LED Lighting Question

BriGuyRN

New member
60 Gallon Setup, just put my first fish in today (4 Green Chromis)

My question is on lighting. I have an LED light system that I can switch from white/blue lights to just blue lights. Are the blue lights supposed to be left on at night to act as "moonlight", or should I turn all the lights off at night. Just want to make sure that I am using the lights correctly and that the fish are getting the right amount of darkness.
 
Fish don't really care, but to answer the question, don't keep lights on 24/7 . That's just begging for algae issues. Get a 8-12 hr schedule for the whites, and then put the moons on for a couple hours after that. Lighting is purely asthetic until you have coral.
 
In all my tanks I've had (this was before LEDs but with the same colors) I ran my whites on a 10 hour schedule with my blues on 2 hours before and after that period, and got great growth on everything. Of course, seeing as you aren't growing anything yet, as stingeragent said, fish don't care, so his suggestion is good. Fish don't 'need' light like coral do, so really just pick a nice convenient schedule that allows you to be able to view them when you want. When you get coral, if you do, that's when you need to be concerned.
 
And when you do get some corals, be sure to run the blue all the time you have the whites on. The photosynthesis that the zooxanthellae (algae) that lives inside the coral polyps helps fed the coral. And it does it's best photosynthesis with lots of blue and some violet spectrum.
 
Even in a FO tank, the colors with the blue lights on pop for me much more than just whites, why not run them both either way?
 
Taking it slow and doing fish only for now is a good approach. The old saying around aquariums is, "Nothing good happens fast in an aquarium!"
 
you may want to define what you mean by blue lights. Is it blue or actinics? Blue light is well within the useful light spectrum for coral, actinics not so much. In a FO tanks the white/blue light is just for illumination while actinics can add "pop" to the color of the fish.

Light that is in the spectrum for photosynthesis can contribute to algae growth.

Botton line in a FO tank is that you only need the lights on when you are looking at the tank.
 
you may want to define what you mean by blue lights. Is it blue or actinics?

Blue light is well within the useful light spectrum for coral, actinics not so much.
What???? What spectrum are blue leds? What spectrum are 'actinic' t5?

In a FO tanks the white/blue light is just for illumination while actinics can add "pop" to the color of the fish.
Blue leds and 'actinic' in t5 fluorescents are virtually the same thing.

Light that is in the spectrum for photosynthesis can contribute to algae growth.

Botton line in a FO tank is that you only need the lights on when you are looking at the tank.
Kind of true, but a puzzling answer.
 
Ron Reefman, Actinic bulbs peak at 420 nm which is in the violet/indigo range. Blue light is in the 440nm - 490nm range. The best blue has recently been shown to be in the 465nm - 485nm range (checkout the work of Carl Strohmeyer). So yes,there is a difference between the two.

If it is true, why is it so puzzling? the original question regarded how long to leave lights on for fish and it seems pretty straight forward that since the light in his situation was only used for illumination for viewing that the lights need not be on for any period when no one was looking... such as at night or during the day when no one was around.
 
Sorry, but I just don't see that much difference between violet (what you call actinic) and blue. And yes, actinic may 'peak' at 420nm, but they still cover a range that boarders on blue.

And as for your assertion that, "The best blue has recently been shown to be in the 465nm - 485nm range (checkout the work of Carl Strohmeyer)."
There are a lot of 'studies' that call out different spectrum and different PAR levels as being "the best" for corals. But it depends on what species of coral you are testing, where it comes from and how deep the water is. Some studies even say some true UV of less than 400nm and some red spectrum are important to some shallow coral's health. The only 'best' is if you are looking at an individual coral. I've read some of Strohmeyer's writings in the past. Give me a link to the recent study you refer to. I really would like to read it.
 
Last edited:
From the article, which is quite old by the way, just updated in 2015, he stats:

"Photosynthetic invertebrates (many corals, anemones, clams, nudibranch, etc.) also need more blue (400-490nm) than "higher" plants especially as tanks increase in depth, with 465-485 recently being shown the optimum blue. Not only is blue/actinic lighting beneficial to photosynthetic invertebrates, it is also aesthetically pleasing to the eye and the 420 nm blue in particular brings out the colors of many corals/clams."

He says all actinic (violet) and blue is useful and that 465nm to 485nm is the optimum blue. I think we can agree that saying it's the best isn't quite the same. I took your words as the one spectrum range you need. That's on my read and is my bad. And he doesn't give any study or examples as to why he says 465nm to 485nm is optimum, he just says that it is. I don't take that as very scientific. And in fact when I first found out about Strohmeyer and read some of what he had to say, my reaction was that it doesn't sound very based in his work but that he is just receipting what he has found from other people's research.

Like many reefers, I consider 400nm to 500nm to be very important to our corals and I wish that led fixture designers would make fixtures that don't need to be run with 50% to 100% more of the blue channel than they do the white channel. I run my DY at 40% white and 90% blue.
 
Back
Top