Here is my lighting - what do you think?

[pisanoal]

I'm hoping you sps experts can take a look at my lighting setup.

I've had this aquarium that has been planned from the start to be sps dominant, set up for about a year now and has been plagued by instability for one reason or another. It's finally stable amd growing the few pieces I have, and I'm getting serious about stocking with some acros. Ive got a few in there now that are doing well. Slimer, a tort of some kind, a myagi tort, and a couple others that are slowly making there way back from the dead.

The one thing I'm not super confident about with this system in its ability to grow sps is my lighting. So I'm curious about what you might have to say about it. Ive attached some pictures for reference.

Its a 6 bulb t5 setup, the tank is 18" wide by 23" tall. The kit is the Miro LET retrofit kit. Ive also got about 125 watts of mixed leds for dusk/dawn, shimmer aesthetics. Bulb combo from front to back is blue+, actinic, coral+, blue+, actinic, blue+. Led strip sits in the middle. Also, as you see in the pics, ive staggered them right to left to cover not of the tank.

I tested PAR values last night after finally rigging up a holder for my sensor that would work with the canopy and came up with 200 at the sand bed and 250 at the top of the rocks. I changed my bulbs from 3 blue+ and 3 coral+ about 6 months ago at the recommendation from an lfs with superb sps pieces. Before the change I was seeing 300 par at the sand bed, and 350 at the top of the rocks. I've included a pretty recent FTS. The center rocks will house the acros. Outliers will be not as light demanding.

Some questions...
Should I switch back to a higher par setup?
Is this setup enough?
Recommend any changes?

Thanks for the help!

Sent from my VS988 using Tapatalk

 

[pisanoal]

Guess I should also add they are about 8" off the water.

Sent from my VS988 using Tapatalk

 

[reefmutt]

I would say the 350 general par levels are better than the 250..
Don’t see why you can’t make sps happy with 300-350.
Par wil be better under the non staggered centre section. Keep higher ligh lovers there and lower light lovers on the edges..

 

[pisanoal]

I would say the 350 general par levels are better than the 250..
Don't see why you can't make sps happy with 300-350.
Par wil be better under the non staggered centre section. Keep higher ligh lovers there and lower light lovers on the edges..

Thanks for the reply. As far as placement, this is exactly what I had planned, and the rock structures are set up accordingly. Ive got some lps and a couple montis that I plan on putting on the edges.

Do you not buy into the whole PUR vs PAR argument on the actinics? That's where I get hung up on them to he honest and is where a lot of my hesitation comes from. Haven't decided what to think about it.

I strongly considered going 8-bulb ATI. But I like my led strip, and that fixture would completely fill my canopy front to back. I hesitate to even mention it as I know that's what people will say to go to. I'd rather not if I can avoid it.

Glad to hear you say at least my previous light levels should be ok though. Do you think just adequate? Or is it sufficient to get good growth and color?

Sent from my VS988 using Tapatalk

 

[reefmutt]

I think you’ll be fine with your current lighting. It should be sufficient.
I don’t think I really buy into the need for true actinics. I certainly have used them extensively over the years but I don’t bother anymore.
I’m not saying that par is more important than pur, I’m just saying tha i don’t think true axtinics are necessary for coral health- esthetics wise, if you like them, I’m not opposed but they aren’t necessarily, imo.
I think It is fairly well established that between blue plus and coral plus bulbs (and many others) the coral will get all of the lower 400nm wavelengths that they need to become fully colored up.

 

[pisanoal]

I think you'll be fine with your current lighting. It should be sufficient.
I don't think I really buy into the need for true actinics. I certainly have used them extensively over the years but I don't bother anymore.
I'm not saying that par is more important than pur, I'm just saying tha i don't think true axtinics are necessary for coral health- esthetics wise, if you like them, I'm not opposed but they aren't necessarily, imo.
I think It is fairly well established that between blue plus and coral plus bulbs (and many others) the coral will get all of the lower 400nm wavelengths that they need to become fully colored up.

Ok thanks. Really appreciate the advice, especially coming from someone with your experience/success.

Sent from my VS988 using Tapatalk

 

[reefmutt]

No problem. You certainly have a good place to start from.
If you are like most of us, you’ll be tinkering with supplemental lighting or tweaking something eventually.

 

[jda]

What PAR meter did you use? Some need a correction factor for the sensor and some others need correction for not capturing enough blue, purple and UV. If it was an Apogee, then it needs at least 1.32 applied to the readings.

 

[pisanoal]

What PAR meter did you use? Some need a correction factor for the sensor and some others need correction for not capturing enough blue, purple and UV. If it was an Apogee, then it needs at least 1.32 applied to the readings.

It is an apogee sensor attached to a multimeter

Sent from my VS988 using Tapatalk

 

[jda]

IIRC, you need to pump those up by 1.32 to get an accurate result.

If it is an older sensor, then it might need more since they really fall off below 450nm. If it is the newer one (510), then it is better but still might need pumped up a bit.

if anybody likes the looks of actinics, then go for it. Nearly every acropora excites below 400nm and actinics have this in spades. However, like Mutt said, plenty of other bulbs get down here too.

 

[pisanoal]

IIRC, you need to pump those up by 1.32 to get an accurate result.

If it is an older sensor, then it might need more since they really fall off below 450nm. If it is the newer one (510), then it is better but still might need pumped up a bit.

if anybody likes the looks of actinics, then go for it. Nearly every acropora excites below 400nm and actinics have this in spades. However, like Mutt said, plenty of other bulbs get down here too.

Its the older one. Really good info, thanks.

With the correction factor, that brings my par up to 250 and 335 roughly. The spread is really even, and doesn't change much even up through the levels of the tank because of how wide the reflectors are. I guess thats good and bad, hopefully mostly good.



Sent from my VS988 using Tapatalk

 

[jda]

Stock away. You are going to be able to keep almost anything and have it thrive. I do have a few acros that like PAR up over 500, but they still will grow and look pretty good at 350.

Some of the best acros are the deepwaters (lokani, loripes, granulosa, cardus (dragons), echinata, etc.) that would love a steady diet of 200-300.