• You are viewing the forum as a Guest, please login (you can use your Facebook, Twitter, Google or Microsoft account to login) or register using this link: Log in or Sign Up

Is Algae worse with LED lighting?

Is Algae worse with LED lighting

  • Total voters
    7
  • Poll closed .
Having spent a little time reading arround the subject, I came to the conclusion that plants can use a whole range of frequencies just with different efficiency. Sadly I haven't read anything that suggests algae is any different.

Yield-dry-mass.jpg Stem-Length.jpg
(research by migro on non aquatic plants)

Ppfd values are king the more light you have the faster plants and algae will grow.

I'm surprised that most the lights don't match the spectrum of the sun.The sun's has about 25% blue and a balance if green and red. That is about 5k colour temp.
I don't understand why we normally go for 6500k.

I think that colour spectrum does make a difference in plant shape but most of the commercial led lights available have a lot more blue light that will shorten stem length. ( not a bad thing) but I doubt there is enough of a difference between manufacturers to make any noticeable difference. The output power makes a far bigger difference

What is important is how the tank looks. Know one what's a pink full spectrum tank even if it gives great growth and saves them 10% on there electricity usage.

I would love to do some testing to see how low levels of uv light affect various algaes and plants. I'd need two identical tiny tanks and run one with a bank of uv leds. Then ask people to send me there algae covered plants.
Ideally set up a camera on time lapse. See if there is a level that kills the algae and not the plants.

Getting co2 and flow arround the tank also make a big difference. But it might be a useful weapon against algae.
 
I started building led fixtures about 5 years ago, at that time about every serious LFS and every serious hobbyist was still in a lot of doubt that led lighting was usefull for growing plants. I still remember an article on the Green Machine website explaining why they didn't sell LED fixtures in their shop. It still was believed no good for growing plants. Anyway it took less than a year for this article to be removed and changed into "Now we do sell led lights!".

This was all due to the rapid evolvement in the led industry.. Also due to that manufacturers that essamble led lights actualy always run several steps behind. They have to come up with a design based on the current available technique and than to make a profitable commercial product need to produce a certain amount of stock that can not be upgraded on the fly. You have to make a 1000 and have to sell a 1000.

Since i'm a vivit DIY'r i noticed all off the shelf available lights in the LFS were way behind, producing a stock that needs months maybe up to years to be sold. And this while the led industry evolved with better performong techniques in few months time, new types of leds doubling in performace roled of the line every 2 months., improving performance. durability and color rendition.

In the begining i builded 3 different led setups in a year time with always with the latest new designs i tracked down. SMD strips ranging from the first best available i used with 25 lumen per led to 3 months later 65 lumen per led. And that very same year the COB led was introduced 12 volt - 15 watt with 110 lumen per watt over a surface of 90x40mm.. That soon after that became smaller and more powerfull.

3 times a different build in a year and each time more than doubling performances.. :) Mean while the LFS was still selling the same old unsufficient cr#p. Even today i still see Light Tube LED replacements that hurt my eyes when i look inside and see which leds are in it and not from brightness. It simply is new old stock not worth buying..

That is something for the LFS to think about before they give an opinion on LED in general. Already before their product is sufficiently reviewed and tested to come up with an opinion, better and completely different ones already available. Thus by the time you have developed an opinion say it takesyou 6 months, it's already outdated and simply only applicable to that particular build and not for led light in general.

Look it up for fun how many different types of leds have been developed in the last 5 years.. You will not see the forest for the trees. And it still s running a rather fast pace..
 
Last edited:
zozo said:
3 times a different build in a year and each time more than doubling performances.. :) Mean while the LFS was still selling the same old unsufficient cr#p.
Click to expand...


I'd never really thought about how fast LEDs are improving. As they get more efficient they generate less heat and the whole units get smaller and heat management gets easier.
The thing that is really shocking is the crazy prices they are charging for low powered tubes.
 
I don't think UV will make any conceivable difference, like I mentioned in post #2, at least those levels of UV low enough not to damage plant cells beyond their natural "sun screen" mechanisms. And I agree, just pick a light you like the colour rendition of, chances are it'll be good for growing plants since the photosynthetically active spectrum and the visual spectrum are pretty much one and the same, see message #10.
 
Last edited:
Dennis Wong has an in depth discussion on plants and light spectrum. Accordingly, plants can utilize all light spectrum, including green light previously dismissed.

https://www.advancedplantedtank.com/rethinking-light-wavelength.html

Algae, being more opportunistic, care even less about light spectrum, besides, there are so many species of algae out there that it’s not possible to paint a broad brush to all.

So I don’t think spectrum of UV light will promote more algae than fluorescent. On the other hand, the directional nature of led may reduce algae on the tank walls by limiting light falling on the walls.

The exception is energetic UV light which may harm certain algae due to delicate cell walls. I notice my outdoor tubs are never bothered by bba, though green water and other filamentous algae can take over.
 
Hi all,
dw1305 said:
If I was to guess that any of these groups are preferentially favoured by different wavelengths of light, when compared to the Viridiplantae, my suggestion would be the Red Algae (including BBA and Staghorn).
Click to expand...
I've just found the link to a paper that @AndyMcD sent me a couple of years ago, <"Effects of temperature, irradiance and photoperiod on growth and pigment content in some freshwater red algae in culture">, that is relevant to this thread. From the abstract
Most freshwater red algae had the best growth under low irradiance ((65 μmol photons m–2 s–1), confirming the preference of freshwater red algae for low light regimens. In general there was highest growth rate in long days and low irradiance........
Click to expand...
Compsopogon coeruleus is "Staghorn" and one of the Audouinella spp. is likely to be BBA.

There are a few other papers that have cited this one that might be useful, this is a Brazilian one <"Photoacclimation in three species of freshwater red algae">.

The papers all seem to suggest that High PAR and a short photo-period are the least favoured condition for Red Algae growth, although they seen <"quite plastic in their response to light">.

Somewhere I have some correspondence which says that BBA like red algae are common in the Igarapes of the Peruvian Amazon, but so far I haven't found it (I thought it was in a thread on UKAPS).

cheers Darrel
 
Most freshwater red algae had the best growth under low irradiance ((65 μmol photons m–2 s–1), confirming the preference of freshwater red algae for low light regimens. In general there was highest growth rate in long days and low irradiance........
Click to expand...

It fits this current situation 100%.. :)

DSC_0469.jpg
 
I can attest that my outdoor tubs and planted bowls by the window that receive direct sunlight don't get BBA. My very low light fish only tanks, less than 30 PAR, also don't get BBA. It is my medium light planted tank, around 60 PAR, that gets BBA. So direct sunlight is unfriendly to BBA, but unsure if it is the high intensity or the UV component that inhibits BBA. I don't think artificial high light can compare with direct sunlight (300 to 1000 PAR ) in intensity, and the absence of UV, to have an impact on BBA.
 
It could also be that the environmental conditions aren't necessarily more suitable for BBA, but that they are perhaps less favourable for other species, which means that BBA can compete on a more level playing field.

When I was researching the impact of groundwater drawdown on wetlands I sometimes found plant species that usually prefer much drier conditions growing in wetland fringes; even a slight change in environmental conditions can be enough to change the dynamics of an ecosystem, particularly a fragile one susceptible to tipping points.

I'm digressing slightly but, it's likely that these species have always grown in less favourable conditions but largely unnoticed or passed off as outliers. I think wetlands or other habitats at the extreme range of tolerance, like old toxic mine workings, are among the few places some species can be found now since their preferred habitat has disappeared, usually under concrete or a sea of wheat, or it's been laid to grazing and they've become outcompeted by C strategists like perennial ryegrass.
 
I still think the affect of adding UV lights to an algae covered aquarium tank could be very interesting. We know its very popular in indoor growing. Look at the spectrum of this bulb.
( I'm not suggesting this much, or using this bulb )

end-power-veg-fs-uv.jpg
Recent research has helped the benefits of UV in horticulture come to light.
UV light activates a plant’s natural defense mechanisms, producing a sort of “sun screen” to protect itself from the damaging light. Some plants can produce as much as 15 different defense proteins with exposure to UV. As the amount of UV increases, so does the production of defense proteins.
We know that Algae is a far a simpler single cell species.. I doubt all algae has the ability to protect itself from UV. I doubt it is a magic bullet that will kill all algae, but by the sounds of it might give BBA a hard time.

It also might not be a bad thing for any fish, UV light exposure stimulates the pigment to reproduce faster, increasing the fish’s natural tolerance levels of UV light. The amount of UV light a goldfish receives has an influence on its color too. Fish exposed to lower levels of UV tend to be paler, while those exposed to higher levels have more vivid colors.
 
Barbara Turner said:
The amount of UV light a goldfish receives has an influence on its color too. Fish exposed to lower levels of UV tend to be paler, while those exposed to higher levels have more vivid colors.
Click to expand...

I keep goldfish and they produced quite a lot of fry over the years.. All are actualy born black.. And i red this statement before but i do not realy see it back in mine. The oldest i have i bought completely orange, but she got completely white in a few years time. Even tho she gets loads of sun...

Here she is.. :)
dscf8829-1-jpg.jpg


And all her offspring is born outdoors recieving all the sun they can get for the majority of the day. Still About 4 of here babies are equaly white all over same as their mother. Actualy not only white but also body shape and relative tail size is simmular..

I wondered why the mother slowly turned white after beeing orange for 2 years.. It seems to be a genetic thing especialy long tailed (comets) are prone to loos pigment at an early age. Her ofspring that turned white already did it in the first year while some other siblings still are simply black and others again already strikingly orange. And all of them live together under same conditions.

I know color can be enhanced and prolonged with a special diet. I gues something like high Carotene content diet. But do not realy know, mine just get regular food.. That's also how commercial breeders color their new borns ASAP. Never seen a natural colored ordenary goldfish in the shop, i know they all are ready for sale at 1 year old and gold as can be. I still have black/natural colored ones older than a year.. :)
 
The spectrum and light intensity will all have an effect on algae. LEDS have their own quirks on both those factors.

While spectrum most likely matters for algae growth, my feeling is that it is only one of the 100s (maybe 1000s) of variables that may matter. I would seriously doubt that it would be easy to isolate spectrum as a variable easily without years of research.

One of the good features of LED is that most will have dimmers which should deal with the intensity issue. In fact you should not buy a LED without a dimmer. Lets force manufacturers to include them for the benefit of all beginners.
 
Well i was always happy with our maxspect razor.
 
That's what was great about it being able to adjust the percentages. Wish I'd shipped it to nz with me i miss aqua scaping.
 
My take on this is leds are more powerful than tubes thats a fact. Let me make this simple as i can. I started my tank with a diy led and was using 60w 6500k + 10000k full blast for 8 hours. I did run into some alage issues, Then i reduced it to 5 hours all the algae was gone. Over 2 months i ramped it up to 8 hours with no issues. 8 months later i added more leds 83w in total and lenses too :

Red 12 leds/ 12%
Blue 12 leds/ 12%
Green 12 leds/ 12%
3200k led 14 leds/ 18%
6500k led 13 leds/ 21%
10000k led 20 leds/ 25%
83w total
plus and i have them running 10 hours with zero algae issues. I only do 35 percent water change a week. To me it seems allot of people tend to buy these led units and run into algae issues because they do not let plants adjust to the lighting. As @rebel said you shouldn't buy leds without dimmers and i agree with him.



This video i dunno how accurate the par reading are but his using leds with 300 PAR on the substrate level and about a 1000 par a the surface level with zero algae issue. So to make this short and simple buy a unit with a dimmer and adjust levels slowly.
 
mow said said:
i dunno how accurate the par reading are but his using leds with 300 PAR on the substrate level and about a 1000 par a the surface level with zero algae issue.
Click to expand...

300par is very high, The guy must be a god at balancing everything perfectly on a knife edge.
Would have been nice to read his section on algae control, but looks like his website is down.
The plant colours are stunning, especially the echinodorus purple Knight.

I reckon I'd need 500w of Led lighting to hit 300par (based on 1.2m long tank with light at 60cm off gravel) I'm not sure if there is a more accurate calculator out there.
We could have a sweep stake on how many hours before everything goes green.

I'm looking at upgrading my DIY light soon, switching to (separate Red, Green, Blue and white LEDs)
Flat out it will hit about 300 watts but I won't get close to that when I've fine tuned the colour.

It's taken a long time play with colours calculation software to get the colour plaques and CRI value to something I'm happy with, started off very purple.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top