My speculation: Vibrant has some fluconazole in it...

[JCOLE]

@taricha sending it out tomorrow!

 

[taricha]

This chart you linked shows you how ph can change color.

But opposite the direction of quat addition.

Around ph 5+ is green then to yellow. 550 nanometers is green.

Methyl Orange is not green at any pH. 550nm LIGHT is green - see a hanna P checker LED (525nm), But 550nm ABSORBANCE is the literal opposite of green (the Red Sea NO3 test is hot pink with a peak absorbance at 540-550nm).

If starting low ph just methyl orange (acidic) is orange, goes up to ph 5 is green, continued additions of acidic additives with an acidic indicator makes it go back to orange.

Methyl Orange is not not remotely green at any pH. In the LaMotte indicator MO and BPB are in the basic forms.

It is what is in these additives that is making it go back to orange. Ie vinegar in one. The addition of more hydrogen to the balance can make it go back to orange.

This paper[pdf] shows how a quat shifts the spectrum of (basic) methyl orange to the left (opposite from pH change), and how a higher dose of the quat causes the shift to revert almost all the way back (see Fig1). AlgaeFix shows this effect and has no "additives" just a polyquat and water. Vibrant shows the exact same effect. (Bonus: also in the paper is an explanation for why some quats can cause the titration step of the Lamotte kit to fail and form brown precipitate.)

I'm just repeating myself to respond to your high volume of assertions that are incorrect and most are easily checked. Not a good use of our time or thread space. Afraid you're on your own there.
If you have hypotheses to test, such as potential substances or conditions that could explain the Vibrant "quat-like" behavior - then great. I'm game for that.

 

[taricha]

One last explanation as clear as I can make it for how the reaction of the Lamotte QAC indicator is completely different from (and has nothing to do with) a pH response...

Here's Methyl Orange pH behavior:

At higher pH, the peak is ~464nm, and at lower pH the peak shifts to the right, to 500nm+. There is no pH that shifts it LEFT of 464nm.

Here's Bromphenol Blue pH behavior:

At high pH, the peak is ~591nm and at lower pH the peak shifts to the left, to <450nm. There is no pH that shifts it RIGHT of 591nm.

Now here's what the LaMotte QAC indicator does when you add a quat.

You can see that both Methyl Orange and Bromphenol Blue start in their basic forms - MO at ~464nm and BPB at ~591nm. As you add quat (algaefix in this data, but Vibrant the same) both do the literal opposite of their pH behavior: Methyl Orange shifts LEFT of 464nm, and Bromphenol blue shifts RIGHT of 591nm.
This is the known response of both those chemicals to a quat, and the absorbance peaks shifting out further to the blue and red end makes the solution look more green as seen here...


This is the designed behavior of the indicator and the whole purpose of LaMotte doing it this way is that the quat response cannot be confused for low or high pH effect. (Very low goes orangey-pink, high stays brown, moderate lows are a mix between brown and the orangey-pink, as seen in post 304)

Besides, the added products - AlgaeFix and Vibrant are pH ~6 and wouldn't shift either indicator away from their basic form anyway.

 

[Sshannon]

Yeah-- it does seem off that they would need to be dosed if a tank doesn't have that equipment. The Dr. Tim's version are bacteria that can live a while but not divide in marine environments, which makes reasonable sense. But as you pointed out the Vibrant folks claim that this is from marine aquaria.

I'm super curious.

I will say that I use it and it works for me. I have no idea how it works, but I am pleased that it's here. If there is a MSDS available, it would certainly require them to include algaecide.

That is a category that the EPA certainly does regulate.

The EPA regulates pesticides/herbicides/algaecides for commercial uses. However, the aquarium industry is quite unregulated, as aquarium keeping is done in the privacy of ones home. I suspect a selective algaecide is involved, one with a similar mode of action as flucanazole, but not necessarily the same ingredient.

 

[a.t.t.r]

The EPA regulates pesticides/herbicides/algaecides for commercial uses. However, the aquarium industry is quite unregulated, as aquarium keeping is done in the privacy of ones home. I suspect a selective algaecide is involved, one with a similar mode of action as flucanazole, but not necessarily the same ingredient.

Did you read the thread? That is what they are pinning down

 

[Sshannon]

Did you read the thread? That is what they are pinning down

I'm currently halfway through reading it. Apologies if I stated something already said.

 

[a.t.t.r]

I'm currently halfway through reading it. Apologies if I stated something already said.

I think they are getting pretty close. Just wanted to make sure you didn't stop at the first page before it got good!

Also. Hello from Parkland!

 

[ScottB]

ditto vibrant has no effect on Bryopsis had it in my tank while dosing for months great for bubble, hair and somewhat hit or miss for turf. one dose of reefhd had immediate effect I was also double dosing the vibrant twice aweek nope

Yes we crossed that bridge some time ago. Keep reading. It gets more interesting than my original speculation.

 

[zuri]

Yes we crossed that bridge some time ago. Keep reading. It gets more interesting than my original speculation.

lol I better things to than speculate what's in a bottle, I know it doesn't have fluc bottom line as i was quoting another user

 

[ScottB]

lol I better things to than speculate what's in a bottle, I know it doesn't have fluc bottom line as i was quoting another user

Not even curious?

It contains an algaecide (polyquaternary ammonium) similar to that found in AlgeaFix. In similar proportion as well.

The scientific evidence is pretty convincing.

 

[ScottB]

Many thanks to all who contributed to this thread and most especially @taricha

I edited the opening post of this thread to minimize confusion for those just now joining. It now includes this language:

***** EDIT 5-December-2021*****
My original speculation was inaccurate. However, it did prompt another hobbyist to run some tests similar to those published in this paper. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33191523/
"This study investigates the utility of bromophenol blue (BPB) as a safe, rapid and user-friendly indicator to detect in situ residual QACs [quaternary ammonium compounds] dried on hard, non-porous surfaces, as well a means to assess their antimicrobial efficacy. At pH 7, BPB has a purple colour which turns blue upon its complexation with QACs..."

"QACs" stands for quaternary ammonia compounds. QACs are commercially used to create disinfectants and algaecides. It is a listed ingredient in AlgaeFix.

I think you will find the evidence fairly compelling that Vibrant does contain a QAC similar to that found in AlgaeFix and in similar proportion.

You can avoid all the noise of this thread simply by starting around Page 4 and then reading the posts authored by our fine fellow hobbyist @taricha

***** End of EDIT and back to October 20th*****

 

[bishoptf]

Great work @taricha not sure why we have folks responding that there are reasons that what you have done is not accurate. I mean really for me it is the fact that @UWC was in the earlier thread stating stuff and once @taricha started down the QAC path no comments have been made. I am pretty sure if someone was claiming that it contained something that they didn't agree with they would be the first ones to comment, but here, nada, crickets. That speaks volumes to me, but eh I'm just some simpleton.

Will be keeping up with this thread for sure, great job!

 

[UWC]

We're still here. It's actually been kind of fun to watch them try and figure out what they think is in Vibrant. Just been sitting back and observing without interjecting. Eventually I'll tell you all exactly why you are getting the quat response on these tests, including how Vibrant is actually mixed up and bottled

 

[bishoptf]

We're still here. It's actually been kind of fun to watch them try and figure out what they think is in Vibrant. Just been sitting back and observing without interjecting. Eventually I'll tell you all exactly why you are getting the quat response on these tests, including how Vibrant is actually mixed up and bottled

Would be nice to know that now vs later, actually all of the ingredients should be on the label so users can make up there own mind if they want to use it or not based on what is in it.

 

[mfollen]

As a current user of vibrant, this thread has been a valuable follow. Thank you all for your contributions.

Agreed why wait to inform and update your customers? I’m using vibrant now on my established system and my rhodactis and acropora have not been looking good lately while using it. it would be helpful to know what may be going on in the system. Or at least rule it out.

 

[JCOLE]

We're still here. It's actually been kind of fun to watch them try and figure out what they think is in Vibrant. Just been sitting back and observing without interjecting. Eventually I'll tell you all exactly why you are getting the quat response on these tests, including how Vibrant is actually mixed up and bottled

 

[a.t.t.r]

@UWC Why not just come out and say it. Since it is clearly not bacterial you should have your dealers stop pushing that as a sales point.

 

[taricha]

We're still here. It's actually been kind of fun to watch them try and figure out what they think is in Vibrant. Just been sitting back and observing without interjecting. Eventually I'll tell you all exactly why you are getting the quat response on these tests, including how Vibrant is actually mixed up and bottled

yeah. Not really "trying to figure out what is in vibrant" anymore. Mostly just testing it different ways against the quat in AlgaeFix and through a remarkable string of coincidences, it keeps coming up indistinguishable (both in the nature of the chemical and in the concentration).

If @UWC wanted to suggest a different chemical or product that is more relevant than AlgaeFix, then it might be possible to test vs that and perhaps even distinguish between the two.

What wouldn't help is unverifiable information. That is no better than the ingredient list on the bottle.

We ARE still trying to figure out why there are seemingly "bad bottles" that can cause unusually bad outcomes (anecdotal). Perhaps @UWC could be helpful there too.

But hey, maybe we'll sort that out on our own. I think I've got some bottles headed my way in the mail.

 

[shwareefer]

Definition of stalling: to delay taking action or avoid giving an answer in order to have more time to make a decision or get an advantage.

Definition of bluffing: to pretend that you will do something or that you know or have something in order to trick someone into doing what you want.

 

[jcolliii]

So, the manufacturer thinks it's entertaining to watch folks try to figure out what is in a product responsible for killing off some folks sps corals. Wow. What dose that say about the attitude of the manufacturer?

EDIT: At this point, after the manufacturer promising and not delivering on a list of ingredients, I would advocate for a boycott of this potentially unsafe product. Especially since it appears you can get the same active ingredient in Algaefix Marine and you know exactly what you are getting there.