Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

whats the cause of this diifecency?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • whats the cause of this diifecency?

    hi, this is 45g/co2/48 watt/EI
    MY Anubius showing this on fairly new leave
    DSC_0676.JPG
    DSC_0671.jpg

  • #2
    If it's only one patch maybe it's caused by a fish or a snail?

    regards,
    dutchy
    regards,
    dutchy.

    My 2011, 2012 and 2013 AGA aquascaping contest entries:
    http://www.barrreport.com/album.php?u=21013

    Comment


    • #3
      hi,
      it started as small brown spot then got bigger.

      Comment


      • #4
        Maybe this can help.



        http://www.aquaticplantcentral.com/f...y-diagram.html
        Last edited by barbarossa4122; 02-13-2011, 01:46 AM.
        "Ich Hatte Einen Kameraden"

        "In the Shadow of Hermes"

        Comment


        • #5
          Having folks learn how to use CO2 right is hard, no chart is going to make this clear.

          And the java fern in Hani's tank has CO2 issues.
          The old leaves will not recover, may as well trim them off and wait for new leaves.

          The Anubias, I've seen this before, but hard to say, could be some ferts in dry form hit it, something else burnt the region, many other potential things other than just ferts of CO2.

          I have some SERIOUS ISSUES with this chart, the 1st thing on Deficiencies has has been falsied is frankly RUBBISH.
          The Mg and K+ quackery has no business there.

          These are myths and the chart only helps to reinforce this myth further.
          I've yet to see a single confirmed case of Ca Deficiency in 15 years, and it is not from a lack of looking.

          I've NEVER seen yellowing due to PO4 deficiency.
          I can go on and on. If you do not know, just leave at that, and make it clear it is an unanswered question........do not GUESS then say you know when you really do not.
          Some parts of the chart are good, but many others are misleading at best and some are outright myths.

          There is little discussion about O2 with respect to CO2.
          And as Wet is aware of, little about lighting.

          I'm going to be particularly harsh on these charts, since many love and cling to them.
          If there is uncertainly and evidence that contradicts it, I'm not going to back down.
          I've tried for over 10 years to show that the K+ and Mg business is real, never have I been able to confirm ANY of it.
          I have on the other hand, falsified it multiple times in multiple tanks.

          Simply claiming the myth over and over will not make it fact.
          www.BarrReport.com

          Comment


          • #6
            Here's an example of Mg and K+ over dose(25ppm and 50ppm+ respectively,) on highly sensitive species:





            Now show me how these plants are stunted will you?
            Anyone?

            The tap was cut 50% with RO, this means 25-26ppm Mg++ in this tank and the tap is very consistent, water changes where done 2x a week. K+ was dosed well over 50ppm per week.

            I have nice soft water now and while I do not need to lard on Mg or K, I also know that excess do not cause any of this correlation baloney either. For that to be the case, the tank above would not be possible. The result would be stunted and I could neither confirm nor deny the conclusion.

            However, if there is no negative effect, it must be some other alternative hypothesis. It cannot be independently due to Mg/K. We can also add high NO3 to these falsifications with the tank above, 50ppm added a week.
            www.BarrReport.com

            Comment


            • #7
              Hi,
              I was playing with the tank, so i decided to see what happen with high light, so i went from 2x24 T5 to 4x24 T5, CO2 with AM1000 and panworld pump px40, an atomizer on the 2217, withen 2 weeks i saw black spots on the java and anubias, could not add any more co2 my Colombia tetra were at the edge. anyways , lowered the lights and all the new leaves are spot free. the pic shows the new leaves, the older ones are underneath.
              DSC_0679.JPG

              Comment


              • #8
                I think light adaptation could be the issue as well, which is not a nutrient issue.

                Give Fern about 1-2 months between changes to make an assessment.

                I have had a client's tank and can tell what is going on, they meddled with the CO2.
                I locked it off so they cannot adjust or meddle, curiously, this is no longer an issue.

                I also reduced the lighting as well, same result.

                Demand for ferts are less with less light, but.........the CO2 was the biggest factor, ferns do not have high nutrient demands.
                www.BarrReport.com

                Comment


                • #9
                  Advice taken about charts. Thanks Tom.
                  "Ich Hatte Einen Kameraden"

                  "In the Shadow of Hermes"

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by barbarossa4122 View Post
                    Advice taken about charts. Thanks Tom.
                    Well, it could be stuff that has nothing to do with CO2 or ferts is part of the problem, time, patience, adaptation, burns, fish etc.......
                    Many things could go into it.

                    I've torn the Mg and K+ and ratio business to bits many times, willignfully spreading myths based solely of their beliefs without any concreate evidence, just a guess, then this clowns go on to poo poo me after I provide evidence to the contrary
                    and willfuly ignore it.

                    More magic and sorcery??
                    Gets old when folks repeat the same old myth 3-4 x.
                    www.BarrReport.com

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X