I think we are thinking along the same lines but I also think a lot of folks mix up kelvin vs spectrum … one being how the photons are aggregately presented to the eye, the other measuring the photons as a unit ….(my oversimplification)
Which is crazy. I wish the hobbiests of today could see the reefing hobby 20 years ago where 90% of tanks had 10-14k lighting and most had no algae issues. Also, in my opinion those aquarium ecosystems looked healthier overall.
It's funny, I just recently watched veritasiums rendition of events. Interesting what we pee-ons take for granted.
Here is my spectra at max run
Case closed
Sincerely Lasse
so we can close this case with proper documentation.Send me a $20 and a SASE and you shall see, just like me.
And even if they figure it out, they will still have no clue the context.
Now that's the correct question? lol
Do tell?
I use GHL Mitras 2 bar and the programing tool with spectra is in their GCC software. Sorry - i should have note that this is the supposed spectra with these settings - not the a measured oneNot so fast, Master Lasse!
What instrumentation and software are producing the imputs and results shown in the graph you posted?
I don't doubt them, I just want one for my tank.
Do tell>
Kris
It was meant to show that it is possible to have an aquarium growing well (to well) using a full spectra lighting and have a white light (for the eyes)
Your sure of this for most corals using photosynthesis - this means that the growth rate of most corals should be higher in deeper water (more blue wavelengths) How do you explain this below then?
Thank you.
Always impressive sir. TyI use GHL Mitras 2 bar and the programing tool with spectra is in their GCC software. Sorry - i should have note that this is the supposed spectra with these settings - not the a measured one
It was meant to show that it is possible to have an aquarium growing well (to well) using a full spectra lighting and have a white light (for the eyes)
Your sure of this for most corals using photosynthesis - this means that the growth rate of most corals should be higher in deeper water (more blue wavelengths) How do you explain this below then?
Light penetration in oceanic water and costal water (most reef is in costal waters by definition) is different. IMO - its a myth about most corals adaption to blue light based on the graphs of penetration of sun light in open oceanic water - see below . Note that most reef building corals exist above 20 meters, From here
However - if we look at light penetration in coastal water (which by definition include most coral reefs) the picture will be different from here
If we look at a normal distribution of corals it looks like this for most cases
Here is a graph from here - its behind a paywall and I have not be able to read the whole article but it is a
compilation of data from the different reef types under different water turbidity. Both from Bermuda and Hawaii. The graph shows the area of the reef type where the respective wavelength falls to 1% of the original value
Its difficult to read this figure but IMO - if we look at 450 nm - the graph shows that in lagoons it penetrate between 10 m and 75 m depending on the turbidity of the water. At the reef flat that is normally less turbid - 450 nm penetrate between 20 and 110 m depending on the turbidity of the water. In nature - the turbidity will vary a lot and hence the spectra that reach our corals. Instead of saying that corals evolved and are adapted to blue light I would instead say that most corals had evolved and are adapted to manage a variety of wavelengths.
There is few articles about different growth rates at different depths for reefbuilding corals. This is on of the few but shows very well that for most corals the rule its as higher up - as faster growth
It means that the spectra that looks something between this two- 30 m line added by me
Further on growth rate - the same source
My conclusion is that best growth for most of the reefbuilding corals are between 0 and 16 m and that will be a light spectra somewhere between this two if you want to follow natural conditions
Sincerely Lasse
Wait, you mean all of our corals don’t come from 80 feet down, in dim blue light, as we’ve been told countless times by “experts” on this forum???I use GHL Mitras 2 bar and the programing tool with spectra is in their GCC software. Sorry - i should have note that this is the supposed spectra with these settings - not the a measured one
It was meant to show that it is possible to have an aquarium growing well (to well) using a full spectra lighting and have a white light (for the eyes)
Your sure of this for most corals using photosynthesis - this means that the growth rate of most corals should be higher in deeper water (more blue wavelengths) How do you explain this below then?
Light penetration in oceanic water and costal water (most reef is in costal waters by definition) is different. IMO - its a myth about most corals adaption to blue light based on the graphs of penetration of sun light in open oceanic water - see below . Note that most reef building corals exist above 20 meters, From here
However - if we look at light penetration in coastal water (which by definition include most coral reefs) the picture will be different from here
If we look at a normal distribution of corals it looks like this for most cases
Here is a graph from here - its behind a paywall and I have not be able to read the whole article but it is a
compilation of data from the different reef types under different water turbidity. Both from Bermuda and Hawaii. The graph shows the area of the reef type where the respective wavelength falls to 1% of the original value
Its difficult to read this figure but IMO - if we look at 450 nm - the graph shows that in lagoons it penetrate between 10 m and 75 m depending on the turbidity of the water. At the reef flat that is normally less turbid - 450 nm penetrate between 20 and 110 m depending on the turbidity of the water. In nature - the turbidity will vary a lot and hence the spectra that reach our corals. Instead of saying that corals evolved and are adapted to blue light I would instead say that most corals had evolved and are adapted to manage a variety of wavelengths.
There is few articles about different growth rates at different depths for reefbuilding corals. This is on of the few but shows very well that for most corals the rule its as higher up - as faster growth
It means that the spectra that looks something between this two- 30 m line added by me
Further on growth rate - the same source
My conclusion is that best growth for most of the reefbuilding corals are between 0 and 16 m and that will be a light spectra somewhere between this two if you want to follow natural conditions
Sincerely Lasse
I'll get hold of the links and pop them in here.It could be good to get links to these studies
Most photosynthetic corals that we have in aquarium exist from 5 meters and upwards. In these depths not so many wavelengths have been out filtrated. The normal "filtration" schema is from clean oceanic waters - it has been showed that the penetration is different in coastal waters - in open oceanic water 480 nm transmit best but in coastal zones 560 nm green/yellow transmit best. Please also see this
Figure from here
A: Radiation, Open ocean and costal water
Corals reefs is costal water and the penetration will be altered because of plankton and organic matter. Because of the spectra in water down to 5 m - corals needs sunscreen and protection That is the reason for all colourful pigments and floucence. In this article is it discussed and explained,
Sincerely Lasse
