A NEW??? & Significant?? Fertilization Question?

Dopey

AC Members
Dec 5, 2002
92
0
6
Scranton, PA
Visit site
So, here's the "question." Does one need to add fertilizer to the water column if the plants one keeps are root feeders (swords and crypts.)


At Least I think it's new and significant... can't say I've heard it discussed before.

Here's the thing. I don't like most plants that are heavy water column feeders. They tend to grow like weeds, and so are labor intensive.

I do like H. difformis, and also keep a few snips of anacrhis to help w/nutrient control. But I don't care if the anachris languishes, and the h.difformis does great as a root feeder. So, am I just asking for algae problems if I supplement the water column in a plant like this.

I imagine I'll need to add a little bit of trace and Fe now and then, but I'm thinking my algae problems might go away with a cleaner water column.

Thoughts?
 
IME, Crypts. and Swords will do fine without in-substrate(plant tabs) fertilization. Especially if you are using one of the clay type, Fe rich substrates.
I've grown both of the above fine without ever using anything but 'water table' fertilization.
What you need to add depends mainly on your lighting and fish load. Many swords will grow, literally out of many tanks, with no plant tabs added.

Len
 
Agree w/Len - I have historically been a "rich substrate, poor water column" grower, but have lately tried "water-column only" feeding. Frankly, I do not see any differences - and I do grow rooted rosette plants mostly, swords, crypts, vals, etc. I just had a bit of a learning curve in dosing for water column only.
 
I agree with both of you. But the crux of my question is this...

If I keep a pristine water column, can I not more efficiently fight algae on my plants than by walking the tightrope of fertilization. If I can keep the water column at basically 0-0-0, and fertilize only the substrate, is this not a better option?

I ask this because I have been unable, by any means, to achieve the "crisp, clean" plant growth I see in photos. While my plants flourish, I always have an ongoing battle with algae on my plants.

I have a 2x90w AH BrightKit, I fertilize these days w/individual nutrients (stump remover, fleet enema, epsom salts, NuSalt, Flourish Trace and Flourish Iron). I have a CO2 injection system.

While I admit to being fuzzy on the "correct" levels (this seems a subject of much debate) I have tried all sorts of combination with similar results.... great plant growth, but not "clean."

So this leads to my pondering about starving out the algae by keeping the water column at 0-0-0, but feeding the plants via roots.

Please, feel free to comment on anything you might feel I'm doing incorrectly... it must be something! Robert, I especially value your experience, so if you can lead me in the correct direction regarding dosing, that would be much appreciated.
 
Because the macros are only part of the solution, all the micros are required as well, along with the light, and the CO2, and they all absolutely, irrevocably must match/balance. Which is why that every time I go up to over ~2.5 W/gal, I burn out and drop back to lower light and slow growth. I will not devote the time and care/pruning/feeding needed to balance plant mass, light, and CO2 against fert supplements. I run slow, but algae limited. My plants are not show or competition, but I am not doing AGA tanks - I am not a plant collector ("How many species can you have in a 20 or 55?"), or a photo-ready aquascaper. A tank with 2-3 species or types of plants is my ideal, 4-5 my max, at six I start seeing the tank as too busy to be a background for fish - forgive me, but to me too un-natural. I grow fish tanks with plants, or planted fish tanks, not plant tanks. My tanks are for the fish, first, last, and always. And I have 2 dozen of the things - If I have a tank that require several hours per week of attention, I am not caring properly for other fish, so I do not go there often or for long. So I supplement only when I must (K regularly, N not infrequently, C pretty regularly, traces sporadically) and when I prune (not often enough) I overdo it and invariably have a period of detectable hair algae for several weeks (I do not learn certain lessons easily). Then things settle down again for several months and we repeat the process. But I do know the plants that I grow, and what they will do in my hands and with my erratic care - so I can deal with them. But details of my care are not going to generalize well to others. I do know my water in fine detail, but do not monitor nutrients closely - If I get off, the plants will tell me. If I over-feed or over-light (I always under-carbon supplement), the algae tells me. And I compensate from there, or ride it out when I know the cause as I usually do.

My tanks are all gravel-laterite or Flourite or Flourite-gravel, and I can handle those. My plants are some swords, more crypts, Anubias (mainly nana and near-nana cultivars), Val, and some Java moss, plus small numbers of Crinum and Apons. Anacharis or Val or Java Moss in the veggie filters. Most of them have been with me for years, some for decades, only a few at any time are "new" to me. I can't transfer their handling on the boards, because it is too tied to the way my tanks are run and operated.

So for general instructions on dosing, listen to Tom Barr or Len, they are much more mainstream than I am, and Tom has taught me a lot - including spurring me to try water column ferts, which took no more time to learn than the trial tanks needed to establish anyway. I just followed his suggestions. Once I had learned of course I dropped back to my erratic ways, but now I can work either way without fretting over it.

I think that not fretting is a basic requirement for me. I know that I can do high light fast grow high maintenence (read as: frequent attention and care) tanks, but I neither want or "need" to do them. My goals for my tanks tend to revolve around some sort of tests - filtration techniques, breeding, reaching or exceeding "wild" size, or how much longer a fish can and will live in captivity versus the wild. They are not short term, high upkeep, or even usually display. I only do 2-3 real displays, and those are the places I sometimes go for higher speed - but I do burn out on it as the payback to me is not enough. I want tanks I can sit in front off anytime and find somthing to watch that is diverting and relaxing, not somthing that is going to list for me the supplements it needs tomorrow and the pruning I need to do on Saturday. So my goals are not Dutch, nor even Amano (but some of his work is closer, more of his early work than the current style), and certainly not AGA. Those are fine, but not me. I am not a planted tank person; I am a fish tank person, with plants where possible.
 
One point I would like to make (that came from Tom) is that algae require far less nutrients than the plants. So in theory, you would have to have 0 across the board. Practically I don't see that as possible.
 
Not quite sure exactly what you mean by 'clean', but you don't have to eliminate nutrients from the water table to have a nearly algae free tank.
I've got a ten and a forty that sparkle and there's not a sign of algae in either except on a few old Anubia leaves in each.
Balance the tank and the plants will keep themselves and the water clean.

Robert, as you've probably figured out by now, you and I come from the same place on fish/plant keeping. My problem is that I can't resist the urge to tinker.:)

Len
 
Not quite sure exactly what you mean by 'clean',
By this I mean if I look at a leaf, all I see is the leaf... no film, fuzz, hair or other plant life besides the leaf. A "clean" leaf.

Balance the tank and the plants will keep themselves and the water clean.

There in lies my problem. This "balance" word that gets thrown around so casually is something I've been unable to figure out in > four years of tinkering. I am ALWAYS fighting an algae problem of one sort or another.

Robert, I agree with your methods. I want low maintenance, natural looking plants that enhance the habitat/appearance of my fish. Not the other way around. However, I am anal enough that algae, which in no way bothers the fish, gives me heartburn.

One comment you made and then left alone got me thinking Robert. You said
Which is why that every time I go up to over ~2.5 W/gal, I burn out and drop back to lower light and slow growth.

Are you saying that you feel my lighting is to high to give me the results I'm looking for without ultra-micro-managing nutrient levels? I'd never thought that 2x90W was too much for a 90G. (Although, given the intensity of the AH Supply bulbs and reflectors, some claim that you should double the wattage output. If that is true, this would give me a working number of ~4WPG.) I suppose I could unplug one set and try that for a few weeks to see what happens.
 
I love the AHS reflectors, and yes, wattage as delivered through use of those is greater in direct plant effect than commercial strip lights by a wide margin. I think AHS suggests 160% of light delivery in comparison to no reflector, but I cannot judge whether or not that is accurately scaled. It is definitely well less than 2x.

If there is any issue w/AHS refectors for me, it is that they are too good - lighting does not spread outward from these as much as from other reflectors I have played with, so the light is primarily directed downward immediately below the fixture - making for uneven lighting in my only moderately lighted tanks. You can work with plant placement and selection to make this work in less strongly lighted tanks, but it is another factor to play with.

If I take my tanks over anything that rounds off to two, so the >2.5 point works for me, I have to go whole hog, CO2 gas, weekly or more frequent macros, at least weekly micros, etc. and 50% partials, or I get algae issues.
 
AquariaCentral.com