Kasselmann Aquarium Plants questions

[Kwyet]

After seeing the recent post about this book and realizing I could get it at a reasonable price, I bought it for myself and called it “groceries”. I know, I’m shameless. Sometimes I also buy myself coffee and call it “medical”.

I was reading through the preliminary chapters and found some surprising things. She says that plants need a minimum of 12 hours of light! She doesn’t mean to have longer lighting periods but lower light either, as she says you can never make up for low light intensity by extending the photoperiod. It seems the light intensity needs to be appropriate to the type of plant, but duration should be 12-15 hours regardless. There were some other interesting things too, but I’ll start with that. I’m interested in how long everyone runs their lights. I’ve never tried to run mine for anywhere near that long.

Thoughts?

 

[techman81]

Darn! You just reminded me that I submitted the form online to order that book and they've never responded back.

 

[Dennis Wong]

After seeing the recent post about this book and realizing I could get it at a reasonable price, I bought it for myself and called it “groceries”. I know, I’m shameless. Sometimes I also buy myself coffee and call it “medical”.

I was reading through the preliminary chapters and found some surprising things. She says that plants need a minimum of 12 hours of light! She doesn’t mean to have longer lighting periods but lower light either, as she says you can never make up for low light intensity by extending the photoperiod. It seems the light intensity needs to be appropriate to the type of plant, but duration should be 12-15 hours regardless. There were some other interesting things too, but I’ll start with that. I’m interested in how long everyone runs their lights. I’ve never tried to run mine for anywhere near that long.

Thoughts?

Before taking any advice from anyone, take an actual look at their tanks. That's all I have to say.

 

[Yugang]

Before taking any advice from anyone, take an actual look at their tanks. That's all I have to say.

In general a fair remark, but less so if it is meant to discredit someone with a great contribution to the hobby. We are better than that on ScapeCrunch.

A beautifull tank does not mean the hobbyist understands the science or is always right.
A good scientist or experienced hobbyist may have other goals with the hobby than copying @Dennis Wong tanks.

Here is a link to a discussion on light duration length, and Christel Kasselmann in her own words

Lighting duration

6-8 hours photo period appears to be largely the de facto standard advice for a high tech/CO2 injected tank on this forum, particularly on a tank start-up - the reason quoted to avoid algae outbreaks From @Guest's excellent soil substrate guide: I 'm not sure on the origin of the 6-8 hours...

www.ukaps.org

 

[Naturescapes_Rocco]

We are better than that on ScapeCrunch.

I agree. Mainstream media has anger enough, this forum should stay relatively friendly if possible. I've been seeing small instances of angry/scathing replies from certain users happening more frequently, which is sad because I love this place.

These massive tanks from Christel Kassleman are undeniably impressive. Take a look if you haven't before:



I have a feeling that her methods are VERY different than mine, but she grows a nice planted tank.

 

[Koan]

A beautifull tank does not mean the hobbyist understands the science or is always right

That's one way to look at it.

Another is that a beautiful tank is the goal of nearly everyone who visits Scapecrunch, or who might be purchasing Kasselman's book.

Science is very interesting, to some of us But we all also know that nature on its own is messy, and much less ornamental than Gardens are.

The idea that something of scientific interest is going to advance you towards your goal of a beautiful garden, is an assumption that I think is appropriately challenged here


<Moderation>

What we don't do at Scapecrunch, is pile on. If anyone has a concern with what they feel is the tone or intent of someone's post, do them the courtesy of addressing them directly, in private messaging.

</Moderation>

 

[Kwyet]

Wow, her tanks are amazing! It’s just astounding to me that she runs the lights for 12 hours. In the UKAPS thread she mentions that the first and last hour of the day in nature are dim, so she may be doing that in her aquariums too, I don’t know. I’ve only read to page 72 so far, so there may be more info later.

I’m just curious if anyone here has experimented with a long photoperiod like this and what the results were, and whether low-tech or high-tech matters in conjunction with that. I’ve read the journals. It seems like most say 7-8 hours. I don’t remember noticing any 12 hour tanks.

BTW—Remember that tone is subjective in print, unless the author makes it very clear with their words. I didn’t take @Dennis Wong’s comment as anything other than a basic caution because of the nature of social media, not a reflection on Kasselmann. Of course, I appreciate everyone’s efforts to keep this a forum where members treat each other with mutual respect.

Thank you all for your comments! Any personal experience on the original question is still welcome!

 

[JuJuFish]

I run all my tanks (and bowls and vases) for 12 hours. Netlea and Week Aqua lights. I don’t know if this really counts as 12 hours since they are at low intensity for part of the day. And low intensity compared to the rest of you even when mine are at their brightest. Low tech and mostly easy plants.

6:45-11:00 8-10% or so
11:00-1700 35-40% or so
1700-1645 8-10% or so.

 

[Kwyet]

I run all my tanks (and bowls and vases) for 12 hours. Netlea and Week Aqua lights. I don’t know if this really counts as 12 hours since they are at low intensity for part of the day. And low intensity compared to the rest of you even when mine are at their brightest. Low tech and mostly easy plants.

6:45-11:00 8-10% or so
11:00-1700 35-40% or so
1700-1645 8-10% or so.

Thank you! Very interesting!

 

[Art]

I used to run my tanks with a 12 hour "photoperiod". My thinking was that daylight in the Amazon is almost exactly 12 hours year-round.

That said, the light I used back then allowed me to set dawn and dusk settings. There was a slow ramping up and a slow ramping down. It was beautiful to experience and I felt I was giving my fish (and plants) as close to a "real" experience as I could. I could even simulate storms and cloudy days.

I bet that the actual, full-blast photoperiod was closer to my 8 hour one that I use now.

 

[Kwyet]

I used to run my tanks with a 12 hour "photoperiod". My thinking was that daylight in the Amazon is almost exactly 12 hours year-round.

That said, the light I used back then allowed me to set dawn and dusk settings. There was a slow ramping up and a slow ramping down. It was beautiful to experience and I felt I was giving my fish (and plants) as close to a "real" experience as I could. I could even simulate storms and cloudy days.

I bet that the actual, full-blast photoperiod was closer to my 8 hour one that I use now.

Were they low or high-tech tanks?

 

[Art]

High-tech. Even had a moon light tied to the system back then.