Hi Guys...

[JenCliBee]

EI method is worked on a baisis of dosing dry ferts or mixing dry ferts then dosing as per the EI method in regards to a tanks size.

Have a look HERE!!!

The addition of pressurised co2 will increase the need for food, weather your dosing is enough is anybodies guess... if no algae issues and plants are as you say flourishing i guess what your adding is sufficing 'for now'. However you could be on the borderline of just enough 'right now'... as plants grow, as mentioned they will increase there need. If this isn't met then plants suffer and algae can take hold.... the main principle of EI method is to not actually allow this and eliminate the potential for lacking from the offset.


Basically increased plant mass will need increased amounts of food. Whichever way you decide to add it is totally upto you, cheapest way is to make your own (very easy to get hold of).

Ive just noticed you will be adding a huge light source also, this is going to increase the metabolic rate of the plants ten fold.... the increased fert amounts are not actually a fail safe then, it's going to be a full on necessity.

Have a read of the link ive given, it will explain the method of EI much more indepth

 

[mike455555]

and here's where you can buy it. i ordered it 2 weeks ago and it arrived 2 days after order was placed. just started dosing for the first week and is working very well =]
im in the same boat as you. 3.2 wpg =] (the tank in sig, although its barren on plants my riccia is pearling even before the addition of co2 )

dry salt doesing is so much cheaper. your paying £10? ish for 500ml? your paying £18 her for... well i made up a 500ml bottle of the stuff with 8 tea spoons ( max,less for other chemicals) of different chemicals. theres enough dry salts to last me about a year id reckon

 

[ian21777]

ok thanks, ill look into that. have i really got that much light? i know its twice what cme with the tank, but it doesnt look like its massively bright? stupid question coming up... i know the watts per gallon rule isnt hard and fast, but when you calculate it is it on the size of the tank or the amount of water in the tank?

 

[mike455555]

i think its todo with how much light hits the bottom of the tank, unsure on that though. im sure someone will correct me if im wrong its only a rough estimate (read the edit in my post)

i think its just how much light a plant gets. light levels get less as they pass though water (why its dark at the bottem of the sea)

 

[ian21777]

and here's where you can buy it. i ordered it 2 weeks ago and it arrived 2 days after order was placed. just started dosing for the first week and is working very well =]
im in the same boat as you. 3.2 wpg =] (the tank in sig, although its barren on plants my riccia is pearling even before the addition of co2 )

dry salt doesing is so much cheaper. your paying £10? ish for 500ml? your paying £18 her for... well i made up a 500ml bottle of the stuff with 8 tea spoons ( max,less for other chemicals) of different chemicals. theres enough dry salts to last me about a year id reckon

Sounds like it works out alot cheaper. ill definitely take a closer look...

 

[mike455555]

it does =] if your going down the liquid carbon root this is also best value for money. done use seachem excell (i think its called) as its more dilute than easycarbo. but the linked item is cheaper and the same conc as easycarbo

 

[JenCliBee]

ok thanks, ill look into that. have i really got that much light? i know its twice what cme with the tank, but it doesnt look like its massively bright? stupid question coming up... i know the watts per gallon rule isnt hard and fast, but when you calculate it is it on the size of the tank or the amount of water in the tank?

Worked out generally on water volume....

your tank is 120L/31.7usg

Your light 4x 24w = 96w

96w/31.7 = 3.02 wpg ..... classed as med/high light.


Dry ferts are certainly the best way to go regarding price. Easy to get and simple to make up. Definitely worth the investment long term.


Edited.... dont ask lol

 

[ian21777]

ok thanks, ill look into that. have i really got that much light? i know its twice what cme with the tank, but it doesnt look like its massively bright? stupid question coming up... i know the watts per gallon rule isnt hard and fast, but when you calculate it is it on the size of the tank or the amount of water in the tank?

Worked out generally on water volume....

your tank is 120L/31.7usg

Your light 4x 24w = 96w

96w/31.7 = 3.02 wpg ..... classed as med/high light.

at the risk of bein pedantic... how does that work? i mean I am in the UK and therfore my tank is only 26.6 gallons. therefore i have 3.6 wpg? its the same for those people who subscribe to the 'fish per gallon' rule... which gallon is the right gallon lol?


Dry ferts are certainly the best way to go regarding price. Easy to get and simple to make up. Definitely worth the investment long term.


Edited.... dont ask lol

Still havnt got the hang of this... how did i get my reply stuck in the middle of the last post lol

 

[JenCliBee]

at the risk of bein pedantic... how does that work? i mean I am in the UK and therfore my tank is only 26.6 gallons. therefore i have 3.6 wpg? its the same for those people who subscribe to the 'fish per gallon' rule... which gallon is the right gallon lol?

I'm UK also lol, i guess when the rule was originally worked out, it was worked out on the usg rather than UK?.... i really dont know the reason behind it and it's a very vague rule anyways considering it was originally meant for T12 bulbs i think. It's a guide line and that's pretty much it.


I would really try to not over complicate things, the rule has been used for a long time and is considered the best way (next to actually accurately reading the levels with a PAR meter) to actually gauge the light levels. There are so many other aspects to the planted tank to get your head round... so it's best to not get to hooked on guides which are tried and tested .

Many people refer to usg when listing there tank size in general, me included sometimes, i guess it's just the way it is.

 

[ian21777]

Ok, im in a bit fo a fix now... trying to get some pics of the tank on here, trouble is, even with the camera on the lowest setting they are too big. any ideas?

 

[stu40]

do you have an imageshack or photobucket account? they're useful for posting lots of large photos.
Individual pics can be reduced in size by using paint, but you'll probably only be able to get 1 per post that way.
Personally, i use imageshack to upload pics from my camera, then copy the 'direct link' info.This gets pasted into the 'insert image' button (2 right of a smiley) on the reply to post page.

click here .post #103 will show you how

 

[ian21777]

great, ill give that a go. thanks alot

 

[ian21777]

Ok got that figured, thanks for the help!!!

So this is the tank. 3 weeks old and one week with the new lighting. The back left is looking a bit bare at the mo, im waiting for the vallis i put in friday to grow in and fill up a bit...

Opinions welcome

 

[ian21777]

Janitors at work...

I know he/she will probably get too big, but father has a bigger tank and will take off my hands if need be...

One of 2... soon to be 4

Flower stem... Still a little bud on top at the mo, any day now i would think