SPS Photoperiod

[johnnstacy]

I have been reading about photoperiod for a couple of years now and I'm not sure there was ever a consensus. This to me is a bummer because you have some saying that 3 hours of MH is plenty and others saying that 12 hours is essential. While still others believe that a split photoperiod is the way to go.

I know there have been discussions and other threads about this but I haven't seen anything specific to sps tanks. I was hoping that I get get you guys to share what has been working for you and what hasn't in terms of light intensity and duration. If you could share the size of your tank, your lighting system and duration the lights are on that would be teriffic. I was hoping that perhaps with SPS folks that we would see more consistency towards a certain photoperiod. While all tanks are different, it seems to me that with a given wattage bulb and tank size and species type, that there would be a majority doing it a particular way.

For me, I jumped on the bandwagon about 9 months ago and started going with a 3 hour MH(250W DE 10K HQI) on and VHO's on 12 hours(160W, 3 blue and one white). I bought into the idea that corals can only use so much light in a day. Even though reefs around the world may be exposed to more light for a longer period, they can only absorb so much in a day. It made sense, kind of. I wasn't sure how you can scientifically determine when a coral stops absorbing light. In any case, I didn't see a major difference one way or the other in terms of growth and coloration which I guess makes an argument for a shorter period if the corals gain nothing form more then 3 hours of exposure. But again, my trial was not scientific. I didn't measure the size of my corals during 12 hours of MH versus 3 hours so I can't say for certain whether there was an effect or not. They did grow on 3 hours. This I know. But I would like to hear from all of you. If I consistently hear that people are getting better growth with 10 hours or more, then I think I would start lengthening my photoperiod.

John

 

[johnnstacy]

Oh shoot. And I forgot to add that there was another sect that said if you are bb, that you don't need as long a photoperiod either. Clearer water......I don't know....

 

[NewSchool04]

even if it's not scientific did your corals grow more, as much or less than before? You've got 9 months to compare it to the light schedule you were running before the change.

I'm curious to hear what you think.

 

[johnnstacy]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7955751#post7955751 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by NewSchool04
even if it's not scientific did your corals grow more, as much or less than before? You've got 9 months to compare it to the light schedule you were running before the change.

I'm curious to hear what you think.

Truthfully, I would have to say I saw no significant change either way. They still grew. No more or less then when I was running the MH for 10 hours a day. My main motivation for lowering my photoperiod had really nothing to do with growth. I was observing some bleaching and/or lightening of the colors and felt, like many others, that overexposure to light could have been a cause. As it turns out, I was probably wrong in that regard based on the discovery of a couple of things. First, I got so fanatical about this light issue, I sold off my 400W DE pendants and bought 250W. This was also due to the fact that I went from a 29" deep tank to a 20" deep tank. When I made that change, and ever since then, some of the corals turned unfavorable colors. Greens stayed the same but oranges and particularly blues and purples became....well....browner. The main discovery(which I'm sure for some was made a long time ago)was that there was a direct relationship between color and food. I overskim big time. Add carbon, phosban, and occasionally polyfilters, and shoot, it's a wonder anything survived in there. I tried the advice of someone about a coral recipe(that used to be on a sticky here on RC but can't find it now), and started feeding each night or every other night. It was an ugly mixture and smelled pretty bad also but man.....my corals really started looking better. Dare I say, healthy?
So, in summary, I really can't be dogmatic about the lighting thing because I was changing other things about the tank also during that time. That is why I would like to hear more input from others.

 

[marcusbigdady]

I went with 5 hrs on the display and 6 hrs on the sump/frag tank about 2 1/2 mths ago due to heat issues (summer time),I was lighting 10 hrs a day on both, i cut back 1 hr a day until i got 5 hrs, i watched very close the results of the light, with no ill effects as of yet no more or no less growth from SPS, but i think that the softies are not growing as much/fast,both are lit with 2-250 DE,nothing else has been change

Wtih the corals not using as much nutriance from the water, due to the lack of the lighting period,can we cut back on our water changes ??

 

[panic]

I run 3 mh for 10 hours - 6 hours each staggered by 2 hours from one side to the other. I could run them less but I like looking at the expensive little sticks that I have invested so much time and money in. I run bb too.