F15hguy
-
Posts
3694 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Plant Articles
Fish Articles & Guides
Clubs
Gallery
Posts posted by F15hguy
-
-
ahhh... the dreaded random fishy. the fear of all tight wad fish keepers.
-
from your own link to a previous discussion shows several articles and links to articles that show proof that green light is of very low yield to plants, the article stated previously comes to the conclusion that different parts of the leaf absorb different lights, and seems to be more of a proof that plants do absorb some green light, it makes sense that the underside of the leaves are better at absorbing green light than those above as that is the light they are most exposed to.
But you seem to have missed the studies suggesting that the use of green light can actually stunt plant growth and the results from those experiment that show that red or blue light produces better yields in several different species.
so the total conclusion is that to make your plants grow really well, use bulbs high in both red and blue spectrum, but if you want them to look pretty as well make sure you include green or they will not reflect any light to please your senses.
-
Effects of Blue, Red, and Green Light on Photosynthesis
Craig Owens and Marsha No
CU Boulder, Fall 2008
For our experiment we tested the question, “What is the relative rate of photosynthesis under red, green, and blue light of Juniper needles?” Our hypothesis is that the color of light is directly related to the rate of photosynthesis. A prior experiment has shown that plants absorb the most light in the blue wavelength range while reflecting the green wavelength range. Taking this into account, we predicted blue light to have the highest relative rate of photosynthesis.
To test our hypothesis, we measured the rate of CO2 change in a container with 0.65 grams of juniper needles under blue, red, and green light. We performed 3 trials, designating 10 minutes, to observe the change in the light and dark. We began our experiment with foil around the container to remove the light and eliminate any initial photosynthesis. Knowing that respiration occurs at all times, we manipulated the data to retrieve the rate of photosynthesis by using the equation; (Photosynthesis+Respiration) - (Respiration) which gave us the amount of CO2 depletion and thus the net photosynthesis rate.
After gathering our data and comparing our results with previous experiments and primary sources, we discovered that red light actually had the highest rate of photosynthesis with an average rate of -0.1525 ppm/g/min while blue light had an average rate of -0.0805 ppm/g/min and green light had an average rate of -0.0192 ppm/g/min. It is important to note that the greater the negative value is, the greater the decrease in CO2 content, in turn increasing the rate of photosynthesis. A t-test comparing the rate of photosynthesis between the red and blue light gave us a P-value of 0.976 which is much greater than 0.05, meaning that there is no significant difference in photosynthesis rate between red and blue light.
-
Well, if it dies the next day, it's the new owner. (If it doesn't eat for a week and THEN dies, I blame the LFS :an!gry .)
But even the LFS requires a water sample, and details on the acclimatisation process used.
sounds like an interesting story there....
even then, the stress from poor acclimation can take several days to manifest, failure to eat can be caused by improper foods/ feeding methods, unsuitable living environments, poor water quality, excessive lighting etc..... so no wonder the LFS doesn't do refunds normally. I did a refund the other day due to a guy purchasing a fish that was completely unsuitable for him (and his 50L WAY overstocked tank) on the recommendation of one of our staff. if it wasn't for that recommendation I would have told him hell no and tried to help him learn a few things before torturing any more of my fish.
-
I haven't seen them yet, but know of several people that breed them exclusively, will have to ask if they have seen them turn up
-
but if the plant appears green then it is not absorbing green light, if it was it would appear red or purple
If your lighting looks extremely bright and your plants seem ultra-green, it means that you have lighting that outputs strongly in the green spectrum. Do not equate this with good lighting for your plants, because plants don't use light in the green spectrum for photosynthesis. -
Lighting for a planted tank should not be chosen on color temp alone. It is true that 'full spectrum' bulbs are referred to as bulbs between 5000 Kelvin (K) and 6500 K and are considered to be best for planted tanks. Yet this does not indicate what wavelength in nanometers the bulb is actually emitting. If you want to optimize plant leaf development (blue light) and stem elongation and color (red light) you need light in both the blue and red spectra for photosynthesis. You need a mix of blue and red for your plants, and green for you (brightness as perceived by humans). If your lighting looks extremely bright and your plants seem ultra-green, it means that you have lighting that outputs strongly in the green spectrum. Do not equate this with good lighting for your plants, because plants don't use light in the green spectrum for photosynthesis. Sunlight peaks in the blue spectrum at 475 nanometers (nm). This is a shorter wavelength than red light and is used by both plants and algae. As light passes through water the intensity decreases. The shorter wavelength blue light penetrates water better and more quickly than red, which is slower and absorbed more quickly. Chlorophyll, the photosynthetic pigment used by plants traps blue and red light but is more efficient with red light at 650 – 675nm. Blue is used at the same rate as red because it is more available for reasons mentioned above.
-
hrmmm. but if they are green they are obviously reflecting and not absorbing, agreed the other pigments may absorb them.
http://www.sas.upenn.edu/~msheila/Microsoft%20Word%20-%20Why%20are%20plants%20green.pdf
-
don't plants reflect most of the green light, hence the green appearance?
-
am leaning towards a species of Notoplax, but still havent found any thing identical yet
-
I get good growth rates and the best colour in the fish from a 1-1 ratio of 'Sunlight' and 'Tropical' Lights
-
he got off lightly, if it had survived it probably would have killed his discus :roll:
-
-
gets the algae off the rocks (I collect fresh ones every now and again,) and also it munches the kelp
-
none of those, it has 3 distinct ridges and looks like it should be soft but its hard, looks kinda like a nudibranch made from rock
i'll see if I can tempt it out for a better photo
-
neons are from cooler water rivers and realy should be kept around 24-26 degrees, Cardinals however are from the same waters as discus so handle the high temps.
-
might make it easier to see
-
I am familiar with Chitions but this fella hitched a ride on a piece of kelp I scavenged, anyone know what type he is?
sorry about the poor quality, he doesn't come out much and when he does its always in the hardest to photo spot.
they move so slowly but when you look again he's disappeared, he spends most of his time in the shrimp's cave and the rest in the overflow from the filter
-
my old breeder used to do this to knock the flakes that stuck to the side of the tank down
-
hahaha can't be my grandma then.... she had much better manners :sml2:
ummm... so you made your grandma do it outside???
eeeewwwww
-
nice fat and happy, his fin's will come back to full glory soon. try dropping the temp by 1 degree, 27 is the best for fighters, and hoplos prefer slightly cooler than 28
-
hrmmm... now theres an idea.....
if the bay club could organise a meeting I could actually attend i might consider talking to my boss.....
-
eeeeek,
looks like someone bred the elephant man with angelina jolie
-
no no no
wait till it breeds, then feed the pinkies to an arowana :evil:
lighting change - best bulbs for planted tank?
in Beginners Corner
Posted
and for further proof....
from http://pcp.oxfordjournals.org/content/52/3/479.full
written by one of the authors from your previously linked article (this is one of the experiments to prove the hypothesis put forward in that article)