Oceamo Icp VS Triton

[AlbertT]

Hello Everyone,
I have sent ICP to Oceamo and triton same exact time to see if there is a difference in between two ICP companies and I got my results back and I want to get everyone's opion of what you think and which company to trust
I am attaching both test and side to side break down though chatgpt as well
Please voice your opinion of what you think
TRITON’s macro-element results are shown on page 2, including Ca 453, Mg 1374, K 414, fluoride 1.16 and iodine 40. Office Tank - September 10, 2026 (B-0DW5eZ).pdf Oceamo reports Ca 420, Mg 1353, K 393, fluoride 1.07 and iodine 31.

MSR234022.pdf

The biggest issue: copper​

This is by far the most interesting disagreement.

TRITON: 7.00 µg/L copper — and TRITON flags it because its setpoint is 0.

Office Tank - September 10, 2026 (B-0DW5eZ).pdf

Oceamo ICP-MS: 0.19 µg/L copper, with its stated ideal range of 0.2–2 µg/L.

MSR234022.pdf

That’s roughly a 37× difference.

If these samples represent essentially the same tank water, I would not make a major intervention for copper based only on the TRITON 7 µg/L result without confirmation. The ICP-MS result is dramatically lower.

There is another interesting clue: Oceamo also tested your RO water and reported copper not found, while RO zinc was 81.5 µg/L.

MSR234022.pdf

Several ultra-trace metals show the same pattern​

TRITON reads:

Zn 6.0, Mn 1.0, Fe 1.0 µg/L

Oceamo reads:

Zn 0.14, Mn 0.08, Fe 0.15 µg/L

So this isn’t just copper. TRITON is reporting substantially higher concentrations for several very-low-concentration metals.

That makes the difference between ICP-OES and ICP-MS particularly relevant here.

Nutrients​

TRITON measured phosphorus at 44 µg/L, corresponding to 0.135 mg/L PO₄.

Office Tank - September 10, 2026 (B-0DW5eZ).pdf

Oceamo’s separate photometric phosphate measurement was 0.11 mg/L. It also measured nitrate at 19.37 mg/L and nitrite at 0.11 mg/L.

MSR234022.pdf

So phosphate is actually reasonably consistent:

TRITON: 0.135 ppm PO₄
Oceamo: 0.110 ppm PO₄

That’s only about 0.025 ppm apart.

One important explanation: salinity​

TRITON says 35.151 PSU, whereas Oceamo says 33.8 PSU.

That ~4% salinity difference explains part of why TRITON’s Ca, Mg, K, Na and chloride tend to be higher.

For example, if Oceamo’s calcium of 420 were normalized from 33.8 to 35.15 PSU:

420 × 35.151 ÷ 33.8 ≈ 437 mg/L

That’s much closer to TRITON’s 453.

But salinity cannot explain copper being 0.19 vs 7, zinc 0.14 vs 6, or manganese 0.08 vs 1.

What I would trust from each test​

For your reef tank, I would give Oceamo ICP-MS substantially more weight for ultra-trace elements, especially when you’re deciding whether to dose things like manganese, vanadium, selenium, chromium, cobalt, etc.

For the major elements, both tests are useful, but we should first normalize them to the same salinity before judging whether they really disagree.

The reassuring part is that several parameters line up surprisingly well: fluoride 1.07 vs 1.16, lithium 207 vs 201, barium 13.42 vs 16, magnesium 1353 vs 1374, and phosphate 0.110 vs 0.135.

The biggest discrepancies worth investigating are copper, zinc, manganese, iron, silicon, iodine, molybdenum and aluminum.

Also, Oceamo detects several elements that TRITON either doesn’t report here or cannot characterize at the same trace level, including rubidium (297.9 µg/L), uranium, thallium, thorium, cerium, ruthenium, neodymium and hafnium.

For your tank specifically, I would use the Oceamo/MS result as the primary guide for trace-element dosing and use TRITON as a useful second data point.

If you want, I can go one step further and make you a complete dosing/action table for your 795-L (~210-gallon) tankshowing each element → which test I trust → low/ideal/high → whether I would dose it → which elements I would NOT dose yet.

 

[ReeferTCG]

First thing I would think is MS vs OES is a completely different world. Ive used both and trust MS over OES… but MS is much more expensive.

 

[areefer01]

So much AI in posts these days...

 

[AlbertT]

So much AI in posts these days...

Unfortunately I have used Chatgbt to compare to each other I figured its easier than doing it manually.

 

[AlbertT]

First thing I would think is MS vs OES is a completely different world. Ive used both and trust MS over OES… but MS is much more expensive.

you are absolutely correct but I checked my salinity and Oceamo was more accurate