Question of the Day Are we past the Estimative Index way of dosing?

[Koan]

Why it is one of the most hotly debated issues in our hobby is not entirely clear to me, as it seems we know what to do to get it right, nor do I see that the state of the art today is much different from what we had 1 or even 2 decades ago.

Well, one thing that has significantly changed in 30 years is hobbyist access to, if not understanding of or management of the crucial macronutrient in aquatic plant systems.

Your Yugang stability reactor for CO2 is actually EI for carbon it is that new approach that allows a hobbyist to maintain consistent levels of the key limiting nutrient, soluble carbon, in excess of plant requirements. While also safeguarding the other half of the hobby, our enjoyment of livestock.

Application of excess of macronutrients for the increase of healthy plant mass goes back to the beginning of agronomy, which is what 30,000 years ago? And strategies for long-term management of growth medium (soil) not long after that.

Then three decades ago, communication made the leap from small aquarium clubs and email groups, to general access internet bulletin boards, for the first time. And this trained agronomist guy brought that extensively well established science of how to grow plants into the hobby conversation.

A hobby conversation that had been the purview of urban, botany-ignorant, non-farming individuals. I think all hobbyists enjoy crowdsourcing and making up ideas, but in this case it was making up ideas about how plants grew, and how algae blooms, to general failure rather than success.

By numbers the hobby will always be almost entirely urban, botany ignorant, non-farming individuals. And the enjoyment of crowdsourcing and making up answers never changes, I think all would agree it's gotten worse not better over that time.

Science can be intimidating, and understandably people don't want to be intimidated in their free time and their hobby. It is a frustrating paradox for everyone.

 

[Yugang]

From a point of view of advising newbies I think EI is probably a good place to start. It's tried and tested and is fairly simple to master, leaving those new to the hobby to concentrate on more difficult aspects, like getting the CO2 right. EI can always be tailored later so the nutrient load isn't so excessive. The necessary water changes perhaps help to establish good husbandry and maintenance habits. I guess it all contributes to initial success and hobbyist retention.

Well, one thing that has significantly changed in 30 years is hobbyist access to, if not understanding of or management of the crucial macronutrient in aquatic plant systems.

+1

I admire Tom Barr, because he was the first to rationalise fertilisation in the planted tank - and we all still benefit from that.
I admire ADA because they were the smartest in commercialisation of fertilisation - and we all still pay for that.

 

[Art]

Hey, what a great discussion! Thank you!

My idea with the "Question of the day" posts is to encourage this type of thinking and open discussion. You guys are awesome!

My personal thinking has changed over the years. I went from:

1. feeling like I didn't know what my plants needed to be healthy so just add 100% of everything in sufficient quantities and don't worry about it (EI); to
2. getting a better feel for the amount of fertilizer my plants need and giving them just that (broken up between macros and micros).

Some aquascapers call this lean dosing. I call it learning what your plants need.

This has resulted in a pretty stable tank with few algae issues. For the most part.

Instability still happens due to mostly life interfering with a routine. This inevitably leads to algae. Pleasantly, however, I've learned to deal with most types of algae so that I don't stress over this. A period of readjustment and the tank is back to looking great, at least to me.

That being said, I am battling BBA now that has taken over. I do admit it is kicking my ass...

 

[Yugang]

My personal thinking has changed over the years. I went from:

1. ..... just add 100% of everything in sufficient quantities .....
2. getting a better feel for the amount of fertilizer my plants need and giving them just that ....

I would argue that for 99% of hobbyists this comes down in practice to the same, apart from semantics. Are you doing water changes so that you keep accumulation in check, and don't need test kits? Are you gradually taking down ferts from excessive levels, to sufficient, to just what your tanks needs? Then ...

Some aquascapers call this lean dosing. I call it learning what your plants need.

.... welcome to team EI, or shouldn't we just settle on the semantics?

This may piss people off

....

I am personally not a fan compartmentalising dosing methods,

..... but from 30.000 feet still see three main branches of fertilisation strategies....

The lean(er) dosing ADA style, and similar, where we add and continue to add premium powders to intricate substrates is in my humble opinion the really different game. Not so much for the plant, I believe, as it discovers that there is not an easy source of its ions in the water column so it just gets it from the substrate. But it is a huge difference commercially, as the community gets influenced with great marketing, a.o. by top scapers in workshops using special aquatic gardening tools shuffling around these powders in multiple delicate layered substrates, then encouraging us doing the same and repeating as we need to keep the sources of nutrients fresh and potent for a continuous re-energizing of the tank. I really admire these vendors for how they basically shaped an entire hobby community around their commercial sweet spot. There is no doubt it delivers top tanks, but I have never seen evidence that same can't be done with much less expensive, and more sustainable (for the hobbyist, less so for the vendors) water column dosing.

This may piss people off

I think third to mention is the offspring of Diana Wallstad methods, and with that we've covered probably the three main lines of thought?