[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[APD] Re: Aquatic-Plants Digest, Vol 16, Issue 5
Send Aquatic-Plants mailing list submissions to
aquatic-plants at actwin_com
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://www.actwin.com/mailman/listinfo/aquatic-plants
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
aquatic-plants-request at actwin_com
You can reach the person managing the list at
aquatic-plants-owner at actwin_com
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Aquatic-Plants digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: RFUG vs UG (Thomas Barr)
2. Re: Chelating Agents (Richard J. Sexton)
3. Re: Chelators (Thomas Barr)
4. RE: re: Ca gluconate (Laith Arif)
5. re: Ca gluconate (nickplummer at nc_rr.com)
6. re: chelators (nickplummer at nc_rr.com)
7. Re:DANGER- A caution for anyone answering Sarahs (Bill D)
8. Re: RUGF versus UGF (Tom Wood)
9. Re: re: chelators (Rachel Sandage)
10. RE: Chelating Agents (Chris White)
11. Re: Re:DANGER- A caution for anyone answering Sarahs (S. Hieber)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 09:12:49 -0800 (GMT-08:00)
From: Thomas Barr <tcbiii at earthlink_net>
Subject: [APD] Re: RFUG vs UG
To: aquatic-plants at actwin_com
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 08:03:55 -0600
From: "Tom Wood" <tomwood2 at flash_net>
Subject: [APD] RUGF versus UGF
T. Barr said: "I've had RFUG's for 10 years with plants."
Why a RUGF versus a UGF?
Just curious since I recently installed a version of a UGF in my
90 - Perforated PVC pipes under a sheet of plastic insect screen
under the substrate, piped back to a submersible pump that is
pulling the water down through the substrate. I could reverse
that flow to push water up through the substrate, but why?
TW
I used 1/2" CPVC, it's smaller than PVC. I made a grid, like a giant
spray bar and drilled holes in it. If I ran the water in normal UG
fashion, the sand/detritus etc will be pulled into these small holes
and also clog the avbove layers, causing pockets of high flow,
inconsistent distribution etc.
By using Reverse flow, this eliminates these issues and I can use any
size sand and have fairly consistent flow at higher flow rates, the
water is prefiltered before being moved into the grid.
Keeps the substrate fairly clean over long peroids.
No need for plastic insect screen also and allows more space for
roots(all the way to the very bottom of the gravel and around the
pipes).
Depending on the spacing, you get a pocket of high Redox and low
redox levels since some parts of the substrate are not being provided
with flow(unlike the Plate designs) much like an egg crate shape
where the outflow leaves the RFUG.
They are also the easiest UG's to make and cost about 10$ for almost
any sized tank and if you want to add heated water into the
substrate, these make more since. This is done mainly for efficient
heating of the tank, not the cable business.
Regards,
Tom Barr
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Aquatic-Plants mailing list
Aquatic-Plants at actwin_com
http://www.actwin.com/mailman/listinfo/aquatic-plants
End of Aquatic-Plants Digest, Vol 16, Issue 3
*********************************************
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 12:16:11 -0500 (EST)
From: "Richard J. Sexton" <richard at aquaria_net>
Subject: Re: [APD] Chelating Agents
To: aquatic plants digest <aquatic-plants at actwin_com>
are way too complicated to distill into some amateur theory - there is
pH, dissolved oxygen levels, substrate interaction, humic compound
interactions, and on and on, and lastly chelation. Iron is involved in
all sorts of very complex equilbria, even without a chelating agent, I
don't think this discussion is helpful or relevant.
Probably not, but it's fun. As one data point water comes out of my tap
at about .25 ml/L ferric. The plants in my tanks eat this up and the iron
goes to zero pretty quickly.
--
/"\ / http://lists.aquaria.net
\ / ASCII RIBBON CAMPAIGN / Killies, Crypts, Aponogetons
X AGAINST HTML MAIL / http://new.killi.net
/ \ AND POSTINGS / http://images.aquaria.net
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 09:27:42 -0800 (GMT-08:00)
From: Thomas Barr <tcbiii at earthlink_net>
Subject: [APD] Re: Chelators
To: aquatic-plants at actwin_com
Sounds much more like some other problem than poor iron, Mg could have
been the issue.GH could have changed in the tap etc, I've never associated
a low Trace iron level with BGA. I've had RFUG's for 10 years with plants.
Hmmm, the tank is filled with well water that has very low KH and GH, so it
is supplemented with pulverised dolomite. Annual water tests done by the
local health department show no change in GH, and neither do my more frequent,
but more crude, home tests.
Annual test? Hehe..........
Generally the home test are okay for GH though.....
I've had RFUG's for 10 years with plants.
Were you using Fe-gluconate or Fe-EDTA?
I've used both and DTPH(Tropica)
Some very subtle differences and mainly Cu I believe rather than Fe chelator.
Would Fe-gluconate be oxidized morerapidly than Fe-EDTA in the
oxygen/bacteria-rich substrate of an undergravel filter?
I would not think it would matter as far as the plants are concerned.
Well, then I'm baffled. The only change I have made was to switch the
Fluorish with Fe-EDTA (whatever brand is cheapest at the time).
Any particular species of plant that was effected and some that were not?
What type of substrate also?
I've
continued dosing with KNO3, Flourish phosphorus, and Flourish Trace.
I initially switched to a product that has Fe and K, but not Mg, so I
don't think I can attribute the problems to Mg deficiency. The improvement
was so rapid that I am convinced of the causal link. I just don't know WHY.
If it was rapid, then this sort of says that it was not traces, but
rather something else.
Traces take a while to show up in plant health, I give them 3 weeks
vs one week for macros before deciding.
You can see PO4 differences in less than hour if there is strong limitation.
Oh well, the tank looks pretty good now, so I guess I won't worry
about it.
Nick
Well, if you are happy, stick with it.
Go back later if you are really curious and try to reproduce it for
the reasons/assumptions you believe to be true.
See if they are, then decide.
Regards,
Tom Barr
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 18:32:32 +0100
From: "Laith Arif" <laith at swissonline_ch>
Subject: RE: [APD] re: Ca gluconate
To: <nickplummer at nc_rr.com>, "'aquatic plants digest'"
<aquatic-plants at actwin_com>
Maybe the Fluorish was old? I've never used Fluorish so I don't know if it
has expiry dates. But I would assume that after 12-24 months it might be a
lot less effective...
Laith
-----Original Message-----
From: nickplummer at nc_rr.com [mailto:nickplummer at nc_rr.com]
Sent: 03 December 2004 15:29
To: aquatic-plants at actwin_com
Subject: [APD] re: Ca gluconate
Tom Barr wrote:
Sounds much more like some other problem than poor iron, Mg could have
been the issue.GH could have changed in the tap etc, I've never associated
a low Trace iron level with BGA. I've had RFUG's for 10 years with plants.
Hmmm, the tank is filled with well water that has very low KH and GH, so it
is supplemented with pulverised dolomite. Annual water tests done by the
local health department show no change in GH, and neither do my more
frequent,
but more crude, home tests.
I've had RFUG's for 10 years with plants.
Were you using Fe-gluconate or Fe-EDTA?
> Would Fe-gluconate be oxidized morerapidly than Fe-EDTA in the
> oxygen/bacteria-rich substrate of an undergravel filter?
I would not think it would matter as far as the plants are concerned.
Well, then I'm baffled. The only change I have made was to switch the
Fluorish with Fe-EDTA (whatever brand is cheapest at the time). I've
continued dosing with KNO3, Flourish phosphorus, and Flourish Trace.
I initially switched to a product that has Fe and K, but not Mg, so I
don't think I can attribute the problems to Mg deficiency. The improvement
was so rapid that I am convinced of the causal link. I just don't know WHY.
Oh well, the tank looks pretty good now, so I guess I won't worry
about it.
Nick
--
Nicholas Plummer
nickplummer at nc_rr.com
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 12:45:08 -0500
From: nickplummer at nc_rr.com
Subject: [APD] re: Ca gluconate
To: aquatic-plants at actwin_com
Maybe the Fluorish was old?
Possible. I used two different containers before switching to
another product. One was purchased from a local petshop and could
have been sitting around for a while, but the other was bought from a
large online supplier that I would expect to have rapid turnover.
Nick
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 12:58:43 -0500
From: nickplummer at nc_rr.com
Subject: [APD] re: chelators
To: aquatic-plants at actwin_com
Any particular species of plant that was effected and some that were not?
What type of substrate also?
Java moss was unaffected. Lysimachia grew O.K. but was more robust
after the switch. Rotala indica had very pale foliage but grew
reasonably well; color is better after the switching iron source.
Riccia appeared white and slowly melted away; after switching iron
sources, it was bright green and grew in thick mats. Hygrophila
difformis produced whitish foliage with emersed morphology, then
stalled. Proserpinaca sp. reverted to emersed morphology and then
melted away. Ludwigia, various species, also died.
Substrate is 50% aquarium gravel, 50% flourite with a standard flow UG.
The tank is fairly small, so I have since simplified the planting.
Currently it has a thick and healthy stand of Rotala indica and a
dense foreground of java moss. Inhabitants are cherry shrimp, neon
tetras, and Heterandria formosa.
Regards,
Nick
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 13:04:57 -0500
From: "Bill D" <billinet at comcast_net>
Subject: [APD] Re:DANGER- A caution for anyone answering Sarahs
To: <aquatic-plants at actwin_com>
[Redacted]
Bill
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 12:16:36 -0600
From: "Tom Wood" <tomwood2 at flash_net>
Subject: [APD] Re: RUGF versus UGF
To: <aquatic-plants at actwin_com>
TB: "I used 1/2" CPVC, it's smaller than PVC. I made a grid, like
a giant spray bar and drilled holes in it. If I ran the water in
normal UG fashion, the sand/detritus etc will be pulled into
these small holes and also clog the avbove layers, causing
pockets of high flow, inconsistent distribution etc. By using
Reverse flow, this eliminates these issues and I can use any size
sand and have fairly consistent flow at higher flow rates, the
water is prefiltered before being moved into the grid. ::snip::
No need for plastic insect screen also and allows more space for
roots(all the way to the very bottom of the gravel and around the
pipes). ::snip::"
I used the regular 1/2" PVC and made an elongated 'H' shape
turned sideways at the bottom of my 90 gallon. The legs of the
'H' are drilled with two rows of 5/16" holes at 90 degrees to
each other, turned toward the bottom of the tank. The plastic
insect screen molds tight to the pipe and keeps 1-3mm blasting
grit out. I used a cross fitting at the intersections of the 'H'
and did a double return back to the pump to hopefully even out
the flow. I'm using it for mechanical filtering since there is no
other filter on the tank, so RUGF would contradict the purpose in
this case. Like I said, just curious.
TW
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 10:46:46 -0800
From: "Rachel Sandage" <rachelsor at hotmail_com>
Subject: Re: [APD] re: chelators
To: <nickplummer at nc_rr.com>, "aquatic plants digest"
<aquatic-plants at actwin_com>
In my own tanks, I can easily see iron deficiency, because several
indicator plants,
most notably a chain sword which might be E. tennelus, lose their
deep green color
and become quite pale.
But I want to go back to your original posting which said,
"I observed extreme chlorosis and poor plant growth in a tank that
has an UG filter, despite the application
of increasing quantities of Flourish. The poor plant growth was
accompanied by frequent blooms of BGA and
a filamentous green alga. Switching to a product containing Fe-EDTA
cleared up the problem"
This brings up two possible answers to why your plant growth
improved, neither of which has to do with the type of iron.
The first is that it was not the type, but the ratio of iron to other
ingredients.
The second is that it was the type and ratio of macro and trace
elements in the two products.
Or both.
Just my $.02
Rachel
------------------------------
Message: 10
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 19:48:30 -0000
From: "Chris White" <criffa at tiscali_co.uk>
Subject: RE: [APD] Chelating Agents
To: "'aquatic plants digest'" <aquatic-plants at actwin_com>
Wu from the DFW club now is switching the iron
sulphate, no chelating agent and I would not be suprised if he reports
absolutely no change in his tanks, I'm eagerly awaiting his results.
I did post a message on here a while ago without any replies, but here
are a few thoughts from me. I'm been avidly reading the archive about
iron and that lovely gluconate vs edta thread and the whole thing
puzzled me making no things clearer. Regardless, I hunted the web for
sources of gluconate thinking it would be better (my train of thought is
probably better not explained). Without any luck, my attention turned
to straight FeSO4. The box I have is 20% Fe; if I have done my
calculations correct, then I think there is a large proportion of
impurity taking into account the sulphate. I'm not going to complain
though, because it does work. One of my plants was growing on the white
side, add FeSO4 (mixed up in water first so not to overdose) and hey
presto, green plants. I tested the water shortly after but no
measurable value of iron was present, albeit using a non-sensitive kit.
Perhaps the "rust" went into the gravel? Isn't that where we want the
iron though? All I can say is that there has been an improvement. The
exact ins and outs of it, I'm probably not qualified to say. But
beware, too much FeSO4 turns the water nasty for a couple of hours,
possibly zapping out oxygen in the process. Anyone else use neat iron
sulphate with similar findings?
Chris
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.289 / Virus Database: 265.4.5 - Release Date: 03/12/2004
------------------------------
Message: 11
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 12:32:23 -0800 (PST)
From: "S. Hieber" <shieber at yahoo_com>
Subject: Re: [APD] Re:DANGER- A caution for anyone answering Sarahs
To: aquatic plants digest <aquatic-plants at actwin_com>
[Redacted]
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Aquatic-Plants mailing list
Aquatic-Plants at actwin_com
http://www.actwin.com/mailman/listinfo/aquatic-plants
End of Aquatic-Plants Digest, Vol 16, Issue 5
*********************************************
_______________________________________________
Aquatic-Plants mailing list
Aquatic-Plants at actwin_com
http://www.actwin.com/mailman/listinfo/aquatic-plants