Meaningful Works

Previous articles have addressed plant nutrition and their roles in post will address two main approaches for supplying nutrients to submersed aquarium plants: the substrate and the water column. These two locations have been fiercely debated over the last 20 years and very intensely since the introduction of PMDD(Poor Man’s dosing Drops, or some referred to them as Poor Man’s Dupla Drops) back around 1995-1996. For the best results with aquarium plant, I highly suggest that everyone reading this also read the Sears and Conlin paper.

Water column:
Kevin Conlin among many others from the APC mailing list helped to developed a cheap simple plant nutrient formulation using KNO3, MgSO4, K2SO4 and the CMS+Boron trace mix. This approach was based upon Liebig’s law of minimums and the prevailing limnology of northern lakes and papers from such researchers as Phillips et al 1978. The main tenet was to provide enough PO4 for plant , but not enough for algae to thrive. I had high PO4 in my tap water while dosing KNO3, K2SO4 and good traces, along with high CO2. Most aquarist at the time (early to mid 1990’s) had 2-3 mm plain sand substrates, with laterite mixed into the lower 1/3 of the layer. Essentially this method was relying mostly on the water column for plant nutrition. This provides guideance on Aquarium Plant Food.

Several Dutch and German aquarist had been adding soil and loam and getting good results as well and not adding KNO3 and K2SO4, but generally used Tropica Master Grow which has some Mg2+ and K+ added. Scientific support based on biological systems had significant support for this culture method (Barko and Smart, 1985, Phillips et al, 1978). This enabled both approaches to work well but neither has dramatic growth over long time frames without re-enrichment of the substrate, often experiencing unexplained lulls in plant development and problems with growing particular aquatic plant species. It is also important to note, historical light intensities where much lower than today’s standards in terms of efficiency, color spectrum and reflector use. 1.5 to 2.0 watt per gallon where the normal ranges using T12 fluorescent lighting without reflectors at that time. 15ppm of CO2 was the normal suggested CO2 range. Micronutrients where added based on test kits for Fe. This means that growth was much slower and the aquatic hobbyist had much more room to work with in terms of the sources of nutrients, smaller loading from biological waste still provided enough for the plants to get by fairly well, substrates alone could supply most of the nutrients at the slower growth rate. Then high light power compact fluorescent lighting dropped in price as did metal halide lighting. There was a rapid trend to more light and higher color temperature. This in turn, led to more dependency upon inorganic fertilization approaches, much like farms that require fertilizers to grow their crops year after year rather than a “balanced ecology” concept where food is gathered from natural areas and no fertilizers are utilized to enhance production. When conversations of “balance” are brought up, the focus should be on balancing the natural biological waste with the plant uptake and nutrient needs. For a more modern approach, the Perpetual Preservation System should also be considered as an alternative approach towards plant nutrition.

Share This