light change- 10K to 14K

NYFrank · #1 10/16/2007, 04:53 PM

I just changed my 2 250wt MH lights to 14,000k lights. They were 10,000k. Because the lights are bluer (darker ?) then the 10K do they need to be on longer to produce the same light intensity for the corals/clams, given the wattage is the same. Thanks for any input.

faded1004 · #2 10/16/2007, 05:33 PM

this is very interesting, i would definately like to know more about what people have to say about this... i would think that maybe a bit longer is logical?

Jester · #3 10/18/2007, 07:40 AM

is the intensity really less with the 14k temp bulb... or does it just seem like that becasue the light is at a different "color"... I have been thinking about this for a while, too...

NYFrank · #4 10/18/2007, 07:58 AM

That is what I am hoping some good people can give us some insite on. I have noticed it takes longer for some of the corals to open in the morning. Being that the light is bluer does "more" reach the bottom of the tank?
Anyone have any good answers. Frank

ROB2005 · #5 10/18/2007, 08:03 AM

I stand to be corrected if necessary, but I believe 14,000K makes your corals grow a bit slower, but it makes certain colors pop out. Blue light is a more far reaching source of it, but it doesn't mean a greater source of light on the bottom. Let me ask you, what prompted you to change them?

NYFrank · #6 10/18/2007, 08:12 AM

Rob I changed them because I had 10K on for almost 2 years and the corals never really took off. Also the colors were flat. Most, but not all places I have seen have 14k on the tanks and the corals seem to grow like crazy. I am going to try this for a few months and if I still see no difference then try some supplements, which I have never used.

killagoby · #7 10/18/2007, 08:13 AM

I would think this would all come down to the PAR of the lights. Correct?

ROB2005 · #8 10/18/2007, 08:15 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by NYFrank
Rob I changed them because I had 10K on for almost 2 years and the corals never really took off. Also the colors were flat. Most, but not all places I have seen have 14k on the tanks and the corals seem to grow like crazy. I am going to try this for a few months and if I still see no difference then try some supplements, which I have never used.

Lighting is only one factor to coral growth. Make sure your water chemistry is in good standing

When you say supplements, you mean those liquid ones you add to the tank?

@Killagoby: Usually 10,000K is the most chosen one when it comes to coral growth, but others have seen growth on higher spectrum, to each his own I guess

capn_hylinur · #9 10/18/2007, 08:21 AM

it is still the wattage that is a measure of the strength or penetration of the light.
The 14,0000k refers to the wave lenght of the light. This is a preferred wavelenght that stimulates the growth of the algae in alot of corals and thus their intense colours.
Ideally it is good to run metal halides and attinics to give both wavelengths of light.---in your case its good to run the 14,000 k halides since you don't have the attinics.

bureau13 · #10 10/18/2007, 11:29 AM

Small correction there, its actually the PAR values at any given point that measure the amount of useful light that reaches that point. The color temperature is a way of describing the spectral output, but manufacturer color temp values appear to have very little to do with reality. Wattage really only measures the power consumed, which is why two different 250W bulbs may both use 250W of power but one may have higher PAR values at any given point than the other.

The bluer bulbs tend to have lower PAR values than the lower color temps, e.g. 10K. I don't think there have been any studies that show that color temp itself has a direct impact on growth, I think that's mainly aesthetic preference.

jds

killagoby · #11 10/18/2007, 01:23 PM

That's why I noted PAR...

JRoweNole · #12 10/18/2007, 02:20 PM

I changed from a 250W 10K USHIO lamp on a PFO magnetic ballast to a 250W 14K AquaConnect lamp on an IceCap electronic ballast.

More blue color without a big difference in PAR.

Tank depth, lamp height, water movement and water quality all important growth factors too.

NYFrank · #13 10/19/2007, 06:53 AM

The water factors are all good, I did just add the Tunze which is really moving the water. Also I only keep the UV on now for 6 hours at night. Someone told me the constant UV kills some if not all of the good stuff the corals need. I have noticed more growth since the UV changed. As for any suppliments other then idione I have not read enough up on it yet to just pour stuff in. I know theres a mass amount of stuff out there!!!

"I changed from a 250W 10K USHIO lamp on a PFO magnetic ballast to a 250W 14K AquaConnect lamp on an IceCap electronic ballast.

More blue color without a big difference in PAR."

I did not know that different ballasts cause the bulbs to burn different colors. So I need to find out the PAR for the bulbs?

capn_hylinur · #14 10/19/2007, 07:15 AM

Quote:

[i
. Someone told me the constant UV kills some if not all of the good stuff the corals need. I have noticed more growth since the UV changed.
[/B]

interesting you should report that---similar situation with my tank.
I was convinced that the uv sterilizer was also acting on good bacteria and inverts produced from my refugium.
Since I removed the uv entirely--about two months now---I have had tremendous growth in corals, improvement in coloration of both corals and fish. At night when the moon rays are on the water is teaming with inverts, copopods etc. which was not the case with running the uv sterilzer 24/7.
I have stopped all feedings of corals with zooplankton also.

NYFrank · #15 10/19/2007, 07:35 AM

Capn_hylinur I would suggest- as they did to me you should not take it out totally but put the light on a timer. This will help to kill off the bad stuff and any good things killed would be made up with zooplankton feedings a few times a week.

capn_hylinur · #16 10/19/2007, 08:18 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by NYFrank
Capn_hylinur I would suggest- as they did to me you should not take it out totally but put the light on a timer. This will help to kill off the bad stuff and any good things killed would be made up with zooplankton feedings a few times a week.

I hear you NYFrank--actually my corals do get feedings---because I feed my fish mysis and brine once a day.

I actually was advised that the increased "good bacteria" produced by the refugium would still do the job that the uv was doing on the bad bacteria.
What concerns me alot is that most bacteria in an established tank is not in the water column--rather it settles into layers.
The only thing in the water column would be the inverts produced by the refug--and they would be removed by the uv

This is a discussion and this point I am completely open minded on the use of a uv in a system that has a dedicated refugium to creating life for the tank.
---so further thoughts by you or others would be appreciated