Macroalgae scrubber (refugium) photoperiods

[Delphinus]

Just curious, is anyone running a caulerpa/macroalgae scrubber on 24/7 photoperiod?

I'm running one on a reverse daylight photoperiod, but am considering temporarily switching it to 24/7, or at least increasing it beyond 12 hours, to see if I get more growth of the algaes.

Trying to figure out what are the downsides to the idea.

[Tau2301]

If and when I get my refugium hooked up to my main tank, I currently plan on running the lights on a 7x24 basis.

I figure it would be best to have the macroalgae generating oxygen all the time. The critters will get accustom to the 7x24.

The big question to me is - does the macroalgae need some down time in which it needs oxygen to regenerate/grow?

[DJ88]

Tony, I haven't read it all but here is a thread about lighting 24/7.

Reefs.org thread on lighting 24/7

[Canadian Man]

Well the post on reefs.org brings up alot of reasons to argue both sollutions.
Tony, my main reason for going with a reverse lighting period is to keep my ph somewhat level, that's it.
I dont really have alot to add to your question but IMO a 12/12 photo period is most realistic.
Oh and hey dont you all ready pay too much for electricity? ;)

[Silverfish]

Hey, thats almost half a cup o coffee!!... at 7-11 :D

[Tau2301]

I guess that answers my question about macroalgae needing some down time to regenerate/grow.

[canadawest]

I illuminate my refugium on a reverse lighting period as well for the following reasons:

1. I believe that plants require a certain period of "sleep" to process the photosynthetic energy they are absorbing. Several articles support this theory.

2. To allow the more nocturnal fauna (such as worms and pods) an opportunity to have darkness to be active in.

3. To maintain a more stable pH balance in my tank.

4. I have heard far more reports of macro algaes going sexual under a 24/7 lighting period than a 12/12 or reverse lighting period. The purpose of my refugium is to absorb nutrients, not to have them all released back into the water! :eek:

5. Conservation of energy. Although my lighting is only 2x13W PC lamps, that is 26Wx12 hours a day or 182.5 full days x 26W. A difference of a few $$ on my Hydro bill that I choose to save.

Just my $.02

[Delphinus]

Thanks for the comments and links, guys.

pH control is the primary reason I went with reverse photoperiod 12/12 on this refugium. However, this tank in question is having a really hard time recovering from its crash about 5-6 weeks ago. The nitrates are profound (i.e., > 80ppm). Thus, I kind of changed some things around that I knew weren't helping the situation, and now I'm thinking about temporarily going with this 24/7 refugium just to try kick-starting the growth and suck down some of those nitrates. I know that if this were a true bona-fide "refugium" then I'd give a hoot about nocturnal 'pods and worms, but for the time being I would rather this be the most effective scrubber it can be, rather than a refugium. It can go back to being a good refugium once the tank has recovered.

Sporalating though ... is not a lot of fun, that's for sure. So that IS a pretty big downside if it happens more under 24/7 lighting.

[ 27 May 2002, 12:43: Message edited by: delphinus ]

[JimE]

Originally posted by canadawest:
I illuminate my refugium on a reverse lighting period as well for the following reasons:

5. Conservation of energy. Although my lighting is only 2x13W PC lamps, that is 26Wx12 hours a day or 182.5 full days x 26W. A difference of a few $$ on my Hydro bill that I choose to save.

Just my $.02

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">.026kw x 12hrs/day x 30days x $.0577/kwh = $0.54/month