Re: [APD] Aquatic-Plants Digest, Vol 25, Issue 50

["S. Hieber" <shieber at yahoo_com>]

Have you tried Rubins?

sh

--- urville <urville at peoplepc_com> wrote:

> i totally agree. i just want to grow plants so big that
> one day i'll 
> have to ask myself. "Did that plant eat my cat?"
> lol
> 
> Vaughn Hopkins wrote:
> 
> >It looks to me like you can enjoy this hobby in many
> different ways.  
> >If you like tinkering, "inventing", making your own
> equipment, you can 
> >enjoy that activity, as I do.  If you enjoy aquascaping,
> making the 
> >artistically "perfect" arrangement of plants, rocks,
> wood and fish, you 
> >can enjoy doing it that way.  And, if you have a
> scientific bent, and 
> >enjoy research, you can buy lots of meters, gages, test
> kits, etc. and 
> >enjoy that part.  I don't see any of those approaches
> being superior, 
> >but just different ways of finding enjoyment in a hobby.
>  Tom Barr is 
> >unique in having many years of experience, both at his
> job and at this 
> >hobby, and, as a result, offers information that I
> haven't seen 
> >anywhere else.  His approach may not appeal to everyone,
> and it 
> >doesn't, in fact, but the information he provides is
> certainly very 
> >helpful to everyone.  Now, as to light levels, I really
> would like to 
> >see more empirical data on the effect of light on plant
> health and 
> >growth, and an improvement to the watts per gallon
> standard would be 
> >very interesting indeed.  (Not that I would necessarily
> change anything 
> >as a result.)
> >
> >Vaughn H.
> >
> >On Sunday, September 18, 2005, at 09:42 PM, Liz Wilhite
> wrote:
> >
> >  
> >
> >>On 9/18/05, Jerry Baker <jerry at bakerweb_biz> wrote:
> >>    
> >>
> >>>. There is a definitive answer on the minimum
> >>>light required, or the most PAR per dollar/watt, and
> just about any
> >>>other topic involving a result that can be measured
> empirically. Just
> >>>because we don't know the answer yet doesn't mean
> there isn't one.
> >>>      
> >>>
> >> There is a definitive answer for every combination of
> CO2 level, pH,
> >>nutrient level and species of plant. That's thousands
> of definitive 
> >>answers,
> >>each equally valid. I've done enough years of research
> in a lab to walk
> >>gingerly around the edges of that size problem space.
> >> I suspect the real reason the pursuit of the ultimate
> in fine grained
> >>knowledge doesn't interest a lot of people is that the
> beauty of a 
> >>planted
> >>tank has almost nothing at all to do with the rate of
> plant growth, 
> >>having
> >>more to do with basic health, fauna, artistry, color
> and texture,
> >>preferences of growth habit and design. It's not that
> no one cares, 
> >>its just
> >>that it is not necessary to enjoy the hobby for most
> people.
> >> Liz
> >>_______________________________________________
> >>Aquatic-Plants mailing list
> >>Aquatic-Plants at actwin_com
> >>http://www.actwin.com/mailman/listinfo/aquatic-plants
> >>
> >>    
> >>
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Aquatic-Plants mailing list
> >Aquatic-Plants at actwin_com
> >http://www.actwin.com/mailman/listinfo/aquatic-plants
> >
> >  
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Aquatic-Plants mailing list
> Aquatic-Plants at actwin_com
> http://www.actwin.com/mailman/listinfo/aquatic-plants
> 

_______________________________________________
Aquatic-Plants mailing list
Aquatic-Plants at actwin_com
http://www.actwin.com/mailman/listinfo/aquatic-plants