6500k T5 Bulbs - Important Spectrums Missing in LEDs?

[Bpb]

It’s strange but this in another area where US reefers appear to differ from the rest of the world, to see anyone with Mh in Europe/ Asia is very rare... T5 and LEDs dominate over here with T5 having a far higher amount of use than in the US. I’d be interested see what % of US reefers still use MH.

Probably a very minute percentage.

 

[ycnibrc]

Haha but can led grow tenius this fast. JF jolt in 1 year from rap 2018 and I have cut 5 frags.

 

[Reefahholic]

It’s strange but this in another area where US reefers appear to differ from the rest of the world, to see anyone with Mh in Europe/ Asia is very rare... T5 and LEDs dominate over here with T5 having a far higher amount of use than in the US. I’d be interested see what % of US reefers still use MH.

No doubt T5’s are popular in Europe. I love T5’s...always have. Even as unpopular that MH’s seem to be...the results speak for themselves.

 

[Mortie31]

No doubt T5’s are popular in Europe. I love T5’s...always have. Even as unpopular that MH’s seem to be...the results speak for themselves.

Ive never questioned the results you get with MH..

 

[Reefahholic]

Ive never questioned the results you get with MH..

Ohh ok maybe I misunderstood. I thought that’s what you were implying.

Mortie31 said:
Not being rude, but why?? Metal halides are the past, whilst I fully accept that LEDs are not perfect yet...

 

[Mortie31]

Ohh ok maybe I misunderstood. I thought that’s what you were implying.

Mortie31 said:
Not being rude, but why?? Metal halides are the past, whilst I fully accept that LEDs are not perfect yet...

I was implying that there the past that the future is LED/T5 , abit like V8, V10 and v12 car engines... they work unbelievably well but not for the future, so I was questioning why he was comparing an LED with a MH light as we know the Mh will most likely win, but times have changed for most reefers, and we’re having to compromise and i feel we need to be driving improvements in LEDs and to get manufacturers to be honest...

 

[Lasse]

Here is one article about how much this person save in his set up

Sincerely Lasse

 

[Lasse]

Haha but can led grow tenius this fast. JF jolt in 1 year from rap 2018 and I have cut 5 frags.

This picture below is interesting because it shows an Acropora that have been below MH/LED for 2 years and below only LED for the last 3 years. Most of the growth has been during the last 3 years (only LED) Notice the frag plugg

​

Sincerely Lasse

 

[Bpb]

This picture below is interesting because it shows an Acropora that have been below MH/LED for 2 years and below only LED for the last 3 years. Most of the growth has been during the last 3 years (only LED) Notice the frag plugg

​

Sincerely Lasse

What is it about the leds that you would give them the nod on better performance? Not talking about budget or cost of operation. But what about the spectral quality, intensity, and coverage do you believe is responsible to the improved results?

 

[ycnibrc]

This picture below is interesting because it shows an Acropora that have been below MH/LED for 2 years and below only LED for the last 3 years. Most of the growth has been during the last 3 years (only LED) Notice the frag plugg

​

Sincerely Lasse

There is no doubt that led can grow corals however the topic of this thread is led spectrum vs halide spectrum. With led it's very hard to tell how much each color intensity to give u the correct spectrum vs halide and t5 the bulb manefacture already preset the spectrum. The op suggest that led need more warm light and Amber led to complete the spectrum which orphek Atlantic have. I run my halide 4 hrs a day the spread that I have is equal to 2xradion g4 each radion is 190w so my halide vs radion wattage is the same. Heat I feel none putting my hand under the pendant I have a fan blow across so the myth of halide is hot and use more electricity is in the 90

 

[Lasse]

however the topic of this thread is led spectrum vs halide spectrum.

The title of this thread is "6500k T5 Bulbs - Important Spectrums Missing in LEDs?" Not if Halides give better growth or not. Th OP refer to the RGB trick of T5 bulbs. Some people start to discuss halides instead - showing pictures of superior growth. I only post one video and one picture of very good growth below LEDs. And if you look at the spectrum - a 6500 K white LED is more similar to the Halides spectra compared with "white" T5 bulbs that have three spectral tops.

What is it about the leds that you would give them the nod on better performance? Not talking about budget or cost of operation. But what about the spectral quality, intensity, and coverage do you believe is responsible to the improved results?

Photons are photons whatever they come from. However the proteins that catch the protons works optimal in certain energy levels - the catching is a quantum process. LED fixtures can be designed just to emit the needed energy quantum that you can express like this E = h*c/λ. The energy quanta of a photon is inversely proportional to the wavelength of a photon. If you know the energy quanta a certain protein need in order to catch energy for the photosynthetic process (and transform/transport the energy quanta to PS2 and further to PS1) you can tailor your LED array to do a maximum work with minimum energy input. However - today many manufactures work much with white phosphorous LED that IMO transfer the spectra of the LED to something like the metal Halides - the technique for white T5 bulbs does not do this - instead they use blue, green and red in order to create a "white light"

In my aquarium - I use a fixture that include RGB LEDs and I run my reds at 100%. It include 4500, 6500 and 8000 K LEDs too, I use them during "High Noon" and minus - plus 2 hours. The setup include greens too.

The large Acropora was grown under a combined type of LEDs including fixtures with much red and green (Green House LEDs) but also pure Blue/white fixtures.

In my home aquarium - I do not run white LEDs (or run them very low) during evenings but I still look at something that looks like a white aquarium. That´s because of my RGB chips that tricks my brain. It tricks my brain but does not dazzle weak light sources such as coral fluorescence as lumens strong white LEDs do. I get better colours too - even better reflected colours! I do not looks into a blue hell - it give the same favors to me as modern T5 bulbs. I have 9 channels to adjust in my fixture and have add a custom build far red fixture too.

It is not a surprise that LEDs will hurt corals at lower PAR than metal halide because the PAR definition cover all photons between 400 - 700 nm not the radiation that the photosynthesis can use. The LEDs will give more of its radiation in wavelengths that the zooxanthela can use compared with the MH. It gives more PUR.

Yes - MH is history sooner or later - its time is gone. The name is technical evolution and it is our luck that this exist. If it not have exist (technical evolution) I had to write down this message, get down to a telegraph station - they send it by morse to Grimmeton south of Gotenburg - they start the generators and send a LW message to New York and a telegram boy pick it up and deliver it to each of you.

Sincerely Lasse

 

[Lasse]

Here you can calculate you energy packets with help of the wavelength



Sincerely Lasse

 

[Bpb]

I appreciate the explanation, and I follow what you’re saying. I don’t mean this to sound rude at all, but it was a lot of words without a conclusion. Yes...photon energy and wavelength are inversely proportional. Yes led fixtures can be tailor made to have a higher PUR estimation than a gas guzzler which has a shotgun approach from 350 up past the 800’s (in trace amounts).
But that doesn’t answer the question. Just states facts that kind of dance around it. If a quality metal halide bulb, say one in the 10-14k range (or dare I say a 6500k high cri CMH) will possess the same wavelengths as a custom reef led arrangement, why is the led more effective. Photons of like wavelengths being equal. For instance. My 14000k bulbs produce every wavelength any led fixture used on a reef does. Why would the led yield better results, specifically speaking of growth.

 

[Lasse]

You must always compare output with input (growth and energy input). If - just as an example taken from the free air - a zooxanthella have its optimal uptake at 420, 450, 480 580, 620 and 660 nm and it optimal penetration at 530 nm - why should you use a light source that give nearly the same amount of photons in the span of 400 - 700 nm when you can concentrate on the important wavelengths? Either to have a higher effect or the same effect with lower energy input. Today we probably does not know all of the interesting energy quanta but that´s another question. We will know in the future.

In addition a MH turn around 24 % of the in going energy into light, A blue LED around 60 % and the phosphorous coated - around 35 %

Sincerely Lasse

 

[Bpb]

You must always compare output with input (growth and energy input). If - just as an example taken from the free air - a zooxanthella have its optimal uptake at 420, 450, 480 580, 620 and 660 nm and it optimal penetration at 530 nm - why should you use a light source that give nearly the same amount of photons in the span of 400 - 700 nm when you can concentrate on the important wavelengths? Either to have a higher effect or the same effect with lower energy input. Today we probably does not know all of the interesting energy quanta but that´s another question. we will know in the future.

Sincerely Lasse

Are you insinuating any wavelength outside of those narrow bands to be caustic and damaging?

 

[jda]

I have only seen five tanks in the EU (all in Germany) that had LED and they do not run them like people in the US do. They run all diodes for larger parts of the day like Lasse does and are not blue heavy until late in the day when they are being viewed, if at all.

Acropora grow faster as they grow - exponential. This is pretty much common with any light type where in the time that it takes to get to a baseball, you can get to a cantaloupe in the same time and then a watermelon thereafter.

Remember that there is more to coral color than just feeding zoox. There is just straight reflection and also sunscreen pigments created to fend off waves that the coral does not want. You need 350nm to about 850nm to get all of these to be as much as they can. Concentrating on just 400-700nm is why I have NEVER seen a LED lit acropora tank that would not have looked better under MH... they were good, but not as good as they could be with color (growth was mostly fine in non point souce applications). I have not seen too many mixed reefs where it made a huge difference, but I am only into acropora.

The human supposition that these animals wasted any wavelengths in nature just baffles me... or that humans, with our limited knowledge and brain capacity, are smarter than evolution. As always, I think that it is better to assume that all wavelengths are important until unequivocally proven otherwise. I have never seen any proof that wavelengths are not necessary and I share nearly all of the same thoughts that Lasse has with red, green (and probably yellow), but I also will extend this to some UV and IR as well... why stop at where a human eye can see when a coral does not have a human eye.

 

[Lasse]

Are you insinuating any wavelength outside of those narrow bands to be caustic and damaging?

No - but not so effective
But it was only an example - it must not be exactly those I wrote - instead I could wrote "a zooxanthella have its optimal uptake at a, b, c ,d, e and f nm and it optimal penetration at g nm "

Sincerely Lasse

 

[Lasse]

Evolution is not smart - it just happens as an result of environmental factors and our brain is also a part of the evolution.

Sincerely Lasse

 

[Bpb]

I hate to seem frustrated but I feel like my question has been avoided

 

[jda]

Lasse... please. You are inventing your own environment and not even trying to duplicate the environment that they left... even if it was inefficient (plenty will disagree with this and will argue that nothing is more efficient than evolved nature). Good news is that it will only take a few millennia for corals in captivity to evolve to this new, even less efficient human-created, environment.

You seem like a smart science based guy, so I'll bet that you are all about nature, evolution and the like when it fits your narrative.