Well.
What one nutrient is missing and is 40% or more of the plant's biomass, that is non limiting in terrestrial plants, but very often limiting aquatic plants?
What are those nutrient deficiencies based on? Aquatic plants or agricultural crops?
Those tables are poor IME, confusing and really hard to tell what is what for the people they are intended to help. I have plenty of experience with nutrients to draw from.
The OP has 30ppm Ca, let's suppose this is correct(it might not be), this would demand a massive amount of plant growth long before any limitation at any growth rate would cause an issue, I've ever seen any Ca++ confirm deficiencies to date, they are extremely rare(but they may occur in some rare cases, typically, not your cases).
What people see mostly is CO2 issues, they involved twist tip growth, due to lack of carbon building blocks. Ca is easy to measure and rule out, CO2 is anything but..............
Folks think they know everything about CO2, then look to blame every nutrient there is but the one that causes the most issue. This does no one any good.
My tap is now super soft sierra snow melt, KH is barely 1degree, the Gh is 1-2 degrees, I add some Gh booster, not a lot, but I do not need much either. Maybe bump it a degree of two, I never adjust KH.
No need.
Adding more GH is fine though, does not harm, can bring out some colors.
I've had GH is the 24 degree and higher ranges.
Regards,
Tom Barr
There is sufficient text there, in your post. Direct, to the point, but rather cryptic. So, let me read it, and then ...
Let me be more blunt. I, as of lately, enjoy pumping nutrients to the max., but, below toxic levels, hopefully, enough below those levels as to where they do no harm to 'true' occupants of that tank, in fact, I enjoy seeing these occupants excel, not only in growth, but in vigor--or, in other words, the fish, invertebrates, etc., anything not a plant, but, in fact, I love the plants also. Now, terrestrial plants as opposed to aquatic plants, you state an obvious difference, and, you make a good point, there is a difference.
Impressive, high sierra snow melt. Perhaps it falls from the realms of the gods?
Anyway, CO2 is simply carbon dioxide. I could expel my breath, through a hose, into the tank, and supply an over-abundance in my tank to satisfy the most demanding plants. I could add any of many types of sugars, into the tank, those sugars then broken down by micro-organisms, and carbon dioxide released, to satisfy the hunger of those plants. I could have a cylinder of CO2 feeding the water column with the gas, feeding this hunger. I could ferment yeast with sugar, and the gas released feed the need. There are chemicals I could add. I could use dry ice in an enclosed container, vented though tubing to an air stone or diffuser, to the tank. Yes, I can do all these things, and so can you.
Or, fish waste, excess food, and the air can supply it, carbon dioxide. Carbon dioxide as a miracle, as scientific, as difficult to supply? No, indeed, a neglected aquarium can, quite easily, kill the occupants with an abundance of carbon dioxide. Decaying vegetation can raise levels of CO2 to well beyond toxic.
Enough, or macros taken to just below toxic levels? A good thing. Micros taken to the same extreme? A good thing. CO2 in plentiful supply? A good thing. High calcium? A good thing? High Magnesium? Already covered, I consider it nothing more than a micro, a good thing.
High Sierra snow melt supplying anything even resembling a nutrient? I think not.
But, if it flows over granite, perhaps. Ground and powdered granite is one of the form of minerals used in agriculture to provide micro-nutrients to the crops we eat. The net will provide all you need to verify this.
Yes, there are gods. But, my aquarium is not under their control, direction, rules, or guidance. I will take care of that.
And you, you are not even a messenger of god. Thank you.
