Planted Brackish

[RVS]

oH! Yours is like peat moss but darker? my mistake lol ...i talked about gravel you about substratum isn't it?
both are good tricks for enhance the roots development ñ_ñ

[Christie_ZXR]

I've still got a bag of john innes no2 left over from my other planted tanks, so I was going to use that underneath the sand. Got a busy week this week, so I don't think I'll be able to fiddle with the tank until the weekend. If a regular peat planting substrate worked okay, I should think the soil should be okay too.

Found my light bulb...it's mounted above my biorb!! lol Totally forgot I'd done that with it. So I'll have to go out and grab a new one.

As for water changes, I'm going to play it by ear and see what happens. I have FW planted tanks which don't need changes as often as others, and some which need more, so I honestly don't know what will happen. Quite possibly nothing at all will change and I'll stick with the same amount of w/cs! Since I'm not going to use co2 and I'm avoiding EI or ferts like the plague (hi tech tanks are too much of a pain for my liking) I shouldn't need the silly water changes that often have to go with them, just regular puffer sized w/cs at the most.

I've got a tank which needs shutting down for some time for the lounge carpet to be redone, and the plants are hygrophilia polysperma (sp?), amazon sword, vallis, giant vallis, java fern, anubis and a few others I can't remember the name of, so they're what I'd like to try in there. What do we reckon?

Checked the salinity this morning to be sure, and we're sitting at 1.004 atm, so I can safely drop that to 1.002 on the next w/c and the bacteria will be happy, reckon the plants will tolerate being chucked straight into that salinity? Or should I drop to FW and then raise back up from the beginning? Mr fig 8 is very healthy, so I'm reckoning on him putting up with a few temporary salinity changes for a couple of weeks before getting him back up to 1.004 or 5.

He's going to be a pain to catch! Mushroom sat still at the bottom and got scooped up in a large jar last time he needed moving for something being done to his tank. But this little guy is sooo quick I think I'm going to have a job persuading him to get into the jar. I can see there being a lot of drama involving many nets, jugs, jars, bloodworms and swearing to get him out and into the tub for this one!!

[puffykid]

Good luck.

Yup as long as you don't change the salinity by more than .002 and give about 3-4 days before the next wc.

[Christie_ZXR]

Coolios. eep! All excited! So annoying that I can't get started straight away!!

[bertie 83]

These things take time. They always work out better that way

[kcartwright856]

As for water changes, I'm going to play it by ear and see what happens. I have FW planted tanks which don't need changes as often as others, and some which need more, so I honestly don't know what will happen. Quite possibly nothing at all will change and I'll stick with the same amount of w/cs! Since I'm not going to use co2 and I'm avoiding EI or ferts like the plague (hi tech tanks are too much of a pain for my liking) I shouldn't need the silly water changes that often have to go with them, just regular puffer sized w/cs at the most.

Water changes required for ferts are much less than water changes required for puffers.

As for the plants, the only ones I've read that work for sure are vals, anubias, java fern/moss, hygros, and "moss balls". There are more, but I'm not certain of them yet.

I don't think they'd appreciate being put right in to 1.002. I would acclimate the plants slowly in a quarantine tank. I've been reading that trying to acclimate too fast is a big part of why a lot of plants fail in brackish tanks.

[RTR]

There seems to be a good bit of confusion about plants and substrates, in addition to the aims and results of Ms. Waldstad's techniques.

There are quite e few soil-based substrates which can work quite well long-term in planted tanks. They are primarily used in high-tech closely monitored and controlled planted tanks. I have used such in the past with excellent results, but I no longer do high light high tech planted tanks. They are what they are and can and do work well, but I am not a planted tank person. I am a planted fish tank person. My interest and aim is the fish and what is optimum conditions for them, not in camera-ready landscaped plant tanks, which these days are as likely as not to be fishless. I also operate too many tanks to devote the time required per tank to operate high tech planted tanks.

Ms. Waldstad worked originally from laboratory papers on plant growth under tightly controlled conditions, and unfortunately attempted to generalize from those results to basically uncontrolled highly mixed planted tank configurations. She seems to have missed the point that the conclusions she drew from the scientific work are not justified under the configurations she supports.

To me there is no possible justification for fish tanks with nitrate levels of 40-100 or more ppm. To me, and in this country to the government, such water is unfit for human consumption. Personally I do not want to have my fish in such polluted waters, period. I would not want either myself or my pets to be exposed to such levels of pollution.

Semi-closed systems always become more polluted than their input water over time due to the bioload in the tank. That needs to compensated by plant/algae growth, particulate removal (mechanical filtration) and nitrate and organics reduction (by biofiltration, and dilution by water partials). Any or all of those techniques may be applied to any given system. There have to date been no, repeat no, long-term successful closed systems. Wishful thinking does not work.

[Christie_ZXR]

RTR, I respect your opinion, but I'm afraid I can't say I share it and I'd rather this didn't descend into argument! Can we agree to disagree on this one please?

All I wanted to do for the puff was use some elements of the method. Namely, the soil substrate and the lighting. I was mainly concerned soil and salt might cause problems.

QT tank is in use and will be for some time, (betta needs monitoring for a good few months and can't risk contamination) so I'm thinking drop the puffs tank back to FW and then increase again if 1.002 would be a problem for the plants. Could always drop to 1.002 and try a few cuttings to see what happens.

[RTR]

Ms Waldstad was far from the developer of soil substrates, even if she did provide your personal introduction to such. There is a lot of info on the web about such.

Just please be a bit skeptical about her claims in general. She imagines more than she can deliver.

And for the fish's sake, don't ignore water quality. It does matter.

[Iliveinazoo]

I've still got a bag of john innes no2 left over from my other planted tanks, so I was going to use that underneath the sand. Got a busy week this week, so I don't think I'll be able to fiddle with the tank until the weekend. If a regular peat planting substrate worked okay, I should think the soil should be okay too.

Found my light bulb...it's mounted above my biorb!! lol Totally forgot I'd done that with it. So I'll have to go out and grab a new one.

As for water changes, I'm going to play it by ear and see what happens. I have FW planted tanks which don't need changes as often as others, and some which need more, so I honestly don't know what will happen. Quite possibly nothing at all will change and I'll stick with the same amount of w/cs! Since I'm not going to use co2 and I'm avoiding EI or ferts like the plague (hi tech tanks are too much of a pain for my liking) I shouldn't need the silly water changes that often have to go with them, just regular puffer sized w/cs at the most.

I've got a tank which needs shutting down for some time for the lounge carpet to be redone, and the plants are hygrophilia polysperma (sp?), amazon sword, vallis, giant vallis, java fern, anubis and a few others I can't remember the name of, so they're what I'd like to try in there. What do we reckon?

Checked the salinity this morning to be sure, and we're sitting at 1.004 atm, so I can safely drop that to 1.002 on the next w/c and the bacteria will be happy, reckon the plants will tolerate being chucked straight into that salinity? Or should I drop to FW and then raise back up from the beginning? Mr fig 8 is very healthy, so I'm reckoning on him putting up with a few temporary salinity changes for a couple of weeks before getting him back up to 1.004 or 5.

He's going to be a pain to catch! Mushroom sat still at the bottom and got scooped up in a large jar last time he needed moving for something being done to his tank. But this little guy is sooo quick I think I'm going to have a job persuading him to get into the jar. I can see there being a lot of drama involving many nets, jugs, jars, bloodworms and swearing to get him out and into the tub for this one!!

Isn't the nitrogen source in John Innes No. 2 ammonia? I'd expect a massive ammonia spike and would expect the spike to be higher and last longer than other soil substrates designed for planted aquariums. With "aquasoils" I would change water daily until the ammonia spike settles, with a sand capped John Innes substrate I wouldn't add any fish until I was sure that ammonia was no longer going to leach into the water column.

Brackish tolerant plants will easily take being dropped into SG1.002.

I love the idea of El Natural and the Walsted methods but just can't buy the mini-ecosystem theory; even mother nature carries out water changes.

[J-P]

We kind of stray off topic here. I think an eco-box is achievable but not on our level. You're talking 1000's of dollars worth of equipment for monitoring, lighting etc... it is a massive undertaking. If you have the deep pockets and time associated with it than give it a try.

To put it quite simply, everything deteriorates. As the water gets stripped of its nutrients they need to be replenished. Either chemically or manually (water changes). Water changes are the easiest way to go about this.

If you go the chemical route, then you are measuring out ingredients, testing, adjusting, testing some more, monitoring... you can see the fault in this. It takes MORE time to adjust the water chemically than to do a water change.

You can do a hydroponic system but that still doesn't eliminate the need for water changes. It is just a better filter.

[bertie 83]

I think if we could test for all toxins we would be shocked at what bad stuff low waterchange tanks have in them. I don't buy this little Eco system theory at all, plants only absorb so much.

[RTR]

Only some of us would be shocked at old water's distance from new water. I do wish we had a DIY test for DOCs, but that unfortunately will not happen.

But we do have GH, KH, pH, and nitrate tests and we have problems getting folks to use those, even periodically.