|
|
|
#2
12-08-2005, 04:35 PM
|
|||||
|
|||||
im assuming that half your light is actinic? if so then 130 watts of light penetrating down 24" isn't enough light to support a squamossa. consider upgrading your lights to 150 hqi's or a 175 watt and you should be good if you want to keep lower light clams.
|
|
#3
12-08-2005, 05:57 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Until you do switch to MH, I would recommend placing the Squamosa higher up on the rockwork, rather than on the sandy bottom. I kept mine under a 96w pc & 2 t5s for several months but right below the surface on a flatter piece of LR & it has doubled in size since last Boxing Day. I also dose with Liquid Reactor.
Anthony
|
|
#5
12-08-2005, 06:47 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
The big difference is that 2 of your lights are 96w PC which has much better penetrating power in a 24" tank than 65w PCs.
JME & JMO. Anthony
|
|
#8
12-08-2005, 09:11 PM
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Squamosas are the least light demanding clam... I would think you would be OK. Why would anyone think that a 96 watt PC has any more "penetrating" power than a 65W one? 96W are 34" long and 65W are 22 or so inches long, making them put out the same PAR per inch... On another note, Squammies tend to like being on the sand bed... have a look at mine in my gallery or on my pic posts... I kept this guy under PC's.... (4 x 65W)... for 6 months and notice no difference in his growth or extension now that he's under metal halides.
HQI is a type of metal halide lamp, double ended.
__________________
135G Mixed Reef. Bullet 2, 25 gal refugium, 2 X250W MH + 4X 96W PC\'s, DIY Calcium Reactor, Coralife 1/6 HP Chiller, Phosban, Tunze, 2 closed loops & SQWD\'s, Seios, Coralife 4 stage RO/DI & a bunch of other expensive gadgets... I may never retire, but I'm gonnahavahelluvanaquarium!
|
Linear Mode
