The new photo makes a difference. We are still in the area of adequate light with the two T8 tubes, so that question I guess is answered. I would replace the tubes though. The Power-Glo is intense, hence the name, and many like this tube but I find the purplish hue it casts over the aquarium disconcerting, and I had this for several years way back when. The Life-Glo will give you good light/colour, and you could combine it with the Sun-Glo or a second Life-Glo. I personally like the warmer light (Sun-Glo) in the mix. You can look into the reflectors, but with these "Glo" tubes you will not really need them, and you may find it too much, so be careful. Of course, another option is to choose different tubes that many not be so good in intensity, and use reflectors. You are in the UK, so daize can best advise what decent tubes are available to you.
The GH of 225 is almost certainly ppm, so that equates to 12 dGH. You will not have hard mineral issues with this, so stay with the Neutro T which is providing the trace or micro-nutrients. Some of the macro-nutrients are the hard minerals in the water, others are nitrogen, carbon, oxygen and hydrogen that are available naturally, and a few that don't seem to be lacking from the latest photo.
By "no substrate" I will assume you are thinking of so-called enriched plant substrates. My view is that these are a waste of money and bother. I will admit they might be helpful in high-tech set-ups, though that is debatable too. But there is absolutely nothing wrong with plain gravel or sand. Your gravel is a bit large-grain, but if you like it, fine. I would prefer sand, especially if you intend substrate-feeding fish like corys, loaches, cichlids. But aside from this, no issues. Even Diana Walstad admits that after a year, a non-soil substrate holds the same benefits as soil from that point on, once the organics have accumulated to supply the CO2, and in my experience this occurs after only a few weeks.
Byron.
The GH of 225 is almost certainly ppm, so that equates to 12 dGH. You will not have hard mineral issues with this, so stay with the Neutro T which is providing the trace or micro-nutrients. Some of the macro-nutrients are the hard minerals in the water, others are nitrogen, carbon, oxygen and hydrogen that are available naturally, and a few that don't seem to be lacking from the latest photo.
By "no substrate" I will assume you are thinking of so-called enriched plant substrates. My view is that these are a waste of money and bother. I will admit they might be helpful in high-tech set-ups, though that is debatable too. But there is absolutely nothing wrong with plain gravel or sand. Your gravel is a bit large-grain, but if you like it, fine. I would prefer sand, especially if you intend substrate-feeding fish like corys, loaches, cichlids. But aside from this, no issues. Even Diana Walstad admits that after a year, a non-soil substrate holds the same benefits as soil from that point on, once the organics have accumulated to supply the CO2, and in my experience this occurs after only a few weeks.
Byron.
