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

[BeanAnimal]

I am not sure that I disagree with the conclusions, but I a also not sure that I agree... This is not a knock on the project, methods or choices made at all and maybe I am missing something obvious. What has been compiled here is pretty amazing one way or the other, so I am not (at all) finding fault or being critical. It is just the conclusions that I am shaky on.

Let me explain and maybe somebody can steer me in the right direction.

A concrete takeaway is that ICP tests are not great, and that is certainly disappointing but what I assumed to be the case already.

The issue I have with the overall conclusions are that that manual testers results are rather variable amongst themselves and this is from pros following strict protocols. Reagent batches raise another set of questions/variables and the average skillset of the average reefer doing the tests adds more uncertainty. So I would think that for the "average" reef keeper, the manual results will be as bad/worse (accuracy and precisions) than the ICP tests.

My takeaway is that trace element dosing based on any of these methods is kinda of throwing darts in the dark.

@Dan_P
@taricha
@Rick Mathew
Thoughts?

 

[Pod_01]

One clear issue is not the accuracy of the test per se, but the accuracy of collecting a sample, bottling it up for a period of time (can be weeks in some cases), shipping it around under temperature fluctuations which may include freezing, and then assuming the water is unchanged when tested.

Randy, how about accuracy of the sample. Meaning is the baseline established and accurate.
With collection I alway wonder what impact my hands have on the results. Shipping is just additional variable.
With P or PO4 from my experience I honestly don’t think there is a good method available to me that provides believable results in the 0.01/0.02 mg/L range. In the 0.05 range and up I think the methods are better.
Also as I mentioned comparing ICP that measures P to Hanna that measures PO4 is odd. To me that is like comparing apples to oranges, yes they are round but now what….

Regardless, as always the discussion has been educational and I might trust my Hanna bit more, just a bit.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Also as I mentioned comparing ICP that measures P to Hanna that measures PO4 is odd. To me that is like comparing apples to oranges, yes they are round but now what….

That's an inherent concern, but ICP should detect all forms of P while a kit only detects a subset of them, and should never be higher.

But in reality, as happened here, folks more often see lower P (or less of the spike detected) by ICP than by test kit, so different forms detected is not the explanation.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

IMO, there are other more complex concerns with ICP that are not solved by going to ICP-MS or to anything relating to "accuracy".

These involve testing and/or not testing of particulates that include bacteria (alive and dead), viruses, and colloidal minerals and colloidal organics with bound metals that might be removed or partly removed or not removed at all prior to testing. Triton said something a few years ago that I interpreted as centrifugation, but if true, may vary greatly site to site depending on the protocol.

 

[Troylee]

Lots of people adjust trace element dosing based on icp. It’s the whole premise of methods such as moonshiners.

They're all on the cash grab! Lol.. we never had these and tanks looked just as incredible or even better 20 years ago vs today..

 

[Pod_01]

tanks looked just as incredible or even better 20 years ago vs today..

Is that true? Or just opinion or hyperbole?

I seen this stated before and this implies there has been regression in reef keeping. Obviously knowledge has been lost, because I am having real hard time getting these finicky expensive SPS to grow and colour up.
If people 20+ years ago did it with out issues I really like to know how that was done?

Just curious….

 

[blecki]

Opinion and hyperbole. 20 years ago they were not growing the same species with the same colors they are now.

 

[Lebowski_]

Lots of people adjust trace element dosing based on icp. It’s the whole premise of methods such as moonshiners.

Should they be?

 

[blecki]

Doesn't this just prove that a test that tests for one specific thing is better at testing for that one specific thing than a generalized test that tests for everything is? Results really shouldn't be that shocking.

 

[Troylee]

Is that true? Or just opinion or hyperbole?

I seen this stated before and this implies there has been regression in reef keeping. Obviously knowledge has been lost, because I am having real hard time getting these finicky expensive SPS to grow and colour up.
If people 20+ years ago did it with out issues I really like to know how that was done?

Just curious….

We kept it simple! We didn’t have fancy icp test, we used a skimmer, and metal halides, with vho or t5… we changed water and let the tanks do what they wanted.. I still use this approach today and it works well! The less you mess with your tank the better it’s turn out! I gotta say for your finicky Sps the majority are just mariculture or wild acros brought in and slapped with a silly name to charge top dollar! Get some old school sticks that have been around and you won’t encounter half the problems you’re having.. I know a couple vendors on here who actually bring wild stuff in but they wait a good 8-12 months to chop them up because survival isn’t the greatest till they get acclimated to captivity.

 

[Troylee]

Opinion and hyperbole. 20 years ago they were not growing the same species with the same colors they are now.

Species haven’t changed.. in fact there is less now than back then because of bans put into place.. I will say colors have changed and the name game has stepped up big time as another cash grab lol..

 

[Reab]

Props to yall for this but any chemist could have told you that its not even close to being accurate. This hobby is about STABILITY not numbers. Yall forget that way too often

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Props to yall for this but any chemist could have told you that its not even close to being accurate. This hobby is about STABILITY not numbers. Yall forget that way too often

I’m a chemist. I’ve run an icp on seawater and other samples myself, as well as having used many kits.

What can I tell is not accurate?

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Should they be?

If icp is accurate, I think it’s better than blind dosing.

 

[areefer01]

They're all on the cash grab! Lol.. we never had these and tanks looked just as incredible or even better 20 years ago vs today..

Marketing in hobbies strong it is.

With regards to additive based solutions be it moonshine, DSR, Triton, or other could provide some value if it removes water changes. RODI efficiency? I understand that not all additive based solutions are the same but maybe there is some value by reducing water changes and/or frequency.

 

[Troylee]

Marketing in hobbies strong it is.

With regards to additive based solutions be it moonshine, DSR, Triton, or other could provide some value if it removes water changes. RODI efficiency? I understand that not all additive based solutions are the same but maybe there is some value by reducing water changes and/or frequency.

Def wasn’t all these little fancy blue bottles.. people swear by it and if it works for them then that’s great! But like the saying goes there’s a million ways to skin a cat! A water change is much cheaper than tons of additives and icp tests.. I’d rather buy live stock but that’s just me..

 

[areefer01]

Def wasn’t all these little fancy blue bottles.. people swear by it and if it works for them then that’s great! But like the saying goes there’s a million ways to skin a cat! A water change is much cheaper than tons of additives and icp tests.. I’d rather buy live stock but that’s just me..

Oh, I agree 100%. As I read the reply I was thinking to myself that there could be some benefit by doing additive based reef keeping. Not all of them are the same and some are, in my opinion, pure marketing. I definitely hear what you are saying

 

[Rick Mathew]

Props to yall for this but any chemist could have told you that its not even close to being accurate. This hobby is about STABILITY not numbers. Yall forget that way too often

Thank you....Totally agree ....Stability is very critical....but how do I know that I am stable without a measurement?...Even if the accuracy is off having a relatively good precision measurement would be important don't you think...At least this is how I see it

 

[Dan_P]

Wow!!!! What a test and article. Thank you @taricha @Dan_P @Rick Mathew

For me, this confirms my theory that one MUST do their own tests at the same time they collect water for an ICP test. It will help you understand if there was a “false or blown test“ by the ICP company.

And while it wasn’t the intent, this also proves multiple ICP companies shouldn’t be trusted at all IMO

Yep! Outsourcing has its good and bad points. Loss of quality control is one of the bad ones.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Thank you....Totally agree ....Stability is very critical....but how do I know that I am stable without a measurement?...Even if the accuracy is off having a relatively good precision measurement would be important don't you think...At least this is how I see it

A stable value for, say, iron that is limiting the growth of, say, macroalgae, does not seem desirable to me.