Bolus dosing

[BeanAnimal]

If someone can tell us there is no biological benefit to be gained, then the chemistry doesn't even matter.

We are seeing a lot of data we can't explain. So at the moment nobody knows. I think even FM doesn't really know

I don't think anybody is saying that experimentation shouldn't be done and data shouldn't be collected.

The issue appears to be people making up explanations that have no scientific underpinning. How does one get past 'repairing' a 'broken' buffer system with a straight face to even consider what comes after?

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Folks who started controlled alk dosing by automated measurement often claimed they saw better growth compared to what they used previously. I don’t know how much of that was wishful thinking and how much reflected reality, but it was a clear claim from many.

This method takes the opposite approach and has the maximum instability in alk dosed (ignoring the possibility of secret ingredient effects smoothing out the alk rise.).

In assessing either approach, it is critically important to understand what they are being compared to, in terms of actual alk and pH levels attained.

It’s entirely possible, IMO, that higher alk is desirable for growth, even if it is unstable. Same for pH.

 

[Garf]

I don't think anybody is saying that experimentation shouldn't be done and data shouldn't be collected.

The issue appears to be people making up explanations that have no scientific underpinning. How does one get past 'repairing' a 'broken' buffer system with a straight face to even consider what comes after?

As it happens I've been monitoring the Alk on my tank (as accurately as I can with a salifert test) and it definitely consumes more at the end of the photoperiod and into the darkness, thus lowering alk. I wonder if they tried adding bicarb during these times to bolster it as it's consumed? I normally add my bit of bicarb in the morning, but going to give it the switcheroo and do it at lights down, and watch the magic happen

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

As it happens I've been monitoring the Alk on my tank (as accurately as I can with a salifert test) and it definitely consumes more at the end of the photoperiod and into the darkness, thus lowering alk. I wonder if they tried adding bicarb during these times to bolster it as it's consumed? I normally add my bit of bicarb in the morning, but going to give it the switcheroo and do it at lights down, and watch the magic happen

Does that alk consumption track with pH? Or the light cycle?

Folks have proposed both, and it can sometimes be hard to distinguish, but the evening result would suggest it is more pH.

 

[MnFish1]

I don't know either. I'm as skeptical as you are.

Day and night time calcification are not the same, so why not explore if there is a optimal way/moment to push it for max results.
If someone can tell us there is no biological benefit to be gained, then the chemistry doesn't even matter.

We are seeing a lot of data we can't explain. So at the moment nobody knows. I think even FM doesn't really know (although they probably don't know they don't know), because of a total lack of controls and no standardisation of the experimental set-up.

I'm just keeping an open mind.
Do I think that it is most likely that the bolus method is not beneficial and might even be detrimental? Yes.

Why - many people use the bolus method - except those who have invested 100's into mods for apex - or other options. Those users may not exactly be objective

 

[Garf]

Does that alk consumption track with pH? Or the light cycle?

Folks have proposed both, and it can sometimes be hard to distinguish, but the evening result would suggest it is more pH.

I've restricted pH to 8.4 today and it's not really dropped (8.36) and saw the same drop in Alk as previously (normally topped out at 8.5ish), so I'd say the reduction in light intensity.

 

[ReneReef]

I don't think anybody is saying that experimentation shouldn't be done and data shouldn't be collected.

The issue appears to be people making up explanations that have no scientific underpinning. How does one get past 'repairing' a 'broken' buffer system with a straight face to even consider what comes after?

Well... can't fully agree with that first statement. At least some seem to think we shouldn't even bother...

And not only making up explanations, but also talking bad of other methods and brands unsubstantiated, using countless fallacies and all sorts of form of cognitive bias.

The broken buffer system makes me grin every time. If "the buffer system" would brake, we'd all be dead, the universe as we know it would sieze to exist. Maybe Ronald Emmerich can make a movie about it.

 

[ReneReef]

Why - many people use the bolus method - except those who have invested 100's into mods for apex - or other options. Those users may not exactly be objective

Certainly, we must assume biased data. Thats why controls, experimental standardisation and independent verification are crucial.

But first, let's see some proof of concept data with some sort of consistency and figure out what is in the FM carbonate mix to make interpretation of the data possible.

 

[MnFish1]

Certainly, we must assume biased data. Thats why controls, experimental standardisation and independent verification are crucial.

But first, let's see some proof of concept data with some sort of consistency and figure out what is in the FM carbonate mix to make interpretation of the data possible.

OH - I don't think that any company has re-invented chemistry - and totally agree with @Randy Holmes-Farley - IMHO - there is no evidence that bolus vs no bolus is any better or worse than any other method

 

[Reef Stu]

I am shocked that a company puts out such utterly and grossly incorrect ideas. They need to send someone at the company to study chemistry before spouting nonsense.

I’m on a phone now and it’s hard to write long passages, but surely such misleading info deserves a long and detailed response.

Lol

 

[MnFish1]

Lol

Your LOL means ? What is your comment

 

[Reef Stu]

I assume the post was sarcasm.

Your LOL means ? What is your comment

 

[Reef Stu]

Didn’t mean to ruffle any feathers, but to implicate that the guys from Tropic Marin do not understand chemistry, is asinine to me. So I assumed it was sarcasm.

 

[MnFish1]

Actually it wasn't sarcasm.

 

[Reef Stu]

Wow. Ok

 

[MnFish1]

@Reef Stu What I meant by that is - Randy knows his stuff. I trust him as much (more) as I trust a poster from a company (or a label). However, you seem to be implying much more than I am. I have no idea whether what the company is saying is true or not. With that said - I trust what Randy has said - so I guess we can leave it there. No one here, though said anything close to what you said they did: "Didn’t mean to ruffle any feathers, but to implicate that the guys from Tropic Marin do not understand chemistry, is asinine to me. So I assumed it was sarcasm."

 

[Reef Stu]

Watch the reef bum YouTube cancel, with tropic marine founder. The guy knows chemistry is all I’m saying.

 

[BeanAnimal]

Watch the reef bum YouTube cancel, with tropic marine founder. The guy knows chemistry is all I’m saying.

Given that logic:

Are you qualified to make that determination or does he just sound convincing because he is explaining things that you can’t verify but sound complicated and like scientific fact?

 

[Reef Stu]

I’m going to stop using the internet now. My bad , I thought this hole time Randy was bashing on tropic Marin. I’ll shut up now. Sorry

 

[Reef Stu]

I love coral magazine Randy