why did the Ludwigia sp. Pantanal become yallow and green ?

a-hua

Subscriber
Aug 5, 2007
42
0
6
i bought a Ludwigia sp. Pantanal which was red in the aquarium shop,
but it became yallow and green on both leaf and stem after 2 days...

why???

the Pantanal i bought
DSC01516.jpg



the other Pantanal i had in the same tank
DSC015203.jpg

DSC01518.jpg


the Syngonanthus belem in the same tank
d40788698-ac-4657xf1x0600x0518-m.jpg


tank info
62*40*40(cm) 100L
T8 38W*2 12 hours a day
akadama soil
30-32 degree C
2-3 co2 bubles / sec with power head + reactor
EI dose
70% WC a week
 

JDowns

Lifetime Charter Member
Lifetime Member
Jul 27, 2007
355
22
18
49
New Hope, Pennsylvania
Well this is very easy to rule out nutrients given your light levels. This looks to be a CO2 issue to me. I'm inclined to say also that if the plant was recently added it very well could be adjusting to the new environment. But progressivly smaller and distorted growth is a good indicator for CO2 problems. This may also just be a case of getting better CO2 into that area via circulation. Either way my focus would be on CO2. Nice looking Tonina Belem also.
 

Tom Barr

Founder
Staff member
Administrator
Jan 23, 2005
18,695
736
113
Give it sometime, it should bounce back and send new side shoots.
If the CO2 is good, the light etc,

Regards,
Tom Barr
 

a-hua

Subscriber
Aug 5, 2007
42
0
6
Tom Barr;38850 said:
Give it sometime, it should bounce back and send new side shoots.
If the CO2 is good, the light etc,

Regards,
Tom Barr

ok,
i will increase a alittle bit co2 and wait.

supplement some info...
i use EDTA Fe Na and horticulture trace 2-3*week.
the Fe is over 2ppm(5-10 maybe),
but the trace is low than advice because more will become cloudy in the water...

by the way,
does the Pantanal need more current ( it is really slow in this tank ) ?
 

a-hua

Subscriber
Aug 5, 2007
42
0
6
JDowns;38846 said:
Well this is very easy to rule out nutrients given your light levels. This looks to be a CO2 issue to me. I'm inclined to say also that if the plant was recently added it very well could be adjusting to the new environment. But progressivly smaller and distorted growth is a good indicator for CO2 problems. This may also just be a case of getting better CO2 into that area via circulation. Either way my focus would be on CO2. Nice looking Tonina Belem also.

this is my first time keep the belem successful....thank you, i am happy too!! :eek:

about the co2 ,
there is a Pantanal i had just beside the co2 reactor,
but it looks like the same with pic 2 and pic 3...:eek:
 

a-hua

Subscriber
Aug 5, 2007
42
0
6
update something...

i move my Pantanal to another 270L, EI + soil planted tank
and it become more like what i saw in the aquqrium shop...:confused:

my friend say besides light, co2 and EI, it is the rich-nutrition substrate make the Pantanal turn red and the look we except...i remember tom said EI and ADA substrate make his Pantanal look like that ....

so, it is all because of the substrate....???
 

Philosophos

Lifetime Charter Member
Lifetime Member
Mar 12, 2009
1,346
0
36
Fe EDTA needs a pH below 6.5 to maintain its bond for any worth while amount of time if I'm not mistaken. I did some reading on the subject a while back. Try Fe DPTA.

Other than that, the green/red thing is nutrient based as much as anything. I'm trying to stop all my plants from turning green as well; nitrate and phosphate limitation would be the latest effort to turn them back red.

-Philosophos
 

a-hua

Subscriber
Aug 5, 2007
42
0
6
Philosophos;39095 said:
Other than that, the green/red thing is nutrient based as much as anything. I'm trying to stop all my plants from turning green as well; nitrate and phosphate limitation would be the latest effort to turn them back red.

would you please share the detail way to turn red by limiting nutrition...or pm me....:)

what i know is base on EI...but just decrease the nitrate...
i try another way that base on EI...but increase phosphate and fe....
the plant do turn red but i forget which one make it ?

by the way,
about Pantanal, i waited for a few days, until it growed up near water line.
but still looked like the 2th pic post on 1th floor....:mad:
so i moved it to another tank.

a-hua
 

Tom Barr

Founder
Staff member
Administrator
Jan 23, 2005
18,695
736
113
Philosophos;39095 said:
Fe EDTA needs a pH below 6.5 to maintain its bond for any worth while amount of time if I'm not mistaken. I did some reading on the subject a while back. Try Fe DPTA.

Other than that, the green/red thing is nutrient based as much as anything. I'm trying to stop all my plants from turning green as well; nitrate and phosphate limitation would be the latest effort to turn them back red.

-Philosophos

So explain this since neither the sediment nor water column is anywhere close to limiting for N or P:

resizepan3.jpg


NO3 added: 40 ppm a week as KNO3, over 15ppm added of PO4.
ADA AS(very rich in N and P).


If that is honestly true, then why is my plant growing so well, very fast(4-6" weekly), I have huge group, repeated it several times(see pic below from a few years before- same sediment and dosing routine), I have excellent color???????

How could it be that? If what you say is true or holds any water?
I've done it several times now, it's not just due to "luck".

resizedsideview20.jpg


Here's a pic after the CO2 was a bit off, the leaves formed became weird, and wider, sometimes it's stunted if I did not clean the Disc.

I used a mazzei on this tank and the CO2 was very stable, when I changes to disc, it took a long time to correct the CO2. Nutrient dosing, light and sediment where unchanged and that is very easy to verify.

CO2 ain't.

But that's all that was left.

So I cleaned and tweaked the disc, then the plant started growing like mad once again. I did not like the disc, so went to needle wheel. Took much less time to adjust the plant, t went through some weird wide leaves and stunted tips, but color was really not affected much.

Then the new growth took off after some patience.

sideviewresized180week4.jpg


Regards,
Tom Barr
 

Philosophos

Lifetime Charter Member
Lifetime Member
Mar 12, 2009
1,346
0
36
Wouldn't species make a difference? I'd imagine some plants would favor higher carotenoid levels regardless of conditions. On the other hand, playing with R. rotundifolia, the only time it seems to turn back to red for me is under nutrient starved conditions.

I've actually had better reds from this plant in a no CO2, low light, low nutrient setup than I have from a heavily ferted, shrimp killing CO2 level, high light system. Nutrient limitation seems to be the choice method, since light level is pretty well discredited.


I'd also like to know where you're sitting on the issue, in comparison to these past posts you've made on the subject:
http://www.barrreport.com/general-plant-topics/5818-so-what-makes-red.html#post36994
http://www.barrreport.com/general-plant-topics/3934-red-plant.html#post22720
http://www.barrreport.com/general-plant-topics/3934-red-plant.html#post22761

-Philosophos
 

whisky

Junior Poster
Nov 28, 2005
1
0
1
I wouldnt say any method of getting color is discredited unless its just flat out silly or counterproductive. Counterproductive meaning defeating the purpose of the aquarium, hurting the goal the hobbyist has in mind. stunting 5 spp to get color from one (as an example) People who are successful at getting good color will "do what works" for the situation they have.

spp mix needs to be considered, and when the right combination of light level and nutrients is found then its remembered for repetition. some plants do respond to light with color, and the same plants can respond with color where lower nutrient levels and lower light are part of the regime.

many times it is best to work on health, then tweak color. it takes time when the sp is new to you, or the set of conditions is new. maybe first time on MH lighting, first time using high performance CO2 delivery.. once you get it worked out - then it can be an effortless thing. you gain a feel for how a sp. responds in known and repeatable conditions.

finding rules that say : when you do X then you will get color..
can be folly. spp. mix, temp, substrate, light level - all of this contributes.

so the hobbyist finds balance and learns by observation. rather than push a boulder uphill and then get frustrated, observe what the plants do as you tweak, use patience and then adjust as needed.
 

Biollante

Lifetime Charter Member
Lifetime Member
Jun 21, 2009
3,210
1
36
Surprise, AZ
Well Said.

whisky;39117 said:
I wouldnt say any method of getting color is discredited unless its just flat out silly or counterproductive. Counterproductive meaning defeating the purpose of the aquarium, hurting the goal the hobbyist has in mind. stunting 5 spp to get color from one (as an example) People who are successful at getting good color will "do what works" for the situation they have.

spp mix needs to be considered, and when the right combination of light level and nutrients is found then its remembered for repetition. some plants do respond to light with color, and the same plants can respond with color where lower nutrient levels and lower light are part of the regime.

many times it is best to work on health, then tweak color. it takes time when the sp is new to you, or the set of conditions is new. maybe first time on MH lighting, first time using high performance CO2 delivery.. once you get it worked out - then it can be an effortless thing. you gain a feel for how a sp. responds in known and repeatable conditions.

finding rules that say : when you do X then you will get color..
can be folly. spp. mix, temp, substrate, light level - all of this contributes.

so the hobbyist finds balance and learns by observation. rather than push a boulder uphill and then get frustrated, observe what the plants do as you tweak, use patience and then adjust as needed.

Well said.

I think sometimes settling down and as Tom Barr said earlier, give it some time, really is the best. Keep doing all the basics. Don't change too many things at once, when in doubt, change a bunch of water.:)

Biollante
 

Biollante

Lifetime Charter Member
Lifetime Member
Jun 21, 2009
3,210
1
36
Surprise, AZ
Philosophos;39113 said:
Wouldn't species make a difference? I'd imagine some plants would favor higher carotenoid levels regardless of conditions. On the other hand, playing with R. rotundifolia, the only time it seems to turn back to red for me is under nutrient starved conditions.

I've actually had better reds from this plant in a no CO2, low light, low nutrient setup than I have from a heavily ferted, shrimp killing CO2 level, high light system. Nutrient limitation seems to be the choice method, since light level is pretty well discredited.


I'd also like to know where you're sitting on the issue, in comparison to these past posts you've made on the subject:
http://www.barrreport.com/general-plant-topics/5818-so-what-makes-red.html#post36994
http://www.barrreport.com/general-plant-topics/3934-red-plant.html#post22720
http://www.barrreport.com/general-plant-topics/3934-red-plant.html#post22761

-Philosophos

Could you expand on your point?

I guess I am failing to see the perceived inconsistencies in the advice.

As for myself, I have had more success with red plants in lower light situations, contrary to most things I have read on the subject.

I am curious.

My latest attempt at red plants in high light, have resulted in beautiful, lush, green plants.:) They really are gorgeous. :D

Biollante
 

Philosophos

Lifetime Charter Member
Lifetime Member
Mar 12, 2009
1,346
0
36
The inconsistency I'm seeing here goes from saying nutrient limitation can be used, to it doing nothing at all. Knowing why this has changed would be helpful.

What I've never seen behind pushing red is good solid science, and I've spent a while trying to nail it down. Most of what I read is conjecture about light levels; the nearest I've found to that would be testing the possibility of spectrum changes. After that, it's nutrients. The reasons as to why seem to be lacking just about everywhere I've gone.

Some species stay red quite nicely, many do not. My frustration has been trying to keep anything red, and the only common link I can find so far is cutting back on nutrients.

If anyone else knows a better way, please tell me.

-Philosophos
 

a-hua

Subscriber
Aug 5, 2007
42
0
6
update ~~

these are some Pantanal moved to another 270L, EI + soil planted tank finally looks like ...:cool:

DSC01570.jpg
 

Tom Barr

Founder
Staff member
Administrator
Jan 23, 2005
18,695
736
113
a-hua;39369 said:
update ~~

these are some Pantanal moved to another 270L, EI + soil planted tank finally looks like ...:cool:

DSC01570.jpg

Ahhh..then it was patience after all:)

Not high light, not limiting NO3 and the other claimed issues.

I will say limiting N has some merit, but at a cost.
I will say having high light also has merit, but also at a cost.
I will say adding GH has merit, and cannot see how more hurts color.
Adding more traces/Fe? Never found any relationship there other than GENERAL growth, which can affect color/vigor etc.

I do not "worry" or "try" to make a plant a certain color.
They just do what they do.

Color and perception are rarely a big deal with color variable plants in horticulture, they chose a different variety, try and breed something with more red etc. So there's little need for terrestrial and there's no $ in it for aquatics, and given all the differences aquarist have with growing aquatics, it's hardly a standard method.

Regards,
Tom Barr
 

Biollante

Lifetime Charter Member
Lifetime Member
Jun 21, 2009
3,210
1
36
Surprise, AZ
Glad For Your Success

I'm encouraged to continue, "red plants" plants have been a mixed bag for me so perhaps no rhyme or reason? Or maybe the reason is in the rhyme!:confused:

Glad to see the success.:)

Biollante