Picture Collection : Plants Deficiencies

**lorba** · 26th Jun 2003, 13:32

Can all members whose plants are currently suffering any known/unknown plant defiencies/damages get a picture and post it here? This thread will hopefully help us to Identify defiencies and provide useful way to counter it. I believe there's no harm in posting some that are already posted. Let's try to post it with details in the format of :

1. Suspected/Confirmed deficiency
2. Picture(s)
3. Symptons
4. Causes
5. Remdies
6. Prevention

It will be good that the picture belongs to you as we contribute it for documentation under AQ.

Thanks for reading and contributing, but please refrain from unnecessary posting

**NaRcOsIs** · 26th Jun 2003, 13:35

good idea! i will start looking for deficiencies in my tank.

**lorba** · 26th Jun 2003, 13:43

Let me start the ball rolling, note that the text is quoted from the web, forgotten source.

1. Suspected/Confirmed deficiency
-------------------------------------------------------
CRYPTOCORYNE DISEASE, CRYPTOCORYNE ROT

2. Picture(s)
--------------------
Will Update

3. Symptons
--------------------
In the early stages small holes develop in the leaves or along the leaf margins. Advanced stages will affect the entire plant or group and cause the breakdown of all the leaves.

4. Causes
--------------------
Not known for sure, but excess Nitrate is a factor. Unclean water, improper nutrients and insufficient light also contribute to the onset of this disease. The odd thing about this disease that by trying to correct the above stated causes, often triggers this disease. Not regular maintenance, but for example doing a water change after a long period or changing the lights well after they were used up can bring about the onset.

As its name suggested, its a common symptons that happens to the cryptocoryne species, usually newly planted or when there's a drastic change in the environment parameters such as lighting intensity.

5. Remedies
--------------------
Immediate improvement to the aquarium set up. Large water change, cleaning of the substrate, removal of all dead and decaying plant material. Don't baby the plants, just leave them alone and they should recover in a few weeks.

For cryptocoryne species, no special remedies are required.

6. Prevention
--------------------
Get on a regular maintenance schedule, do the water changes, keep up with the fertilization and change your lights when the recommended time arrives.

**Plantbrain** · 26th Jun 2003, 14:40

Not to discourage you, but this is an old topic that gets brought up many times every few months.

I will say this about it, identification of a specific deficiency is something that is more learned than shown. I will also say that the solution is rather simple.

Confirmed deficiencies are tough and need to be done in controlled conditions.

If folks had that much control in the first place they generally would not have a deficiency.

Deficiencies generally are expressed through our lack of maintenance.

Once a deficiency is visible, it's much like a cavity in one's tooth. Damage has already been done/started etc.
Brushing your teeth is a much better solution than trips to the Dentist.

So keeping good nutrients/CO2 levels will prevent algae and help plant health. This approach takes care of things before there's a problem. Poor plant health is already a problem by the time you catch a deficiecy.

Deficiencies also look very similar. Different plants express the deficiencies differently. No plant is really the same.

So, ....How do you do this?
Weekly water change to prevent build up, dosing 2-3x a week to prevent things from running out.

Plants have general ranges that they do well in, some minor tweaking is needed sometimes.

Regards,
Tom Barr

**lorba** · 26th Jun 2003, 15:56

----------------
On 6/26/2003 2:40:39 PM

Not to discourage you, but this is an old topic that gets brought up many times every few months.

I will say this about it, identification of a specific deficiency is something that is more learned than shown. I will also say that the solution is rather simple.

Confirmed deficiencies are tough and need to be done in controlled conditions.

If folks had that much control in the first place they generally would not have a deficiency.

Deficiencies generally are expressed through our lack of maintenance.

Once a deficiency is visible, it's much like a cavity in one's tooth. Damage has already been done/started etc.
Brushing your teeth is a much better solution than trips to the Dentist.

So keeping good nutrients/CO2 levels will prevent algae and help plant health. This approach takes care of things before there's a problem. Poor plant health is already a problem by the time you catch a deficiecy.

Deficiencies also look very similar. Different plants express the deficiencies differently. No plant is really the same.

So, ....How do you do this?
Weekly water change to prevent build up, dosing 2-3x a week to prevent things from running out.

Plants have general ranges that they do well in, some minor tweaking is needed sometimes.

Regards,
Tom Barr
----------------

Definitely not discouraged

. I agree with you.

But looking at numerous post of topics like [Why my plant are melting, turning to some colour], this thread can hopefully tidy up the likelihood-answers and provide a basis from which we can diagnosis, which, at the end of the day, are probably leading to the same answer - maintain your tank well.

**Plantbrain** · 27th Jun 2003, 01:50

My point is that simply resetting the tank will solve every issue without needing any deficiency diagnose.

Photo's are simply not needed to cure what ails the plant. Except for a few algae, the same can be said for various algae control protocols as well.

It's all the same old thing.

Folks often expect some profound approach, some intellectual deep insight etc with complex answers etc, but it's(the how) more simple than folks think.

The &quot;how&quot; to always keep nice tanks/plants etc is much easier/simpler than &quot;the why it works&quot;, the diagnose itself, the testing involved to figure out what the diagnose may or may not mean, the test which are subject to error also, the level of aquarist etc etc etc.

It's much more work to figure it out this way. The way I've suggested is far less work and yields the answer and results you are looking for.

&quot;How to keep and maintain healthy plants&quot;

Once an aquarist has the ability to control the tank and test well enough to established the deficiencies, they no longer need such information since they have nice conditions.

Having good conditions except for one parameter of interest at time is the only way to analyze the effect.

If you have that kind of control, unless you are interested in the science etc, most folks at this level are already are keeping a nice tank and don't louse up one nutrient just to see what destruction it will do to their tank.

Old timers that have gone a few rounds and know what they need to do to get a tank back into shape. Some test but most do the big trim/prune/dosing nutrtients after etc and keeping up on the tank maintenance routines.

It's the same old thing over and over.

Regards,
Tom Barr

**naturetan** · 27th Jun 2003, 04:34

May I suggest to list down the good range of nutrients ideal for healthy plant growth. This would address most of the deficiency, as well as providing good information for problematic tank like algae. Then we do not need to figure out this and that, but ask everyone to achieve that ranges in their fertilization?

Tom Barr, there's another issue that might not be easy to recommend for everyone with your estimative method. Many with large tanks would rather prefer not to have large water changes everytime, but is happier testing to know their tank consumption rate and make 20-30% water change, perhaps once in one or two weeks time. Would like to let you know about our country situation.

Actually, it's not about the price of the water that deter people, but it's about water conservation that our country has been regularly campaigning. To us, water is very precious since we as a small country which lack of natural resources, have to go about to other country to beg them to supply us.

So to many, if changing of smaller amount of water works for their tank, they would be happy to do so without large changes. Thus, you'll still see test kits play a part in the forum to understand individual tank consumption rate. Though I'm currently using the estimative method for my 2ft tank, I would consider changing to small water changes too should I owe a bigger tank.

Thus, recommending a large water change everytime to all is difficult. Hope this help you understand about our country context of water situation, and why our forum keep discussing about testing their tank water chemistry, which I understand you're not in favor of.[

]

**PeterGwee** · 27th Jun 2003, 07:05

[quote]Don't keep large tanks if it's a concern.
If you have the $ for large tanks then you should be able to afford the associated water bill.

Often, there are 3 tiers on a water bill, one for normal folks without large tanks, or folks that like 30 minute showers or wash their cars once or twice a week etc etc.
As your per capita/house/apartment usage goes up, so does you rate per cubic meter/ cubic ft etc.

This is enough to deter folks from using lots of water in areas where there is little water, like CA. We'd rather give the farmers all the water here or steal entire rivers from the Sierra's to feed LA

Aww the politics of water is a really ugly place here in the USA and in much of the world. It's going to get much worse in the future.

But your concern is more a social political issue. Answering your question can take that path.

But one way you can do what you are asking about is to have numerous test kits, good ones also. You'll have to test often(weekly) and you might get away with less testing as you get a feel for the tank's ebb and flow of nutrient consumption.

I really feel if water conservation is a large concern, a non CO2 tank apporach is far more condusive. I only add water to top off for evaporation only. I change maybe 30-50% every 3-6 months.
I also use the wastewater to water my garden out front. Some folks I know even refilter their wastewater through carbon/DI beds. Some used RO and saved the wastewater from that for the garden, but you'd need room for that.

You are going to give up something if you don't plan on large water changes. $, time and testing/kits, faster growth, less guessing etc.

Sure, you can do it but there's always a trade off. Whether or not these are worth it or not may be open to debate.

Regards,
Tom Barr[quote]

**naturetan** · 27th Jun 2003, 12:39

----------------
On 6/27/2003 7:05:09 AM

You are going to give up something if you don't plan on large water changes. $, time and testing/kits, faster growth, less guessing etc.

Sure, you can do it but there's always a trade off. Whether or not these are worth it or not may be open to debate.

----------------

I'm not sure what's the trade off for small water changes, but I've seen people successfully doing it for years without much problem, and they're happy with that. Perhaps, they go moderate with everything, lighting, fertilization, etc, and avoiding excess.

I understand that a non-CO2 tank are rather limited to the number of plants one can grow, and the plants aren't as rich and green as a CO2 tank? So, if there's an alternative to take inorder to avoid both extreme, many would be happy to go about doing it.

Well, this might leads to the social-political issues. But we can't deny such social context in our country, not to mention the civic-conscious each individual are encouraged to take for the usage of our limited natural resource.

FC · 27th Jun 2003, 13:21

Puzzled...how PeterGwee became Tom Barr?

**Allen_1971** · 27th Jun 2003, 13:49

Peter,

While many of us respect Tom for his many contributions to the hobby, I'm a bit surprised that you just copied something he wrote wholesale.

Firstly, some of what was written doesn't apply directly to the earlier post, making it irrelevant. Furthermore, Tom probably doesn't have a good understanding of the sensitivities pertaining to water and its use in Singapore.

On the whole, even though you may agree with what was written by Tom, it would have been much better to contextualize and paraphrase it.

**naturetan** · 27th Jun 2003, 13:54

----------------
On 6/26/2003 3:56:42 PM

But looking at numerous post of topics like [Why my plant are melting, turning to some colour], this thread can hopefully tidy up the likelihood-answers and provide a basis from which we can diagnosis, which, at the end of the day, are probably leading to the same answer - maintain your tank well.
----------------

Lorba, since plants deficiency are rather difficult to analyse and many times are inter-related with other nutrients, here's my take to be put as a reference for anyone whom encounter deficiency problem. One should strive to acheive a good range of water parameter below:

Macro Nutrients
CO2 -&gt; 20-30ppm (reading taken from KH/PH relationship)
NO3 -&gt; 5-10ppm (test kit or estimative dosage)
K -&gt; 20-30ppm
PO4 -&gt; 0.5-1ppm (test kit or estimative dosage)
GH -&gt; 3 or more (test kit)

Micro Nutrients
Traces dose together with Fe.
Fe -&gt; 0.5ppm or more (test kit or estimative dosage)

Too high the nutrient, make water changes. Too low, dose the appropriate amount.

Further information on where to buy those product might be provided. It's easier for many whom are new. Above parameters are extracted from Tom Barr's recommendation. Feel free to comment if not right.

**TBI** · 27th Jun 2003, 14:24

think peter is tryin to let people that it had been posted before....if im not wrong.
anyway it is good that he post it again to let those that hv not read it before.
copy is wrong but copy wit the right intention is BEST! heehee
anyway i used to copy when i was in school...heehee

**PeterGwee** · 27th Jun 2003, 14:37

Allen, I did not just cut and copied for your info. I am the one who asked Tom about how we can do the estimative index method without the large water changes in Aquabotanic and this is just what he replied. I just took his comments and applied it here....isn't naturetan asking Tom about it? Mmmm...maybe it does not answered the question directly but I'm in a rush back to camp (ICT)...no choice lah...rush rush...

**timebomb** · 27th Jun 2003, 17:02

Peter,

You didn't do anything wrong by copying Tom's post. However, you confused many people when you didn't state clearly that it was a copy. We all saw Tom's name at the end of the post but many of us wondered how you suddenly became Tom Barr. You should have prefaced Tom's post with some of your own remarks. For instance, you should have said &quot;Here's a post from Tom Barr&quot; or something like that.

Allen may have sounded a bit hostile in his post but I don't think any hostility was intended. Take it easy, man. Be more thick-skinned. Like me. [

]
People pass sarcastic remarks on my opinions all the time but I don't feel a thing at all.

Loh K L

**naturetan** · 27th Jun 2003, 17:06

Err... PeterGwee, don't worry, Allen is just giving some supportive statement, while making some suggestions to your posting and meant no hostility. I'm very sure.

Let's keep any discussion based on facts written, and not about individual personality. This will give us a more conducive virtual platform where knowledge grows.

**Allen_1971** · 27th Jun 2003, 17:15

Peter,

If I came across as hostile, then you have my apologies... thats was not my intent.

my point is simply this, Tom's reply to you in AB came in response to a certain context of questions. While it bore some relevance to the questions which Naturetan asked, it was not completely relevant. As such, you could have taken the time to contextualize it. This could either have been done by paraphrasing what Tom said to more specifically answer NatureTan, or by explaning the context to which Tom's answer was given. Either would have helped.