Too much or too little light?

[Dana Riddle]

I looked at the specs on the SQ-420 sensor and as I suspected, it is the older model without enhanced response to the blue. Response to a LED producing light at 420 nm and below will be about 50% (much better if you're using 470nm LEDs.) It looks like the software allows one to toggle between 'air' and 'water' measurements (water measurements without a correction will be 8% higher than reported.) So, I suspect that your PAR measurements could be lower than actual. Now, with that said, I, too, bleached an orange capricornis when I left the light on in 'manual' mode. I have moved it to lower light and recovery is beginning. I suspect that at least some of the 'issues' reported about LEDs are actually due to misleading PPFD measurements.
On another note, I see you're in Atlanta.

 

[revhtree Verified Admin]

Off topic but I always struggle with what is and isn't enough light even though I have a PAR meter. I'm gonna beg @Dana Riddle to come north about an hour and help me dial my lights in soon and take him our to dinner! HA!

 

[madweazl]

March 31st last year, this little guy was receiving 106 PAR (Apogee MQ500 with full spectrum sensor and 1.32 immersion correction factored in) and had literally just come back from the dead (no visible living tissue or polyps but obviously had at least one).

This is when I started to toss out the beliefs that acroporas "needed" 250-350 PAR to survive and grow.

Now the same acro receives about 275 PAR (transitioned to an SPS dominant tank about six months ago). I really miss the green growing edge it used to have but learned that many of the "requirements" we believe exist, simply don't.

 

[Leyth]

I looked at the specs on the SQ-420 sensor and as I suspected, it is the older model without enhanced response to the blue. Response to a LED producing light at 420 nm and below will be about 50% (much better if you're using 470nm LEDs.) It looks like the software allows one to toggle between 'air' and 'water' measurements (water measurements without a correction will be 8% higher than reported.) So, I suspect that your PAR measurements could be lower than actual. Now, with that said, I, too, bleached an orange capricornis when I left the light on in 'manual' mode. I have moved it to lower light and recovery is beginning. I suspect that at least some of the 'issues' reported about LEDs are actually due to misleading PPFD measurements.
On another note, I see you're in Atlanta.

Yep, I'm in Atlanta. Wanna come over and fix this for me? haha

I've read through the responses on this thread and I just want to thank everyone for chiming in to help assist me. However, I am a rookie to this hobby. I'm trying my best, but some things are a little over my head. I've kept spread sheets of all my test results and my dosing schedules. I test some parameters every day and make sure I don't go more than 5 days without testing all parameters(except for phosphate as I didn't have a test for this but it's on the way).

If I can put together a common denominator of everyone's opinions in this thread, it seems like I should cut back on lighting and see how that effects the tank. Should I raise the fixture? Decrease the schedule lighting time? Both?

 

[Leyth]

Would a picture with labels of the type of coral and PAR ratings help before I do something like that actually? Like, I can label a FTS with the PAR ratings and the coral names with a tag that says whether they're thriving or not.

 

[madweazl]

Would a picture with labels of the type of coral and PAR ratings help before I do something like that actually? Like, I can label a FTS with the PAR ratings and the coral names with a tag that says whether they're thriving or not.

I think the information you provided in regard to PAR values is adequate without a map.

 

[Leyth]

I think the information you provided in regard to PAR values is adequate without a map.

Ok thanks. Am I understanding correctly that I should consider cutting back on lighting?

 

[madweazl]

Ok thanks. Am I understanding correctly that I should consider cutting back on lighting?

I believe the issues with your montis are related to light intensity. If you arent going to move them, yes. I also believe the best course of action is to move them to an area of lower light so that you can continue to provide the same intensity to the acroporas that are doing well in the same location (no sense in making changes that effect everything to correct an issue with a couple corals).

 

[Leyth]

I believe the issues with your montis are related to light intensity. If you arent going to move them, yes. I also believe the best course of action is to move them to an area of lower light so that you can continue to provide the same intensity to the acroporas that are doing well in the same location.

Ok thank you for your advice.

 

[A. grandis]

PAR data from one of Dana Riddle's posts (I cant find the original thread where he posted them for the link). Formatting was edited a bit to make it easier to read (hopefully I didn't goon up any values in the process).

Host -- Compensation -- Saturation -- Photoinhibition -- Depth

Acropora cervicornis ------ n/a --281 -- n/a -- 17m
Acropora cervicornis ------ n/a --331 -- n/a -- 17m
Acropora digitifera -------- 82 ---387 --n/a -- 1m
Acropora divaricata --- --- 10 ---77 ----n/a ---40m
Acropora formosa ---------170 --340 --n/a ---1m
Acropora gemmifera ------ 270 - 340 --n/a -- 1m
Acropora granulosa ------- 53 ---102 -- n/a --40m
Acropora microphthalma -n/a - 300 --n/a --n/a
Acropora millepora --------n/a - 190 -- n/a - <2m
Acropora millepora -------- n/a --230 --n/a - <2m
Acropora nobilis ------------n/a --310 -- n/a - <2m
Acropora nobilis ------------n/a --180 -- n/a - <2m
Anthopleura elegantissima -73 ---n/a ---n/a --n/a
Montipora capitata -------- n/a --135 ---250 - n/a
* Montipora danae --------- n/a --200 -- n/a - n/a
Montipora tuberculosa ---- n/a --180 -- n/a - <2m
Montipora tuberculosa ---- n/a --300 --n/a --<2m
Pavona varians ------------ n/a -- 110 --350 -- n/a
* Pavona/Leptastrea ------ n/a-- n/a-- 500 -- n/a
Pocillopora damicornis ----n/a -- 225 --n/a -- <2m
Pocillopora eydouxi --------n/a -- 323 --n/a -- n/a
Porites cylindrica ---------- n/a -- 200 - n/a -- n/a
Porites lobata ---------------n/a -- 250 - 350 -- n/a
Porites lutea ---------------- n/a -- 400 - 750 -- 1.5m
Sinularia densa ------------ n/a -~207 --n/a -- n/a
Stylophora pistillata ------ 40 ----200 - n/a -- n/a
Stylophora pistillata -------n/a ---300 - 600 --n/a
Tridacna maxima ----------n/a- >600 >1,900 n/a

* Monti danae "Superman"
* Pevona/Leptastria "Jack-O-Lantern"

That's a nice post. It shows us how diverse is the PAR number for the different depths.
One can obviously find same coral in many types of environment and depths. We need to remember that!
Also, the corals coming to the market aren't labeled by the depth they were collected, and adaptation to artificial light is a must.
Interesting post, nevertheless. Thanks for sharing.

Would be great if you could share the links when you find them.

Ps: The so called "Jack-O-Lantern" from Jason Fox is a Leptastrea sp., not Pavona sp. (you misspelled).

Grandis.

 

[teller]

One thing I learned from this thread is that the culprit for bubble algae and film algae at the back of the tank is LED's.....
....of course this was already "cirurgical" removed from initial posts!

 

[A. grandis]

March 31st last year, this little guy was receiving 106 PAR (Apogee MQ500 with full spectrum sensor and 1.32 immersion correction factored in) and had literally just come back from the dead (no visible living tissue or polyps but obviously had at least one).

This is when I started to toss out the beliefs that acroporas "needed" 250-350 PAR to survive and grow.

Now the same acro receives about 275 PAR (transitioned to an SPS dominant tank about six months ago). I really miss the green growing edge it used to have but learned that many of the "requirements" we believe exist, simply don't.

Adaptation, my dear, adaptation.
Nice pictures!!! Gotta love Acros!
Thanks very much for sharing!
Grandis.

 

[A. grandis]

One thing I learned from this thread is that the culprit for bubble algae and film algae at the back of the tank is LED's.....
....of course this was already "cirurgical" removed from initial posts!

LOL! Funny.
Grandis.

 

[A. grandis]

Off topic but I always struggle with what is and isn't enough light even though I have a PAR meter. I'm gonna beg @Dana Riddle to come north about an hour and help me dial my lights in soon and take him our to dinner! HA!

You must have LEDs to need such help.
Just kidding!
Grandis.

 

[Dana Riddle]

Raise the fixture to diminish light intensity. Altering photoperiod opens up a whole new can of worms.

 

[Dana Riddle]

Off topic but I always struggle with what is and isn't enough light even though I have a PAR meter. I'm gonna beg @Dana Riddle to come north about an hour and help me dial my lights in soon and take him our to dinner! HA!

I might be in Dalton in February....

 

[revhtree Verified Admin]

I might be in Dalton in February....

That is about 20min from me! Let’s meet up for food and you can come see my set up. Don’t expect much in the way of corals. I’m doing a whole new rock swap out tomorrow!

 

[A. grandis]

Raising the fixture won't actually SOLVE the problem. He will actually need to lower the fixture again after a while and if he doesn't change intensity settings it won't work. Lowering the intensity of those LEDs now will do part of the trick. Then if he wants to keep them he can add more intensity and suffer through the process learning his tank/LED relationship. If he remove the LEDs and put all T5s the problem will be solved immediately.
Ok, I think I said all I had to. ;Watching
Grandis.

 

[justingraham]

Raising the fixture won't actually SOLVE the problem. He will actually need to lower the fixture again after a while and if he doesn't change intensity settings it won't work. Lowering the intensity of those LEDs now will do part of the trick. Then if he wants to keep them he can add more intensity and suffer through the process learning his tank/LED relationship. If he remove the LEDs and put all T5s the problem will be solved immediately.
Ok, I think I said all I had to. ;Watching
Grandis.

So Dana riddle told the op what to do all of us what he would do in this situation but u and this led hatred u have on every light thread can’t let it go and tell the op to do something completely different.

Because U obviously have tons of scientific data to back this up like Dana does right? You have a lab obviously correct? Some published scientific data? A paper at least typed up in Microsoft word?

Op if it was me I would listen to Dana and I think the Monti is to high up lower that and I hope your Corals bounce back I know the feeling your going thru

 

[saltyfilmfolks]

That was MY suggestion. The easiest and safer of all IMO.
But that's only MY opinion, right?
You know... every time I suggest that to LED users they always come back thanking me forever.
I've never had a negative response from removing LEDs and replacing for T5s and / or halides, according to their needs.
But I did see loss of corals due to changing LED settings here and there, so that shows me there is also a risk.
Therefore my suggestions are aways to cut those LEDs from the equation... 100% happy with results at all times.
Hope you guys understand once for all my point when recommending such thing.
See... I have good friends that stays with the LEDs because they had an investment and don't want to go back to the T5s, but they are ways letting me know why such "this" and "that" is happening in their tanks... They are my friends and they aren't afraid to admit it. They aways say: "yeah, that's because of the LEDs" or " yeah, can't help that cause of the LEDs"...
I'm just exposing the truth of dealing with this LEDs. Until they find the right sweet setting for that particular system they will play a bit of Russian roulette with some touch of PAR numbers. Unless they turn the LEDs all the way low in intensity and go from there. But don't forget to keep the params perfectly at all times and specially know the lines of those water parameter values. Hope they can figure out and keep them very stable too. I'm not too worried about that for my system because I'be got my T5s.
Grandis.

Lol.

You should know this by now of course.
But it do often reccomend treating led just like t5 or any other source.
I see the greatest success with led tanks here that do that. As well as my own.