Medium light plants?

The friendliest place on the web for anyone with an interest in aquariums or fish keeping!
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

lmw80

Aquarium Advice Addict
Joined
Jun 14, 2003
Messages
5,972
Location
Bristol, Pa
As of right now I have ~3 or 3.5 wpg on my 20 long. I will eventually attempt DIY CO2, but for now I am looking for medium light low maintenance plant suggestions. I have finally got my hair algae situation under control (or shall I say my flagfish have, lol) so I can't wait to get more plants in there!

Thanks!
 
That is definitely a high light tank Lori. Avoid the CO2 at all cost. IMO they act to rapidly and can cause your fish to go into shock. Chemicals like Flourish Excel will work but are expensive in the long term.

The last time I saw Daniel he was sleeping on the couch. Wake him up and tell him you need a DIY CO2 set up. :lol: :lol: :lol: But really, the DIY is your most viable option.
 
CO2 tablets just don't work well at all. most of the CO2 doesn't stay in the water, and what does is quickly used up.
Excel does work well, but a few plants like valisneria and anachris are damaged by Excel use.
Also, I'm assuming you have at least 3 dKh, so you can safely inject CO2...

You'll need serious liquid ferts: NO3, PO4, K, Iron and Trace. If you've seen mine or Travis's dosing schedules, you'll wanna follow the same sort of routine, just smaller doses.
 
hm....k, so first I have to figure out the whole DIY set-up.....hopefully next weekend I can read the article I found about it.

Thanks for the help guys!
 
This whole thread leads me to a question I never thought to ask before. In this case there is a 3-3.5 wpg setup, what if lmw80 just planted things like java fern and java moss, among other low light plants. What happens?

In this case, no co2 added, but isn't the chain reaction directly affected by how much co2 the plants are actually using, not by the wattage being thrust at the water? I read a past post of Malkore's that helped me really understand things, and this makes me wonder now...

The more light, the more the photosynthesis process in the plants allows them to use the o2, co2 and ferts. co2 usually needs to be added when passing the 2-2.5 wpg range because the plants are gobbling up the co2 in the tank during the reaction faster than the fish can reproduce the co2. (this was my quickie understanding)

Isn't it possible the plants just wouldn't be using up the co2 in the tank faster than the fish can produce it? Maybe this would only apply to those plants that do NOT appreciate higher wpg?
 
java ferns can definitely be fast growers. I turned 2 java ferns bought in October 2003 into about 50 plants of similar size, PLUS two huge java ferns that I don't prune much.
All using 2.93 wpg and 25-30ppm of CO2.

I also used to think java's wouldn't pearl...but I was wrong. Just because the plants don't grow an inch a day doesn't mean they don't photosynthesize like crazy under high light conditions.
But java's will never use nitrate and phosphate as quickly as, oh say your common hygrophilia species will. (hence why they are noxious weeds in several states).


I may be fairly knowledgable about aquatic plants, but by no means should you think of me as an expert. I am far from the level of people like Diana Walstad, Tom Barr, or Curt Dunaway.
 
malkore said:
java ferns can definitely be fast growers. I turned 2 java ferns bought in October 2003 into about 50 plants of similar size, PLUS two huge java ferns that I don't prune much.
All using 2.93 wpg and 25-30ppm of CO2.

So then for what is probably most common low light plants, the theory wouldn't apply, as they would just continue to use up as much light as provided, forcing the co2 levels to drop unless supplemented. I know I've seen plants that enjoy lower light levels, but that selection would probably be very limited.

malkore said:
I may be fairly knowledgable about aquatic plants, but by no means should you think of me as an expert. I am far from the level of people like Diana Walstad, Tom Barr, or Curt Dunaway.

I never meant to infer you were (that doesn't sound right does it?) just simply that you tend to explain solutions, as well as a simple explanation of why, not just the solution to a given problem or challenge. As i noted above, I really like your explanation of the photo- process, with regards to co2 you posted eslewhere some time ago. I think it gives a much better explanation of why, and how to handle supplementing co2 in a tank.
 
Back
Top Bottom