T Crocea placement

[blackcloudmedia]

I just picked up two beautiful T croceas yesterday. I was wondering what the concensus is on placement. Im running 2 250 watt 20000k MH's with a 96 watt actinic and a 96 watt 10000k (to balance the white). I placed them on the sand for proper photoaclimation purposes and they have attached themselves to the glass bottom through the sand. Should I leave them here approx 1 foot 7 inches from the surface with 250 watts 3 inches over the surface? Or should I place them up higher. THis is an SPS tank so there isnt going to be much room once the corals grow more.

 

[Anonymous]

With lights that close to the surface I'm guess they won't be crawling up to get more anytime soon.

 

[jandree22]

With lights that close to the surface I'm guess they won't be crawling up to get more anytime soon.

Yeah 250 is a healthy dose of light for a 75g. Methinks the fact that he setup shop permanently on the bottome means he's a happy camper.

I, on the other hand, with 150w x2 over my 75g will most certainly have to take the penalty of placing any future maxima or crocea up closer to the surface.

 

[blackcloudmedia]

OK cool thanks guys. Ive just read a lot of articles saying 250 wasnt (really) that bright compared to the sun.

 

[jandree22]

OK cool thanks guys. Ive just read a lot of articles saying 250 wasnt (really) that bright compared to the sun.

lol, 400W or even 1,000W MH bulb isn't really bright compared to the sun, either. That statement is kind of like saying a Tunze stream isn't (really) that much flow compared to an ocean current. :wink:

 

[Anonymous]

OK cool thanks guys. Ive just read a lot of articles saying 250 wasnt (really) that bright compared to the sun.

:lol:

 

[jandree22]

Any chance you could link up any of those articles where you read that? I’m just kinda curious to read them.

Don’t get me wrong, I don’t mean to razz you… actually much props to you because you’re researching into the proper care of your specimens. But that kind of comparison on the intensity of MH isn’t really a good way to measure the effectiveness of MH lighting in the home aquarium. Reason being… sunlight can penetrate water nearly the length of a football field down, while metal halide might shine down to 10 or 20 feet… similarly, corals in the wild are established several meters under water, while in the home aquarium they’re generally less than 2’ down.

 

[blackcloudmedia]

I just got off work and its almost 1 am so Ill look for some of those articles when I wake up. But just google "sps care" and you will find so much conflicting/confusing stuff on lighting. The one artice I was quoting seemed to favor 400 watts MH yet failed to mention size of tank or depth. Two critical measurements when giving a bulb reccomendation to anyone. It still worded it in a way that made you feel like you were starving your corals.

 

[jandree22]

Well, really no need to link specific articles, I'll just dig on my own. It's a shame because some of these comments you've found are either poorly explained or baseless claims. Not trying to say I'm infallible, far from it, but rest assured that your lighting system is PLENTY strong for SPS in a 75g.

I personally was a bit leery of 150w x2 over my 75g, until I came across threads like these on RC. Some wicked nice tanks under 150W MH… as always, pics say 1000 words.

75g SPS under 150W 10K bulbs
75g SPS under 150w 20K bulbs

 

[Anonymous]

Light requirements for Tridacnids are often overstated on forums too, especially with regard to T. maxima and T. squamosa.
I find that if fed sufficiently, they do very well under lower light conditions, although color may be altered after a time, depending light intensity.