[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Lighting

>From: krandall at world_std.com
>Actually, I suggest 2-3 w/g.  My personal preference is for 3 w/g as long
>as you can also supply supplemental CO2.  It lets you grow almost anything.
> In many water supplies, at 2 w/g, you'll be limited to low-moderate light
>species.  The flip side is you can probably get away without supplemental

Here is another point of view. 
I use no more than 2 watts per gallon and I can grow just about anything
that I want too. The plants that I have the most trouble with are some
species of Cryptocoryne, but who doesn't <g> I also have one tank with
crypts, chain swords and "blood red" Rotala macrandra with ~1 w/Gal.

This is not to say that 3 w/gal (50% more light) would not be better...
just unnecessary for my needs. My water is soft to moderately hard.
Because of the tap water, I normally keep my tanks soft (2-3 DH or 40-50
ppm CaCO3), but more recently I have been experimenting with harder water
(up to 6 or 8 DH or ~ 150 ppm CaCO3) and have not noticed many negative
effects, but have seen many postive ones with several plants including some
crypts and the Alimataceae (i.e. Echinodorus and Sagittaria). Their leaves
are now noticeably larger. ... including specific species that I have kept
in the same soft water, 2w/g condition for several years. So, before you
worry too much about that 3-bulb fixture, try your tank out with 2 bulbs.
By the way, 2w/gal corresponds to the Takashi Amano data set for all but
the smallest tanks. See the KRIB.

Neil Frank,
TAG editor