Well, yes, there are, but as already indicated there aren't many such pigments. In the long list provided by Riddle, only 6 pigments are identified as having excitation peaks of less than 400 nm. Of those 6, two of them aren't corals (one is the anemone,
Condylactis gigantea and the other is the hydromedusa,
Aequoria victoria). Of the four remaining pigments actually found in corals, one is from the deep water
Leptoseris fragilis found at depths beyond 60 m in the red sea. So, while you will get some fluorescence with UV light (if you have corals of the species with those pigments) you are going to get far more fluorescence with visible light.
Quote:
|
The thing about using UV light is that the bluer you go, the more energy is in the light, so its easier to get photoinhibition with UV light, due to its higher amount of radiation (this is as per a conversation with Dana Riddle).
|
I'm not sure I agree with this statement. Photosynthesis is a quantum process based on the photons themselves rather than the relative energy levels of the individual photons. It is my understanding that photoinhibition occurs due to the number of photons hitting the photosynthetic apparatus more so than the energy level of the photons. Note that the wavelength/frequency/energy level is important in terms of the action spectra of the pigments but it is the specific wavelengths rather than whether they are longer or shorter.