Why the trouble with LED
- Thread starter snowmansnow
- Start date
This is not fact but speculation.
All plants and animals need certain raw materials to grow. Plants need fertilizers and CO2, not just light. If you have ever had a planted tank and blasted it with light (let's say 200 PAR) but no CO2 or ferts, you get poor growth. If you inject CO2 and dose ferts but use lower light, they grow like weeds. There are limiting factors - the plant can't take in infinite light and turn it into growth if it doesn't have ALL of the raw materials it needs.
SIMILARLY, you can't just blast corals (which are animals) with tons of light and expect them to grow. They are limited by other factors. Without calcium and other elements, they are incapable of creating new skeletal frame to grow onto. And the idea is that without food, light will only allow for so much growth.
This is all speculative, but I've read accounts and seen pictures of some stunning SPS tanks putting these concepts to work.
Sent from my VS985 4G using Tapatalk
Thanks Russ. I knew there was more to it but didn't have anything in front of me to add more detail.
Sent from my VS985 4G using Tapatalk
- Messages
- 4,967
- Reaction score
- 371
I see the reasoning, but something feels backwards about this to me.... Unnatural .
Are the po4 and no3 levels around the GBR or other large coral colonizations this high?
Would the SUN produce more PAR than our lights? Then why would the rules change for aquarium kept corals?
So long, and thanks for all the fish.
Are the po4 and no3 levels around the GBR or other large coral colonizations this high?
Would the SUN produce more PAR than our lights? Then why would the rules change for aquarium kept corals?
So long, and thanks for all the fish.
great questions. not so easy to answer.
GBR and Carribean are phosphate limited. ones off south africa are nitrate limited.
keep in mind some of our tanks read 0 nitrate and still have it. just like when GHA is in a tank but phosphate reads 0. you gotta look at the "paleness" of the coral to determine the zoox densities.
the sun is a powerful light. but a lot of corals are 100 feet down and brown. some in indonesia are turbid. lots and lots of variables.
but i will say this....
buy any frag and place it in a 20 gallon. give it light. flow. heck. even feed it. no fish or any other life. that thing will pale and die in no time. otherwise some of us would go fishless reef.
- Messages
- 4,967
- Reaction score
- 371
Well, as you say, as long as there is any algae in a system there IS a food source. Algae just doesn't grow without it.
But back to the point, the whole adding nutrients just FEELS backwards to me.
I'm not saying that keeping a successful sps tank in captivity doesn't require adjustments from nature.
Guess I'm just hard headed hehe.
This is a pretty cool PAR reference guide. This isnt exact mind you.... just a ballpark of what to expect for the most ideal clear conditions.
Turbid waters are much different
http://imagebank.osa.org/getImage.xqy?img=LmxhcmdlLG9lLTIwLTE4LTIwNDgyLWcwMDI" alt="" />
[QUOTE=][B]SnowManSnow;1075909 wrote:[/B] Well, as you say, as long as there is any algae in a system there IS a food source. Algae just doesn't grow without it.
But back to the point, the whole adding nutrients just FEELS backwards to me.
I'm not saying that keeping a successful sps tank in captivity doesn't require adjustments from nature.
Guess I'm just hard headed hehe.[/QUOTE]
Not hard headed at all. If you are lightly stocked, you will have these kind of issues. Otherwise you are on the other side of the fence and need to remove nutrients due to accumulation.
Some have a perfect balance.
You are more likely to have this balance with a surplus and using carbon dosing or gfo as they are slowly getting seeped out while coral are still experiencing the nutrients. Rather than never having access to them (nutrients) at all.
You could also just go 200-300 par and play it safe. Really all our tanks have so many variables its rough to say what is "correct".
hope that makes sense.
- Messages
- 4,967
- Reaction score
- 371
just a few more thoughts..
The paleness of zooxanthella is normally due to an inadequacy of light. I can see how this would cause problems when considering a new light technology like LED. The reasoning could be wrong in this way:
My corals are pale, therefore my nutrients are low... HOWEVER perhaps the person's corals are pale because his lights suck, and adding nutrients is just putting a band aid on the issue while the coral slowly dies.
Now, if your corals are browning out then your lights are probably too strong.. at least that has been my limited experience.
One problem we face with LED is that everyone wants their lights to be adequate, since they probably paid a good bit for them (same is true with any equipment in the hobby). But just like with t5 fixtures ALL LED FIXTURES ARE NOT created equal. Yes, I currently have LED lights, but I'm trying to be patient enough to adjust them to my tank.
I'm also not totally convinced that a high enough par reading is all there is to determining what the corals need. (but thats just me).
What the current trend seems to be is:
If corals are losing color (normally people mean bleaching), then they LOWER the lights and UP the nutrients in the system, when in nature there are only trace nutrients and STRONG light.....
Yes higher nutrients can improve color, I don't doubt that, but ... still seems backwards haha..
again ... im just a musician.. what do i know
- Messages
- 4,967
- Reaction score
- 371
Russ-IV;1075910 wrote:alt="" />
This is a pretty cool PAR reference guide. This isnt exact mind you.... just a ballpark of what to expect for the most ideal clear conditions.
Turbid waters are much different
http://imagebank.osa.org/getImage.xqy?img=LmxhcmdlLG9lLTIwLTE4LTIwNDgyLWcwMDI" alt="" />
Not hard headed at all. If you are lightly stocked, you will have these kind of issues. Otherwise you are on the other side of the fence and need to remove nutrients due to accumulation.
Some have a perfect balance.
You are more likely to have this balance with a surplus and using carbon dosing or gfo as they are slowly getting seeped out while coral are still experiencing the nutrients. Rather than never having access to them (nutrients) at all.
You could also just go 200-300 par and play it safe. Really all our tanks have so many variables its rough to say what is "correct".
hope that makes sense.[/QUOTE]
WOW! thats really cool.. i've been looking for that... (was looking this morning actually)...
what is amazing is that there is 450par at 100 feet!
careful.... not everything is so simple. That is also one of the clearest areas of the ocean you can get.
http://science.kennesaw.edu/~jdirnber/BioOceanography/Lectures/LecPhysicalOcean/LecPhysicalOcean.html">http://science.kennesaw.edu/~jdirnber/BioOceanography/Lectures/LecPhysicalOcean/LecPhysicalOcean.html</a>
might be a good place to start if you are feeling leisurely.
- Messages
- 5,121
- Reaction score
- 7
I don't understand this statement. I've had fishless frag systems.
I think you are leaving out some details.
A picture would be worth a thousand words in this case.
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0087416"> It was presumed that during day 7 to day 9, Symbiodinium used the lipid in order to survive since the reserved nitrogen source had been used up. After 9 days of nitrogen starvation, the Symbiodinium cells entered the death phase (Fig. 1A).</a>
.... in any case. You "could" do it. Hence even with my light bioload i dose nitrogen and phosphate. It would be disingenuous to the reader to state
[I][B]"yeah... just throw some corals in some water and all will be fine"[/B]</em>.
- Messages
- 5,121
- Reaction score
- 7
Sorry no pics not sure how they would help since there were no fish but nonetheless What details do you need?
Each system had 4 200 gallon vats 12" deep with 2 400 watt halides 16" over each system , flow was provided by 7500gph pump, sump was 400 gallons with a 6 feet protein skimmer, 2 gallons of carbon. No fish at all. No testing was done besides alk and ph. I will say that some of the corals were only there a few days but some were there for months. No feeding was done . Not sure the phosphate levels or nitrate levels but I would assume somewhat low since we could not get any macro algae to grow.
Have you tried a fishless system?
Your quote above would be deceiving if someone actually said it but no more so than this one
buy any frag and place it in a 20 gallon. give it light. flow. heck. even feed it. no fish or any other life. that thing will pale and die in no time. otherwise some of us would go fishless reef.
Each system had 4 200 gallon vats 12" deep with 2 400 watt halides 16" over each system , flow was provided by 7500gph pump, sump was 400 gallons with a 6 feet protein skimmer, 2 gallons of carbon. No fish at all. No testing was done besides alk and ph. I will say that some of the corals were only there a few days but some were there for months. No feeding was done . Not sure the phosphate levels or nitrate levels but I would assume somewhat low since we could not get any macro algae to grow.
Have you tried a fishless system?
Your quote above would be deceiving if someone actually said it but no more so than this one
buy any frag and place it in a 20 gallon. give it light. flow. heck. even feed it. no fish or any other life. that thing will pale and die in no time. otherwise some of us would go fishless reef.
lol this is like arguing the world is flat.
you give way too many variables. how dirty was your old tank? was it previously used? why protein skimmers for no bioload? not supporting macro doesnt mean no nutrients.
i have placed corals in a sterile tank before fish, and sps will be the first to go. generally in a week.
this isnt even a debate. no bioload, no corals. plain and simple
another question. if your frag rack was so successful without fish, why put fish in now?
- Messages
- 1,157
- Reaction score
- 0
Most of the SPS in my tank have been in my tank for at least 6 months. Throught the six months I have not changed my lighting, but the t5s are getting old. In the last month, some of my coral have begun to fade. Especially my tricolor, which is the closest to the light source. I noticed the largest decrease of color after adding gfo to the system.
So, if I'm reading this correctly, I should up my nutrients and lower my lighting?
So, if I'm reading this correctly, I should up my nutrients and lower my lighting?
- Messages
- 5,121
- Reaction score
- 7
No argument here Russ. I never said it was sterile. Did I? Just stated with out fish.
New systems
Skimmer was to remove any mucus etc from shipping.
Never stated not supporting macro "doesn't mean no nutrients" simply implied obviously low bioload.
Never added any fish,
So make up your mind is it sterile systems , uln systems or fish less systems that corals will not survive in.
Based on your statement above it was fish less systems if that is the case you are DEAD WRONG and the earth is flat.
Fish less doesn't necessarily mean sterile. I'm not sure sterile could even exist in a saltwater tank?
