Cheap plant fertilizer

[Ira]

http://www.thekrib.com/Plants/Fertilizer/sears-conlin.html

This link goes to a page talking about fertilizers and plants. Basically the effects on plant growth of adding certain minerals and...Well, fertilizers. At the bottom it's got a recipe for cheap fertilizer. I haven't gotten exactly the right ingredients but I've gotten close using just normal trace element mix, epsom salts and chelated iron from a garden center. As for whether it helps or not...I'm not really sure. I've been using it in my tanks with plants because I'm on tank water so I figure it couldn't hurt to give them. I've tested it on a tank of guppies using huge doses of the fertilizer and it didn't seem to hurt them. And about $20 worth of ingredients lasts...Ummm....Well, I'm not sure, I made a 300ml mix up about 6 months ago and just now am making another batch, and that's using less than 1/10th of the ingredients. So, I'd guess about $2 a year for fertilizer?

I suppose any of you guys with big planted tanks would already be doing something like this. If so, I MEANT to make a useless post.

[Pegasus]

ALL posts are USEFUL Ira, but are you sure this concoction is not giving you the nitrite probs you've been having lately?

A Very handy link, I'll add it to the growing list in "Useful Links"

[Ira]

The nitr(a)te problems have been only in the last week. I've been using the stuff for 6 months. Anyway, this mix I actually took out the little bit of potassium nitrate the recipe wanted.

[Warren]

I've been using a very similar fertiliser based off the Sears Conlin recepie. It works really well and is very cheap. It does not contribute at all to the problems Ira is having. If anything it will improve the situation. I've never had trouble in my planted tank, and it looks great. Anyone who's seen it will probably agree.

[Pegasus]

Thanks Warren

Not up with additives for plants, but just wondered if it could have been causing Ira's problems.

Bill.

[Warren]

Its late, go to sleep!

Just for reference; To date, the Sears Conlin report is about the best information available to people to describe an almost foolproof method of keeping a planted tank. I recommend it. I've used it to set up nearly a dozen tanks and all started up and continued to work really well.

If you are struggling to keep your plants happy, give it a go. Also if you have a big tank it will save you lots (and lots) on fertilisers.

[Pegasus]

Hi Warren, & others,

While on the subject of plants, could I ask,

If plants are reared under intensive growing conditions, eg, fertilizers, CO2 etc, how do they fare when taken out of that enviroment and placed in a normal tank with only fish wastes to survive on.

Bill.

[Pegasus]

Geez.... Is that the time YAWN.... another long day... or is it two, I can't remember

Ok... Where's the link for our growing list, or have we already got it.

Edit.

Just checked... We have

[Warren]

If plants are taken out of the environment they are happy in and put into a normal tank, they will not do well. It is a sad fact (well proven by many people) that plants require certain conditons that are not present in most aquariums.

Its like this: You have an aquarium dedicated to growing plants with a good balance of fish, or you don't have plants.

You can try to add plants to a normal aquarium, but they will enevitably end up looking tatty and algae covered.

There is a reason that the plants are reared under intensive growing conditions with fertilisers, CO2 etc and its because its what they need to survive. Anything less and they will not outcompete the algae, or slowly fade away.

[Pegasus]

Well Warren, you're a very clued up guy, that I respect the opinion of tremendously, but I must say I have to disagree with this.

Its like this: You have an aquarium dedicated to growing plants with a good balance of fish, or you don't have plants.

You can try to add plants to a normal aquarium, but they will enevitably end up looking tatty and algae covered.

[Warren]

I agree, you did do it without some of the fancy gear, but the basics were the same. It would have been primarily setup as a planted tank.

However, unless your tanks look like Takashi Amano's Nature Aquarium World setups... If you can maintain a tank that looks like this for a number of years then its because the focus was on the plants. Sure some people fluke a combination that works, but the Sears Conlin method works guaranteed.

If you get the right balance, it is because you have focussed on the correct conditions for the plants. If the balance is right, the plants can be shifted and will grow well even if the water conditions are not quite identical. Look at plants as if they were a fish. All fish have certain pH, Temperature and Hardness requirements that are different from each other. In nature, virtually all plants have nearly identical basic water parameters.

Bottom Line, no arguments:

If you grow or grew aquatic plants well, it is because the water conditions were right. You may not have known why, but it is guaranteed that it is because of the reasons set down in the Sears Conlin report. Technology like CO2, and Hi-tech fertilisers just help keep the balance more easily by supplying the plants just what they need.

Therefore to answer your original question:

Yes it is possible to move the plant, but it will only move successfully if it is put into conditions that are optimal for it (see above).

[Rob]

I was going to object to Warrens comment:

Its like this: You have an aquarium dedicated to growing plants with a good balance of fish, or you don't have plants.

Because I have (what I consider) well planted tanks, though (I had thought) not dedicated to the plants. Then I thought a bit more about the tanks,

• OK I haven't adopted CO2

• I did put in a substrate below the gravel specifically for plants to grow

• I did change from one fluoro tube to two because I was dissatisfied with plant growth

• I do add fertiliser for the plants

• I got rid of the clown loaches because they kept putting horse shoe shaped holes in the sword plants

• I do keep an eye out for different plants

So perhaps I'm a bit more plant orientated than I intially thought - I like having a balance of plants and fish, this can be achieved with 'low-tech' systems. OK I don't have the plant growth rate that Warren has, I still do have plant growth though - enough that I can earn some 'pocket money' by selling off excess plants.

I think Warrens comment comes across as very black and white, with no possibility of grey - which may not be entirely true - I would look past the word 'dedicated' and instead focus on balance. You need a balance of plants and fish, you need a balance of what the plants need and what commitment (money and time) you are prepared to make (I know some of my plants would perform better if I added more lighting - but I'm not prepared to make that committment).

As for Pegasus's question of:

If plants are reared under intensive growing conditions, eg, fertilizers, CO2 etc, how do they fare when taken out of that enviroment and placed in a normal tank with only fish wastes to survive on.

I would say that if the tank the plants are being transferred to will support plant growth then the intensively grown plants will survive. There would probably be some intitial deterioration while the plant adjusts to the new conditions and becomes established but then it should continue growing (at a slower rate though).

Of course I think we have probably all come across tanks that just can't grow plants - in these cases the plants are just consumables.

I'd like to throw in the statement (unfortunately I can't claim the idea as my own):

I'm not a fish keeper, I'm an aquarium keeper (ie fish in an ascetically pleasing environment, often encorporating plants)

[Caryl]

Rob said "OK I don't have the plant growth rate that Warren has"

Bet you don't have the equipment or power bills either! :lol:

Warren's tank looks great (I have seen it live and up close) but I have seen other well planted tanks that haven't had so much time and money spent on them with perfectly acceptable results.

Having put in my 2 cents worth I think I will go and trim the plants in my 1.2m tank as they are getting out of hand - without the aid of heating coils, fertiliser, fancy lighting etc.

[Pegasus]

Hi again.

You make some good points Warren, but lets face it, you have spent possibly many years studying a topic that you felt was one that you could excel in, which from the reports of people whom have seen your setup, you seem to be achieving, but think of the person out there with no finacial means to suport a venture like you have undertaken.

Does this mean, (from your previous statements) that they never have a hope in hell of producing good plants and fish, or that the average aquarist has been living in a dream world all this time, as to produce anything of quality in the plant line is going to take food from their table to cover the cost.

Hundreds of millions of aquarists, past and present, would disagree with you.

I have never heard of this.... is it a person, or society??

However, unless your tanks look like Takashi Amano's Nature Aquarium World setups

I never will want my tanks to look like his/theirs, and don't particularly want to.

Plants do require certain conditions, and the guy with the ten thousand dollar glasshouse can produce better looking tomatoes than I can on my well fertilized vege patch, but I'll beat him hands down when it comes to taste. (yum yum... Roll on summer)

Bottom Line, no arguments:

If you grow or grew aquatic plants well, it is because the water conditions were right. You may not have known why, but it is guaranteed that it is because of the reasons set down in the Sears Conlin report.

NOTE**

We were growing plants long before these people were even born.

Was your Sears info off the net.?

We were growing them before that as well.

As with fish, anyone that keeps plants should study their requirements.

Many of the plants I grew were in tubs or vats, many without fish, and all without CO2 or Sears Conlin, whom I had never heard of until recently.

Yes, the conditions were right, because I took the time to study what the particular plants needed, many of which were Crypts, which are not easy to grow.

You may not have known why

I certainly did Warren... I certainly did.

In summary.

You are obviously a great guy, with great ambitions, with outstanding knowledge in many fields, and we all truly respect your words of wisdom, however, I for one will continue to grow plants by the methods used by many others thoughout the world.

Happy Days :)

Bill.

[Derek]

Just to add my $0.02 (or perhaps a bit more.)

The Sears-Conlin report is primarily aimed at controlling algae in a planted aquarium. It does not profess to be the "complete answer" to growing plants. Warren is correct when he says

.... the Sears Conlin method works guaranteed.

I have used it myself for many years and can also testify to its success. However it is not a magic bullet which works on its own, it needs to be used in balance with other factors including the fish load and what is fed to the fish

Both case studies in the Sears-Conlin report were tanks that tended towards what is often referred to as "high tech". They both had lighting levels in the region of 0.5watts/litre, they both had substrate fertilization and one had CO2. Under those conditions I would expect one of the macro or micro elements to be the limiting factor in growth. This would cause an imbalance which would allow algae to flourish and potentially outcompete the plants. Fertilizer addition to the water column (at the correct dosage) would alleviate this problem.

However if lighting levels are lower than 0.5watts/litre (which is the most common cause of failure in growing plants IMHO) I would not expect a lack of either macro or micro nutrients to be a problem. In this senario additional fertilization is unlikely to help. Just as adding CO2 will not help if the light levels are the limiting factor

The high tech approach of CO2, heating cables, substrate and water column fertilization will enable a much wider range of species to be grown in any one tank. They will also grow bigger and faster. You could say plants look better (less tatty) because they are producing new leaves faster than the old ones can become tatty from nibbling fish or algae infestations, etc.

The low tech approach can produce some wonderfull tanks but they are usually limited to a smaller range of species.

In both cases good healthy plants can be produced. Deciding if their rate of growth is acceptable is up to individual expectations.

[Ira]

Hmmm, I really need to pump up the wattage on all my tanks. One is 4-5 feet deep and about .3 watts/L and the other is a standard depth and still just .3 watts/L. Both probably lose a lot due to lack of reflectors too.

[Pegasus]

After my previous posts and the discussion with Warren I decided to do a litlle more research on the new methods (perhaps not so new )which seem to be becoming more an more the way to go these days.

Well Warren, it seems that from the pages I have read (must be hundreds) that you can indeed produce better plants using the methods you mention, which was never the issue of course, as any plant given the ultimate in conditions and enviroment will obviously thrive better than one that is neglected.

I'd just like to say that I was staggered by some of the reports I have read, and the fantastic pictures of some of the results obtained.

I must admit that a few of the setups looked more in line with a laboratory than a living room fishtank, but non the less, still very appealing, with amazing results.

There is obviously a new world out there in the techniques of growing Aquatic Plants, (for those that can afford it) and one that we should all at least endeavour to at least consider if we want to get the best from the plants that are available to us here in NZ.

I had never seen a plant "pearl" before, and again, this was quite an eye opener.

Great post Derek... Hope to see you here more often

Bill

[Warren]

Hmm... Seem to have stirred up a hornets nest.

Well, at least it got some of you thinking.

I only have one last addition. How many of you still have most of the original plants you started with. I still have most of the plants I originally purchased over 6 years ago?

[Pegasus]

Picard of Star Trek would say "Make it so"

Please Warren, Don't make it so.

I only have one last addition

[Warren]

I do in fact have most of my original plants.

Because I have an Amazon Biotope, most of the plants are of the Echinodorus species. Nearly all of these plants have rhizomes of one form or another. It is very possible for all these plants to be original. Likewise with crypts. It is only stem plants that will not be original as they grow so very fast (2-4 inches a day). Like wise, I have all my original Aponogeton's as this plant has a bulb. Every 6 months or so the plant will shed all its leaves. I then winter the bulb in a separate cooler tank, and return it back to the main tank approx 3 months later where it suddenly bursts back into life.

I'm not talking about the leaves, only the main part of the plant. So I do in fact have most of my original plants, sorry Pegasus, good try. Hypothetically, how long does a plant live, - as long as you supply its needs. The problem is, most plants don't get a fair chance and disappear with 6 months or so. In an aquarium where they can thrive, it need not be so.

I still argue the point however, that if you have kept plants successfully and had them grow well, there was a reason for it. That reason is because the conditions were right for growing the plants whether you knew it or not. In essence, you had a setup that gave results very similar to what I have. You probably came up with a method or routine that worked. However, it would have been guesswork or luck that got it there. Well, now the guesswork is gone. There is a formula for success and it does have quite a bit of tolerance.

So if you want to grow plants successfully or at least have them hold their own (so your aquarium stays looking nice), read the Sears Conlin report. It will give you the basics and guide you down the correct path.

[Pegasus]

Hi again Warren,

Got to laugh.... When I saw the mail arrive I thought of you, and having not stipulated what plants, I knew exactly what you would say regarding the Echinodorus and Aponogetons, for I too had bulbs and rhizomes from various plants for many years. The first Aponogetons I bought were from an auction at a fish show, and I thought I had been ripped off as when I unwrapped them at home they looked quite dead, but shortly after planting they began to grow, and some time later sent out fine thin shoots to the surface. What happened in between at that time I don't remember, (pretty busy breeding fish) except I awoke one morning to find the whole surface of the tank covered in beautiful tiny flowers... pinkish I think they were... it's a lot of years ago.

Those same bulbs were "recycled" as you might call it, for many years, so I submit to your post, you are quite correct, but about the fleshy ones... well..... If I remember correctly I used to store them in a cool dark place for some time after lifting them, before replanting later on.

Just one.... and only one, thing I disagree with and that is:

However, it would have been guesswork or luck that got it there.

[aspiringAmano]

Pegasus-you stated in an earlier post on this thread that you would like to grow plants semi-comerically-well if this is the case(obviously dependant on species) most modern growers grow their plants emmersed,not submersed as most hobbyists do-this gives much faster and more robust growth,but also different leaf forms and changes in appearance. If for example you want to grow crypts you can simply get some clear tubs,put sand/laterite/flourite,whatever your choice is,stick a few pieces of rhizome in the substrate,cover the substrate with water and cover the tank with cling-film with little slits cut in the top.put in a window and shortly you will have a bunch of crypts-repeat lots of times to make your fortune

David

[Pegasus]

Hi David,

You said,

you stated in an earlier post on this thread that you would like to grow plants semi-comerically-

[aspiringAmano]

Where in the UK? I am origionally from Scotland.

David

[Pegasus]

London, been in NZ 27 and a bit years.