Any Plans to Test Salt?

[Hedgedrew]

Any feedback from anyone. Dave. Or Joe at unique on the salt?

 

[swk]

I'm starting to trust same results coming back consistently. Already there are high end salt manuf who are starting or planning to change their product. What is useless are the people testing from their tanks. Everything is absorbed or used up already. I trust the direct salt method with ro and doing water changes with proper salt!!!!

That is encouraging to hear!

I know after our conversation, even with having a near perfect triton results, I'm trying a bucket of a different salt because of the things I have been experiencing that mirror your experience.

 

[Nano sapiens]

I'm starting to trust same results coming back consistently. Already there are high end salt manuf who are starting or planning to change their product.

Absolutely. The savvy salt manufacturers will take notice of all this and adjust their mixes accordingly. First time many of them have been challenged by factual data coming directly out of the reefing community and it'll be interesting to see how this plays out.

What is useless are the people testing from their tanks. Everything is absorbed or used up already. I trust the direct salt method with ro and doing water changes with proper salt!!!!

Agreed that it is useless in regards to determining the salt mix concentration of elements. However, it's not useless for the aquarist, of course, since it provides useful data from which to analyse a tank's element balance.

Short term, what I forsee coming out of the Triton testing of salt mixes is more aquarists blending different salts in various ratios to address any major element anomalies.

 

[joefishUC]

A lot of really good points here. I have seen minor fluctuations in the salt brands we have tested at Unique/Triton which although, minor, is further proof to get our systems off of water changes.

Having been a firm believer of water changes for over 20 years in the coral game, I have finally opened my eyes to the benefits of not relying on water changes for element stability. Sure there are many times when water changes are necessary or beneficial but to RELY on them for the maintenance of minor element replenishment is simply yesterday's method. Procedures and processes get better understood, refined and replaced with more efficient methods. Just because something worked for so long doesn't mean it can't get better. Nor does it mean that the previous method was flawed. It simply demonstrates that there was room for improvement.

I think most solid reef keepers accept that balanced nutrient export can be achieved through various methods of filtration without relying on water changes. Now comes the mental hurdle of realizing that elements can be supplied daily through dosing without having to do an arduous water change. If reef keeping at its heart is parameter stability then shouldn't we embrace a method that minimizes variability? Water changes are inherently chock full of variables. The act of swapping tank water with freshly mixed salt water to replenish elements with even the best salt on the market demonstrates a conflict of interest. If you look at our hobby over the span of time and notice the trends, you will see that we are headed in the direction of maintaining reef aquaria without gross water changes. Calcium reactors, computerized dosers, lab grade testing equipment and a deeper understanding of whats needed all point to no water changes in my opinion.

Having said that, there obviously is still a need for a good salt. Triton Pure salt is not a salt for regular use. It has no trace elements. It only has analytical grade macro elements and is intended to be used in situations where a surplus of trace elements or contaminants are present in one's tank. Flushing or diluting the unwanted item out through water changes with Pure salt will reduce the problem in proportion to the amount of water swapped. PURE salt is expensive but is as clean as hobby salt can get. Triton does not condone regular water changes and therefore does not produce a balanced salt. Their position also happens to be that it is a extremely challenging to produce a completely balanced salt mix, at competitive pricing, consistently from batch to batch. They took the far easier route of producing a base elementz set that when used daily completely replaces the need for trace element supplementation through water changes. Everything a reef tank needs is in the base elementz and added slowly, every day, keeping the levels stable all the time. If a tank shows a rapid depletion of a specific element, say zinc or manganese due to a large population of a particular species that heavily relies on these elements, then the hobbyist, aided with the triton test, can supplement just these elements. Sorry for the rant but I had to get my thoughts out there.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

A lot of really good points here. I have seen minor fluctuations in the salt brands we have tested at Unique/Triton which although, minor, is further proof to get our systems off of water changes.

Having been a firm believer of water changes for over 20 years in the coral game, I have finally opened my eyes to the benefits of not relying on water changes for element stability. Sure there are many times when water changes are necessary or beneficial but to RELY on them for the maintenance of minor element replenishment is simply yesterday's method. Procedures and processes get better understood, refined and replaced with more efficient methods. Just because something worked for so long doesn't mean it can't get better. Nor does it mean that the previous method was flawed. It simply demonstrates that there was room for improvement.

I think most solid reef keepers accept that balanced nutrient export can be achieved through various methods of filtration without relying on water changes. Now comes the mental hurdle of realizing that elements can be supplied daily through dosing without having to do an arduous water change. If reef keeping at its heart is parameter stability then shouldn't we embrace a method that minimizes variability? Water changes are inherently chock full of variables. The act of swapping tank water with freshly mixed salt water to replenish elements with even the best salt on the market demonstrates a conflict of interest. If you look at our hobby over the span of time and notice the trends, you will see that we are headed in the direction of maintaining reef aquaria without gross water changes. Calcium reactors, computerized dosers, lab grade testing equipment and a deeper understanding of whats needed all point to no water changes in my opinion.

Having said that, there obviously is still a need for a good salt. Triton Pure salt is not a salt for regular use. It has no trace elements. It only has analytical grade macro elements and is intended to be used in situations where a surplus of trace elements or contaminants are present in one's tank. Flushing or diluting the unwanted item out through water changes with Pure salt will reduce the problem in proportion to the amount of water swapped. PURE salt is expensive but is as clean as hobby salt can get. Triton does not condone regular water changes and therefore does not produce a balanced salt. Their position also happens to be that it is a extremely challenging to produce a completely balanced salt mix, at competitive pricing, consistently from batch to batch. They took the far easier route of producing a base elementz set that when used daily completely replaces the need for trace element supplementation through water changes. Everything a reef tank needs is in the base elementz and added slowly, every day, keeping the levels stable all the time. If a tank shows a rapid depletion of a specific element, say zinc or manganese due to a large population of a particular species that heavily relies on these elements, then the hobbyist, aided with the triton test, can supplement just these elements. Sorry for the rant but I had to get my thoughts out there.

I'd have to say on the face of it, I don't buy this argument. I like the idea of the Triton testing quite a lot. I'm less convinced that not doing water changes is a step forward, although better salts to do them could/would be.

We do not have the tools to reduce many specific elements that may accumulate except by water change, and there are loads of things that accumulate that we must use water changes to export (such as certain organics). If you do not, they will accumulate. That may be OK, but supplementing specific ions by testing solves neither of these issues.

I'm also not convinced that water changes cause big fluctuations that you seem to suggest. Using the same salt and doing frequent small changes will not likely cause any bigger fluctuations than boosting things when you determine they are getting low. By definition, there was a fluctuation.

We also do not have to tools for properly detecting many elements that many of use feel are important to dose, such as iron. So we are left with blind dosing (which may be OK in some cases), or doing water changes to at least bring in some without it becoming excessive.

 

[Keithcorals]

I'd have to say on the face of it, I don't buy this argument. I like the idea of the Triton testing quite a lot. I'm less convinced that not doing water changes is a step forward, although better salts to do them could/would be.

We do not have the tools to reduce many specific elements that may accumulate except by water change, and there are loads of things that accumulate that we must use water changes to export (such as certain organics). If you do not, they will accumulate. That may be OK, but supplementing specific ions by testing solves neither of these issues.

I'm also not convinced that water changes cause big fluctuations that you seem to suggest. Using the same salt and doing frequent small changes will not likely cause any bigger fluctuations than boosting things when you determine they are getting low. By definition, there was a fluctuation.

We also do not have to tools for properly detecting many elements that many of use feel are important to dose, such as iron. So we are left with blind dosing (which may be OK in some cases), or doing water changes to at least bring in some without it becoming excessive.

Just curious what organics build up?

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

What exactly builds up in each tank will depend on what the specific tank organisms you have release, what organic export means you have in place, and the bacteria you have potentially modify.

But the possibilities include toxins, slimes, metabolic wastes, etc.

The fact that tanks can turn yellowish is evidence of organic accumulation, but it only applies to those organics which absorb blue light. Most do not. Using ozone to clarify the water removes the yellowness, but not most of the organics. GAC and skimming also remove organics, but mostly those which are completely or partially hydrophobic.

Fully hydrophilic organics won't be skimmed out or bind much to GAC.

Water changes remove a portion of everything suspended or dissolved in the water.

 

[mikellini]

What are some hydrophilic organics you are talking about? Do they get metabolized by coral, bacteria or other things?

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

What are some hydrophilic organics you are talking about? Do they get metabolized by coral, bacteria or other things?

Some do and some do not.

In the ocean, those that accumulate can be present for hundreds of years or longer before slowly being broken down by UV and O2. They are the remnants of bacterial metabolism. Only some of them have been identified and characterized. In a reef, where the inputs of organics may be much higher per unit volume and the time scale we are interested in is shorter (weeks to years), I'd expect different accumulations.

I discuss organics here:

Organic Compounds in the Reef Aquarium by Randy Holmes-Farley - Reefkeeping.com

 

[mikellini]

Do you think running UV would help?

 

[hart24601]

I'd have to say on the face of it, I don't buy this argument. I like the idea of the Triton testing quite a lot. I'm less convinced that not doing water changes is a step forward, although better salts to do them could/would be.

We do not have the tools to reduce many specific elements that may accumulate except by water change, and there are loads of things that accumulate that we must use water changes to export (such as certain organics). If you do not, they will accumulate. That may be OK, but supplementing specific ions by testing solves neither of these issues.

I'm also not convinced that water changes cause big fluctuations that you seem to suggest. Using the same salt and doing frequent small changes will not likely cause any bigger fluctuations than boosting things when you determine they are getting low. By definition, there was a fluctuation.

We also do not have to tools for properly detecting many elements that many of use feel are important to dose, such as iron. So we are left with blind dosing (which may be OK in some cases), or doing water changes to at least bring in some without it becoming excessive.

Randy, as he often does, makes great points is pretty much where I am at with this concept. I like the testing, I like how we can check manufacturer's claims and hopefully drive them to improve their salt. As to the ability to eliminate water changes, I don't think the testing is quite there yet to really test for everything that impacts our tanks in the sensitivity required or even the the capability to test for them as Randy stated with organics. I would say this system makes a stronger case for small daily water changes rather than fully stopping them.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Do you think running UV would help?

To get rid of organics? Maybe a bit.

 

[Keithcorals]

Wouldn't the tanks that have been run for years without water changes with good results and currently thriving corals indicate that the buildup of organics is not something to be overly concerned about. Also this is me not being a chemist but if they do not brake down for an extremely long time wouldn't this mean they are not very reactive?

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Wouldn't the tanks that have been run for years without water changes with good results and currently thriving corals indicate that the buildup of organics is not something to be overly concerned about. Also this is me not being a chemist but if they do not brake down for an extremely long time wouldn't this mean they are not very reactive?

It means only one thing: you can keep exactly what they keep in the exact health they are, using exactly the husbandry techniques they use.

One could make the same comment about any attribute of a tank, including testing with Triton (or not), adding trace elements (or not), etc.

The refractory organics in the ocean are not likely a concern in a reef tank. It is the more recently released ones, especially those that have a purpose of being toxins that is more of a concern, IMO.

 

[Keithcorals]

It means only one thing: you can keep exactly what they keep in the exact health they are, using exactly the husbandry techniques they use.

One could make the same comment about any attribute of a tank, including testing with Triton (or not), adding trace elements (or not), etc.

The refractory organics in the ocean are not likely a concern in a reef tank. It is the more recently released ones, especially those that have a purpose of being toxins that is more of a concern, IMO.

So something like the hormone (I think it's a hormone) a goldfish releases that will stunt it's growth in a small amount of water where the Chemical builds up more rapidly. Or possible like people are always saying that corals will give off chemicals to attack each other. In the Ocean this would only effect other corals in very close range but in a tank they could build up and have a negetivd effect on lots of the other corals in the tank. Or are these not good examples of posible negative organic buildup? This has me thinking if I could find the right salt that some sort of combination of the triton method and very small but frequent water changes may be a well rounded approach with less overall downsides. But then that brings us back to the testing salts and knowing you have one that isn't going to throw your parameters off.

 

[joefishUC]

What about the idea that dilution math demonstrates that frequent partial water changes cannot maintain or control any parameter that is on a rising trajectory. If a tank is accumulating any compound, toxin, etc which a water change is "needed" to remove, then changing say 10 or 15% of the water pr week will only slow down the accumulation but not keep it in check. Within a relatively short period of time, anything not being removed via partial water changes will rise well beyond the desired range. I'm not suggesting that people abandon their water changes or trying to win a debate on water changes vs no water changes but I do want people to be open minded to the latest trends and ideas in reef keeping. The triton method which has been successfully around for over 3 years has evolved organically through trial and error with a goal of trying to replicate seawater as closely as possible. It turned out that not doing water changes gave the best results. If water changes gave better results than they would be part of the Triton method. In this past October Scott Fellman and I spent three days in German with Ehsan at his Triton labs and asked a gazillion questions so we could better wrap our heads around this no water change concept. His tank and many others in Europe are designed without performing regular water changes. Nitrates, Po4, yellowing compounds, etc are all dealt with in ways besides doing water changes. The results are breathtaking.

Another thing keep in mind, like i stated earlier, is that there is always room for improvement. I personally view the triton method with three distinct branches. One is the testing service. The second branch is the regular use products like base elements, macro and a handful of the trace elements. The third are items like Iron, Chromium, Cobalt, etc that are more experimental at this point. I refer to them as "tomorrow's elements" because we aren't quite there yet to suggest or recommend them in any exact fashion. It is still blind dosing at this point with these but with the added plus of being able to check for over dosing through the ICP testing. Of the 32 parameters tested, only 3 or 4 "desirable" trace elements have lod's above natural seawater which means that this test will be extremely useful for spotting abundances or gross concentrations of these elements. Things like Iron (which Randy pointed out) and Cobalt are two elements that will benefit from future advancements in water testing when elements can be tested to the parts pr trillion on an ICP-MS. Until then, Triton and blind dosing of these are quite similar in this regard.

As for correcting fluctuations via blind dosing, water changes or The triton method: Anything that will maintain better parameters on a daily basis will result in the least amount of fluctuations and therefore require correction. Surely, one would have to dose to correct fluctuations, but the Base elementz were designed to deliver the best full spectrum shot of macro and trace elements daily so that the least amount of correcting is needed. This method has proved to be a slight improvement over relying on water changes for trace element supplementation which is typically weekly at best, only as good as the salt used, and happens to add all of the needed things in one shot. Again, we could be splitting hairs here and I am not trying to win an argument, I just want people reading this to be open minded to today's products and methods.

 

[gpwdr]

What about the idea that dilution math demonstrates that frequent partial water changes cannot maintain or control any parameter that is on a rising trajectory. If a tank is accumulating any compound, toxin, etc which a water change is "needed" to remove, then changing say 10 or 15% of the water pr week will only slow down the accumulation but not keep it in check. Within a relatively short period of time, anything not being removed via partial water changes will rise well beyond the desired range. I'm not suggesting that people abandon their water changes or trying to win a debate on water changes vs no water changes but I do want people to be open minded to the latest trends and ideas in reef keeping. The triton method which has been successfully around for over 3 years has evolved organically through trial and error with a goal of trying to replicate seawater as closely as possible. It turned out that not doing water changes gave the best results. If water changes gave better results than they would be part of the Triton method. In this past October Scott Fellman and I spent three days in German with Ehsan at his Triton labs and asked a gazillion questions so we could better wrap our heads around this no water change concept. His tank and many others in Europe are designed without performing regular water changes. Nitrates, Po4, yellowing compounds, etc are all dealt with in ways besides doing water changes. The results are breathtaking.

Another thing keep in mind, like i stated earlier, is that there is always room for improvement. I personally view the triton method with three distinct branches. One is the testing service. The second branch is the regular use products like base elements, macro and a handful of the trace elements. The third are items like Iron, Chromium, Cobalt, etc that are more experimental at this point. I refer to them as "tomorrow's elements" because we aren't quite there yet to suggest or recommend them in any exact fashion. It is still blind dosing at this point with these but with the added plus of being able to check for over dosing through the ICP testing. Of the 32 parameters tested, only 3 or 4 "desirable" trace elements have lod's above natural seawater which means that this test will be extremely useful for spotting abundances or gross concentrations of these elements. Things like Iron (which Randy pointed out) and Cobalt are two elements that will benefit from future advancements in water testing when elements can be tested to the parts pr trillion on an ICP-MS. Until then, Triton and blind dosing of these are quite similar in this regard.

As for correcting fluctuations via blind dosing, water changes or The triton method: Anything that will maintain better parameters on a daily basis will result in the least amount of fluctuations and therefore require correction. Surely, one would have to dose to correct fluctuations, but the Base elementz were designed to deliver the best full spectrum shot of macro and trace elements daily so that the least amount of correcting is needed. This method has proved to be a slight improvement over relying on water changes for trace element supplementation which is typically weekly at best, only as good as the salt used, and happens to add all of the needed things in one shot. Again, we could be splitting hairs here and I am not trying to win an argument, I just want people reading this to be open minded to today's products and methods.

Hi Joe!

I'm going 100% Triton and rebuilt my entire system to the Triton specs.

Could you post the Triton Manual? Not the Triton for Dummies Manual the Triton Manual

I learned a lot from it. If you don't have it I can pm it to you.

I can't change the PDF to JPEG.


Gene

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

What about the idea that dilution math demonstrates that frequent partial water changes cannot maintain or control any parameter that is on a rising trajectory. If a tank is accumulating any compound, toxin, etc which a water change is "needed" to remove, then changing say 10 or 15% of the water pr week will only slow down the accumulation but not keep it in check. .

That is certainly true: water changes only limit the problems, not eliminate them.

So the question is, wouldn't you rather stabilize at at a lower level then let it accumulate forever (whatever it is)?

For example, I show what happens to an accumulating ion with different water change schemes in the article below. While it is stated to be for nitrate, it applies to any accumulating material. Wouldn't you rather have 10% of the level you might otherwise attain after a year without water changes?

Water Changes in Reef Aquaria by Randy Holmes-Farley - Reefkeeping.comfrom it:

Figure 12. Nitrate concentration as a function of time when performing daily water changes equivalent to 0% (no changes), 7.5%, 15% and 30% of the total volume each month (in other words, 0%, 0.25%, 0.5% and 1% per day). In this example, nitrate is present at 100 ppm at the start, and is accumulated at a rate of 0.1 ppm per day when no water is changed.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

So something like the hormone (I think it's a hormone) a goldfish releases that will stunt it's growth in a small amount of water where the Chemical builds up more rapidly. Or possible like people are always saying that corals will give off chemicals to attack each other. In the Ocean this would only effect other corals in very close range but in a tank they could build up and have a negetivd effect on lots of the other corals in the tank. Or are these not good examples of posible negative organic buildup? This has me thinking if I could find the right salt that some sort of combination of the triton method and very small but frequent water changes may be a well rounded approach with less overall downsides. But then that brings us back to the testing salts and knowing you have one that isn't going to throw your parameters off.

Yes, that's my thinking as well.

 

[gregoryleonard]

Mixed up a fresh batch (30 gallons) of Tropic Marin Pro from a brand new bucket this weekend and sent in a sample to Triton today for testing, so will be interested in seeing what the test comes back with. I tested the basics before sending the samples and here are the results. Salinity - 35 pt (after calibrating), Temp 77, Ak- 7.728 (hanna checker), Calcium 440 - (API), Magnesium - 1350 (Red sea coral pro test kit). Triton starts their water analysis again on the 19th after being closed for a month so the sample should get there just in time. I will gladly post the results as soon as they are available. I was however happy to see that the big 3 (AK, CA, MG) tested out very close to NSW on my test and where triton's base line is for each and will be excited to see all the results, so if I need to use a salt for WCs in the future it will be close on the main params that I am looking for as I am following the Triton dosing method. Stay tuned.