Do actinics provide any value to corals?

[The Propagator]

Thats because I pointed out exactly where you blurred the lines and busted you.

 

Bye Bye !!

[Mr. Fosi]

Technicly it is biologicly linked though isnt it?

I mean it is biologicly stressing them to make them produce those prety colors right?

 

What I meant was: the colors and growth are not directly linked.

 

That is, you don't need the colors for growth and you don't need growth for the colors.

[chuckfullservice]

All you need is love , love ,love .

No hating people I think your all intelligent and appreciate all your guys knowledge and input .

Prop I'm sure there have been plenty of times you have made a mistake and you probably wouldn't like it if someone rubbed it in your face!

Whats kinda funny is if you two met , you probably would be best friends because you have a mutual interest in which your both very passionate!

Soo please stop ripping each other your both just trying to help out by giving your opinions which are appreciated!!!!!!

Be cool and peace out !

[The Propagator]

What I meant was: the colors and growth are not directly linked.

 

That is, you don't need the colors for growth and you don't need growth for the colors.

 

 

Ahaaaa...Very good sir. Now I understand what you mean

 

 

 

Chuck......Its just me baby. "I calls'em like's I sees'em"

 

But I dont take any of this personaly.

 

Its the internet for Christ sake! LOL!!

 

I hope he dosent either, but eh.......... what are ya gonna do ya know?

[Nyxis]

Thats because I pointed out exactly where you blurred the lines and busted you.

Bye Bye !!

 

Alright you want me to spell it out for you here we go.

 

My first post

Fosi you might want to take a look at that link. I know it makes more sence that more blue light = better but in that experiment they determined that spectral qualities were unimportant. Apparently if you have enough intensity a wide spectrum bulb of any kind works just as well as one with a higher output in the blue range. The lousy part about it is there is no way to tell how much intensity you need to cross over into any light works just fine land.

 

Props first chime in

Beat me to it FOSI wink.gif

 

didnt Sanjay, Borneman, Califo, and other big names in this hobby already do this experiment and come up with a conclusive YES, actinic does increase the health of your coral?

 

Next comes a bunch of talk about using people who are not trained in this field as experts no need to quote this. Actually there should be no need to quote any of this but for some reason I need to hold some people's hands through this conversation.

 

Props first expert e-mail from his first very long post

"Eric Borneman

That's a crock. Now, if you have a tank that is mostly lit by metal halides and there are a couple of normal output actinics, it may be relatively small by comaprison. But if you have a tank lit by normal output lights, its a different story. If you use VHO actinics, its a different story. Actinic lighting is a special spectrum, sure - yes, its aesthetic, but it is also functional...as functional as any light soruce for corals and the spectrum part, while duplicating deeper water spectrum, is also functional to shallow water photosnthetic life."

 

Which states that blue actinics are not useless (who was arguing that point?)

 

Props second expert e-mail

Kevin, you can disagree if you want, but I promise this is not a defended opinion. I can assure you I have the "data", and we can chat about relative contribution of wavelengths to zooxanthellae day and night - and I will have the papers to back myself up.

 

But, this is not the point. The point is if actinics are mostly aesthetic. They aren't. Photosynthesizers need light. They need x amount of light to reach their photosynthetic saturation level. Any above that must be dissipated or it is photoinhibitive or damaging. White light, red light, blue light....just get the photosynthetic machinery to that level. Now do corals have the photosynthetic machinery to do this with actinics. Yes. Case closed. "

 

Pretty much the exact same thing.

 

Yet another expert email

The context with which I believe the statement that actinics are for nothing more than aesthetics is that it isn't that important what the composition of the spectrum of the bulb is, as long as there is enough light of the appropriate wavelengths for photosynthesis to occur. So as long as you satisfy the needs of photosynthesis, beyond that it doesn't matter what bulbs you use, actinic, day light etc.

 

If you cannot see how this directly supports what I wrote in my first post you will never be welcome in the TOPS society I'm sorry don't bother with the tests.

 

My reply

Prop I cannot find anything in there about Actinic increasing coral health(your original statement). Was anyone arguing that actinic was completly useless to corals? Because that's who it looks like your reply was written for.

 

Props victory over an imagainry foe who apparently has the same name as me and was arguing that actinic is purely asthetic

Nyxis,

Your obviously insane.

Knit picking at words wont change facts.

Wheather it increases health or helps them remain healthy are one in the same to me bro'.

All your doing now is scrambling franticly trying to find somthing wrong, and holding on to what ever scrap you can make up or dig up, and trying your damndest to twist words to make them suite you.

 

Take your beating like a man/woman/chronic complainer, what ever.

 

 

Remember what I said?

 

"When I do I dont want any whimping out like " but he isnt a marine biologist WTF!" Facts are facts."

 

After this prop goes off into some train of thought I can't even begin to follow. As of yet prop has produced 0 that's right 0 proof, data, anything to support his claim that actinic does increase the health of your coral. Instead he posted this gem.

 

My whole point was to prove that they had already performed tests to see if actinic's provided usable lighting

 

So somewhere in there prop decided to abandon his first assertion that actinic increases coral health and decided to jump into actinic produces useable light. Let's see if I can retire from this thread now.

[supernip]

dont mind too much nyxis. After a while, you automatically how much of a contribution someone's posts are. This is just c7 syndrome. You'll learn that ignoring certain people will keep you on this site much longer than to argue with them

[The Propagator]

Crawl back in your hole nip'itz.

 

 

 

 

 

Nyxis,

 

Ahh the sound of insanity.

 

Flailing your arms, quoting post's, and acting like an idot wont change anything.

You still changed your mind TWICE on this subject,and blended two threads together.

Now you want to argue over a single word, and totaly avoid the facts of what realy just happend. We both obviously agree that ACTINIC LIGHT SERVES A PURPOSE.

I posted the info because you questioned credibility of source on every thing I posted that SUPPORTED WHAT YOU SAID DIPPY

 

 

I can just see you pounding away at your keyboard right now with little beads of sweat rolling down your fore head.

[supernip]

thats 2 break downs you've had on me so far. =( Im sorry to hurt your feelings so much

[The Propagator]

LOL !!!!

 

Beleive me that wasnt a break down Nip.

That was teasing, because you saw fit to chime in on somthing that was none of your business with your famous "certain people" comments in your usual fashion towards me.

 

If you dont want confrontations don't start confrontantions.

 

[supernip]

please, cry me a river.

 

 

you can start a thread in the lounge about how much I suck. Stop derailing thread now

[The Propagator]

I believe you derailed it futher with your own comments.

 

Little boy that cried wolf syndrome?

[Nyxis]

Crawl back in your hole nip'itz.

Nyxis,

 

Ahh the sound of insanity.

 

Flailing your arms, quoting post's, and acting like an idot wont change anything.

You still changed your mind TWICE on this subject,and blended two threads together.

Now you want to argue over a single word, and totaly avoid the facts of what realy just happend. We both obviously agree that ACTINIC LIGHT SERVES A PURPOSE.

I posted the info because you questioned credibility of source on every thing I posted that SUPPORTED WHAT YOU SAID DIPPY

I can just see you pounding away at your keyboard right now with little beads of sweat rolling down your fore head.

 

When the hell did I change my opinion? Where? Quote for me where exactly I changed my opinion. Did I ever say actinic is useless for corals they simply cannot use blue wavelength light for photosynthesis? No so quit trying to jam words into my mouth and claim some kind of victory here. I have tried to give you the benifit of the doubt but you are too damn arrogant to let this go. So come up with some form of proof that you are right or stfu.

[Mr. Fosi]

Could we take the pi$$ing contest to PMs and quit clogging what used to be a useful thread with bunch of useless argument?

[RayWhisperer]

So this is where the Nip sux thread in the lounge started from.... It all comes together so nicely now.

[The Propagator]

Dosent it .

 

 

 

 

 

 

Agreed F.O.S.I.

 

 

 

 

 

So any ways.............

Any one else find any thing usefull on this topic in a search?

[gotboostedvr6]

I've found in the last 2 weeks or so of gathering info from serious (fulltime) coral farmers use 6500k-8k MH lighting and use no actinic to supplement...not saying that it doesnt help but mabe that the help it gives isnt worth adding them..

 

 

They have told me that the difference in groth using the same water is noticable with in the first month when you go to a lower kelvin.. but never less than 6,500k

[adinsxq]

um.

 

let's all be nice

 

 

 

OR DIE!!!!

[Mr. Fosi]

A little late to the party, don't you think?

 

gotboostedvr6: Good info. It fits right in with everything that has been said.

[Robster]

Though I'd just add a little bit of interesting reading:

 

http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2005/12/aafeature2

 

and:

 

http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2006/9/aafeature

 

interesting reading, and a side note that most all of your bulbs these companys make they forget to include the spectrum analysis and CRI and lum/watt (basically all the info that is necessary to know what your bulb is doing).

 

Now though I have not read all the noted articles etc..etc... unless a company took a spectrum analyser down to 20m or so in nice tropical waters and then re-created that exact spectrum curve in a bulb, then the rest is pretty much a moot point, don't you agree?

 

Cheers!

-R

[horsehunter]

I have read this entire thread and now my head hurts. Not wanting to hijack thread could you answer some questions?

 

I have moved the contents of my 20 gal (24x 12) to a 33 gal. (36x 12) to get more clearance around the sides and the fact that the tank stand and hood which I already had fits the space in my den better. I positioned my 2x65w pc Aqualight 1 -10000k and one actinic lamp under the hood. In addition to this I have added a 20w NO Marine glo flourescent.

 

I would like to improve the lighting with out spendind a whole lot of money.

 

Do I gain anything by switching the actinic for another 1000K or a 50/50?

 

I have considered taking the Aqualight apart and using the lamps ballasts and endcaps in the hood and mounting a 150w HQI but I am worried about heat issues.

 

Thanks for any thoughts.

 

Frank

[Mr. Fosi]

Robster: On the contrary, many companies provide a truncated specrograph on their lap packaging (example: coralife) and I routinely email companies for more detailed copies.

 

See: http://www.nano-reef.com/forums/index.php?...=89244&st=0, especially page 3.

 

The origional question that started this thread was about whether or not actinics provided any benefit, which is what most of the answers (and references) here have been posted to answer.

 

Plus, it would take more than just some specral measurements of specific depths. Turbitidy (which changes according to season or other factors) and sun angle all influence the underwater light field.

 

I would like to improve the lighting with out spendind a whole lot of money.

 

Always difficult. If you are willing to buy a 150W HQI retro kit, why not DIY your own pendent?

 

If I recall correctly, aqualights have flat reflectors, a switch to DIY parabolic reflectors would drmatically increase your light capture ability.

 

Do I gain anything by switching the actinic for another 1000K or a 50/50?

 

Your tank will look brighter with the 10000K, but you'll lose most all of the "pop" that comes from fluorescence.

 

It might look brighter and keep some pop with the 50/50, but I can't make a prediction because the change may be negligable.

 

I have considered taking the Aqualight apart and using the lamps ballasts and endcaps in the hood and mounting a 150w HQI but I am worried about heat issues.

 

Do you mean to say that you have considered retrofitting an MH in the fixture while keeping the stock lighting?

[horsehunter]

Robster: On the contrary, many companies provide a truncated specrograph on their lap packaging (example: coralife) and I routinely email companies for more detailed copies.

 

See: http://www.nano-reef.com/forums/index.php?...=89244&st=0, especially page 3.

 

The origional question that started this thread was about whether or not actinics provided any benefit, which is what most of the answers (and references) here have been posted to answer.

 

Plus, it would take more than just some specral measurements of specific depths. Turbitidy (which changes according to season or other factors) and sun angle all influence the underwater light field.

Always difficult. If you are willing to buy a 150W HQI retro kit, why not DIY your own pendent?

 

If I recall correctly, aqualights have flat reflectors, a switch to DIY parabolic reflectors would drmatically increase your light capture ability.

Your tank will look brighter with the 10000K, but you'll lose most all of the "pop" that comes from fluorescence.

 

It might look brighter and keep some pop with the 50/50, but I can't make a prediction because the change may be negligable.

Do you mean to say that you have considered retrofitting an MH in the fixture while keeping the stock lighting?

 

 

Sorry about that I have no idea what i did.

 

Mr Fosi I would mount the CF lamps and reflectors directly in the hood without the fixture remotely mounting the ballasts and hopefully have room for a 150 w HQI

[Mr. Fosi]

I suppose you could try it...

[Robster]

Mr. Fosi,

 

I in no way mean to impugn your posts, as I agree to actinics are beneficial. The point I was attempting to elude to is that simply saturating specific light spectrums cause they are known to be beneficial (e.g. actinic), while not taking into account the spectrum intensities being put out by one’s other lighting could result in over-saturation of some spectrums and That may or may not be beneficial. (e.g. oxygen is great and fully needed to be able to live, but 100% saturation of oxygen would not be a good thing.)

 

To much of a good thing is typically bad.

 

Cheers!

-R

[mybuickskill6979]

heres what i'll say just from my research. any photosythetic organism relies heavliy on mostly to colors. RED AND BLUE. while alot of people say the actinics won't help anything i tend to think its bull... but the cool thing is too that actincs have a black light effect on some coral organisms. so id say while not absolutely necessary its will do more in favor of your corals then it will hurt them thats for sure.