Thoughts on AI Prime Schedule?

[Capt_Rick_Dixie]

Hey, all! 

 

Wondering what your thoughts are regarding my lighting schedule.  It's sitting about 6" above my Nuvo 10.  I'm thinking I'll be sticking with LPS and Softies for this tank. Maybe, MAYBE some hardier SPS.  I essentially took the AB+ schedule and cut most of the intensities in half to compensate for the tank size and height of the light.  I made a few small changes as well but those are mostly preference based.  Really, as long as you're not burning corals and messing with your lighting consistently corals will adapt and grow just fine (within reason), but I'm curious to see if I'm on the right track here for a solid lighting schedule. 

 

Anything you think I should change?   What are you running and how does your tank(s) look with your schedule?   

 

 

 

 

  

[This guy is extra salty]

Contest 2.5g

 

160g

[Clown79]

19 hours ago, Capt_Rick_Dixie said:

Hey, all! 

 

Wondering what your thoughts are regarding my lighting schedule.  It's sitting about 6" above my Nuvo 10.  I'm thinking I'll be sticking with LPS and Softies for this tank. Maybe, MAYBE some hardier SPS.  I essentially took the AB+ schedule and cut most of the intensities in half to compensate for the tank size and height of the light.  I made a few small changes as well but those are mostly preference based.  Really, as long as you're not burning corals and messing with your lighting consistently corals will adapt and grow just fine (within reason), but I'm curious to see if I'm on the right track here for a solid lighting schedule. 

 

Anything you think I should change?   What are you running and how does your tank(s) look with your schedule?   

 

 

 

 

  

Schedules are pretty much what you like.

 

So many hobbyists out there with success and they all use different settings. It would be easier if there was a 100% setting proven to be best but I haven't found one.

[Capt_Rick_Dixie]

That's the annoying part about lighting lol.  Use a bit of lighting theory and set it to what you like and let the coral adapt and you'll be fine.  Buuuutttt it's always nice to get some insight from other users.  

[Capt_Rick_Dixie]

6 hours ago, This guy is extra salty said:

Contest 2.5g

 

160g

Nice!  How is the growth in your system?  

 

Have you noticed much of a difference in health/growth with peaks and valleys in your photoperiod? 

[This guy is extra salty]

19 hours ago, Capt_Rick_Dixie said:

Nice!  How is the growth in your system?  

 

Have you noticed much of a difference in health/growth with peaks and valleys in your photoperiod? 

Well it’s the contest 2.5g with only soft Corals. Everything seems to be doing great. Light is 8”AWL with a diffuser as a lid. Didn’t bother with acclimation mode since I had the diffuser. But granted the tank has only been running since April 1st.  And I have noticed the zoanthids have sprouted 1or 2 polyps per colony in there. The shrooms are fluffy and have split once from the mother. The setting is/was used by @Cannedfish when he had his 10g TOTM earlier this year

[Clown79]

19 hours ago, Capt_Rick_Dixie said:

Nice!  How is the growth in your system?  

 

Have you noticed much of a difference in health/growth with peaks and valleys in your photoperiod? 

I used the spikes and respites, its David saxby settings. Used it for quite a while and noticed no changes in my coral growth.

 

It supposed to give corals a break from intense lighting like cloud coverage.

[Capt_Rick_Dixie]

1 hour ago, Clown79 said:

I used the spikes and respites, its David saxby settings. Used it for quite a while and noticed no changes in my coral growth.

 

It supposed to give corals a break from intense lighting like cloud coverage.

I'm always interested to see if people are able to notice/document any significant growth while using respite periods in their lighting.  I suppose that would take a proper study though.  Maybe one day I'll give that a go.  

 

In my opinion there doesn't seem to be a need for it unless we're running very large systems with corals recently taken from the wild.  So many of the corals we keep are aquacultured or have been in captivity so long that they have acclimated to our artificial light cycles.  But I mean if it looks good and it works does it really matter? haha.    

[Clown79]

44 minutes ago, Capt_Rick_Dixie said:

I'm always interested to see if people are able to notice/document any significant growth while using respite periods in their lighting.  I suppose that would take a proper study though.  Maybe one day I'll give that a go.  

 

In my opinion there doesn't seem to be a need for it unless we're running very large systems with corals recently taken from the wild.  So many of the corals we keep are aquacultured or have been in captivity so long that they have acclimated to our artificial light cycles.  But I mean if it looks good and it works does it really matter? haha.    

It sounded like a good idea, in theory. So I tried it, I just adjusted the percentages because David Saxby's tank is A LOT bigger than mine.

 

 

I noticed no growth, no increase in colouration, some corals were actually not happy.

 

Went back to my own settings and things are much better.

 

The key is find one you like the look of, the corals are happy with, and leave it.

[This guy is extra salty]

I use the Saxby setting from 2017 not the recently updated one, on my 200g (4 hydra 26) I liked the growth and coloration but mostly that tanks parameters were extremely stable.

YOUR TANK, YOU DO YOU.

[MrObscura]

I was running ab+ originally at 50%, but it wasn't enough light. I bumped it up to 100 and things responded well. But for a while now I've been running WWCs Prime setting and I like it. Its 4 hours of blues and violets at 100% and the rest at 10% followed by 7 hours of just the blues and violets still at 100.

 

I did add an hour ramp up at the beginning, which the don't run, to bring it to a 12 hour schedule.

[Capt_Rick_Dixie]

17 hours ago, MrObscura said:

I was running ab+ originally at 50%, but it wasn't enough light. I bumped it up to 100 and things responded well. But for a while now I've been running WWCs Prime setting and I like it. Its 4 hours of blues and violets at 100% and the rest at 10% followed by 7 hours of just the blues and violets still at 100.

 

I did add an hour ramp up at the beginning, which the don't run, to bring it to a 12 hour schedule.

Interesting.  I haven't really looked into WWC's settings.  I'm stoked to see that it's working well for you! 

[Clown79]

17 hours ago, MrObscura said:

I was running ab+ originally at 50%, but it wasn't enough light. I bumped it up to 100 and things responded well. But for a while now I've been running WWCs Prime setting and I like it. Its 4 hours of blues and violets at 100% and the rest at 10% followed by 7 hours of just the blues and violets still at 100.

 

I did add an hour ramp up at the beginning, which the don't run, to bring it to a 12 hour schedule.

Gonna check that one out. I like heavy blue settings.

[This guy is extra salty]

On 10/2/2019 at 5:19 PM, MrObscura said:

I was running ab+ originally at 50%, but it wasn't enough light. I bumped it up to 100 and things responded well. But for a while now I've been running WWCs Prime setting and I like it. Its 4 hours of blues and violets at 100% and the rest at 10% followed by 7 hours of just the blues and violets still at 100.

 

I did add an hour ramp up at the beginning, which the don't run, to bring it to a 12 hour schedule.

Mind sending me that WWC schedule?

thisguyisextrasalty@gmail.com

[MrObscura]

6 hours ago, This guy is extra salty said:

Mind sending me that WWC schedule?

thisguyisextrasalty@gmail.com

It's simple. Just 4 hours of blues and violets at 100% with white, green and red at 10%. Then just the blues and violets, still at 100, for 7 hours.

[This guy is extra salty]

6 hours ago, MrObscura said:

It's simple. Just 4 hours of blues and violets at 100% with white, green and red at 10%. Then just the blues and violets, still at 100, for 7 hours.

And send it to thisguyisextrasalty@gmail.com

 

thanks!

[A.m.P]

Technically they changed the WWC setting, what they use on their hydras and their normal lighting systems is actually AB+ XD 

 

There was a big debate on the Facebook AI lighting group, it's essentially like 20% R+G with AB+ lighting intensity for the first four hours, then just AB+ (except 100% V +UV and blues if I'm remembering correctly) for six. Some of their display tanks out front use 100% blues and no other channels during peak visitor-hours too, or at least that's what folks who visited in-person said. You could always call and ask, they'll probably just email you the setting directly as they're all super-friendly and helpful folks.

 

Their grow out tanks all use AB+ on radions anyway IIRC.

[MrObscura]

They run what they call a "modified version of AB+" on their displays which all run radions. Though its actually quite different than AB. It's a 1 hour ramp up to blues and violets at 100% with cool white and green at 50, red at 10 and warm white at 0 for like 4 hours followed by just blues and violets for 7 hours or so. 

 

But that's radions. I'm running their prime setting that they run on nanos. I got it directly from them.  

 

And Salty, you could have set it up by now rather than waiting for me to send it. Lol

[A.m.P]

Does that include the UV channel?

[MrObscura]

3 minutes ago, Amphrites said:

Does that include the UV channel?

Yeah, uv at 100%.

[A.m.P]

9 minutes ago, MrObscura said:

Yeah, uv at 100%.

Okay, one of the schedules which got passed around was literally just RY + V lol, wanted to double-check since you have the correct-schedule, I'll have to try this out for fun seems as if, it's liable to be roughly-equivalent in PAR to AB+ because of the lack of whites.

[MrObscura]

I don't have a par meter, but just for the hell of it I did compare lux between the 2  settings and the WWCs prime setting produced slightly higher numbers than AB+ @ 100%.

[A.m.P]

That is... Very unexpected... That would probably mean the effective-PAR rating is actually substantially-higher considering how poorly Lux-meters pick-up blues and violets to begin with.

[MrObscura]

You know what? I just remembered some time back a member here ran my settings at peak and tested par for me to give me an idea. In a 12 inch cube, such as my nuvo 10, with a prime 9 or so inches above the water he got...

 

Just below waterline 470 center 250 edge

Mid level 250 center 150 edge

Sandbed 170 center 100 edge

 

But I'm not too concerned with par. Theres plenty of examples of even light loving Corals thriving in what used to be considered lower par. Even WWC for example is only getting 250par max at the surface in their 300g mixed reef and acros thrive everywhere in the tank from low 100s to 250. 

 

Too little or too much light is a problem light, but I think keeping corals nourished with detectable nutrients and especially providing lots of flow are more critical. You get those right and any proven ldecent light/schedule will do.

 

But then again I'm still a noob with only a  little over a year in the hobby with many struggles, so wtf do I know? Lol

[A.m.P]

Oof that is considerably-more PAR than AB+, would definitely have to be an experiment with a long-acclimation mode...
AB+ would be expected to give around 210 PAR center 6" and 110 PAR @ 12", and that's with it only 8" above the water!