boil them to get the tanning out. or just leave it and keep doing water changes. Over time the tanning will leech out.
Debunked: CO2-Myth --- See tanks without carbon dioxide fertilization
- Thread starter HarleyK
- Start date
Here is my take (I run pressurized co2) you can grow your run of the mill plants without co2 if you have somewhat decent lighting and fertz. You are not going to grow some of the more demading plant and it isnt going to be LUSH unless you have co2 in place period.
Define LUSHJasonG75;4728021; said:
Pics taken 29 days apart, no CO2. Different cameras, sorry for the poor quality of the second pic, but I am sure you can see the difference. Any more growth, and weeding would turn into an annoying chore.
HarleyK
When I started out, I really didn't intend on getting into planted tanks. I simply wanted to replace my fake plants with real ones. Trust me, I am not an expert, pro, advanced hobbyist, etc. But, with NO attention towards the plants, I am getting 4" of growth everyday with hornwort. In the beginning, I was getting more like 8". My java ferns, wisteria, anubias and of course hornwort are all doing great 
With my hornwort, once it hits the top of my 30" deep tank, I cut it in half and replant the trimming. I move smaller trimmings to other tanks. A lot of times, I take trimmings to friends and local hobbyists. This $1.50 plant has doubled its original growth more times that I can remember.
I don't use CO2. Even my lighting isn't all that good, a single 48", 40 watt basic light.
There are a dozen Cichlids and a BN Pleco along with sand substrate, some decent rocks and a couple of pieces of smaller driftwood.
I realize these are all pretty basic plants...but I love 'em in my tank
Before (sorry for cell phone quality):
After:
With my hornwort, once it hits the top of my 30" deep tank, I cut it in half and replant the trimming. I move smaller trimmings to other tanks. A lot of times, I take trimmings to friends and local hobbyists. This $1.50 plant has doubled its original growth more times that I can remember.
I don't use CO2. Even my lighting isn't all that good, a single 48", 40 watt basic light.
There are a dozen Cichlids and a BN Pleco along with sand substrate, some decent rocks and a couple of pieces of smaller driftwood.
I realize these are all pretty basic plants...but I love 'em in my tank
Before (sorry for cell phone quality):
After:
HarleyK;4748789; said:Define LUSH
Pics taken 29 days apart, no CO2. Different cameras, sorry for the poor quality of the second pic, but I am sure you can see the difference. Any more growth, and weeding would turn into an annoying chore.
HarleyK
Again...."run of the mill plants" lets see, what do we have in here? Dawf Sag, Vals, chain sword, duckweed(frogbit) Swords, Anubias. LOOKS wonderful btw. BUT in no means do any of these plants "require" Co2. Very lush.
"You are not going to grow some of the more demading plant in this situation"
JasonG75;4767891; said:
Thanks for the compliment. For a complete species list, see post # 71.
Honestly, this thread is not necessarily about what plants have what specific demands. I generally refer such discussions to Christel Kasselmann's great Aquarium Plants book. That covers it all.
As a general rule of thumb, I'd be hesitant to categorize plants into "demanding" and "run of the mill". There are extremes where this applies, but in between it's blurry, as water chemistry varies across regions. If your tap water happens to mimic a plant's indigenous conditions, then it's easy to keep, some would say "run of the mill". Another hobbyist in a different location can have the hardest time cultivating that plant and would say it's too demanding because it'd need excessive water treatment to thrive. Best example: I have the exact same 10 gal set-ups at work and at home. 20 miles apart. At work, Java moss is taking off like crazy. At home, I cannot cultivate it for the life of me. Only difference is the municipal water supply. Crazy.
HarleyK
Wow, what a great thread! Very informative. Thank you Harley for starting it.
My main reason for having tank is for fish but I think live plants look fabulous and I guess they benefit the water quality as well. I want my plants to grow but not to the detriment of the fish. I would guess this would be the case for most folks on this site.
I have africans, so I decided to keep javaferns and anubias glued to rocks. I have 4 t5s 10,000 x 2, 6500 and anactinic over a 65 gal. the tank is two months old and so far so good with the plants. They grow very slowly, but I guess they are slow growers anyway.
Thanks again!
mark
My main reason for having tank is for fish but I think live plants look fabulous and I guess they benefit the water quality as well. I want my plants to grow but not to the detriment of the fish. I would guess this would be the case for most folks on this site.
I have africans, so I decided to keep javaferns and anubias glued to rocks. I have 4 t5s 10,000 x 2, 6500 and anactinic over a 65 gal. the tank is two months old and so far so good with the plants. They grow very slowly, but I guess they are slow growers anyway.
Thanks again!
mark
I am very much into gardening outdoors, and I know that people often tend to overfertilize plants, which can lead to weakness in the plants as well as creating more maintenance issues (because plants have to be pruned and divided more often). I am a big fan of choosing plants to meet a garden's light, soil, and water conditions, rather than trying to alter garden conditions to suit a specific plant. It makes sense , then, that there could be a parallel to this with aquarium plants.
However, I'm 'way over my head when it comes to trying to even understand most of what is being discussed in this thread!
I have had a 10-gallon unheated tank (ranges from about 66-80 degrees) for the past five years. It has 2 hillstream loaches, 5 pygmy corys, and 5 white clouds. Low light; regular aquarium gravel. The only plant in there is a java fern, but it seems to do okay.
I do 2.5 gallon water changes every week, and I have a carbon filter. Do you think the java fern would grow better if I got rid of the carbon filter? Do you think that because of the java fern, I could actually cut back on the water changes, and the plant would then adapt to the lower carbon dioxide levels and grow better?
And I guess the big question is, if I stopped using a carbon filter and cut back on the water changes, would my fish die?!
However, I'm 'way over my head when it comes to trying to even understand most of what is being discussed in this thread!
I have had a 10-gallon unheated tank (ranges from about 66-80 degrees) for the past five years. It has 2 hillstream loaches, 5 pygmy corys, and 5 white clouds. Low light; regular aquarium gravel. The only plant in there is a java fern, but it seems to do okay.
I do 2.5 gallon water changes every week, and I have a carbon filter. Do you think the java fern would grow better if I got rid of the carbon filter? Do you think that because of the java fern, I could actually cut back on the water changes, and the plant would then adapt to the lower carbon dioxide levels and grow better?
And I guess the big question is, if I stopped using a carbon filter and cut back on the water changes, would my fish die?!
What did the person early in the thread mean when he said that he had lost his tank to blackbeard algae, which is what he deserved for not bleach dipping? Should people really dip new plants in bleach before adding them to their tanks?
