UV Light for your Reef Aquarium? | Reef Receipts
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 20 авг 2023
- Brandi and I talk about the effects of UV light on underwater organisms in this latest episode of Reef Receipts. This was a meta analysis of 168 different research studies to give a comprehensive look at UV's effect on marine life.
ARTICLE: onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/f...
Join this channel to get access to perks:
/ @tidalgardens
www.tidalgardens.com
#tidalgardens #coral #reefaquarium
Check out our Amazon Affiliate Links to Items we use at Tidal Gardens
The salt we use:
Reef Crystals - amzn.to/3tYz9GA
Our Favorite Fish and Coral Foods:
Polyp Lab Reef Roids - amzn.to/424CTsa
Sustainable Aquatics Hatchery Diet 1.2 mm - amzn.to/35Xnz5B
Sustainable Aquatics Hatchery Diet 0.8 mm - amzn.to/2N10IPH
Nori Sheets - amzn.to/2LQVzsQ
Super Helpful Random Stuff:
Sicce Utility Pump - amzn.to/3qjgu6X
Wireless Remote Control - amzn.to/38FaMGy
ETEKCITY Infrared Thermometer - amzn.to/3nH7Pt9
OXO silicone dryer mat - amzn.to/2TFadnX
OXO Turkey Baster - amzn.to/3ofxyuV
Rubbermaid 1/2 Tray - amzn.to/3hrPscy
Photo/Video:
Canon C200 Cinema Camera
Canon C70 Cinema Camera
Canon 5Ds R - amzn.to/33qklaf
Canon 100mm Macro - amzn.to/33pbUvG
Canon 100mm IS Macro L - amzn.to/3guFh3h
Canon EF MP-E 65mm f/2.8 macro - amzn.to/3gz9HBO
Audio:
Shure SM7B - amzn.to/2DUQPP1
Sennheiser 416 - amzn.to/3ajHpIT
Sennheiser AVX Lavalier - amzn.to/33Ud4iU
SSL 2+ Audio Interface - amzn.to/3ZZVpjV
Cloudlifter CL-1 - amzn.to/2XY4En8
Aston Halo Portable Microphone Reflection Filter - amzn.to/36hoSfH
Copyright Information:
This video was shot and edited by Tidal Gardens. Tidal Gardens owns all intellectual property rights to this content. 
Животные
I loved this format with the occasional informative and funny visual overlays.
Hobbyist and scientific study is how the hobby evolves. Interesting topic, hope to see more of this format.
Really enjoyed this deep dive. Great to have informed experts in their field giving analysis like this. Love to see more!
For me there was clearly a before and after on the lack of UV. I will never go back to led only again. Thank you for the content.
I love stuff like this. More of this!
Just to engage further, I have a BS and am certified in conservation (terrestrial natural resources). Though I have zero training in marine science, that's all passion and hobby.
That mismatch often leads to numerous hunches on how a basic principal from say: UV based in hard biology, microbiology specifically, translates to the Reef Tank. "Tank" being the key word, as it's not a native reef. It's a quasi-in vitro, and certainly both a closed and controlled environment.
I think all of us with a scientific background in everything from general chem and biology, to specific applied sciences, all try to leverage parts of 'sciences' understand on specific questions. Because there is no one scientific discipline looking at the complexity of a Reef tank. Marine biology comes closest, as they study natural reefs. But even that falls short in our controlled glass boxes with a mix of a half dozen different reefs in it.
I'd argue it's why most of this hobby's most successful and out spoken founders in the latter 20th century all had either scientific or engineering backgrounds of some kind.... Ya, More content like this :)
I had a lot of heartburn to Mr. Dellaquila's methodology, because while he measured the UV output of certain lighting fixtures. What was shown lacked any correlation or reference to how biologically important, damaging, or irrelevant UV is to corals. We know humans need UVB, we know reptiles need UVB; and we know too much is harmful to both. There are concrete points of evidence around vitamin D synthesis, and cancers to support both. But numerous tanks show long-lived coral colonies devoid of UV exposure for years, with no signs of stress. So that argument didn't hold water.
On top of, the college level biology teaches: More UV = Bad. Because so many examples exists where it holds true. We use UV to sterilize equipment, treat food packaging, or reduce pathogens all because it kills in high concentrations though those DNA related mechanisms. Which match the expected outcomes from this study's charts and data tables.
But, this discussion is very constructive. For example, I was under the impression UV didn't penetrate deep enough to matter for most coral, now I stand corrected. And after watching it, I'm better informed on corals limited resistance to UVB, thank you. But, there still isn't good information on whether it's beneficial to them [corals]. At best, I'm with Than and wonder if there may be limited benefits in that UVB helps kill off some of the competing bacteria or other organisms which may harm the corals or other cnidarians? After all, that is why UV is used in traditional aquaculture at scale. The traditional UV system only treats water-borne species however, while a fixture with UV carries many implied forms of collateral damage over time (most likely) that have to have trade off... Yay, more questions :)
Good content!
By the way, this series is exceptional among the hobby. Just the sort of comprehensive empiricism we need more of.
Its really good this kind of discussion, very interesting
I absolutely those this format!
Love these videos, thanks
I love this series!
Thank you for this!
Brandi!!!!!! Yayyyy! Y'all are awwww..some!!!
Lol! Thank you! 🩷🩷🩷🩷
That’s was excellent. More please Than!
Love this! More diving into the scientific literature!
i'm only at a thirs of the video - i just love this, the hobby needs to bring the scientific parts more up to the public like you did there, please more of this :)
Great topic
love these
Great video than, as always.
I appreciate that
Brandi been busy! Thanks to her for the excellent summary of this research, and kudos to Than for hosting the session. Concerning the 8% outliers, I was wondering if those results may have occurred primarily at comparatively low UVB intensity? Since essentially everything is toxic above certain threshold concentrations, it makes me wonder if there could be a threshold beneath which UVB tends to be more beneficial than harmful? I might have to get off my lazy butt and actually read the paper.
Hey Than/crew may I ask what focal length the lens was that you used for this video?
Great video and great format. Here is an idea for another one maybe: is additional bio-filtration like matrix really helping in lowering nitrate (dénitrification) or is it just performing simple nitrification like plastic bioballs?
Great video. I'm going to paraphrase here, so I may not use the correct terminology, but I has watched informal video about the light spectrum. Tne thing I took from it, as a hobbyists, was that the 2 times the sun put out red that impacts the earth is st sunrise and sunset. I has to aak myself, is that the best time for use to increase the intensity of red of our leds!
Food for thought.
The red of sunset and sunrise isn't due to an increase in red light but rather a reduction in the longer wavelengths. So if you wanted to mimic that in the aquarium it would mean keeping the reds on all the time and shutting off the blues to allow the reds to be more visible.
I think we need a crash course on how to read research papers like this. Also, her slight southern drawl is reminding me of home 😭
I would love to see a video in this style looking at the importance of Violet light. 400-430nm
Biologists stated that the ozone in the oceans filtered out UV A and UV B. And that unhealthy ocean has very little ozone in the water but also has very little life living in those waters. What people need to understand is that all corals now are no longer collected from the ocean. All are tank raised so coral only now and are brought up in the condition we give them.
Than, how much W, WW, R, & G do your prefer at the farm?
Can you do one on pH? I delved into it quite a lot myself, it was interesting reading about how corals actively try to keep the calcifying fluid layer about 8.5, so I took that to mean higher pH up to about 8.5 would help in calcification (growth). But there's a lot out there and was hard to summarise it.
Does Brandi have any suggestions for websites or published journals which specifically follow coral research? Where should people go to follow the "cutting edge"? Other than your videos, of course ;)
Lol. That’s a good idea. I will put together a list of journals with the highest impact factors.
My wife's cousin was servicing his AC and was exposed to the UV sterilizer in about 5 mins he was almost blinded and had his eyes covered up for two weeks. As someone that two tanks in my home offices, id prefer to be exposed to it daily for 8 hours lol...
Her 'southern Belle' is showing with the word 'on' sometimes. Great video though, good info.
Normally adding extra variables reduces your power and so the models are less likely to be significant. So including everything is a more conservative approach, especially as it matters in what order variables are removed. You can end up fishing around to find the combination that gives the result you want. So I don't have a problem with including everything, but agree that some model selection process could clarify their findings.
I’m a stats nerd, so I definitely enjoy this kind of conversation. I apologize in advance for the stream of consciousness response. 🤪The n had to be in the 100’s of thousands though- maybe millions I would be more comfortable with them including everything If they had given a better rationale. They also could have done a power analysis. And maybe they did and just didn’t discuss it. I imagine the data was in a stats program…. So some amount of variable selection would have been possible… but probably would have been running for weeks… maybe longer? 😬 that may have been the problem? Meta analysis are soooo time consuming. I applaud anyone doing them.
Becca has to be the one editing this video 😂
You mean zooplankton has decreased by a lot, not phytoplankton, dont'you (since the text talks about krill, which is zooplankton)? Phytoplankton has actually increased I think. At least in the form of huge algae blooms.
Ok, from later in the video I get the impression that phytoplankton numbers in general have also dropped.
I don't get it; you have to have a controlled environment to get an idea how UV can affect the organism. This has to do with the comment of where they are getting the meta data which has to do with different controlled environments. So, in my mind this would mean the same clarity of water (water quality), organisms that are staged at different depths...which can be up to 60 meters unless you have a pretty good idea on adjusting the UV so you can simulate a 0 to 60-meter depth. You also have to account for the organisms that have mutated (or evolution) over the past 40+ years to adjust for the drastic change in their environment. You also have to know if that particular organism on how much UV it could handle a millennium ago vs. now to account for its evolution over the years which could also include temperature, water quality, pollution, location, etc. I would think it would be a challenge to select an organism now on how it handles its environment compared to one let's say 100 years ago. If your goal was just to see how they are impacted today and their current status I guess you can see how it impacts them if you know what made them thrive in the past which I don't think there is much scientific study 100 + years ago to get accurate data. I know the scientific community has noticed the drastic changes in the past 50 years, I just think there is a lot of variables and it's not just one thing but maybe a combination of the current environment to include mutation or evolution not only to the organism but also diseases that can have a negative impact on them, not to mention if they have other life forms that either help them positively or negatively and if that balance has also been effected. I guess you have to start somewhere, and UV seems to be at least one variable that's possibly causing a negative impact. I'm not a scientist so I have no idea what I am talking about, just sharing my thoughts out loud with my limited experience.
I agree with you completely. The fact that the first study of uvb in marine organisms was in 1979 is certainly limiting. I still learned a ton from this study. Like you said, it's at least a starting point. It is assumed that evolution typically occurs over long time scales, but there are clear instances of it happening in a rapid fashion. I would have to do some digging to figure out the rates in corals. Maybe someone else knows that off the top of their head. May be a good study for us to cover in the future... if it exists. 😄
Basically UV is necessary, just not at the current levels.
Too much of anything is bad anyway 😅
I've been on the UV train for years after keeping reptiles and more so when Chris Meckley mentioned his experience with halides and euphilia.
We use UV in food processing were I work to keep high traffic areas sterile from things such as listeria which is everywhere.
I want to add the link for the discussion for that paper and some more metal halide thoughts here just in case...
ruclips.net/video/h_idNYmhPf0/видео.html
My coral love UV it makes them bounce 😂
That's proof of the evidence that UV (B) has a negative impact on organisms as bouncing is a form of cancer as to what I have understood.
Led lights don't give off real uv its just a colour gimic only get uv from flourecent tubes and metal halide fittings with no glass covers
There are LEDs that produce UV all the way to UV-C but they are very expensive and are not in aquarium fixtures. Case in point, the ITC Reef Delete.
Sorry, Country Harvest
Let's face it.we have to destroy the Sun. Doc BC
Hahahaha. That literally made me laugh out loud. Using a sledge hammer for a nail approach. I like it. 🤣
Thanks for the informative video Than and Brandy. Your wider angle camera is picking up too much detail on your skin. There may be a detail or sharpness adjustment on that camera that is just a bit too high causing this. The other angle looks better and looks more natural. It's hard to find a better content creator on youtube than Tidal Gardens. Just hoping I can be of some help pointing this out.
i dont want any UV in my house