LED Supplement experiment - Supplementing with Incandescent heat lamps to improve coral growth

[chcgregg]

Hi all,

After reading up on the results from @Lasse, and information from @Dana Riddle in regards to the importance of far red and infra red spectrums in lighting, I'm going to conduct an experiment.

I have a 300 litre Acropora dominant reef aquarium with 2x Radion XR30 G3 Pros running at 74% intensity with all channels at 100% (approx 12,000 kelvin), and with the XR30 diffusers . Seeing that radions do not have any spectrum above the hyper red (660nm), I am going to add one 60w Tungsten filament heat lamp 80 degree parabolic internal reflector mounted one inch above the radions, and in the centre of the aquarium approximately 285mm (11.2") above the waterline. These lamps emit a lot of far and infra red spectrums, and even above 1000nm. I will document any results, positive or negative on this post, and of course maintain water chemistry as stable as possible.

My hypothesis is that the high intensity LED lighting may be bottleknecking the electron transfer from PSI to PSII and causing damage to it, which retards photosynthesis and thus coral growth. PSI Pigment 700 absorbs the light emitted by the heatlamp (absent in the LED) and will assist in preventing possible bottlenecking to PSII and damage to it. I expect to see a positive influence (increased growth, possibly colour) after 6 months of having the incandescent heat lamp run for 6 hours a day.

I have the heat lamp and housing, I will update with photos very soon. It would be interesting to read what results people have achieved if any similar experiments have been conducted.

Regards,
Callan

 

[chcgregg]

Here is the aquarium as of the 2nd of January, 2020. Water chemistry is stable at 420 Calcium, 8 dkh Alkalinity, and Magnesium at 1300. Nitrate is a bit high at around 10ppm, and Phosphate approx 0.04. Coral colours are okay, will be better at a lower nitrate I predict. Growth is okay, the tank is consuming 120mls of each Calcium and alkalinity supplement of Randys Part 1 every day. Some acropora have very little if any active growth tips, others are actively growing. There is a small case of AEFW on two - three corals, they will be getting dipped and the flatworm eggs destroyed with frag glue smeared over them.

The tank has been running for approx. 6 months, most colonies started off at a reasonable size. The acropora have only grown about 1 - 1.5cm maximum, some not at all.

As you can see, between the radions is the incandescent 60w heat lamp. The 80 degree parabolic reflector should spread light throughout the tank. I will consider adding two more, one at each end of the radion if I notice good results within the next few weeks.

The Seriatopora, Pocillopora, Stylophora and Montipora have grown very well in this tank, some of the few which have faired well underneath the radion lighting. Coralline algae growth has also been very noticeably slow.

The tank gets broadcast fed with ocean nutritions reef Pulse coral food once a day, and the fish fed twice a day with pellet foods, and occasionally a sheet of nori.

Honestly, colours are very average. Flow and water quality is spot on. It seems to be that LED's dont grow corals like metal halides and T5 do, but why? I have had SPS dominant reef aquariums chich have run halide and T5 on the, and have produced better colours and growth in corals than LED. This mostly visual experiment might hopefully pave the way for interesting results, all of which I will publish weekly on this thread.

 

[naoki]

I couldn't follow your logic quite well, but are you talking about Emerson effect? Is it demonstrate in coral photosynthesis? We generally think the importance of far red light in terms of phytochrome-mediated response such as photomorphogenesis (instead of photosynthesis). Are you aware that there are some studies suggesting that the replication of zooxanthellae may be disturbed by red light?

BTW, electron flows from PS II to PS I in non-cyclic electron flow of photosynthesis. Also, in general, the reaction center (P680 and P700) absorbs a very small fraction of total photons absorbed (compared to the other pigments in the antennae complex of the photosystems).

 

[chcgregg]

I apologise, I was supposed to write bottleknecking electron transfer from PSII to PSI, not the other way around. Below is a quote from Dana in another thread discussing the benefit of infra red wavelengths.

It's interesting that Orphek have added infra red LED's to their Atlantik fixtures, and many people are reporting positive results with Acropora. Why are the majority of LED manufactures leaving out spectrums above 660nm? It seems that we are trying to prove mother nature right by growing corals in only the spectrum that human eyes can see, not whatcorals may actually need.

As I said above, it is an experiment to see what changes may occur, positive or negative.

Got my Saturday chores done - maybe cutting grass for the last time until Spring! Yay!
Here's the scoop on LEDs generating radiation peaking at 730nm. But first, some background.
In a quirk of nomenclature, Photosystem II transfers collected photons (now in the form of electrons) to Photosystem I (so named because it was discovered first.) Chlorophylls and Accessory (or Antennae) Pigments collect light and channel it to Reactions Centers. The Reaction Centers in Photosystem II absorb light at 680nm (hence these are called Pigment 680 or P-680.) The Reaction Centers in Photosystem I absorb light at 700nm (Pigment 700, or P-700.) There must be a balance of electron flow between Photosystem II and Photosystem I or damage can occur (Photosystem II acts as the electron donor, and Photosystem I the acceptor. If Photosystem I cannot accept electrons from Photosystem II, a 'traffic jam of electrons occurs.) Photosystem I can absorb light at 730nm and this helps in preventing the 'traffic jam.' Now, what happens when no far red light is available (such as we would see at depth?) In these cases, something called a 'State Transition' or 'Spill Over' of energy from PSII to PSI possibly occurs, thus stimulating PSI and allowing it to accept the electrons from PSII. Is this possible in all zooxanthellae species/clades/types? Here we venture into unknown territory (at least it is not known by myself.) Until detailed laboratory experiments are conducted with the several hundred types of zooxanthellae and we understand how common - or not - Spillover is, it is likely that exposure to radiation at 730nm will do no harm and quite possibly beneficial.

 

[Lasse]

Interesting experiment. I run around 30 w 740 mm LEDs above my tank during my light peak (15:00 - 20:00). Honestly - I can´t say it showing any credible results either way. For the moment - I run my light at 83 % and it slowly rising to around 100 % in March. 100 % is about 300 W. I use GHL LED light bar II. I run it in "European" way with all white in 100 % during peak hours and blue in the morning and evening. At 100 % - there is around 42 W 630 nm, 42 W 530 nm, 42 W 470nm, 10 W 4500 K, 23 W 6000 K, 43 W 8000 K, 43 W 455 nm, 33 W 425 and 22 W 450 nm. I have a lot of red. It is not a acropora dominated reef, more a mixed reef.

One important thing is that I have not seen any negative results with my high percent of wavelengths above 600 nm.

However - I expect that the far red could have importance when you are rather near the saturation limit of photosynthesis according to damage and/or growth but probably not for most of the colouration of our corals.

We have done in vitro experiment with photosynthesis (read oxygen production) according different wavelengths but till now - no in vivo experiment with a whole ecosystem. I hope to do such experiments in my own aquarium in the future. The challenge is to find an oxygen measurement that is accurate enough.

Another challenge is that there is indications that to high (and to low) oxygen levels in a system is more devastating to calcification than we previously thought - this means that results from experiments in aquarium there photosynthesis produce more oxygen that the circulation transport away from the corals easily can be misinterpreted.

Do you have a pH probe - the pH swings can be used as an (weak) indication of photosynthesis.

Don't misinterpret me for being too negative - on the contrary - you have come to the exact same conclusion as I after looking at systems with MH and LED systems with the old blue / white combination. I just want to highlight the difficulties of interpreting the result whatever it is.

I´m following this with high expectations

Sincerely Lasse

 

[chcgregg]

Interesting experiment. I run around 30 w 740 mm LEDs above my tank during my light peak (15:00 - 20:00). Honestly - I can´t say it showing any credible results either way. For the moment - I run my light at 83 % and it slowly rising to around 100 % in March. 100 % is about 300 W. I use GHL LED light bar II. I run it in "European" way with all white in 100 % during peak hours and blue in the morning and evening. At 100 % - there is around 42 W 630 nm, 42 W 530 nm, 42 W 470nm, 10 W 4500 K, 23 W 6000 K, 43 W 8000 K, 43 W 455 nm, 33 W 425 and 22 W 450 nm. I have a lot of red. It is not a acropora dominated reef, more a mixed reef.

One important thing is that I have not seen any negative results with my high percent of wavelengths above 600 nm.

However - I expect that the far red could have importance when you are rather near the saturation limit of photosynthesis according to damage and/or growth but probably not for most of the colouration of our corals.

We have done in vitro experiment with photosynthesis (read oxygen production) according different wavelengths but till now - no in vivo experiment with a whole ecosystem. I hope to do such experiments in my own aquarium in the future. The challenge is to find an oxygen measurement that is accurate enough.

Another challenge is that there is indications that to high (and to low) oxygen levels in a system is more devastating to calcification than we previously thought - this means that results from experiments in aquarium there photosynthesis produce more oxygen that the circulation transport away from the corals easily can be misinterpreted.

Do you have a pH probe - the pH swings can be used as an (weak) indication of photosynthesis.

Don't misinterpret me for being too negative - on the contrary - you have come to the exact same conclusion as I after looking at systems with MH and LED systems with the old blue / white combination. I just want to highlight the difficulties of interpreting the result whatever it is.

I´m following this with high expectations

Sincerely Lasse

Lasse,

Thanks for commenting! I was keen to hear your input It will be difficult to measure exact results without conducting the experiment in vitro, but I will be visually documenting the results of this experiment in vivo. It seems possible that the far red wavelengths may protect corals from the damage due to photo inhibition, which can be common with high intensity LED fixtures, if they are improperly implemented.

Acropora that are grown in Halide and T5 lighting seem to have a richer colour than grown under LED. Could this be due to the 350-400nm and 660+ nm spectral ranges? Or because the vast amount of reefers using LED are only growing them under 18,000k colour temperates which may actually make colouration worse. A few people who have been in the hobby for many years have suggested that reefers start off blue, and over the years transition to full white spectrums "european" style. Do Acropora produce more chromoproteins in intense, lower kelvin lighting? Seems probable.

I have had Acropora kept under the AB+ radion template, and haven't ever been happy with it and the corals always lacked colour. I still think that there are very important spectrums missing in most LEDs which when accounted for, will produce results similar if not identical to MH/T5. Running a heat lamp is a cheap and easy way to introduce a significant amount of infra red wavelengths into an infra red devoid lighting setup. Could be that the next test after 6 months is to introduce a UV-B fluorescent bulb, if I still don't get results

There's a lot to think about and many questions to answer, but I am keen to see the results from this.

I appreciate your thoughts! I try to be as open minded as possible, and educated opinions are always appreciated.

 

[SMSREEF]

Very Interesting @chcgregg !

I’m gonna follow along to watch your results.

 

[LC8Sumi]

Isn’t infrared filtered out by water (in the ocean)?

 

[redfishbluefish]

I have the same question as @LC8Sumi , and I question this with extreme ignorance. I remember years ago, when I had freshwater only, that I was told red doesn't penetrate more than inches below the water. So with IR and far IR being even longer wavelengths, my simple mind tells me IR is gone within the surface of the water???

 

[Softhammer]

There is a very good reason why the ocean is blue at reef depths.

 

[Lasse]

Yes but it is percent filtration. If the source is powerful enough (sun) it will still be a lot at a depth of 2 - 3 meters.

Sincerely Lasse

 

[Lasse]

According red and depth - at 5 meters you can stills see red colour or red marks on fish.

Sincerely Lasse

 

[Lasse]

Does MH heat a tank? And if so - how does it heat?

Sincerely Lasse

 

[Rybren]

I have the same question as @LC8Sumi , and I question this with extreme ignorance. I remember years ago, when I had freshwater only, that I was told red doesn't penetrate more than inches below the water. So with IR and far IR being even longer wavelengths, my simple mind tells me IR is gone within the surface of the water???

Here's one of Dana's charts showing the spectral composition of Type 1 seawater at a depth of 10 feet. STill lots of red...

 

[redfishbluefish]

I found this very simplistic graphic:

 

[LC8Sumi]

I have an IR webcam though, and I can see the corals and fish in pitch black darkness with it, so probably it can penetrate a couple meters/feet - so it would work in an aquarium (intensity is a different question & I have no idea how much goes through). But I’m not sure that in nature it would work well on reefs & maybe the corals, apart from shallow water species evolved such that they don’t need/benefit IR because of this. It’s a great experiment though & I’m very curious about the results.

 

[hart24601]

It will be interesting to watch, however I have not experienced slow growth with LEDs by any means, they seem to grow coral just as fast, if not faster than other methods I have used. I think the threads have been removed now, but there was an acro growing contest that I won here on R2R back in 2014 and all I used was LEDs, no other supplement. The contest was open to every lighting and tank type. That doesn't mean LEDs are amazing, but it does indicate they don't hold growth back, or if they do there are other methods to ensure fast growth as I wasn't shy about saying I spot fed the acro every night.

Orphek included IR LEDs now and claims they do just what you are suggesting, so it's worth testing.

I personally suspect the biggest issue with lighting types is cognitive bias. Generally people running MH and hybrid are either people that have been in the hobby a long time and have very mature tanks, or people transitioning from being new in the hobby and running LEDs then switching as they become more advanced and their tanks are maturing which goes a long way for having a nice SPS tank by itself. Of course there are exceptions and I still love to see experiments like this!

 

[chcgregg]

It will be interesting to watch, however I have not experienced slow growth with LEDs by any means, they seem to grow coral just as fast, if not faster than other methods I have used. I think the threads have been removed now, but there was an acro growing contest that I won here on R2R back in 2014 and all I used was LEDs, no other supplement. The contest was open to every lighting and tank type. That doesn't mean LEDs are amazing, but it does indicate they don't hold growth back, or if they do there are other methods to ensure fast growth as I wasn't shy about saying I spot fed the acro every night.

Orphek included IR LEDs now and claims they do just what you are suggesting, so it's worth testing.

I personally suspect the biggest issue with lighting types is cognitive bias. Generally people running MH and hybrid are either people that have been in the hobby a long time and have very mature tanks, or people transitioning from being new in the hobby and running LEDs then switching as they become more advanced and their tanks are maturing which goes a long way for having a nice SPS tank by itself. Of course there are exceptions and I still love to see experiments like this!

This is one answer I was hoping to recieve. What LED's are you currently running, the same ones of which you won the contest with?

LED's will grow coral, that's proven. I am more concverned with the spectrums that are left out, and maybe if they were added in as they should have been from day 1 instead of making it a marketing contest, they might have provided results on par (no pun intended) with MH and T5.

 

[chcgregg]

I have the same question as @LC8Sumi , and I question this with extreme ignorance. I remember years ago, when I had freshwater only, that I was told red doesn't penetrate more than inches below the water. So with IR and far IR being even longer wavelengths, my simple mind tells me IR is gone within the surface of the water???

As @Lasse mentioned, MH lamps heat the tank because of infrared radiation, T5's do as well, but not to the same extent. A vast amount of the energy relased from a MH bulb is wasted in heat and invisible radiation (far red and infra red).

MH and T5 dont lack the far red spectrum, but most LED's do. MH and T5 have been proven to grow corals quickly and produce fantastic colours, the general consensus is that most LED's aren't as good, but why? This "why?" (general consensus) makes me speculate that in our artificial slices of the ocean that far red and infra red may be way more important to maintain efficient photosynthesis and coral growth and colouration than we think.

 

[hart24601]

This is one answer I was hoping to recieve. What LED's are you currently running, the same ones of which you won the contest with?

LED's will grow coral, that's proven. I am more concverned with the spectrums that are left out, and maybe if they were added in as they should have been from day 1 instead of making it a marketing contest, they might have provided results on par (no pun intended) with MH and T5.

I was running just cheap black boxes for the 1st half of the contest, then moved to a larger tank and switched to hydra 26s (and won another as the contest prize). Now I run orphek. I strongly feel that lights get too much blame for colors and growth.