Nitrate and phos kit

[estebanb450]

What kind of test kit do you use to measure low phosphate and low nitrate?
Thinking of getting a Hanna checker low range for the phosphate. But can’t decide which is kit is good for low range sps are looking pale color think it’s to low nutrients

 

[Reef Jeff]

I use the Red Sea Algae Management test kit for NO3 and PO4. I find it to be easy to use and very accurate. Both measure to low range with a short spread between the measurements.

 

[Greenstreet.1]

The incredible non eatable Hanna green egg for po4 and for no3 was elos but hard to get in my area so went back to salifert.

 

[UWC]

Hanna for Phos. Nyos for NO3 :)

 

[lbacha]

Hanna for Phos. Nyos for NO3 :)

+1

I'm considering trying the Red Sea low range nitrate kit once I need to replace my nyos as it only goes down to 1 on their scale

 

[jda]

Hannah Ultra Low for phosphate. I just use Salifert for nitrate. It is always clear, which make me happy and what I expect - I know that I have some because I do not use any additives to drive it lower and the bacteria in the tank will always leave some to drive the equilibrium... it will not bottom out.

A mail-in test had my nitrate at .1 and phos at .008, which is what I get on Hannah (rounded).

 

[ReefAddiction34]

Red Sea algae kit. Works great and easy to read the different levels

 

[estebanb450]

I might stick with the Red Sea and Hanna since I have there brand for other tests

 

[Chris Villalobos]

My phosphate has always been so low that I had to spend extra money for the Hanna ULR Phosphate checker. My first measurement with it was 5 ppb! I don't know anyone who can accurately read the ultra low visual phosphate checks. My personal opinion is if your phosphate is below 0.03 ppm (where the current literature says it should be) you will never be able to visually read it with the naked eye.

 

[drawman]

Hanna ULR for PO4 and Salifert is great for NO3. I never liked Red Sea for these two tests.

 

[Salt1972]

Hanna for Phos. Nyos for NO3 :)

+1. I like the numeric display of the Hanna and have found it to be accurate by comparison. I tried 4 or 5 different Nitrate tests and was always left wondering by the color chart comparison. NYOS has the dual cuvette comparison and it is much easier (at least for me) to read with confidence.

 

[Garbonzo]

Red Sea for me.

 

[goober]

I use salifert for no3 but honestly it always feels like a guessing game. Any word on hanna making an no3 egg?

 

[TexasTodd]

I just picked up the Hanna ULR phos kit. Got a reading on the screen of 2. Is this then .02 PO4? I think someone here said there was a conversion for the ULR reading.
Thanks,
Todd

 

[TX_Punisher]

I just picked up the Hanna ULR phos kit. Got a reading on the screen of 2. Is this then .02 PO4? I think someone here said there was a conversion for the ULR reading.
Thanks,
Todd

.01. A bit low. I try to shoot for 7-9 on the ulr.

 

[jda]

You have to take that ULR reading and multiply by 3.066 and then divide by 1000.

2 is not the end of the world. .005 to .01 with the error built in... or a bit more than seawater.

 

[TexasTodd]

Thanks, so it equates to half and two decimal points over? I have some algae growing Cheato pretty well in fuge and a bit of green micro growing in a couple of spots in tank, not much, but surprised on such a low reading. I do have a little bit of GFO running I'll probably shut down, only about 3/4 of a cup, been in use 1 month plus and this is on a 150g display with another 30g in sump.

 

[TexasTodd]

Ah, thanks for the formula JDA

 

[jda]

I do not sweat anything between about 1 and 10. I do not like to go over that, but I also do not freak out if it is less than 25. I do not like to be at 0, but I do not know how this is possible without GFO, Carbon Dosing or LanCl. I know that dosing N and P is all the rage now and talk about "nutrients" even though they are really building blocks and offer no real nutrient, but I am a believer in throughput with heavy export (chaeto, skimming, WC) and import (fish food) and a low residual number. What kills me is that zoox actually gives nutrients to the coral in the form of glucose, but there has been a bad trend of lighting acropora with low quality lighting lately. You would think that if people go out of their way to add building blocks (N and P) thinking that they are adding nutrients, then why would they not feed the zoox as high quality of light as possible?

...sorry for the tangent. To summarize, I would find a number between 1 and 20 that you are comfortable with and shoot for that... that should keep you under .05, or so... which I like.

 

[TexasTodd]

Thanks again. I've had 4 other very successful Acro tanks (five if you count moving one) all with halides and either VHO or VHO/T5 with MH. I've really been trying to make it work with LED this time and it's been tough. The only reason I wan LED is the heat issue is a big deal in San Antonio. It's also making me dive much deeper into parameters, flow, etc. trying to make sure everything is about perfect as well as doing things like I'm now running my reds and whites on main fixture at only 2% and added a light bar I think is a higher quality light with some 12k (it also only uses 3w diodes). Ideally it seems LED should be 18"+ off the water which I can't do in my canopy. I'm also trying to do it without spending $2500 just on lights.
I have a big skimmer run wet, some cheato with good light, and do about 10% wc a week. Tried a little GFO as this was a system I purchased used in March that needed some tuning up and former owner had been running GFO which I've been tapering down after improving flow, getting a much better skimmer, and working up to full strength kalkwasser for top off. I think our local club's PAR meter maybe only registers half of the PAR with LEDs. Just from past experience and coral reactions versus readings it read in my tank, and it's supposed to be one of the better meters I think.

Anyway, I'll feed a bit more and shoot for a bit higher but below 10 on my new meter!
Todd