Broke Down And got lights

[Gawd_oOo]

Had everything doing fairly well as windowsil plants, but then the dews started losing dew, and the pings were all tilting toawrds the window.

So I went and did a bit of shopping. Picked up 3 4' 2 bulb shoplight fixtures t8/t12.

Bulbs I got are:

2x GE t8 (only t8 bulbs they had, figured and give them a shot)
4100k 2650 lumen 32w 72cri

2x GE Daylight t12
6500k 3050 lumen 40w 75cri

2x GE Plant & aquarium t12
?k (just says widespectrum) 1900 lumen 40w 90cri

Setup less then 1 foot from most of the plants.

Lights are like this

Daylight (blue-ish)
Plant (red)
t8 (white)
t8 (white)
plant (red)
daylight (blue-ish)

Did I do alright? Any info on the Plant and aquarium bulbs? color temps? Are the lumens to low on those?

 

[Clint]

that sounds great!

 

[chloroplast]

I've been growing my plants exclusively under cool white fluorescents for the past couple of years, so my practical experience with other bulb types is nil.  However, here's what I think based on what I know of photosynthesis:

1. The relative amount of light absorbed by most plants is highest at wavelengths between 450-500 (blue) and 650-700 nm (red).  However, even though plants absorb both blues and reds, they are more efficient at absorbing the 450-500nm blue wavlengths (70-90% absorbed) than they are absorbing the red 650-700nm wavelengths (20-50% absorbed).  This is why if you ever had a choice between cool white (blue) and warm white (red) fluorescents, you'd want to choose the cool whites--not only are they more efficient (emit more lumens) but more of the light they emit is absorbed.

2. The daylight bulbs you bought have a temperature of 6500K, so the wavelength for which its light intensity is maximum (Lmax) is ~450 nm.  The T8s you bought have a Lmax of 710nm.  So, assuming prices are similar, it seems to me that you might be better off replacing the 2 T8s with 2 daylight bulbs, because the daylight bulbs produce more blues AND more lumens.



But this is just a suggestion (and maybe I'm nitpicking).  You are certainly providing your plants with a wider (healthier) spectrum than I'm providing mine!!  And they will love the extra light you're giving them.

Hope this was somewhat helpful.

PS:   To answer your other question, your GE plant & aquarium bulbs have a temperature between 3000-3200K.

EDIT: One last thing....lighting is like potting media...everyone has their own preferences. You'll hear people swear by cool whites only, others will say they use a mix of cool and warms, others cool and daylight, and others add some UV bulbs. So don't be surprised if there is a wide range of suggestions.

 

[LLeopardGGecko]

My lighting advice: Go by intensity, as in the wattage of the bulbs. The higher the wattage, the better the light. I don't deal with all that color temperature and spectrum mumbo jumbo

 

[chloroplast]

Quote[/b] ]The higher the wattage, the better the light. I don't deal with all that color temperature and spectrum mumbo jumbo

That's precisely the attitude I've had--I only use cool whites!!! But those on the other side of the fence may be onto something....

Which is why I'm planning to do a small experiment comparing plant parameters (leaf/pitcher size, color, rate of production, among other things) from a population of N. gracilis clones placed under cool white (n=3) versus those under a cool/warm white mix (n=3).

The drawbacks.....Being in an apartment, I won't be able to control the variables as best I want, but i'll do my best. The sample size will be low, so the power of the statistical analysis will be weak, but I don't have an unlimited supply of plants! Moreover, since there are no standardized conditions for growing CPs, the results may be valid only for a narrow range of conditions.....but then again, my purpose is not to answer these questions for the entire CP community!

I haven't thought out the experiment in great detail, so I'm just rambling here....but I'll let the group know the results when I have them.

 

[Gawd_oOo]

Well I can say that after 1 day, the Drosera capensis already look much better. The younger leaves all made dew today. which they haven't done for a bit now.

 

[chloroplast]

Quote[/b] ]Well I can say that after 1 day, the Drosera capensis already look much better.

That's great news and the most important thing! Actual results speak much louder than conjecture.

 

[Clint]

well, i think lumens and color are very important.

i think of it like this, you can have all the light in the world, but without the right kind of like you won't get a tan.

 

[PoWeRPSUHort]

Wavelength is everything to a plant, remember light is both a particle and a wave. The wavelength is due to the frequency or the energy level of the wave, measured by the distance between wave crests or troughs. Unless the light is of the correct wavelength, the plant's chloroplasts will not absorb any energy usable for photosynthesis. Now these wave of light travel in packets called quanta (? check me); this is the particle nature of light and the higher the wattage the larger the quantity of quanta emitted for absorption by the plant. BUT...unless the quanta have the right wavelength, the energy will be reflected, absorbed as heat energy, or otherwise displaced, but most importatnly it will not contribute to rate of photosynthesis for the plant.



Light quality is of greater importance to plants than the light quantity. The suggestion otherwise is moot.

Quote[/b] ]My lighting advice: Go by intensity, as in the wattage of the bulbs. The higher the wattage, the better the light. I don't deal with all that color temperature and spectrum mumbo jumbo

 

[LLeopardGGecko]

Quote[/b] ]Light quality is of greater importance to plants than the light quantity. The suggestion otherwise is moot.

Well all I know is that I've used cool white bulbs, daylight bulbs, and warm white bulbs and I've never seen a difference in how well plants grow under them. The only difference I've seen is when I up the wattage.

 

[Gawd_oOo]

I don't know if it's just in my head or not, but to me I can feel heat on my hand when it is under one of the red lights, the plant and aquarium bulbs, but not any of the others, and all the bulbs are cool to the touch.

 

[Gawd_oOo]

Quote[/b] (PoWeRPSUHort @ Dec. 10 2005,7:38)]Wavelength is everything to a plant, remember light is both a particle and a wave. The wavelength is due to the frequency or the energy level of the wave, measured by the distance between wave crests or troughs. Unless the light is of the correct wavelength, the plant's chloroplasts will not absorb any energy usable for photosynthesis. Now these wave of light travel in packets called quanta (? check me); this is the particle nature of light and the higher the wattage the larger the quantity of quanta emitted for absorption by the plant. BUT...unless the quanta have the right wavelength, the energy will be reflected, absorbed as heat energy, or otherwise displaced, but most importatnly it will not contribute to rate of photosynthesis for the plant.

Lol, I am going to make a question from this and ask my Biology teacher, just to see if she has a clue what you are talking about. We are getting the 6 week crash course on the plant kingdom... My school is a joke.

 

[chloroplast]

Quote[/b] ]Light quality is of greater importance to plants than the light quantity. The suggestion otherwise is moot

I would respectfully disagree. It would do little good if the plant were exposed to light of the "correct" wavelength at a rate of one photon per day! Likewise, it would do little good if the plant were exposed to light of the "incorrect" wavelength at a very rapid rate. Thus, it seems evident to me that both the quality and quantity of light plants recieve are very important for their growth.

It is perfectly plausible that a plant receiving a large quantity of poor-quality light could have a GREATER rate of photosynthesis than a plant receiving a small quantity of good-quality light. This is due to the fact that it is the "relative percentage of chlorophyll-absorbed light" that changes respective to wavelength. To provide a quantitative example, Plant-#1 exposed to 10 units of 490nm-wavelength light (absorbing 80% of such light) would absorb LESS useable light per unit time than Plant-#2 exposed to 2000 units of 510nm-wavelength light (absorbing only 1% of such light).

 

[PoWeRPSUHort]

Quote[/b] (chloroplast @ Dec. 11 2005,1:05)]

Quote[/b] ]Light quality is of greater importance to plants than the light quantity. The suggestion otherwise is moot

I would respectfully disagree. It would do little good if the plant were exposed to light of the "correct" wavelength at a rate of one photon per day! Likewise, it would do little good if the plant were exposed to light of the "incorrect" wavelength at a very rapid rate. Thus, it seems evident to me that both the quality and quantity of light plants recieve are very important for their growth.

It is perfectly plausible that a plant receiving a large quantity of poor-quality light could have a GREATER rate of photosynthesis than a plant receiving a small quantity of good-quality light. This is due to the fact that it is the "relative percentage of chlorophyll-absorbed light" that changes respective to wavelength. To provide a quantitative example, Plant-#1 exposed to 10 units of 490nm-wavelength light (absorbing 80% of such light) would absorb LESS useable light per unit time than Plant-#2 exposed to 2000 units of 510nm-wavelength light (absorbing only 1% of such light).

As hawkeye pierce would say, chloroplast, you have a firm grasp for the obvious.


I stated that quality AND quantity were important but that UNLESS the wavelength is within the correct range, it does the plant NO GOOD!

The underlying reason for my posting in the first place was to DISPELL any misinformation that light qulaity is unimportant. That is an uninformed point of view and needs to be challenged.
Quantitiy is important of course, but I never suggested that low light levels of good quality light would be good for CPs.

BTW your example neds work, I can point you to a good plant physiology book.

 

[LLeopardGGecko]

Can't we all just get along?

 

[chloroplast]

Quote[/b] ]BTW your example neds work, I can point you to a good plant physiology book.

This is a good segue to the first statements I'd like to make:  I am not a plant biologist. I'm an MD/PhD student pursuing neurology/neuroscience.  My last exposure to college botany was way back in 2001 as a senior biology major.  I've done some reading on the side, but indoor gardening is just a hobby--so if plant science is your "thing" you'll have to excuse some of my ignorance.

That said, in my defense, the example wasn't meant to be a tome on the physiology of photosynthesis.  Rather, it was meant to simply show that typically, quality and quantity of ambient light are both important. In what respect does the example need "work"? I believe the overall arguement is sound. For the actual numbers, I relied on an absorbtion spectrum of chlorophyll depicted in the text Plant Biology, TR Rost et al; Wadsworth Publishing, 1998.  If this is what you are questioning, could you please provide a reference depicting what you believe is a more accurate absorbtion spectrum?  Thanks.

Quote[/b] ]I stated that quality AND quantity were important

I did not see this statement in your original post and I perceived the tone of your original statement to be biased in favor of quality over quantity.  If I was mistaken, I apologize.

Quote[/b] ]UNLESS the wavelength is within the correct range, it does the plant NO GOOD!

I would disagree with this.  Plants use light in many non-photosynthetic physiological processes, so just because a wavelength cannot be used for the purposes of photosynthesis does not make it unuseful.

Quote[/b] ]The underlying reason for my posting in the first place was to DISPELL any misinformation that light qulaity is unimportant.  That is an uninformed point of view and needs to be challenged.

I fully agree.  However, people on both sides of the fence have evidence supporting their view. Some people have seen greater benefit increasing quantity over quality and vice-versa.  Much of these statements are based on uncontrolled experimentation, so it's best if one uses them simply as general guidelines and find what works best for one's self.

As for myself, my plants seem very happy under cool whites, but I'm planning a small experiment to see whether some would do better under a mix under my growing conditions.

Quote[/b] ]Quantitiy is important of course, but I never suggested that low light levels of good quality light would be good for CPs.

Nor did I state you did.

Quote[/b] ]Can't we all just get along?

Mitch....always the voice of reason!!  

 No wonder why you have such awesome terraria!

I can't speak for PoWeRPSUHort, but I enjoy debating a topic every once in a while, so long as it remains reasonable, on-topic, and mature.  Synapses are like muscle--if you don't use them you lose them!  

Now, I've got to get back to watching my beloved Patriots wipe the floor (or snow-covered field) with the Bills!

 

[LLeopardGGecko]

Quote[/b] ]Mitch....always the voice of reason!! No wonder why you have such awesome terraria!

Just trying to keep the peace

 

[Gawd_oOo]

Ok, to take back my topic now...

After however few days it has been, I can say that my plants look tons better, Pinguicula are starting to redden abit. Pinguicula 'John Rizzi' is starting a flower. D. capensis typical are red and dewy. D. madagascariensis is getting red hairs.

 

[chloroplast]

Quote[/b] ]Ok, to take back my topic now...

Yeah, sorry about that! Sometimes threads get hijacked!

Quote[/b] ]After however few days it has been, I can say that my plants look tons better, Pinguicula are starting to redden abit. Pinguicula 'John Rizzi' is starting a flower. D. capensis typical are red and dewy. D. madagascariensis is getting red hairs.

Not bad--congrats. Seems like the plants are liking the lighting! A few of my pings are flowering--I absolutely love the shape of their flowers.

 

[Gawd_oOo]

Yesterday at school we were looking at the anatomy of flowers.

I took a flower from my P. 'Aphrodite' and a few scapes from U. lividia. It was really neat to get a look at them under the disecting scope. It will definatly help in my attempts at pollenating the pings.

Ya, I only mentioned the Rizzi, because this will be the first flower for me. I have a few that seem to never stop flowering.