# red low light plant?



## AnniePN (Oct 8, 2011)

Are there any low light plants that are red??


----------



## Psionic (Dec 22, 2011)

Red tiger lotus is all I can think of. But I don't know that many plants. 


-Val


----------



## smokaah (Nov 30, 2011)

I have seen red tiger lotus do very well in Fluval Ebi with around 13W/8Gallons. 

I have several red plants that do well in my 29 gallon with 2x24W HOt5. I add 5ml iron weekly.


----------



## Rainer (Jan 30, 2011)

Have you checked out Crypt cordata blassii?


----------



## sketch804 (Mar 2, 2011)

rotala hybrid will grow red in most light. That crypt mentioned is a good one, as well as c. Affins, and c. Wendii 'brown' or 'red' are nice also. But generally speaking the red gene is just the plants response to being growning/living in intense lighting, so it does this so it isnt 'bleached' out or 'burned' so to speak..good luck!


----------



## aweeby (Oct 1, 2011)

I get good color from ludwigia repens under medium light. Mileage may vary, though, so i've heard. 




Like sketch said: Red coloration in most plants is a result of antioxidants created to protect the plant from the elevated levels of oxygen that photosynthesis produces. Under high light, photosynthesis works faster, creating more o2, driving some plants to make antioxidants to prevent damage. So it's kind of hard to have a low light red.


----------



## Hoppy (Dec 24, 2005)

The classic low light plant that is very red is Alternantha reineckii. It is a plant that is often assumed to need high light, but I always had lots of BBA on it if it was in high light. I notice that people who keep it in low light areas of the tank, don't have that problem, but still get the color.


----------



## sketch804 (Mar 2, 2011)

aweeby said:


> Like sketch said: Red coloration in most plants is a result of antioxidants created to protect the plant from the elevated levels of oxygen that photosynthesis produces. Under high light, photosynthesis works faster, creating more o2, driving some plants to make antioxidants to prevent damage. So it's kind of hard to have a low light red.


Ah there we go! I knew someone would chime in with more info about that! 

And Hoppy is right, I have seen that plant in lower light tanks look just fine..but when I kept it it needed to not be shaded but accepted lower light conditions.


----------



## AnniePN (Oct 8, 2011)

Thanks for all the information! I will look into getting some of the suggested plants.


----------



## plantbrain (Dec 15, 2003)

aweeby said:


> Like sketch said: Red coloration in most plants is a result of antioxidants created to protect the plant from the elevated levels of oxygen that photosynthesis produces. Under high light, photosynthesis works faster, creating more o2, driving some plants to make antioxidants to prevent damage. So it's kind of hard to have a low light red.


So why are most red plants found in low light habitats in nature?
why are there no/extremely few red cacti or desert plants?
Most of the tropical foliage sold for house plants that are red come from the understory where light is much lower.

Aquatic plants are also low light plants, so called shade plants.


----------



## plantbrain (Dec 15, 2003)

The Hygro araguria (or something close ) is a good lower light tolerant plant IME.


----------



## sketch804 (Mar 2, 2011)

plantbrain said:


> So why are most red plants found in low light habitats in nature?
> why are there no/extremely few red cacti or desert plants?
> Most of the tropical foliage sold for house plants that are red come from the understory where light is much lower.
> 
> Aquatic plants are also low light plants, so called shade plants.


I half way agree with that one...because I don't think that ALL red plants are or need high light. Yes there are many red low light plants, but then again there are many examples of plants that are in high light also that are red..just check a Japanese maple for one, whether it be man made or natural. But I believe there is _NO_ real set rule for red plants. just in high light some plants turn red for the reason stated, but not all by any means. Just kind of depends on the species and factors in nature that bring this on. 

I wish I knew where to get that low light small hygro you have in that tank also (on a side note)


----------



## zergling (May 16, 2007)

Ludwigia sp 'Red' / 'Hybrid' stays red in low light.

Lighting here is Archaea 30cm 3W LED light.


----------



## zergling (May 16, 2007)

plantbrain said:


> The Hygro araguria (or something close ) is a good lower light tolerant plant IME.


THIS....I want to try.....prolly when I redo my tanks next month :biggrin:


----------



## aweeby (Oct 1, 2011)

plantbrain said:


> So why are most red plants found in low light habitats in nature?
> why are there no/extremely few red cacti or desert plants?
> Most of the tropical foliage sold for house plants that are red come from the understory where light is much lower.
> 
> Aquatic plants are also low light plants, so called shade plants.


wow, I was just refuted by tom barr. this one's going in the book. 

I meant more like: these plants aren't used to light (i.e. they're 'low light' relatively so) but they've adapted in the case that they do 'see' light- they make antioxidants when exposed to our crazy wattaged bulbs. And if you want to say it that way, anything that's not the sun is kind of 'low-light', don't you think? Even MH. atmosphere aside, and all. And fyi, there's practically a tropical rainforest in my backyard and nothing on the lower levels are red.

and that is a nice hygro you have there. Need to get me some of that. 

But I'll step aside here. I've seen enough of these crazy debates to scare me away from this kind of thing.


----------



## Jeffww (Aug 6, 2010)

zergling said:


> THIS....I want to try.....prolly when I redo my tanks next month :biggrin:


PM me when you're ready. I'll happily give some out for free. It's outrageous that people charge so much for it.


----------



## plantbrain (Dec 15, 2003)

sketch804 said:


> I half way agree with that one...because I don't think that ALL red plants are or need high light. Yes there are many red low light plants, but then again there are many examples of plants that are in high light also that are red..just check a Japanese maple for one, whether it be man made or natural. But I believe there is _NO_ real set rule for red plants. just in high light some plants turn red for the reason stated, but not all by any means. Just kind of depends on the species and factors in nature that bring this on.
> 
> I wish I knew where to get that low light small hygro you have in that tank also (on a side note)


Since as you state, there are no rules for red plant, then this means that *high light is not why the plants are red to begin with*:icon_idea

Which was my point......know any desert plants that are red? Lots of light there........


----------



## sketch804 (Mar 2, 2011)

plantbrain said:


> .. *high light is not why the plants are red to begin with*:icon_idea..


Nuff said, I agree with that..Not what I meant by my previous statement, just may have come out like that hehe..well succulents are a very odd form of plants..Not exacly the norm and the normal rules don't really apply to them at all (or at least with the ones my friend and I have kept) ha!


----------



## plantbrain (Dec 15, 2003)

aweeby said:


> wow, I was just refuted by tom barr. this one's going in the book.
> 
> I meant more like: these plants aren't used to light (i.e. they're 'low light' relatively so) but they've adapted in the case that they do 'see' light- they make antioxidants when exposed to our crazy wattaged bulbs. And if you want to say it that way, anything that's not the sun is kind of 'low-light', don't you think? Even MH. atmosphere aside, and all. And fyi, there's practically a tropical rainforest in my backyard and nothing on the lower levels are red.


Yes, what we add is "low light", I agree.

But we also add ferts and CO2 and other things that are often missing in most natural systems. This makes the plant better able to grow and allocate resources to gathering light. If folks just focus on good general conditions, then the plants do quite well on their own. 



> and that is a nice hygro you have there. Need to get me some of that.
> 
> But I'll step aside here. I've seen enough of these crazy debates to scare me away from this kind of thing.


All it takes is for a few folks to show their tanks/plants with low light and a standard light intensity/meter to measure it.

I measure light in Lake Tahoe, and even 8ft down, it's insanely high, 2500 umols, this is due to less air at higher altitudes blocking the solar radiation. 
There are no red aquatic plants in the lake. Florida: Crypts in a very shady forest:









Light is typically 500-800umol, which is still light saturation for these species, but pretty low light overall. Many Crypts have a great deal of red color. Most aquariums might run 30-70 umols in general, a few higher light systems: 80-150 on the sediment. Not much goes above that.

This plant looks like something we keep, but turns green and ugly in our CO2 enriched tanks:










Veronica anagullius-aquatica, maybe it is the light in this case. I've collected a dozen times, always reverts to green and ugly leaves. Beautiful plant in creeks and rivers submersed. But........all it would take is for one person to grow it like the pic above in a tank without high light, and my goose would be cooked.

Maybe it requires high light as well? I cannot say. We likely should take each plant species on a case by case basis, and get away from the gross generalizations about red plants needing high light, there are just too many exceptions at this point we can confirm.


----------



## plantbrain (Dec 15, 2003)

sketch804 said:


> Nuff said, I agree with that..Not what I meant by my previous statement, just came out like that hehe..well succulents are a very odd form of plants..Not exacly the norm and the normal rules don't really apply to them at all (or at least with the ones my friend and I have kept) ha!


Dudyla is often red, nice little CAM plant, grows all over, there are a few ornamental cacti that are red in color, a few annuals are red leaved, most are green though, or green with lots of white hairs(glaucous), I love the desert plant ecosystems, tough suckers. Same with the aquatic systems, also a very tough place to be a plant. And of course wind swept mountaintops and marine tide pools. I'm lucky to live somewhere I can go visit these places with a few hour drive.

But finding a nice red plant that is NOT a crypt is not easy.
Red tennellus stays pretty red even at 40 umols.
The red hygro is a tougher easier plant IME/IMO.
There is also a red liverwort that became really weedy and I finally got rid of it after several years that came from Sumatra I believe or Jakarta. Many wanted it but it was such a weedy thing........and as we well know, liverworts are very low light tolerant.

BBA is a red algae and the red algae are also the deepest macro algae of any general type of macro algae, 800 ft deep.

I think what many think is the high light thing: with faster growth, it takes longer for the Chl a to get incorporated into the tissue, so the initial under developed tips will have less Chl a, and more red color that is not shaded.
Since light and relative rates of growth are directly linked, this hard to tease apart.

In non CO2 tanks with less light, I've had nice red color in several species. But the system was Nitrogemn limited, but since the rates of growth where also small due to no CO2 enrichment, the stress to the plant from low N, was not nearly as pronounced as with a similar tank with CO2 gas additions.

So ti was easier to deal with the dosing and ferts for the non CO2 tank without causing too much problem. When we increase rates of growth 10X...things change and what was easy before, now changes real fast.


----------

