshwater

Age: 3.5 months

Filtration: Fluval 406 and Fluval 306

CO2: Pressurized delivered via inline atomizer on the 406

Lighting: two 48inch Finnex 24/7 CC LEDs set to max intensity for 7 hour photo period. CO2 comes on two hours before lights, shuts off one hour before lights off.

Fertilization: EI method dry ferts.
- 3/4tsp KNO3, 3/16tsp KH2PO4, 1/4tsp K2SO4 on Mon, Wed, Fri
- 1/4tsp CSMB on Tues, Thurs, Sat
- 50% water change on Sun

Water Supply: RODI water remineralized with potassium bicarbonate for KH, and magnesium, calcium, and potassium sulphate for GH

Substrate: Eco-complete

WATER PARAMETERS

Temperature: 77.3f during lighting hours, drop to 75.6f during night hours (cold room)

dKH: 5

dGH: 7

Ammonia and Nitrite: 0ppm

Nitrate: 40ppm

Phosphate: 5ppm

Potassium: I do not own a test for this, but I can’t imagine it is low. I use potassium bicarbonate and potassium sulphate for RODI remineralization, plus dose EI method KNO3, KH2PO4, and K2SO4.

CO2 and pH: I prefer to measure CO2 with the pH drop method. The pH drops from 8.1 to 6.8 over the first two hours of CO2 saturation. pH stays below 7.0 for remainder of lighting period. This indicates CO2 levels at or above 30ppm for entirety of photo period. Fish do not show signs of distress during CO2 hours.

So basically, what the is going on here? Plants are showing signs of deficiency despite every reading indicating ample nutrients, CO2, and lighting.

I deal with consistent green hair algae, especially on the carpeting plants (marlisea and s. repens). Some minor BBA on plants, as well.

I’m just really lost here. Clearly NO3 or K uptake is being interfered with, but by what, and how?

Any and all help greatly appreciated.

I'm new to plants and haven't a clue so I'd like to follow to learn. I hope someone has answers for you.

 

Tldr: plants showing classic signs of CO2, potassium, and nitrate deficiency despite ample availability of all of the above.

Affected plants:

H. compacta
Deficiency symptoms: classic pinholes in leaves (K deficiency), stark white undersides (CO2 or NO3 deficiency), inevitable transparency and leaf death. Only visible on old growth.

Water lily
Pinholes on both submerged leaves and lily pads, pinholes inevitably grow bigger and black at the edges, leaf death. Only visible on old growth.

Wisteria
Minor BBA on edges of old growth, stark white undersides on both new and old growth.

These are the most egregiously affected plants. Several other plant species consistently exhibit shrunken, unhealthy old growth despite healthy and vibrant new growth.

Some very important tank details and parameters:

TANK DETAILS

Size: 75 gallon community freshwater

Age: 3.5 months

Filtration: Fluval 406 and Fluval 306

CO2: Pressurized delivered via inline atomizer on the 406

Lighting: two 48inch Finnex 24/7 CC LEDs set to max intensity for 7 hour photo period. CO2 comes on two hours before lights, shuts off one hour before lights off.

Fertilization: EI method dry ferts.
- 3/4tsp KNO3, 3/16tsp KH2PO4, 1/4tsp K2SO4 on Mon, Wed, Fri
- 1/4tsp CSMB on Tues, Thurs, Sat
- 50% water change on Sun

Water Supply: RODI water remineralized with potassium bicarbonate for KH, and magnesium, calcium, and potassium sulphate for GH

Substrate: Eco-complete

WATER PARAMETERS

Temperature: 77.3f during lighting hours, drop to 75.6f during night hours (cold room)

dKH: 5

dGH: 7

Ammonia and Nitrite: 0ppm

Nitrate: 40ppm

Phosphate: 5ppm

Potassium: I do not own a test for this, but I can’t imagine it is low. I use potassium bicarbonate and potassium sulphate for RODI remineralization, plus dose EI method KNO3, KH2PO4, and K2SO4.

CO2 and pH: I prefer to measure CO2 with the pH drop method. The pH drops from 8.1 to 6.8 over the first two hours of CO2 saturation. pH stays below 7.0 for remainder of lighting period. This indicates CO2 levels at or above 30ppm for entirety of photo period. Fish do not show signs of distress during CO2 hours.

So basically, what the is going on here? Plants are showing signs of deficiency despite every reading indicating ample nutrients, CO2, and lighting.

I deal with consistent green hair algae, especially on the carpeting plants (marlisea and s. repens). Some minor BBA on plants, as well.

I’m just really lost here. Clearly NO3 or K uptake is being interfered with, but by what, and how?

Any and all help greatly appreciated.

HI Bbunkie01,

Could you please supply some pictures? Tank overall, and close up pictures of new leaves and older leaves of the species being effected.

Is your CO2 on a solenoid & timer or does it run 24/7? When do you dose your nutrients?

 

As Roy said, pictures will definitely help.

Two ideas come to mind here.
1) CO2 deficiency
2) The minerals you use to remineralize your RODI water

I know that you've said your CO2 is dialed in but using the pH to calculate the ppm is not always accurate. Dialing CO2 in is by far the hardest factor to successfully master. I like to do this: Set the CO2 to a relatively high rate. Wait a few minutes. The fish will usually start to hyperventilate. Lower the CO2 little by little every 15 or so minutes until the fish stop hyperventilating at the surface. Push the CO2 as far as you can just until the fish stop hyperventilating. You want to keep it at this borderline level. Yes, it does cause temporary stress to the fish. However, I've found that this is absolutely the best method to dialing into CO2 within just a few tries. How is the flow around the tank? The CO2 needs to be transported through good flow throughout the tank so there should ideally be no dead spots in the tank. Please try upping the CO2 using this method.

I don't have experience with remineralizing water, as my tap water has been decent quality already. Maybe try using the tap water in your area. Even if the nitrates are high, it doesn't matter. The nitrates in it will only benefit your plant growth. I've personally found that in my hightech tanks, high potassium content has hindered the best possible growth. I'm only mentioning potassium because I noticed that you're dosing K2SO4 and potassium bicarbonate. I know many show tanks run their K levels at well over 100ppm, but I don't like this approach for K. When I was at the height of dosing K (probably around 40-50ppm 3x per week), the old growth on my plants looked like utter trash. The new growth looked great, but the older growth looked like it was suffering from a K deficiency which is why I kept dosing more K. After a while, I went on a tank reset. I did a 75% water change and went back to dosing normal EI levels without K2SO4 and using only around 15ppm K from the KNO3. Within a week, all my issues cleared up. Old growth stopped deteriorating and actually improved. What I think may have been happening was the K was blocking other nutrient uptake, so lowering its concentration would then allow the nutrient blockage to stop. This particular tank also had a soil substrate, with a high CEC value, so it's possible that the dirt absorbed tons of K and as a result caused a toxicity or nutrient blockage.

 

As Roy said, pictures will definitely help.

Two ideas come to mind here.
1) CO2 deficiency
2) The minerals you use to remineralize your RODI water

I know that you've said your CO2 is dialed in but using the pH to calculate the ppm is not always accurate. Dialing CO2 in is by far the hardest factor to successfully master. I like to do this: Set the CO2 to a relatively high rate. Wait a few minutes. The fish will usually start to hyperventilate. Lower the CO2 little by little every 15 or so minutes until the fish stop hyperventilating at the surface. Push the CO2 as far as you can just until the fish stop hyperventilating. You want to keep it at this borderline level. Yes, it does cause temporary stress to the fish. However, I've found that this is absolutely the best method to dialing into CO2 within just a few tries. How is the flow around the tank? The CO2 needs to be transported through good flow throughout the tank so there should ideally be no dead spots in the tank. Please try upping the CO2 using this method.

I don't have experience with remineralizing water, as my tap water has been decent quality already. Maybe try using the tap water in your area. Even if the nitrates are high, it doesn't matter. The nitrates in it will only benefit your plant growth. I've personally found that in my hightech tanks, high potassium content has hindered the best possible growth. I'm only mentioning potassium because I noticed that you're dosing K2SO4 and potassium bicarbonate. I know many show tanks run their K levels at well over 100ppm, but I don't like this approach for K. When I was at the height of dosing K (probably around 40-50ppm 3x per week), the old growth on my plants looked like utter trash. The new growth looked great, but the older growth looked like it was suffering from a K deficiency which is why I kept dosing more K. After a while, I went on a tank reset. I did a 75% water change and went back to dosing normal EI levels without K2SO4 and using only around 15ppm K from the KNO3. Within a week, all my issues cleared up. Old growth stopped deteriorating and actually improved. What I think may have been happening was the K was blocking other nutrient uptake, so lowering its concentration would then allow the nutrient blockage to stop. This particular tank also had a soil substrate, with a high CEC value, so it's possible that the dirt absorbed tons of K and as a result caused a toxicity or nutrient blockage.

Very interesting points on K. Do you happen to know of a reliable K test? I’ve only been able to find one on Amazon that appears to be geared more toward saltwater testing.

I’ve always assumed my K levels were potentially too high. I can explore some different GH remineralizers that forego K2SO4. I’ve also read that K levels up to 100ppm are common in professional aquascapes, which is why I’ve never thought much about dumping so much in there, both via regular dosing and remineralization. Moreover, I’ve never felt comfortable using sodium bicarbonate for KH remineralization in a freshwater tank, though maybe I’m being paranoid there. After seeing a recommendation for potassium bicarbonate from Tom Barr himself, that’s what I settled on.

Not opposed to changing any of this, just explaining my thought process.

I’m currently treating an ich infestation. Once the meds are out of the tank next week, I will attempt another CO2 recalibration with your advice. I just can’t imagine how much further I can push my regulator. I have a GLA Gro-1 regulator set to 50psI working pressure. I swear I’ve maxed out my BPS (5+ at least).

Flow should be fine. I have the intakes of both canister filters in opposite corners of the tank. Both outflows are DIY spraybars positioned on the left and right side walls of the tank. The outflow with the inline atomizer is pointed down into the water column. The other spray bar is pointed upward to create surface agitation. Creates a strong circular flow in the tank.

I will definitely provide pictures tomorrow afternoon.

Thank you for your response.

HI Bbunkie01,

Could you please supply some pictures? Tank overall, and close up pictures of new leaves and older leaves of the species being effected.

Is your CO2 on a solenoid & timer or does it run 24/7? When do you dose your nutrients?

Yes, I will absolutely provide pictures tomorrow afternoon.

Yes, CO2 is controlled via a solenoid on the regulator. GLA Gro-1 regulator.

CO2 runs from 11am to 7pm. Lights run from 1pm to 8pm.

I consistently dose nutrients every morning around 10am.

 

Excess surface movement is not desirable for high tech CO2 injected environment. A very slight and light ripple, if even that is desirable. Only for Lowtech tanks should the surface be agitated to encourage gas exchange. You want to minimize gas exchange as much as possible to prevent the CO2 from gassing off.

As for remineralizing, I definitely wouldn’t put the sodium bicarbonate in there. A lot of people think that the K level of toxicity is very very high (400+ppm), but I think it’s definitely within reach (80-200ppm). I’ve yet to overdose nitrates, but I’ve had micro toxicities before (scorched and twisted new growth) from dosing twice the recommend amount of CSM+B

 

Excess surface movement is not desirable for high tech CO2 injected environment. A very slight and light ripple, if even that is desirable. Only for Lowtech tanks should the surface be agitated to encourage gas exchange. You want to minimize gas exchange as much as possible to prevent the CO2 from gassing off.

As for remineralizing, I definitely wouldn’t put the sodium bicarbonate in there. A lot of people think that the K level of toxicity is very very high (400+ppm), but I think it’s definitely within reach (80-200ppm). I’ve yet to overdose nitrates, but I’ve had micro toxicities before (scorched and twisted new growth) from dosing twice the recommend amount of CSM+B

Okay, now that is definitely interesting. I’ve always assumed I needed strong surface agitation, even moreso with CO2 injection. I could indeed be gassing off too much CO2.

I’d rather keep max GPH on the Fluvals, so I won’t decrease flow rate. But I can definitely tweak the spray bars to create less surface agitation.

I will actually take a short video tomorrow on my phone to document my current surface agitation. Maybe it’s too much.

 

Okay, now that is definitely interesting. I’ve always assumed I needed strong surface agitation, even moreso with CO2 injection. I could indeed be gassing off too much CO2.

I’d rather keep max GPH on the Fluvals, so I won’t decrease flow rate. But I can definitely tweak the spray bars to create less surface agitation.

I will actually take a short video tomorrow on my phone to document my current surface agitation. Maybe it’s too much.

A video would definitely help. As for a reliable K test, I doubt any exist out there that are accurate and affordable. Even the tests for nitrates are highly inaccurate. Can’t imagine it’d be any better for K

 

A video would definitely help. As for a reliable K test, I doubt any exist out there that are accurate and affordable. Even the tests for nitrates are highly inaccurate. Can’t imagine it’d be any better for K

Inaccurate or imprecise?

 

If plants in different spots are showing different deficiencies I woukd check the water circulation in the tank. Its possible that the nutrients aren't being evenly distributed throughout your tank.

 

Inaccurate or imprecise?

Inaccurate. Readings are straight up wrong most of the time.

 

As for a reliable K test, I doubt any exist out there that are accurate and affordable. Even the tests for nitrates are highly inaccurate. Can’t imagine it’d be any better for K

HI All,

I think that there may be an misconception that the test kits available to hobbyists are 'highly inaccurate'; possibly folks repeat what they read or hear and fail to investigate.

I personally checked the calibration of my API Nitrate Test Kit and found it to be 100% accurate at all levels from 160 ppm to 5.0 ppm. It is important to read the instructions thoroughly and do the required 30 seconds (or more) of shaking for bottle #2 prior to adding the drops and the shaking for 1 minute after adding all the drops. I used the Rex Grigg method of calibrating with known ppm nitrate levels in various solutions.

 

HI All,

I think that there may be an misconception that the test kits available to hobbyists are 'highly inaccurate'; possibly folks repeat what they read or hear and fail to investigate.

I personally checked the calibration of my API Nitrate Test Kit and found it to be 100% accurate at all levels from 160 ppm to 5.0 ppm. It is important to read the instructions thoroughly and do the required 30 seconds (or more) of shaking for bottle #2 prior to adding the drops and the shaking for 1 minute after adding all the drops. I used the Rex Grigg method of calibrating with known ppm nitrate levels in various solutions.

Curious if you’ve ever tested the accuracy of strips?

 

HI AquaticJ

Sorry, no I haven't tested strips.

 

A video would definitely help. As for a reliable K test, I doubt any exist out there that are accurate and affordable. Even the tests for nitrates are highly inaccurate. Can’t imagine it’d be any better for K

HI Bbunkie01,

Could you please supply some pictures? Tank overall, and close up pictures of new leaves and older leaves of the species being effected.

Is your CO2 on a solenoid & timer or does it run 24/7? When do you dose your nutrients?

Hey, everyone. I managed to upload a 4 minute video on Youtube at the following URL:

I've never uploaded a video before, so hopefully it looks fine and I don't sound too scattered. Thanks again for the help!

 

Excess surface movement is not desirable for high tech CO2 injected environment. A very slight and light ripple, if even that is desirable. Only for Lowtech tanks should the surface be agitated to encourage gas exchange. You want to minimize gas exchange as much as possible to prevent the CO2 from gassing off.

I would be inclined to disagree, Bbunkie01 more gaseous exchange is ideal in a CO2 injected tank. If there is little surface agitation, CO2 levels may shoot up to dangerous levels quite fast because there is nowhere for it to go. In order to maintain a constant CO2 level, you actually need some to be escaping.
This is an extremely informative video on the topic:

 

I would be inclined to disagree, Bbunkie01 more gaseous exchange is ideal in a CO2 injected tank. If there is little surface agitation, CO2 levels may shoot up to dangerous levels quite fast because there is nowhere for it to go. In order to maintain a constant CO2 level, you actually need some to be escaping.
This is an extremely informative video on the topic:

Dennis Wong’s videos have been my number one educator on a planted tank. This exact video was why I previously prioritized surface agitation.

By chance, did you watch my video two posts above? Pretty short. I show my surface agitation and circulation setup, along with the visible algae and plant deficiencies.

Check it out if you have the chance. As previously stated, I am well and truly lost at this point. Plants dying, lots of algae, and yet all my readings indicate a healthy environment.

 

I would be inclined to disagree, Bbunkie01 more gaseous exchange is ideal in a CO2 injected tank. If there is little surface agitation, CO2 levels may shoot up to dangerous levels quite fast because there is nowhere for it to go. In order to maintain a constant CO2 level, you actually need some to be escaping.
This is an extremely informative video on the topic:

Wait what? The CO2 will gas off with excess surface movement although OP only has a small ripple on the surface which is fine. The agitation is not as intense as I previously thought it was for OPs tank.

If you’re injecting CO2, you want to preserve as much as possible. It wouldn’t make sense to encourage extreme surface movement when you’re injecting CO2. If anything, less surface movement will allow you to be more efficient with the CO2 because you’ll be Able to use less. There needs to be good tank circulation, but this circulation should not make the surface very agitated. A light ripple is good, but anymore than that is not very desireable.

EDIT: Just watched his video. I found it quite interesting, and I agree with most of it, but I do not necessarily agree that the water becomes saturated with the optimal level of CO2 and then the excess is gassed off through excess surface agitation. I think the gassing off would happen far earlier than the water becoming saturated, leading to sub optimal CO2 levels. If you have a high injection rate and a low gaseous exchange, the plants will have more CO2 to utilize AND the equilibrium will be achieved by the plants constantly using the CO2 throughout the photoperiod. In this way, the plants remove the CO2 from the water at such a rate that prevents the CO2 from becoming lethal.

 

Wait what? The CO2 will gas off with excess surface movement although OP only has a small ripple on the surface which is fine. The agitation is not as intense as I previously thought it was for OPs tank.

If you’re injecting CO2, you want to preserve as much as possible. It wouldn’t make sense to encourage extreme surface movement when you’re injecting CO2. If anything, less surface movement will allow you to be more efficient with the CO2 because you’ll be Able to use less. There needs to be good tank circulation, but this circulation should not make the surface very agitated. A light ripple is good, but anymore than that is not very desireable.

According to Dennis Wong, the thought basically boils down to this:

High, less efficient rate of injection paired with high surface agitation is superior to low, more efficient rate of injection paired with little surface agitation.

Wong is of the opinion that gassing off is ultimately inconsequential (within reason). Moreover, he claims strong O2 saturation in the water column, as well as water exchange between top and bottom layers of water, promotes a healthier environment for both flora and fauna. The higher your O2 levels, the more CO2 you can inject without harming your fish.

So it’s a trade off. Strong surface agitation ultimately means higher rate of injection and therefore less efficient use of CO2. But it also means strong O2 saturation and tank circulation.

Not saying that’s the gospel truth, but Wong is certainly an accomplished aquarist worth listening to, IMO.

Any other thoughts on my video? I know you mentioned the surface agitation seemed appropriate. What about the footage of the plant deficiency and overall circulation? Still leaning toward an overall CO2 deficiency as the main culprit?

Thank you again for your time.

 

Any other thoughts on my video? I know you mentioned the surface agitation seemed appropriate. What about the footage of the plant deficiency and overall circulation? Still leaning toward an overall CO2 deficiency as the main culprit?

Thank you again for your time.

I just made an edit to my old comment. Dennis is definitely a great source and very knowledgeable, and there are so many ways to create a successful planted tank. My way is definitely not the end all be all.

Your tank actually looks very nice. I noticed a few things though.

1) Your tank is quite deep. I'm almost inclined to say that the older growth is looking like that due to a lack of light. It was only the real old growth that was near the bottom that had few holes. Plant leaves get weaker in lower light and are more prone to holes. Another lowlight indicator for me was the color of the ludwigias and appearance of the lower leaves. In my lowtech tanks, the ludwigias look the exact same color and the lower leaves literally look identical. In extremely highlight tanks, you'll notice that the older growth looks just as lush as the new growth and is super bright and colorful. Also, your nutrient dosing seems to fine, if not ideal.

2) You mentioned your hygrophila had white undersides. This isn't a deficiency. This is simply the growth habit of hygrophila. Especially in hightech conditions, the lighter underside of the wisteria is more pronounced (my experience with growing wisteria with and without Co2.) Your water wisteria is in perfect condition. The compacta might be developing a few holes, but I'm almost sure that it is because of the light. I know that one hygrophila leaf at the top looked a bit out of place but I've noticed one thing about hygrophilas. If they get a chance to attempt to grow emersed or actually do grow emersed, then the new leaf at the top will tend to get burnt or melt a bit as the plant transitions from submersed to emersed. This happened all the time with my wisteria. It would race to the top, then the new growth would temporarily become burnt/melted, and then it would start to grow emersed.

3) I noticed the slight amount of BBA on the staurogyne repens. BBA is usually a CO2 issue. I think you're almost there in terms of Co2 balance and that CO2 mist looks really great in your tank. I would recommend the method I mentioned earlier about really pushing the bounds of your CO2 injection. Really push that as far as you can without stressing your livestock. If successful, the BBA will turn red and disappear on its own within hours/days of dialing in the CO2.

Props to you on all the research that you've done. You've clearly studied the planted tank setup before diving in, which is a lot more than most people including myself can say when getting into planted tanks originally.

 

Wait what? The CO2 will gas off with excess surface movement although OP only has a small ripple on the surface which is fine. The agitation is not as intense as I previously thought it was for OPs tank.

If you’re injecting CO2, you want to preserve as much as possible. It wouldn’t make sense to encourage extreme surface movement when you’re injecting CO2. If anything, less surface movement will allow you to be more efficient with the CO2 because you’ll be Able to use less. There needs to be good tank circulation, but this circulation should not make the surface very agitated. A light ripple is good, but anymore than that is not very desireable.

EDIT: Just watched his video. I found it quite interesting, and I agree with most of it, but I do not necessarily agree that the water becomes saturated with the optimal level of CO2 and then the excess is gassed off through excess surface agitation. I think the gassing off would happen far earlier than the water becoming saturated, leading to sub optimal CO2 levels. If you have a high injection rate and a low gaseous exchange, the plants will have more CO2 to utilize AND the equilibrium will be achieved by the plants constantly using the CO2 throughout the photoperiod. In this way, the plants remove the CO2 from the water at such a rate that prevents the CO2 from becoming lethal.

Keeping co2 levels stable is more important then preserving co2, Good water circulation is also more important then co2 preservation. Losing co2 because because of surface aggitation doesn't matter.

I run my co2 24/7 keep the drop checker almost yellow and don't have any worries about gassing my fish.

 

HI Bbunkie01,

Getting back to your original question, based upon what I was able to see in the video it appears that more magnesium, calcium, and possibly more potassium is needed. Although some of the "hole damage" in the Hygrophila appears to be more physical than nutrient related (is there a pleco in the tank?)

Here is what I suggest:
1) Continue doing everything as you have been; dosing, water changes, photoperiod
2) Pick up a bottle of Seachem Equilibrium
3) Do an initial dose of 1 teaspoon per 10 gallons; this should increase the hardness in your tank by about 2.0 dGH and add needed magnesium, calcium and potassium.
4) Thereafter; when you do weekly water changes add sufficient Equilibrium to return the hardness back to 2.0 dGH higher than your tap water.

Now wait..............for two weeks. Watch the new leaves as they emerge, do not watch any existing leaves they will not improve and may continue to decline. Do the new leaves look greener, straighter, healthier, possibly a little larger? You may also see an increase in the growth rate of some species. As these new leaves mature if the holes are nutrient related they should not re-appear. Also, the new 'melting' leaf issue with the Hygrophila should diminish and may go away completely.

If you have questions, just ask! Keep us posted as things progress! -Roy

 

I just made an edit to my old comment. Dennis is definitely a great source and very knowledgeable, and there are so many ways to create a successful planted tank. My way is definitely not the end all be all.

Your tank actually looks very nice. I noticed a few things though.

1) Your tank is quite deep. I'm almost inclined to say that the older growth is looking like that due to a lack of light. It was only the real old growth that was near the bottom that had few holes. Plant leaves get weaker in lower light and are more prone to holes. Another lowlight indicator for me was the color of the ludwigias and appearance of the lower leaves. In my lowtech tanks, the ludwigias look the exact same color and the lower leaves literally look identical. In extremely highlight tanks, you'll notice that the older growth looks just as lush as the new growth and is super bright and colorful. Also, your nutrient dosing seems to fine, if not ideal.

2) You mentioned your hygrophila had white undersides. This isn't a deficiency. This is simply the growth habit of hygrophila. Especially in hightech conditions, the lighter underside of the wisteria is more pronounced (my experience with growing wisteria with and without Co2.) Your water wisteria is in perfect condition. The compacta might be developing a few holes, but I'm almost sure that it is because of the light. I know that one hygrophila leaf at the top looked a bit out of place but I've noticed one thing about hygrophilas. If they get a chance to attempt to grow emersed or actually do grow emersed, then the new leaf at the top will tend to get burnt or melt a bit as the plant transitions from submersed to emersed. This happened all the time with my wisteria. It would race to the top, then the new growth would temporarily become burnt/melted, and then it would start to grow emersed.

3) I noticed the slight amount of BBA on the staurogyne repens. BBA is usually a CO2 issue. I think you're almost there in terms of Co2 balance and that CO2 mist looks really great in your tank. I would recommend the method I mentioned earlier about really pushing the bounds of your CO2 injection. Really push that as far as you can without stressing your livestock. If successful, the BBA will turn red and disappear on its own within hours/days of dialing in the CO2.

Props to you on all the research that you've done. You've clearly studied the planted tank setup before diving in, which is a lot more than most people including myself can say when getting into planted tanks originally.

Thank you very much for your encouraging words. This is my first hi-tech tank, and I’ve tried to consume as much information as possible to make it a success. I’ve definitely stumbled along the way (including a minor flood when I didn’t put a check valve on an airstone line; lesson learned for eternity).

Re: light. As stated in my original post, I have two Finnex 24/7 currently set to max intensity for a 7 hour photo period. According to my research, these LEDs produce approximately 45 PAR at substrate at my depth.

Now, these lights were only recently moved back to max intensity. In the early life cycle of this tank, green dust algae was a major, major problem. I walked both lights down to 70% intensity, where they stayed for a little over a month. The GDA disappeared.

During that month, I dialed in CO2 (or so I thought) via measuring pH drops. With no sign of GDA, I started walking back up the light 10% intensity at a time every two weeks. I, too, suspected a lack of light around this point of the tank.

So that could definitely be an issue that will correct itself with the lights back at max intensity. The LEDs have only been on max intensity again for one week. I’d prefer to dip my toes into T5 territory eventually, but that’s down along the road.

Re: h. compacta and wisteria. I had no idea h. compacta tended toward natural white undersides. Very interesting. Thank you. Also good to hear about the wisteria looking healthy. That plant started off as a single 8 inch stalk in the back left corner of the tank, and it is slowly taking over that entire vicinity now.

Thank you again for your kind words. Very relieved to hear that nothing looks too wrong. I have some time this weekend to closely monitor some further increases in CO2. Wish me luck.

 

HI Bbunkie01,

Getting back to your original question, based upon what I was able to see in the video it appears that more magnesium, calcium, and possibly more potassium is needed. Although some of the "hole damage" in the Hygrophila appears to be more physical than nutrient related (is there a pleco in the tank?)

Here is what I suggest:
1) Continue doing everything as you have been; dosing, water changes, photoperiod
2) Pick up a bottle of Seachem Equilibrium
3) Do an initial dose of 1 teaspoon per 10 gallons; this should increase the hardness in your tank by about 2.0 dGH and add needed magnesium, calcium and potassium.
4) Thereafter; when you do weekly water changes add sufficient Equilibrium to return the hardness back to 2.0 dGH higher than your tap water.

Now wait..............for two weeks. Watch the new leaves as they emerge, do not watch any existing leaves they will not improve and may continue to decline. Do the new leaves look greener, straighter, healthier, possibly a little larger? You may also see an increase in the growth rate of some species. As these new leaves mature if the holes are nutrient related they should not re-appear. Also, the new 'melting' leaf issue with the Hygrophila should diminish and may go away completely.

If you have questions, just ask! Keep us posted as things progress! -Roy

Thank you so much for your reply.

I do have a single bristlenose pleco in the tank, as well as many snails. I’ve never seen him munch on the h. compacta, but he very well could be.

Right now, I am using remineralized RODI water, not tap. So obviously, my KH and GH starts off at 0. I remineralize in a Brute bin usually 48 hours before water change day.

I use Nilocg’s GH Booster for remineralization. I believe this is extremely close if not identical to Seachem’s Equilibrium: magnesium sulphate, calcium sulphate, and potassium sulphate (1tsp will raise 10 gallons by 2 GH).

I make approximately 30-35 gallons of RODI water every week for one 50% water change. I add 8tsp of the GH Booster, and 2.5tsp of food grade potassium bicarbonate. This leaves the remineralized water at 3-4KH and 6-7GH. Would you suggest I use even more GH Booster?

I stopped using my tap water because it is extraordinarily hard and not good quality. KH 8, GH 18. TDS 500+. Very high in phosphate and silica, too.

Thank you again for your reply. I’m open to trying Equilibrium as a GH remineralizer if you think that’s the way to go.

 

I’m almost sure that once the light is back on at 100%, your plants will grow beautifully. Also your pleco damage makes sense since the Lower leaves are weakened from lack of light.

Your tank will look pro within a few more months! Please keep us updated.

 

I’m almost sure that once the light is back on at 100%, your plants will grow beautifully. Also your pleco damage makes sense since the Lower leaves are weakened from lack of light.

Your tank will look pro within a few more months! Please keep us updated.

Again, so reassuring to hear. Thanks again. Will absolutely update this thread in a couple months or so.

 

I do have a single bristlenose pleco in the tank, as well as many snails. I’ve never seen him munch on the h. compacta, but he very well could be.

I use Nilocg’s GH Booster for remineralization. I believe this is extremely close if not identical to Seachem’s Equilibrium: magnesium sulphate, calcium sulphate, and potassium sulphate (1tsp will raise 10 gallons by 2 GH).

I make approximately 30-35 gallons of RODI water every week for one 50% water change. I add 8tsp of the GH Booster, and 2.5tsp of food grade potassium bicarbonate. This leaves the remineralized water at 3-4KH and 6-7GH. Would you suggest I use even more GH Booster?

Thank you again for your reply. I’m open to trying Equilibrium as a GH remineralizer if you think that’s the way to go.

HI Bbunkie01

Thank you for the video and the explanation regarding RO and re-mineralization.

First of all like most catfish Plecostomus are most active from dusk to dawn so the physical damage to the Hygrophila may not happen when you are around. I was going to recommend increasing your GH Booster dosing (the Nilocg's GH Booster is similar to Equilibrium) but before we do that let's try something else.

Plants need all the basic macro-nutrient (N, P, K), secondary nutrients (S, Ca, Mg), and micro-nutrients (Fe, B, Zn, Mn, etc) and they should be dosed at levels that provide the necessary level of nutrients without causing a deficiency. Plants have evolved of millenniums to deal with these nutrients within certain ranges on concentration (ppm levels). If we overdose some nutrients it can effect the uptake of other nutrients. For example excessive calcium (Ca) can effect the uptake of magnesium (Mg). That is why we try to provide nutrients to achieve certain nutrient levels in our tanks. For example 20 ppm - 30 ppm of nitrates (NO3) is considered a good range for most species of plants.

When you mix up your re-mineralization solution with the formula you provided it results in a solution containing:

27.7 ppm of calcium (Ca)
5.6 ppm of magnesium (Mg)
101.3 ppm of potassiuI'm (K)

Seachem Equilibrium as well as the other GH Boosters on the market tend to overdose potassium to begin with. With the potassium bicarbonate and the K2SO4 you are dosing it appears that you are dosing over 110 ppm of K. That is a massive overdose of potassium. Here is what I suggest. First do 50% water changes back-to-back. One one day and one the next day. This should help you get the potassium level down to a more reasonable level.

Here is what I suggest:
1) When you re-mineralize use baking soda (bicarbonate of soda / NaHCO3 - NOT Baking Powder) to increase your dKH.
2) stop dosing the K2SO4 as part of your EI dosing, between the K in the Equilibrium and the K in the KNO3 and the K in the KH2PO4 that should be more than enough potassium.
3) Dose your other nutrients as you have been.

Let us know how things are going over the next two weeks! -Roy

 

HI Bbunkie01

Thank you for the video and the explanation regarding RO and re-mineralization.

First of all like most catfish Plecostomus are most active from dusk to dawn so the physical damage to the Hygrophila may not happen when you are around. I was going to recommend increasing your GH Booster dosing (the Nilocg's GH Booster is similar to Equilibrium) but before we do that let's try something else.

Plants need all the basic macro-nutrient (N, P, K), secondary nutrients (S, Ca, Mg), and micro-nutrients (Fe, B, Zn, Mn, etc) and they should be dosed at levels that provide the necessary level of nutrients without causing a deficiency. Plants have evolved of millenniums to deal with these nutrients within certain ranges on concentration (ppm levels). If we overdose some nutrients it can effect the uptake of other nutrients. For example excessive calcium (Ca) can effect the uptake of magnesium (Mg). That is why we try to provide nutrients to achieve certain nutrient levels in our tanks. For example 20 ppm - 30 ppm of nitrates (NO3) is considered a good range for most species of plants.

When you mix up your re-mineralization solution with the formula you provided it results in a solution containing:

27.7 ppm of calcium (Ca)
5.6 ppm of magnesium (Mg)
101.3 ppm of potassiuI'm (K)

Seachem Equilibrium as well as the other GH Boosters on the market tend to overdose potassium to begin with. With the potassium bicarbonate and the K2SO4 you are dosing it appears that you are dosing over 110 ppm of K. That is a massive overdose of potassium. Here is what I suggest. First do 50% water changes back-to-back. One one day and one the next day. This should help you get the potassium level down to a more reasonable level.

Here is what I suggest:
1) When you re-mineralize use baking soda (bicarbonate of soda / NaHCO3 - NOT Baking Powder) to increase your dKH.
2) stop dosing the K2SO4 as part of your EI dosing, between the K in the Equilibrium and the K in the KNO3 and the K in the KH2PO4 that should be more than enough potassium.
3) Dose your other nutrients as you have been.

Let us know how things are going over the next two weeks! -Roy

Sound advice. Thank you.

I figured I was on the high end of potassium concentration. I didn’t know how much that could/would affect other nutrient uptake, but I figured I was fine (if not low), when plants were still showing pinholes. Though now I see just how much was being overdosed.

I’ve read mixed things about sodium bicarbonate in a freshwater planted tank. Some say even a little Na will damage your plants, and ultimately that Na will accumulate over time to the point of toxicity since nothing can actually use it. But then others say it’s not a big deal at all. Low levels of salt are found in most natural freshwater systems, and plants are adapted to tolerate it in low concentrations.

What is your experience using sodium bicarbonate for KH in a freshwater planted tank?

 

HI Bbunkie01

Seachem Equilibrium as well as the other GH Boosters on the market tend to overdose potassium to begin with. With the potassium bicarbonate and the K2SO4 you are dosing it appears that you are dosing over 110 ppm of K. That is a massive overdose of potassium.

Completely agree with this. When OP first posted the stats, I thought there was possibly too much potash in the water, although many other factors can come into play. Definitely agree to stop the K2SO4 dosing.

 

Completely agree with this. When OP first posted the stats, I thought there was possibly too much potash in the water, although many other factors can come into play. Definitely agree to stop the K2SO4 dosing.

SeattleRoy suggests sodium bicarbonate over potassium bicarbonate for KH. What are your thoughts on this?

On the K overdose in general, since my nitrate and phosphate levels are both reading high as is (40 and 5ppm respectively), what about cutting down on both KNO3 and KH2PO4 in addition to eliminating K2SO4 altogether?

Edit: I wish there were more options for KH buffering RODI water than just sodium and potassium bicarbonate. I know some have used calcium carbonate, but reports suggest it takes a very long time to fully dissolve.

 

Is there an issue with your tap water? If you have okay tap water, then I’d simply use that and then dose your normal amounts of KNO3 and KH2PO4 without the K2SO4. You can try my dosage that I personally use for my own tanks which is:

20ppm NO3
4ppm PO4

KNO3 provides enough K. KH2PO4 provides barely any K. I wouldn’t cut down on the PO4. It’s a very important element for plant growth. If you used regular tap water, you wouldn’t have to bother remineralizing it. Roy is right in that GH boosters tend to be very potash heavy. I’m not sure that I can safely recommend sodium bicarbonate. A lot of plants do not react well with sodium.

 

Is there an issue with your tap water? If you have okay tap water, then I’d simply use that and then dose your normal amounts of KNO3 and KH2PO4 without the K2SO4. You can try my dosage that I personally use for my own tanks which is:

20ppm NO3
4ppm PO4

KNO3 provides enough K. KH2PO4 provides barely any K. I wouldn’t cut down on the PO4. It’s a very important element for plant growth. If you used regular tap water, you wouldn’t have to bother remineralizing it. Roy is right in that GH boosters tend to be very potash heavy. I’m not sure that I can safely recommend sodium bicarbonate. A lot of plants do not react well with sodium.

I was having much greater difficulties with both algae and plant growth using tap water.

I live in the American Southwest, and my tap water is extraordinarily hard and polluted. Trace amounts of lead and uranium. KH 8. GH 18. Lots of phosphate and silica. TDS 500+. My city regularly tops “worst tap water in America” lists. A lot of people here refuse to even drink it.

I don’t deny I could maybe make it work, but I made the transition to RODI water a while back for all of my freshwater tanks for peace of mind. I also have plans for a reef tank way down along the road.

Plus, to be honest, I really enjoy my RODI system. I enjoy making 0 TDS water. It added another layer to the hobby. I enjoy maintenance on the system itself, as well as all the bells and whistles one can add to it.

Edit: I have about 30lbs of seiryu stone in the tank, which is supposed to serve as a natural KH buffer. I could lower the amount of potassium bicarbonate I’m using for remineralization?

 

Sound advice. Thank you.

I figured I was on the high end of potassium concentration. I didn’t know how much that could/would affect other nutrient uptake, but I figured I was fine (if not low), when plants were still showing pinholes. Though now I see just how much was being overdosed.

I’ve read mixed things about sodium bicarbonate in a freshwater planted tank. Some say even a little Na will damage your plants, and ultimately that Na will accumulate over time to the point of toxicity since nothing can actually use it. But then others say it’s not a big deal at all. Low levels of salt are found in most natural freshwater systems, and plants are adapted to tolerate it in low concentrations.

What is your experience using sodium bicarbonate for KH in a freshwater planted tank?

HI Bbunkie01

I have used Sodium Bicarbonate for 11 years to increase my dKH. My water is extremely soft here in Seattle, 2.0 dKH and 2.0 dGH out of the tap. I found that approximately 1/16 teaspoon of Baking Soda (NaHCO3) added to 3 gallons of water increases my carbonate hardness by about 1.0 dKH. It add about 7 ppm of sodium (Na) and a little over 18 ppm of carbonates (HCO3). I tried calcium carbonate but it did not dissolve well, even in acidic conditions and it increased by dGH along with the dKH.

I used to put aquariums salt in my tanks, that added 70 ppm of Na to the tank and I never had an issue growing plants. Based upon what I have learned sodium and chloride (both of which are utilized at low levels) are not a problem in planted tanks unless excessive.

 

HI Bbunkie01

I have used Sodium Bicarbonate for 11 years to increase my dKH. My water is extremely soft here in Seattle, 2.0 dKH and 2.0 dGH out of the tap. I found that approximately 1/16 teaspoon of Baking Soda (NaHCO3) added to 3 gallons of water increases my carbonate hardness by about 1.0 dKH. It add about 7 ppm of sodium (Na) and a little over 18 ppm of carbonates (HCO3). I tried calcium carbonate but it did not dissolve well, even in acidic conditions and it increased by dGH along with the dKH.

I used to put aquariums salt in my tanks, that added 70 ppm of Na to the tank and I never had an issue growing plants. Based upon what I have learned sodium and chloride (both of which are utilized at low levels) are not a problem in planted tanks unless excessive.

Good to know. Hard to argue with 11 years of experience.

I would imagine no more than 1.5-2tsp of sodium bicarbonate will be sufficient for 30-35 gallons of RODI water, yes? Should raise the KH from 0 to approximately 3.

Edit: As an aside, will approximately 7ppm of Na fight common parasite infestations like ich? I’ve heard some parasites can’t stand even minute amounts of Na, but 7ish ppm may be too small. Just curious.

 

HI Bbunkie01

3/16 teaspoons should increase 10 gallon by approximately 1.0 dKH. 9/16th teaspoons should increase 30 gallons by 1.0 dKH. 27/16 (1-11/16) teaspoons should increase 30 gallons by 3.0 dKH. So, ballpark 1 3/4 teaspoons for 30 gallons.

Nope, dosing these levels are not even close to the amount needed to effect ich.

 

HI Bbunkie01

3/16 teaspoons should increase 10 gallon by approximately 1.0 dKH. 9/16th teaspoons should increase 30 gallons by 1.0 dKH. 27/16 (1-11/16) teaspoons should increase 30 gallons by 3.0 dKH. So, ballpark 1 3/4 teaspoons for 30 gallons.

Nope, dosing these levels are not even close to the amount needed to effect ich.

Figured as much. Just curious if utilizing sodium bicarbonate for KH would be “killing too birds with one stone,” so to speak, in combating sodium adverse protozoa.

Trusting your experience, I’m going to try sodium bicarbonate for KH remineralization. Wish me luck!

 

Darn, I didn’t realize the tap water was so bad. It definitely makes sense to use the RODI water then.

As for the sodium bicarbonate, I think Roy’s 11 year experience is unbeatable. I’ve had a bit of experience with Na in a planted tank and I didn’t have the hottest results. The tank was full of Val’s which are known for being salt sensitive and they melted a bit after. Honestly, I think you should be fine though. It’s worth a shot.

 

HI Bbunkie01

3/16 teaspoons should increase 10 gallon by approximately 1.0 dKH. 9/16th teaspoons should increase 30 gallons by 1.0 dKH. 27/16 (1-11/16) teaspoons should increase 30 gallons by 3.0 dKH. So, ballpark 1 3/4 teaspoons for 30 gallons.

Nope, dosing these levels are not even close to the amount needed to effect ich.

Figured as much. Just curious if utilizing sodium bicarbonate for KH would be “killing too birds with one stone,” so to speak, in combating sodium adverse protozoa.

Darn, I didn’t realize the tap water was so bad. It definitely makes sense to use the RODI water then.

As for the sodium bicarbonate, I think Roy’s 11 year experience is unbeatable. I’ve had a bit of experience with Na in a planted tank and I didn’t have the hottest results. The tank was full of Val’s which are known for being salt sensitive and they melted a bit after. Honestly, I think you should be fine though. It’s worth a shot.

I’ve never had luck with Val’s no matter what water I put them in. I know they’re supposed to be pretty easy low tech plants, but I’ve never had much luck with them.

Going to try sodium bicarbonate and removing K2SO4. I was able to tweak my CO2 even higher today without any losses. Some of the lower wisteria was pearling for the first time. I believe I’m headed in the right direction here.

Thanks so much for the conversation and help. This is a great hobby and community.

 

HI Bbunkie01

My experience has been that Vallisneria species like water that is on the harder side with plenty of carbonates.