Difference between revisions of "Category talk:Low-light Plants"

Latest revision as of 08:52, 3 July 2011

Is this the place for discussion? I think this "low light" plant list is very misleading. It all depends on your definition of what low light is, and that in and of itself is very ambiguous. True "low light" plants are on a very short list. These are plants that are known to grow very slowly and be able to tolerate sub standard light levels to a greater extent than other aquatic plants. The list would include Anubias, some mosses, and some aquatic ferns. Maybe a very few Cryptocoryne species. That's it. Certainly no stem plants would qualify.

Most of the plants on your list would not survive in what most people would consider low light- 1 watt or less per gallon. It is ridiculous. It looks like the same list that was posted on three or four forums and laughed off most of them.

This page has been on here longer than I have. No idea where the list originated from. Hygro polysperma would be classed as a stem plant yes? I had it in a shut down tank with 2" of water left for over a month. The only light was from the window on the opposite side of the room. It was putting out new lovely green shoots above and below the water line. If that ain't low light I don't know what is! --Cat 17:03, 15 March 2011 (EDT)

Well Hygrophila polysperma has been illegal in North America for over ten years. Sunight is a legitimate source of light to grow plants, but it is very difficult to measure. The whole idea of "low light" and what constitutes "good growth" is so subjective and not the least beat definitive. If someone is going to apply a wide brush definition of the term and apply it to a list of plants, it should be qualified somehow to explain it is dependent upon a whole array of other factors such as C02, how old the substrate is, (if its five years old it is very rich in nitrogen), nutrients, water conditions, and other variables. In some peoples eyes and the inexperienced the plants may appear perfectly healthy when in fact they are stunted and deformed. It is just too general a classification in my opinion. But when newbies read this they think they can stick the plant in their new aquarium with the little 15 watt bulb that came with the tank and it should grow just fine.

I'm in the UK. Hygro is everywhere here, very easy plant to grow, handy stuff. If you feel like re-writing this article, go right ahead! My plant knowledge is limited, very trial and error and throw DIY ferts at it and hope it doesn't die! --Cat 17:47, 15 March 2011 (EDT)

Indeed this is an old page. That block of text was added by Q in 2007. Plants should be automatically added here by using the {{Plant Data}} template, but I just now see that I haven't finished the categorization template for plants. I'll get to it ASAP so they can be switched over.--Brian 22:24, 15 March 2011 (EDT)

Alright added the categorization to the new template, this category should slowly move over to Category:Low Light Plant P.S. Category:Pages Using Outdated Templates--Brian 22:34, 15 March 2011 (EDT)

This reminds me of reading about tropical plants for indoor use. "Low light" is indeed incredibly subjective - considering that in the tropics, being shaded by trees, larger plants, and some other plants is still more light than ever comes through a temperate window. I consider my aquarium to be "low light" since I can't get a sunburn from it. It's only got about 150w/75 gal. right now. Seriously, if I spent one hour under the canopy in the tropics without protection, I'd get skin cancer, after my skin regrew from being burned off. Huw Powell 22:43, 15 March 2011 (EDT)

low light[edit]

Yes it is subjective. The hobby generally regards 1-2W of T8 tubes per US gallon as low light. My own 250L tank only has 2x 38W tubes. Which is 76W over 55g, or 1.38W per gallon. But my amazon swords, crypts and Ricca moss grows well enough for me. Though I'm tempted to try 3 tubes. :)

With T5 tubes more common now as well as LED lighting coming along. These numbers are becoming meaningless. --Quatermass 16:29, 16 March 2011 (EDT)

I m going to delete to the whole pre/pre section, since it adds nothing and is hard to read. Huw Powell 03:50, 3 July 2011 (CDT)

Watts per gallon[edit]

This has never been a clear measure, and is even less useful with modern lighting (HO T5, LED), and completely ignores depth. SO I deleted it as a measure of "low light". Huw Powell 03:52, 3 July 2011 (CDT)