Is there any real benefit to full spectrum lighting?

[damsels are not mean]

Since the par/pur levels on the reefs is much higher then our tanks, but continues to fluctuate, dont you think they would congregate in deeper depths then they do if full spectrum wasn't the preferred choice. I mean they literally have had millions of years to evolve. If the blue spectrum was preferred, they would have evolved to optimize the deeper water even if it was a lower over all pur they received. Many encrusting and soft corals did just that. Branching sps on the otherhand evolved to take advantage of the high intensity full spectrum zones with high surging flow.

This is easily observed on the reefs.

Well another issue with this line of thinking is that the branching high energy species like that are not necessarily there because it's the best place to grow. It could be that they have evolved to tolerate less than ideal conditions. This gives them an edge on competing for space with corals that didn't do that. And again this could simply be a matter of brightness. We really need a controlled experiment to answer the question.

 

[damsels are not mean]

Yes but the issue then is to have a tank deep enough and large enough to give the larvae options on where to start coral structure development at. Having multiple light spectrum and intensity sections to see where they choose to congregate.

This is probably not feasible, so our next option is to look at the man made reefs such as sunken ships, or the concrete pile ons that have been set up over the years.

One long aquarium. A long LED strip or collection of individual fixtures. Several "random flow" powerheads at regular intervals along the back (this is the hardest part to control). rubble at the bottom in a relatively even spread as a good recruitment surface. The strip is all blue on one end, all red on the other, and a neutral white in the middle. This creates an infinite range of effective color temperatures and you'd expect coral larvae to recruit in a bell-curve like shape around some temperature value if there is such thing as an optimal spectrum. We would expect based on what we know about red light for there to be none there. And if there are it'd call into question the validity of this experiment in determining optimal growth spectrum.

You could also observe growth differences, not just in size but density and shape as well.

 

[Shooter6]

Well another issue with this line of thinking is that the branching high energy species like that are not necessarily there because it's the best place to grow. It could be that they have evolved to tolerate less than ideal conditions. This gives them an edge on competing for space with corals that didn't do that. And again this could simply be a matter of brightness. We really need a controlled experiment to answer the question.

If they evolved to that environment, then it is now optimal to them. That is like polar bears. The north pole is not ideal conditions for any other species of bear other then them. They evolved to maximize that environment.
They survive in zoos across the world, but are not there by choice. They will go extinct in the wild if their environment is lost, they will not move south into the forest and mountains like brown and black bears.

 

[djf91]

Well another issue with this line of thinking is that the branching high energy species like that are not necessarily there because it's the best place to grow. It could be that they have evolved to tolerate less than ideal conditions. This gives them an edge on competing for space with corals that didn't do that. And again this could simply be a matter of brightness. We really need a controlled experiment to answer the question.

Yes, initially, but then evolution would tailor the species. There would be competition. Certain, more “fit” genotypes within a species would outcompete though less fit individuals. Natural mutations within the population better equipping individuals to survive and take full advantage of that environment would manifest.

Nowhere in those shallow reef photos does it look like some remnant population barely hanging onto life. That is just silly.

 

[Shooter6]

One long aquarium. A long LED strip or collection of individual fixtures. Several "random flow" powerheads at regular intervals along the back (this is the hardest part to control). rubble at the bottom in a relatively even spread as a good recruitment surface. The strip is all blue on one end, all red on the other, and a neutral white in the middle. This creates an infinite range of effective color temperatures and you'd expect coral larvae to recruit in a bell-curve like shape around some temperature value if there is such thing as an optimal spectrum. We would expect based on what we know about red light for there to be none there. And if there are it'd call into question the validity of this experiment in determining optimal growth spectrum.

You could also observe growth differences, not just in size but density and shape as well.

All red is known to be harmful. The issue with leds is truly matching full spectrum sunlight and the proper par/pur levels to match the sun at the same depth the sps are mostly found in on reefs. The leds would need to be a mixed color collection something like orphek or3 reefday bars, but probably a different layout. Then tuned to set the right output. Then get the sps to spawn, and not filter out the larvae so they have the time to settle where THEY want. A long tank probably wouldn't work unless it was long and deep.

 

[djf91]

One long aquarium. A long LED strip or collection of individual fixtures. Several "random flow" powerheads at regular intervals along the back (this is the hardest part to control). rubble at the bottom in a relatively even spread as a good recruitment surface. The strip is all blue on one end, all red on the other, and a neutral white in the middle. This creates an infinite range of effective color temperatures and you'd expect coral larvae to recruit in a bell-curve like shape around some temperature value if there is such thing as an optimal spectrum. We would expect based on what we know about red light for there to be none there. And if there are it'd call into question the validity of this experiment in determining optimal growth spectrum.

You could also observe growth differences, not just in size but density and shape as well.

Would also like to see a 400 watt 10k Metal halide placed somewhere.

 

[oreo54]

Placing frags skews any experiment. Look at reefs. Frags will be broken off and fall to deeper levels. Some will take hold and continue to grow. That wasn't the choice place for the larvae that grew the coral, just surviving in less then optimal conditions.

Yep start with the "babies"..
Haven't breached the paywall yet though..

University of Chicago Press Journals: Cookie absent

All species exhibited as much (or more) sensitivity to red stimuli as to blue/green stimuli, which is consistent with a role for long-wavelength visible light in the preference for substrata observed during settlement and in facilitating vertical positioning of larvae in the water column.

 

[oreo54]

All red is known to be harmful. The issue with leds is truly matching full spectrum sunlight and the proper par/pur levels to match the sun at the same depth the sps are mostly found in on reefs. The leds would need to be a mixed color collection something like orphek or3 reefday bars, but probably a different layout. Then tuned to set the right output. Then get the sps to spawn, and not filter out the larvae so they have the time to settle where THEY want. A long tank probably wouldn't work unless it was long and deep.

No it is actually simple..Violet pump.. rgb phosphors all in one chip.

KYOCERA Develops World's First Full-Spectrum LED Aquarium Lighting; Innovative technology mimics sunlight at specific underwater depths; designed to optimize growth of corals and marine plants | News Releases | KYOCERA

Kyocera announced that the company developed the world’s first full-spectrum LED lighting for aquariums.

global.kyocera.com

 

[Shooter6]

No it is actually simple..Violet pump.. rgb phosphors all in one chip.

KYOCERA Develops World's First Full-Spectrum LED Aquarium Lighting; Innovative technology mimics sunlight at specific underwater depths; designed to optimize growth of corals and marine plants | News Releases | KYOCERA

Kyocera announced that the company developed the world’s first full-spectrum LED lighting for aquariums.

global.kyocera.com

This is assuming your graph is accurate for one and measurements are full spectrum not spectrum specific.

Here's a vid from Miami, live stream....

 

[oreo54]

Mffffmmmmffff

 

[Shooter6]

No it is actually simple..Violet pump.. rgb phosphors all in one chip.

KYOCERA Develops World's First Full-Spectrum LED Aquarium Lighting; Innovative technology mimics sunlight at specific underwater depths; designed to optimize growth of corals and marine plants | News Releases | KYOCERA

Kyocera announced that the company developed the world’s first full-spectrum LED lighting for aquariums.

global.kyocera.com

I dont know the depth but this is a little more blue but you can still see white shimmer and full spectrum light.

 

[oreo54]

Light and Color Below the Surface - Catalina Island Marine Institute

Have you ever gone diving and noticed that colors above the surface may look very different than colors below? This is because light and color are very different underwater. Water is very good at absorbing light, and to understand this a little bit better, let’s talk about good ol’ Roy G. Biv...

cimi.org

 

[oreo54]

 

[djf91]

What photosynthetic corals grow off the California coast?

 

[GARRIGA]

Placing frags skews any experiment. Look at reefs. Frags will be broken off and fall to deeper levels. Some will take hold and continue to grow. That wasn't the choice place for the larvae that grew the coral, just surviving in less then optimal conditions.

My point is on testing same colony frags at different wave lengths to determine if there's any growth variation. Don't need a spawning for what I'm suggesting. Just an option if the assumption is that evolution presented a better survival pattern at certain wave lengths. Depth in nature along with water turbidity would affect wave lengths but in the class room we can replicate it by using only certain wave lengths.

 

[Lasse]

Coral color is developed as a type of sunscreen against spectrums they do not particularly like. You give a red coral a little more red, they become a deeper red. You give a green coral a little more green they become a deeper green. Adding blues makes colors pop more but will only enhance near blue coloration.

There is two types of colours in corals - reflecting and fluorescence. When a colour is reflected - the same photon will be reflected - it means if more protons of the same wavelength will be reflected - you will see a deeper colouration of that wavelength, But to get a reflecting wavelength (read colour) you need to have just that wavelength from your source. Without red photons no coral that can reflect this wavelength and will as show up as red coral. However some colour proteins have the ability to take a higher energy photon (read lower wavelength) take energy from it and send back a photon with lower wavelength (read other colour and lower energy quanta). This is named fluorescence and this happens when you "pop" your corals. This is quantum mechanic and its normal that blue radiation will end with green to yellow colours of florescence. But it can take two step also an send out red photons when incoming photons is blue

This is the same reason plants are green. They use it to naturally filter out the greens and yellows of full spectrum sunlight so that photosynthesis can be maximized with the more red and blue part of the spectrum.

This is not true - they are green because chlorophyll reflect some of the green photons but rather much of them passthrough the leaves and with help of co systems can be used in photosynthesis - not so effective - but still in use

Coral coloration is arguably the best reason to use full spectrum lighting, because this guarantees that whatever color the coral needs to block out with their sunscreen will be present to help it color more deeply.

The sunscreen of corals is not only (IMO) a result of reflecting "overdosed" photons. The protection works also with help of the fluorescence where high energy photons is "robbed" of some of its energy and reflected back as photons with lower energy (and other colours)

With all of this statement about higher intensity of blue wavelengths in deeper water is to do a logical somersault. The amount and intensity of blue wavelengths (blue photons) is always max exactly in the surface of the water - and the intensity of the blue wavelengths (the amount of blue photons) decreases with depth as all radiation. Whats differ between - let us say the surface and 10 m is the percentage of blue wavelengths compared with all radiation of visible light. An example At the surface - the amount of blue photons may be 25 % of all photons reaching the surface. Because that saltwater filter out much of yellow and red photons - at 10 meyter the blue photons may be 50 - 60 % of the total amount of photons that reach 10 meters depth. But still - the amount of blue photons reaching 10 meters is not more than the ones that reach the surface - more likely they are fewer. So if it was totally true that corals prefer blue photons - they should be in the surface - because the amount of blue photons is highest at the surface.

However - the photosynthesis is a quantum mechanic process - it means on/off cycles - 1 proton - 1 cycle (or something like that) The amount of photons per time unit is important. This means if you spread out the PAR value over a full spectrum instead of concentrate it at the blue wavelengths - you probably will have the same result. IMO - its the intensity that's is important.

There is one finding that can be interesting according to red light - in spite of the fact that it is probably the most effective wavelength's even for coral photosynthesis it can damage corals at to high intensity. It seems that red wavelengths do not trigger the formation of sun screen proteins the way the blue (especially UV-A) does.

Sincerely Lasse

 

[Shooter6]

My point is on testing same colony frags at different wave lengths to determine if there's any growth variation. Don't need a spawning for what I'm suggesting. Just an option if the assumption is that evolution presented a better survival pattern at certain wave lengths. Depth in nature along with water turbidity would affect wave lengths but in the class room we can replicate it by using only certain wave lengths.

Turbulence wouldn't effect wavelengths unless there's particulate matter in the water column.

 

[Lasse]

Yep start with the "babies"..
Haven't breached the paywall yet though..

University of Chicago Press Journals: Cookie absent

Here is a similar article - no paywall

This is also interesting

Sincerely Lasse

 

[Shooter6]

There is two types of colours in corals - reflecting and fluorescence. When a colour is reflected - the same photon will be reflected - it means if more protons of the same wavelength will be reflected - you will see a deeper colouration of that wavelength, But to get a reflecting wavelength (read colour) you need to have just that wavelength from your source. Without red photons no coral that can reflect this wavelength and will as show up as red coral. However some colour proteins have the ability to take a higher energy photon (read lower wavelength) take energy from it and send back a photon with lower wavelength (read other colour and lower energy quanta). This is named fluorescence and this happens when you "pop" your corals. This is quantum mechanic and its normal that blue radiation will end with green to yellow colours of florescence. But it can take two step also an send out red photons when incoming photons is blue


This is not true - they are green because chlorophyll reflect some of the green photons but rather much of them passthrough the leaves and with help of co systems can be used in photosynthesis - not so effective - but still in use


The sunscreen of corals is not only (IMO) a result of reflecting "overdosed" photons. The protection works also with help of the fluorescence where high energy photons is "robbed" of some of its energy and reflected back as photons with lower energy (and other colours)

With all of this statement about higher intensity of blue wavelengths in deeper water is to do a logical somersault. The amount and intensity of blue wavelengths (blue photons) is always max exactly in the surface of the water - and the intensity of the blue wavelengths (the amount of blue photons) decreases with depth as all radiation. Whats differ between - let us say the surface and 10 m is the percentage of blue wavelengths compared with all radiation of visible light. An example At the surface - the amount of blue photons may be 25 % of all photons reaching the surface. Because that saltwater filter out much of yellow and red photons - at 10 meyter the blue photons may be 50 - 60 % of the total amount of photons that reach 10 meters depth. But still - the amount of blue photons reaching 10 meters is not more than the ones that reach the surface - more likely they are fewer. So if it was totally true that corals prefer blue photons - they should be in the surface - because the amount of blue photons is highest at the surface.

However - the photosynthesis is a quantum mechanic process - it means on/off cycles - 1 proton - 1 cycle (or something like that) The amount of photons per time unit is important. This means if you spread out the PAR value over a full spectrum instead of concentrate it at the blue wavelengths - you probably will have the same result. IMO - its the intensity that's is important.

There is one finding that can be interesting according to red light - in spite of the fact that it is probably the most effective wavelength's even for coral photosynthesis it can damage corals at to high intensity. It seems that red wavelengths do not trigger the formation of sun screen proteins the way the blue (especially UV-A) does.

Sincerely Lasse

Thank you for putting to words my thoughts on blue light, and it's real measurements at shallow depth vs deeper. There's no way the blue light is as intense deeper down as it is at the surface.

 

[Lasse]

There's no way the blue light is as intense deeper down as it is at the surface.

Exactly - where should the extra photons come from?

Sincerely Lasse