I’d be ashamed to post so soon after recent events, a rusty vortech took out a number of colonies, setting me back years in some cases. I also had a timer stick on and run my light for 2 days, it’s been a bad year in reefing for me.
Which light colour is best for corals!
- Thread starter merereef
- Start date
- Tagged users None
I’d be ashamed to post so soon after recent events, a rusty vortech took out a number of colonies, setting me back years in some cases. I also had a timer stick on and run my light for 2 days, it’s been a bad year in reefing for me.
Thank you , 11 years in and I’m still here :) yes it’s like life’s up and downs, perfect one minute , crap the next. I love the challenge though, reefing is always rewarding, even when it knocks you back.
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2011
- Messages
- 3,162
- Reaction score
- 7,455
- Location
- Dallas, Georgia
- What state or country do you live in
- Georgia
The bottom line: Growth of Porites coral fragments was analyzed after exposure to distinctly different LED lights. Differences were statistically insignificant. Here's the article I wrote about the procedure.
https://www.advancedaquarist.com/2015/4/corals
tamanning
Active Member
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2020
- Messages
- 320
- Reaction score
- 398
- What state or country do you live in
- Florida
This answer is along with everything I read so far. The real thing is to find out the native depth of your corals and try to get as close to the spectrum at their ideal depth. That can be hard to do when running a mixed reef.
The short answer is that most likely everything that is in your tank was collected on one breath, or shallower. Not everything, but nearly all. Most of the corals can live deeper, but that is not where they were collected from. Expensive gear, rebreathers, risk, time and all of that is saved for deepwater fish that can get 100x the price wholesale that a coral can... even then, 100-120 feet is pretty deep for a lot of fish.
tamanning
Active Member
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2020
- Messages
- 320
- Reaction score
- 398
- What state or country do you live in
- Florida
I did a little research and for example hammer corals. native depth is 130 to 150 feet.
the most prevalent light is actinic. in fact below 10 meters or close to 30 feet almost all red and green are gone.
the most prevalent light is actinic. in fact below 10 meters or close to 30 feet almost all red and green are gone.
What you are seeing there is max depth. If you ever in the coral sea or triangle, you can go out and collect your own stuff with the collectors. You will get a mask and a chisel or saw. Go and find Tullio's Facts of Light speech from MACNA from a few years back...stick with it and pay attention to the info since there is a lot of it there. There are more euphyllia just an inch under the water at low tide than there are at over 30m of depth. We did not see euphyiila out of the water at low tide like you see acropora, but there is a ton that is really shallow.
A. grandis
2500 Club Member
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2012
- Messages
- 4,906
- Reaction score
- 3,535
- What state or country do you live in
- Hawaii
If you ever get a chance, listen to some speakers at the larger conferences. They can get you a lot of the correct information. A lot of them are from the field, or have been to the field a lot. NEVER. I mean, never, listen to a manufacturer, even if they sound like they produced some science like a CoraLab, which is just an advertising arm for EcoTech disguised to trick people into think that they are independent. Manufacturers are not always wrong, but they are more than they are not and really need vetted. BRS videos are infomercials with some truth/facts, but also some stuff that is shady and is questionable... like they might not tell any lies about something, but when they only review and include stuff that they sell and leave out better/other options, then that is shady. They have some great videos and they have some horrible ones. All in all BRS videos are OK if you take them at arms-length and stuff and thing of them as advertising first. Books and real science is always good. Dr. Randy Holmes-Farley is always worth reading. Hobbyists can be a mixed bag - find some that you want your tank to be like and try and learn their WHOLE method and the reasons behind stuff... picking pieces is a recipe for failure, IMO. I have learned a lot from Coppolino and when Steve Weast still had his Oregon reefs tank running... smart hobbyists that are good documenters and with world-class tanks. Hobbyists that have seen many decades and many trends who still have awesome tanks are good. Anybody who wants to make a name being an outlier is good to avoid, or at least read with suspicion... just understand that outliers do sometimes work, but their methods won't always work for you.
That video by Tullio is good. His delivery has bored some people, but don't be dumb and just look at the information and what he is saying... lots of great stuff there.
Lastly, pay attention to the details. While it is true that I have seen some science that says that red can only penetrate 15 meters, the water type matters and in the clear water where most reefs are, it can penetrate up to 40... so where the numbers come from matter. If you factor in that red can mostly get to 120 feet, there are not many scuba folks that go deeper than that, so full spectrum is going to be there for most corals that human see without a James Cameron underwater rig. Lots of people were quoting a study that was using lake Michigan as a testbed which is not only very murky with diminished penetration, but a long way from the South Pacific.
That video by Tullio is good. His delivery has bored some people, but don't be dumb and just look at the information and what he is saying... lots of great stuff there.
Lastly, pay attention to the details. While it is true that I have seen some science that says that red can only penetrate 15 meters, the water type matters and in the clear water where most reefs are, it can penetrate up to 40... so where the numbers come from matter. If you factor in that red can mostly get to 120 feet, there are not many scuba folks that go deeper than that, so full spectrum is going to be there for most corals that human see without a James Cameron underwater rig. Lots of people were quoting a study that was using lake Michigan as a testbed which is not only very murky with diminished penetration, but a long way from the South Pacific.
oreo54
5000 Club Member
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2017
- Messages
- 7,028
- Reaction score
- 4,176
- What state or country do you live in
- Wisconsin
One thing often overlooked when doing artificial to natural light comparison.
Water may attenuate say 50% of the red at 2 meters but your BASELINE amount is very high
i.e 50% red "PAR" of sunlight is still a lot of red compared to what "you" apply with say 4W of 660nm LED.
There are times it goes both ways , your light exceeds ocean light.
Not even considering the dynamics of the light either.
Unless your tank light has 2000 "par" in a sunlight balanced spectrum talking about spectrum color losses is not comparable.
Matter of fact, considering any artificial lights to any depth of light in nature is "almost" pointless.
Few come even close to spectrum and/or intensity in regards to any water type/depth.
This just "is"
Water may attenuate say 50% of the red at 2 meters but your BASELINE amount is very high
i.e 50% red "PAR" of sunlight is still a lot of red compared to what "you" apply with say 4W of 660nm LED.
There are times it goes both ways , your light exceeds ocean light.
Not even considering the dynamics of the light either.
Unless your tank light has 2000 "par" in a sunlight balanced spectrum talking about spectrum color losses is not comparable.
Matter of fact, considering any artificial lights to any depth of light in nature is "almost" pointless.
Few come even close to spectrum and/or intensity in regards to any water type/depth.
This just "is"
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2011
- Messages
- 3,162
- Reaction score
- 7,455
- Location
- Dallas, Georgia
- What state or country do you live in
- Georgia
I've been away from this thread for a while. If the 'best' light is for photosynthesis, spectrum doesn't matter much (when most considering aquarium lighting) and it sure doesn't matter when intensity exceeds the Saturation Point (usually 300 to 400 PAR). Of course, excessive PAR and Photoinhibition Points (Dynamic and Chronic) can cause bleaching. On the other hand, fluorescent proteins are produced when the coral animal is exposed to violet/blue light. Non-fluorescent colors (chromoproteins) are a result of exposure to violet/blue light at higher intensities.
tamanning
Active Member
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2020
- Messages
- 320
- Reaction score
- 398
- What state or country do you live in
- Florida
My tank seems to react better to high blue with a lower intensity white red and green. It seems to me the more I read and videos and some of the guys on here. I'm getting conflicting information.
That is why I said that you have to pay attention and get through that video. The information is accurate and important, but it is hard to watch for some. What he says is right, so if you did not get much from it, come back and watch it later on and maybe you will have an epiphany of sorts.
Photosynthesis is not the only reason to want light. Sunscreen pigments, straight reflection, etc. all impact how the coral looks in your tank. I HATE false equivalencies, but it is like an forum of aliens studying humans posting that sugar is all that matters since it gives us energy... and that glucose is the most efficient so it is the best and the only thing that humans need... all the while the smart aliens are shaking their heads about the troves of misinformation and failure to see the big picture beyond the simple.
Photosynthesis is not the only reason to want light. Sunscreen pigments, straight reflection, etc. all impact how the coral looks in your tank. I HATE false equivalencies, but it is like an forum of aliens studying humans posting that sugar is all that matters since it gives us energy... and that glucose is the most efficient so it is the best and the only thing that humans need... all the while the smart aliens are shaking their heads about the troves of misinformation and failure to see the big picture beyond the simple.
tamanning
Active Member
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2020
- Messages
- 320
- Reaction score
- 398
- What state or country do you live in
- Florida
I understand most but it seemed he spent most of his time telling us our standards of measurements are all wrong. So trial and error rules the day. start low increase slowly and watch.
Did you hear him also say were stuff was collected - on one breath? What the light composition was in these areas? Why you cannot trust a manufacturers measurements? Why comparing artificial light to natural light is mostly a waste of time in the minutia? Why there is no efficiency between light sources (mostly)? Watch it again in a year and see what you get out of it the next time once your breath and depth of foundational knowledge has changed. What you got out if it was just one of the points.
If nothing else, just know that daylight (true full spectrum, not LED manufacturer full spectrum) for growth and color and then blue it up to illuminate when you want to look at stuff. This is a good one-sentence blend of what to do.
If nothing else, just know that daylight (true full spectrum, not LED manufacturer full spectrum) for growth and color and then blue it up to illuminate when you want to look at stuff. This is a good one-sentence blend of what to do.
Similar threads
