So do you think there is a big difference between 420nm and 450nm coloring wise? True actinics put out all their output at 420nm and 20K lamps at 450nm. Do you think 450nm get such a good rap because it's so much more intense than a 420nm VHO lamp? Or do you think the slightly higher wavelength of the 450nm is the reason?

Joy riding:D

Joe, the spectrums really are almost the same, but not the intensity,Bob

Joe, since there is plenty of 420nm in the XM bulbs we run, wouldn't blue (450nm) supplementation be more ideal? I am thinking of switching to T-5 blue supplementation rather than my VHO actinic. Maybe even leave the actinic in, and run the blue in addition. Either that, or leave the actinic bulbs in, and switch to the 20k XM's. Any reason to prefer one over the other?

Rush

So, these corals that people are blasting with a particular wavelength to bring out a particular color are what color in the wild/nature? How many have been on a reef flat in Fiji? It doesn't look like the tanks people try to keep. Corals will respond to the light they get. Have you ever thought that bright blue coral in your tank is actually not liking the spectrum, just reacting to it?

FR, good point. One of the most colorful reefs I've ever seen, used 6-400W Iwsaki's. Nutrient-poor water, as mentioned in the previous posts, discourage Zoox. overgrowth, allowing bright colors to come thru. That's the one common bond all colorful SPS reefs must achieve,Bob

If I am correct there are Three MAIN types of zooxanthelle. Each deriving the most benefit from different spectrums. The Reason that an intense spike in the 450 works so well is because it Just hits 2 of the 3 types in a big way and hit the third type moderately. The 10K bulb has great intensity, but really focuses on just one type of zooxanthelle, therefore lacking in some colors. From the presentation that Tyree gave based on sanjay's and others studies it looked as if the 20k with the 6.5k provided a better all around spectrum than the 10k and 20k. The combination of a Radium and a Saki hit all three zooxanthelle types rather hard. The radium by itself was not enough to cover all three. I believe there is also a type that benefits from peaks in the 680nm which no bulb has yet to have a spike in.

I intend, depending on how bad my electricty bill is, to try a 250 saki, along with 2x400 Radiums, and 4 Actinic VHOs all within a 3'x2.5' area. We will see how things color. I almost want to see how things do with the raduims and VHO alone to use as a control before I start the experiment.

This is an issue that will be hard to tackle, as alot of the PAR values that are offered to our sps tanks might be too much in some case and not enough in others. This has to do with the depth at which the corals were collected, they are not always marked as far as depth and the light reading is not taken for sure. It will take some one to go down to the reefs (ahum...JB) and measure the PAR values while SCUBA diving.

I believe ReeferMac uses Iwasakis and Radiums, and is pleased with the results.

Tom Berry:fish2:

FWIW I will only chime in and say every reeftank is different, just because it looks one way in another tank, you move it to your tank with the same lighting will not guarantee that your coral will look like it does on the mother colony that it came from.


I have learned that there are many things other than lighting that have to do with the coloration of corals.

Now for my lighting on my 75G I run 2 250W 10K Coarlvue and 440W of VHO Super Actinic light.

I turn my VHO's on at 7 am and they go off at 10 PM. My MH's come on at Noon and goes off at 8PM. I could not be happier with the coloration and the growth of my corals.

Mark

here is a shot under overdriven 20k radiums plus vho.[IMG]http://tonysreef.tripod.com//sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/dsc02713.jpg[/IMG]

Not to sound off key here, but since we are talking lighting.

Is there any research or information on how lenght of photoperiod effects growth and coloration. If spectrum/intensity etc... are a factor,,I would tend to believe that different exposure periods to theses varied levels would also change the coloration and growth rates of different corals.

Just a thought, though maybe no substance to it!

I am a bit hazy on the Steve Tyree presentation on Reefs.org, but it seems to me that he divided the available "acceptable" bulbs into 3 categories: Violet, Blue, and Full Spectrum. He argued that both 10K bulbs and actinics fall into the first category; 20K and 12K in the second: and only Iwasaki bulbs in the third. According to Steve, the 10K bulbs are deficient in blue wavelengths and should be supplemented by a "blue bulb." Conversely, actinics or 10K bulbs can help add some violet spectrum to the 20K bulbs (he was talking, I think, only about radiums). Don't remember what he said about the 65K, except that it has plenty of blue and lots of people don't like how it looks. I've thought about combining 65K and 20K bulbs, but the former are so powerful (at least in the 400w version) that they tend to overwhelm 20K bulbs (unless you use a lot of them).

I think ballasts are also an issue here (both visually and in terms of output). For example, 400W Iwasaki bulbs are (visually) less yellow ))and have higher par, not that they need it)with mercury vapor ballasts; 400W radiums are much less blue (and have higher par) with PFO HQI ballasts, etc.

Just as an aside, yellows under 20K (+actinics) are yellow enough for me, tho' I have never done a side-by-side comparison with 10K or 65K bulbs.

Well, here are some observations.

A friend & I have switched some of the same sps back & forth between our tanks, We have used 400w Radiums/pulse starts and 400w Iwasaki,s. He currently runs the same combo I did on my 225. A center Iwasaki, flanked by a pair of Radiums.

Some of our observations are;

--the large soft corals seemed to like the Iwasaki,s brilliance the best. :lol:

--sps bleach much easier from 400w Radiums than 400w Iwasaki,s


--motipora seemed to like the Iwasaki light better than acro colonies.

--Radiums dont last a year, even on the so called "correct ballast", pulse starts.

--and here is the catcher... :eek2: .... all of the above corals did better in a standard 120g with 6 110w vho lights. {4-50/50 and 2-actinics}. All Icecap driven of course.

We had more growth from green digita, tha under the above 400,s. The caps had better colour, esp. around the outside rims. And here is the most stunning, an acro colony, that was usually a nice green colour under everything else, developed the most beautiful blue tips under the vho lighting. It has never got this brilliant under the halides. :confused:

Also another observation,
the sps in my old 170 cube, grew better under a center 400w 12K Sunburst and 4 normal output 40w GE ultra bulbs, than any combination since, with the exception of the vho set up.

While I,m in hiatus here, I have some frags from my friends tanks plus my digita colonies, sitting in a 55g rubbermaid tub. It has the above 400w 12K and a pair of 40w normals over it. The 12K is at least 18 in. above the tub. Nice growth and colour from the digita and one of the acro frags has turned a nice deep green.

So all this says to me, {all else aside}, it seems the lower light set ups worked better. :eek1:

Doug, I think this somewhat reinforces the initial point - that much as we'd like to focus on light as being the `key ingredient' ... sometimes it might lie in the system.

Who's to know what other differences factored into the VHO tank [not to in the least diminish your observations, though]. What really `gets' me is how sometimes `just enough' light can make an amazing tank/coloration ... where `all the light in the world' seems to have trouble coloring things.

I for one fall in the `lots more going on than light' camp.

Flatlander, those are very interesting observations. I don't think SPSers like to here that VHOs keep better SPS corals. They have pride in their halide set-ups. However, I don't doubt you findings for a second.

IMO as long as intensity is there, Kelvin ratings are a personal preference.

IMO flow rate is very under rated.

Then again, who am I to say? I have learned everything from reading and you fellow RCers.

Anyone know what the zooxanthellae nm ranges that Tyree is talking about?

I saw it in his presentation here this spring ... thought that was going to be a big focus of his at MACNA [he's speaking].

Basically he plotted out the adsorption rates of Chlorophyll A, B, and one other photosynthetic chemical .... and then compared them to the output graphs [nm] of various bulbs.

He seemed to like Radiums the best, for that giant peak at 450, which would saturate Chlor A+B well.

But then he did bring up the flourescing proteins involved in coloration, and how they require various frequencies to reflect back other frequencies to our eye. Hard to explain ... yet there is benefit to spikes all over the map.

Location of Steve Tyree Talk
 

Here is the location of the Steve Tyree talk on lighting in the reef.org library:

[url]http://www.reefs.org/library/talklog/s_tyree_060202.html[/url]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Markk96 [/i]
[B]I have learned that there are many things other than lighting that have to do with the coloration of corals. [/B][/QUOTE]
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Flatlander [/i]
[B]-and here is the catcher... :eek2: .... all of the above corals did better in a standard 120g with 6 110w vho lights. {4-50/50 and 2-actinics}. All Icecap driven of course. [/B][/QUOTE]

Nutrient levels and the type of zoox you're growing will have more to do with it.

Doug, the biggest difference is not only K but MH being a point source and flo not.

[QUOTE][i]

Doug, the biggest difference is not only K but MH being a point source and flo not. [/B][/QUOTE]

Jerel, not sure what that has to do with the colour or growth, except the point source for deep tanks? More please. :)


FWIW,
The 120 mentioned ran my pair of 400w pulse start Radiums for some time. Finally in the middle of summer, {air conditioning & all}, heat became an issue and the tank was switched back to the vho. The results mentioned before, happened after the switch from the Radiums to the vho system.

On his current 180, with the three 400,s the growth and colour is fine, but not like in the vho tank.

Another point. {on the 180}. Before he added the center 400w Iwasaki, he supplemented the pair of 400w Radiums with 4 vho bulbs, 2 blue and 2 white. The coral colour & growth was better then, than the with the 3 400,s and no vho.
:confused: "what can I say" :lol:

I should also add the 120 did have a much higher level of nutrients, than either his 180 or my 225 did, so like you mention Mark, more is in play here than lighting alone.

and although this is a lighting thread, the comment on flow is correct from our observations. The difference in corals, {even large leathers & colts}, when exposed to current from something like Tunze stream pumps is amazing.

Another common problem is people rarely measure the light levels in their tank. IMO if you can get PAR levels between 200-400 you should be able to keep almost any SPS. FWIW in a RDO talk [url=http://www.reefs.org/library/talklog/s_tyree_110198.html]Reef Building Stony Corals[/URL] Tyree states on the reef, areas that have the greatest diversity of life have PAR values measuring 200 to 600 microE/m2s.

So it seems to me, as long as you have met the basic requirements on the range above. You should have enough light.

As pointed out. The light part is one piece, actually probably easier to achieve then many think. The rest, meaning low nutrients and water quality, is where the rest of it all happens.

I have to agree with flatlander somewhat on the VHO issue. I feel it has to do with the fact that the phosphors are most likley a bit more diverse and therfore giving the corals more of a spectrum to work with. Colors tend to POP a bit more when provided with mulitple spectrums. I think that URI has some magical Phosphors that they are using :) So long as you get the intensity, 6-8 VHO's I think that the corals dont' care much. They are actually probably happier because they are not fully saturated within the first 4-6 hours the 400 watt halides come on. They can continue to process the food(light) they are receiving for the full 10-14 hours before they are saturated.

I heard the tyree talk at the last SCMAS meeting. And though he was not the worlds greatest public speaker he brought with him a wealth of information regarding Spectrum and useable color output by several individual coral pigments. Though it seems that some members were sleeping, I found the excess of information very informative and made me want to analyze my lighting set up the moment I got home.

Eugene Reefer, thnx. for the link,Bob

Well since I recently got my Li-Cor 1400 data logger and emerged/ submerged light sensor, I guess I'll throw out some quantum lght values at ya'll. JB I know you did a light study not too long ago so you should know where I am coming from.

IMO, sps show fastest growth when receiving 300+ umol/s/m^2

IME this generally equates to 3-6" underwater from vho/pc/t5 that is right above the surface

for a single halide bulb in parallel reflector mounted 6" above the water it is roughly
24+" underwater for 400w iwasaki on m59
<18" u/w for 400W ushio on blueline
<12" u/w for 400w radium on pulse start
<20" u/w for 400w radium on HQI
<14" u/w for 250w radium on HQI

the PPFD will jump as high as 50% for an additional 6-10" beyond the depths I have listed when using 2 bulbs mounted end to end.

For example, you can attain 300 umol/s/m^2 at a depth of 20" when using 2 250W radiums on an HQI.

For the sake of comprehension and clarity, all values are generalized and I assume that bulbs are new and reflectors are clean etc.
For these values let me reiterate that I am speaking about "maximal" stony coral growth rates