Actinic Blue Light

by **spongebob4460** » Wed Mar 12, 2008 11:40 pm

i know with my tank, i only see algae when i increase my lighting more than 6 hours... even with ammonia at 3ppm i dont see a drop of algae. It all depends, i would rather have a few hours of great looking lights, than many more hours of so-so looking lights. I dont know what my tank would look like with only daylight lights... so i have nothing to compare and i dont want to buy bulbs and be stuck if i dont like the look.

by **miami754** » Thu Mar 13, 2008 12:54 am

I am surprised that your plants grow with only 6 hours of light. Do you only keep the actinic bulb on for 6 hours or all lighting? Are your plants showing signs of growth? If you are worried about the look, go to plantgeeks.com and ask around for examples of people's tanks with different lighting. There are alot of very knowledgable plant people over there so they could help you out.

by **saltwaterpimp** » Thu Mar 13, 2008 1:06 am

14000k is simply a depth whitch the light travels so if there is plants and corals around 40 to 50 ft below sea level then yes i would. they are like apples and oranges, true actinic blue bulb has the same light properties as a freshwaterplant bulb.i am not saying you could only run a actinic bulb. because you do need the lower k rating in a bulb for plants.

by **miami754** » Thu Mar 13, 2008 1:15 am

Several things. 14000K is not the depth the light will travel. It refers to the color of the light which you are right, does relates to how far it can travel, but the main purpose of stating the temperature of a bulb is not to say how far it will travel into the water. Also, an actinic bulb does not have the same properties as a FW bulb. Actinic's have a different spectrum, and hence emit light at different frequencies and wavelengths than FW bulbs. The frequency and wavelength of light are two of its main properties so it is incorrect to say they have the same properties.

by **Peterkarig3210** » Thu Mar 13, 2008 1:20 am

I registered on www.plantgeek.com forums already and these people could probably get technical enough to convince me. The thing in coral that needs light is, so I've heard, the same thing that's in plants: chlorophyll. That is where these folks get the idea that there is a similar requirement for light. I think the main reason you need actinic light for coral is because that is the spectrum that gets down to the corals that are more than a few feet under. Most plants in nature are much shallower I believe and are used to using a broader spectrum of light. I think the actinic spectrum may be good for plants, but I guess with my reasoning a broader spectrum would be more appropriate and may produce more growth. Do I make sense?

by **saltwaterpimp** » Thu Mar 13, 2008 1:32 am

a 50/50 plant bulb is actinic 03 and a 65k or 10 k what ever the put in them.you are right its not light travel its the depth it found at.

by **Peterkarig3210** » Thu Mar 13, 2008 1:39 am

I'll post the reply I get from plantgeek forum on this. Does this light favor algae growth, or is it just not as good for plants?

by **miami754** » Thu Mar 13, 2008 2:35 am

Here is the response you got from plantgeeks:

hi garman. I used a 50/50 SW bulb that came with one of my compact flourescent fixtures. One half of the bulb is literally pink - the actinic half, the other half is 10,000K so fine for plant growth.

However, my plants reached past the actinic half as if it didn't exist at all. I don't think that it actually promotes algae, but it may if your plants start to die from the super-low light and water quality deteriorates.

That's my experience using a half-actinic bulb in a FW planted tank. IMO, that light spectrum seems totally unusable by plants so you're wasting your time and money if you choose such a bulb. I had to for a week or so, because I bought the fixture like that and had to order the 6700 K FW bulb separately.

So far, one person agrees with me that it is unusable for FW plants. We will see what else others say. I have kept several heavily planted tanks, but those people know more than me so I'll trust what they say either way. I have a sneaky feeling that your actinic is causing your algae to grow because there is no way you should have to reduce your lighting to 6 hours a day to keep it from growing. That is just too short of a time. I would doubt many people at plantgeeks would say that plants can grow with this kind of light duration. I'll stay up-to-date with what they say though.

I used to buy my plants from a guy named Off-Ice who I believe started that site. He used to sell me some really nice plants, but I am not sure if he still sells them or not.

by **spongebob4460** » Thu Mar 13, 2008 2:43 am

Miami, I don't have a planted tank... I was just referring to the length of light versus algae... I didn't realize the thread had moved over to planted tanks, I was only referring to the type of light because i have a 50/50 and was wondering the use of the actinic on the tank in general. I guess i'm lost on where this thread is going, lol.

by **miami754** » Thu Mar 13, 2008 2:51 am

My fault, my fault - I must have assumed it. I sincerely apologize. Now, I understand why you are able to only keep your lights on 6 hours a day. By all means, yes only keep it on 6 hours a day if you like the light. It doesn't matter if you don't have live plants. Do whatever works for your tastes. I am sorry again - I don't know where I started thinking you had live plants. Is your tank all set now that you figured out it cycled and did a water change?

I am still interested over on the plantgeeks site to see if they think it promotes algae. I'll stay tuned over there.

Actinic Blue Light

52 posts • Page 4 of 6

Actinic Blue Light

52 posts • Page 4 of 6