is 400w too much?

[wakesetter]

I have new customer who is having trouble with their pearl bubble and frogspawn. The water tests out nicely (ca 420, KH 10.5, NO3 <1pm, PO4 <.03ppm) but they are receding and dying back. I started with the tank recently (it has been up for a year) and these two corals are not improving. They are both about 10 inches under the water with a 400W 10K Venture right overhead. Is it possible that this is just too much light? I was considering just moving them down and seeing if they will improve. What do you think?

 

[Flipturn88]

That's definitely too much light without proper acclimation, IMO. I would recommend moving them down as you considered, or at least finding a shady ledge. The caves and ledges in my tank are filled with LPS - they don't like the 250W halide and thrive in the areas of lower light. HTH

 

[wakesetter]

the corals have been in there for quite a while, so I am not sure how they were acclimated. Either way, I think I will try moving them down and out to the sides and see if they inflate more.

 

[ONEMANBAND]

I have frogspawn at the bottom, middle, and top of my tank with 400W 10Ks does not seem to matter, mine seem to do best in medium flow areas of the tank. Flipturn I think you are putting a pretty general assumption out there about LPS only liking ledges and caves, I have over 800hrs scuba experience and can assure you that many corals considered to be soft and lps can be found right next to sps corals. I think the terms sps and lps are abused and should be abolished, what does a corals mouth size really tell you about?

 

[Flipturn88]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7030747#post7030747 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by ONEMANBAND
Flipturn I think you are putting a pretty general assumption out there about LPS only liking ledges and caves, I have over 800hrs scuba experience and can assure you that many corals considered to be soft and lps can be found right next to sps corals. I think the terms sps and lps are abused and should be abolished, what does a corals mouth size really tell you about?

I see you read this month's Reefkeeping.

That's definitely too much light without proper acclimation, IMO.

That's the key; all corals are subjected to being burned by intense light, regardless of their classification. I never said LPS couldn't live under intense light (especially corals in the wild, since most have grown in the particular location in which they are found), only that a lack of acclimation will cause problems.

 

[ONEMANBAND]

The caves and ledges in my tank are filled with LPS - they don't like the 250W halide and thrive in the areas of lower light. HTH
----I must be way off base, the noon sun in the tropics makes 400watt halides look like nitelights.


He said they were in the tank for a year, how is that not enough acclimation?

 

[Flipturn88]

If they are never properly acclimated, oftentimes the corals will not acclimate themselves; this can be seen with SPS bleaching and LPS receeding (although both problems are not always caused by lighting shock, as we know). Granted each situation is different, depending on the individual specimen, lighting, etc., but such has certainly been the case in past experiences.

I haven't acclimated most of my LPS to the more intense part of my lighting, but I'm confident they would do well if I did. On the other hand, I have seen people lose corals who did not take the time to properly acclimate them, and it is often a slow process. HTH

 

[Flipturn88]

Another factor to consider is the presenece of any "leather" corals (Sarcophyton, Sinulara, etc. species) in the tank; they are known for producing an intense amount of toxins that can stress neighboring coral, and LPS are often the first victims. Running carbon can help - but not always solve - the situation.

 

[ONEMANBAND]

All good points flipturn, Sorry if my postings seem rude , I type pretty fast and sometimes forget my manners. I was just pointing out to look at flow as a possible problem vs. lighting. All your points are obviously based upon solid foundations, I just do not think that the 400watts is the main problem due to corals being in the tank for a year.

 

[Flipturn88]

Hey, no problem! I certainly don't have it all down, and this hobby can be very subjective at times. Learning from others' experiences is very important to me, so I certainly appreciate your opinion.

Please let us know how the sitation goes, wakesetter.

 

[Crusty Old Shellback]

Just my 2 cents here. The 400's may be too much. I do have a 7+ year old bubble that I mved from a tank with 175 W Mh to a deeper tank with 400W DE MH bulbs. I did place him at the bottom of a 3' tall tank and he didn't have any problems acclimating to the higher light level.

I also ahve a 5+ year old Frogspawn that was in the same tank w/ 175W Mh and was right below the surface. I did notice that he was a bit closed up from his state that he was when on the bottom of the tank. I moved him back down as I had to adjust some of the corals for better growout areas and he opened back up shortly there after.

On a side note, the 175W Mh was a XM 10K and the 400W Mh was a Hamilton 14K. The 175 W tank also has 220 W PC atinic where as the 400W tank has no atinic on when the MH is on.

I also have leathers in these tanks, close to the LPS and they do not seem to bother each other. All of my corals are almost always fully open. There are some older pics of the 175W Mh tank in my gallery.

 

[gflat65]

Another thing to consider is whether or not the bulbs were just replaced. I may be a bit anal on bulb replacement (HQI's every 12 months, SE's every 9 and VHO's/PC's every 6), but I still have to acclimate the corals to the new lights. Several of my LPS cannot handle the 250DE's, even after careful acclimation and seven months of being used to it. A number of them are fine with it, but I even lost a few due to the lighting change.

I probably shouldn't mention this without an article to back it up, but I think remember reading that someone had tested par levels in the ocean and it showed that we tend to do overkill in our tanks. 400W of light over 24" of water can be a bit more intense than sunlight over a 30-40' reef. I've seen LPS from all levels of depth, too, but primarily, the larger colonies (esp. plating types) I see lower or on ledges and caves in the Caribbean (except brains, they are everywhere). Now, I haven't done the Pacific yet, so I haven't seen too many different sps, so it may be a bit different out there. You don't typically see too many sps on ledges and overhangs, though...

 

[gflat65]

well, I've searched and searched and can't find the article, I thought IO read over a year ago... I did find some other PAR measurements in tanks, not done by Sanjay that show much more than twice the levels he shows on most of his bulbs at varying levels in multiple tanks, so I am now confused. One thing I did find (and should have not needed pointing out to me) is that a coral on the reef is not subjected to a constant barage of light like they are in the tank (lighting varys as the sun moves, where most people don't incorporate tracks that their MH travel to change positioning on reef tanks). I did find an article that mentioned that photosynthesis was reduced dramatically by corals (A. aspera, specifically mentioned) at the brightest time of the day, as a response of the coral (not damage from too much light). The photosynthesis returned to a much higher rate as the light intensity decreased. On another note, some of the best NSL users (like Tropicorium) are located in areas that get very little light, when compared to reef levels, but the depth of the tank is what makes the difference. Calfo points out in his Book of Coral Propagation that it is much more efficient economically to use NSL in northern areas due to the reduced need to cool in the summer time. He grew in Pittsburgh, which (as he stated in the book) was once rated the second rainiest city in the country).

I know I have derailed this thread, so for that I apologize. Since I've further confused the subject, I'll stick with my first response... Where the lights recently changed?

 

[wakesetter]

The lights are due for change right now. They are about 12-13 months old. There is also a cup coral that is not opening up. It is really frustrating. I am going to do weekly 30% water changes for three weeks and see if it helps. There are no soft corals in the tank. I do have many other tanks with softies and lps or stonies with no problems. Any other ideas?

 

[gflat65]

It may be in the lights age? I have had several corals show me when it is time to change bulbs... Be careful when adding new lights (acclimate the lights). You can either cut photoperiod or use screening. Increase photoperiod over a week or two, with an eye on the corals' reaction, or place several screens (window screen) over the tank and remove one every so often with a watchful eye on the corals. Hope that helps.

 

[Flipturn88]

What other coral are in the tank? How are they doing?

My first guess is still the lighting - unless they had been doing well in previous months.

 

[gflat65]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7041712#post7041712 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Flipturn88

My first guess is still the lighting - unless they had been doing well in previous months.

I'm thinking it could still be the light, if it is not giving them what they need (i.e., needing replacement). If the decline has just been over the last few weeks/month, that's what my suspicion would be. I know people run bulbs longer, but differences in manufacturing on the same brand (as well as difference in ballasts, etc.) could cause it to quit giving the requirements for photosynthesis (or dramatically reduce them). Like I mentioned, I've had corals show signs that the bulbs needed to be replaced by not looking so good in the past (which is why I am so anal about changing bulbs on a shorter time cycle now).

 

[TropTrea]

thios is very interesdting. Up to alst month I had a 75 gallon with 400W 14K coralvue bulbs. Plus 260W of Pc Actinics. I had gotten a frag of frogspawn about 6 months ago and it had grown fantasticly for me.

Personaly I think water flow and feeding are equaly as important as lighting.

Dennis

 

[wakesetter]

I really can't say if they have declined as the bulbs aged. I just started on the tank. I will replace them this week and see how they do. I am also going to do some water changes and start growing some chaeto in the sump. Hopefully they will come around.

 

[highland135]

I've only been in this for about 3 months but aquired a frag of frogspawn that was on the bottom of a tank under mh in a LFS. I have a 35 gal 22" tall and have it currently on the bottom of the tank under 130 Pc and it is doing nicely.