Lighting ?

[reefguru21]

I recently have found that the 3-5watts and 5-8watts per gallon label that we give soft and hard corals is simply stupid. I was running a sarcs,xenia,shrooms,and assorted polyps under MH's and actinics for about six months, then my Mh hood cracked due to poor construction, so I've been running 80watts over a 75 gallon tank for a week and a half I've got better polyp extension then even has anyone eles had this experience or know what I talking about what if any logical lighting intensityes should we suggest to newbies other than high wattage check book draining lighting systems, keeep in mind I believe this only about softies I still run MH over sps's and clams. Just wondering?

[tinyreef]

the greater polyp extension could be the reaction to 'poorer' light. the lower light forces the animal to extend more light catching real estate (its body) to gather the same amount of light energy it had gathered under intense light but without full extension.

 

an analogy: you can fill a small cup quickly during a torrential downpour but you'd need a large bucket to catch the same volume of water during a light spring shower.

 

then again all this mh's stuff could be marketing bs! i don't think so though. corals and anemones will darken under poor lighting. it seems to be doing well with the added color but it's sometimes a sign of insufficient lighting. very deceiving. :

[reefguru21]

Good point tinyreef, I just thought the scale that most people use for wattage to gallons is al screwed up that's all.

[tinyreef]

oh don't get me wrong. i agree with you, the watts/gallon ratio is definitely off 'a bit'. especially now that we've got different levels of mh's and then you toss in PC's, VHO's, NO's, and different quality ballasts too! ???

 

let's not forget the many tank configurations we have nowadays as well. you had an o'dell or a perfecto and it came in two styles (bare tank or with starter kits ).

 

it was much easier with the NO's and VHO's (what happened to my HO? oh yeah, i divorced her! ). watts/gallon were actually accurate then.

 

(jumps off the soapbox to let the next person rant)

[Physh1]

I agree with tinyreef here....

 

On a side note it should be known that many "normal" recommendations do not apply to nano reefs. Nanos' almost have a totally different set of rules....most of which are still pretty broad

 

Cameron

[tinyreef]

are you calling us abnormal? WE'RE the normal ones! it's everyone else that's the wackos! right, dave?