Unusual nitrate levels?

[Spyro]

You say it is way overstocked but without any numbers how many fish it is impossible for anyone to evaluate the stocking level. In your opinion it isoverstocked but others may disagree.


To know for sure make a nitrate reference solution with a known concentration of nitrate. Then measrue the reference solution with both of your test kit.s This will tell you with 100% certainty if one of your test kit is wrong.



Question are the plants actually growing. If the plants are growing then they are consuming nitrate. Plants can only consume nitrate if they grow. If they don't grow they likely will not consume any nitrogen. If you have no growth and nitrate stays stable or drops, then you might have created a place with low oxygen concentration that is ideal for the special bacteria that can convert nitrate to Nitrogen gas.

Plants will consume nutrients wherever they are. if they are only in the substrate they will remove it from the substrate. But if they are in the water column they will take those. In general plants need water soluble nutrients, Nutrients in the vast majority of tanks have nutrient in the substate and in the water column.

Regular water changes do control nitrates if you cycle enough water frequently enough. The problem is is that Some people seen to think a 10% water change every few weeks is enough. Water changes do work if you do it once a week consistently. And it that doesn't reduce nitrate levels they you need to replace more water during the once a week water change.

Furthermore it is important to note that water change are not just about reducing nitrate, They also reduce excess potassium sodium, and micro nutrients. water changes also help stabilize GH and KH levels. you should always do water change. Many only do water change only when nitrtes get high. Or if the nitrate levels stay low don't do water changes at all. If you don't do regular water changes the water will eventually become toxic even if the nitrate levels stay low. A usfulll video for water changes.

-I have about 25 platies (12 full size and 2 month old accidents), betta, 2 Guppies and 2 Mollies. 90l tank

- I'll repeat: faulty test results should return widely inconsistent results and not perfect diminishing curve (negative return on nitrate production). There is no reason to doubt test results from 2 separate kits with current test result consistency.

- You can't have rising levels of sodium and Potassium unless you introduce them somehow? And are not used up by plants, fish, algae, etc.

I watched plenty of videos on water change. But also videos on balanced tank= food goes in - fish eat it - micro nutrients used by algae, bacteria - fish eat it - eventually plants eat it and/or it is converted by bacteria into nitrogen and removed from environment.
Which also makes perfect sense.

 

[AbbeysDad]

Before I set this thread aside I'll just add that in 50+ years of fishkeeping, including breeding, raising, and selling hundreds of fish, I have never had a tank with zero nitrates... and this includes heavily planted tanks, deep sand, denitrification using Seachem Matrix/De*Nitrate (pumice stone), my nitrate fight, and even with Dr. Kevin Novak's anoxic biocenosis clarification baskets.
But having 'said' all of that, as mentioned by another member, I also tell a cautionary tale of zero nitrates. You see, nitrates keep bad company and although it's our only measure of pollution, it's just not the only pollutant in the aquarium water. And unfortunately not all contamination magically disappears...enter the routine, periodic, partial water change within the confines of our tiny glass boxes to keep the fresh water fresh and replenish minerals.
As evidenced by the constant flow of creeks, streams, and rivers etc., nature in it's vastness, constantly renews fresh water with rains and snow melt. Not to be a broken record, but I've read that the water flow exiting the Amazon river is so great that fresh water can be collected 12 miles out at sea!
So even if by some magic you really have zero nitrates, you'd be well advised (as in my signature) to do routine partial water changes to keep the water fresh.

 

[Byron]

I am only going to comment on the botanical issues, the water change issue is already covered. Let me just point out though that "experience" is not necessarily "knowledge," so don't confuse them. What may work for those individuals--or appears to be working--may actually not be working for all we know. But to the botany.

Aquarium plants obviously require nitrogen, a macro-nutrient. Most of them do not use nitrate, ever, in a situation like that described here. The plant species and numbers tells us this is not a high-tech method planted tank which would have mega light, diffused CO2, and daily nutrient additives. Plants in such a system may use nitrate (undoubtedly do).

Aquatic plants can use ammonium (NH4+), nitrite (NO2-) or nitrate (NO3-) as their nitrogen source. The majority of aquarium plants prefer nitrogen as ammonium. Scientifically-controlled studies have clearly proven this; you can find references in Diana Walstad's Ecology of the Planted Aquarium, chapter 7. This is no surprise, when we consider that ammonium predominates in almost all aquatic sediments because they are anaerobic, and such conditions discourages nitrification and encourages de They will take ammonia/ammonium up in balance with the light intensity and other nutrients, but they do take up a lot of it, depending upon the rate of growth. This is why floating plants like Water Sprite (Ceratopteris cornuta) and similar which are very rapid-growth species are termed "ammonia sinks." The reason plants are beneficial in controlling nitrate is not because they actually take it up, but in taking up so much ammonia/ammonium they in fact out-compete the nitrifying bacteria [studies have determined this, references to these in Walstad], and nitrite and then nitrate are not by-products with plants. This is the basis behind the "silent cycle" when fish can be introduced to a new tank if there are adequate fast-growing plants to handle the ammonia/ammonium.

These plants only turn to nitrate when ammonia/ammonium is depleted--which rarely if ever happens in most fish tanks. Plants, algae and all photosynthesizing organisms use the Nitrogen of ammonium--not nitrate--to produce their proteins. This process takes energy, a lot of it. It takes considerable energy from the plant to convert nitrate back into ammonium in order to synthesize proteins.

Respecting plant growth rates, the faster a plant grows the more light (intensity primarily as this drives photosynthesis) and nutrients in balance it requires. This applies to all plants, aquatic and terrestrial.

 

[Spyro]

Before I set this thread aside I'll just add that in 50+ years of fishkeeping, including breeding, raising, and selling hundreds of fish, I have never had a tank with zero nitrates... and this includes heavily planted tanks, deep sand, denitrification using Seachem Matrix/De*Nitrate (pumice stone), my nitrate fight, and even with Dr. Kevin Novak's anoxic biocenosis clarification baskets.
But having 'said' all of that, as mentioned by another member, I also tell a cautionary tale of zero nitrates. You see, nitrates keep bad company and although it's our only measure of pollution, it's just not the only pollutant in the aquarium water. And unfortunately not all contamination magically disappears...enter the routine, periodic, partial water change within the confines of our tiny glass boxes to keep the fresh water fresh and replenish minerals.
As evidenced by the constant flow of creeks, streams, and rivers etc., nature in it's vastness, constantly renews fresh water with rains and snow melt. Not to be a broken record, but I've read that the water flow exiting the Amazon river is so great that fresh water can be collected 12 miles out at sea!
So even if by some magic you really have zero nitrates, you'd be well advised (as in my signature) to do routine partial water changes to keep the water fresh.

That's fair enough. You are within your rights to dismiss the crazy idea and put the thread aside.
However, I'll point out this to you:
In your 50 years experience you never had a tank filled with Anubias and Java Fern nor went for 20 years with only topping up evaporated water (something people claim they have done and claim to have 50 years experience also).
So, with all due respect: you don't actually know if it's possible or not for Anubias and Java Fern to draw so much Nitrates out of the tank.
And that's what we are here on this thread for: to find out through actual scientific method experiment and not theoretical assumptions.

I'll leave you with this: Just about every scientific discovery and technological development was dismissed as impossible or not true but general consensus that it's not possible and crazy idea. And many were accidental discovery too.

You're free to not find out experiment result and keep your belief about Anubias or potentially learn something you haven't thought of.

Eithher way: thanks for the advice.

BTW: there is no such thing as 'fresh water'. Water only changes state from liquid, gas, ice. But it's always the same water.
Rivers, streams oxygenate water which makes water 'fresh'. Something that your air pump does. Hence: your water will forever stay 'fresh' and never go stale like in a mud puddle or bucket. Stale water is just water that's not oxygenated and as result anaerobic bacteria takes hold and starts producing toxic gases.
Rivers and streams also contaminate water with minerals and elements. Thus: if you do not change water you will not be adding or removing pollution from water. Life forms do that: plants, bacteria, algae, etc.
If you don't change water: you are likely to run out of pollutants rather than have build up.
Now, organic matter is different thing and will build up due to fish waste if plants and bacteria are unable to process it all. Which is doubtful in a fish tank and especially in mine, since I don't have any plants that draw nutrients from substrate.
So yeah, I'll have to change water to vacuum the organic matter for sure. But that's not the subject of this thread.

 

[Spyro]

I am only going to comment on the botanical issues, the water change issue is already covered. Let me just point out though that "experience" is not necessarily "knowledge," so don't confuse them. What may work for those individuals--or appears to be working--may actually not be working for all we know. But to the botany.

Aquarium plants obviously require nitrogen, a macro-nutrient. Most of them do not use nitrate, ever, in a situation like that described here. The plant species and numbers tells us this is not a high-tech method planted tank which would have mega light, diffused CO2, and daily nutrient additives. Plants in such a system may use nitrate (undoubtedly do).

Aquatic plants can use ammonium (NH4+), nitrite (NO2-) or nitrate (NO3-) as their nitrogen source. The majority of aquarium plants prefer nitrogen as ammonium. Scientifically-controlled studies have clearly proven this; you can find references in Diana Walstad's Ecology of the Planted Aquarium, chapter 7. This is no surprise, when we consider that ammonium predominates in almost all aquatic sediments because they are anaerobic, and such conditions discourages nitrification and encourages de They will take ammonia/ammonium up in balance with the light intensity and other nutrients, but they do take up a lot of it, depending upon the rate of growth. This is why floating plants like Water Sprite (Ceratopteris cornuta) and similar which are very rapid-growth species are termed "ammonia sinks." The reason plants are beneficial in controlling nitrate is not because they actually take it up, but in taking up so much ammonia/ammonium they in fact out-compete the nitrifying bacteria [studies have determined this, references to these in Walstad], and nitrite and then nitrate are not by-products with plants. This is the basis behind the "silent cycle" when fish can be introduced to a new tank if there are adequate fast-growing plants to handle the ammonia/ammonium.

These plants only turn to nitrate when ammonia/ammonium is depleted--which rarely if ever happens in most fish tanks. Plants, algae and all photosynthesizing organisms use the Nitrogen of ammonium--not nitrate--to produce their proteins. This process takes energy, a lot of it. It takes considerable energy from the plant to convert nitrate back into ammonium in order to synthesize proteins.

Respecting plant growth rates, the faster a plant grows the more light (intensity primarily as this drives photosynthesis) and nutrients in balance it requires. This applies to all plants, aquatic and terrestrial.

Makes sense. Thanks for the reply, interesting read.
Anubias and Java Fern aren't planted so they pull nutrients directly from water; much like floating plants. Still surprising they would pull so much of it from my tank as slow growers (if indeed they are responsible)

 

[StevenF]

I watched plenty of videos on water change. But also videos on balanced tank= food goes in - fish eat it - micro nutrients used by algae, bacteria - fish eat it - eventually plants eat it and/or it is converted by bacteria into nitrogen and removed from environment.

In order for plants to grow they must have N, Ca, Mg, P, S, Cl, Fe, Mn, B, Zn, Cu, Mo, Ni. Note that sodium (Na) is not on the list. how would sodium get in your water, it is in fish food, It is in your tap water and it is in some KH boosters. Water companies also sometime add sodium, Calcium and phosphate compounds to control PH and water pipe corrosion. Potassium is also in your tap water and KH boosters and most fertilizers have more than plants needed.

Your fish food and tap water will also include elements that fish and plants don't need to grow. Such as uranium, lead, strontium barium fluorine, bromide and iodine, selenium lithium, cesium,aluminum, tin, silver and many other elements. All of them are due rain eroding these out of rock and soil. If you send a tap water sample to a lab for ICP-OES test it will probably detect many of them in your tap water. The vast majority of them are metals and they will not be consumed by plants or fish in any significant am amount. And they can build up to lethal levels given enough time and water evaporation.

 

[Spyro]

In order for plants to grow they must have N, Ca, Mg, P, S, Cl, Fe, Mn, B, Zn, Cu, Mo, Ni. Note that sodium (Na) is not on the list. how would sodium get in your water, it is in fish food, It is in your tap water and it is in some KH boosters. Water companies also sometime add sodium, Calcium and phosphate compounds to control PH and water pipe corrosion. Potassium is also in your tap water and KH boosters and most fertilizers have more than plants needed.

Your fish food and tap water will also include elements that fish and plants don't need to grow. Such as uranium, lead, strontium barium fluorine, bromide and iodine, selenium lithium, cesium,aluminum, tin, silver and many other elements. All of them are due rain eroding these out of rock and soil. If you send a tap water sample to a lab for ICP-OES test it will probably detect many of them in your tap water. The vast majority of them are metals and they will not be consumed by plants or fish in any significant am amount. And they can build up to lethal levels given enough time and water evaporation.

That's true and good point. And true for some more than others.
For example: Sodium gets into my tank by me putting it in there on purpose in enormous amount compared to what I will probably get with tap water in 20 years.
Potassium, calcium, phosphate, iron, magnesium, etc I also put into my tank on purpose by the way of mineral supplements for fish and plants; Since my tap water source is rain catchment it is very soft and with very little minerals in it.
Someone with tap water from mountain river/stream catchment area; with water running through sediment rock will have completely different water and thus accumulation of minerals in the tank.
But in general, yeah. I agree with you.
But some guy that claims they didn't change water in 20 years might not have toxic or harmful levels while someone might get there in 6 months; depending on their source water and consumption of minerals in the tank.

 

[DoubleDutch]

That's fair enough. You are within your rights to dismiss the crazy idea and put the thread aside.
However, I'll point out this to you:
In your 50 years experience you never had a tank filled with Anubias and Java Fern nor went for 20 years with only topping up evaporated water (something people claim they have done and claim to have 50 years experience also).
So, with all due respect: you don't actually know if it's possible or not for Anubias and Java Fern to draw so much Nitrates out of the tank.
And that's what we are here on this thread for: to find out through actual scientific method experiment and not theoretical assumptions.

I'll leave you with this: Just about every scientific discovery and technological development was dismissed as impossible or not true but general consensus that it's not possible and crazy idea. And many were accidental discovery too.

You're free to not find out experiment result and keep your belief about Anubias or potentially learn something you haven't thought of.

Eithher way: thanks for the advice.

BTW: there is no such thing as 'fresh water'. Water only changes state from liquid, gas, ice. But it's always the same water.
Rivers, streams oxygenate water which makes water 'fresh'. Something that your air pump does. Hence: your water will forever stay 'fresh' and never go stale like in a mud puddle or bucket. Stale water is just water that's not oxygenated and as result anaerobic bacteria takes hold and starts producing toxic gases.
Rivers and streams also contaminate water with minerals and elements. Thus: if you do not change water you will not be adding or removing pollution from water. Life forms do that: plants, bacteria, algae, etc.
If you don't change water: you are likely to run out of pollutants rather than have build up.
Now, organic matter is different thing and will build up due to fish waste if plants and bacteria are unable to process it all. Which is doubtful in a fish tank and especially in mine, since I don't have any plants that draw nutrients from substrate.
So yeah, I'll have to change water to vacuum the organic matter for sure. But that's not the subject of this thread.

I agree with the top part. In a way you've managed to get a balance in your tank.
I think balance in nutrients, light, gasses and bacteria is keyword for an healthy tank.
Looking at your tank, plants and fish does tell a lot more than test results.

I disagree on the part of the "fresh water"
There is more "pollution" in inhabited water than the stuff we're testing. Fish, snails, plants, etc.... add hormons and other compounds in the water. In the enclosure of a tank several of those compounds won't go on their own (or by bacteria / fungus we don't like) so need waterchanges to do so.
I don't tell it has to be weekly (as stated several times) but water should be changed now and then. If not the balance will be lost after a while cause certain bacteria / fungus will start thriving and take over. Cyanobacteria are an example of bacteria that benefit of an unbalance for instance.

If the testresults are correct your tank isn't "overstocked" hahahaha. Then it is perfectly stocked.

 

[Spyro]

I agree with the top part. In a way you've managed to get a balance in your tank.
I think balance in nutrients, light, gasses and bacteria is keyword for an healthy tank.
Looking at your tank, plants and fish does tell a lot more than test results.

I disagree on the part of the "fresh water"
There is more "pollution" in inhabited water than the stuff we're testing. Fish, snails, plants, etc.... add hormons and other compounds in the water. In the enclosure of a tank several of those compounds won't go on their own (or by bacteria / fungus we don't like) so need waterchanges to do so.
I don't tell it has to be weekly (as stated several times) but water should be changed now and then. If not the balance will be lost after a while cause certain bacteria / fungus will start thriving and take over. Cyanobacteria are an example of bacteria that benefit of an unbalance for instance.

If the testresults are correct your tank isn't "overstocked" hahahaha. Then it is perfectly stocked.

Yeah, I don't really know much about water change-less system. I just stumbled on a YouTube video of a really elderly fellow that kept fish for 70 years (Fish father or Father fish I think). He does tanks without filtration and water changes, replicating lakes and ponds environment in the tanks. Something about deep substrate with sand and mud, and plants. Seems legit. Then I seen a bunch of videos on the subject in the feed including AquariumCoop video of fish store where they have all natural tanks and haven't changed water in 25 years.
So, it seems possible with right set up. Contrary to what I am being told.
Bit to advanced for me, I was just curios what happened to my nitrates lol

In the meantime: I've spoken to a guy that's into aqua scapping plant tanks.
He said he stumbled onto the same thing with Anubias and Java Fern that aren't planted into substrate: apparently they are Nitrate removing machines. Because he doesn't keep fish in all tanks, he has to dose with Nitrogen (mainly in form of Nitrates).
He said: he had to dose he's Anubias/Java Fern tank 2-3 times more then heavily planted tanks and nitrates would just get gobbled up faster then he could provide them, sort of speak.

But there is a catch (there always is one haha):
He constantly had to battle cyanobacteria outbreaks as they just love nitrate low environment.
He said he did quite a bit of research trying to battle it and said they also love phosphates. While Anubias and Java Fern gobble up nitrates, they use very little phosphates as they are slow growers.
He thinks my set-up is recipe for purple cyanobacteria outbreak. With no nitrates and phosphates from fish food. Unless i clean fish poo once a month or so and/or get some plants with substrate roots.
But he said it's just low maintenance set up due to plants and platies that munch on algae unless I start overfeeding.

Ha ha, not good. If he's right and I get cyanobacteria outbreak while doing experiment

 

[Avel1896]

Hey there, tour nitrates are ok.

 

[AbbeysDad]

BTW: there is no such thing as 'fresh water'. Water only changes state from liquid, gas, ice. But it's always the same water.
Rivers, streams oxygenate water which makes water 'fresh'. Something that your air pump does. Hence: your water will forever stay 'fresh' and never go stale like in a mud puddle or bucket. Stale water is just water that's not oxygenated and as result anaerobic bacteria takes hold and starts producing toxic gases.

Wrong. Water is fresh when it's free of all contaminants whether it's from evaporation/condensing or filtered through fine membranes (RO-RO/DI). So setting aside air pollution (e.g. acid rain) rain water is pure and is further filtered through the soil and obtains necessary minerals. Aerating polluted water does not make it more pure.

Rivers and streams also contaminate water with minerals and elements. Thus: if you do not change water you will not be adding or removing pollution from water. Life forms do that: plants, bacteria, algae, etc.

Minerals are NOT contaminants but building blocks for life as all plants and fish need minerals.

If you don't change water: you are likely to run out of pollutants rather than have build up.

Wrong again. Pollutants not removed by plants as nutrients and that we can't test for build up to toxic levels if left unchecked.

Experts agree that anubias and java fern are very slow growers and do little to remove ammonia/nitrates from the aquarium. I have tanks with slow growing anubias and java ferns that seem to do little for lower nitrates. I find that fast growing water sprite is way more effective.

Father Fish is a proponent of sand over mud (aka dirt tank) but if you watch more videos you'd see that he has an extensive automated water change system with huge vats of pre-treated water out back.

Cory McElroy (Aquarium Co-Op) did feature a store in one video that had heavily planted tanks and didn't do conventional partial water changes. However, they sell fish out of those tanks so a significant amount of water is routinely removed and later topped off with fresh water... a pseudo water change!

Every couple of months someone comes along to challenge routine periodic partial water changes. Even with claims of low or no nitrates. They claim that their fish are fine, some even breeding and they live an 'average amount of time'. Sadly their average usually isn't the 10-15 years most fish could live if properly cared for. These armchair hobbyists tend not to come back and report that their tank crashed.

Believe what you will but I have learned that the only way to maintain a stable water chemistry is with routine partial water changes to replace polluted water with fresh water and replenish necessary minerals.

 

[Spyro]

Wrong. Water is fresh when it's free of all contaminants whether it's from evaporation/condensing or filtered through fine membranes (RO-RO/DI). So setting aside air pollution (e.g. acid rain) rain water is pure and is further filtered through the soil and obtains necessary minerals. Aerating polluted water does not make it more pure.

Minerals are NOT contaminants but building blocks for life as all plants and fish need minerals.

Wrong again. Pollutants not removed by plants as nutrients and that we can't test for build up to toxic levels if left unchecked.

Experts agree that anubias and java fern are very slow growers and do little to remove ammonia/nitrates from the aquarium. I have tanks with slow growing anubias and java ferns that seem to do little for lower nitrates. I find that fast growing water sprite is way more effective.

Father Fish is a proponent of sand over mud (aka dirt tank) but if you watch more videos you'd see that he has an extensive automated water change system with huge vats of pre-treated water out back.

Cory McElroy (Aquarium Co-Op) did feature a store in one video that had heavily planted tanks and didn't do conventional partial water changes. However, they sell fish out of those tanks so a significant amount of water is routinely removed and later topped off with fresh water... a pseudo water change!

Every couple of months someone comes along to challenge routine periodic partial water changes. Even with claims of low or no nitrates. They claim that their fish are fine, some even breeding and they live an 'average amount of time'. Sadly their average usually isn't the 10-15 years most fish could live if properly cared for. These armchair hobbyists tend not to come back and report that their tank crashed.

Believe what you will but I have learned that the only way to maintain a stable water chemistry is with routine partial water changes to replace polluted water with fresh water and replenish necessary minerals.

Well, whether I am wrong again or not is debatable:
I'll repeat:
You cannot have stagnant or stale water if your water is aerated:

"Stagnant water has little dissolved oxygen in it and is a prime breeding ground for bacteria. Pools of water, such as those sitting in the back of an infrequently flushed toilet tank, become stagnant as the oxygen works its way out of the water and is not replaced. The only way to prevent water from becoming stagnant is to aerate it. This can be accomplished through good water circulation."
Stagnant water is breeding ground for harmful bacteria, viruses and dying beneficial microorganisms.

The water you replace with 'fresh' water is actually still fresh water. Unless you added so much salts and minerals in it that you turned it into 'mineral/salt' water.
"Fresh water (or freshwater) is any naturally occurring water containing low concentrations of dissolved salts and other total dissolved solids. Though the term specifically excludes seawater and brackish water, it does include non-salty mineral-rich waters such as chalybeate springs. Fresh water may include water in ice sheets, ice caps, glaciers, icebergs, bogs, ponds, lakes, rainfall, rivers, streams, and groundwater contained in underground aquifers."

Pure uncontaminated water is:
"Water is a compound made up of hydrogen and oxygen, so pure water would be water that contains nothing but hydrogen and oxygen."
Therefore: anything other than hydrogen and oxygen is water contaminant.

Potable water:
"Potable water is not pure water because it almost always contains dissolved impurities. For water to be potable, it must have sufficiently low levels of dissolved salts and microbes"

Polluted water:

• Chemical pollution. The most common type of water pollution, chemicals can infiltrate both underground water sources and those sitting on the Earth's surface. ...
• Groundwater pollution. ...
• Microbiological pollution. ...
• Nutrient pollution. ...
• Oxygen-depletion pollution. ...
• Surface water pollution.

So you are talking about polluted water not pure water. And generalising mineral content of water; as I previously stated: I have to ADD minerals to my 'fresh' water because it doesn't have much in there to begin with. So changing water to replace minerals would be counterproductive in my case.
I did watch Father Fish video and he said:
"I have glass lid on top of this aquarium and had very little evaporation over the years. This tank only had small top ups since 1998. I use tap water. Do not use RO water. Do not use rain water...."

Experts agree? I haven't seen anyone that is expert or agree on anything regarding Anubias other than general consensus that they are slow growing. There is no study, no experiment, no nothing to say how much Nitrates they remove.

Water Sprite far more effective?
Probably, I'll take your word for it. I have no idea. I have Anubias/Java Fern and doing experiment to see if they are responsible for lack of Nitrates in my tank or is there another factor.

Challenging water change ritual?
I don't care about your water change ritual. I never stated I don't believe in water change.
In fact I repeatedly stated in this thread:
1. This thread is about unusual Nitrate readings in my tank NOT about water change
2. The reason I'm not changing water is because I want to do experiment to see if Anubias/Java Fern are responsible
3. I'll have to do water changes in my set-up regardless of Nitrates as I have to remove fish poo anyway.
4. I have no interest in making water changeless set up.

Why on Earth do you and another poster or 2 insist on bringing up water change and insisting on arguing about it, well that's the question only you can answer.
The only reason I'm arguing with you is because I'm little bit annoyed with people going on and on about water change 'challenge' issue that I don't care about other than passing interest and curiosity.

 

[DoubleDutch]

Can't everyone has his own opinion on certain things? Isn't this what a forum is about ?
There is no wrong and right in our hobby.

As said I think (and that's what you're telling in your post) water is polluted in different ways. Some can be solved by natural filtering (sometimes even without a filter), others can't.

In the enclosed environment like a tank only waterchanges can remove these pollution.
A build up can cause an unbalance.

 

[NannaLou]

@DoubleDutch - I think from following this thread there are plenty of opinions! I’m not in any way able to comment on all the science that’s being discussed, I’ve only had fish for three months and it’s all way beyond my knowledge.

I’m trying to read the thread without letting any form of “argument“ get in the way and taking each point and counter-point as another factor to add to the theory (it’s always difficult to read a tone in a typed reply).

In post #20 the OP does mention again, “if indeed they are responsible“ so still appears to be at the testing his hypothesis.

I’ve read posts on here about the knowledge of water hardness etc. changing and becoming more advanced/widely understood; I expect ‘cycling’ is another topic that has changed and developed over time.

I’m enjoying the debate, and am waiting for some data (a nice excel spreadsheet would be good ) to see what the results are, and what conclusions can be drawn.

 

[DoubleDutch]

@DoubleDutch - I think from following this thread there are plenty of opinions! I’m not in any way able to comment on all the science that’s being discussed, I’ve only had fish for three months and it’s all way beyond my knowledge.

I’m trying to read the thread without letting any form of “argument“ get in the way and taking each point and counter-point as another factor to add to the theory (it’s always difficult to read a tone in a typed reply).

In post #20 the OP does mention again, “if indeed they are responsible“ so still appears to be at the testing his hypothesis.

I’ve read posts on here about the knowledge of water hardness etc. changing and becoming more advanced/widely understood; I expect ‘cycling’ is another topic that has changed and developed over time.

I’m enjoying the debate, and am waiting for some data (a nice excel spreadsheet would be good ) to see what the results are, and what conclusions can be drawn.

Hahahaha I doubt there is an excelsheet available and I understand the annoyance of the OP about "answers/opinions" on a question not asked. I don't think that specific question will be answered though I think the plants definitely help to keep this "overstocked" tank in balance. I like the part of our hobby that sometimes outcomes are unexpected / not being scientifically proven.