The Planted Tank Forum - View Single Post - Persistent Myths about Planted Ripariums
View Single Post
Old 09-08-2011, 01:50 AM   #37
hydrophyte
Planted Tank Guru
 
PTrader: (141/100%)
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Madison, Wisconsin
Posts: 9,560
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by plantbrain View Post
Wood is the raft
Ever made a raft?
Ever walked down a stream or by a lake and seen plants growing on a log?

What is a raft?

I mean really, I see little difference between these so called DIFFERENT terms here. I like Riparium personally better, but simply doing away with paludarium all the way seems better.

I mean the type of planter is what makes it different?

Are these questions unreasonable that I am asking?
They seem pretty basic and simple and I'm not getting any real support for their differences in the prior post. I'm asking some rather basic questions and suggesting Riparium seems more reasonable once you get out of the water.

Emergenariums?

Paludarium's claim to have a component of each fails as well, since many riparian systems have all of these as well, and marsh/swamps might lack much submersed growth or terrestrial aerobic sediments.

I think the name chosen was poor for paludarium, and a wiser term "Riparium" is more applied to a wide range of tanks/set ups.
You guys keep trying to say it's just a hobby and that they are different, but I see little that supports this claim or view.

I can call something anything I want, say my tank "lake-arium" and then say that it applies to all aquatic systems, which clearly it does not. Aquarium simply applies to water, so it is a better description.

Where emergent growth occurs above water, and/or terrestrial systems are linked, this seems to best describe Riparium. These are not myths or arbitrary made up stuff cause I want it to be this way, these are definitions based on the root of the word.

That is why I do not like the paludarium term and why I prefer the term, Riparium.


It's pretty simple, there's no arbitrary issues with it, it describes a wider range of habitat, you/Hydrophte coined it etc.

Why even bother trying to make a big deal about paludariums at all?
Promote this and run with it. Suggest the paludarium is not a particularly descriptive word. Planters may make the hobby easier, but they do not define a habitat. Likewise, terrestrial planters still have some linkage with the water table. So the crown of the plant where the stem/root connect might help when it comes to the submersed, emergent etc.

The plants I have in my tank have roots way around the water, but are fed indirectly by the moss.

The wood acts as a natural raft.

This is something one might see along a creek which I would refer to as a riparian zone.
What do you really mean with all of this? Do you have some other agenda or motive in mind? How are you going to stop people from using the word paludarium? Who says that the elements and functioning of a model ecosystem display necessarily has to be so loyal to anything in nature? Hundreds of thousands of hobbyists who keep their dart frogs in planted enclosures refer their setups as "vivariums". Should this term be discarded because their is no such thing as a wild ecosystem called a "vive"? How would a change like that ever be enforced and why should it be changed if the description serves very well.

By the way, most of the dart frog vivariums that I have ever seen bear little resemblance to anything that I have seen in anture. Most of them have been filled mainly with plants that grow in treetops, but attached to a 3D background that is more like a rock wall, and with animals that in the wild live on the flat rainforest floor. They look plenty nice though and the plants and animals can be very happy inside.

It is good to have agreed-upon terms to distinguish between ripariums and what I am calling paludariums because the basic elements of setup are distinct and the kinds of living things that make the best inhabitants are distinct...
  • Ripariums are mainly for fish and plants.
  • Paludariums are mainly for amphibious animals and plants, and maybe also fish.
Swamps are wetlands with lots of trees. The setup that you linked the pictures for--which looks to me like a cross between what I am calling a riparium and what I am calling a paludarium--has plants growing adhered to the manzanita sticking out of the water. Of the places that I have been in nature the feature that I have seen that most resembled this kind of growth are floating logs in the backwater swamps along the Mississippi River that by the end of the summer are covered with thick growth of Eleocharis acicularis and other little plants. Assuming that my observation is representative--I'm not claiming that it is--and applying your reasoning then shouldn't you call that a paludarium? The logs growing along the edges of streams and rivers, the riparian zone, tend to grow less plants like that because the water level fluctuates more and because the flowing water tends to scour plants from hard surfaces
hydrophyte is offline