• 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

Recommendations for floating plants with short roots . . .

Wookii

Member
Joined
13 Nov 2019
Messages
4,267
Location
Nottingham
A strange request I know, but I currently have a low tech tank with lots of Amazon Frogbit, it looks great and we really light the shadowy appearance it helps create, however the roots on the Frogbit take up a bit too much of the tank (around 2/3rds of the height, with many stretching 200mm or more. I'd like to keep floating plants with roots, but not so long.

I know I could trim these, but that's an ongoing hassle I'd like to avoid, as these things grow fast (they've quadrupled in number in the space of 2-3 weeks).

Potential candidates so far are red root floaters, and going a different route, possibly Riccardia chamedryfolia (as suggested by @Simon Cole here - no roots, but might give a different and interesting look).

If anyone can comment on the relative length of the roots on the Red Root Floaters (Phyllanthus Fluitans) compared to Frogbit, that would be appreciated (they certainly look a lot shorter in web images), plus if there are other suggestions, that would be great.
 
Hi all,
I'd like to keep floating plants with roots, but not so long.
Red Root Floaters (Phyllanthus Fluitans) compared to Frogbit, that would be appreciated (they certainly look a lot shorter in web images),
Phyllanthus or <"Salvinia (natans) "auriculata group"> have much shorter roots. Phyllanthus has <"never done very well for me"> (nor did <"Hygrorhyza aristata">), but Salvinia is pretty bomb-proof.

Riccia fluitans and Utricularia gibba don't have any roots, but are quite "weedy". Azolla caroliniana and the Lemna spp. are even weedier. I've not tried R. chamedryfolia.

cheers Darrel
 
Last edited:
Isn't the length of root of Frogbit affected by the amount of nutrients in the water? if so, through more fertiliser in.
 
Hi all,
Isn't the length of root of Frogbit affected by the amount of nutrients in the water? if so, through more fertiliser in.
They do apportion more resources to the roots when there are less nutrients present in the water column and vice versa.

The problem is that the plants are smaller with low nutrients and much bigger with more nutrients.

The end effect is that root length tends to be fairly similar, with big leaf rosettes having relatively shorter roots, but on a bigger (all around) plant.

cheers Darrel
 
Hi all,


Phyllanthus or <"Salvinia (natans) "auriculata group"> have much shorter roots. Phyllanthus has <"never done very well for me"> (nor did <"Hygrorhyza aristata">), but Salvinia is pretty bomb-proof.

Riccia fluitans and Utricularia gibba don't have any roots, but are quite "weedy". Azolla caroliniana and the Lemna spp. are even weedier. I've not tried R. chamedryfolia.

cheers Darrel
It was Natans and frogbit I had

I did buy a Tropica invitro pot of "Salvinia auriculata" a couple of weeks ago to try an alternative floater, but the leaves have stayed quite tiny. Is that typical? Or is 'Natans' a different variety?

If this is a correct image of 'Natans', then its massively bigger than the 'Auriculata' than I have:

91NPb2UEACL._AC_SL1500_.jpg
 
Hi all,
I did buy a Tropica invitro pot of "Salvinia auriculata" a couple of weeks ago to try an alternative floater, but the leaves have stayed quite tiny. Is that typical? Or is 'Natans' a different variety?

If this is a correct image of 'Natans', then its massively bigger than the 'Auriculata' than I have:

91NPb2UEACL._AC_SL1500_.jpg
Have a look at the <"earlier linked in thread">.

To tell which Salvinia is which, you need to look at the <"shape of the hairs"> (and sporopcarps).
My guess is that all the ones in cultivation, and sold under different names ,are actually Salvinia "auriculata group". I've not personally seen a plant that didn't have the whisk shaped trichomes

cheers Darrel
 
To the best of my knowledge, the name on the products correspond with the content. Tropica is honestly not as fast as may be wished fore, to up-date the scientific names.
 
To the best of my knowledge, the name on the products correspond with the content. Tropica is honestly not as fast as may be wished fore, to up-date the scientific names.

Sorry Mick, I misunderstood when I posted the question, and was thinking the name 'Auriculata' was applied to a number of different varieties.
 
I grow 4 types of floaters: water lettuce, Amazon frogbit and Salvinia, and volunteered duckweed I’m struggling to get rid of. Salvia and duckweed have the shortest roots, but grow at explosive rate that need frequent thinning. My Frogbit don’t get long roots, no more than an inch maximum, not sure if it is due to direct sunlight or rich nutrient. My water lettuce has the longest roots, up o 4 inch, which I love to serve as breeding mop for fry to hide.
 
Last edited:
Hi all,
and was thinking the name 'Auriculata' was applied to a number of different varieties.
It is, that is why its technically <"Salvinia "auriculata group or complex"> rather than Salvinia auriculata.
...........Salvinia molesta belongs to a group of closely related Neotropical species that share the feature of eggbeater type hairs (Mitchell 1972; Mitchell 1979). Named the “Salvinia auriculata complex”, the members include S. auriculata Aublet, S. biloba Raddi, S. herzogii de la Sota, and S. molesta. Although subtle differences have been found among the members of the group, sporocarps are generally needed to tell these species apart (Forno 1983; Mitchell 1972).......
Plants that are out on the pond in the summer grow big and beefy and develop sporocarps (like little hanging bunches of grapes), but I have no idea if they are fertile or not.

cheers Darrel
 
Hi all,

Have a look at the /www.ukaps.org/forum/threads/whats-wrong-with-my-chili-rasboras.39658/page-3#post-435094']earlier linked in thread[/URL]">.

To tell which Salvinia is which, you need to look at the /www.ukaps.org/forum/threads/floating-plant-id.61335/#post-602935']shape of the hairs[/URL]"> (and sporopcarps).


cheers Darrel

Oh thats different than what i had lol
 
Hi all,
Salvia and duckweed have the shortest roots, but grow at explosive rate that need frequent thinning. I m not sure why my Frogbit don’t get long roots, no more than an inch maximum.
It is probably a nutrient effect, both short roots and explosive growth rate suggest that there are plenty of nutrients (mainly a NO3 effect?) in the water column.

A couple of weeks ago I got a bit mixed up with <"water change containers"> and poured about 300 mL of <"pale blue Miracle-Gro"> liquid feed into the <"nano-tank in the kitchen">, which still doesn't have any fish in it.

photo2_zpsf966be53-jpg.jpg

I don't know <"how much Miracle-Gro it was">, but it was enough to make the Salvinia grow noticeably and go from "little leaves" to "big leaves".

I'll see if I can get a photo of the change in growth form.

cheers Darrel
 
Last edited:
My Frogbit don’t get long roots, no more than an inch maximum, not sure if it is due to direct sunlight or rich nutrient.
It is probably a nutrient effect, both short roots and explosive growth rate suggest that there are plenty of nutrients (mainly a NO3 effect?) in the water column.
In the low tech, the growth has certainly been considerable in terms of numbers of plants.

From this:

224B4E1C-BCC9-44C5-8EC3-59BBBE514A83.jpeg


To this:

7CA9E5CA-97D8-4A5E-BDFE-7BCFEE951941.jpeg


. . . in a little over two and half weeks.

You can see in the latter photo the length of the roots, but now I look back and compare the two, they are a lot longer now than when introduced, and I am dosing a lot less than full EI, so maybe reduced nutrients are the reason?
 
Back
Top