• You are viewing the forum as a Guest, please login (you can use your Facebook, Twitter, Google or Microsoft account to login) or register using this link: Log in or Sign Up

Which plants in hard water?

eminor

Member
Joined
5 Feb 2021
Messages
784
Location
France
Hello, I have a rather hard water °GH : 17, pH : 7.1, °KH : 12, NO2 : 0, NO3 : 19 ppm

I have a strong lighting power, I inject co2 at 30 ppm, daily fertilization, I have the following plants in the aquarium

Plant that grow well :

  • Rotala Rotundifolia
  • Bacopa moonirie
  • Reineckii mini
  • hygrophila tripartita
  • Christmass moss
  • cryptocoryne wendtii green
  • eleocharis mini
  • ludwiga sp super red

Plant that grow not that good :

- heteranthera zosterifolia ( leaves are smaller and thinner than in soft water )
- Pogostemon erectus ( grows quickly but the stem is thin, it's very ugly )

I have a list of plants that interest me, but I don't know which ones can support the hardness of my water, can you help me ? Here are the plants

  1. Nesaea Crassicaulis
  2. Ludwigia Arcuata
  3. Alternanthera Rubra
  4. Ludwigia Ovalifolia
  5. Alternanthera Colorata
  6. Alternanthera Splendida
  7. Rotala Rotundifolia Vietnam H'Ra
  8. Hygrophila Salicifolia
  9. Hygrophila Polysperma Ceylon
  10. Nesaea Pedicellata
  11. Cabomba Aquatica
  12. Proserpinaca Palustris Cuba
  13. Rotala Macrandra

thank you
 
th
Hello, I have a rather hard water °GH : 17, pH : 7.1, °KH : 12, NO2 : 0, NO3 : 19 ppm

I have a strong lighting power, I inject co2 at 30 ppm, daily fertilization, I have the following plants in the aquarium

Plant that grow well :

  • Rotala Rotundifolia
  • Bacopa moonirie
  • Reineckii mini
  • hygrophila tripartita
  • Christmass moss
  • cryptocoryne wendtii green
  • eleocharis mini
  • ludwiga sp super red

Plant that grow not that good :

- heteranthera zosterifolia ( leaves are smaller and thinner than in soft water )
- Pogostemon erectus ( grows quickly but the stem is thin, it's very ugly )

I have a list of plants that interest me, but I don't know which ones can support the hardness of my water, can you help me ? Here are the plants

  1. Nesaea Crassicaulis
  2. Ludwigia Arcuata
  3. Alternanthera Rubra
  4. Ludwigia Ovalifolia
  5. Alternanthera Colorata
  6. Alternanthera Splendida
  7. Rotala Rotundifolia Vietnam H'Ra
  8. Hygrophila Salicifolia
  9. Hygrophila Polysperma Ceylon
  10. Nesaea Pedicellata
  11. Cabomba Aquatica
  12. Proserpinaca Palustris Cuba
  13. Rotala Macrandra

thank you
the nesaea's will not work (side note: they are now called Ammania), macrandra as well. the rest should be worth a try.
 
You can try something like Hygrophila sp. 'Tiger' instead of the Ammania, not exactly the same but would may work better.
 
Most aquatic plants will do fine in hard water. For instance, the plants you appear to be struggling with have grown very well for me in very hard water. It could be that some other confounding factors are responsible, e.g. small leaves on heteranthera zosterifolia and long internodes on Pogostemon erectus could be caused by a CO2 flow and distribution problem.

Aquarium Gardens in Huntingdon have rock hard water but the plants are all very healthy and the scapes stunning...

1628715501045.png
 
Most aquatic plants will do fine in hard water. For instance, the plants you appear to be struggling with have grown very well for me in very hard water. It could be that some other confounding factors are responsible, e.g. small leaves on heteranthera zosterifolia and long internodes on Pogostemon erectus could be caused by a CO2 flow and distribution problem.

Aquarium Gardens in Huntingdon have rock hard water but the plants are all very healthy and the scapes stunning...

So great to read that, so my lack of skill is the problem then :)

CO2 is so hard to manage, i might be wrong, but CO2 seems to be the root of almost every problem ? how can i be certain that the distribution is good ?
 
It always helps to post a FTS and images of the problem plants. That way it's easier to diagnose potential problems.
Other info like the type of filter and output, and type of light including intensity and photoperiod etc is always helpful to know as well.
 
yes, there are very few plants that prefer softer water. finnicky rotala sp, ammania, tonina, synoganthus and eriocaulon are some examples. though even these do not care about gh levels. more so Kh they care about.
 
It always helps to post a FTS and images of the problem plants. That way it's easier to diagnose potential problems.
Other info like the type of filter and output, and type of light including intensity and photoperiod etc is always helpful to know as well.
Light :15 gallons tank, diy led Marswall CRI 95, 5500°K, 40w max ~4500 Lumens, photoperiod 8H.
Filter : Internal filter, 60 gallons/hour

Pogostemon has not been trimmed since way too long

20210811_235948.jpg


20210812_000033.jpg


20210812_000024.jpg
 
Plant that grow not that good :

- heteranthera zosterifolia ( leaves are smaller and thinner than in soft water )
- Pogostemon erectus ( grows quickly but the stem is thin, it's very ugly )
It is not a difficult plant to grow in general. It stunts often if grown in the combination of hard water and heavy water column nutrient dosing. In hardwater tanks, root feeding the plant and keeping water column dosing lean prevents stunting.

The article is referring to kH when mentioning hardness, not gH. Like Michael mentioned, plants usually dont mind higher gH.

If you want to reduce, kH, you can search this forum for JBL Tormec, there seems to have been quite a few previous discussions on the product.
 
CO2 is so hard to manage, i might be wrong, but CO2 seems to be the root of almost every problem ?
Correct - this is true more than 90% of the time. The following post describes some of the morphological differences between plants in the terrestrial form versus their submerged form=> Cause of death?

CO2 grows plants and the difference in the robustness of the various plants is primarily based on their ability to make adaptations underwater to as much as possible, obtain CO2. Gases do not move very easily in water, so those plants that make the better adaptations are more likely to succeed. As mentioned by other posters, with the exception of possibly a handful of species, GH/KH has very little to do with the success of plants. The vast majority of plants really do not care about water parameters. They only care about gas exchange and nutrition.
how can i be certain that the distribution is good ?
Start by reviewing the information presented in=> Water flow in the planted aquarium?

Cheers,
 


The article is referring to kH when mentioning hardness, not gH. Like Michael mentioned, plants usually dont mind higher gH.

If you want to reduce, kH, you can search this forum for JBL Tormec, there seems to have been quite a few previous discussions on the product.
If i reduce column dosing, other plant will turn into a bad shape, or maybe that was co2 cause too ( sorry for my english)
 
If i reduce column dosing, other plant will turn into a bad shape, or maybe that was co2 cause too
It's very difficult to prove that the shape change was due to that one thing. As you say, you may have had both low nutrients and low CO2 at the same time. After the shape change, did you then increase the water column dosing? If so, did the new leaves have a good shape? In order to be sure that a certain thing is the cause you have to add it and remove it and add it again to make sure cause is related to effect. It must be repeatable.

This problem is made even more difficult to solve when the lighting is very strong because strong light requires more CO2, so there is always the risk that you can confuse some factor that you imagine is the cause when the real cause is poor CO2.

When a plant grows tall it gets closer to the light. Being closer to the light means the light falling on the leaf is stronger than when the plant was smaller. The structure of plants is built by carbon. Almost 50% of a plant tissue is carbon. When carbon is is short supply the plant steals carbon from tissue in order to use it to build proteins, enzymes and in other chemical reactions. The result is that the structure is compromised when the carbon is stolen. This is what causes the bad shape, pin holes, browning and decay, leaves falling off and rotting stems.

Look at this example. This is Luwigia glanduosa in a deep tank. These leaves are about 50 cm down from the surface and you can see the leaves are flat and their shape is nice. Since they are far from the light they are not so red, but CO2 is OK here.
8398040838_38f16751ba_c.jpg


Later, they have grown much closer to the light which gives them more color, but they cannot get enough CO2.
The amount of CO2 they need to keep the leaves flat with good shape is so high that it would kill the fish.
8396953573_0a24f1d102_c.jpg


So it's very difficult, first, to determine how much CO2 is in the tank, and second, is difficult to keep up with the demand of the plants as they get more mass and get more light. In both cases the nutrient levels were very high. I repeatedly cut the plant to be shorter and the leaves grew normally until the plant reached a certain height and then the leaf shape became deformed.

Cheers,
 
It's very difficult to prove that the shape change was due to that one thing. As you say, you may have had both low nutrients and low CO2 at the same time. After the shape change, did you then increase the water column dosing? If so, did the new leaves have a good shape? In order to be sure that a certain thing is the cause you have to add it and remove it and add it again to make sure cause is related to effect. It must be repeatable.

This problem is made even more difficult to solve when the lighting is very strong because strong light requires more CO2, so there is always the risk that you can confuse some factor that you imagine is the cause when the real cause is poor CO2.

When a plant grows tall it gets closer to the light. Being closer to the light means the light falling on the leaf is stronger than when the plant was smaller. The structure of plants is built by carbon. Almost 50% of a plant tissue is carbon. When carbon is is short supply the plant steals carbon from tissue in order to use it to build proteins, enzymes and in other chemical reactions. The result is that the structure is compromised when the carbon is stolen. This is what causes the bad shape, pin holes, browning and decay, leaves falling off and rotting stems.

Look at this example. This is Luwigia glanduosa in a deep tank. These leaves are about 50 cm down from the surface and you can see the leaves are flat and their shape is nice. Since they are far from the light they are not so red, but CO2 is OK here.


Later, they have grown much closer to the light which gives them more color, but they cannot get enough CO2.
The amount of CO2 they need to keep the leaves flat with good shape is so high that it would kill the fish.


So it's very difficult, first, to determine how much CO2 is in the tank, and second, is difficult to keep up with the demand of the plants as they get more mass and get more light. In both cases the nutrient levels were very high. I repeatedly cut the plant to be shorter and the leaves grew normally until the plant reached a certain height and then the leaf shape became deformed.

Cheers,
By that time, my co2 diffusion was bad, black holes, etc, i'm learning slowly, i know that the pH need to drop 1 point to get perfect co2, i found a sweet spot, every plant are pearling like crazy but as always it's not that easy i think. It's been 2 month even more since i won the war against BBA, i though it came from my tap water. I read from you that was a Co2 deficiency related algae.

I also had GSA algae which seems to be Phosphates related algae, which made me think that maybe my tap water have not that much phosphate after all but
if i'm not wrong, Phosphate does not cause algae because in EI there are lot and a lot of it without algae, i read about it too.

I was playing with CO2, my diffuser was awful, the placement was wrong, i fixed it, plant are beautiful, no holes, etc, thx to the wonderful Ukaps community

Should i let the plant reaching the top ? if there is too many, the flow is bad then maybe, that make co2/nutrients distribution to be bad ?

How do you know so much about tank ? any suggestion to improve ? thx

srry for my english
 
Last edited:
Should i let the plant reaching the top ? if there is too many, the flow is bad then maybe, that make co2/nutrients distribution to be bad ?
Hi,
Yes, of course you can let the plant reach the top, but I would trim the top a couple of times to see the quality of the new growth. Often, when the plant reaches the surface it will improve because the leaves at the surface can breath CO2 from the atmosphere. If you allow the tank to become overgrown however then this can be a problem. All you need to do is the remove some so that it is not so thick. With so many long leaves and thick stems the flow through the plants is severely reduced and that causes CO2 and nutrients to not reach some of the plants. Also, it's better to control the strength of the lights so that you do not fall into the trap of having such high intensity at the top of the tank.
How do you know so much about tank ? any suggestion to improve ? thx
Hi, thanks, but it's not because I'm smart. It's because I've made the same mistakes as everyone else and have learned how to improve flow and CO2 in exactly the same way as you just did.
For improvement, as I mentioned, if you pay closer attention to your aquascape instead of allowing the tank to become overgrown and unruly then there will be fewer problems. Learn how to organize and place the plants, for example, by placing the taller, faster growing stems in the back and put shorter, slower growing plants in the front. Keep things trimmed and neat and do lots of large water changes and filter cleaning to keep organic matter from building up in the tank or inside the filter. When fed CO2 plants produce LOTS of organic waste, and that causes problems, so you really need to constantly remove it from the tank and filter.

Cheers,
 
May I interest you in some Cryptocoryne species? C. Aponogetifolia, C. Crispatula var Balansae and Usteriana would all be very good candidates, with the C. Aponogetifolia being quite uncommon. Most of these are quite large plants relative to other aquatics which might not suit your scape, but I think they are quite rewarding to keep. The C. Aponogetifolia and Balansae have been reported to flower underwater and produce a huge spathe over 80cm long in their natural habitat, but I'm unsure if this would, or ever will happen in a home aquarium. I reckon you would be quite successful with a lot of the more common Cryptocoryne species as they tend to be very forgiving, but the species mentioned above are "hard water loving" plants which tend to be found in harder water in the wild. This might mean they'll do better in this environment than more common species but I'm not so convinced about that.
 
May I interest you in some Cryptocoryne species? C. Aponogetifolia, C. Crispatula var Balansae and Usteriana would all be very good candidates, with the C. Aponogetifolia being quite uncommon. Most of these are quite large plants relative to other aquatics which might not suit your scape, but I think they are quite rewarding to keep. The C. Aponogetifolia and Balansae have been reported to flower underwater and produce a huge spathe over 80cm long in their natural habitat, but I'm unsure if this would, or ever will happen in a home aquarium. I reckon you would be quite successful with a lot of the more common Cryptocoryne species as they tend to be very forgiving, but the species mentioned above are "hard water loving" plants which tend to be found in harder water in the wild. This might mean they'll do better in this environment than more common species but I'm not so convinced about that.
I can confirm that C. Balansae does great in hard water. Had if in my last tank (~5 years ago) with liquid rock for tap water. After a slow start it turned into a monster and I was replanting runners every week. Some of the leaves grew so long the reached all they way to the surface, across the top, and would almost touch the bottom on the front of the tank. Tank was ~15 inches from substrate to top so those were some serious leaves.

Sent from my SM-G970U1 using Tapatalk
 
Back
Top