[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [APD] root tab

> From: "S. Hieber" <shieber at yahoo_com>
> Subject: Re: [APD] Don't missunderstand me too quickly
> To: aquatic plants digest <aquatic-plants at actwin_com>
> someone said:
>  "Rather than suggesting that the water column is the only way
> . . .something I do not espouse, a mix of both will give you
> the most
> flexibility and the best results."
> I think that's sort of right. 

In terms of plant growth rates it's correct, not sort of

A faster rate of growth implies implictly that the plant can
grow faster, thus the plant "prefers" that over another location
for nutrients.

Yes, thre's no better method in
> terms of plant growth, but that doesn't mean all other methods
> are worse.

In terms of plant growth they are.
The focus is plant growth.
By knowing what each does individually and in combination, you
can tailor whatever your goals might be.

 You get generaly the same results as just dosing
> the water column. And adding ferts to the water column has
> certain advantages over tabs -- cheaper and easier being among
> them.

Well, try this, add plain sand and jobes sticks only, add all
you want for that matter.

Next try ADA As and EI.

You tell me and make some predictions what will happen over
time. What will occur when you uproot and prune.

> And for Pete's sake I hope no one thinks I said, ever, that
> there is only one way to grow plants. That would be leaping
> from a horse to hippo -- What I have said is that using
> substrate fertilizer tabs generally is unnecessary compared to
> adding ferts to the water column. Tabs do not make plants grow
> any better than just putting ferts in the water column. 

Some seem to disagree, but I have research to the contrary as
well as observations. I would argue in favor of this, not
against the water column.

I also
> noted that there are special cases where there could be some
> advantagein using substrate fertilizers -- those cases would
> be for special needs *and* where the kind of tabs or fert
> balls you use would not let the ferts soon into the water
> column. However, you will be hard pressed to find any root tab
> maker that makes any claims about how much or how quickly the
> ferts do or don't get into the water column.

Basically that number is zero and for good reasons.

> I also said that I think the reason that many if not most
> folks that use tabs do so for reasons not really relevant, for
> the mistaken belief that ferts have to come in through the
> roots or that ferts in the water column are bad, or both.

I'd say most folks have this belief.
Toss a jobes stick into the water column vs deep into the
substrate to see why.

I was clearly able to show why this caused algae, what specific
part in the jobes stick was causing the issues and that the
other ferts we add do not cause algae issues.

We/I did not/would not have learned that if I held such beliefs
and did such methods solely.

> There are lots of ways to grow plants. 

No, not really. They need ferts, we add them to the water column
or the sediment or both.

There are no Star trek transport systems or magic involved here.

At least seven more or
> less distinct techniques (if you include kitty litter but
> don't count layer cakes), with lots of variations and overlap.
> One of the variations involves cow manure. That method works,
> but I would not recommend it; I just note it in passing.

Why not?
> Folks want to use root tabs, fine with me, but I don't want
> some poor unsuspecting newbie to think that they should run
> out and buy them because there is generally some special
> benefit or advantage to using them.

Ease of use perhaps is the best argument and something is better
than nothing.........

> sh

Tom Barr


Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
Aquatic-Plants mailing list
Aquatic-Plants at actwin_com