Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Red Plants, Iron Dependant???
"Craig Brye" wrote in message ...
Yeah... I'm not claiming to be an expert, but I've done "a ton" of research as I have kept aquatic plants for several years now. I've always heard/read about red plants requiring more light. It's also been my experience that red plants I've kept in the past (such as Diandra and E. Rubin) have always faltered when the lighting wasn't strong enough (while other plants were able to prosper). Are you sure that they just did not need more nutrients instead vs the other plants? The lighting was not it after all? What kind of research are you referring to? I've heard all sorts of claims over the years that folks have written. Things like: Plants prefer soft water..........not true. PO4 causes algae(or excess), not true, I add PO4 liberally, I do not have algae Fe causes algae(or excess) Again,. I add it liberally, no algae. NO3 causes algae(or excess) as above 15ppm is the optimal CO2 level(not true, it's 2x this amount, 30ppm for common aquatic submersed plants, this concentration comes from Bowes in various research papers and personal communications) Just because 95% of folks say it, DOES NOT MAKE IT SO. I question it because I had findings that certainly suggest otherwise. No one has suggested any reason or mechanism that refutes the observations I have stated. **I think one thing that folks have trouble with is isolation of an issue. You have to isolated it and then mess with a range of units that interest you. **The other thing is if someone says excess PO4, let's say 1.0ppm causes algae, why do I not have algae then with high light and NO3/K/Fe etc? If this causes algae, where is my algae? Can we still say that is true? Why is it true in some cases and not others? Lighting is no different. This is a similar situation. You crank the CO2/NO3/PO4/GH/Traces etc, low light tanks work great. The Best Eustralis, the best Rotala macrandra, the best D diandra, a Rubin "Tree", Gloss, Chain swords, Hair grass, mats of Riccia etc, all did super are 2w/gal of NO FL lighting in a 24" deep tank with 5" of substrate and good parameters. The other big issue with lighting, it is the one thing that we cannot really get a good measure on so it is indirectly measured or grossly estimated at best. So getting everything else correct and in a good range that you have chosen will allow you to see how the spectrum and the intensity influence plant growth. We went down this about 5-6 years ago on the APD on high light= red plants. Neil, myself, Roger Miller, Karen Randall and many others talked about it. NO3 at low stable levels seems to be the main trick to redden plants, not more light was the general conclusion most came to that tested and tried things out. You name the plant, I've grown it at 2w/gal of NO FL lights with a reflector. There's a few newer stem plants I have not tried, but 99% of the red plants I have grown very well in moderate to low light by today's standards. Take any Ludwigia, or Rotalas and see what color they are when they break the surface and have far more light. Karen Randall agrees on this and tells folks that most red plants are in fact shade low light understory plants. She and I have been at it a few years too. The chemical in red, the anthocyanin is mainly considered an anti herbivory agent in most red plants by Plant Ecologist. The tender tips of plants(the softer part with the most nutrients) are often red for this reason. Some have said the chemical will help protect the plant from high light also as a possible secondary usage, namely from UV radiation. Most desert plants are green..... Regards, Tom Barr |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
red, red, red rose | Gardening | |||
what's a good iron level to maintain? | Freshwater Aquaria Plants | |||
Keeping red plants red | Freshwater Aquaria Plants | |||
Amazon Swords holes in leaf... iron problem? | Freshwater Aquaria Plants | |||
Jonsered Iron Horse | alt.forestry |