One, from me... I have used both actinics, 6700, and 10000 bulbs as supplemental lighting to 150 watt metal halide, and I observed the best response from actinics.Where would I find the evidence?
Really? Huh. That's interesting.One, from me... I have used both actinics, 6700, and 10000 bulbs as supplemental lighting to 150 watt metal halide, and I observed the best response from actinics.
The blue light that penetrates deep doesnt just appear in the deep, its still there and in greater intensity in shallow FW. I am not saying that actinics are by any means ideal, but light in the "420 to 460nm range" is indeed one of the photosynthetic peaks.D.gilly
Perhaps this small fact escaped you but most actinic lights are in the 420 to 460nm range.
Most of the plants we grow in our tanks come from very shallow water.
I have 60 Gal heavy planted tank. I have 65 Watts x 2 and 65 watts 50/50 x2 so my question is what is watts per gal do I have? it won't be (4 x 65)/60 ?
Thought you said you had a 6700K? The 50/50's make the 'wpg' a bit less accurate, plus CF lights are generally more effecient towards wpg so ist tough to give exact numbers. Youll draw 65Wx2 out of your outlet but when talking about lighting up plants its not always straight forward. Do you have polished reflectors, parabolic? I'd probably rate your lighting as medium light. Without a single bulb in the under 10,000K range, you may be somewhat lacking in the red end of the spectrum.