The minum PAR fos SPS

justed checked mine

justed checked mine

IMG_1282.jpg



I guess I'm screwed :eek2: (2) MH 250s
 
I have the stock lighting in my 29 gallon biocube and I have (albeit very minimal growth but good polyp extension) stylophora on my sandbed due to my crabs constantly dislodging them and they have full extension of the polyps good color (stock lighting sucks) and are actually growing minimally and thats under around 100 par MAYBE and thats probably pushing it for pc in the biocube.
 
Most of my sps are at 220-250 Par. Below is a pic

47a0df03b3127cce98548f2aa34100000035100AcMWTRm4YsmIg


The mad mans blue stag in the back is at about 150 par. It did okay, did not grow as fast.

Now in the new setup I have moved them higher.
 
Sprung really paved the way for modern reefkeeping. Nevertheless, like most pioneers, he was wrong about a lot of things... Most corals can't really use more than 300 PAR or so, although they may tolerate it. Using reef PAR values isn't the best way to determine what corals do best with. In reality, light adds stress and in our systems, there is a lot of stress to begin with, so, the added stress can be too much. For many of us, keeping PAR levels lower, i.e. closer to the photo-saturation point, tends to produce better results. Pristine tanks can handle a bit more, but, nevertheless, it's only doing more good up to a point.
 
considering par as only factor, 200 is sufficient to color up nicely and grow 90% of aquacultured acropora species
>200 High
100-199 Moderate
<100 Low
This is my experience with an apogee quantum par meter
 
Ive been growing sps for 18 months, and i still dont know jack about most all of it... but these initial PAR numbers are complete nonsense... the best numbers i get is mid to high 300's, and my growth is jus fine... though first post figures are nonsense...
 
Sprung really paved the way for modern reefkeeping. Nevertheless, like most pioneers, he was wrong about a lot of things... Most corals can't really use more than 300 PAR or so, although they may tolerate it. Using reef PAR values isn't the best way to determine what corals do best with. In reality, light adds stress and in our systems, there is a lot of stress to begin with, so, the added stress can be too much. For many of us, keeping PAR levels lower, i.e. closer to the photo-saturation point, tends to produce better results. Pristine tanks can handle a bit more, but, nevertheless, it's only doing more good up to a point.

That makes the utmost sense. I stumbled into this thread tonight, and has been quite the read. So my next question naturally would be- what is the photo-saturation, or the ideal saturation PAR for the different sps to not just survive, but to thrive with efficient PAR?
 
oh, and I forgot to ask..... so naturally.... it would be safe to assume maricultured species demand higher PAR than the aquacultured specimens, no? Would this be one of the major reasons attributing to the high death polls in the maricultured specimens? The inability to replicate the PAR ??
 
That makes the utmost sense. I stumbled into this thread tonight, and has been quite the read. So my next question naturally would be- what is the photo-saturation, or the ideal saturation PAR for the different sps to not just survive, but to thrive with efficient PAR?

This article discusses photosaturation/photoinhibition of some shallow water corals.

Also, you can get a rough idea for a range of corals from "table 1" at the bottom of the article:
http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2007/3/aafeature1

If your around the photosaturation point, you should be in good shape. A little higher may get you some more color, but once you start getting closer to photoinhbition, it's getting stressful. Most corals start to photosaturate less than about 350 PAR, some much less even. So, significantly higher than that, your wasting electricity and possibly unnecessarily stressing your corals.
 
Back
Top