[newt]

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

 

[Jason Baliban]

Awesome Post!!!!roud:

How do MH fall into this? I believe they are a much broader spectrum?

jB

 

[aquanut415]

interesting, and well written but...

so then, what is your conclusion?

or are you sort of saying that because of this...

Fix the water chemistry and you should be able to get rid of the algae without impairing the total light available to your plants in areas of maximum activation for photosynthesis.

we can really use any combination of lights so long as you get a full spectrum of light and adequate brightness?

thanks...

 

[epicfish]

I think he's saying that (and not saying that I understand it any better than you, it's just what I perceived from it):
1) Pick bulbs depending on their spectral graphs. It's just unfortunate spectral graphs aren't provided for many bulbs. As long as plants can use the light provided, you're good to go!
2) Instead of cutting lights to prevent algae, if we carefully and deliberately manipulate our lighting schedule as well as monitor and adjust our water fertilization, we can beat algae.
---the manipulation of the lighting schedule to curb algae is because plants are more adapted to changes in lighting and can harness light soon after it is provided, as opposed to algae that must have a good period of lighting first before it starts to photosynthesize and replicate.

 

[Chrona]

Great post! Should be stickied

 

[aquanut415]

sorry to disagree with you guys, but i feel there is a lot of things wrong with this post.

first off, the majority of the text is plagarized. show some credit to the author from who this text was copied! the author clearly has not written this themselves, it came almost directly out of a chapter in a book about light in a plant physiology text book. so, its not really new, or thier ideas.

secondly, considering the quantity of text that has been plagarized, the authors opinions make up a fraction of the text written, and is simply speculative, with no data to back up thier claims.

while it may be "interesting", it seems that it primarily summarizes some of the better known facts about plants and how they use light, while not clearly making any significant contributions to what hobbyists, or botanists already now about plants and algae.

and lastly, some of the conclusions the author makes about cultural methods to prevent algae growth are questionable at best. id like to see more evidence, more real life experiences, than a lot of mumbo-jumbo about PAR, and optimum spectral distributions to try and convince me this author has any idea what any of that really means as it relates to "optimal plant growth".

 

[newt]

interesting, and well written but...

Hhmmm, flip flopping on us.

Not copied.

So if you know more lets here it.

 

[aquanut415]

newt, i was simply trying to say something nice before i got into it with you.

so its not copied huh?
how about those graphs? where did they come from?
how about citing ONE SINGLE REFERENCE...

I KNOW you didn't do the research you present.. its not even worth my time dissecting your BS sentence by sentence.

there is no shame in using a book to find examples, or using specific data to back your claims... but you need to reference where the info comes from.

are you claiming here on TPT that you were the individual responsible for determining the wavelength at which the carotenoid pigments abosrb light? or how about chlorophyll a? how did you do it?

im trying to give you every out here, cause i think what you are trying to do could be helpful. but you need to be responsible when you make claims, let us know what is your opinion, and let us know what the facts are by referencing the source from where the info comes.


HAHAHHHAHAA>>> and now i see you removed the entire post, wise decision!

i think that was the smartest thing youve done yet!