The Planted Tank Forum banner

Excellent List of Low Light Plants

384K views 297 replies 123 participants last post by  thewaves 
#1 · (Edited)
Please Note: I am not the author of this list. The author of this list, James From Cali, is also a member on this site and he has been kind enough to continually update, revise, and update this list. For James' most updated list, please see further threads from James in this post.

This is an excellent list of low light plants for anyone looking for plants to start a low light tank. It was posted by James From Cali at: http://www.myfishtank.net/

"Plants Ideal For Low Light/Low Tech Aquaria
Some people may be wondering what plants do well in a Low Light setup. I used to be the same way(and still am sometimes) and now I am wanting to make a list of what is appropriate for this kind of tank. Any one wanting to add to the list please go ahead. List Common and Scientific name please.

Java Fern - Microsorum pteropus
Windelov Java Fern, Windelov Fern - Microsorum pteropus 'Windelov'
Narrow Leaf Java Fern - Microsorum pteropus v. 'narrow leaf'
Java Moss - Vesicularia dubyana
Green Hygro - Hygrophila polysperma
*Sunset Hygro - Hygrophila polysperma 'Rosanervig'
Ceylon Hygro - Hygrophila polysperma 'Ceylon'
Rotala Rotundifolia - Rotala rotundifolia
Rotala Rotundifolia sp. Green - Rotala rotundifolia sp. 'Green'
Rotala Indica - Rotala indica
Hornwort - Ceratophylum demersum
Parrots Feather - Myriophyllum aquaticum
Moneywort, Water Hyssop - Bocapa monnieri
Brazilian Pennywort, Pennywort - Hydrocotyle leucocephala
Crypt Wendtii - Cryptocoryne wendtii
Crypt Balansae - Cryptocoryne Balansae
Pygmy Crypt - Cryptocoryne pygmaea
Guppy Grass - Najas guadalupensis
Anubias barteri - Anubias barteri v. barteri
Anubias barteri 'marble' - Anubias barteri 'marble'
Anubias barteri v. 'glabra' - Anubias barteri v. 'glabra'
Anubias nana - Anubias barteri v. 'nana'
Coffee leaf anubias - Anubias barteri v. 'coffeefolia'
Crypt retrospiralis - Cryptocoryne retrospiralis
Crypt spiralis - Cryptocoryne spiralis
Golden nana - Anubias barteri v. 'nana golden'
Narrow leaf nana - Anubias barteri v. 'nana narrow leaf'
Petite nana - Anubias barteri v. nana 'petite'
Philippine Java Fern - Microsorum pteropus 'Philippine'
Red Java fern - Microsorum pteropus "red"
Crypt Becketii - Cryptcoryne becketii
Pelia - Monosolenium tenerum
Waterwheel Plant - Aldrovanda vesiculosa
Bacopa - Bacopa caroliniana
African Water Fern - Bolbitis heudelotii
Hornwort - Ceratophyllum submersum
Crypt Aponogetifolia - Cryptocoryne aponogetifolia
Micro Crypt - Cryptocoryne petchii
Tropica Sword - Echinodorus parviflorus 'Tropica'
Downoi - Pogostemon helferi

*Do not ned high light to attain pink color. Dosing Iron can bring out this color. I have learned this from experience.

Thank you,
James"
 
See less See more
#138 ·
yeah, the tank is 4 yrs old, and I will add a root tab once in a while too, thanks!
Once i have that going Ill add to this thread regarding how well it did in the low light.
 
#143 ·
This seems to be a very easy plant, even more easier than the Hygrophila sp. Its a real weed. Very pretty plant too. I unfortunately dont have any experience with this plant......yet.:D

So I planned on planting some mature swords in my 20 tall low tech, but instead I planted a 6 inch tall amazon and a 7 inch tall osiris. They have been chilling for a week now and don't seem to be struggling at all...Ill keep you posted in a few more weeks....btw, I dose 1.5 mL excel once a day or 2 and I dose a mL of FLuorish once a week after water change, thats it.
Swords are probably some of the easiest plants to keep if you do things right from the get go. I found that they grow amazingly well in a sand substrate(same as cryptocorynes) with their crown just a little burried under the sand when young and as they grow they push the crown out. Keep posting your experiences and specs for some new comers that are having problems.

My experience with swords have been great. My neighbor and I bought some emersed Argentine Swords and they went from pea gravel/horticulture sand to regular gravel/potting soil to plain sand. They did best in plain sand. No CO2 and I believe less then 1wpg. The one that is not doing well is cordifolius and I am unsure the reason but I am thinking lack of ferts.
 
#142 · (Edited)
So I planned on planting some mature swords in my 20 tall low tech, but instead I planted a 6 inch tall amazon and a 7 inch tall osiris. They have been chilling for a week now and don't seem to be struggling at all...Ill keep you posted in a few more weeks....btw, I dose 1.5 mL excel once a day or 2 and I dose a mL of FLuorish once a week after water change, thats it.

P.S. I used to have this tank near my balcony where it got direct sun for a couple hours, but I recently moved it to my bedroom because my girlfriend says that 3 tanks in the living room is too much :(

Anyways, the only light these swords have been getting is a 14 watt fluorescent (and its a 20 gallon tall) and I have the regular crappy substrate...I will keep you all posted, because Im quite interested my self in the outcome

Just a question for you more experienced aquarists....if I were to overdrive this 14 watt T8, could I keep my excel and flourish treatments the same? or would I need to amp them up? I figure if I was getting like maybe 20 watts, thats 1 wpg, so that would be better for the plants,...
 
#144 ·
I want to set a list up that is identicle to this except for biotope aquariums. For instance having it laid out like such:

Japan: pH:xx; Hardness:xx.x*
Marimo Ball

And so on. Any ideas? I was thinking about just making a seperate thread and link it to this one for a reference and so no Biotope discussion can be fill up this thread. What is everyones thoughts about me doing this.
 
#145 ·
I can not believe this conversation has been going on this long with nobody challenging it. I have been biting my tonge, but I can't take it any more!


Wow, much effort went into this I can see, but I disagree with so much of it. The term low light is so subjective and misleading when every other componant to successful plant keeping is not addressed. I think in a sense it is mis leading to simply make a blanket list of plants under the term "low light".

The definition of low light to most people new to the hobby is whatever light came with their aquarium, and then maybe bumping that up to between 1 and 2 watts of flourescent light per gallon of water. I don't think half the plants on your list would grow in those conditions, and even if they do survive, what kind of condition are they in?

The stem plants in particular I have a problem with. Generally speaking, stem plants are the most light demanding of all aquatic plants. There are a few exceptions. Most of the exceptions are now illegal in the USA because they grow so prolificaly. Rotalas, Stargrass, Ambulia? Are you serious?
Downoi? Low light? HC? Thats crazy! You are telling me HC is a low light plant? I would love to see that. Hygrophila difformis under weak light has thin stems that can not support the weight of its own leaves and flops over. With strong light and re planting tops the stems remain strong, thick and sturdy.

Any floating plant is pretty much a given. When it is two inches away from the light, any plant will grow. A couple of the plants on the floating list technicaly I would not call floaters. They are stem plants that will take root in the substrate under bright light.

Cryptocorynes,

Yes several common Cryptocoryne species are very tolerant of low light levels and growing submersed, but they grow painstakingly slow. Like an inch a year. They might as well be plastic. Balansae, retrospiralis, aponogetifolia, and pygmaea really do better under high light levels. Balansae in particular can be quite finicky.

Vallisneria I would defintly not call a low light plant. Not in a million years. Dwarf Sag.. yeah, you can get away with it, but the leaves will be much thinner than under high light. Micro Sword - Lilaeopsis braziliensis, now I know you have never grown this plant under low light. I won't believe it for a second. This plant has always been know as being the MOST light hog of any foreground plant. It is the KING of high light plants. Unless you are growing it in only inches of water, there is no way it would survive.


Aponogetons

Under weak light the plant will only survive on whatever energy is stored in the bulb, and most likely will only grow a few inches tall or have thin weak leaves. Once the energy in the tuber is used up, then the leaves die off and it will not grow back. Under good light, and good feeding, the plants grow to be huge, over two feet in length, tons of leaves and flower stalks. Aponogeton boivinianus is the most light finicky of all of them.

Sword plants. All sword plants more or less grow the same and are sort of iffy in the low light catagory. NEWBIES often think that the sword they bought potted that has been growing "well" in their ten gallon tank for the last 8 months is just wonderful. You and I know that a healthy sword plant would swallow a ten gallon tank for lunch.


Red Lotus - Nymphaea zenkeri 'red', If you want Tiger lotus to have leaves the size of a quarter and grow to be maybe six inches tall, then grow it under low light. If you want leaves the size of your hand and the plant to be the dominate focal point, give it some real light, C02, and feed it at the roots generously.

A true low light plant list is much shorter. Maybe ten plants.

I know there is a lot of discussion here about various conditions to make these plants grow. It doesn' matter. All people are going to read is, OH this is on the low light plant list, so I can grow it in my 55 gallon tank with my 15 watt bulb.

Do you realize how hard it is to convince some fish people that if they want to grow plants the little 15 watt bulb on their 55 gallon tank just ain't gonna cut it? They will blame the plant, or the store they bought it from, or their water, or they will dump a gallon of fertilizer in the tank, anything except the light. They will finaly give up and go back to plastic plants. Having a list like this REALLY HELPS.


This is the most insane list of "low light" plants I have ever seen. You might as well say every plant is low light. :thumbsup:

If you want to engage a conversation about how having 40 or 50 ppm of C02 and half a watt of light per gallon of water will enable these plants to grow fine, then OK. If you want to talk about a low tech, soil based tank, or the Walstad method, fine. Do that and open that up to debate, but don't call it a "low light plant list". Good grief.

Let me also add, I mean no dis respect to any one. I am NOT making a personal attack on any one here. I know James is very well meaning and a generous person who only wants to help. He enbodies the very spirit of what this forum is supposed to be, but I think this thread has serious flaws and can cause a serious problem. I believe it is extremely misleading, grossly generalized, and very open to interpretation.

So I planned on planting some mature swords in my 20 tall low tech, but instead I planted a 6 inch tall amazon and a 7 inch tall osiris. They have been chilling for a week now and don't seem to be struggling at all...Ill keep you posted in a few more weeks....btw, I dose 1.5 mL excel once a day or 2 and I dose a mL of FLuorish once a week after water change, thats it.
LOL.. You see! Thats exactly what I am talking about. A healthy sword plant would out grow a 20 gallon tank in less than six months. Just because it doesn't die in two weeks does not mean the plant is healthy. Sword plants are like Oscars. You can put a baby Oscar in a 20 gallon tank, but it is not a good idea. It does not stay a baby for very long

One other note: I know you posted this on at least three other forums, and your low light plant list is different on each WEB site. My comments on specific plants were from your list on aquaticplantcentral.com which I presume are also on your list here, but I did not compare plant by plant on your two lists. That was too much work!
 
#172 ·
The definition of low light to most people new to the hobby is whatever light came with their aquarium, and then maybe bumping that up to between 1 and 2 watts of flourescent light per gallon of water. I don't think half the plants on your list would grow in those conditions, and even if they do survive, what kind of condition are they in?
Tongue biting?
Name a single species of any plant that cannot be grown to a high level at 1.5-2w/gal of PC/T8T5 lighting?

Low tech will include CO2 or not? If so, then it's not the light, it's the CO2.
If Excel is included, then there's little issue.

The light level in this tank is the same as it is it is in the other:



HC:


Light was measured using a PAR meter at various points in the tank.
What does well in that tank, is independent of light for the other.......

Adding CO2/Excel will certainly extend and promote plant health/growth at lower intensities of light, this is well documented and Tropica has a good article on that subject.

You cannot get away from the holistic aspects of growth, light, CO2 and nutrients, not just one of these parameters.

Non limiting CO2/nutrients allow less light to be used and extends the lower range of lighting.

That's right smack in the middle of the range you suggest is unacceptable for plant growth for the specific plants you mentioned, HC, Gloss, Stem plants etc.

Maybe for non CO2/Excel, but not in the broad sense.
But if you add CO2/Excel, then it's not independent of lighting is it then?

So it's either both light and CO2, or not lighting alone. Something else is limiting, hampering growth etc, not light.

Otherwise, the above examples cannot be possible, and yet......they are.
Several hundred folks in the Bay have seen those same tanks.........

I 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.

Regards,
Tom Barr
 
#146 ·
I appreciate the post. I take no offense by it because if there are corrections that should be made or something that isnt accurate then it should be stated. As far as somethings though I would like to point out and clarify:

1) If people care not to read about the methods of growing them in these lighting conditions and they fail that is on them. There is several pages of discussion in this thread about maintaining there plants.I had even stated multiple times that some plants may not work for others, everyone's tank is different. If they do not take the time to fully research the information that is not anyones fault. That should not even a point against this thread due to the fact that everyone here is already very well knowledgable and newcomers already ask the questions anyway so a search is not difficult for them.
2) In low light no plant will severly outgrow a tank in 6 months. A healthy sword will start to outgrow a 20g tank in 6 months but the fact is Growth is slow. Some may grow faster and become tank busters soon in low light but it just brings me back to everyone's tank is different.
3)I have never stated I personally tried any of these plants minus the ones I have tried. I researched and was hoping to experiment with them. I had messaged and spoke with people who had low light tanks and they told me what worked for them. When I was just beggining(when the original list on MFT.net was made) with planted tanks I went by what I knew were low light and what was suggested to me to add.
4) The plants on the list have not been changed on any of the sites. I mainly update this one and havent had the chance to update the others. There is NO difference.

I will actually edit the list and just post with plants I am having luck growing in low light (29g tank with 17 watt bulb has some Victors). I would presume it be the only way to truly solve this situation of inaccuracy. But as I post new updated lists (Which wont be updated constantly due to not getting plants on a constant basis and plant growth rate). I would only base my plant list by growth rate/3 months, Lighting level, ferts and CO2 addition. I will also sepperate each plant into certain catergory. I think this makes it a win win.
 
#148 ·
Well i came to this thread to request some LOW light, non-green plants, but of course got caught up in some of the more recent posts and just wanted to say that in MY experience, Hygrophila difformis (Wisteria) can and does grow well under my low-lighting conditions. It grows up with strong stems in both my .75 wpg 20g H tank, and my 5g 2.5wpg tank. It grows FAST too, and does not become "leggy." And my small Crypt wendtii red may as well NOT just be plastic, as it has gone from about 5 leaves to about 20 leaves and grown about 2+ inches in the 6 months i've had live plants in the tank (this is my .75wpg 20g tall tank). So it's like James and others have said many times, everyone's tank is different, what grows in one may not in another. And I think that's a good, important, thing to keep in mind. :thumbsup: That's just my $0.02. :)

And I think it's a great list to use as a starting point, but getting advice about your specific tanks parameters and what might have a better shot at working than something else is generally a good idea anyway, and something that I think anyone who cared enough about their tank to have found a forum such as this would probably do. :icon_wink

But anyway....back to my question....:hihi: I need some more color in my tank, it's very...GREEN....any suggestions for low light plants that would add some different color to the tank?

as always, thanks in advance! :)
 
#149 ·
I think a Nymphea lotus might do the trick for you.

Ludwigia repens may or may not work out (I think it would grow OK, but may stay more green than red underneath the leaves).

I can't remember how tall/big Indian red swords get, but a small one would be probably OK at least for a while. Fert tabs should help it out some.
 
#150 ·
Cool thanks for the suggestions! I know i may not get anything super brightly colored with my conditions, but even a darker green, or hint or red, something a little different than my very bright green other plants would be nice. And I think i need to look into getting a 65k or so bulb and see if that helps :)
 
#152 ·
Cool, thanks for the suggestions! I'm thinking i'll pick up a larger Crypt wendtii red for the back (i have a small leaved red one in front of the driftwood) and maybe see what i can find for the lotuses, they have a very different look than what's in my tank too :)
 
#153 ·
I'm setting up an Asian themed tank. It is only 10g, and is my first planted tank. The lighting is about 1.5 wpg, but I think I'm going to find a ballast to overdrive the bulb. I'm going to see how the tank does before I do that though. :)

Anyway, without my going through this entire list of plants...does anyone know off-hand which of these plants originate in Asia? So far I have Java Fern, Java Moss, and Hygrophyllia difformis. My LFS has these...anything else may be difficult to find!
 
#156 ·
Thank you very much for putting this list together and all the debates that came along with it. As a first time planter (well soon to be just need to buy a few more things) this list points me in the right direction as to what plants I should be looking at. I want to run my t5ho 4x80 in my 180 gallon fish tank I hope that that will be enough light (crosses fingers).
 
#161 · (Edited)
Let's keep this in perspective.

Tom Barr is highly trusted and has set up more tanks and experimented with more tank setups(plant types, light levels, ferts, low light, high light) than any of us ever will. Anyone new to the hobby should, therefore, seriously look at his methods and recommendations.

So, how does this relate to James list of low light plants? We can argue based on our individual experiences that some of the plants on the list may or may not be the best choice for a low tech setup, but this does not negate the value and validity of setting up a low tech, low light setup, with proven low light plants. No experienced hobbyist would ever argue that plants in such a setup my not produce huge lush leaves, or grow at astronomical rates like those grown via high tech setups. However, there are many individuals new to the hobby that don't want to mess with EI fertilization 3 times a week, invest in expensive c02 equipment, perform 50% water changes weekly to prevent excess build up of ferts, and continuously trim plants just to keep plants from choking out their tanks. And while light may not be the only contributing factor to algae, I have found from my own experimentation that it is a huge factor. Just try it yourself. Put a bunch of plants in a tank, bomard it with high light, use no c02 and no ferts and watch the algae farm that emerges. This relates to the point that you would be hard pressed to find algae issues to that extent in a low tech tank. You may end up with some diatom algae and green dust algae at the beginning and perhaps some black beard or black brush algae, but in my experience this algae seems to die back in a low tech tank and disappears as the tank matures.

I have two tanks. A 40 gallon high tech with all the bells, toys, and whistles and a 5 gallon low tech setup up(no c02 14 watts daylight pc lighting, and daily dosing of excel). While the plants to grow at an insane rate in the 40 gallon, it is a real PITA keeping on top of the maintenance chores to keep the tank from crashing. I also have a 15 gallon high light, DIY c02, with ADA Aquasoil II. The SAE and Kuhli loach are alive and kicking, but again, it is a PITA, with respect to maintenance because the plants grow extremely fast and I have to keep on top of weekly water changes. In comparison, the 5 gallon is a piece of cake and I am quite happy with the growth rate and the fact that it is very low maintenance. Unlike the 40 gallon and 15 gallon tank, there is more room for neglect with the 5 gallon without issues, not that I would neglect it. The tanks are all algae free and the creatures in all the tanks appear healthy.

If I could do it all over again, based on what I now know and learned from setting up different tanks, I would go low tech, low light with low light plants instead of going high tech. For me, the trade off of having slower plant growth with much less maintenance is well worth not having to ensure high maintenance on a tank to keep it from crashing.

I credit Tom Barr for sharing his low tech approach and would advise anyone new to the hobby, who just wants to grow some plants without a lot of fuss to check out his method. It may not be the only method of setting up a low tech, low light tank, but in my experience it works really well. Choose plants from James excellent list and set up as per Tom Barr's method and you may be surprised as to how easy it is to grow plants without a lot of fuss or trial and error.

http://www.barrreport.com/articles/433-non-co2-methods.html

P.S. and as a side note.

I have a co-worker who is not into planted tanks. He has some java moss in his guppy breeding tank and uses the "stock" lighting(yeah you heard it right, the stock lighting that came with the tank). He takes no special measures, uses no ferts, has only plain old gravel and the java moss is lush green and growing like crazy. We have the same tap water, we have purchased the moss from the same source and I even tried a sample of the one grown in his tank, and I have tried growing the java moss in both my high tech and low tech tanks without success. It starts out green, then gradually turns brown and dies. Go figure. So, yeah it is possible to grow certain plants with only stock lighting and no special requirements whasoever. My co-worker is living proof of that.
 
#171 ·
I credit Tom Barr for sharing his low tech approach and would advise anyone new to the hobby,
Well Diana Walstad is a strong Advocate for the non CO2 method also, as was Dorothy Reimer before her(who's now since passed, she was a very nice sweet high energy gal), and many others. I grew a number of species without CO2 long before I got into planted tanks in earnest.

We each have folks that give us ideas and we modify them.
I was curious if we took the sediment out of the equation, the rate is well known with CO2 vs non CO2, that water column dosing and fish waste should be able to do the trick and then we can measure and look at it closer.

But I came at it from the other end, started with non CO2, then CO2 enriched side, then returned back and applied what I knew from both methods.

Sediment ferts works and can/should be added as well, it will make the method for either non CO2, Excel or CO2 enriched methods work even better.

"My" method is just the water column, but does not negate anything in the sediment either. It complements those sources.

Location is less critical, however, proponents of sediments ferts often claim, falsely at that........we can and have shown otherwise, adding ferts to sediment somehow is some advantage that prevent algae.

No, it does not.

Folks still have troubles with this issue, claim otherwise, even though you add it and see that in many tanks, there's no algae inducement.

Thus it cannot be possibly be a correct speculation/hypothesis
Folks can huff and belly ache all they want, but they cannot avoid this fact.
That is the observation, and it's a demostratable result.

This is true for non CO2, Excel and for CO2 enriched methods.
That's a bold and true statement that took some time to arrive at and lot of tanks, testing and folks trying it to realize.

Still, many get algae and blame the nutrients.
But if that was the really the cause, we would have to see in all cases, or at least 95% or so. But we do not, we have newbies or folks where the CO2, water changes, plant densities, etc are not truly independent. So they look for the old myths and dogma since they really do not know.

Then it gets repeated.
Some folks promote methods all the time.........and they work, the real question is why they work.

This is critical. This can prevent myths and solve more issues for the folks that have not had the success that perhaps others have had.

Nutrients are less important, CO2 stability/light are really much more critical.

This is still true here for non CO2/carbon enrichment methods.
So not doing those water changes seems to stabilize things for many, having higher plant density, why do some plants do well while others not? CO2 competition mostly(we can provide good light and nutrients easy enough). Allelopathy can be ruled out via activated carbon etc. So it leaves us mostly with CO2 stability as a root cause for issues=> algae, which is indirectly related to poor plant health that leads to algae. So it's all about the plant's health, when that is disturbed, then we have algae.


Regards,
Tom Barr
 
#162 ·
I think James made a good point when he said that different people's results will vary with different plants. Water parameters, substrate, actual CO2 levels, actual PAR values... all of these will vary from tank to tank, even under the "same low wattage."

Personally, I've never had problems keeping Vals in low lighting. Stems like Bacopa carolinina, Najas (several different species), and several Hygros also do well. Stargrass does OK, just I have to really be careful how I keep it trimmed to avoid shading. I'm about to try every Crypt species I can get my hands on to see how they do for me. C. wendtiis I know do fine.

Seeing as it's pretty common goal for someone setting up a low light tank to not have to trim too frequently, IMO slow plant growth is a good thing. I don't mind if my Lotus isn't as brilliant red as my neighbors or if it stays nice and short- I kinda like it that way. My personal plant "standards" are - 1) does it stay alive 2) does it look nice. I'm not that picky, I guess. :)

I think James' list is a great starting point. People just need to keep in mind that planted tanks are always trial and error- the plant that does great in one tank may or may not in the next (or even in the same tank just in a different spot... :icon_roll) That's one of the joys and frustrations in working with plants, period- terrestrial or aquatic. :)
 
#163 ·
Homer and Laura thank you. As I have been away with dealing with school and some issues and havent been here to post for a while I am happy to see that this thread is still looked at from time to time. Thank you.

I agree with Homer about viewing Tom Barrs methods, I simply enjoy reading his stuff. I actually have his Non CO2 method printed out so I have it on me at all times and I could refer people to it.

Laura, I am actually making my 29g a crypt/grass tank. I am just going to use the stock light and no fertilization. I will eventually just have Cryptoryne balanse and lucens(i believe), anubias, and Sagitarria subulata.

I never stated I have tried these plants, I actually done the opposite, and wish for people to experiment with it themselves. I read alot of peoples experiences, whether online or here about it in person.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top