Sponsor Our Community
Go Back   The Reef Tank > Reef Club Forums > TCMAS

TCMAS Twin Cities Marine Aquarium Society Club Forum


Registered Members don't see these ads. Register now it's free!

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 08-04-2005, 11:28 PM   #1
Burchoid
Little Fishy
 
Burchoid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Oakdale, MN
Posts: 281
Question

Coloring up - PAR or higher K?


Ok. I have my 75G with 2 X MH 250W 14K Hamilton bulbs running on a mag ballast and 110W supplimental actinic VHOS, but I still have a coral or two that either lost some color during shipping, or never was a good color to begin with.

Either way, I see two opposing ideas out there for coloring up your corals real good. Some people say to get a higher PAR rated lamp which means you have to sacrifice to a lower kelvin bulb or get a higher wattage setup.

Others say you need a high kelvin rated bulb to acheive good colors (lower PAR).

So which is it?? Short of upgrading the wattage on my system, whats the best thing to do to get some colors to come back in some of my corals? All my water params are in check.

According to http://www.cnidarianreef.com/lamps.cfm the bulbs I have now have a PAR rating of 214, a far cry from the PAR rating of the mighty XM 10K at a whopping 600.

Would tripling my PAR rating be enough to offset the change to a less-blue bulb?
Registered Members don't see these ads. Register now it's free!
Burchoid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2005, 11:35 PM   #2
redwinger
Got Crabs?
 
redwinger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Woodbury, MN
Posts: 5,526
IMO par and kelvin rating only add a small piece to the puzzle. Some corals can take months to color up but I also believe that minimal nutrients have just as much or more to do with how a coral holds its color. Your colors will "pop" more under a higher K bulb but if you have a abundance of nutrients in the tank they won't reach there full potential. Par to put into lehmans terms is the lower the par the slower the growth. Higer the par the faster the coral will grow.
__________________
<a href="http://www.suburbanchrysler.com/home.html">St Paul Chrysler</a>
<a href="http://www.suburbanchrysler.com/home.html">Minneapolis Chrysler</a>
redwinger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2005, 11:57 PM   #3
JnS
micro nut
 
JnS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: TWIN CITIES
Posts: 4,853
if we are reffering to RM corals, they will not look the same under 14k with actnics as they do in their pics under 20k with actnics.

but like redwinger said shipping stress can make corals take a long time to color up.
__________________
JnS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2005, 12:05 AM   #4
Superman
There is no kryptonite!
 
Superman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Eastern Twin Cities, MN.
Posts: 1,542
What is your lighting period for your halides?
__________________
DRILL IT!!
Superman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2005, 12:12 AM   #5
Jeremiah
Nothing to See Here
 
Jeremiah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Prior Lake, MN
Posts: 1,222
Images: 79
Agree with redwinger 100% on this one. I would just be patient, your lighting setup should be pretty rockin if everything else is in order.
Jeremiah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2005, 12:18 AM   #6
Burchoid
Little Fishy
 
Burchoid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Oakdale, MN
Posts: 281
Lightbulb

Singin the Coral Blues


I've slowly been been increasing it, its now at 12 hours actinics, 10 hours halides, which I know is a lot, but I don't have any algae problems. My sump/fuge lighting is on for 13 hours overlapping with the actinics to stabilize the tanks PH and other params. Nothing is bleaching out and most the corals are happy as could be! The polyps on some of my corals I have noticed REALLY colored up lately, but the base on the one that is supposed to be blue/white is still pink, and the mili I have that is supposed to be blue is still pink, and the other acro that is supposed to be blue and neon green is neon green and pink/light blue.


I am having touble bringing out the blues in my corals I guess. I just realized this. Is this just a coincidence? All the greens and fuscias and oranges all pop like mad, but no blue. HMmmMmmMmmM....
Burchoid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2005, 12:23 AM   #7
redwinger
Got Crabs?
 
redwinger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Woodbury, MN
Posts: 5,526
I have reduced my photoperiod to 6 hours actinic and 5 hours halide and have had good growth and better coloring. It can take months. I have had one coral for about 3 months and it is just starting to color up. Some will color up in a week but others can take longer.
__________________
<a href="http://www.suburbanchrysler.com/home.html">St Paul Chrysler</a>
<a href="http://www.suburbanchrysler.com/home.html">Minneapolis Chrysler</a>
redwinger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2005, 12:39 AM   #8
Burchoid
Little Fishy
 
Burchoid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Oakdale, MN
Posts: 281
Sheesh 6 hours and 5 hours? Thats not to close to an actual reef, not that our tanks are, but you would think the closer to actual reef conditions the better, and most reefs get at least a good 10 hours of sunlight don't they? I would slowly back my photo period back down, but I would like to know why first.
Burchoid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2005, 12:52 AM   #9
redwinger
Got Crabs?
 
redwinger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Woodbury, MN
Posts: 5,526
Your right as the corals only see about 1 hr of direct overhead sunlight in the ocean. So I am still running them to long. Corals IME seem to lighten with longer photoperiod and deepen in color with shorter photoperiods.
__________________
<a href="http://www.suburbanchrysler.com/home.html">St Paul Chrysler</a>
<a href="http://www.suburbanchrysler.com/home.html">Minneapolis Chrysler</a>
redwinger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2005, 12:53 AM   #10
Jeremiah
Nothing to See Here
 
Jeremiah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Prior Lake, MN
Posts: 1,222
Images: 79
Actually that is probably closer to the reef then you would think. I don't know all the numbers but when sunlight is hitting the water an certain angles it bounces off and doesn't penetrate very deep. So in reality it's not that long during the day that the sun is up at a high enough angle to really penetrate.
Jeremiah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2005, 12:54 AM   #11
redwinger
Got Crabs?
 
redwinger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Woodbury, MN
Posts: 5,526
http://www.thereeftank.com/forums/sh...ht=photoperiod check this link out burchoid, it will explain it in depth.
__________________
<a href="http://www.suburbanchrysler.com/home.html">St Paul Chrysler</a>
<a href="http://www.suburbanchrysler.com/home.html">Minneapolis Chrysler</a>
redwinger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2005, 01:00 AM   #12
Burchoid
Little Fishy
 
Burchoid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Oakdale, MN
Posts: 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by redwinger
Your right as the corals only see about 1 hr of direct overhead sunlight in the ocean. So I am still running them to long. Corals IME seem to lighten with longer photoperiod and deepen in color with shorter photoperiods.
Oh, comon, you know the corals get more than 1 hour of intenst light Any light at less than a 45 degree angle to the water should be fairly intense, especially in the tropics. If I do the math, based on 12 hours of daylight, that leaves us with 6 hours of good intense sunlight! hah! I see why a smaller photoperiod may be more accurate...

I will take your advice and slowly back the photoperiod back down closer to 6 or 7 hours...
Burchoid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2005, 01:03 AM   #13
David Grigor
TCMAS Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Brooklyn Center, MN
Posts: 5,665
Images: 7
Redwinger summed it up pretty good.

PAR is one measuring tool but doesn't tell the whole story. For example: A bulb can be high par concentrating more in the yellow red color sprectrum yet will not get the same results as one concentrating a little more in the higher spectrum.

I too am starting to realise that there is more to it than just the bulbs. While I'm not a zeovite ( and never will ) however, I am finding alot of what they say to be true ( just don't believe in their method ), low nutrients can play almost as much of a role as the lighting.

I have been getting pretty good results with T5 Flourescent lighting with barebottom, 10% Twice weekly water changes, and heaving skimming on a 58g. I personally wouldn't have believed since I have been a 400W MH user for many years.
David Grigor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2005, 01:10 AM   #14
redwinger
Got Crabs?
 
redwinger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Woodbury, MN
Posts: 5,526
Dave haven't seen you for a while hows little Ann Marie doing?
__________________
<a href="http://www.suburbanchrysler.com/home.html">St Paul Chrysler</a>
<a href="http://www.suburbanchrysler.com/home.html">Minneapolis Chrysler</a>
redwinger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2005, 09:17 AM   #15
Skipponator
The Reefer in the Boonies
 
Skipponator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Little Canada MN
Posts: 1,721
Sp redwinger, your actinics are ony for 6 hours, is this before any MH, and then how long after the MH does you actinics stay on? Your leaving them on while the mH is on also? Could you post your lighting times for us? I've been trying a different lighting schedule and so far things are looking oretty good (they were before), just curious on what an "optimal" setting "could" be. I have noticed with my XM 10k that the coloration and growth has really boosted since switching from Ushio/ Giesemann.
__________________
Skipponator is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
actinic vho , magnesium levels



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Sitemap:1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190
Sponsor Our Community

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:32 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Our lawyer tells us that, by pressing the "New Thread" or "New Reply" button, you acknowledge that the opinions and information expressed in your article are yours alone and not those of thereeftank.com, dba The Reef Tank. Further, you agree to indemnify The Reef Tank, its moderators, administrators and agents from any and all liability which may arise as a result of your article. (C)opyright 2006 TheReefTank.com