I recently started keeping this weed again after perhaps 10 years, we grew it nicely for a long time in the 1990's in the SFBAAPS club among several of us.
Some myths seem to have been promoted since AFTER this time and have become an issue as I have been getting PM's about the so called "requirements" for nice healthy growth.
High PO4 is one, this is not true.
Most plants do well, but it's hardly a requirement for nice health and color. Several SFBAAPS members grew this plant very nicely at PMDD target ranges, 0.2ppm of PO4.
And..it looked as good as ANY I've seen.
Likewise, fast forward to today, the same nice mauve color and cherry like red is apparent in my plants and also in the same plant I bought at AFA which does not add much ferts or PO4, and yet the color and match was the same.
My tank might grow faster, but the coloration was the SAME. ADA AS is one thing that was common between both habitats, Neil Frank also used/s potting soil with good results on this plant.
The water column ppm's have been ALL OVER the place, and I really have been unable to verify any such claims and correlation that others have reported or advice they get from other folks.
This same type of pattern about plants needing some special pampering has never set well with me and I've rarely found any support when I attempt to grow these so called tough plants.
A few emergent species seem to be poor plants to grow submersed, but true aquatic species? Nope.
Some might need more CO2, more traces or some other thing, but the higher ppm's have never once harmed growth in plants I've tested(and I have a list of 35 plant species where folks have made such claims and every single one was falsified curiously.....not making friends.... I know.....but that's not the point, horticulture is), however, limiting a nutrient/fert will have a beneficial effect if you have poor CO2/light conditions also
Put another way, folks that believe this to be true where limiting or low N or P etc....aids........tend not to have independence in their test.
Poo pooing me personally, calling me rude, disrespectful whatever......... does not cut it or make the myth go away. It has been falsified.
All you need is a few cases/examples and it's toast.
Some myths seem to have been promoted since AFTER this time and have become an issue as I have been getting PM's about the so called "requirements" for nice healthy growth.
High PO4 is one, this is not true.
Most plants do well, but it's hardly a requirement for nice health and color. Several SFBAAPS members grew this plant very nicely at PMDD target ranges, 0.2ppm of PO4.
And..it looked as good as ANY I've seen.
Likewise, fast forward to today, the same nice mauve color and cherry like red is apparent in my plants and also in the same plant I bought at AFA which does not add much ferts or PO4, and yet the color and match was the same.
My tank might grow faster, but the coloration was the SAME. ADA AS is one thing that was common between both habitats, Neil Frank also used/s potting soil with good results on this plant.
The water column ppm's have been ALL OVER the place, and I really have been unable to verify any such claims and correlation that others have reported or advice they get from other folks.
This same type of pattern about plants needing some special pampering has never set well with me and I've rarely found any support when I attempt to grow these so called tough plants.
A few emergent species seem to be poor plants to grow submersed, but true aquatic species? Nope.
Some might need more CO2, more traces or some other thing, but the higher ppm's have never once harmed growth in plants I've tested(and I have a list of 35 plant species where folks have made such claims and every single one was falsified curiously.....not making friends.... I know.....but that's not the point, horticulture is), however, limiting a nutrient/fert will have a beneficial effect if you have poor CO2/light conditions also
Put another way, folks that believe this to be true where limiting or low N or P etc....aids........tend not to have independence in their test.Poo pooing me personally, calling me rude, disrespectful whatever......... does not cut it or make the myth go away. It has been falsified.
All you need is a few cases/examples and it's toast.
