All the LPS you listed with the exception of the bubble will need to be near the top even with the 175 watts and they still may not thrive.
Right lights for a 40g reef tank
- Thread starter Nickeleye
- Start date
Bubble does well, almost all leathers will do well, Any colonial anenomes, all polyps.
Realize this is not a full list others will survive but may not thrive.
Realize this is not a full list others will survive but may not thrive.
Can you define "thrive"? I think that term is fairly subjective. What one person considers to be thriving may be another person's idea of just barely surviving. Don't get me wrong, I'm listening carefully and not trying to start an argument. I just want to be sure I understand where you are coming from.
I think I'm probably going to want to stay away from anenomes for a while for two reasons. 1 - I'm just a beginner and don't want to kill something I can't care for. 2 - I hear it's best to let your tank establish itself for several months before even thinking about anenomes.
If anybody else is reading this thread and has comments or suggestions I'd love to hear them
I think I'm probably going to want to stay away from anenomes for a while for two reasons. 1 - I'm just a beginner and don't want to kill something I can't care for. 2 - I hear it's best to let your tank establish itself for several months before even thinking about anenomes.
If anybody else is reading this thread and has comments or suggestions I'd love to hear them
By thrive I mean to grow and expand at a rate expected in the wild.
I would not reccomend many anenomes for a 40 gallon tank at any time and even with the lighting you are mentioning 175 watts would be on the low end for almost all species.
I would not reccomend many anenomes for a 40 gallon tank at any time and even with the lighting you are mentioning 175 watts would be on the low end for almost all species.
To define lighting in a natural way as this has been the subject of study in many cases. What we are trying to do in the home aquarium is duplicate the natural substance and intensity of natural light at varying times of the day. With the lights that you are suggesting, even at 192 watts, you are only touching the intensity of natural light. Now this ofcourse is dependant on the depth of water where you are doing your studies. One of the well known facts of the light spectrum within the salt water column is the fact that the blue wavelength of light is one of the deepest penetrating light sources. This is one reason that many people use actinic O3 lamps in the set up. With your set up the actinic wont make a big difference because of the depth of your aquarium, accept for the color that it helps produce in your inhabitants. As far as the average light per gallon in perspective of watts to gallon ratio goes, for a full reef set up, 10 watts is a good number to work with. I have had as high as 18 watts per gallon with very good success. Many of your inhabitants will do OK in lower lights but as mentioned, will not thrive. Corals pigmentation is the product of zooanthidae algae that is sustained within the tissue of the corals flesh. Without the proper lighting for photosynthesis, the coral may expel the algae that it contains. This will lead to its possible demise if you cant get things turned around within a short time period. This is known as coral bleaching. Now setting aside corals for the purpose of lighting in relation to the home aquarium. There are a number of inhabitants that thrive in higher light that you will find on your live rock that most people are unaware of. Many of these things have a symbiotic relationship with other life forms that you may find in your system whether they are on a microbial basis or something like calurpa grass that you can see. These things are all part of keeping the natural system thriving.
In short, get the 192 PC combo. You will be much happier in the long run. Your tank will thrive rather than exist. For the PC bulbs I would recommend one 50/50 bulb and one 10k bulb. The 50/50 bulb will produce the actinic O3 in the 420 nm range in one bulb which will bring out the blues in your tank.
In short, get the 192 PC combo. You will be much happier in the long run. Your tank will thrive rather than exist. For the PC bulbs I would recommend one 50/50 bulb and one 10k bulb. The 50/50 bulb will produce the actinic O3 in the 420 nm range in one bulb which will bring out the blues in your tank.
Considering PCs put out more heat, cost more money, and use more electricity, I dont understand where your coming from.
Hmm. Maybe I've been grossly mistaken this whole time. I thought your above statement was actually the exact opposite...
Reefscape - Thank you for the feedback. Good information.
So metal halide would be better for me than PC's?
Originally posted by Nickeleye
Hmm. Maybe I've been grossly mistaken this whole time. I thought your above statement was actually the exact opposite...
Ok, let me explain.
First off, MH has more light output per watt than fluorescent (especially PC).
That alone doesnt make the MH system more efficient, but if both MH and fluorescent are both ran on electronic ballasts with similar efficiency ratings, then the MH does have a lead. Likewise, they could both be ran on magnetic ballasts of varying efficiency.
For the heat issue, the debate centers on temperature rather than actual heat output.
MH is one localized spot so all the heat is very focused and will give you a relatively high temperature. Fluorescents spread the heat out across the entire length of the bulb, giving a lower temperature.
But in terms of actual heat given off, MH gives off less (per watt).
Price-
175 watt electronic MH ballast- $130
175 watt endcap and reflector- $30
175 watt bulb- $60
total of ~$220.
250 watt MH setup is ~$240.
A single ARO 96 watt CF ballast and endcap - $80
96 watt bulb - $30
CF reflector- $20
96 watt CF setup- $130
(2)96 watt CF setup- $230
A 175 watt MH puts out about the same light as 2 96 watt CFs, so you can see the savings.
