No Water Column Feets And Sediment Fertilization Exclusively

[plantbrain]

Jeff W had mentioned his method works well(fairly pure scrubbed water column free of PO4 and generally pretty lean while having a sediment rich nutrient source), I made no such debate that it did not nor grew plants effectively.
what was debated was whether or not water column nutrients worked well also, clearly, anyone of sound mind can see that both methods can and do work well. However, I've done both well and do not try to push versus the other method, because each has their trade offs and specific goals, generally based upon a set of assumptions.

The goal here is not to debate that, rather, to show that aquatic plants under controlled conditions can and do grow well with pure sediment nutrient sources, no water column sources at all, nor added CO2.

I've long grown plants with this method and we use this method at the lab.

We use several methods here and several sediments.
The water column can be polished and scrubbed clean via massive DI unit that removes everything other than gases.
Another just the anions(PO4/NO3/SO4 etc), yet another, just the cations(metals, NH4, K+, Na+ etc)

Here are several plants that I've been growing in outside vaults, (86x24x32) with DI drip water added at 10 gph, this essentially removes any trace of nutrients in the water column thus the weeds can only use the sediment as a nutrient source.


In aquariums, this is rather difficult to measure and set up, but many use slow continuous drip water changers and this might offer a nice method for some. For myself, I am interested in how best to compare a sediment to another.

If there are interactions between sediment A leaching into the water column, this can influence sediment B's growth obviously.

So how to get around this issue?
Scrub the water column using a large DI system.
One nutrient scrubbing(say just PO4 or just NO3) and leaching in aquariums is tough and no water changes will have leaching issues.


This forces the plant to use only what it can get from the roots.
The ADA soil does pretty good.

So can you have a nice planted tank without dosing to the water column using a rich sediment? Of course.
Both water column and sediment? Of course.
Water column only? Of course.



I also used another vault and used our ridiculously hard tap well water(GH is 325ppm and 52 mg/L is Mg, very high Mg).

I dripped this through as well at a similar rate.
Not much difference to tell the truth, the color was a bit better in the harder water.

U grammifolia grows like a weed, but the Eusteralis never gets that big, about 40-70% reduction in size in the hard water.
KH is 250ppm.

Isoetes grows well, L aquatic and L aromoatic also do well, as do most all Myrios, Rotala "Green" grows well but slowly.

Here's a nice large giant native pondweed:

Light is about 200 micromoles(about 3w/gal for most folks) and reduced using shade cloth.


In the HC example, think about it, the plant and any plant that can be grown emergent can easily grow without any water column dosing or nutrients over it's entire life other than CO2/O2 etc.
All Crypts and swords obviously can do this, but they can also grow just fine with pure water column dosing as well.

Is this surprising?
No, not one bit.

Plants can grow and get nutrients two different ways.
They can adjust to a variety of nutrient sources, concentrations and conditions.

We can and have added KNO3 and shut the flow of exchange water off ands observed growth.
Same for KH2PO4.
At high starting plant health density, you never get algae
Surprising?
Again no.
We get more weeds, just like in the CA delta:

If you make assumptions, try seeing if they are really true with a fair and logical assessment.
Then test, then show the results and methods, and then conclude.


Regards,
Tom Barr

 

[Dave Spencer]

Hi Tom,

Thanks for the info. I notice you mention ADA Aqua Soil performed well as the soul nutrient source. Does this mean that it contains all the nutrients without the need for Powersand? Are you also suggesting that the AS was the best performing off the shelf substrate nutrient?

Who would have thought plants could grow without a poisoned water column?

Hopefully you will have compiled enough data to write an article on the Barr Report, if that was your intention.

Cheers, Dave.

 

[plantbrain]

Several articles

Regards,
Tom Barr

 

[garuf]

Several articles

Regards,
Tom Barr

how do I get the articles? I'm always after something to read

 

[Liam]

Yeah Jeff W does grow lovely plants with the lean water, what annoys me is that he has been writing the same articles for years with the same method using substrate heating and phosphate and nitrate removing resins. It clearly works and that’s fine but so do many other methods with their pros and cons. In September PFK he gives his water stats saying that his 30ppm nitrate is horrendous and needs total removal. If I were thinking of doing a first planted tank his method would be enough to put me off. Anyway he has been promoting this method as if it were the only way to grow plants for years, as a writer he should try something different and share that instead of the same old thing again and again when you have heard what he has to say once there isn’t much point in reading his articles. His plant profiles are okay I suppose.

Nice pics of the excellent growth Tom, thanks for showing them.

Garuf google the barr report and you can find the articles.

 

[garuf]

I agree, his methods work but its off putting if you are lead to believe its the only way as he seems to do from reading his articles, i'd write an article on how to (or not to ) set up a CO2 injection tank to show there is an easier way if I had more confidence in my facts and writing ability just to show there is another way.

and thanks Liam I've found them now I'll be reading them tomorrow once I've finished twilight watch.

 

[plantbrain]

Yeah Jeff W does grow lovely plants with the lean water, what annoys me is that he has been writing the same articles for years with the same method using substrate heating and phosphate and nitrate removing resins. It clearly works and that’s fine but so do many other methods with their pros and cons. In September PFK he gives his water stats saying that his 30ppm nitrate is horrendous and needs total removal. If I were thinking of doing a first planted tank his method would be enough to put me off. Anyway he has been promoting this method as if it were the only way to grow plants for years, as a writer he should try something different and share that instead of the same old thing again and again when you have heard what he has to say once there isn’t much point in reading his articles. His plant profiles are okay I suppose.

Nice pics of the excellent growth Tom, thanks for showing them.

Garuf google the barr report and you can find the articles.

Well, it meets his idea of a goal, however.................

His goals are obviously not everyone else's and clearly we have examples and experiences to show that not one, or two methods work quite well in fact.....but no less than 5 or more work very well.

My point here is to show that Jeff's can and do work and I can support this, even while arguing in favor of other methods, such as the much leaner Non CO2 method, and the much richer EI method, two polar extremes.

If you can show that you can do several methods, this gives you a well balanced view point.
I suggest folks explore this idea. Especially the non CO2 method and approach.

It has a lot to offer and is not that hard nor cost much relative to the higher light CO2 enriched systems.

I've never been able to show heating cables do anything more than heat the water, no studies, actually several would counter the argument that they work, have ever been shown to aid or increase plant growth in anyway.
There's also nothing in a natural system that acts like that either.
So while some things you can explore and see that they work well and test, others are far far more speculatory
I do not agree with everything, but some points that are actually testable and supportable and not based on belief.

We can and have tested cables in the USA, every summer,m we turn them off, we turn them on again, then off again, not one person has ever said or suggested they saw any differences in growth of better tanks vs the other doing this several times back and forth to see.

If they had any success or significant impact, clearly someone would have seen something, there'd be something to suggest, some test(there is, it's called Redox probes pushed into the sediments, heat increases flow through the sediments, that influences Redox, roots have optimal redox ranges for optimal growth, these are general at non heat cable flows/Redox levels, because..........roots in natural system do not have cable).

That's another point.
The point here is this shows an example of the water column super lean works well.
Why it works is quite another matter.

Regards,
Tom Barr

 

[plantbrain]

I agree, his methods work but its off putting if you are lead to believe its the only way as he seems to do from reading his articles, i'd write an article on how to (or not to ) set up a CO2 injection tank to show there is an easier way if I had more confidence in my facts and writing ability just to show there is another way.

and thanks Liam I've found them now I'll be reading them tomorrow once I've finished twilight watch.

You'd be naive the think that plants can only grow one way.
And that only method will achieve everyone's goal with planted tanks.

We all have different goals, some are similar, some are not.
Many do not care for CO2, some do, some want very fast growth, some moderate, some slow.
What modulates growth?
What are the lower limits?
The upper limits?
In between?

Basic questions we should be asking.

What are the trade offs?
How much effort do we want to put into the tank?

I do hardly anything for this system, but it's a large lab with plenty of vault space to grow.


Regards,
Tom Barr