Embracing a new concept...and freeing our minds from preconception. Not easy.

[uniquecorals]

I rarely do a wc and when I do my corals more importantly my sps hate it. My RBTA disappears for a week and generally things look terrible. I never have nitrate of phosphates and feed heavy. 200 gallon total water, my skimmer is rated for 500

Ok, this brings up one of my long-held anecdotal theories: An infrequent water change is a potentially significant disruption to a system that has been operating "on autopilot" for a period of time, and this may have some negative consequences attached...Disrupting stability and the "normal" (whatever that might be) for a closed system that appears to be functioning well can be a stressor to the inhabitants...I think you could make a pretty good case for that theory...Or not...:squigglemouth:

 

[mike007]

This Is great stuff i am very Intrigued. Can't wait to learn more.

 

[lefkonj]

Not sure if its mentioned in one of the posts but isn't this similar to the De-Nitrafication systems people have been making. You remove a % of water to a container, dose with a chemical that eat Nitrates, and sometimes phosphates. The water gets put back in the tank, process repeats several times a day. The waste portion (nitrate and phosphate) are removed so now you add trace elements, and no longer need water changes. I know a few folks who do this and have not done a water change in months, others longer.

 

[Squamosa]

By knowing exactly what is deficient or excessive in your water chemistry, adjusting becomes a simple matter of adding or removing the trace elements in question


Can you explain how the removal of excessive trace elements is accomplished, if not by water change?

Randy, why would you have excessive trace elements if the system shows you what you need to supplement and by increasing these values to 'optimum' you should not have excess in your system.

...or do you mean nutrient management?

This is what we are trying to accomplish with DSR.

 

[Goodgreef]

There's already a US company doing these tests. $35-40 each. Aquariumwatertesting.com. It might not test the same number of elements but it covers a lot.

 

[uniquecorals]

I would like to ask a question about the ICP testing as I intend to get my system tested occasionally.
At the moment in the UK tests have to be sent to Germany, Results can take up to lets say 8 days.
Over the course of the 8 days what changes could occur to the sample sent? Could certain elements alter?

Hi Mick,

We were advised that no significant changes would occur in the sample during this time...Wonder if Randy might chime in on that...?

 

[uniquecorals]

There's already a US company doing these tests. $35-40 each. Aquariumwatertesting.com. It might not test the same number of elements but it covers a lot.

Yes, AWT does a different panel of tests; not sure what technique they use or accuracy vs. Triton. Pricing is in range, however.

 

[thejuggernaut]

It sounds like this is two part dosing on steroids. We already test for a limited number of elements, Calcium, Alkalinity, Magnesium and maybe a few others, that we replace independently as our corals and fish consume them. This is the same thing but instead of 2 or 3 part it will be 34 part dosing. As far as the no water changes and single food source goes, it is a way to control variables. Bringing freshly mixed salt water up to match your tank water would require testing of the water every time you did a water change, plus knowing the exact volume of the new saltwater to calculate how much of each additive to add to bring it up to the sought after levels. If the prices given were in the ball park, that would add at least $40-45 to each water change, and probably take a weeks lead time before a water change could be made. If they can export through GAC, GFO, and macro algae and only import trace element in controlled doses, then maybe they can more closely mimic NSW.

Interesting idea? Yes. Paradigm shift? Who knows.

I do think it will require a bit of tweaking and probably will need to be done frequently at first, as your bioload increase. Once a tank is established and is grown in, then maybe testing will only need to be done a few times a year. I see a potential problem in propagation systems, where their bio loads can shift wildly as corals are sold in large sales, and brought in through large vendor orders, putting different consumption levels on different trace elements at different times.

 

[thejuggernaut]

I would like to ask a question about the ICP testing as I intend to get my system tested occasionally.
At the moment in the UK tests have to be sent to Germany, Results can take up to lets say 8 days.
Over the course of the 8 days what changes could occur to the sample sent? Could certain elements alter?

I would say PH and O2 levels would definitely change but without something to consume trace elements, they should stay the same. But like was stated before, Randy would know better then most people.

P.S. It is great to see such a valuable source of information now contributing to R2R. Randy is definitely an asset to the forum and the hobby in general!

 

[Eienna]

Yeah...L.A. tapwater is a real horror story! Good news: RO/DI manufacturers have complete job security! LOL

The water in Hemet was over 700TDS at one point...I'd LOVE to see the chemical analysis on that one. *wince*

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Randy, why would you have excessive trace elements if the system shows you what you need to supplement and by increasing these values to 'optimum' you should not have excess in your system.

...or do you mean nutrient management?

This is what we are trying to accomplish with DSR.

I mean things like copper that come in with every feeding, and possibly as impurities in calcium, alkalinity and magnesium supplements.

For example, I never intentionally add copper, but it was higher in my tank than in my salt mix.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

I would like to ask a question about the ICP testing as I intend to get my system tested occasionally.
At the moment in the UK tests have to be sent to Germany, Results can take up to lets say 8 days.
Over the course of the 8 days what changes could occur to the sample sent? Could certain elements alter?

I'm not sure what their procedure involves, but often such samples are acidified to redissolve carbonate and oxides that had precipitated. Sometimes they are filtered as well, but I wouldn't want to do that for these sorts of samples.

I'm not sure how much can happen in 8 days, but the growth of bacteria and attachment of those bacteria to the sides of the container could result in a drop in certain trace elements if they take them up.

ICP blasts apart molecules at very high temperatures before detecting the elements, so in general, it shouldn't matter what form the ions take as long as they make it into the injected water sample.

 

[Chameleon]

I'm not sure of the benefit of doing that rather than a water change.

Small organics could be removed this way, but it would take a lot of dialysis fluid (at best, removing 50% of the organics would require 100% of the tank water volume in dialysis fluid), and so could not be more efficient than a water change (is less efficient, actually). It would also equilibrate every inorganic ion with the dialysis fluid if the pores were large enough for organics to pass.

Hey Randy,
You are right about it taking a larger volume of seawater to remove equal an volume of organics, however if maintenance of a parameters at a specified level was the goal using seawater made to your desired water parameters would be the dialysis buffer of choice and then not only would you be maintaining organics, but also ion balance, salinity, and everything else. This is why I see it as a good approach. Maybe a bit more less efficient, but but what you lose in efficiency you make up for in inclusiveness. Also If one were to go this route then we could start working with ways to deplete the excess organics in the dialysis buffer to extend its life. This would be external to the tank itself so we could consider various precipitation reactions, filters (carbon), and other approaches as well as long as the end result is removable from the buffer and or exceeds the size of your semipermeable membrane pores. The only issue I see with using a dialysis solution is when it comes to dosing calc and alk in which I think a continuous approach such as a calcium reactor would work best.

 

[Chameleon]

I rarely do a wc and when I do my corals more importantly my sps hate it. My RBTA disappears for a week and generally things look terrible. I never have nitrate of phosphates and feed heavy. 200 gallon total water, my skimmer is rated for 500

Sounds like there is something wrong either with the water or the method..this is atypical

 

[Mike Paletta]

Great thread Scott, really thought provoking. I was at MACNA and saw the presentation and talked extensively with Ehsan discussing the technology. Since I work in a scientific area I am a firm believer that more information is always better than less, and Ehsan showed that his company will provide much more information in regards to what is in our water than any other tests that we have out there. Having said that and after following this thread I am unsure of one major thing: What is the goal of this? Having done this for a long time, I have seen a lot of different methodologies come and go, and while many of these have at least incrementally improved what we are doing and our overall success, very few have really been major breakthroughs. So considering the unprecedented level of success that many hobbyists now have, what is this going to provide to increase our success above what we are doing now? Since there are already many ways to be successful in the hobby, isn't this just adding one more way? I'm not trying to be negative in any way as I am already preparing to send some of my tank water to be tested, but I'm curious what all of you think this will provide to increase our success?

 

[Big E]

Scott, thanks for the response-------

I'm just going to make a few final thoughts..............this idea has so many tentacles it's just one big marketing ploy by the company that is making/providing this service.

Corals have been around for millions of years and the most amazing thing about them is how adaptable they are. I seriously doubt they are going to thrive or stress out over a few ppm on any element or 100^th of a percent of some other measureable.

I'm seeing a backing of a basic reef keeping export system that has proven to work for a good 10+ years...........nothing ground breaking there. We already know consistency is important.

Most of the corals people buy now are from aquacultured sources, other hobbyists, ect. They aren't coming from the ocean or have adapted pure ocean conditions. Our tanks aren't the ocean........other vairables are at play & I’d bet most are not measurable.

Now what happens when I add some fish or corals, or the corals just get bigger and these dynamic numbers change.........they have to test all over again to make sure I'm in line with "nirvana".

I'm sorry................but this whole thing is a joke to me..................splitting hairs for no apparent reason and for sure costing more than consistently doing some water changes. I’ll stay out for the rest of this discussion and wait for this to prove itself over the next 3-4 years.

 

[uniquecorals]

Great thread Scott, really thought provoking. I was at MACNA and saw the presentation and talked extensively with Ehsan discussing the technology. Since I work in a scientific area I am a firm believer that more information is always better than less, and Ehsan showed that his company will provide much more information in regards to what is in our water than any other tests that we have out there. Having said that and after following this thread I am unsure of one major thing: What is the goal of this? Having done this for a long time, I have seen a lot of different methodologies come and go, and while many of these have at least incrementally improved what we are doing and our overall success, very few have really been major breakthroughs. So considering the unprecedented level of success that many hobbyists now have, what is this going to provide to increase our success above what we are doing now? Since there are already many ways to be successful in the hobby, isn't this just adding one more way? I'm not trying to be negative in any way as I am already preparing to send some of my tank water to be tested, but I'm curious what all of you think this will provide to increase our success?

Absolutely not negative..

What really provoked our interest as coral propagators was that it seems to be an ideal way to remove variables and keep a greater environmental consistency in play. With a huge population of corals growing out, we would experience times where they'd look awesome, look not so good, and look okay..>We wanted to smooth out the fluctuations that are almost inevitable when you're dealing with large volumes of water and corals in closed systems, and Triton's methods seem to provide that. And, by knowing exactly what corals are consuming, it gives us a better idea about what to add to keep them healthy and growing. Add to it the fact that we could reduce water changes in our 16,000 gallon plus system, given the severe drought we have in CA, and you can start seeing the attractiveness to us!

Again, it's just another way to get to a goal...We love the empowerment that we can get by knowing in greater detail what's up in the H2O. Granted, there is much to learn...And in the end, if it translates to an easier, more responsible methodology for home reefs, it's a cool thing. We are all striving for improvement in what we do...this is, we think, one way to do that!

-Scott

 

[uniquecorals]

Scott, thanks for the response-------

I'm just going to make a few final thoughts..............this idea has so many tentacles it's just one big marketing ploy by the company that is making/providing this service.

Corals have been around for millions of years and the most amazing thing about them is how adaptable they are. I seriously doubt they are going to thrive or stress out over a few ppm on any element or 100^th of a percent of some other measureable.

I'm seeing a backing of a basic reef keeping export system that has proven to work for a good 10+ years...........nothing ground breaking there. We already know consistency is important.

Most of the corals people buy now are from aquacultured sources, other hobbyists, ect. They aren't coming from the ocean or have adapted pure ocean conditions. Our tanks aren't the ocean........other vairables are at play & I’d bet most are not measurable.

Now what happens when I add some fish or corals, or the corals just get bigger and these dynamic numbers change.........they have to test all over again to make sure I'm in line with "nirvana".

I'm sorry................but this whole thing is a joke to me..................splitting hairs for no apparent reason and for sure costing more than consistently doing some water changes. I’ll stay out for the rest of this discussion and wait for this to prove itself over the next 3-4 years.

Hey, you're certainly entitled to your opinions...and I welcome them. That's the point of this thread. I have given you our opinions on Triton based on our experience thus far. There is legitimate science behind it. Again, we have never proffered this as "THE" way to have a successful reef. It's a method and a means of getting more information that can help you get there. Many people will be content just to get some tests and see what's up with their water.

I agree that corals show remarkable adaptation. However, if you are forcing an organism in a closed system to make more rapid (like in weeks/months versus eons!) adaptations, I believe it's causing stresses that we may not quite grasp. I also agree that adding animals to a system will increase the demand for trace elements, nutrients, etc. That's true in any aquarium utilizing any "method" out there. Look, Google me. I have written more about doing water changes and nutrient export and all of that stuff than just about anyone out there...I also am very skeptical of wacky claims and vague "methodologies." Your preaching to the choir. Part of the reason we are so fascinated by Triton is that, to some extent, it helps take some of the guesswork out of growing and caring for cora, which is what we do for our livelihoodl. Is it for everyone? Of course not. We're going to explore it. We are going to be transparent about our results- good or bad. Yes, we will offer the Triton tests so that others can see and learn, too.

Is there any harm in trying to provide a more stable, less variable-influeneced environment for corals in captive systems? I don't think so. We are very interested in anything that can help us provide a more consistent, healthy environment for our corals. A marketing ploy? Let there be no doubt that we intend to offer these tests, as we believe they are an excellent means for reefers to gain more information. And the reason we're having this discussion is so we as a group- a hobby community- can ferret out fact from hype. It's an educational journey that we are all taking together. If you feel that it's a joke, that's totally fine. We don't think it's a joke, so we're giving it a solid look. It's only been around for a couple of years, so the longer term results aren't there yet.

I remember back in 1986 when George Smit brought the first "Minireef" systems to market in the US- there were all sorts of discussions and arguments about the trickle filter and "live rock" and how it was totally absurd to sell "rock" to "filter" the water...Now, I'm not saying that Triton's introduction is on par with the trickle filter..My point is that it's part of our hobby culture to question new claims, new products, new ideas- to be critical. And, conversely, it is also part of our culture to give things an honest shake before rushing to conclusions...We have been impressed by what we've seen thus far, and we're going to continue exploring. If others want to, they will have access to the same stuff we do. We're not preaching...we're sharing our enthusiasm for something new. If it's interpreted as simply a "marketing ploy"- well, then we have some work to do! oh:

 

[Elysium]

I'm not sure what their procedure involves, but often such samples are acidified to redissolve carbonate and oxides that had precipitated. Sometimes they are filtered as well, but I wouldn't want to do that for these sorts of samples.

I'm not sure how much can happen in 8 days, but the growth of bacteria and attachment of those bacteria to the sides of the container could result in a drop in certain trace elements if they take them up.

ICP blasts apart molecules at very high temperatures before detecting the elements, so in general, it shouldn't matter what form the ions take as long as they make it into the injected water sample.

I do environmental consulting for a living and the typical practice for sending samples for metals analysis is to preserve with nitric acid. This retards the formation of hydroxide precipitates and biologic reactions. Typically the lab will only use a small aliquot (<10ml) of the sample, so any precipitates either inorganic or organic precipitates on the sides of an unpreserved container are typically not captured for analysis.

Pre-preserved samples are generally preferred, but labs have been known to acidify the sample upon receipt to digest any precipitates prior to running the analysis.

 

[Rob Top1]

Very interesting for sure. The DSR method caught my attention several months back and find this on a similar level as mentioned. My laymen question is in regard to the ionic balance. I didn't see this addressed. We all know that nutrients are easily removed via skimming, chemical filtration and refugiums. Elements can be dosed back in. No water changes needed to accomplish those two. It is my understanding that what can only be corrected VIA water changes is the shift in ion charges. Over time through the biological processes positively charged ions shigt to negitive and vice versa. There is a need to correct that for sysyem stability and water changes are the omly way. I would have to dig though the books to find the reference but I think it is Spung's volume three. Again I'm not an expert and may have misunderstood this. If I did please correct me. If I did not, how does this system account for this shift