Kessil A160WE or Radion XR15w Pro?
- Thread starter Swaefa
- Start date
- Tagged users None
radion.
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2007
- Messages
- 6,381
- Reaction score
- 4,853
- Location
- Waukesha, Wi
- What state or country do you live in
- Wisconsin
You going sps? if so I would go Kessil. If not it really does not matter most leds would be fine and actually on a small tank I would look at the AI prime.
Kessil dive a little more into the UV spectrum actually below 400nm which is better for shallow water sps coloration.. It is what is missing form most led fixtures.
Kessil dive a little more into the UV spectrum actually below 400nm which is better for shallow water sps coloration.. It is what is missing form most led fixtures.
Kungpaoshizi
Valuable Member
The programmable aspect of the radions is still what keeps my attention, despite the price.
I was big on adding UV (one reason to get the Pro) but at the same time, we do not see the <400 UVA. But there is a lot of conjecture as to if <400 is good or bad. In several studies it's been speculated if lower than 400 can lead to coral bleaching. Others have observed even UVA (the least damaging) has inhibited larval settlements. Still a lot of speculation, but the fact corals protect themselves from it by various mechanisms makes me wonder if it's necessary, or just a stressor. Reduction of growth has been recorded as well.
Since <400 is not a visible spectrum, it won't have any effect on luminescence. (as far as we can see)
Couple fun reads here..
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v365/n6449/abs/365836a0.html
http://www.aquarium-design.com/reef/uvlighting.html
http://www.osti.gov/scitech/biblio/6617070
(full text of the above in pdf)
http://scholarspace.manoa.hawaii.edu/handle/10125/16330
Though at the same time, AA did a writeup too, in which "The UV-A LED produced no visual response on coral host coloration and zooxanthellae." Again suggesting that perhaps only species specific reactions may occur in the inclusion or absence of UVA.
http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2003/11/aafeature
I was big on adding UV (one reason to get the Pro) but at the same time, we do not see the <400 UVA. But there is a lot of conjecture as to if <400 is good or bad. In several studies it's been speculated if lower than 400 can lead to coral bleaching. Others have observed even UVA (the least damaging) has inhibited larval settlements. Still a lot of speculation, but the fact corals protect themselves from it by various mechanisms makes me wonder if it's necessary, or just a stressor. Reduction of growth has been recorded as well.
Since <400 is not a visible spectrum, it won't have any effect on luminescence. (as far as we can see)
Couple fun reads here..
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v365/n6449/abs/365836a0.html
http://www.aquarium-design.com/reef/uvlighting.html
http://www.osti.gov/scitech/biblio/6617070
(full text of the above in pdf)
http://scholarspace.manoa.hawaii.edu/handle/10125/16330
Though at the same time, AA did a writeup too, in which "The UV-A LED produced no visual response on coral host coloration and zooxanthellae." Again suggesting that perhaps only species specific reactions may occur in the inclusion or absence of UVA.
http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2003/11/aafeature
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2007
- Messages
- 6,381
- Reaction score
- 4,853
- Location
- Waukesha, Wi
- What state or country do you live in
- Wisconsin
UV would be detrimental to Zooxanthellae. It has been proven that shallow water corals use different color proteins to absorb UV and protect themselves from UV. Matter of fact Dana Riddle has done a few studies and has changed his stance since the article quoted above. Allot of the colors in corals are produced by proteins and pigments meant to protect the corals from spectrum they do not need or want and also to change or enhance the colors they need. It is one of the reasons certain corals can grow at greater depths and others cant grow in shallow water. Some corals UV can be bad while others they can bake in it.
People tend to focus on spectrum that is best for photosynthesis but it goes way deeper than that with corals since they are really not plants, They are farmers really.
People tend to focus on spectrum that is best for photosynthesis but it goes way deeper than that with corals since they are really not plants, They are farmers really.
Last edited:
Salty1962
Wrasse and SPS Lover
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2015
- Messages
- 8,484
- Reaction score
- 7,744
- Location
- Charlotte, NC
- What state or country do you live in
- North Carolina
Get the flexibility and par of the radion. I put a XR30W over my frag tank and "WOW", what a difference from the Maxspect R430 nano I had on there before. The Maxspect is for sale now
Kungpaoshizi
Valuable Member
Sorry, I know it's off topic, but do you have a reference to a list which shows which corals have beneficial effects and which have negative effects from UVA? That would be awesome to do tanks according to each...
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2007
- Messages
- 6,381
- Reaction score
- 4,853
- Location
- Waukesha, Wi
- What state or country do you live in
- Wisconsin
Sorry, I know it's off topic, but do you have a reference to a list which shows which corals have beneficial effects and which have negative effects from UVA? That would be awesome to do tanks according to each...
No But I believe Dana has a article on which some proteins do which.. I doubt anyone would ever test which corals, most sps can not even be identified by the hobby so a list would be really useless.
It is hard to find data on even what zone or even part of the world a coral comes from.
Corals of the world is probably the most complete book I even know of.
Under 400 nm there is very little data period. But you know corals have to have some mechanism to protect from UV or they would be destroyed.
Most of this data probably wont be available to the hobby much either.
Even here they do not test for under 400 nm
http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2013/11/aafeature
Allot feel the big difference why led still does not produce as good of colors as halides and T-5 in some coral is lack of UV spectrum. That is why so many led fixtures try to focus on UV as such a popular advertisement on led fixtures. Problem is most advertise UV but not much less than 400. It is why so many of the newer fixtures are now including UV: Semi LEDs it is as close as you get that is readily available and still affordable. There are Sub 400 nm leds now available but they cost more than a fixture from what I understand. Kessil has got a little lower than 400nm because they actually make their own leds and do not rely on commercially available leds.
Last edited:
Kungpaoshizi
Valuable Member
Ya that's the kicker.. Until we can figure out methods of identification, it's a crap shoot.. heh
I wonder what type of genetic markers they'll find and their relation to growth/coloration styles.. I've often wondered if some corals sold are in an induced state by some tweak of care, whether it's known to the seller or not.
It's times like this I wish I had several warehouses full of space and plumbed water/electrical.
I wonder what type of genetic markers they'll find and their relation to growth/coloration styles.. I've often wondered if some corals sold are in an induced state by some tweak of care, whether it's known to the seller or not.
It's times like this I wish I had several warehouses full of space and plumbed water/electrical.
Both work for me. I like the flexibility of radions. Even though I have 2 forms of color blindness, I notice the rainbow effect caused by having separate LEDs for each color on the radion. I like the point source of the kessil better. The Radions are my favorite overall.
