shorter photo period = faster growth

[Obi-dad]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14532217#post14532217 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by mrpenguin
What do you think of running 2 pure Actinic for 2 hours before and 2 hours before and after the 4 main bulbs come on for 6 hours.

So 6 hours with 6 bulbs on a 75G and 10 hours in total with the pure Actinic ??

Would running pure Actinic defeat the purpose of the shorter photo period ?

I recommend trying that and waiting for at least a month before deciding to change, as it takes a while before color changes happen.

I think because there are so many factors involved (water clarity, feeding, light fixtures with varying amount of light entering the water, etc) that there is no good 'rule' of photoperiod length. Each should try one thing, wait a good amount of time to determine effect, then try varying it, and wait again. I think different photoperiods will work for different tanks.

Mine likes less photoperiod, and was not because of jumping on a fad, it was from last summer when I reduced the photoperiod due to heat in my office - and at the end of the summer realized the colors were better. Am I positive it was only the photoperiod? No, but I think that was the only major change.

 

[RockyMtnReef]

That is escentially what I do. I think it creates a nice dusk/dawn effect. My actinics come on about 2 hrs before the MH come on. They both stay on together for 5 hrs and then the MH shut off and the actinics run another hour.

 

[mrpenguin]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14532382#post14532382 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by RockyMtnReef
That is escentially what I do. I think it creates a nice dusk/dawn effect. My actinics come on about 2 hrs before the MH come on. They both stay on together for 5 hrs and then the MH shut off and the actinics run another hour.

Thats what I am trying to create, a more natural dusk/dawn effect for the fish and corals ... not just all of a sudden 12pm sun on them and then gone again.

 

[RockyMtnReef]

I think it works quite well. Plus when the MH shut off I know that I need to get off the chair I have in front of the tank and go to bed

 

[bebereef]

Can't have a better reminder :rollface: :rollface:

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14533129#post14533129 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by RockyMtnReef
I think it works quite well. Plus when the MH shut off I know that I need to get off the chair I have in front of the tank and go to bed

 

[Ace1]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14527520#post14527520 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by RockyMtnReef
I tried shortening my cycle (now 8 hrs Actinic/5 hrs MH) and have been pleased with the results as well. I was giving this some thought after reading this thread and here is my take. Note this is purely "nonscientific" mind you. I have two kids and when they are going through a growth spurt I can always tell because they sleep like the dead. It seems that for kids anyway they grow in their sleep, not when they are awake and running around. I am wondering if corals are the same way? They gather the energy they need when the lights are on but the actual growth takes place when the lights are off. It makes sense then that as long as they are getting enough light to store up that energy that more time in darkness would give them more time for actual growth.

Like I said. Purely unscientific but I figured I would throw it out there.

seems to make sense to me, i dont think scietific knowledge is necessary correct knowledge, i believe in personal truth based on experience is the relative truth

 

[mrpenguin]

I think I seen on the National Geographic Blue Planet DVD's about coral reefs and they showed that most growth on corals takes place at night.

Hey, even bodybuilders dont grow in the gym, their muscles get bigger at night when they sleep when the tissue repairs itself and get bigger and stronger..

 

[IndyReefMan]

For those noting increased coral growth with decreasing photoperiod, have you seen any differences in the rate of alkalinity depletion in your systems? One would expect to see an increased rate of alkalinity depletion with decreasing photoperiod if there has been increased growth. Yet, I've seen the exact opposite. As I have decreased photoperiod, I have had to turn down the two-part dosing rate on my LiterMeterIII. Yet, I have seen just as much growth (if not more) since decreasing my photoperiod (Decreased T-5 Actinics from 12 hr to 10 hr and decreased MH from 8 hr to 5.5 hr). This isn't what I expected to see.

 

[ReefEnabler]

maybe that has something to do with some other alk user, like coraline algae. there are alot of factors to consider so it may not be as simple as correlating coral growth with alk.

 

[hdesai123]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14527520#post14527520 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by RockyMtnReef
I tried shortening my cycle (now 8 hrs Actinic/5 hrs MH) and have been pleased with the results as well. I was giving this some thought after reading this thread and here is my take. Note this is purely "nonscientific" mind you. I have two kids and when they are going through a growth spurt I can always tell because they sleep like the dead. It seems that for kids anyway they grow in their sleep, not when they are awake and running around. I am wondering if corals are the same way? They gather the energy they need when the lights are on but the actual growth takes place when the lights are off. It makes sense then that as long as they are getting enough light to store up that energy that more time in darkness would give them more time for actual growth.

Like I said. Purely unscientific but I figured I would throw it out there.

I was thinking along the same lines and therefore I started dosing Calcium and Alk (can't afford a calcium reactor so dose B-ionic 2 part) at night before I go to bed. If the actual growth occurs at night than the addition of calcium and alk will help in their growth. I will see what happens.

 

[Laurier]

interesting thread. i have noticed my t5's bleaching out my frags lately so i will have to give this a shout. As of tomorrow i will be on the 8 hours of 2 bulbs and the other 6 for 5 hours

 

[gaetanocallista]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14508710#post14508710 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Ace1
more thoughts regarding the 24 hour photoperiod for better brightness

on land if there is too much sunlight higher evolved plant and vegetation life suffer from what is called a DROUGHT, of course seeds and many things still survive this period but it is generally a stressful time for most species of animal and plant life.
Could this be true on the reefs? It would seems so as many evolved life forms would have to adjust to heat, UV overexposure, many corals may not have a chance to HUNT at night etc
Also the reefs could experience Algae blooms of plague proportions causing less evolved life forms and many single celled organism to dominate..

Based on this view of how Nature has performed in the past it would seem like a 24 hour photoperoid would be better followed by a 24-48 hour dark day.. Could this be the other part of these reefers secret?

Other than that a 24 hour photoperiod seems very primative and synthetic when viewed from a Purely Natural perspective.

**note**
im not at all advanced in the chemistry or scientific aspect of all this so i could be missing many pieces to the puzzle, my logic come simply from viewing and comparing things to what Nature has shown us in the past and continues to show us everyday.

Yes, 24 hours of dark.
No problems with corals. Obviously this is possible one time only before photograph. The sps lost zooxantelle and are more bright and colored

 

[Todd March]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14547432#post14547432 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Laurier
interesting thread. i have noticed my t5's bleaching out my frags lately so i will have to give this a shout. As of tomorrow i will be on the 8 hours of 2 bulbs and the other 6 for 5 hours

What bulbs are you running? Chances are you are running equal white to blue tubes, or more white than blue...?

 

[kmacartney]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14547432#post14547432 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Laurier
interesting thread. i have noticed my t5's bleaching out my frags lately so i will have to give this a shout. As of tomorrow i will be on the 8 hours of 2 bulbs and the other 6 for 5 hours

I have had the same problem.

 

[MarcoPolo]

can I ask a dumb question? everyone is speaking abt number of hours/day? What abt height - I mean, height Vs. water level. I keep my MH 25 cm (~10 inch) above water level. Is that good, too high or too low? Will a few inches higher or lower make a big difference?

 

[mr_anderson]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14551051#post14551051 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by MarcoPolo
can I ask a dumb question? everyone is speaking abt number of hours/day? What abt height - I mean, height Vs. water level. I keep my MH 25 cm (~10 inch) above water level. Is that good, too high or too low? Will a few inches higher or lower make a big difference?

No questions for you! Reefcentral is not a place to ask questions....everyone on this website should already know everything. Jk... before we can help you, you should tell us what typy of reflectors you are using. that makes a lot of difference.

 

[aurora]

Marco,

Most of us want the bulb as close as safely possible. However, if you have a wider tank, a higher bulb will give more light spread but less intensity. I guess it's a matter of preference.

10" above the water is a good distance regardless of reflector. The distance from the water depend alot on your tank. If you have quite a bit of turbulence at the top, you don't want it too close that water can splash and hit the bulb since that can cause the bulb to shatter. However, you can get microsplashes that over time will leave a slight salt residue on the bulb. The best distance is where your bulb barely gets salt residue from microsplash and also give you room to work with above the tank and provide good light spread for even tank lighting.

 

[mr_anderson]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14554652#post14554652 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by aurora
Marco,

10" above the water is a good distance regardless of reflector.

I disagree. If he is using lumenarc or lumenbright reflectors, having the bulb 10" from the water surface is way too close.

but we're not here to talk about reflectors now are we. lets get back on subject and talk about the mater at hand.

 

[MarcoPolo]

I have a Giesemann Infiniti light system . This is what the web site says abt reflectors

"With wide, deep positioned reflectors, the INFINITI has excellent antiglare properties, making it an ideal light to be viewed from any position. The maximum light performance is achieved by the use of the latest reflector technology. The combination of a high gloss finished reflector of 99.8% purest aluminium with CAD-designed light distribution gives the ultimate in reflectance and is revolutionary in the illumination of aquariums."

thus is 10" is too close to water surface?

I am getting water splashes so will probably need to raise height any way

thanks for helping me

 

[macreefster]

i have finally settled on a light cycle that seems to work for me. 7-9 am moonlights, 9-11 am actinics only, 11am - 5pm halides only, 5-7pm actinics only and 7-9 pm moonlights. after a couple of weeks i have notices more PE during the day, but not appreciable as i already had good PE. other than i havent noticed anything more other than a smaller electrical bill, which works for me! its only been a couple of weeks, so i didnt expect any color changes yet. am going to start taking weekly pics to document and share the changes. pics coming soon.