24 hours of light?

MELLOWROO421 · #1 (**permalink**) 08-30-2007, 01:21 AM

I know certain plants require a specific photo period for the onset of flowering, so it led me to wonder... are there any plants I should be concerned about giving a full 24/7 lighting period? I am growing out a bunch of plants including a neo. fireball, alocasia rugosa(sp?), some random nepethenes, creeping fig, philo silver blue, cryptanthus black mystic, baby tears, watermelon vine, pilea, riccia moss, rabbits foot ferns, peperomia, scilla, and a few others that slip my mind. Just wanted to make sure that none of them require a dark period. May be a stupid question, but then again who is the bigger fool, 1 who asks a foolish question or 1 who asks nothing at all?
Brian

Frogtofall · #2 (**permalink**) 08-30-2007, 02:32 AM

Just ask yourself... What does mother nature do??

Even in the parts of the world that get almost 24hrs of light, still get some darkness. Let the plants get their darkness. I'm sure the Krebs Cycle is important.

KeroKero · #3 (**permalink**) 08-30-2007, 03:19 PM

I really have to ask... why would you be giving any of your plants a 24/7 lights on photoperiod? Most of the tropical plants in PDF tanks only need minor, if any noticable, change in photoperiod to flower... often just the change in ambient room light from changing light in your area, even if you keep your plant lights on a 12/12 cycle, is enough to set many off. Sometimes you may manually have to go from a 14/10 to a 10/14 cycle and back again to give some of the more seasonal plants a go.

The only plants I can think of that would need any sort of "dark period" would be those that go dormant... and believe me, you don't need to tell them, they'll tell you. They suddently look like they drop dead. They are usually tubers, which you'd then put in a cooler, darker place for a few motnhs, then move back to a warmer, brighter place where they perk back up (note: warmth = sunlight so it's really more of a temp thing than a light cycle thing once they go dormant). Some tropicals tend to go dormant completely randomly, and come back on their own (talk about a pain... why did my caladium die?! why?! then 2 months later, it's back like nothing ever happened...)

MELLOWROO421 · #4 (**permalink**) 08-30-2007, 03:41 PM

I've been giving them up to 24 hrs of light in hopes of them growing faster. Faster growth means more cuttings which means more free plants for new viv's!

I think I'll put them back on a 13/11 cycle like they would be in the frog tanks. Thanks for the replies.

KeroKero · #5 (**permalink**) 08-30-2007, 03:58 PM

Not a good idea, and it won't really make them grow faster... plants actually have two ways of producing energy, one they use during the day using light, and one at night. Just give them their optimum environment (day/night cycle, humidity, temp, water) and they'll grow as fast as is healthy for them.

Axl · #6 (**permalink**) 08-30-2007, 04:55 PM

Maybe, adding CO2 can help to give them a 'faster growth'. But giving them their optimum enviroment is the key.

Groundhog · #7 (**permalink**) 09-11-2007, 05:27 PM

There is NO debate here. Listen to Corey on this one. I am curious: where did hear/read that 24 light may be a good idea? To put it really simply, plants may make food during the day, but they metabolize at night. Do not think for a moment that plants only grow during the day. Constant light will not only be useless, it could eventually kill them.

Then again, for all I know you could be an 11-year old kid:-)

Seriously, as in the aquarium hobby, there should be a book on "botany for the horticulturist." Hey, there's a new caresheet--"Basic Botany for the Horticulturist"--who's down?

MELLOWROO421 · #8 (**permalink**) 09-12-2007, 03:30 AM

I don't know a whole lot about plants but there is 1 plant in particular I can think of that is best grown in 24 hours of light during it's vegitative stage and then switched to 12/12 for its flowering cycle. This not only helps keep the plant from stretching during a dark cycle but also helps it gain size faster. This is regular practice for not only this particular plant but also many different types of hydroponicaly grown vegitables. This is the reason for my question in the first place.

Quote:

Then again, for all I know you could be an 11-year old kid:-)

http://www.dendroboard.com/phpBB2/viewt ... &start=195
Trust me, some times I wish I were still 11! :lol:

andy83 · #9 (**permalink**) 09-12-2007, 07:53 AM

A month or so ago I went on vacation for a little over a week with help to come by every now and then to feed the frogs etc..... Well, I came back to find one of the timers had been stuck on for the entire time.

Most of the plants at least lost a few leaves. Both broms I have in there suffered but have since came back but slightly damaged. The orchids did alright with no noticeable damage. Funny thing though the moss seamed to be looking good when I came back.

This was 96 continuous watts with the other 96 coming on at regular cycles. Eeek....lets just say I would not like for that to happen again.

Groundhog · #10 (**permalink**) 09-12-2007, 09:18 PM

Melloroo: Did not mean to dis ya. Now, I thought one could START vegetables under constant light, but they must eventually be transferred, no?

For the most part, light duration does not compensate for light intensity (just as increased watering does not offset low humidity). Plants undergo different metabolic activities in light and darkenss, and need both.

I still think we need a "basic botany for horticuture" sheet :wink: