blue blub
- Thread starter GROWSZOAS
- Start date
crazyseany
New member
steve..... are you looking for something like a 20K blub?
DiscoReefRover
Active member
nab that bulb steve youll like it love my xm 20ks
sean
sean
serpentman
part time superhero
I can 2nd that
DiscoReefRover
Active member
I love the color it gives the corals and get pretty decent growth too and IMO Par dont mean didly I personally like the fact that I dont get blinded every time i look at my tank ....And between Jeff and I we have come to the conclusion that there is a slight color and brightness bettween DE and SE XM 20 K bulbs ....DE less bright with a more pinky blue white ...and the SE beig brighter with a more crisp blue white color ..
Kreeger1
KING LEAR
All things being equal in a tank a bulb with higher par equals better growth so for growth though, par means everything. But really, theres a million factors which cause growth to be good and bad, bulb par is just one factor in that. Unless your running a coral farm color should be more important than growth I would think.
For us to look at Kelvin temp probably means more , to the corals par probably means more.
The same bulb will also look 10 different ways on 10 different ballasts too.
For us to look at Kelvin temp probably means more , to the corals par probably means more.
The same bulb will also look 10 different ways on 10 different ballasts too.
crazyseany
New member
probably wrong place to ask but.....
not exactly how they measure par (Watts?) but with coral is there a point of no return?
where a higher par does no good?
kinda like if you put a 250w bulb on one end of a 40 long and a 400w same temp bulb on the other end.... are you necessarily going to have better growth on the 400 end? (which would have a higher par at given depth?)
say if I was to set up a 20 long(shallow) tank. would I get faster/better growth using a 400w over a 250 or 250 over a 175?
thanks,
sean
and bump
not exactly how they measure par (Watts?) but with coral is there a point of no return?
where a higher par does no good?
kinda like if you put a 250w bulb on one end of a 40 long and a 400w same temp bulb on the other end.... are you necessarily going to have better growth on the 400 end? (which would have a higher par at given depth?)
say if I was to set up a 20 long(shallow) tank. would I get faster/better growth using a 400w over a 250 or 250 over a 175?
thanks,
sean
and bump
serpentman
part time superhero
I agree with Erik, I think color is of higher importance for a display rather than growth. Mixed temp bulbs could probably be used to achieve both but there are trade offs. I've read Sanjay's articles and he doesn't speak too fondly of the XM 20K's. However, I can say from first hand experience that the corals color up nicely. I would say growth has been decent. Obviously nothing like a 10K, but everything I have has been developing nicely. Although I am not sure what my PAR levels are, my guess is they are greatly improved by my reflectors (LBs). I ultimately chose the XM's due to their cost. Since all 20k's drift spectrum sooner and should be replaced more often, I figured it would save in the long run.
Sean to answer your question, although higher PAR does translate to higher growth rates, there is a point at which too much PAR or photo saturation can occur. At that point, the zooanthellae shut down photosynthesis and growth stops. Also, burning can occur. In the example you listed, the 400W although higher in PAR, would cause photosaturation quickly and ultimately would likely result in damage, especially if the photoperiod was longer than a couple hours. Consequently the 175W would probably achieve better growth as the corals would be photosynthesizing all day. Granted, all this is assuming the nutrients are available to promote growth.
Sean to answer your question, although higher PAR does translate to higher growth rates, there is a point at which too much PAR or photo saturation can occur. At that point, the zooanthellae shut down photosynthesis and growth stops. Also, burning can occur. In the example you listed, the 400W although higher in PAR, would cause photosaturation quickly and ultimately would likely result in damage, especially if the photoperiod was longer than a couple hours. Consequently the 175W would probably achieve better growth as the corals would be photosynthesizing all day. Granted, all this is assuming the nutrients are available to promote growth.
Similar threads
