Long term effects of co2 exposure

[Ria95]

certain plants cannot grow underwater without supplemental co2 then they shouldn’t be under water

This must be an eminent authority in the field of botany as he presumes to dictate what we should and shouldn’t keep in our aquariums and which plants should stand where in this world. Maybe the plants listen to him, unlike naughty hobbyists.
In nature, in northern USA, Proserpinaca palustris gets killed by low temperatures every winter. Should we demand that aquarists freeze their Proserpinaca in winter and grow them from seeds the next season because that‘s what happens in nature? What nonsense would that be; more relevant to improve their growth than strive to match what they have to deal with in nature.

If the plant is able to survive long term and grow fully underwater it clearly has the adaptations to do so. If under otherwise good conditions, in the aquarium good growth is observed only when increasing the CO2 levels, then it‘s a issue of CO2 availability, not of the plant being fully underwater.
Conversely, you can push CO2 as much as you like, plants that are unable to grow fully underwater will ultimately be lost... not because of their CO2 demand, but because they lacked the adaptations required for underwater survival.

As mentioned, some plants are better than others, depending on how well adapted they are. Even some of the old-school, no CO2 injection plants show in their patters of growth that they target the surface as fast as possible. Think of the humble Ludwigia repens or Bacopa that, if left alone, grow towards the surface and only once they reach it they start to produce massive side-shoots to expand across the water. The upright growth pattern is more or less absent in the emersed growth.

 

[dw1305]

Hi all,

Even some of the old-school, no CO2 injection plants show in their patters of growth that they target the surface as fast as possible. Think of the humble Ludwigia repens or Bacopa that, if left alone, grow towards the surface and only once they reach it they start to produce massive side-shoots to expand across the water.

I'd actually say that is the aim of all amphibious plants, to <"get above the water's surface"> and get access to atmospheric gases and pollinating insects.

Conversely, you can push CO2 as much as you like, plants that are unable to grow fully underwater will ultimately be lost... not because of their CO2 demand, but because they lacked the adaptations required for underwater survival.

This why you get <"obvious zonation"> in turloughs <"https://www.npws.ie/sites/default/files/files/Project_Report_consolidated_all.pdf">. There is a classic paper on Violets (Viola spp.) by <"Robert Lloyd Praeger">.

......... No, we definitely don't have two pigeon holes "Aquatic" & "Non-Aquatic", what we have a continuum from <"xerophytes to hydrophytes"> and there are plenty of plants in the semi-aquatic category.......

When I used to take botanical tours <"to the Burren"> whether "the tide" was in or out was important for people who wanted to see <"Viola persicifolia">, because it needs to have been out of water for a while before it flowers.

cheers Darrel

 

[Oldguy]

Having read the posts in this thread with interest and aquarium cultivation notes from commercial growers with at times the original habitats of the plants offered for sale then: most are amphibious and are grown immersed for commercial reasons.
Some grow to two metres or so high as bank side plants but can be grown with CO2 and kept trimmed short so that what I would term 'juvenile' growth is maintained. Gardeners do similar tricks with terrestrial plants, some live for years some don't or are thrown out because of loss of the required juvenile or young growth.
Two UK aquatic plant families that seem to marry both worlds are water crowfoots and water starworts, the former with floating and submerged leaves and the latter with an emergent rosette of leaves which break the surface of the water.
The posts in this thread as always are informative and add to our knowledge and enjoyment of the hobby.

 

[_Maq_]

Maq, as I recall, the tanks in your journal

I have no journal.

It might be the case that other people, when they plan for a tank in their living room, desire a tank that looks more similar to Greggz‘ tank

Yes, that depends on one's tastes. Some people prefer to go to a castle and enjoy a tidy garden around it, walking white soft-sand paths. And others, like me, prefer to go to intact nature habitats, where nothing is tidy and developed to perfection as gardeners perceive it.
It's quite ridiculous that "nature aquariums" often look more like gardens under full-time care of a well-paid professional gardener.

If as you suggest, a tank looking like this is the fruit of lacking knowledge and skill to ‘expend‘

I didn't say that such people "lack" knowledge. I said that CO2 injection may substitute the skills and knowledge. And it certainly does, in many cases.

plants and fish sure seem to benefit

Fish????
And plants... well, see above. Certainly they benefit in their owner's eyes.

 

[PARAGUAY]

I recommend Scarborough Castle to you @_Maq_ if get over to Yorkshire