Do Zeolite work in sea water?

[biom]

I know Randy's strong opinion that zeolites are useless in salt water and they are serving mostly as substrate for bacteria but in this particular case I'm not fully agree. Actually zeolites (and particularly sodium–potassium forms like clinoptilolite) do work in salt water - they do remove Ammonia from it. Yes, the excess of Na+ and K+ in sea water do influence ammonia removal negatively and zeolites in sea water are 30-40% less effective if compared to distilled water, but this could be adjusted by adding more zeolites. And they are removing Ammonia quite quickly in about 20 min.

Here is very good reading with results from US EPA team's research:

https://www.acc.umu.se/~vatten/zeolite.pdf

Here is graph from it showing dependence of zeolite Ammonia removal capacity from salinity (i've modified slightly for easier understanding, red dot is salinity @35)

In the same paper there are results showing zeolites could remove 100% of Copper, Lead and Zinc from sea water, which explain why Zeovit method is using copper containing supplements like ZeoSpur2 without constrains that copper will accumulate in the water column. .

So it is true, the Zeovit method is using zeolites as main exporter of nutrients, especially of nitrogen. That's why I have bag of Zeovit stones in hand in case of ammonia peak in my thank or metal contamination.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

I do believe they bind things from seawater. Clinoptilolite binding ammonia (although not much compared to freshwater), for example. I also believe they bind some potassium. Exactly what is bound and with what affinity depends very strongly on the exact zeolite chosen which alters the internal pore size to fit different ions.

What I do not believe is that this binding makes the ammonia ore bioavailable to the bacteria on thezeolite.

Bear in mind, however, that it is a once only effect. It would be like GFO that is left in the tank long term: once full it is done binding stuff.

FWIW, I have consulted for a company (ZS Pharma) that uses a zirconium silicate (ZS-9; not strictly a zeolite) to bind potassium in human patients with hyperkalemia.

http://www.zspharma.com/clinical-development/zs9/

 

[biom]

I do believe they bind things from seawater. Clinoptilolite binding ammonia (although not much compared to freshwater), for example. I also believe they bind some potassium. Exactly what is bound and with what affinity depends very strongly on the exact zeolite chosen which alters the internal pore size to fit different ions.

Yes. I'm not big fan of Zeovit at all, but it is fair to said that zeolites could work as Korallen Zucht stated: "... It permanently absorbs ammonium (NH4 + ) and ammonia (NH3), the first two chemicals in the nitrification cycle, thus preventing the formation of nitrite (NO2) and nitrate (NO3). Certain other elements are adsorbed as well and require addition to counteract depletion, which would have a negative effect on the environment..."

What I do not believe is that this binding makes the ammonia ore bioavailable to the bacteria on thezeolite.

I'm not sure who said that binding makes the ammonia more bioavailable to the bacteria, certainly I did't find such a claim in their guides, internet site or product description (may be I miss something). They just say:" The mulm, released from the ZEOvit material, contains bacteria that are used as food by the corals...", which I believe is true.

Bear in mind, however, that it is a once only effect. It would be like GFO that is left in the tank long term: once full it is done binding stuff.

Yes, that's why zeolites should be replaced completely every 6-12 weeks.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

I'm not sure who said that binding makes the ammonia more bioavailable to the bacteria, certainly I did't find such a claim in their guides, internet site or product description (may be I miss something). They just say:" The mulm, released from the ZEOvit material, contains bacteria that are used as food by the corals...", which I believe is true.

They may not be claiming it any longer, but it was all over the zeo boards and elsewhere a dozen years ago.

Habib and I (and many others) debated it here in 2004:

http://archive.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=133912

In post #48 I begin to express skepticism to the idea that the ammonia is more bioavailable to nearby bacteria due to being bound to the zeolite.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Yes, that's why zeolites should be replaced completely every 6-12 weeks.

What is the practical advantage of binding some ammonia this way? Reduced nitrate? Isn't the organic carbon dosing in the zeovit system easily able to accomplish that anyway?

 

[biom]

What is the practical advantage of binding some ammonia this way? Reduced nitrate? Isn't the organic carbon dosing in the zeovit system easily able to accomplish that anyway?

No, organic carbon dosing in Zeovit is actually in very small amounts and zeolites are the main exporters of nitrogen.

 

[biom]

They may not be claiming it any longer, but it was all over the zeo boards and elsewhere a dozen years ago.

Habib and I (and many others) debated it here in 2004:

http://archive.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=133912

In post #48 I begin to express skepticism to the idea that the ammonia is more bioavailable to nearby bacteria due to being bound to the zeolite.

Thank you! Very interesting debate. 12 years after you are still skeptical about zeolites .

 

[biom]

What I do not believe is that this binding makes the ammonia ore bioavailable to the bacteria on thezeolite.

I think this could be tested if saturated with ammonia zeolites are introduced in water enriched with acetate and phosphate but without nitrogen source.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

No, organic carbon dosing in Zeovit is actually in very small amounts and zeolites are the main exporters of nitrogen.

How is that known?

Is rising nitrate seen as a sign that the zeolite needs changing?

 

[biom]

How is that known?

Is rising nitrate seen as a sign that the zeolite needs changing?

I've tried to send you PM but with no success, sorry may be I'm doing something wrong? I'm not very confident with computers
Yes, generally rising of nitrates could be a sign of zeolites saturation, but when i was under Zeo Dominance I preferred to change zeolites more frequently (every 4-5 weeks) instead of waiting nitrates to rise.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

I've tried to send you PM but with no success, sorry may be I'm doing something wrong? I'm not very confident with computers
Yes, generally rising of nitrates could be a sign of zeolites saturation, but when i was under Zeo Dominance I preferred to change zeolites more frequently (every 4-5 weeks) instead of waiting nitrates to rise.

Thanks.

I have pm's turned off because I get to many ordinary questions by pm.

 

[biom]

, fully understand.
@Habib some backup is needed, Randy is taking advantage in zeolite discussion dozen years after.

 

[Squamosa]

I've tried to send you PM but with no success, sorry may be I'm doing something wrong? I'm not very confident with computers
Yes, generally rising of nitrates could be a sign of zeolites saturation, but when i was under Zeo Dominance I preferred to change zeolites more frequently (every 4-5 weeks) instead of waiting nitrates to rise.

I was under the impression the ZeoVit system, if utilised correctly and to its full conclusion, resulted in very low (certainly undetectable nitrates) nutrients.
What is the point in having essentially, two similar systems, when, as Randy points out, the carbon dosing alone could lower nutrients?

I have read that the stones reduce in "efficiency" the longer they are in your system and colours increase when you add new stones, but wouldn't this just be that the old stones are now super saturated with bacteria lowering the nutrients even further, in effect being too effective and the nitrates rise slightly with the new stones because they have limited bacterial colonisation, resulting in improved colours? This runs in opposition to their much touted ULNS!

I also agree with Randy that the mix of zeolites utilised by ZeoVit draw out K+, this is something I've noticed when I was running ZeoVit and also from the many posts about K+ deficiency on their forum.

Just my opinion

 

[biom]

I was under the impression the ZeoVit system, if utilised correctly and to its full conclusion, resulted in very low (certainly undetectable nitrates) nutrients.
What is the point in having essentially, two similar systems, when, as Randy points out, the carbon dosing alone could lower nutrients?

Very good question Zeolites are efficient enough to remove (bind) all organic nitrogen (in form of ammonia) available in the water, but they have nothing to do with phosphates, and if only zeolites are used phosphates will rise uncontrollable.
That's why small doses of organic carbon are added to ensure bacterial growth leading to phosphate reduction. But then next problem appear - zeolites are binding up all organic nitrogen and bacterial growth is nitrogen limited - here small expensive blue bottles are coming to help again many of Zeo products contain nitrates, ammonia, aminoacids etc.

I have read that the stones reduce in "efficiency" the longer they are in your system and colours increase when you add new stones, but wouldn't this just be that the old stones are now super saturated with bacteria lowering the nutrients even further, in effect being too effective and the nitrates rise slightly with the new stones because they have limited bacterial colonisation, resulting in improved colours? This runs in opposition to their much touted ULNS!

No, in contrary. Unnatural bright colors that corals have under Zeo are because of their zooxantellae are being almost removed both because of low nutrient environment and because of copper poisoning. When zeolite is full nutrients rise, corals start looking more natural (darker) because zooxantellae are recovering.

I also agree with Randy that the mix of zeolites utilised by ZeoVit draw out K+, this is something I've noticed when I was running ZeoVit and also from the many posts about K+ deficiency on their forum.

Yes, it is proved that zeolites could bind some K+. But even now when I'm running carbon dosing my K uptake is even higher.

 

[Myka]

In the same paper there are results showing zeolites could remove 100% of Copper, Lead and Zinc from sea water, which explain why Zeovit method is using copper containing supplements like ZeoSpur2 without constrains that copper will accumulate in the water column. .

I've not thought much of this before. I've enjoyed occasional dosage of ZeoSpur2 in my non-Zeo tank, and not thought of the possibility of copper build up. Maybe I should also think of a copper removal media shortly after the ZeoSpur2 dosing.

 

[biom]

I don't think it is of big concern if you are using it occasionally, the copper concentration in it is really small. But if you are using it as per instruction (every two weeks or so) and you dont have zeolites it could be risky.

 

[marke]

Can you explain more about copper poisoning and coral coloration?
The zeolites remove the copper, so we buy a little blue bottle of copper and supplement? Until we reach what level? Do you have a target level? Maybe NSW levels?
Please correct my thinking here as I am not a scientist.
In many of the sps ulns including zeo theory, the concept is to reduce nutrients (Nitrate and Po4) to NSW levels. In doing this with carbon dosing, zeolite, chaeto, fuge etc; we end up pulling out more nitrates than po4. So explains Dr Redfeild (16/1)? Hence not only do we go carbon deficient, but we end up with zero nitrates (deficient) before we reach our target goal of po4. Hence gfo and similar resins. We can get to this point (zero nitrates, and I want lower PO4) with or without zeolites pretty easy. Most corals symbiotic algae can get their carbon from light, but not bacteria. Hence carbon dosing to build bacteria colony size. PO4 is hard to get to zero, so corals and other algae and bacteria have plenty of po4. Now I question Nitrates? If at zero? How do corals, algae, bacteria get this? And here comes a blue bottle with no label indicating ingredients? Call it aminos (good nitrate source), nitrates,carbon and 24 other things. Point is we need to add nitrates! Some use potass nitrate stump stuff? I think a pure amino acid is a great nitrate that builds protein and is what is in the organic matrix. Hence take a system to zero nutrients and overfeed it(adding back the nutrients)-----has been mentioned by many sps growers as their secret to success. Regardless of the bottle color?

 

[biom]

Can you explain more about copper poisoning and coral coloration?
The zeolites remove the copper, so we buy a little blue bottle of copper and supplement? Until we reach what level? Do you have a target level? Maybe NSW levels?

here we've discussed https://www.reef2reef.com/threads/what-is-in-zeospur2.231768/

Please correct my thinking here as I am not a scientist.
In many of the sps ulns including zeo theory, the concept is to reduce nutrients (Nitrate and Po4) to NSW levels. In doing this with carbon dosing, zeolite, chaeto, fuge etc; we end up pulling out more nitrates than po4. So explains Dr Redfeild (16/1)? Hence not only do we go carbon deficient, but we end up with zero nitrates (deficient) before we reach our target goal of po4. Hence gfo and similar resins. We can get to this point (zero nitrates, and I want lower PO4) with or without zeolites pretty easy. Most corals symbiotic algae can get their carbon from light, but not bacteria. Hence carbon dosing to build bacteria colony size. PO4 is hard to get to zero, so corals and other algae and bacteria have plenty of po4. Now I question Nitrates? If at zero? How do corals, algae, bacteria get this? And here comes a blue bottle with no label indicating ingredients? Call it aminos (good nitrate source), nitrates,carbon and 24 other things. Point is we need to add nitrates! Some use potass nitrate stump stuff? I think a pure amino acid is a great nitrate that builds protein and is what is in the organic matrix. Hence take a system to zero nutrients and overfeed it(adding back the nutrients)-----has been mentioned by many sps growers as their secret to success. Regardless of the bottle color?

Yes, because of fish and coral food nature there is imbalance between C:N: P, and taking into account that carbon and nitrogen are far easily exported out of the system in comparison of phosphorous, that is why organic carbon and nitrates should be added to the system to ensure balance.

 

[cb684]

I started my system using full zeovit. Even using 2 different reactors with half of the zeolites in each reactor, I still did not like how my tank react after changing zeolites. I used to have diatoms blooms, even after rinsing the zeolites for 3 days in RODI water.
A few weeks ago I removed my zeolites reactor and did not see any negative impact. At that point I had 5 ppm of NO3 and 0.02 ppm of PO4 and neither NO3 or PO4 increased. Last week I mistakenly dosed 10 times more ZeoStart3 to my tank over a few hours (I plugged it on the wrong controller outlet). ZeoStart3 has a very characteristic acetic acid odor, but it may have other carbon and nitrogen components. In two days my NO3 and PO4 were down to 0 ppm. So I am not sure if this little (unintentional) experiment of mine agrees with the claim that zeolites are a major N03 export system.

 

[biom]

So I am not sure if this little (unintentional) experiment of mine agrees with the claim that zeolites are a major N03 export system.

No, they are not NO3 export system. They have nothing to do with NO3 or PO4. btw I dont think it is good idea to use ZeoStart3 as carbon source in non Zeo system. There are many other carbon sources with well known ingredients vodka, vinegar, NOPOX, etc.