I can't believe this list is even still here after all this time, its been deleted off of other sites it was posted on. Tom i do not take issue with you that many plants can be grown under special circumstances with so called "low light". I have been a supporter of Diana Walstad for years, and YOU could YOU should write a book on what constitutes "low tech", and I totally agree that if you factor in C02 and other conditions that you can get many plants to grow. The "Walstad" approach is a whole detailed system that involves many factors.
But thats not what we are talking about here.
This is not a list of plants that will grow with the Walstad method, or a list of plants that will grow with the Tom Barr method, it is not even a list of "low tech" plants, it is a blanket list of so called low light plants which in and of itself is totally misleading and ridiculous.
Tom, if we go by what you just said, and assume it is true that most any plant will grow under "low light" as long as you have elevated C02 and any other factors you want to throw in THEN YOU DON'T NEED ANY LIST OF LOW LIGHT PLANTS BECAUSE IT APPLIES EQUALLY TO EVERY PLANT!
Just my humble opinion. I'm not trying to be mean, but this just really seems so flagrantly... oh whatever
The light level in this tank is the same as it is it is in the other:
Ok, but you only have java fern, moss, and micranthemoides in there right? And your pumping in your 40 ppm of C02!! Micranthemoides in an open space with C02 grows like a weed.
have never been particularly keen on calling aquatic plants low light vs high light. They all do pretty well at some rather low light levels and the low light plants grow pretty fast at higher levels of light as well.
Well thats the whole point here as to why his list is so misleading. Most people who are looking for low light plants have a 15 watt bulb on a 55 gallon and are not pumping in 40 pppm of C02 and they look at this list and say oh boy i can grow tonina and ludwigia glandulosa with my anubias nana and java fern, YiPPie!
When you call a plant a "low light" plant, you are giving the impression that it is a tough, resiliant, "hard to kill" plant that can prosper in less than favorable conditions. That is the image that comes to mind, I guarantee you 100% for sure. I would say 90% of the plants on his list DO NOT fall into that description. Many of them are quite delicate in nature, and very easy to kill. Do you understand what I am saying now?