Aquatic Plant Forum banner
1 - 2 of 2 Posts

· Premium Member
Joined
·
3,373 Posts
As you said Bryce not the final word but I think it throws out good benchmarks for most situations.

One thing I'll say is there are alot of variables to deal with in terms of light. The original thread starter gave very little information so it would be almost impossible to pinpoint the root (no pun) of his/her algae problems. For example, 26 watts of 10g is not alot of light in most situations, but on one extreme if I fill up a 10g and run 26 watts of light on it for 10-12hrs per day, guess what your getting algae in there over time and in order to minimize this you would clearly have to reduce the lighting. On the hand if I take the same tank and give it consistent co2, fill it with plants one would probably look to increase lighting, ferts so the plants can grow well and remove the niche the algae has found. Algae doesn't need alot of light to grow if nothing is competing with it. So gettiing back to the original thread starter it's not surprising that the guidance is going in different directions.

One other thing I would add is there is a huge difference between intensity and duration. Many plant species actually curl up their leaves after 7 to 9 hours of receiving light. They are done working for the day, so it would stand to reason that anything longer in duration would only be helping algae.
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
3,373 Posts
Bryce. That fitch one is one of my favourite chuckles. lol Amano doesn't use that amount of light himself anymore and I won't go into using W for it. lol That calculator suggests even more W than the WPG rule which we know is well out of date and with todays improved more efficient lights then the old low light wattage can be today's high light wattage!!! You can't supply suggestions from a 13 year old article when technology is involved!!!

As an example if I type my tank size in it comes up with 113W. You must be kidding. 60W is the max I've ever used and that was darned bright. The tank you see below in the sig is bright enough with 48W. Not the brightest by far but 113W. Thats beyond a joke. they must be calculated

ADAs own lighting units seem to be lowlight units diguised!!!

Check out the thread!!!:

http://www.barrreport.com/general-p...aqua-forest-nice-low-par-values-who-knew.html

AC
Supercoley I'm a little confused by your statement. The big tank your linking to in the Barr report looks like it's running in the range of 3 to 4 wpg. The Mini S light that ADA sells is 27watts for around 4g or 6.75wpg. These are pretty much in the range of Bryce's chart.

Your tank in your link is a lowlight setup with Crypts and Ferns so the lighting chart wouldn't apply anyway. Sorry if I misunderstood, but I'm not getting where your coming from .
 
1 - 2 of 2 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top