08-12-2012, 07:54 AM
|
#11 | | |
Thanks a lot for the reference to the other thread. The plants have been in the tank since roughly since May or June, but I know what you mean about "settling in." They were doing very well until about a month ago. Except for the Wisteria which grew noticeably slower than the others. I also lost a Pygmy chain sword that was in full light.
| 
|  | |
08-12-2012, 10:01 AM
|
#12 | | | Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikaila31  How exactly are the plants dying? What are the symptoms?
1.5wpg is certainly enough light for plants in a 10 gallon. I would say you may have a nutrient deficiency. Thats usually what a sudden halt in growth points to when not much has changed. | Here are some pics of the plants in my tank, such as they are:
Last edited by Nemo the Clownfish; 08-12-2012 at 10:04 AM..
| |
| | |
08-12-2012, 01:08 PM
|
#13 | | |
I think it is the light but likely nutrients too. The "new" growth on the Wisteria for instance is the wider leaf form, which is one way the plant reacts in an attempt to get more light. I've had exactly the same under dual T8 tubes. This plant needs good light and nutrients.
If the light up to now was that single Aqueon tube, then it was not sufficient. Mikaila is correct on the 1.5 wpg being adequate, but not with poor light to start with. A single tube full spectrum/cool white would be sufficient for most of these plants, though the Wisteria and Cabomba may still struggle.
On the Flourish, I would dose it twice weekly. You mentioned a figure previously, but if this were me I would add about 1/2 teaspoon twice weekly. I do this in my 10g and I have Cabomba which is fairly new (3 weeks) and so far it is growing slow but healthy. I haven't tried Cabomba in many years, and not since I changed over to my more recent lighting/nutrient program so I 'm testing it out.
Byron.
| |
| | |
08-12-2012, 05:03 PM
|
#15 | | |
If the plant bulbs reduce green light without increasing the red/blue light then yes, the light output would be less. But if the difference in spectral output is relative (which I am assuming), the overall light output will be largely the same quantity just different qualitatively. This cannot be determined just by looking at the light, for the reason I have explained before. Quote:
Originally Posted by Byron I know after years of using the tubes that plants will grow much stronger under full spectrum lighting as opposed to these so-called plant or aquarium tubes, when they are in the same size/wattage | On this point, why do you assume this was/is due to more light? Maybe the better growth was due to 'better' light. See: http://jxb.oxfordjournals.org/content/61/5/1267.long, and this that I had linked to previously: http://pcp.oxfordjournals.org/content/50/4/684.full for a couple of explanations as to why it may be the latter rather than the former.
| |
| | |
08-12-2012, 06:31 PM
|
#16 | | | Quote:
Originally Posted by Quantum If the plant bulbs reduce green light without increasing the red/blue light then yes, the light output would be less. But if the difference in spectral output is relative (which I am assuming), the overall light output will be largely the same quantity just different qualitatively. This cannot be determined just by looking at the light, for the reason I have explained before.
On this point, why do you assume this was/is due to more light? Maybe the better growth was due to 'better' light. See: http://jxb.oxfordjournals.org/content/61/5/1267.long, and this that I had linked to previously: http://pcp.oxfordjournals.org/content/50/4/684.full for a couple of explanations as to why it may be the latter rather than the former. | I don't fully fathom the technical aspects, but I do know that aquarium plants grow better with full spectrum/cool white light, high in red, blue and green. This spectrum is "brighter" and I've no idea what this may mean except that it is more capable of driving photosynthesis.
I know you disagree on lumens, but several plant sources still say this is significant. And the full spectrum may have 400 lumens compared to the aqua-type tubes 200. This would seem to correspond to the intensity/brightness, no matter how it may actually relate.
The above-linked studies both use terrestrial plants. I remember the cucumbers, this came up in one of my plant groups a while back, and I cannot remember who it was that pointed this out, and went on about water reducing the intensity of light more than air. The level of TDS in water also impacts this.
Byron.
| |
| | |
08-12-2012, 07:43 PM
|
#17 | | | Quote:
Originally Posted by Byron I do know that aquarium plants grow better with full spectrum/cool white light, high in red, blue and green. | On this we agree. The spectrum that most closely matches natural sunlight seems to be best for plant growth, which makes sense logically as that is the environment in which they evolved. The studies linked, while not perfectly applicable, appear to support this.
| |
| | |
08-13-2012, 07:23 AM
|
#19 | | |
T8s are more efficient, so even though the T12s are higher watts, the light output will be about the same per unit length. But, keep in mind that it is the ballast in the fixture that determines wattage, not the tube itself. So for instance, a T12 bulb in a fixture meant for T8s will be underdriven since they need more current than the T8 ballast provides. As a result it will produce less light than it would with the correct ballast. I think it is recommended not to use T8s in T12 fixtures without also changing to a T8 ballast, I assume this is because the T12 ballast would deliver higher current than the T8 bulb was designed for.
Regardless, two of either of these over a 10 gal is somewhat high light. I tried a dual 18" T8 over a 20 gal (16" tall) and had algae issues. This was without CO2 and using only comprehensive fert. Whether or not you get algae depends on your specific set-up, i.e. plant species and nutrients, etc.
| |
| | | |
Similar Threads 
