[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Vallisineria,Aquatic Plants Digest V3 #483
Aquatic Plants Digest wrote:
>
> Aquatic Plants Digest Sunday, August 30 1998 Volume 03 : Number 483
>
> In this issue:
>
> Trace elements w/o Fe
> Re: Aquatic Plants Digest V3 #481
> Re: Aquatic Plant Reference index
> Re: Cichlid help
> Re: Copper -- Safe?
> Re: Copper -- Safe?
> Caring for plant groupings
>
> See the end of the digest for information on unsubscribing from the
> Aquatic Plants mailing list and on how to retrieve back issues.
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1998 07:34:59 -0400
> From: "Frank I. Reiter" <FIR at istar_ca>
> Subject: Trace elements w/o Fe
>
> For some time now I have been wondering whether my plants are a bit short of
> some trace element. I can easily see how this might be, as I very rarely
> add any. Perhaps once each month I add enough to get my iron levels to 0.1
> or so, and it takes another month again before the iron level drops enough
> to warrant adding more.
>
> The other day I set out to find a trace element mix which did not include
> iron, hoping to add a little to see how the tank responded. I struck out -
> I could not find one.
>
> Many of us have experimented with adding other iron sources to our tanks.
> My own tanks have latterite for example. Is it possible that by doing this
> we make it more difficult to maintain healthy levels of other
> micronutrients?
>
> Can anybody suggest a source for a trace element mix w/o Fe?
>
> Frank.
>
> - -----
> The very act of seeking sets something in motion to meet us;
> something in the universe, or in the unconscious responds as if
> to an invitation. - Jean Shinoda Bolen
>
> http://home.istar.ca/~fir
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1998 08:42:16 EDT
> From: RDotta7777 at aol_com
> Subject: Re: Aquatic Plants Digest V3 #481
>
> In a message dated 8/29/98 4:13:20 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Aquatic-Plants-
> Owner at actwin_com writes:
>
> << I have a problem in my planted tank. 50 gallon tall, heavily planted, 7 3"
> SAEs. Until a few days ago they cavorted freely around the tank.
>
> About 36 hours ago my partner asked where are the fish? I looked around
> and could not find them. Since it was late at night, I decided to wait for
> the AM. When I looked then, I found them huddled on the bottom in a corner
> in the back. I checked the pH and it had dropped from its normal 6.1-6.3
> to 5.4 or so. I started adding NaHCO3 slowly, and brought the pH back up
> to its usual range over the course of six hours. >>
>
> Dave,
>
> I'm not what is happening, but it happened to mine sae's also. They were fine
> for about one month and growing fast. They were swimming in a group and quite
> interesting to watch. Almost over nite they stopped. They wouldn't eat
> either. Three saes from the same purchased group were fine in another tank
> and still doing all the swimming and cavorting around.
> I decided to supplement their diet; i noticed that the algae was almost non-
> existant in the tank. So i put in raw zucchini on a clip. They slowly went
> to it almost reluctantly. Soon there were four and five eating it. They seem
> to be getting fatter again and much more active. Don't know if it was an
> illness or diet problem. Right now they seem to be getting better.
>
> Rich
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1998 10:03:32 -0500
> From: Karl Schoeler <krsfert at citilink_com>
> Subject: Re: Aquatic Plant Reference index
>
> > At 03:48 PM 8/28/98 -0400, Aquatic Plants Digest wrote:
> > >Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1998 02:30:56 -0700
> > >From: Steve Pushak <teban at powersonic_bc.ca>
> > >Subject: aquatic plant reference index
> > >
> > >Does anyone have the aquatic plant reference listing (originally made by
> > >George Booth and later updated by Neil Frank) which has been updated
> > >with Baench Atlas 3 or any other new books?
> > >
> > >Is anybody interested in updating the listing?
> > >
> > >Is anybody interested in preparing a similar listing with URL links to
> > >world wide web pictures of those plants?
> > >
>
> Steve,There is a link for an aquatic plant index at the website for the
> Minnesota Aquarium Society. The list is very complete, and
> to my knowledge has been updated to include most if not all
> of the latest aquatic plant publications. The Minnesota Aquarium
> Society is very active in this area and has won many FAAS
> awards in the horticultural categories.
>
> I am not aware of any pictures included in this, or any link
> to others sites having them, but the list _is_ excellent.
>
> Karl R. Schoeler
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1998 11:11:47 EDT
> From: IDMiamiBob at aol_com
> Subject: Re: Cichlid help
>
> Anthony writes:
>
> > I have never heard of cichlids being described as plant eaters, but many ARE
> >
> > plant 'disrupters.' In the process of making their nests, they can move a
> > lot
> > of gravel, and WILL dig up any plant that's in their way. This is exactly
> > the
> > behaviour you are witnessing with your bumblebee
>
> African Lake Cichlids are vegetarian almost exclusively. I would not
> recommend them in any planted tank.
>
> Bob Dixon
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1998 12:29:24 -0400
> From: Alysoun McLaughlin <alysoun at patriot_net>
> Subject: Re: Copper -- Safe?
>
> > As Mardel Labs/St. Jon's Tech. Rep. (manufacturers of Coppersafe), as well as
> > a friendly, neighborhood, pet-fish ichthyologist, I'd like to encourage folks
> > to 1) utilize a chelated copper test kit for monitoring concentration, and 2)
> > remove the compound from the water after effecting a cure... chronic
> > appreciable copper exposure is of detriment to fishes and plants.
> > Bob Fenner
> >
>
> I just went and checked, and it's actually Aquarium Systems' SeaCure
> I've been using, not CopperSafe. Guess it's what they had on the
> shelves that week...
>
> Anyway, the package inserts also strongly recommend use of a test kit.
> Unfortunately, copper test kits aren't cheap, and I couldn't justify it
> for just a few applications, when there was also a no-test-required
> option on the label. And as I said, it's worked pretty well, so far.
>
> I just re-read my post, and I should clarify; it wasn't well-phrased.
>
> On the three occasions that I've used it, I applied one drop per gallon,
> then one drop per two gallons, a few days later. On one of these
> occasions, I dosed a third time (one drop per two gallons) over the
> course of the week.
>
> I do 20% water changes weekly, and when I dosed three times in the week,
> I did approximately a 40% water change. When I said 'no water changes',
> I meant during the course of treatment.
>
> Alysoun McLaughlin
> Wheaton, Maryland
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1998 12:53:07 -0400
> From: Alysoun McLaughlin <alysoun at patriot_net>
> Subject: Re: Copper -- Safe?
>
> > > appreciable copper exposure is of detriment to fishes and plants.
> >
> > 3) If possible, use a small bare hospital tank for treatment!
> >
> > - --
> > Cliff Lundberg ~ San Francisco ~ cliff at noevalley_com
>
> Want to try catching my rasboras? :)
>
> Anyway, my point was, while copper might not be *recommended*, it's not
> an instrument of sudden death, either. At least, short-term, high
> levels of exposure for treatment, in my case, have had no visible
> effects on my plants (continued growth at the same pace, no deformations
> or discolorations).
>
> So there's some room for experimentation on the initial question, which
> was whether low levels would keep algae at bay vs. any long-term effects
> on fish or plants.
>
> Alysoun McLaughlin
> Wheaton, Maryland
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1998 12:24:31 -0600 (MDT)
> From: "Roger S. Miller" <rgrmill at rt66_com>
> Subject: Caring for plant groupings
>
> Some plants develop tightly-knit groups when they are grown in aquaria.
> In a lot of respects caring for these groups of plants is quite a bit
> different from caring for individual plants.
>
> I think this would be a great topic for Karen Randall to take up in her
> A.F. articles. If she's reading, then I guess she can take that as a
> suggestion, but in the mean time I'd like to hear about the problems that
> other aquarists have with keeping plant groups and how they solve the
> problems.
>
> For instance...
>
> I have groups of Vallisneria asiatica (?) in several of my tanks - I've
> had as many as 70 healthy plants growing closely spaced in a 10 gallon
> tank. Starting from a few plants spaced 2-3 inches apart, it takes a few
> months for the runners to develop a tight group of plants. Up to a point,
> these groups stay healthy and can be very attractive, but I've had four
> problems with them.
>
> Older plants don't fare well, and when I start finding large leaves dying
> back I trace them back to the plant and examine the general state of the
> plant. A lot of times the whole plant is in bad shape, with several dying
> leaves and browning roots. I remove those plants.
>
> After a period of healthy growth, the group will periodically start
> producing stunted growth. New plants are stunted when they are so closely
> spaced that they can't root directly into the substrate. Sometimes I also
> see stunted new plants at the edge of a very tight group. The best
> solution I've found for this is to uproot the group (either all of it, or
> a large part of it), discard the stunted plants and replant the healthy
> plants at a more reasonable spacing.
>
> Debris collects in the groups. This is true in many plant groups but
> probably worse with val since it doesn't have low-growing leaves that hide
> the base of the plants. In a couple cases this has been good for the
> maintenance of the group. I've seen healthy plants with roots mostly in
> the collected mulm. But most often the debris collection is ugly. The
> debris can be siphoning out regularly, but in addition it's best to keep
> the group back away from the front or sides of the aquarium so the debris
> is less obvious.
>
> The groups don't stay where I want them. New runners expand the groups
> constantly, and removing older plants alters the shape and location of the
> group. I found it necessary to allow some of the runners outside the
> group to develop new plants to the point where I can use the new plant to
> replace older plants removed from inside the group. That means that the
> group is often a little out of shape, but it's good for the long-term
> maintenance of the group.
>
> So that's my thoughts on keeping groups of V. asiatica. Anyone else?
Roger: Val has always degenerated/died out for me in "old" plantings.
I don't have hard timing on this and it is probably variable, but a
guesstimate would be 8-12 mos. As soon as degeneration appears I clear
the area and replant the healthy younger growth. I do not believe this
is nutritional or environmental, but a part of the plant's natural
cycle. If you ignore the dead/weak areas, younger plants will extend
new runners back into the area- implying there is no substrate problem.
This doesn't do your aquascaping any good in the meantime. If you want
neat clumps, I don't think you want Val. If it grows at all it spreads
fast
I'm
> particularly curious about approaches to maintaining groups of crypts,
> various "carpet" plants, and the special problems with groups of stem plants.
>
> Roger Miller
>
> In Albuquerque, where its been unusually hazy - I hiked to the top of a
> mountain west of here yesterday, and the haze limited visibility to an
> area about the size of West Virginia!
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of Aquatic Plants Digest V3 #483
> ************************************
>
> To unsubscribe to aquatic-plants, send the command:
> unsubscribe aquatic-plants
> in the body of a message to "Majordomo at ActWin_com". Archives are
> available on the web at http://www.actwin.com/fish/aquatic-plants
> or via FTP to ftp.actwin.com in /pub/aquaria/aquatic-plants.