what type of clams under T5 lights?

nunofs

Non-member
I'm thinking of adding a clam to my tank, a 75g with 324W of T5 lighting. I have pretty good growth and coloration on all corals I have (both SPS and LPS) but I'm still concerned that not all clams would do well in my tank.

I'm pretty sure a Derasa would do fine, but they get large and I like the coloration of the Crocea better, which also stay smaller but supposedly need much more light... I believe the Squamosa and Maxima grow even larger than the Derasa, so those two are out.

Anyone with experiences (good or bad) keeping clams under T5s? Any opinions on whether a Crocea would do well (not just barely survive) with my setup?

Thanks,
Nuno
 
Nuno I'm a clam-newbie, so I can't offer any advice on that front. But for the clam experts who may not have had the opportunity to see your tank, I can vouch for the fact that Nuno's tank is VERY BRIGHT! It's amazing that there's no metal halide above that tank. Nice color of light too.

I'd say your tank has about as much light as my 3x 175W MH.
 
i think that much T5 light would allow you to have just about any clam you want but you might want to start off with a derasa or squamosa, as they are lower-light clams. but i would think a maxima or crocea up in your rocks would be fine.
 
I had 2 crocea, 1 black maxima and a squamosa under 4-54w T5s overdriven. Suppose to be equivalent to 320w. I had the squamosa on the sand but the max and croceas 1/2 way up on the rocks in a standard 90 (24"?? to the sand). No problems what so ever.
 
normally id say under t5's is pushing it for clams, but nate knows his stuff if its really that bright then its probably fine...i have mine under 2 250s and 2 t5's in a 75g so i dont have that much trouble...except w/electric bill.
 
I`ve been researching the same topic on diffrent forums and they say that a Derasa,Squamosa and hippo can be kept under my lighting(440 vho)as long as most of the bulbs are 10k.
 
I have my durasa under a single 175 MH in my 37 and he's doing awesome. I never thought I'd get into clamms, but he/she is one of our favorites in the tank.
 
i have seen people keep them under 150w hqi in a 30g cube...it looked pretty good.
 
Thanks for the input, everyone!

Wrassefan's positive experience has me feeling a bit more confortable going with a Crocea... though if I find a colorful Derasa that I like, I may end up going with that... have to go clam shopping one of these days :)

Anyone has opposite views, namely trying a clam under T5s and having it not do well?

Nuno
 
Btw, my T5 setup is not overdriven, it's 6x54W on Triad ballasts... so I still have the option of swapping those ballasts for a pair of IC660 and getting a bit more light out of the same bulbs, in which case I'd be at about 480W... but I'll only go that route if I really must.

Nuno
 
I conclude that non-over driven T5 is no better than PC light. It is so confusing after all the info and mis-info on the web.
 
Dong, I'm not sure how you reached that conclusion but I don't agree at all... although they are close in terms of the underlying technology (both PCs and T5s are just thin fluorescents), the big difference is that you can get reflectors for T5 bulbs that will manage to aim most of the reflected light into the tank, while with PCs (due to them being U-shaped) the reflectors can never be as efficient (ie, a lot of reflected light hits the bulbs again and never reaches the tank). Now, if you get a cheap T5 fixture like the ones that are being sold on eBay with a single flat reflector for 4 or 6 bulbs, then it's probably close to the output you'd get with the same wattage of PCs... but with individual reflectors (from IceCap or SLS) I believe T5s are much brighter than PCs (I used to have PCs over my nano).

Nuno
 
Actually I talked to people who is not in the hobby but in the research lab. The reason for T-5 is cost saving, not more light output. The real deal is MH and T-5 will never reach the light output level at the same watt. Of course, if you have 500w of T-5, you may be able to get the light intesitiy of 150w MH. But that is a lot of wasted energy.
 
dz6t said:
I conclude that non-over driven T5 is no better than PC light. It is so confusing after all the info and mis-info on the web.
wrong...too many people have had too much success keeping sps and clams with T5 lighting for your statement to be true. Do some research before you throw out a statement like that. I had kept sps and clams for over a yr with a ton of growth and success. Have you even seen T5s in a tank??
 
I would have thought that as well if I didnt see wrassefans tank in person and pics with T-5s and the colors he was getting
 
dz6t said:
The reason for T-5 is cost saving, not more light output.


If it's cost saving, it puts out more light per dollar, right? What else would be cost saving about a light?

The advantage of T5, as I understand it, is that while they probably produce a similar amount of light as VHO (T12) and PC, a much higher proportion of the light produced can be harnessed and directed towards the tank. It's really only a difference of geometry. Otherwise the tubes operate on the same principle for all three. The difference with T5s is that their narrowness allows them to be efficiently surrounded by reflectors, unlike VHO and PC.

At least that's my theoretical understanding of it. In practice, seeing it in action over Nuno's or Andy's tank just shows you that these things just produce more light in the tank than any PC or VHO I've seen or used.

Nate
 
I tried clams when I had 175 MHs w/ 2 VHO bulbs and I still couldn't keep them alive for long and growing. It wasn't until I went to the 250 DE HQI bulbs that they started doing WELL.
 
Back
Top