Blue vs. Red Action Spectrum: Scientific answers to the age old question

[gojo]

Hi,

Below I list the effects of the blue and red wavelength (action and absorption spectrum) in regards to their interaction with plants*...hint: blue wins (kind of) ;)
*not species/strain specific

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Measurements:
-Action Spectra of Photosynthesis (ASP) = 400-500nm and 600-700nm
-Chlorophyll Carotenoids Absorption Spectra (CCAS) = 400-500nm and 600-700nm
-Photosynthetic ally Active Radiation (PAR) = 400-700nm
-Quantum Yield Curve = ASP x CAS (Chlorophyll Absorption Spectra)
-Plant Usable Radiation (PUR) = PAR with QYC
-Photosynthetic Photon Flux (PPF) = Photons within PAR
-Blue PAR = 400-500nm
-Blue PAR 'sweet-spot' = 480nm
-Red PAR = 600-700nm
-Red PAR 'sweet-spot' = 650nm
-PAR Average (PARA) = 400-500nm%:600-700nm%

PAR is a good method of measurement considering it includes ASP and CCAS and all bulbs offer their spectral output within PAR range.

PUR is PAR adjusted to take the Quantum Yield Curve (https://cannabis-world.org/cw/showthread.php?t=3760) into account so wavelengths are weighted according to QYC

PPF is the amount of photons emitted in specific time/area within the PAR range; all wavelengths are weighted equally.

PARA is the average percent of relative energy emitted within Blue PAR and Red PAR.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Regarding lumens, PAR and photons:
The only accurate type of measurement for light intensity is "Photosynthetic Photon Flux" (PPF) and to a greater extent "Photosynthetic Photon Flux Density" (PPFD). Lumens and PAR are grossly inaccurate when measuring the actual plant usable light energy produced by a bulb.
Here is why :
a) higher levels of lumens does not necessarily mean more plant usable light (in most cases it means the opposite)...its about Quantum Yield Curve (ASP x CAS) and amount of photons (PPF).
b) a bulb with a high PAR rating only means the bulb emits more of its energy within the 400-700nm wavelength; not the amount in regards to photons.
c) PPF measures microEinsteins per square meter per second, for photons having wavelengths between 400-700 nm (PAR). This has the same limitation as the PAR watt, by treating all wavelengths in the range as equally useful for plant growth (eg. equal weight). This is why we can use blue and red PARA, PARA ratio and PUR, etc.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Blue PAR (400-500nm):
-increased photosynthesis
-preferred by chlorophyll b**
-preferred less than, but nearly as much as red by chlorophyll a
-stimulates the phototropic response (plants grow towards blue light)
-zeitlupe is a blue light receptor*
-phototropin is a blue light receptor*
-cryptochrome is a blue light receptor*
-zeaxanthin is a blue receptive pigment that opens stoma in daylight (important if you add Co2)
-carotenoids*** absorb blue light and transfer the energy to chlorophyll b (helps offset lower efficiency of blue photon)
-wavelength is shorter and higher in energy, blue photons are absorbed less efficiently (lower action rate due to photons higher energy)

*The blue light receptors do a variety of the following:
mediate blue light-induced phototropism (circadian rhythms), chloroplast re-localization, opening of the stomatal aperture and stimulates proton pumps that drive protons out of the cells which starts off a whole set of reactions; electrochemical gradients, osmosis of water, etc.

**Chlorophyll b is naturally more concentrated in the lower section of higher plants, especially in shaded plant matter. When plant matter is in the shade Chlorophyll b will accumulate in greater amounts.

***Carotenoids are naturally more concentrated in/near the canopy of higher plants. When a plant is under intense blue PAR light carotenoids will accumulate in greater amounts in the canopy.

Red PAR (600-700nm):
-enables the conversion of starch into malate which keeps the stomata open. (important if you add Co2)
-preferred by chlorophyll a, although blue is preferred nearly as much by chlorophyll a
-nearly all plants have a higher concentration of chlorophyll a than chlorophyll b
-wavelength is longer and lower in energy, red photons are absorbed more efficiently (higher action rate due to photons lower energy)

-----------------------------------------------

PAR for HID lights!:
Here is great info* (http://pcp.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/47/3/419) I found regarding the specific PAR for HID! :)
*the results of this article needs further review and study, the field of blue light photoreceptor is a young one without much depth...yet


Basically the info says:
a) within a half an hour plants under blue PAR (specifically 450nm) show a striking accumulation of mRNA (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messenger_RNA) when compared to green and red wavelengths
b) mRNA increases proportionately to light intensity (eg. photons, as measured in PPF using a Quantum Meter, even to levels higher than required by photosynthesis.
c) mRNA rapidly dissipates when the plant is in the dark
d) there may be a known or unknown blue light receptor (see above) which initiates the process of accumulating mRNA*
*This experiment was conducted with green alga focusing on the Lhl4 gene


Lhl4 encodes a distant relative of light-harvesting Chl-a/b proteins in the green alga Chlamydomonas reinhardtii. Lhl4 mRNA markedly accumulated within 30 min after illumination and in proportion to the light intensity up to a fluence rate much higher than that required for photosynthesis. The high intensity light (HL)-induced accumulation of Lhl4 mRNA required continuous illumination, and the mRNA level rapidly decreased when the cells were placed in the dark. HL only slightly stabilized the mRNA, suggesting that the HL-induced expression of the Lhl4 gene is primarily regulated at the level of transcription. Blue light was more effective for inducing Lhl4 gene expression than green or red light, and far-red light had no effect. The action spectrum for Lhl4 gene expression was examined at wavelengths between 325 and 775 nm using the Okazaki Large Spectrograph. The obtained spectrum showed a distinct peak in the blue region (450 nm) and a shoulder in the UV-A region (375 nm). The curve in the spectrum rose steeply in the short wavelength UV region. In addition, we observed two minor peaks in the green (575 nm) and the red (675 nm) regions. The action spectrum suggests that a blue/UV-A light photoreceptor with a flavin-based chromophore participates in the HL response of Lhl4 gene expression. However, the hypersensitivity to near UV-B light suggests the involvement of an unidentified UV light perception system in the expression of the Lhl4 gene.
------------------------------------------------------------

Results:
In the end it is PPF that really matters. At this time it seems the most beneficial light source would be a HID (600-1000watt for mRNA) with the correct level of PPF (higher is better, 1200-2000) and the following focused wavelength ratio; blue to red PAR of 60:40.

------------------------------------------------------------

Benchmark for PPF:
What we need is a bunch of data from a Quantum Meter using MH and HPS with cannabis as the test subject. Then we could determine a benchmark for PPF*, PARA and PUR ratio. I bet the blue:red PARA ratio and blue:red PUR ratio of 60:40 or 50:50 will prove the most beneficial considering "Spectral Adaptation" .
*I suggest as a starting benchmark of 1200-2000 PPF.

Thoughts?

Graph A: "Chlorophyll Carotenoids Absorption Spectra"
Graph B: "Action Spectra of Photosynthesis"
http://img2.freeimagehosting.net/uploads/38e7c1d10f.gif (http://www.freeimagehosting.net/)

[gojo]

So how about a real world solution you ask...

Right now the 'best' bulb and HID in terms of PAR is the Hortilux-Blue 1000MH...sorry about that to the HPS/lumens crowd...:p

The reasons I choose the Blue MH are based upon available and accurate scientific information (see thread starting post):
a) Lumens are not a factor in this choice as they are not an accurate measurment.
b)Photons (PPF/D) are not a factor in this choice as their measurements are not known.

*A bonus to MH is they are cooler running and cost less than HPS.

The Blue MH offers 45-50% relative energy (wavelength) within the blue PAR and 25-30% is in the red PAR. Not to mention that the whole PAR range is produced by the Blue MH.

-----------------------------------------

Spectral Graph of Hortilux Blue 1000watt MH
(PAR range is 400-700nm)
http://img528.imageshack.us/img528/554/hortbluespecdm2.th.gif (http://img528.imageshack.us/my.php?image=hortbluespecdm2.gif)

[c-ray]

great post
plants that mature in the fall outside of the tropics need more red light though, while tropical sativas should in theory do fine with more blue light all the way through

[gojo]

> great post

Thanks! :)

> plants that mature in the fall outside of the tropics need more red light though

Do you have any scientific data to show this? As thats what I used to think too, but it turns out blue PAR heavy light with a good amount of red PAR is most benifical to plants regardless of the season or location.

Photons are the most important factor in terms of useful light energy. Then comes wavelength, as long as the photons are within the PAR range plants thrive, blue an red PAR are not nearly important as PPFD.

That theroy I think falls into the realm of "old wives tale"...but I could be mistaken.

Have a good day!

[c-ray]

what I meant is they need more red light relative to plants in the tropics, not more red than blue light, I agree they need lots of blue light overall but plants outside the tropics are used/acclimatised to a more red light rich environment, especially later in flowering...hps bulbs are way red (orange and yellow too)

http://web.uconn.edu/poultry/NE-127/Images/Spectrum1/Slide1.JPG

[gojo]

> more red light relative to plants in the tropics

ah, I misunderstood you. And yes I agree, which is why I suggested we create a benchmark for PPF/D specific to cannabis. All the data I've posted is non-cannabis related. So maybe a blue PAR:red PAR ratio of 60:40 or 55:4 maybe that would be more appropriate...someone needs to get one of those Quantum Meters so we won't have to guess any longer ;)

Thanks an nice graph :)

BTW, I added a bit more info to my thread starting post I forgot to add. It shows how using high intesity blue PAR light creates a reaction in the plant so more carotenoids are produced (to handle the extra blue photons). Just another reason to use higher wattage HIDs.

Here's what I added:
**Chlorophyll b is naturally more concentrated in the lower section of higher plants, especially in shaded plant matter. When plant matter is in the shade Chlorophyll b will accumulate in greater amounts.

***Carotenoids are naturally more concentrated in/near the canopy of higher plants. When a plant is under intense blue PAR light carotenoids will accumulate in greater amounts in the canopy.

:)

[gojo]

Hey,

Just thinking about what you said regarding % of red PAR vs % of blue PAR and red/blue levels overall...I did some math and come up with some interesting results:

A blue PAR:red PAR ratio of 60/40 reudced is:
1.5:1

The Hortilux Blue 1000watt MH has a ratio of 45:25 (by my naked eye exam of the graph) and that reduced is:
1.8:1

1.5:1 and 1.8:1 are not too far off. It seems the Hortilux Blue may still be the best choice for now.

I have yet to look into any other bulbs except the SunMaster line and the HPS-One. The Hort Blue is far superior to any of the SunMaster bulbs or the HPS-One. I would like to see some numbers from HPS bulbs if anyone has time?

:)

[The Cannarchist]

I have a sunmaster warm delux MH 1000w,that should fit the profile gojo?

[jamaicamon]

I don't know about the profile but sunmaster warm deluxe is a really nice bulb with more blue spectrum (according to my eyes anyway). they run noticeably hotter than a hps though and need more space between bulb and tops or air cooling to bring 'em close.... if my memory serves me right.

[gojo]

Hi Cannarchist,

> I have a sunmaster warm delux MH 1000w,that should fit the profile gojo?

Sorry no, not even close. But thats not to say you can't grow great cannabis with that bulb, as I'm sure you know ;) . I used to use that exact bulb until I started researching...take a look at the SunMaster Spectral Output and compare that to the Hort Blue Spectral Output

Spectral Output of SunMaster Warm Delux 1000watt:
(click to enlarge)
http://img87.imageshack.us/img87/4421/smwarmdelux1000mp6.th.jpg (http://img87.imageshack.us/my.php?image=smwarmdelux1000mp6.jpg)

Spectral output of Hortilux Blue 1000watt:
(click to enlarge)
http://img528.imageshack.us/img528/554/hortbluespecdm2.th.gif (http://img528.imageshack.us/my.php?image=hortbluespecdm2.gif)

Here is what I see from the graph:
a) The SM bulb has two distinct spikes and a few other smaller spikes within PAR*.
b) The first spike is at 480nm which is within blue PAR and is also the blue PAR 'sweet-spot' (650nm is the red 'sweet-spot').
c) The second spike is not within blue PAR at 575nm.
d) As you can see the rest of the PAR range is 2-5% and there are few spikes in blue PAR up to 20%
e) light energy in the blue PAR range is lacking and incomplete
f) light energy in the red PAR range is practically non-existent at 2%**.

*This in and of itself is not good as the whole PAR range should be produced in relative proportionality. This is especially important in regards to blue PAR an red PAR as they are a range and a spike does not fill the range. A good bulb should provide light through the whole blue and red PAR (450-500nm and 650-700nm, respectively).

**Red PAR is very important (as you know), thus the low red PAR % makes the SunMaster a non-starter for me.

-----------------------------------------------

The cold, hard numbers...

A blue PAR:red PAR ratio of 60:40 reduced is:
1.5:1

The SunMaster has a blue PAR:red PAR ratio of 45:2 (by my naked eye exam of the graph) and that reduced is:
22.5:1

So again the SM bulb does not fair very well...

--------------------------------

I guess the question now is do you have 200.00 for a Hortilux Blue 1000? :)

Cheers

[c-ray]

once upon a time there was an electrodeless sulfur lamp that promised to deliver us from wicked babylon, unfortunately it only surfaced for a brief period and then vanished...check out the spectral emissions they give me a woody

http://www.lightinglab.fi/facilities/LightPipe/lightpipe4_150.gif

actually if you check this link (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sulfur_lamp) and scroll to the bottom of the page you will see there are some companies getting into this again

RuUhZxkr194

knight 4 to pawn 3...you sunk my battleship!

[gojo]

Holy Jesus!!!
Where has that bulb been all my life? That is an amazing output, I wonder what the photon level is...man I wish those were in hobby-style production.

cheers,

[c-ray]

<insert conspiracy theory here>

[gojo]

haha, just viewed the youtube video, nice song title ;)

The good thing about the Hort Blue is it means the manufacturers are going in the right direction. I foresee the next generation of bulbs (2-3 years) to emit a high % blue:red PAR along with higher PPFD. I also think they will stop advertising lumen level and start advertising PPF level (or at least they should).

I think I'll conatact Hortilux and ask what the Blue 1000watt PPF level is...

:)

[jamaicamon]

ahhh well. we've just been taken to school Cannarchist. thanks guys.

[The Cannarchist]

Gojo,

How about the Hortilux 1000w super blue,the one with the 600w HPS and 400W MH in the same bulb?

[Green Supreme]

Fancy schmancy. Peace GS

[The Cannarchist]

http://www.eyehortilux.com/superblue.html

[c-ray]

lots of yellow on those

http://www.eyehortilux.com/images/LU1000MH_dist.gif

[The Cannarchist]

I'd never seen that until I checked out the eyehortilux site.

Those and the MH Hortilux blue retail around the $150-200 mark.Online that is,should be around the $75 CDN mark at the local vietcong store.

[gojo]

Hey Cannarchist,

Yea, c-ray is right; way too much yellow and not enough blue PAR or red PAR. The Hortilux Blue 1000watt is the way to go...

cheers :)

[gojo]

Photons within PAR is the key:

I still need to find out the PPFD of the Hort Blue so we know how much light energy is being emitted by the bulb...otherwise were working in the dark, so to speak ;). Then I'm going to contact a few different HPS bulb manufacturers and find out what the PPFD is for their bulbs. I will use this and each bulbs spectral output for comparison.

I have yet to find any data regarding which type of HID produces more photons in general. We know HPS produces more lumens but I'm not sure how/if that correlates to photons.

cheers

[The Cannarchist]

Low life hours at 6000 rated and horizontal only.....What are the other companies doing along those same lines I wonder?

[c-ray]

Low life hours at 6000 rated and horizontal only.....What are the other companies doing along those same lines I wonder?

which light is that?



switch it on please
lveEQWrDRuI

[gojo]

c-ray:
> which light is that?

The Hort Blue I believe.

cannachist:
> Low life hours at 6000 rated and horizontal only

yea, it's life hours are kind of low.

As far as other companies and other R&D bulbs I don't know. I know Hortilux makes a few bulbs in MH an HPS. Maybe if you shoot them an email with some info from this thread and your question they may be able to help? I think the most beneficial HID would be an HPS with the PPF/D mentioned earlier.

[c-ray]

I wonder what the life span would be with a digital ballast?

[The Cannarchist]

Good point.

Another one with good blue ,from memory, was the solarmax 600w MH conversion bulb.

[The Cannarchist]

Can't find a spectral chart for it though.

[gojo]

Hey guys,

OK, I've thought about the bulb cannachist mentioned and I did a little research with some interesting/confusing results:

-----------------------------

First the confusing part:

a) This is the spectral graph for the Hort Blue 1000watt on the website (http://www.eyehortilux.com/blue.html):
(click to enlarge)
http://img528.imageshack.us/img528/554/hortbluespecdm2.th.gif (http://img528.imageshack.us/my.php?image=hortbluespecdm2.gif)


b) and this is the spectral graph for the same Hort Blue 1000watt from the Hort Blue PDF (http://www.eyehortilux.com/tb/blue/EQS-N-52-78-57945.pdf):
http://img375.imageshack.us/img375/163/graph2fd4.th.png (http://img375.imageshack.us/my.php?image=graph2fd4.png)


In the website graph the blue PAR:red PAR ratio is 45:25 which is 1.8:1 reduced (the goal is 1.5:1). But in the PDF graph the blue PAR:red PAR ratio is 20:15 which is 1.3:1 reduced. I would hope the website graph is correct as it's numbers are better than the PDF graph.

I'll contact them and see what the deal is.

------------------------------------

Now the interesting part:

The Hort Super-Blue actually looks like it may be a contender as the superior bulb vs. the Hort Blue. The Hort Super-Blue has a blue PAR:red PAR ratio of 20:10, that reduced is:
2:1

Our goal is:
1.5:1

So the Hort Super-Blue is not too far off and I would be happy using those numbers. The blue:red PAR ratio is less important than photons within PAR.

If the Hort Blue graph from the website (45:25) is accurate then the Hort Super-Blue in inferior in terms of blue PAR:red PAR and PAR overall. However, if the other graph is accurate (25:20) then the Hort Super-Blue is nearly equal when you consider PPFD is the determining factor.

Another issue to consider is lumens. Yes, I know I said they don't matter and they don't...but until we get the PPF the level of lumens is the only determining factor between bulbs in terms of light energy (beggars can't be choosers ;) )

Initial lumens of Hort Super-Blue:
110,000

Initial lumens of Hort Blue:
80,000

The other advantage to the Super-Blue are it's life hours at 10,000, but it can only be run horizontally.

-----------------------------------------

So the Hort Blue and Super-Blue seem to be neck-to-neck with the caveat of the accurate Hort Blue spectrum graph. So the determining factor will be photons as PPFD...I hope the Hortilux tech people have those numbers!

I am betting the Super-Blue will outperform the Blue. Maybe not in terms of highest % of blue/red PAR and overall PAR, but possibly in terms of PPFD (which is most important).

I'll contact them as I'm really interested in which one is Superior. Thanks for the link, I did not know of the Super-Blue :D

> Another one with good blue ,from memory, was the solarmax 600w MH conversion bulb.

If I have time I'll try to look into it.


cheers,

[c-ray]

good stuff

any idea what the blue PAS/red PAS for an HPS would be?

[gojo]

Hey c-ray,

> any idea what the blue PAR:red PAR for an HPS would be?

In general or average? No. Each bulb has a different spectrum and many (most) do not even attempt to emit light energy in the blue PAR:red PAR ranges...Hell there just now trying to emit light energy in PAR and forget about PPFD. They just don't care about it or don't know about it. I suspect they don't know because this info is fairly new and unless they have a good R&D team (like Iwasaki) they are in the dark.

--------------------------

I was thinking a bit more (yea, I do too much of that) regarding the red PAR % of the Hort Super-blue vs. Hort Blue.

Ideal 60:40 ratio:
1.5:1

Hort Blue website graph:
1.8:1

Hort Blue PDF graph:
1.3:1

Hort Super-Blue:
2:1

So regardless of which Hort Blue bulb graph is accurate the Hort Blue bulb contains more % of red PAR than the Hort Super-Blue. Once again though it is photons which are the determining factor. But it is interesting and a bit funny that the MH has more red PAR then the HPS/MH :D

cheers,

[gojo]

Hey all,

Just an update: I spoke with the Hortilux people and they going to measure the PPFD for the Blue and Super-Blue for me (as they don't have this info handy). In a few days they will contact me with the results! :D Talk about customer service...Horitlux rocks!

I also asked for PPFD within blue PAR and red PAR along with the PPFD. I know they'll do the PPFD bit but they may not do the PPFD blue:red PAR bit. If they don't do the blue/red PAR stuff we can do it with a bit of guesstimation.

:D

[gojo]

One more bit of info (I also need to add to first post):

-red light contains more photons than blue light.

[c-ray]

good work buddy!

[The Cannarchist]

yep,Good work indeed Gojo.

You show me the bulb and I'll do a test on it.

[gojo]

Hey,

Accurate and reproducible measurements to be used as determining factors in bulb quality and bulb comparison:

I want a method to (fairly) accurately measure the average % of relative energy emitted within the blue and red PAR (to be used as a tool for comparison and judgment).

To know how effective a bulb is for plants we can use the following data:
-The PPFD
-The PPFD within blue and red PAR

The first we have, the second we do not. So we need a method to judge the average % of relative energy in both blue and red PAR; I will call this "PARA" (PAR Average). With PARA we have another method (besides PPFD) to judge a bulb via. it's levels and ratios of blue PARA and red PARA.

So we now have two methods to judge a bulb:
1) PPFD
2) PARA levels and ratios

With these two methods we can also compare bulbs to one another regardless of MH/HPS issues (...I think, I'm not a math guy)...with a few caveats:
-PPFD is to be used as the main determining factor
-When blue:red PARA ratios of two bulbs are equal (or close to it) the bulb with the highest % relative energy in blue, red or a combo of both* wins. (*relative to what the comparison is).
-I am assuming the bulb is hung as close as possible to the canopy (ex. 1.5' for 1000w). This circumvents the need to take light distance into the equation in regards to the amount PPFD actually reaching the canopy and sub-canopy.

----------------

OK, time to take a break and then I'll post the PARA results (with graphs because I like pictures ;) ) of the Hort Super-Blue and Hort Blue bulbs...I hope we can compile a list of different bulbs data.

----------------

Here is an example of the Plantstar bulb which shows the data we would use in a perfect world: PPFD, PPF in blue PAR and PPFD in red PAR:
(see the nm and photon info below the section "Plant-specific parameters for the 400 and 600 W lamps")

Click to enlarge:
http://img61.imageshack.us/img61/4565/plantastarspecses5.th.jpg (http://img61.imageshack.us/my.php?image=plantastarspecses5.jpg)
cheers

[gojo]

Hey,

Here is the results of the blue and red PARA, their levels and ratios. I am tired so I will only post the pics, test results and preliminary conclusion now...tomorrow I will come back and explain how to figure out PARA.

---------------------------

Hortilux Super-Blue 1000watt HPS:

1. This is the Super-Blue spectral graph broken down into sections and the lines show my points of measurement (they correlate to X and Y columns in spread-sheet).
B = Blue PAR
R = Red PAR
* = Sweet Spot
http://img2.freeimagehosting.net/uploads/3413c1296b.png (http://www.freeimagehosting.net/)

2. Here is a screen shot of the spread-sheet showing the % of relative energy in 10nm increments with 11 measurements:

http://img2.freeimagehosting.net/uploads/53607587c0.png (http://www.freeimagehosting.net/)







Hortilux Blue 1000watt MH:

1. This is the Blue spectral graph broken down into sections and the lines show my points of measurement (they correlate to X and Y columns in spread-sheet).
B = Blue PAR
R = Red PAR
* = Sweet Spot
http://img2.freeimagehosting.net/uploads/2c17a75b60.png (http://www.freeimagehosting.net/)



2. Here is a screen shot of the spread-sheet showing the % of relative energy in 10nm increments with 11 measurements:

http://img2.freeimagehosting.net/uploads/ccd427f2c5.png (http://www.freeimagehosting.net/)






-----------------------------------------------


Results:

Super-Blue:
Blue PARA = 20
Red PARA = 27
blue:red PARA ratio = 1:1.3

Blue:
Blue PARA = 44
Red PARA = 37
blue:red PARA ratio = 1.2:1

----------------------------------------------------------

Preliminary Conclusion:


Either way both bulbs are very good in terms of PARA. PPFD will prove who is the superior, hopefully the tech people will have that in a day or two.

--------------------------

cheers,

[gojo]

Added a new part to the blue PAR section in post #1:

-stimulates the phototropic response (plants grow towards blue light)

more later

[gojo]

Hey,

I was reviewing the CCAS and ASP and I noticed that I should be using a blue PAR of 400-500nm and red PAR of 600-700nm. The reason is Chlorophyll A is absorbed within the blue PAR at 400-425nm and chlorophyll B is absorbed in red PAR at 410 or so...I was using 450-500nm and 650-700nm.

I have updated the info, results, pics and spread-sheet in this post:
https://www.cannabis-world.org/cw/showpost.php?p=58732&postcount=37

As reference here the new PARA ratios:
Super-Blue
Blue PARA = 20
Red PARA = 27
PARA ratio = 1:1.3

Blue
Blue PARA = 44
Red PARA = 37
PARA ratio = 1.2:1

----------------------------------------------------------

Fixing a typo:

I also noticed that I have been typing "PAS" and "PASA" instead of "PAR" and "PARA" (...damn Blockhead ;) ). The typo has no effect on the results or method. I went through this thread and fixed all my typo's.

-------------------------------------------------

Updated info:

I updated the first post a bit with more accurate terminology and definitions. Here's what I added:


Measurments:
-Action Spectra of Photosynthesis (ASP) = 450-700nm
-Chlorophyll Carotenoids Absorption Spectra (CCAS) = 400-700nm
-Photosynthetically Active Radiation* (PAR) = 400-700nm
-Blue PAR = 400-500nm
-Blue PAR 'sweet-spot' = 480nm
-Red PAR = 600-700nm
-Red PAR 'sweet-spot' = 650nm
-PARA = The average percent of relative energy emitted within (1) Blue PAR and (2) Red PAR.
*Is a good method of measurment concidering it includes ASP and CCAS

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Regarding lumens, PAR and photons:
The only accurate type of measurement for light intensity is "Photosynthetic Photon Flux Density" (PPFD) within blue PAR and red PAR. Lumens and PAR are grossly inaccurate when measuring the actual plant usable light energy produced by a bulb.
Here is why :
a) higher levels of lumens does not necessarily mean more plant usable light (in most cases it means the opposite)...its about PAR wavelength and amount of photons (PPFD).
b) a bulb with a high PAR rating only means the bulb emits more of its energy within the 400-700nm wavelength; not the amount of light.
c) PPFD measures microEinsteins per square meter per second, for photons having wavelengths between 400-700 nm (PAR). This has the same limitation as the PAR watt, by treating all wavelengths in the range as equally useful for plant growth which is why we need to use blue and red PARA and PARA ratio's.



:D

[The Cannarchist]

My brain hurts.....

But at least I can figure it out.

Thanks Gojo.

[Green Supreme]

So have we decided a winner yet? Peace GS

[The Cannarchist]

The Hort "Blue" has the closest ratio to the desired 1.5:1 @ 1.4:1

[gojo]

Hi,

Well, you are mostly correct. I forgot to adjust the red PAR and red PARA to 600-700nm (I am currently using 650-700nm). Chlorophyll B is absorbed in red PAR at 410-420 (or so) and ASP is high even at 420nm.

So I am now uploading the last and final update to the pics and PARA results.


Here's the *real* results using 400-500nm and 600-700nm:
------------------------------------------
Super-Blue
Blue PARA = 20
Red PARA = 27
PARA ratio = 1:1.3

Blue
Blue PARA = 44
Red PARA = 37
PARA ratio = 1.2:1


So cannarchist is still correct, the Blue is closer to the 1.5:1 at 1.2:1. The Super-Blue has a higher ratio red PARA at 1:1.3.

So it will be interesting to see which bulb provides more PPFD as right now we have a nice little "blue (MH) vs. red (HPS)" trial as the Hort Blue is mostly blue PARA and the Hort Super-Blue is mostly red PARA. :D

Sorry about all these annoying fixes and updates. I have to do my posting late at night when I'm really tired. But now it's all correct and no more updates (until the PPFD results)...I promise!

--------------------------------------------------

> So have we decided a winner yet? Peace GS

I personally like the Hort Blue so far, but it's up to PPFD.

:)

[gojo]

> my brain hurts...

Sorry about that :) and I'm looking forward to see your test grow with the winner :D :D :D

[gojo]

Ok...I have the PPF levels! and much more :D (...without Horitlux ;) )

Hort Blue 1000w MH:
(see below for defintions)
-PPF = 1327.573
-PUR = 838
-Total Blue PUR = 445.063
-Blue:Red PARA (from my spread sheet) = 1.2:1 (55:45)
-Blue:Red PUR ratio (inverse of Knna's to match PARA) = 1:1 (50:50)
-System Efficiency = 28.59%

Hort Super-Blue 1000w HPS:
-PPF = 1426.000
-PUR = 928.529
-Total Blue PUR = 278.345
-Blue:Red PARA (from my spread sheet) = 1:1.3 (45:55)
-Blue:Red PUR ratio (inverse of Knna's to match PARA) = 1:2 (33:67)
-System Efficiency = 30.23%

Hortilux Eye Super-HPS 1000w...holy PPF batman!
-PPF = 1805.494
-PUR = 1246.680
-Total Blue PUR = 222.904
-Blue:Red PUR ratio (inverse of Knna's to match PARA) = 1:4 (25:75)
-System Efficiency = 36.52%

Note: Next post I'll post pics of the results and the spead sheed itself so any of you can use it to figure out your bulb.

Deteriming Factors:
IMVHO as long as a bulb is emitting 1200-2000 PPF* it is a good bulb...with the caveat you keep the bulb as close to the canopy as possbile (thus negating the need to figure the PPF/D which is not a trivial task). PPF is a much more important factor than specific spectral measurements in regards to PPF per nm (eg. PUR**) or otherwise.

*PPF levels as a point of reference:
-Sun at noon in mid-winter emits: 1200 PPF
-Sun at noon in mid-summer emits: 2000 PPF
-Tomato and other sun-loving veg/fruits grow vigorously under: 400-1000 PPF

**If PUR is also used as a form of measurement use 600-800 PUR per meter squared (65-85 PUR per sq foot) for a fairly close approximation of 60-80 wpsf:
600-800 PUR pms = 65-85 PUR psf = 60-80 wpsf

Due to "Spectral Adaptation" (https://www.cannabis-world.org/cw/showthread.php?t=3760) and other un-quantified variables (accessory pigments, blue light photo-receptors, cytokinins, etc) I think a 60:40 or even 50:50 [1:1] ratio of blue (400-500nm) to red (600-700nm) PARA and/or PUR is most beneficial...regardless of MH or HPS HID source.

---------------------------------
Decisions, decisions, decisions:

So by those figues the Super-HPS wins as it has higher PPF, period. But if you want to get into murky waters we sure can ;) ...

a) I am curious as to the growth/yield increase with 1800 PPF vs. 1400 PPF. Is there a ceiling (eg. rate of diminishing returns) to PPFs benifit? The sun averages at 1600 PPF at noon so is 1800 PPF benifical?

b) Then we have to consider PUR along with blue & red PAR: how important are they in relation to PPF? (especailly the UV range of 350-400nm; think THC production and color).

c) If we keep PPF between 1200 and 2000 then PUR and b&r PAR IMVHO will play a greater role...My hunch is that a plant grows just as well under 1400 PPF as 1800 PPF...but I could be wrong.

d) If I were going to buy a new bulb I would buy the Hortilux Blue 1000watt MH with a PL Maxima reflector. I know the PPF and PUR are much less but I think there may be a PPF ceiling (as is the case with wpsf) and Hort Blue offers much more in terms of fuller PAR and what I concider to be more beneficial blue:red ratio of 50:50 to 60:40.

Although 1800 PPF, 1250 PUR and 25:75 PUR blue:red ratio does sound really good for flowering. I would be very likely to suggest the Hort Super-HPS for flower...I may do the same...once I look at the spectral graph and find the blue and red PARA and their ratios.

e) A good bit of the info from Knna's spread sheet has to do with efficiency which does not directly correlate to a better source of light. Although it does mean more light is being emitted. It is also very useful for power bills and other concerns.

-------------------------------------------------

Due to the fact the Hort Super-Blue and Hort Blue are so similar in terms of PPF and PUR it would be interesting to see a grow comparision. The reason is it would mostly come down to blue vs. red wavelengths. This could perhaps be a good blue vs. red experiment as we know many/all of the most important variables which are nearly equal between both bulbs (except for b:r ratios).

It would also be intersting to see a test grow between the Hort Super-HPS and Hort Super-Blue as they have fairly similar PUR ratios (I don't have blue and red PARA ratio's yet for the Super-HPS). The main difference is PPF and PUR so it could show if there is a ceiling to PPF and if so where it may be located.

------------------------------------------------

Hortilux was no help with the PPF as they said they don't have the equipment to find the PPF for me...so I had to find another way...

I was going to buy a Quantum meter but the Apogee is about $200 and it under-reports 400-450nm, over-reports 580-600nm and doesn't measure 650-700nm at all...all with a 3% margin of error...yikes thats not good~!! The next choice is the Li-Cor Quantum meter which measures the whole PAR range and gives equal weight to all wavelengths...too bad it's $800.00

Finally I found a guy called "Knna" over at hempcultivation.com who made this great spread sheet which automatically breaks down a bulb. The spread sheet shows the following:

-Efficiency System (bulb and ballast efficiency at converting light energy from electricity--important for energy consumption.)
-PPF :D :D :D
-PPF per watt
-PPF per klm (klm is a lumen / 1000)
-PUR (PAR adjusted to include Quantum Yield Curve (https://www.cannabis-world.org/cw/showthread.php?t=3760)--so the PAR wavelengths are not weighted equally to reflect GYC [ASP x CAS])
-PUR per PPF
-PUR per watt
-PUR per klm
-Lumen per watt
-red:blue PUR ratio (similar in idea and function to my "blue:red PARA ratio") except Knna gives too much weight to red light IMO.

There is a +/-8% margin of error when using the spread sheet as I use 10nm increments and many Spectral Graphs (SPDs) of bulbs are not completely accurate. I compared my results with those of 5nm increments and the difference was marginal (1-2%) while saving a lot of time...so 10nm it is.

The great thing about Knna's spread sheet is anyone can use it. I translated some of it from Spanish and adjusted a few acronyms, along with making it more user-friendly in terms of readability/comprehension.

Here is the thread for this great spread sheet (http://www.gardenscure.com/420/lighting/89513-bulbs-comparison-tool.html); I suggest you read the thread if you like the 'nuts and bolts'...

...but if you want answers just ask me or use the spread sheet or ask in that thread but I haven't seen Knna in a while...

I do suggest you download the spread sheet I attach to this post. I modifed v2 so it is now in English and I included the results from the Horitlux Super-Blue 1000 HPS and Hortilux Blue 1000 MH.

-->Download my modified version of Knna's "BulbComparisons-v2" spread sheet HERE ('BulbComparision-v2.01_gojo.xls.zip') (http://www.megaupload.com/?d=RCN4HA0L)

---------------------------------------------------------

I also have the formula to find PPFD ;), which is essentially the PPF reaching the plants. PPFD can be taken at the canopy and within it too, all you need is a lux meter or foot-candle meter and PPF. PPFD can be used to see the overall foot-print, see how well the light is penetrating into the canopy and if the lower buds are getting enough PPF, etc, etc.

-----------------------------------------------------------

Ok, next post I'll post screen shots of the results and such. Then I hope people will ask questions if they don't understand something... And post their thoughts/opinions if they do
:D
cheers

[gojo]

Hey all,

Ok heres the pics of the results, I'll come back later and explain all the results if anyone doesn't understand them. If anyone is interested (and I hope you are) I could write a how-to w/pics for using the spread sheet on your own if anyone is interested.




Hortilux Super-Blue 1000w HPS:
http://img187.imageshack.us/img187/5193/bulbscomparisionv201gojrv6.png (http://imageshack.us)






Hortilux Blue 1000w MH:
http://img249.imageshack.us/img249/5930/bulbscomparisionv201gojhq2.png (http://imageshack.us)






Horitlux Super-HPS 1000w:
(this is in the original Spanish language and color/text format)
http://img504.imageshack.us/img504/8937/bulbscomparisionv201gojpd5.png (http://imageshack.us)



Here is the template I made for you to use, it has 1000, 600 and 400 watt enteries:
(click to enlarge, it's too big for full size posting)
http://img55.imageshack.us/img55/9074/bulbscomparisiontemplatbz5.th.png (http://img55.imageshack.us/my.php?image=bulbscomparisiontemplatbz5.png)




Cheers

[c-ray]

from http://www.progressivegardens.com/knowledge_tree/plantphys.html

[gojo]

Hey c-ray,

Nice graph! Haven't seen it before :D

Hortilux Blue 1000 MH = 5500 K

Hortilux SuperBlue 1000 HPS = 3000 K

So the Hort Blue is still the winner. I am buying a Hort Blue 1000watt and the new PL maxima reflector next week. The PPF and PUR of the Hort Blue are less than 100 points lower than the Hort SuperBlue...IMVHO, in this case wavelength is more important than 90 or so points.

Thoughts?

Cheers :D

[Green Supreme]

Nice, well you've done the research. I look forward to the practical end. Peace GS

[The Cannarchist]

well I'm already running super HPS,as I already knew that they produced more...........

I'll add a Hort Blue to one bed (3 x 1000w) and remove an HPS so it will look

HPS - Blue - HPS , in a line.

I've got to construct a new veg section soon and will use the Hort blue for that.And we'll see if I can build a double section bed to test the super HPS against the Hort blue in a grow off.

Good work all round Gojo.

Thanks:up:

[gojo]

Hey cannarchist,

> super HPS against the Hort blue in a grow off.

:D excellent

> Good work all round Gojo.

Thanks

> Thanks

Your welcome :D

[c-ray]

SolarMax One (http://www.rambridge.com/products/garden/light/solarm/solarone.html) 1000w bulbs have both MH and HPS in the same bulb, using an S52 1000w HPS ballast

http://www.rambridge.com/products/garden/light/solarm/onebox.jpg



here's the spectrum on it
http://www.rambridge.com/products/garden/light/solarm/chart1.jpg

[c-ray]

SolarMax (http://www.rambridge.com/products/garden/light/solarmax.html) MH conversion bulbs (that run in an HPS ballast) have lots of blue
they come in 400, 600 and 1000w flavours, and they say horizontal mount only

http://www.rambridge.com/products/garden/light/solarm/bluebox.jpg

here's the spectrum:
http://www.rambridge.com/products/garden/light/solarm/vegchart.jpg

[c-ray]

here is the spectrum for the normal MH SolarMax (http://www.rambridge.com/products/garden/light/solarm/solargold.html):

http://www.rambridge.com/products/garden/light/solarm/vegchart.jpg

actually the conversion bulb solarmax and the regular MH solarmax both use same chart...I just noticed...
I found them online for about $100

[dpn]

what do people think of this bulb?
http://advancedtechlighting.com/cdmed18.htm

[Nirrity]

Hello Gojo!

I didn't see the reason you rated blue higher than red.
I mean whatever the articles said HPS gives much higher yields compared to MH. I could agree that like someone said MH gives a "connoisseur crop" while HPS gives "commercial crop", but I think it is the presence of UV-B along with UV-A and blue and UV-B:UV-A:blue ratio what really makes MH crops connoisseur not essentially blue:red ratio.

Note I have no my own experience to proof anything though so it's all just pure speculation. I use Philips TL12 but now I think (http://cannabis-world.org/cw/showpost.php?p=65234&postcount=22) it's mistake to use it without UV-A and blue..

Nevertheless, I would try just add UV-B, UV-A and blue to the HPS. The best source for UV-B is Philips TL12 lamp http://img407.imageshack.us/img407/5609/tl12iy1.jpg,
UV-A questionable, perhaps Philips CLEO or any suntanning lamp, and Philips TL52
http://img513.imageshack.us/img513/2139/tl52im0.jpg
for a blue. The trick here is to attain proper UV-B/Uv-A/blue ratio that resembles that of a sun around equator. I think this way is more favourable because no one measured and have exact levels of UV-B and UV-A emission of metal halides. For a huge setups I think it's better to add some aquarium MH, like USHIO Aqualite
http://img513.imageshack.us/img513/9656/ushiovf3.jpg.


BTW, there are a lot of lamps besides Hortilux with good spectrums

http://img513.imageshack.us/img513/8868/spectrumsmh8.jpg.

So, basicly, why blue and why Hortilux?
And lastly, is PPFD a relative or absolute measure? I mean could 100 watt HPS with a 4" distance match PPFD level of 600 watt HPs with a 24" distance?