[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [APD] Aquatic-Plants Digest, Vol 25, Issue 50
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