250 watt SE MH lamps compared

[JB NY]

Thanks. I thought that was nice of Sanjay too.

[RGibson]

Joe has there been any new test on 175 watt MH lamps?

[reefware]

WOW thats alot of reading, What a great thread though. Are there any plans to test other wattage or style bulbs?

[reefware]

Sorry Double post

[Cruiznblue]

Not sure if I missed it, but have you dont any test on DE bulbs? Too many pages to read through.

[electric130]

the title of the thread is "250 watt SE MH lamps" not DE's. DE's have been tested in other threads.

[JB NY]

Originally posted by RGibson
Joe has there been any new test on 175 watt MH lamps?

Not that I know of. I'm not planning on testing them.

reefware and Cruiznblue, as of now I'm just doing the 250 watt SE lamps.

[NoFear29]

tagged

[electric130]

Originally posted by NoFear29
tagged

Originally posted by RC Staff
In our ongoing effort to continually improve Reef Central, the RC Staff would like to encourage everyone not to reply to threads with “Just Tagging Along� or other noncontributory comments. These kinds of replies are discourteous to the others who are subscribed to that thread as this causes them to reopen threads that have no useful additional information. It also makes it difficult for the moderators and Team RC members to find threads with no replies thus not serving the thread originator. If you want to follow a thread of interest, please use the “subscribe to this thread� link below the quick reply box. The effect will be the same. You can easily track the thread of interest in the subscribed threads section of your “My RC� page.

We would like to thank you in advance for your cooperation in this matter.

Regards,

The RC Staff

[fitti69]

Trying to pick some brains here . I am thinking about running 1 400w Iwasaki and 1 400w blueline 10k+ over a 2x2 area . I am curently running the bluelines but the growth sucks (looking at joes test i can see why). I would plan on easing in the saki's , to a total of 4 to 6 hours total photoperiod per day . What do you guys think ? would I be able to keep my color and improve the growth ? Oh ya , heat is not an issue .

Thanks, Mike

[Scooterman67]

I run the BL super white, it seems to be doing fine! The 10k was very blue & low on PAR.

[Aquavadis]

Hi Guys,

I noticed that in many of the scientific studies on coral bleaching scientists used PUR ( photosyntheticaly useful radiation which is biased with the organisms ability to absorb light at specific wavelengths.) instead of PAR since PAR is based on plant photosynthesis and gives a reading very close or equal to yellow light intensity.
They also use PAS ( Photosynthetic Action Spectrum) defining how photosynthetic organisms respond to light at specific wavelengths and they use PSR (Photosynthetically Stored Radiation) developed as a metric.

It has been a ? for me since the time PAR started to become popular among hobbyists because there are 6 colors within 400nm and 700nm but not all of them are utilized at the same rate by zooxanthellae especialy red. As far as i know violet is the other color utilized by zooxanthellae but it isnt within the PAR waveband. I think the succes of low PAR 20 K bulbs is because of 20 K's have more violet, blue and green -which are more used by corals- than 10000Ks and 65K's having higher PAR not showing the accurate waveband for coral photosynthesis. And the strange thing is in some of those studies high PAR intensity was considered as a reason for coral bleaching.

I am not a scientist so i may have a missunderstanding but do we realy need to be curious about PAR? IMO high PAR intensity doesnt mean high growth.

Kadir

[Aquavadis]

Hi Guys,

I noticed that in many of the scientific studies on coral bleaching scientists used PUR ( photosyntheticaly useful radiation which is biased with the organisms ability to absorb light at specific wavelengths.) instead of PAR since PAR is based on plant photosynthesis and gives a reading very close or equal to yellow light intensity.
They also use PAS ( Photosynthetic Action Spectrum) defining how photosynthetic organisms respond to light at specific wavelengths and they use PSR (Photosynthetically Stored Radiation) developed as a metric.

It has been a ? for me since the time PAR started to become popular among hobbyists because there are 6 colors within 400nm and 700nm but not all of them are utilized at the same rate by zooxanthellae especialy red. As far as i know violet is the other color utilized by zooxanthellae but it isnt within the PAR waveband. I think the succes of low PAR 20 K bulbs is because of 20 K's have more violet, blue and green -which are more used by corals- than 10000Ks and 65K's having higher PAR not showing the accurate waveband for coral photosynthesis. And the strange thing is in some of those studies high PAR intensity was considered as a reason for coral bleaching.

I am not a scientist so i may have a missunderstanding but do we realy need to be curious about PAR? IMO high PAR intensity doesnt mean high growth.

Kadir

[Aquavadis]

Hi Guys,

I noticed that in many of the scientific studies on coral bleaching scientists used PUR ( photosyntheticaly useful radiation which is biased with the organisms ability to absorb light at specific wavelengths.) instead of PAR since PAR is based on plant photosynthesis and gives a reading very close or equal to yellow light intensity.
They also use PAS ( Photosynthetic Action Spectrum) defining how photosynthetic organisms respond to light at specific wavelengths and they use PSR (Photosynthetically Stored Radiation) developed as a metric.

It has been a ? for me since the time PAR started to become popular among hobbyists because there are 6 colors within 400nm and 700nm but not all of them are utilized at the same rate by zooxanthellae especialy red. As far as i know violet is the other color utilized by zooxanthellae but it isnt within the PAR waveband. I think the succes of low PAR 20 K bulbs is because of 20 K's have more violet, blue and green -which are more used by corals- than 10000Ks and 65K's having higher PAR not showing the accurate waveband for coral photosynthesis. And the strange thing is in some of those studies high PAR intensity was considered as a reason for coral bleaching.

I am not a scientist so i may have a missunderstanding but do we realy need to be curious about PAR? IMO high PAR intensity doesnt mean high growth.

Kadir

[Aquavadis]

sory about the multiple posts

[ReefSalt]

3 times you must really want an answer huh Kadir

LoL

I personally found great colors using 20k over 10k ect.for growth I have not really seen a considerable difference,like you Im no scientist,but it would be nice to know.

[Aquavadis]

LOL

Yes i am realy curious about it. Lighting is one of the most complicated and most expensive part of reef keeping. Like everybody i dont want to spend $$$ for no reason. Actualy more than that i want to have the lighting what the corals in my tank realy need.

[electric130]

choose your lighting based on the corals you want to keep and where they are in nature. if you want SPS, the majority of them are in shallow water, you your best choice would be 6500k. if you want some deeper water corals like some of the LPS and softies, a higher K bulb such as a 14K would be a better choice. ideally, you'd pick a bulb that's best for the corals, not what looks the best to you, but that's not what most people do. they pick whatever they like to look at.

[Aquavadis]

Yes i agree with you about the bulb and depth relation. I read an article of Steve Tyree there he told that maximum diversity of SPS corals occured at the depths around 10-15 meters. 10 meters depth is where the light irradiance is %50 of its irradiance at 1 meter depth. So a big part of red and yellow must be attenuated at that depth. There he also reccomends 400 Watters for the acros coming from very shallow waters- i think around 1 meter or so- of Fiji but for the other SPS corals coming from deeper waters he tells that they can thrive under NO, VHO or PC bulbs as long as enough intensity provided and that intensity isnt too much. For my understanding 5-6 Watt/gallon provided by the reliable bulbs available to the hobbyists can achive that intensity in the shallow tanks such as 18" high. Considering the big part of light attenuation occures within the first 10-15 meters layer of water it make sense. Sure we should consider the depths the corals come from and chose a bulb having a Kelvin degree can mimic the natural habitat of the corals. It looks like zooxanthellae utilize the wavebands available at the depths where the corals live in the nature. Corals live in the very shallow waters may benefit from red light but the ones living in the deeper levels dont since it is not available at that depths. Thats why PUR looks more relaible to me.

But i am telling again i am just a poor hobbyist not a scientist. So all my points may be wrong.

Kadir

[pjr]

JB NY, I'm just wondering... have you ever tested any T5 bulbs... specifically an overdrivern HO bulb? I am curious on how a 6-wide or 4-wide setup on T5 bulbs driven by a quality ballast (E.g. IceCap) would campare in terms of output to a 250W MH/ Nobaody... and I mean nobody... has performed any decent T5 testing. All we are left with is manufacturer clams for making decisions.

[Aquavadis]

As far as i could follow JB NY hasnt tested any T5 HO. I dont know if this link works for you.

http://archive.reefcentral.com/forum...n&pagenumber=3

[Julio]

There have been several studies done on VHO,NO and T5, there is an article on this in the current issue of FAMA.

[Julio]

There have been several studies done on VHO,NO and T5, there is an article on this in the current issue of FAMA.

[Julio]

sorry abotu the double post

[DMK]

wondering if anyone had any info on the geiseman megachrome 14.5K lamps?