[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[APD] Re: Name that deficiency
>Oops. Sorry. I have made some changes to my Blog.
>The new link is:
I do not think it's Ca, although having 50ppm or higher is not bad either.
CO2, NO3 is my bet. I've had this plant in similar conditions and at low NO3 it has __perhaps__ expressed this growth.
Traces, PO4, K+, GH, KH were all pretty high and non limiting. That much I do know.
Folks that run their NO3 low under high light are asking for trouble IME. I think better color is achieved at less light, it's easier to slow the NO3 uptake and prevent NO3 from bottoming out at lower light levels. NO3 crash are common since many folks now add PO4 which also drives much faster NO3 uptake rates.
NO3 test are not the best either so many assume they have lots of NO3 when I think they might not.
Jeff and I have had an interesting discussion about this at APC forums.
At slower assimilations rates, the plant has more time to assimilate the nutrients and put them where they are needed. A purist will grow a non CO2 tank since that would slow the rates down even further. I had very good reds with my non CO2 tank with no dosing of iron etc and low Ca, B levels.
Most aquatic plants are low light plants, something to consider.
But to solve the problem, I'd try adding more CO2, certainly more KNO3(try 2x as much as normal), maybe more Ca and Mg, traces and PO4 seem covered. So there's only a few things it can be and it might be a couple, not just one. This plant also does best with not crowded for light, I pulled up some from a river near here, big woody emergent plants.
Alternatively, trying less light intensity may also balance the tank better to your liking.
Aquatic-Plants mailing list
Aquatic-Plants at actwin_com