HOBBY GRADE TEST KITS CAN OUTPERFORM ICP MEASUREMENTS…REALLY??

[Christoph]

Except, unless I’m mistaken, ICP doesn’t test nitrate. All ICP vendors use a colormetic or titration type kit just like us.

In that case ICP didn’t out perform a hobby kit. The ICP company’s “hobby kit” just out performed your “hobby kit”

Let me add a correction here:
We do measure nitrate with anion chromatography - the gold standard for laboratory nitrate measurements, that does not suffer from interferences (eg from nitrite).

Unfortunately the misinformation that laboratories are using "test kits" to measure nitrate is hard to get rid of ;-)

 

[MnFish1]

Let me add a correction here:
We do measure nitrate with anion chromatography - the gold standard for laboratory nitrate measurements, that does not suffer from interferences (eg from nitrite).

Unfortunately the misinformation that laboratories are using "test kits" to measure nitrate is hard to get rid of ;-)

The easy way to get rid of that misconception is to post - like you just did - or - when someone orders an ICP test - you say 'these tests are measured with state of the art equipment - but not ICP'.

 

[MnFish1]

The thing I like about sending samples to multiple vendors is if, as in this case, the results are similar, it suggests a certain degree of reliability.
I therefore feel more comfortable dosing or holding back, depending on results.
Also when sending in a sample to a single vendor, I tend to distrust any results that significantly differ from something I test for.
For example, if I test my Nitrate @ between 1 - 5 mg/l and get a single ICP result - say 30 mg/l - I will give credence to MY result, as I've been using an API test for over 30 years.
But, as in this case, there are two independent results indicating my NO3 was 30 mg/l. I'm therefore somewhat convinced that either API changed their formula - or more likely - I got a bad batch.
In retrospect, I had noticed low Nitrate readings using my kit, causing me to dose more NO3 than normal. That should have told me something.
Anyway, I just ordered a Salifert kit which is a distant 2nd for me.



Understood
and thanks

First - no one has proven that sending the tests in at all - let alone multiple - improves the success of a reef tank. Right. - so. And -totally agree your own result is likely more accurate

 

[MnFish1]

Let me add a correction here:
We do measure nitrate with anion chromatography - the gold standard for laboratory nitrate measurements, that does not suffer from interferences (eg from nitrite).

Unfortunately the misinformation that laboratories are using "test kits" to measure nitrate is hard to get rid of ;-)

Curious - how about phosphate? alkalinity? I personally am not familiar with anion chromatography - however - I hope its a method more accurate than 'Joe Hobbiest'

 

[Christoph]

Curious - how about phosphate? alkalinity? I personally am not familiar with anion chromatography - however - I hope its a method more accurate than 'Joe Hobbiest'

If you wanna read about ion chromatography, the Wikipedia entry is quite good: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ion_chromatography

Phosphate: We use a chemical test that has the same principle as hobbyist tests (molybdenium blue method), however we are using state-of-the art laboratory photometers with large optical pathlenghts. So also not compareable to home testkits

Alkalinity: We are using acid-base titration on a automated titrator (also state of the art scientific equipment) - the underlying chemical principle is however also the same as in home testkits.

Best regards, Christoph

 

[jda]

Let me add a correction here:
We do measure nitrate with anion chromatography - the gold standard for laboratory nitrate measurements, that does not suffer from interferences (eg from nitrite).

Unfortunately the misinformation that laboratories are using "test kits" to measure nitrate is hard to get rid of ;-)

It is because most of them used to, some of them still do and there is no transparency for most companies as to how they do things. You are the only one on here talking about how you perform tests.

You spoke to phosphate at your place above, but I talked to two labs and neither even knew that there were other phosphate forms beyond ortho and the total P on their results was a math calculation based off of the ortho results.

It is unfortunate, but lowest common denominator does apply to this.

 

[MnFish1]

If you wanna read about ion chromatography, the Wikipedia entry is quite good: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ion_chromatography

Phosphate: We use a chemical test that has the same principle as hobbyist tests (molybdenium blue method), however we are using state-of-the art laboratory photometers with large optical pathlenghts. So also not compareable to home testkits

Alkalinity: We are using acid-base titration on a automated titrator (also state of the art scientific equipment) - the underlying chemical principle is however also the same as in home testkits.

Best regards, Christoph

this is a bit demeaning imho. people send samples thinking they are getting a gold standard, which gold standard do you offer

 

[Christoph]

this is a bit demeaning imho. people send samples thinking they are getting a gold standard, which gold standard do you offer

I do not really understand, please clarify

The methods i posted are the gold standard. We are using ICP (OES or MS), Ion chromatography (cation and anion), photometry for phosphate and titration for alkalinity - salinity is measured using conductometry.

Best regards,
Christoph

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Actually - thats not entirely true - depending on what huge means. As a salt substitute - it would be fine with functioning kidneys - but without getting into the intracellular/extracellular buffer system for potassium - which would hijack the thread somewhat - I will just say - you could easily kill someone with a small dose of potassium intravenously. The effects on the heart are nearly instantaneous - not giving the kidneys time to excrete it

I agree, and I don’t advise injecting anyone or anything with KCl. lol

FWIW, I was on the scientific advisory board of the company that developed Veltassa (a potassium binding polymer) for hyperkalemia, so I am familiar with the toxicity, though my work with them mostly came after it was approved.

 

[David S]

Yep, I know that ICP companies do not use the ICP procedure to measure NO3 but whatever method they use, they got it right and the Hobby kit whiffed

 

[ingchr1]

Except, unless I’m mistaken, ICP doesn’t test nitrate. All ICP vendors use a colormetic or titration type kit just like us.

In that case ICP didn’t out perform a hobby kit. The ICP company’s “hobby kit” just out performed your “hobby kit”

The easy way to get rid of that misconception is to post - like you just did - or - when someone orders an ICP test - you say 'these tests are measured with state of the art equipment - but not ICP'.

Curious - how about phosphate? alkalinity? I personally am not familiar with anion chromatography - however - I hope its a method more accurate than 'Joe Hobbiest'

The Oceamo website states how they test nitrate, phosphate and alkalinity. Not sure why there would be misconceptions?

 

[rtparty]

The Oceamo website states how they test nitrate, phosphate and alkalinity. Not sure why there would be misconceptions?

The individual I quoted didn’t use Oceamo and my point still stands, ICP doesn’t measure nitrate. It’s a separate test

 

[MnFish1]

The Oceamo website states how they test nitrate, phosphate and alkalinity. Not sure why there would be misconceptions?

Because most people don't read the 'fine print' - and if they do, they don't completely understand it.

 

[ingchr1]

Because most people don't read the 'fine print' - and if they do, they don't completely understand it.

Fine print? It's at the very top of their water analysis page.

 

[MnFish1]

Fine print? It's at the very top of their water analysis page.

Fine print was an 'expression' - I didn't mean it literally. I would be surprised if many people read the documentation that comes with the tests. If they did, there would be far fewer misconceptions about this testing and its uses IMHO.

 

[drawman]

Yep, I know that ICP companies do not use the ICP procedure to measure NO3 but whatever method they use, they got it right and the Hobby kit whiffed

With complete bias I will say I would trust Salifert all day over API.

 

[MnFish1]

With complete bias I will say I would trust Salifert all day over API.

. I can't read salifert - so I will give - with complete bias - I would trust API over salifert - with the margin of error included

 

[areefer01]

Now which one to believe and take action???

And herein lies the crux of the problem. We see it in various posts be it ICP or comparing manual results or comparing manual to automated.

Crazy town.