Ei & Substrate Question

[Underwurlde]

OK, so I'm looking into EI

It is a method of over-dosing a tank by physically adding all the nutrients a plant needs. This we know.
So if this is the case, then why bother with fancy substrates such as eco-complete, Tropica, ADA Aquasoil etc?

Why not just bung some lifeless gravel in the tank and be done with it?

I know there's an obvious answer to this.

Andy

PS
Can anyone recommend a substrate composition for an EI setup.... Thanks!

 

[RadaR]

We get the "fancy substrates" because they provide nutrients to the plants through the roots, which benefit plants like crypts and swords. It's a constant supply of nutrients without overloading the tank which may cause algae infestation. These substrates also tend to have great grain sizes.

 

[Underwurlde]

Hmmm - I always thought a plant got 'fertilized' via its roots so that kinda makes sense.

With EI, I thought the whole idea was to purposefully overdose (within a certain very wide range - hence no need for test kits) the tank with macro & micro nutrients - combine this with adequate lighting, CO2 & numerous plants will hence out-compete algae and is therefore not a problem (whose major nutrient is ammonia anyway). This 'overdosing' is then cancelled by a big waterchange and the dosing regieme is then 'reset'.

Andy

 

[George Farmer]

Why not just bung some lifeless gravel in the tank and be done with it?

Many people do, and have great success. You may have seen JamesC's tank. Plain quartz. http/www.fishforums.net/index.php?showtopic=167008

A nutrient-rich substrate and EI gives the plants access to nutrients everywhere at once so (in theory) they expend less energy. Many plants will also grow quicker given a nutrient-rich substrate.

ADA Aqua Soil and EI is the best possible combo for rampant growth according to Tom Barr. He has tried many different techniques and I believe him.

Some do not like the idea of overdosing the water column, especially with nitrates and phosphates. The ADA system typically runs a leaner water column. I've just read that Amano's tanks in the ADA 2006 catalogue are under 2ppm NO3. You need a nutrient-rich substrate to get healthy plant growth with this leaner macro technique.

 

[Underwurlde]

Good answer.

Rampant I like & rampant growth I like even better!

Now, I wonder if dosing the wife's coffee with NPK will make her rampant.

Andy
PS if you don't hear from me in the next couple o'weeks, it's cause I'll be breathing through a tube...

 

[Themuleous]

Good answer.

Rampant I like & rampant growth I like even better!

Now, I wonder if dosing the wife's coffee with NPK will make her rampant.

Andy
PS if you don't hear from me in the next couple o'weeks, it's cause I'll be breathing through a tube...

that made me chuckle

 

[Fwapp]

Now, I wonder if dosing the wife's coffee with NPK will make her rampant.

How do I explain why I'm chuckling to my workmates?

 

[plantbrain]

We get the "fancy substrates" because they provide nutrients to the plants through the roots, which benefit plants like crypts and swords. It's a constant supply of nutrients without overloading the tank which may cause algae infestation. These substrates also tend to have great grain sizes.

No, that is not why folks add ferts to substrates, that's the classic myth.
I also have grown swords and crypts for decades without any ferts added to the substrates and they grow at alarming rates, so I would not suggest to folks that they prefer anything as to nutrient source location water column vs the substrate.

There's no such evidence and there is significant evidence among botantist that aquatic plants can use nutrients without any impact on relative growth rates without roots.

See Cedergreen and Madsen 2001.

Crypts and swords are river/stream plants.
as such, they use their roots to prevent them from being swept away. They also live in amphibian habitats, they have no water column during the dry season.
Unless you have such a tank that goes dry part of the year, this will not be our case.

Roots do function to provide storage for these plants, Rhizomes in swords and crypts etc, perhaps some hormonal functions, but otherwise, I've seen no such evidence based on the growth rates when you have non limiting conditions in either location.

And this makes sense, plants can take nutrients from both locations if given a choice. If your limiting the water column, clearly they will invest in root uptake.
Why trasport nutrients up from the substrate to grow the leaves in the water column if you do not have to?

That makes no sense.

Regards,
Tom Barr

 

[ChrisC]

Hi Tom,
So from what you have said, plants will absorb nutrients from either the leaf or the root, choosing the leaf if given a choice? This is interesting. From what I know, the logic behind nutrient rich soil is to limit the amount of nutrients in the water column, as algae cannot take nutrients through roots.

Chris

 

[plantbrain]

I wonder why so many assume that high NO3 and PO4, actually it is not that high to begin with, is an issue?

Here's the poor assumption that is made:

Fish waste = KNO3/KH2PO4 dosing.

Not even close to the same.
One is inorganic salt, the most bioavailabkle form of nutrient.
Test kits typically measure total NO3 and total PO4, not bioavailable forms exclusively.
Advance research testing does distingush between such assumptions in the testing methods and nutrient forms.

Fish waste produces organic N, that's converted into NH4 by bacteria, this requires O2.
Then bacteria go another round to convert it into NO2= and then to NO3.
Some NO3 exists in bound organic forms, not much though. The same is not true for PO4.
A lot may be bound as organic PO4.

This is why we cannot keep adding more and more fish to supply the N and P needs for higher light tanks with CO2 etc.

With less light and by default less CO2 demand and growth rate, you begin to be able to supply more and more N&P from fish waste without too much NH4 accumulating in high light(= algae), not as erronously assumed, high NO3/PO4 = algae.

The system is not this neat simple system so many assumed in the past.
It's more complex than that but not impossible to understand or comprehend either.

NH4 - bad at higher levels, more light etc.
NO3 and PO4 not bad at very wide ranges.

If you doa controlled test yourself, you can see this as many aquarist have that routinely dose KNO3/KH2PO4.

I do not suggest adding NH4, but you can if you wish, you may also try adding progressively more and more fish and see what happens also.
Both result in algae at higher lighting, fish death at lower levels.

Not due to PO4/NO3 levels, rather, NH4 which is highly toxic and especially in non CO2 tanks with plants(the NH4 turns to NH3 form which is much more deadly6 at higher pH's, and non CO2 tanks go much higher in pH later in the day).

Regards,
Tom Barr
.

 

[plantbrain]

FYI,

"Overdosing", "excess nutrients" and other terms referring to EI etc are hyperbole.

In order for plants to grow and not be limited there must be an excess of nutrient available to the plant, that is the definition of non limiting nutrients. Any farmer knows this.

We add a fair amount above this amount to provide wiggle room so we do not have to dose upon a "razor's edge" being very careful to dose just enough or rely on substrate ferts to a large degree.

Adding substrate ferts will help to provide backup sources for nutrient though, this provides the best of both worlds, and less draw on the substrate ferts(thus they will last longer as well) when good levels are present in the water column.

Some refer to the EI dosing as adding high levels of pollutants, similar thing again, ignorance and hyperbole.

One person's pollutant is another's fertilizer plant food.

When you discuss such methods, realize that adequate and optimal may means two different things.

Non CO2 tanks have low nutrients and that is fine, the demand is also reduced. So if you have 2ppm of NO3, that might last 2-7 days whereas a high light CO2 tank might last 10-15X less and see rapid plant deficiencies as a result.

If you also have a nutrient rich substrate, then you will also have much more backup prior to reduction in the water column.

So given a choice of optimal methods, the ADA AS + EI will yield the best solution for a low to high light CO2 tank, obviously you may use less water column nutrients if you chose or reduce then with less light, but maintaining them will not induce algae nor cause harm to fish etc.

The range is very wide and adding KNO3 to see if you can harm fish or shrimp is a very easy test to do that I've done several times to see.
I never got any fish deaths at 120-160ppm of NO3 for over 3 days. Shrimps did start dying at 160ppm, I had 50% death for those, none for fish though.

So I'm not sure where folks get such poppycock about the health etc.
A simple test will show the falsification of such conjecture.

That is why I get rather forceful in my advice about things, unlike the arm chair aquarist, I test. And that gives me alot more knowledge and arguement than any hack agruing with me.

So while I suggest not testing for EI, it's based on a lot of testing to support it's contentions. Algae, fish/critter health and plants as well as the human factor.

Much much more than any other methods.

Regards,
Tom Barr

 

[Underwurlde]

Great stuff from the man himself!

So plants aren't 'stupid' then. If they can get the nutrients directly to where they are required, i.e. through thier leaves then they can. However, IF it is avialable at the roots then so be it and I am now thinking of that source as a kind of back up plan should you miss dosing due to i'll health, forgetfullness or a holiday etc. Also it is more suited to a not-quite-so-high-tech tank.

I wonder how long ADA Aqua Soil lasts in the tank (I know this is relative so difficult to know)?

(Another thing I was wonder about is that you can dose almost all the things a plant supposedly needs using NPK and SeaChem Flourish except Nickel. I wonder why that is the only thing missing from Flourish)?

Andy

PS.
Thank you for your research into EI & making everyone aware of it. Great work.

 

[plantbrain]

Great stuff from the man himself!

So plants aren't 'stupid' then. If they can get the nutrients directly to where they are required, i.e. through thier leaves then they can. However, IF it is avialable at the roots then so be it and I am now thinking of that source as a kind of back up plan should you miss dosing due to i'll health, forgetfullness or a holiday etc. Also it is more suited to a not-quite-so-high-tech tank.

I wonder how long ADA Aqua Soil lasts in the tank (I know this is relative so difficult to know)?

(Another thing I was wonder about is that you can dose almost all the things a plant supposedly needs using NPK and SeaChem Flourish except Nickel. I wonder why that is the only thing missing from Flourish)?

Andy

PS.
Thank you for your research into EI & making everyone aware of it. Great work.

It's less that they are stupid, rather they are lazy.
when there is ample food/resources they do not have to put much effort into growth and acquisition of nutrients/ At a low limiting levels, the nutrients are controlling things, at a non limiting, the plants themselves are controlling their rate of growth.

Good substrates are good for most any type of plant set up or method.
You might have lesser use for it in some set ups, but most tanks can certainly gain from it top some degree.

A good nutrient rich Substrate that has discrete units of ferts, that can provide outer aerobic conditions per grain, rather a big thick layer, so that the roots even 1/8" long have access to the nutrients and when you uproot, the grains are still protected inside where the root hairs might penatrate.

I think the ADA soil will last several years, many replace after 2-3 years, some go longer.
Easy enough to vacuum some out and add new on top.
I just pour it right in.

Ni is not really a limiting nutrients near as anyone can tell in aquatic plants.
And it's use is so small and there's so many items that might be a source of it also.

Regards,
Tom Barr