[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Aquatic Plants Digest V3 #1364
>
>>Your un ID'd plant is likely to be Altenanthera reineckii/sessilis. It's the
>>easiest(relatively)
>>nice red plant to grow IMO.
Olga wrote: (Hi, Olga!)
>Hi Tom, well maybe this is true in your particular water. Though I have
>much success with many aquatic plants, Altenanthera reineckii/sessilis
>doesn't grow worth a darn for me. I have better success with almost any
>other red plant.
I've been told that I have "magic water" in Marin County,CA<G>. Perhaps I
can sell it on ebay<g>! It bugs the H*ll out of me when I can't grow a
certain type of plant. So I try everything to get it to go.
Alleopathy might be something to consider also with not able to grow this or
that plant.
I use to think that I couldn't grow Eichhornia diversifolia and it wasn't a
good aquatic plant.
Then I removed my Heteranthera zosterfloia and wham! It started growing just
fine along with other plants. I haven't found anything that would suggest A
reineckii is effected by this alleopathy but it certainly is a possibility.
There are so many possible combinations that finding a relationship is
extremely difficult and lucky many times. I can't do well with certain
Crypts under many types of MH,PC,and FL's lighting but they do super under
Quartz lighting.
>>If it's not your lighting then it's your trace/macro elements then.
>
>Kean doesn't say what size the tank is. Perhaps 2 watts per gallon is
>inadequate for this size tank. Iron counts but in my experience high light
>is what gives red plants their best colour. I think very red A. reineckii
>will need more light. Anyone else?
I believe I did say that I have nice red colored plants in 2 watts/gallon
and that *assuming* the green plants are doing fine in Kean's tank
then...............yada yada.
He was specifically asking about red plants not a general plant problem. I
agree watts/gallon isn't the best quanitifer of light levels due to tank
sizes maybe being extra tall etc. but do we have a better rule of thumb that
can measured light without buying lux meters/PAR meters and effeciency
ratings and that whole mess?
Examples of nice red plants can be seen from Neil Frank's nice red
plants(he doesn't use anything over 2 watts a gallon) and other's on the
list who are quite able to grow very red plants without lots of light. Color
AND light are also, as Roger miller stated, lore from aquatic plant books,
just like iron in regards to red color. Red color isn't produce directly
from high light and great iron levels.
>
>>On Mon, 1 Nov 1999, Tom Barr wrote:
>>
>>> Lack of red color
>>> is often thought of as a iron deficiency.
>>
>>This is oft repeated. Is there any reason to believe it's true?
>>
I worded it that way as to avoid saying it was indeed iron with certainty.
I know that specifically iron doesn't cause red color but in general terms
it does help in overall health of the plant. I see that what I wrote was
suggesting that it could be iron that causes reds in plants. This is not so
nor is what I think.
I reject the notion that high light levels and iron are reasons for good red
color. Perhaps better/faster growth, more dense foliage, general health but
when it comes to color by itself, I disagree.
I have too many instances were tanks haven't had any iron added, low light
levels yet extreme red color. My observations have been mirrored by others
on the this list and not on this list.
Why is there a red intense color when these two elements are absent then?
Seems very unlikely that they are.
There are **holes** in every generalization. Just ask Bill Clinton his
response to sexual relations<g>.
It's too soon to say exactly why plants can have great red color sometimes
and little later. There are theories out there but I'm still working on it
and don't wish to comment yet.
Regards,
Tom Barr