So what gives coral color??

ouling

Member
Market
Messages
867
Reaction score
0
Sorry my dear readers, but ive missed out on 90% of the speech concerning coloration and would love if you would comprise me with the details.

All I know is that:
more light = brighter color?
DSB and nutrients have no direct correlation between color?
The man seem to be shorting the MHI stocks?
Higher Alk = better coloration?

Thanks guys.
 
I wish that someone could post a graph of the average sps that reefers have in there tanks and at what par reading the growth is just as good as the color....anyone?
 
Rit, when you say "higher alk", do you mean 10-11 dKH, or even higher?
 
Ouling, you can check out some of his articles. This one has some stats toward the end that might be of use.

http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2007/3/aafeature1/view">http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2007/3/aafeature1/view</a>

There are other articles there on the topic, just search for his name.
 
reef1973;81297 wrote: I wouldn't recommend a tank that is less than a year old to maintain a high Alk level. It's too dangerous. There is no room for error and a little mistep will cause the tank to crash.

I've heard this line before

"Dad, why is it snowing inside the fish tank?"
 
jeep9783;81292 wrote: I wish that someone could post a graph of the average sps that reefers have in there tanks and at what par reading the growth is just as good as the color....anyone?

The problem is there is no such thing as an average coral. they are different. Even within the same Genius (Acropora, Montipora, etc) the requirements are vastly different. That's why you have to go coral by coral and you can make some generalizations but saying an "average" SPS is just to broad.
 
leveldrummer;81433 wrote: happy coral=happy zoox happy zoox=happy colors. what ever you can do to keep the corals happy, will achieve better coloration (stable enviroment, proper/high enough lighting, flow so they can breath, proper amount of nutrients, proper trace elements, no stressors)


Happy Zoanthellae = brown corals
 
leveldrummer;81433 wrote: happy coral=happy zoox happy zoox=happy colors. what ever you can do to keep the corals happy, will achieve better coloration (stable enviroment, proper/high enough lighting, flow so they can breath, proper amount of nutrients, proper trace elements, no stressors)




The coral doesn't decide( for lack of a better term) what color it is going to be.
 
Here's some of what I took from the talk, this may be a long post. Happy reading, and let me know if I'm wrong.

The bulk of his talk was about the relationship of Electron Transport Rate(ETR), Photosynthetically Active Radiation(PAR), Photoinhibition, and the point of light saturation.

PAR is micromol photons x m^2 x second. Surface PAR at the equator is 2100. A study of his was that the average aquarium has a PAR value of 233.
1 PAR = 50 lux.

ETR is the rate of photosynthesis.

Photoinhibition is the point at which a coral will shutdown due to excessive light.

Light Saturation Point is the point at which a higher PAR value benefits the coral less, causing inefficient use of light.

Corals contain color protein pigments. There are just over 100 of these pigments identified. They believe there are thousands. They are classified by number. I was not able to jot down the numbers of the pigments...

There are 3 types of color proteins. Fluorescent, Non Fluorescent, and Chemical Oxidation.

Fluorescence - When the molecular absorption of a photon triggers the emission of another photon with a longer wavelength. In essence, one color is absorbed and another is released. Or, Activated by light.

Non Fluorescent - These are chromoproteins. They merely reflect light, typically in shades of blue or red.

Chemical Oxidation - He didn't really touch on this one enough to make it into my notes... If I can find out more on this one, I'll post it, unless someone else can fill it it.

He gave a lot of examples after explaining the relationships. Here are most of the acceptable and saturation points. These get very specific, as you'll see variance within a species.

Dinosaur Egg - Acceptable: 175 PAR
Yellow Orange Fungia - Acceptable: 110 PAR - Saturation: 290 PAR
M. capricornis (standard color) - Acceptable: 100 PAR Saturation: 160 PAR
M. capricornis (sunset) - Acceptable: 100 PAR Saturation: 180 PAR
Acropora tortuosa - Acceptable: 241 PAR - Saturation: 450 PAR
The two oddballs..
M. undata - Saturation: 125PAR - Best color: 180 PAR So in the range of lower ETR due to excessive PAR, this species showed better color. It is VERY important to note, that this is the exception in this case, not the rule.
Purple Monster - He stopped reading the saturation point at 450. He could not get this coral to reach a point of saturation.

He emphasized that two of the most important things to get better colors from your coral is a stable proper alkalinity level and proper water flow.

So Ouling, according to him, your 1000 PAR was just a waste of money with your power bill, as most corals will grow just fine and have good color with a PAR reading less than 1/10th the level of the sun.

He mentioned using LED spot lamps as a way of cheating to target a specific color to illuminate. He also said LEDs systems are much better than halides, and that VHOs are better than T5s. Then there was the short section on U.V. light.

The case he used was a red coral turning green in the presence of U.V. light. In a small amount, a green protein would receive the U.V. and transfer the energy to a red receptor protein. In excess, the red protein would bleach, causing only the illumination of the green protein.
 
Danny, do you recall why he stated that VHO's were better than T5's? (I had to take a call during that part of the presentation.)

Thanks
 
Thanks. It was a really interesting talk. Some of this research he presented was only about 2 weeks old, so this is right on the edge of where husbandry lighting needs are being deciphered. Hopefully in a few years they'll have catagorized enough coral to publish a book.

One thing we talked about after his presentation was how long it took to get these results. 3 hours to prepare the test, 3 hours to perform the test, and several more hours to interpret the data. Pretty much a full day in the lab for just one coral. And more often than not, something would go wrong with the test, and he'd have to start over.
 
In regard to VHO vs. T5-

I believe he said he got better PAR ratings from VHOs compared to T5s in addition to lower heat levels. He only tested T5s under a shared reflector however, so it was less focused than using individual reflectors. I think that test could go either way. He noted that you can cram a lot of T5s in a fixture to make up for the difference.

I hate VHOs for two reasons. If one bulb goes out, they all go out, so troubleshooting is a pain in the butt. And the short life of them is the second. I wouldn't dare run a VHO over 6 months. And when it comes to changing multiple fluorescent bulbs, it really needs to be phased in over several days, especially if the bulbs are really old, as the sudden change in intensity could bleach a coral, but I supposed that can happen with any lighting system.
 
So are you sure you dont want to consider Secretary next year? lol
Awesome notes Danny!
 
Thanks, and believe me, I put a lot of consideration into that position. It's something I'm already good at, whereas being a treasurer will be a new experience for me. I'm very confident of my ability to handle the position, it's just something I haven't done specifically. I can always run for it in two years if I'm elected as treasurer.

I was sitting next to Dakota at the meeting. Ask him how many notes I was taking. I filled up 10 pages of mini legal pad paper with nearly illegible scrawl. I think it was harder to decipher my writing than it was to interpret the presentation.
 
Great posts today, Danny! Thanks, I wish I could give some rep ;-)

And IMO, individual reflectors are the only way to go with T5's- otherwise their small diameter is pointless. And people are claiming lifespans of around 18 months with T5 bulbs, although I'll be replacing mine at least every 12. And in my setup, if one bulb goes out (which hasn't happened yet), 2 bulbs go out (6 bulbs driven by 3 ballasts).
 
Well with what we know about PAR now, check your levels when you get new bulbs. Test again at 6 months and 12 months. That will be the true test. hehe.. I think I'm just trying to get everyone to bother Tony about borrowing the PAR meter.
 
DannyBradley;81493 wrote: Well with what we know about PAR now, check your levels when you get new bulbs. Test again at 6 months and 12 months. That will be the true test. hehe.. I think I'm just trying to get everyone to bother Tony about borrowing the PAR meter.

Yes, that sounds like a worthwhile test to perform- just a pain in the arse. But I'm hoping to test my setup, then replace two of the ballasts with an icecap 660 and retest.
Also, I have a secret source for a PAR meter, so don't worry Tony ;)
 
wbholwell;81491 wrote: And IMO, individual reflectors are the only way to go with T5's- otherwise their small diameter is pointless.

True.. but can you image the results you'd get with individual reflectors on VHOs?
(I never understood why more people dont do this)
 
wbholwell;81496 wrote: ...replace two of the ballasts with an icecap 660 and retest.

I like that idea!!!
lol

wbholwell;81496 wrote: Also, I have a secret source for a PAR meter, so don't worry Tony ;)

Hey, I like that idea too!!
 
Back
Top