Hey, that's my diagram!Example of picking spectrum by flourescence..Note though the lower the blue the less it interferes with your eyes.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Hey, that's my diagram!Example of picking spectrum by flourescence..Note though the lower the blue the less it interferes with your eyes.
Does not appear to be a huge difference in spectrum. Am I correct in thinking the primary differences are in the number of LEDs of each wavelength and total wattage for the three gens?Just 470nm, or consider repeating 410/420/470. The G5/G6 went meh on the lower violet. The below is all channels at 100%.
I think what is possibly being overlooked here is the action spectrum is only relevant if the amount of lumens being produced is significant enough to provide enough PPFD to make a difference. If you're only producing 50 lumens at 430nm, you may not be getting as much photosynthetic response as if you were producing 200 lumens at 450nm. In my experience, the higher wavelength LEDs are notoriously low in PPFD.Just to fill the left side of the hr which peaks around 455-ish?
If the spectrum is correct adding something as simple as say 430:410 2:1.
Want to play the UV game say 400:410:430 1:1:2
Or skip the 410.
Of course each "color" will have it's own efficiency thus throwing off any way of actually balancing anything.
Just leaves sort of a best guess..
If you buy this action spectrum of one coral and one algae you see it peaks around 430 and diminishes in the 400 range.
Still effective but now in the same range as say cyan or green.
Of course there is always the discussion on the left side of 430 creating more "sunscreen" pigments than say boosting the right side (around cyan)
Then there is which band stimulates which florescent protein the best and also does not "glare" it out.
my less than 2 cents worth.
Are you saying coral zooxanthellae have Chlorophyll b?Here's your light running AB+ overlayed with Chl a (pink) and Chl b (yellow). You have 450nm covered (Chl b), and suggest not adding more. But then there's Chl a, and you're not hitting those peaks much at all. As you mentioned, a 410/420/470nm bar would compliment the G5 Radion quite well. The lower spectrum diodes would hit Chl a. The 470nm will give you some pop the Radion is lacking.
If it helps, here's a 425/440/470nm DIY version of the AliE bar that I ran with my G4 XR30. Those three were repeated along the length of the 24" bar. Totally stuck that thing in the oven and did some hot swapping. Yes...it's that easy.
Science stuff aside, you'll dig the added fluorescence of the 410/420nm. The G4 had that deep blue (415nm) that many users liked. And you know that biology band BRS mentions? That's PUR, and you'd be improving that quite a bit.
-Jim
I was aligning the available spectrum with Chl peaks; however, this suggests that coral have Chl a. https://aslopubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.4319/lo.1989.34.7.1331Are you saying coral zooxanthellae have Chlorophyll b?
Ok, I see. Coral zooxanthellae do contain chlorophylls a and c2. Chlorophyll b is unique to land plants, algae and cyanobacteria. The reference you identified suggests the occurrence of chl b in the skeletons is endolithic--it exists within the coral skeleton where light is able to penetrate, perhaps as a hitchhiker, independent of the living coral tissue and zooxanthellae, and plays no role in coral nutrient production.I was aligning the available spectrum with Chl peaks; however, this suggests that coral have Chl a. https://aslopubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.4319/lo.1989.34.7.1331
Actually since lumens is a subset of PPFI think what is possibly being overlooked here is the action spectrum is only relevant if the amount of lumens being produced is significant enough to provide enough PPFD to make a difference. If you're only producing 50 lumens at 430nm, you may not be getting as much photosynthetic response as if you were producing 200 lumens at 450nm. In my experience, the higher wavelength LEDs are notoriously low in PPFD.
Doesn't matter, those or Maa's ect. Whichever are being produced in response to whatever wavelengths.By "sunscreen" pigments, are you referring to the xanthrophylls, or to the carotenoids?
You are Dan Kelly?Hey, that's my diagram!
Which begs my ignorance-based question…why are most all LED reef lights firing 450nm down range? Availability at the time of introduction, and the hobby has just stuck with it? I’m looking at a 14,000k MH, and it peaks at ~420nm. I think the only LED I’ve tested with an all channels at 100% peak around 420nm was the original ReeFi Uno. Is it the Carotenoids bump that’s shown in some charts as being a touch lower than 450nm?Ok, I see. Coral zooxanthellae do contain chlorophylls an and c2. Chlorophyll b is unique to land plants, algae and cyanobacteria. The reference you identified suggests the occurrence of chl b in the skeletons is endolithic--it exists within the coral skeleton where light is able to penetrate, perhaps as a hitchhiker, independent of the living coral tissue and zooxanthellae, and plays no role in coral nutrient production.
Royal blue were the most available, most efficient and at the beginning " cheapest" LEDs one could get.Which begs my ignorance-based question…why are most all LED reef lights firing 450nm down range? Availability at the time of introduction, and the hobby has just stuck with it? I’m looking at a 14,000k MH, and it peaks at ~420nm. I think the only LED I’ve tested with an all channels at 100% peak around 420nm was the original ReeFi Uno. Is it the Carotenoids bump that’s shown in some charts as being a touch lower than 450nm?
I prefer the pop from 470nm, which is why the AliE bars are such a value.Royal blue were the most available, most efficient and at the beginning " cheapest" LEDs one could get.
Besides gave great " pop".
Actually still holds true today mostly.
Zoo light harvesting when factoring in the efficient PCP complex is quite broad.
Peridinin-chlorophyll-protein complex - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Peridinin outnumbers chl a in, usually, a 4:1 ratio and has close to 100% energy transfer into the photo system.
Yea but 450/470 vs anything else...I prefer the pop from 470nm, which is why the AliE bars are such a value.
Here's my long-winded opinion/answer (the shortened version, lol). Since well over a decade ago ~450nm royal blue and ~465nm blue LEDs were the only blues commonly available. That's when reefers started experimenting with them. We've learned to appreciate the combination of growth, coloration and fluorescence associated with them. Reefers like the visual pop, so manufacturers throw together what's readily available and cheap, and consumers love them. There's no valid need for additional shades of blue or violet, which would require effort on the part of the semiconductor manufacturers, so that's what were still getting. The wavelength variations we're seeing are a result in variability during manufacturing, resulting in post-production binning.Which begs my ignorance-based question…why are most all LED reef lights firing 450nm down range? Availability at the time of introduction, and the hobby has just stuck with it? I’m looking at a 14,000k MH, and it peaks at ~420nm. I think the only LED I’ve tested with an all channels at 100% peak around 420nm was the original ReeFi Uno. Is it the Carotenoids bump that’s shown in some charts as being a touch lower than 450nm?
The luminous efficacy of the violet-pump LEDs examined during this study was generally lower than
that excepted from typical blue-pump phosphor-converted LEDs (pcLEDs). Although the violet LEDs
were found to be stable in the AST conditions, the stability of the phosphors used in the violet-pump
LEDs varied greatly, resulting in significant changes in luminous flux and chromaticity in some
conditions
In regards to PPFD? Ok, but reefers have more in mind than that.Only thing that really matters is the number of photons produced per unit of energy applied..
I think you dashed down a rabbit trail over that one. The real point I was making was that there's no need to be concerned about the 420nm peak in the photosynthetic response curve.Yes generally speaking you have less photons generated out of a 420nm led than a 470nm led when run at the same err wattage. But you definitely don't need buckets full of them to equal. Maybe 3:1 in some of the worst cases. Just a guess. Based on some of the last known numbers on efficacy like 70% vs 45%.
When I was just starting out in LEDs only blue (~470) and royal blue (~450) were available, and I believe they're still the most commonly available blues out there. Ask ChatGPT, "Why was 450nm chosen when making blue LEDs?" Then ask the same question for 470nm. It gives a number of good reasons why 450 and 470 may have been chosen.Which begs my ignorance-based question…why are most all LED reef lights firing 450nm down range? Availability at the time of introduction, and the hobby has just stuck with it?
UV starts at 400nm?Want to play the UV game say 400:410:430 1:1:2
My understanding is anything 400nm and above is not UV.UV starts at 400nm?