Can You Have Too Many Plants?

[ellena]

I bought a couple of plants in pots when I got my tank. (pic in my post at the time http/www.fishforums.net/index.php?showtopic=281832&hl= )I took them out of their pots and tried to bury them in sand, which did not go well.
So today, I thought I'd go and get replacements. These had lead instead of pots, which I managed to use to weigh down the original plants. So now I have 2 lots.
Can lots of plants have any detrimental effects?

Have I gone mad with plants? lol!

 

[aaronnorth]

as long as the fish have enough room to swim you are fine

 

[oswoldy]

I bought a couple of plants in pots when I got my tank. (pic in my post at the time <a href="http/www.fishforums.net/index.php?showtopic=281832&hl=" target="_blank">http/www.fishforums.net/index.php?showtopic=281832&hl=</a> )I took them out of their pots and tried to bury them in sand, which did not go well.
So today, I thought I'd go and get replacements. These had lead instead of pots, which I managed to use to weigh down the original plants. So now I have 2 lots.
Can lots of plants have any detrimental effects?
Have I gone mad with plants? lol!

Depends whether you want to see the fish or not I think too many plants can be bad because some get a lack of light so die,rot, then give off ammonia. You are also supposed to remove the lead weights because it restricts the growth of roots.

Mike

 

[ellena]

Thanks guys
How would I decide if they had enough room to swim? Is the inch per gallon guide about swimming room or waste processing?
One of the plants doesn't have roots, and the lead is well above the roots on the other. It works so much better than the pots.

 

[aaronnorth]

Thanks guys
How would I decide if they had enough room to swim? Is the inch per gallon guide about swimming room or waste processing?
One of the plants doesn't have roots, and the lead is well above the roots on the other. It works so much better than the pots.

as long as they dont get trapped basically. Leaving an open space at the front is fine. It also allows you to check upon the fish.

 

[ellena]

Aaah! I see-cool. I'll leave them while it's cycling anyway and perhaps thin them out if they survive and fill out

 

[nmonks]

Not mad, but I fear you've bought the wrong plants. I'd be staggered if Cabomba did well under the fairly dull lighting provided by the hood on your BiOrb aquarium. Even Vallisneria will be struggling for survival, and it's one of the more adaptable plants in the hobby.

For one thing, the lamp is physically small, lighting up only a smallish portion of the substrate. More importantly, it's really not a light designed for demanding plants. At best, a BiOrb is a neat if expensive gizmo rather than a serious or good value aquarium (a lot of people would say things a bit less complimentary about them, but I'm holding back).

Plain sand looks pretty, but obviously plants can't grow in it any more than you could grow a tomato plant bedded in rock chippings. For plants with roots, you need a substrate that contains, at minimum, iron and a few other essential minerals. There are various ways to do this, but one thing that doesn't work is the assumption plants "get their food from the water". Unless you fish excrete reduced iron ions (and they don't!) the plants will turn iron-deficient (i.e., yellow) quickly. Not that your plants are going to live that long, but it's worth bearing in mind for when (not if) you start over in a few weeks time.

If this was me, I'd have concentrated on a few, judiciously chosen plants that I was sure didn't need much light. Java ferns, Anubias, Java moss, and some of the hardier crypts such as Cryptocoryne wendtii would be on my list. I'd only use the latter if I had a decent substrate in the tank; the ferns, Anubias and moss are all epiphytes*, growing attached to wood, so freeing up more volume of the tank for water.

Cheers, Neale

*Unlike plants with roots, such plants actually do get the nutrients they need from the water, so tend to be extremely easy to look after.

Have I gone mad with plants? lol!

 

[ellena]

Hi nmonks, thanks for the advice. I'd gone with planting them in the sand on advice from here. I have added a fertiliser for them. I've got them now so I'll go with them and if the light proves too low for them I'll go for the types you've suggested.
Plants were the one thing I didn't research properly before buying although they'd done OK for the 2 weeks, so that's why I bought more of the same.

 

[buckiejim2]

Hi Ellena.

Normally i would say you cannot have too many plants as plants do much good in brightly lit tanks by removing nitrates and other compounds. However in your case if you have not enough light then the plants will decay and cause pollution problems thus affecting your fish. Also your tank looks rather too small for the amount of plants for you to be able to actually see your fish which i assume is why you got the tank in the first place.
If you do want plants then stick to a couple of small cheap plants and make sure you remove the dead leaves when they appear and replace the plants when they die. If you find you are replacing plants too often then you may need to consider plastic plants. BJ

 

[aaronnorth]

Not mad, but I fear you've bought the wrong plants. I'd be staggered if Cabomba did well under the fairly dull lighting provided by the hood on your BiOrb aquarium. Even Vallisneria will be struggling for survival, and it's one of the more adaptable plants in the hobby.

i have grown cabomba and vallis under a biube light which i think is the same wattage. Albeit slowly, and they struggled but they did survive!!

Plain sand looks pretty, but obviously plants can't grow in it any more than you could grow a tomato plant bedded in rock chippings. For plants with roots, you need a substrate that contains, at minimum, iron and a few other essential minerals. There are various ways to do this, but one thing that doesn't work is the assumption plants "get their food from the water". Unless you fish excrete reduced iron ions (and they don't!) the plants will turn iron-deficient (i.e., yellow) quickly. Not that your plants are going to live that long, but it's worth bearing in mind for when (not if) you start over in a few weeks time.

I disagree with you there. Any plant can be grown in an inert substrate, it just means you ned to dose the water column more heavily. Ok, fish dont exrete iron, but that's what plant fertilisers are for!

Here is Dave Spencer's tank, this is just plain sand, with EI dosing. I dont see the so called "heavy root feeders" struggling here

http/www.fishforums.net/index.php?showtopic=271607&hl=

Nutritous substrates are ideal as a back up. Incase you miss a dose then there is always a source of nutrients available

 

[nmonks]

I disagree with you there. Any plant can be grown in an inert substrate, it just means you ned to dose the water column more heavily. Ok, fish dont exrete iron, but that's what plant fertilisers are for!

This has been argued endlessly, for decades. Certainly some plants will absorb iron and other minerals from the water directly; floating plants and epiphytes clearly must do. But surely amphibious plants (like Amazon swords) adapted to spending most of their time with their foliage above the waterline will be adapted to using their roots to absorb minerals rather than their leaves, and given that, it's hard to see how they would do equally well in both situations. I'm mindful of the argument you can grow tomatoes and other plants hydroponically; yes, you can, technically, but the fruits they produce don't taste of anything at all. Workable, yes, optimal, no. Call me old fashioned!

Others have argued that the oxygen-rich nature of aquarium water means that fertilisers added to the water may not remain available to aquarium plants for long. Sure, you could add fertilisers on a daily basis, but it's a heck of a lot easier to simply put something iron-rich under the sand or gravel and let the plants get what they want themselves. Enormously cheaper, at least as effective, and zero maintenance. By contrast the EI method is difficult to explain and understand, expensive to set up and use, and usually doesn't work without CO2 and strong lights. It's an approach best suited to advanced aquarists who are trying to get the very best growth from demanding plants being maintained in a high-tech aquarium.

All my planted aquaria use pond soil in combination with sand or gravel. Plant growth may not be "Amano-style" pretty, but it's rampant, and I'm giving away buckets of plants all the time. The rest ends up on the compost heap. This is without CO2 and just the use of regular lights and no liquid fertilisers. For someone like me who's more interested in the fish than the plants, taking this low-tech, low-cost approach is, in my opinion, the best way to keep their plants healthy.

Cheers, Neale

 

[Dave Spencer]

This has been argued endlessly, for decades.

I must say that I am surprised for the need to debate something that is so easily proven. I have yet to find a plant that is not easily grown in an inert substrate, provided the water column is adequately fertilised. I haven`t tried every plant, including Amazon swords, but I am willing to bet I could grow them in the fine gravel I am keen on at the moment.

There is no doubt in my mind that I get the best results from ADA Amazonia substrate alongside EI, but inert substrate and EI works very well too. The CEC of the substrate allows me to forget my EI dosing due to slackness on my part.

I often read the term “heavy root feeder” on TFF. It should be banned in my opinion.

Certainly some plants will absorb iron and other minerals from the water directly; floating plants and epiphytes clearly must do. But surely amphibious plants (like Amazon swords) adapted to spending most of their time with their foliage above the waterline will be adapted to using their roots to absorb minerals rather than their leaves, and given that, it's hard to see how they would do equally well in both situations.

Precious few of the plants we use are true aquatic. Most of us buy our plants in their emersed form, and watch their appearance change to immersed growth once we plant them in the tank. They can readily adapt to either situation. I am just about to embark on keeping my own plants hydroponically, and then planting them in my aquascapes when needed. Hopefully, this will save me a fortune in buying in new plants all the time.

Others have argued that the oxygen-rich nature of aquarium water means that fertilisers added to the water may not remain available to aquarium plants for long. Sure, you could add fertilisers on a daily basis, but it's a heck of a lot easier to simply put something iron-rich under the sand or gravel and let the plants get what they want themselves.

I`m not sure why you are putting so much emphasis on iron. It is basically one of several trace elements that is covered by adding a decent trace element dose to the tank.

By contrast the EI method is difficult to explain and understand, expensive to set up and use, and usually doesn't work without CO2 and strong lights. It's an approach best suited to advanced aquarists who are trying to get the very best growth from demanding plants being maintained in a high-tech aquarium.

I disagree with this. Admittedly, some people are scared off by the names of the salts used, but the process of dosing is not complicated by any means. EI dosing can be adjusted to low light tanks, and tanks with no CO2 very easily.

Seeing as you have given permission, I am going to call you "old fashioned”.

Dave

 

[nmonks]

Go ahead! None of this new-fangled EI nonsense in my fish tanks, if you please! Next you'll be telling me to rip out the air pump and the undergravel filter and start using one of those silly-looking canister contraptions.

But seriously, I don't see any advantage at all to the EI system when used in low-tech tanks without CO2. Seems infinitely cheaper and easier to use a decent substrate and let the plants get what they want from that. If you stick plants in an inert substrate in a low-tech plants and then don't make the effort to dose with fertilisers as required, any plant growth will be indifferent, at best.

I'm not saying EI doesn't work -- clearly it can work very well -- but I think it appeals to aquarists who want to keep demanding plants, or have their sights set on Dutch- and Amano-type aquaria.

I suspect we're arguing over emphasis rather than substance here! My point was merely that if you had a BiOrb tank, and stuck in a couple of potted Cryptocoryne species, and made sure the substrate was tolerably rich, then you could expect reasonable success. Stick some Cabomba and Vallisneria into plain sand, and I'd not expect them to do as well. They might struggle for a while, but a couple of potted crypts would be a whole lot more satisfying, not to mention prettier in a spherical aquarium.

Cheers, Neale

Seeing as you have given permission, I am going to call you "old fashioned”.