T5 lighting question...

[parker002]

I have a Coralife 48" HO T5 fixture that uses 54W bulbs. It came with two 10000K lamps and one of them burnt out the other day. Carl had previously recommended replacing the 10000K bulbs with 6500K bulbs or something close. I was going to replace both lamps with the Coralife 6700K HO bulbs but couldn't find the time to get to a place that sells Coralife, I'm just too busy right now.

The only place that I could make it to sells Zoo Med. In my original Aqueon T8 setup, I replaced the original bulbs with Zoo Med 5400K T8s and I had very good luck with them lasting a long time. So I decided to go ahead with it.

When I got there, they only had 1 Zoo Med 6500K bulb that was 48" HO 54W. I noticed that right next to that they had a Zoo Med "Flora Sun" bulb that was only 5000K but said it was specifically designed for "max plant growth".

I compared the spectral graphs on both boxes - here's what they look like. The 5000K is on the left and the 6500K on the right:



After looking at that, I went with the 5000K bulb, mainly because it has light output above 650nm that the 6500K bulb simply doesn't have. I remembered reading in Carl's planted tank article that yellow/green light is wasted so the output in the orange/red spectrum seemed like a plus.

I am also combining it with a 10000K lamp, so I thought it would be more complimentary. Particularly in that the 10000K will penetrate all the way to the bottom of my tank so having a super bright 2nd bulb wasn't needed - I could afford to sacrifice brightness. Also, I have been having problems with my plants growing "out" instead of up, largely I think due to having 108W of 10000K T5 HO lighting (combined with two 15W T8s which I have removed.

So I guess my question is did I make the right choice? From an aesthetic standpoint, I'm extremely happy. The combination of the bright white of the original 10000K and the reddish glow of the 5000K is really cool and makes my plants and fish really look great. I just am not sure if I made the right decision for the long term health of my plants...

[Carl]

This will probably work as a compliment to your 10,000k lamps, however I am rather suspicious of their graphs since 5000k lamps just by the common interpretation of 5000k are a more softer light with more greens and yellows and generally are a much more poor PAR light (See Aquarium Lighting Nanometers & PAR).
I have a graph in this article in the nanometer section that shows a typical 5500k light which should be similar to what you purchased.

That said, as with higher end LEDs and even T2s, not all 6500K, 10,000k lights are created equal and many can achieve this 5000K via different nm spikes (just as 5+5 and 2+8 both = 10), so your ZooMed lights may be a lower kelvin temperature light that achieves the correct nm near infrared spikes and without the wasted green/yellow. If so. this would be news to me and I just learned something new as per their lighting. But I am still rather questioning of their graphs since it is different from others

Carl

[parker002]

Looking around, it seems ZooMed isn't the only one. I found 3 or 4 companies marketing "max growth" 54W T5 bulbs and they all have a reddish glow to them.

How would one go about validating I wonder?

[parker002]

Not that forum anecdotes are totally scientific or anything but I'm finding via Google that there's a few people using these Zoo Med lamps (or Giesemann Aqua Flora, which are apparently similar but Gieseman doesn't publish a K rating for the Aqua Flora bulb) and are reporting much better plant growth, especially when combined with 6500K lamps.

Interestingly enough, in with the (mostly) favorable reviews, I found this forum post about the Giesemann bulbs:

But something I was going to say earlier, I bet the reason the Aquaflora are not listed a K rating is because their spectrum deviates to much and doesnt correspond to a K value, much like many plant bulbs that have a different balanced spectra compared to daylights.

I also found a lot of references to these kinds of "plant growth" bulbs alongside mentions of "roseate" bulbs which apparently operate primarily in the 620nm range and are the red equivalent of blue actinic and 420nm bulbs.

Is this just new science? Or snake oil?

[Carl]

I had a conversation with the Lighting expert at Quality Marine and he had a good point that many terrestial plant lights also have more "red" and are often under 5500k, however although a green plant is a green plant whether under water or above water; plants that grow under water must adapt to the FACT that red light is quickly filtered out, thus higher kelvin lights much be used in water much deeper than 6-12 inches.

So while this is not snake oil, these lights are not taking into consideration the effect water has on "red" light energy. The end result is in shallow tanks that only have these lights (or for plants near the surface), there should not be a problem, but in deeper tanks without other higher kelvin lights the results cannot be as good.

This is information I need to add the Lighting Article.

Carl

[parker002]

So you did learn something?

What you said above is particularly important to me - I actually think I made the RIGHT decision here.

I have a 10K bulb, which should give me the penetration I want at the bottom of my tank. But more importantly, I only have one instead of TWO now, so this should hopefully encourage my crypts, for example, to grow UP instead of OUT.

Furthermore, since the 5000K bulb doesn't penetrate as far, it will hopefully coax a bit more height out of my swords, ludwigia, and hygro.

EDIT: Due to logistics of cleaning, feeding, etc. I moved the 14G tank to the living room, right next to the 55G. I now know what the big difference is between the two - by tank is CONSIDERABLY brighter than hers in terms of light. Yet her plants look much more lush and full.

[Carl]

Sept 12, 2011 11:46:33 GMT -5 parker002 said:

So you did learn something?

YES

What you said above is particularly important to me - I actually think I made the RIGHT decision here.

I have a 10K bulb, which should give me the penetration I want at the bottom of my tank. But more importantly, I only have one instead of TWO now, so this should hopefully encourage my crypts, for example, to grow UP instead of OUT.

Furthermore, since the 5000K bulb doesn't penetrate as far, it will hopefully coax a bit more height out of my swords, ludwigia, and hygro.

EDIT: Due to logistics of cleaning, feeding, etc. I moved the 14G tank to the living room, right next to the 55G. I now know what the big difference is between the two - by tank is CONSIDERABLY brighter than hers in terms of light. Yet her plants look much more lush and full.

What are her lights?

Carl

[parker002]

www.walmart.com/ip/Lights-of-America-10-Watt-Mini-Fluorescent-Aquarium-Bulb-1-ct/10448675

[Carl]

I could not tell if these were 6500k or other daylight bulbs, but generally speaking these little power compacts are pretty good for light output.

I personally have similar 15 watt versions that put out quite a bit of light for the wattage used, although not as much as T2s

Carl

[parker002]

I did identify one other potential difference - my tank has a UV sterilizer. There seems to be quite a bit of evidence out there (some scientific, some anecdotal, some a bit of both) that 24x7 UV use breaks down chelated iron.

This would not only explain why her plants have less yellowing than mine, it would also explain the cloudy water I get in the few hours after dosing my tank. This idea is further reinforced by the fact that my water was cloudier when using Seachem Iron vs the Plantex CSM+B I'm using now (and reports say that gluconate is much more vulnerable to UV than EDTA).

[parker002]

Of course, one of the most well-known names in planted tank chemistry says he uses UV (not 24x7) and doesn't have any issues with iron chelates.

[Carl]

While much of my information as top specific is observational (& thus somewhat anecdotal), I would agree to EDTA (Chelated) Iron or Copper for that matter not being that sensitive to UVC while gluconates are (as in SeaChem)

That said, I have found very little need to dose iron other than general purpose root tabs over the years and have had lush growths in many tanks.
I have found lighting and CO2 (or lack there of) often more the issue.

Keep in mind brightness of light does not always mean better, that is what CRI is for and I note (in the Aquarium Lighting Article) this is not a parameter to measure and aquarium light by, only human lighting.

Of course, one of the most well-known names in planted tank chemistry says he uses UV (not 24x7) and doesn't have any issues with iron chelates.

Although this can be looked at as an observation as well, but I am curious as to how long he/she runs his/her UV.

There was one plant guru I used to follow (I had a friend who was a member of his exclusive club that sent me information to read since I was not a member), then I was blown away one day with his total off the cuff remarks and highly inaccurate (& downright inflamatory) about aquarium Redox, despite the plethora of real research to the contrary. Later after noting this to another friend in the industry, I found that he was a very UN-humble person that stumbled more on his guru status by serendipity rather than hard core research.
My point in this story is to be wary of some of these plant, reef, or other anointed gurus when it comes to subjects such as UV Sterilization and Redox.

The bottom line is I would certainly not write off the iron/UV possibility, I have serious doubts, especially since you are NOT using a glucanate.


Carl

[parker002]

If you want to exchange PMs to find out who I'm talking about, that's fine - I'm not gonna mention any names, especially when they also have message boards that (kind of) compete with this one.

From what I can gather, he runs his UV after water changes and when adding new plants or fish but he otherwise leaves it off. I also gather from his other posts on his message board that he seems to be pretty down to earth but that's probably not a perfect gauge as to a person's real character.

My plants really reacted well to doing the PPS Pro method (macro nutrient mix with Plantex CSM+B for trace) especially in my daughter's tank.

That being said, several of my plants are already showing interesting reactions to the new 5000K lamp. My crypts in particular used to grow most of their leaves horizontally, parallel to the substrate. The bigger ones as of this morning are assuming an inverted cone shape with several large leaves now perpendicular to the bottom.

[Carl]

Probably not the same person, but I would disagree with such a schedule since part of the reason for UV Sterilization is Redox Balance, which can benefit all life, not just fish.

Your plant results make sense as lamps that product primarily red lights are going to force a plant straight up, and since you are more balanced with your 10,000, this should work quite well.

BTW; although I have never used the PPS Pro method (& similar), I know of others that have with good results too. That said I have had good results with more basic methods that includes partial following of the German Method, good lighting, and adequate CO2 (from a variety of methods)

Carl

[parker002]

I like the PPS Pro method because it's simple for someone like me who has trouble remembering things. Dosing is done every day for both solutions (macro and trace) whereas with Flourish, one formula is every 2 days and others are every 3 days - I needed a calculator to keep track of my dosing!

Also, the PPS Pro (as well as any other method using dry ferts) is just so much cheaper over the long haul...

[Carl]

The others I know have made it rather complicated with mixing of their own doses, etc, so making it uncomplicated is great IMHO!

What I did for dosing in the past (besides simple Root Tabs), was to add Flourish and Excel to a container with mostly water (usually a pop bottle) and add an air line with a control valve and then drip this solution into the aquarium over a week or more time.
for me this took almost no time other than some initial set up and while this was/is far from any professional/advanced method, it worked reasonably well as for results.

Carl

[parker002]

I don't know if it's the CO2 (haven't used it for several days), the ferts (haven't used them for even longer), or this new 5000K lamp but my Ludwigia (no longer leaning since I moved them, btw) are getting redder by the day. Some of them are almost PINK.

[Carl]

I think this further confirms this comment you made earlier in the thread:

What you said above is particularly important to me - I actually think I made the RIGHT decision here.

These red spike are definitely helping to balance the lack of red in a 10,000K light (especially in a a more shallow tank under 15 inches in depth)

Carl

[parker002]

Yeah, I bet you're right. Even though my tank is 20" deep, the smaller plants aren't doing this to near the extent that the tall ones near the surface are...