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.
Blue light in the ocean in six threads? I only know of just this one.To be honest this discussion has spread over at least 6 other threads now and it's the same on all of them.
So let it rest.To be honest this discussion has spread over at least 6 other threads now and it's the same on all of them.
there is no right or wrong. I see everything different then others. It’s all about lighting. Same as someone once told me. “Even if you could read others minds, you would never be able to figure out what their mind was telling YOU”Well, after reading Dana Riddle's old article today, I'm not sure if there are good answers.
Reminds me of one of the most misused photos..The white light is the reason the corals are mostly yellows and browns. It's not until they are placed in our reefs, under artificial light spectrums that they change to the crazy colors that people see in captive reefs.
SPLOOSH!Reminds me if one of the most misused photos..
Very true.It makes me think that corals really dont care about all of ours guessing, scientific mumbo jumbo, and light manufacturers claims....
Give them light and they will grow.
We can talk about growth rate, pattern, colors, extensions, but that leads us only in new "mumbo jumbo".....
Corals in tank dont need sunrise, sunset, clouds, thunders, moonlights and god knows what other gizmos manufacturers puts in lights.....
They need light and stability, wrong constant spectrum is better than ideal which user change five times per day....
So the best spectrum is probably - stable spectrum
Well for starters there is NO DOUBT in my mind that 1400 PAR can saturate photosynthesis for most corals if not all.Very true.
Down on the great barrier reef we did see monti caps and acro fingers poking out of the ocean in places with wave action. No those must have been getting par in the thousands but they were still growing.
It would seem that our concerns about lighting are finally over; that it is just a matter of time before these 400 or 1000-watt lamps find their way to our tanks, and our corals will respond in a positive manner, literally growing out of the water to bask under an unblinking artificial sun. We have not only mimicked nature – we have improved upon it!
We take this information and combine it with anecdotal evidence from hobbyists and make sweeping statements, such as:
It appears as if we have it all figured out. We forgot to ask the corals.
- Small-polyp corals require intense lighting!
- Soft corals require less light than stony corals!
- Lighting systems utilizing metal halide lamps are necessary to maintain SPS corals!
This article will examine the optimal amounts of light required for 5 Hawaiian stony corals, 1 soft coral and 1 Tridacna clam, and is intended to complement a previous article “Too Much Light!” (Riddle, 2004a). Those proponents of unlimited photoacclimation by symbiotic zooxanthellae, and hence extreme lighting, will likely be surprised by these findings. And, as a reference, a quick listing of photosynthetic data for other coral/zooxanthellae symbioses from various references is offered at the conclusion of this article.
That's the point of the scientific process. Graphs, aren't just made to sell points. They can also plot facts.Haha think about how many times science has been proven wrong! And graphs, you know graphs are made to sell points not facts....
If you look up what I said, it's common knowledge graphs are made to highlight selling points.That's the point of the scientific process. Graphs, aren't just made to sell points. They can also plot facts.
If you look up what I said, it's common knowledge graphs are made to highlight selling points
If it's common knowledge, why would he have to look it up?If you look up what I said, it's common knowledge graphs are made to highlight selling points.
Self answering question.If it's common knowledge, why would he have to look it up?
So you think that par in the thousands doesn't cause photo inhibition?Very true.
Down on the great barrier reef we did see monti caps and acro fingers poking out of the ocean in places with wave action. No those must have been getting par in the thousands but they were still growing.
No white. I do you see a lot of yellows oranges reds and purples. Funny, look how blue everything looks in the water. Like, really really blue just an inch below the surface.Reminds me of one of the most misused photos..
Seen or actually dove them? To what depth? How many hrs have you logged? I have over 5000 hrs civilian logged and countless military. Both open and closed circuit. Even mixed gas.
You're not being honest. You're exaggerating and trolling.To be honest this discussion has spread over at least 6 other threads now and it's the same on all of them.
From Scuba.com:You don't go diving with stupid orange lenses on a dive mask to color correct the coral for a reason by the way. That reason is they are not needed, as they are in full spectrum to near full spectrum daylight
Interesting data in the article by Dana Riddle. Photoinhibition begins between ~350 to 750 µmol·m²·second, depending on which coral was tested. So much for the "never too much intensity" argument. Since most reef tanks are a mix of corals, it appears that a PAR of just under 350 for the light-loving corals would be the upper goal for all lights, and higher PAR could actually cause some corals to effectively starve due to the shutdown of the photosynthetic process via photoinhibition.How Much Light?! Analyses of Selected Shallow Water Invertebrates’ Light Requirements
Dana examines the optimal amounts of light required for select stony corals, soft coral and a Tridacna clam, and is intended to complement his previous article 'Too Much Light!' (July 2004).reefs.com
Forgot link..