Prime Does Not Remove Ammonia

[MnFish1]

So could the badge not be changing color after prime was added since prime converted the ammonia to it's non-toxic ionized form that seems to still be detected by the badge? How do we know the badge indication is still free ammonia after the addition of prime? Perhaps I missed that.

I think (my sole opinion) - is that Seachem states on their website - that the multitest will 'ignore' (i.e will measure) - free ammonia in the presence of Prime. Seneye says (for what ever reason) - dont use it with prime, etc etc Theoretically @Dan_P is correct - the alert badge should measure a change. My only comment is it would be an extremely small change - state 'toxic' vs 'detoxified. The levels in the test were barely over the safe level. No offense to Dan

 

[Dan_P]

BTW - My comment came across harsher than I meant. I just don't have any clue with the spectrophotometer means? I mean it might mean a lot - but - its at an extremely low level where ammonia is being measured. The seachem alert is not (according to seachem) - designed to do this - I do not know about the other methods used. I'm going to test their 'multitest' as soon as it arrives - (supposed to be today) - to see if indeed that test actually shows a decrease in ammonia. If not - all good - I have no positive seachem agenda.

Maybe Seachem‘s comment about “not designed to detect low levels of ammonia” applies to a visual assessment of their products. The color in the multi-test can be quite dark compared with the Alert at the same concentration of free ammonia. So, it is definitely the better choice.

The spectrometer like the Hanna photometer can detect light levels and discern color changes where the eye struggles to even see. Light bouncing off the Seachem Alert is more than enough for a visible spectrometer to detect and analyze. By analyze I mean measure the light intensity at different wavelengths. My spectrometer can detect the color change of the Seachem Alert when it is still in the safe zone and the color change not deep enough for detection by my eye. This is why I have confidence in my test results. These ammonia sensors are very sensitive if you have a method to “see” the slight color change.

 

[Dan_P]

So could the badge not be changing color after prime was added since prime converted the ammonia to it's non-toxic ionized form that seems to still be detected by the badge? How do we know the badge indication is still free ammonia after the addition of prime? Perhaps I missed that.

Pretty much only free ammonia can get into these ammonia sensors and cause the embedded dye to change color.

 

[MnFish1]

Pretty much only free ammonia can get into these ammonia sensors and cause the embedded dye to change color

funny thing what do you base this on? - what the company says? well then I guess we should also believe that prime detoxifies ammonia>

 

[MnFish1]

Maybe Seachem‘s comment about “not designed to detect low levels of ammonia” applies to a visual assessment of their products. The color in the multi-test can be quite dark compared with the Alert at the same concentration of free ammonia. So, it is definitely the better choice.

The spectrometer like the Hanna photometer can detect light levels and discern color changes where the eye struggles to even see. Light bouncing off the Seachem Alert is more than enough for a visible spectrometer to detect and analyze. By analyze I mean measure the light intensity at different wavelengths. My spectrometer can detect the color change of the Seachem Alert when it is still in the safe zone and the color change not deep enough for detection by my eye. This is why I have confidence in my test results. These ammonia sensors are very sensitive if you have a method to “see” the slight color change.

there is no documentation that you have chosen the correct nm to analyze - right? I agree that you think you're right - I have bo evidence other than that to believe you're right

 

[Dan_P]

funny thing what do you base this on? - what the company says? well then I guess we should also believe that prime detoxifies ammonia>

Scientific literarure explains how ammonia sensors are made, how they work and the type of dye molecules embedded in the film. They are known as optodes. I would guess that Seachem buys these sensors from a third party. Seneye uses this same sensing technology, though a different sensing film, and has a photometer similar to Hanna Checker but water proof, measure the color change. Finally, months of firsthand experience testing this technology also informs.

As for believing Prime claims, recall that last year I used Prime in an attampt to make a 0 ppm ammonia standard and discovered Prime did not remove any ammonia. Subsequently, @taricha did an exhaustive study of Prime and could not find ammonia removal capability. Then I attempted again to detect ammonia removal by Prime and found none. So, I actually did believe Prime claims, but I was disappointed by Prime performance. I then tested, and confirmed my original test results. Prime cannot remove ammonia from artificial saltwater.

My new conjecture is that ammonia removal by water conditioners might not be true across all products. I have only tested two though, Prime and Cloramx.

 

[brandon429]

Dr. Reefs bottle bac thread was wrecked for ten pages by MN in exactly this manner, from the sidelines, its constantly unfortunate.


I prefer when his constant belittling of other peoples work comes in the form of his own test, from his own thread, his own findings, on a given matter.

see below for examples on how to wreck someone else’s efforts for fifteen pages:
https://www.reef2reef.com/threads/bacteria-in-a-bottle-myth-or-fact.403226/page-97Destructing a perfectly documented unassisted marine cycle.


What’s happening here and for the next ten pages exactly matched the first Prime thread, on repeat.

 

[Dan_P]

there is no documentation that you have chosen the correct nm to analyze - right? I agree that you think you're right - I have bo evidence other than that to believe you're right

The wavelength (nm) to observe the color change of the ammonia sensor is determined in a few steps. The visible spectrum of light reflected from the sensor is recorded when the sensor is fully recovered, i.e., not exposed to ammonia, and another after it is exposed to ammonia. The two spectra are overlayed to identify which part of the spectrum intensity changes the most when the sensor is exposed to ammonia. It is from that region of the spectrum that the wavelength to monitor the sensor was selected.

 

[Dan_P]

Dr. Reefs bottle bac thread was wrecked for ten pages by MN in exactly this manner, from the sidelines, its constantly unfortunate.


I prefer when his constant belittling of other peoples work comes in the form of his own test, from his own thread, on a given matter.

see below for examples on how to wreck someone else’s efforts for fifteen pages:

Destructing a perfectly documented unassisted marine cycle.

Style might be at the heart of many email and social media confrontations that would otherwise not be confrontational. Social media has no filters like there are in face to face communication to smooth out the rough patches in the message. Social media ”road rage” wastes precious time as you point out.

R2R is friendly and comfortable place to hang out in cyberspace. Most of the time folks behave well, being careful not antagonize each other. This makes R2R a productive place, producing informative threads like Dr. Reefs bottled bacteria study. The contribution of the skeptic is important to have in these threads. Difficulties arise if we aren’t sufficiently self aware to know when we cross the line between constructive skeptic and destructive cynic.

The only simple solution I see is to get off stage where image maintenance is so important and drives the ***-for-tat cycle. Send a private message to flesh things out. Don’t you notice our messages have a slightly different feel when we aren’t communicating in front of an audience?

A Zoom meeting would be a better option to deal with confrontation . I can hear a forum moderator intervening in a battle, saying “you two go to your Zoom and hammer your problems out. I am tired of this bickering. You are making a mess of this thread“ How difficult would it be to set up instant Zoom meeting for conflict resolution?

 

[brandon429]

My ideal read for point v counterpoint would be to see where MN links an aspect of his study that either supports or refutes an aspect of yours. We never get that mode.


watching him invent new angles of debate while Randy seems impressed with your line of reason starts to get concerning when it goes out to page ten of constant doubt but without any links I can read for his work. In agreement with what you mentioned above, when MN takes time to make a study the conversation usually goes really well and on track… so does the study.

nobody wrecked his rip clean analysis thread whatsoever.

He was able to make inferences and findings and nobody wrecked his efforts.



His findings were rather in line with rip clean threads anyway, there wasn’t much to wreck other than if someone just wanted to do so, but we all showed courtesy. You’re owed the same.

 

[Rick Mathew]

My ideal read for point v counterpoint would be to see where MN links an aspect of his study that either supports or refutes an aspect of yours. We never get that mode.


watching him invent new angles of debate while Randy seems impressed with your line of reason starts to get concerning when it goes out to page ten of constant doubt but without any links I can read for his work. In agreement with what you mentioned above, when MN takes time to make a study the conversation usually goes really well and on track… so does the study.

nobody wrecked his rip clean analysis thread whatsoever.

He was able to make inferences and findings and nobody wrecked his efforts.



His findings were rather in line with rip clean threads anyway, there wasn’t much to wreck other than if someone just wanted to do so, but we all showed courtesy. You’re owed the same.

Sometimes the desire to be right overtakes the all other forms of reason. This makes it very difficult to make sense of reasonable debate or skepticism....It becomes "noise" both to the sender and the receiver....Just my observation

 

[brandon429]

that new experiments forum they created is the absolute perfect place for rebuttals and furtherance of our knowledge of cycling dynamics/ammonia control etc.
MN has real ability to create experiments just like Dan and T he should post new works there, I'll sub and enjoy reading like I did his rip clean detailed findings. they gave me new takeaways we can use in tank takedown threads


I think even Dan would agree and welcome some questioning of methods right here, some follow up questions but I'm getting good at sensing when its about to destruct/ten pages and that's the point I'd like to see new experiments added in the research forum so I can draw my conclusions or read those from others

 

[MnFish1]

Dr. Reefs bottle bac thread was wrecked for ten pages by MN in exactly this manner, from the sidelines, its constantly unfortunate.


I prefer when his constant belittling of other peoples work comes in the form of his own test, from his own thread, his own findings, on a given matter.

see below for examples on how to wreck someone else’s efforts for fifteen pages:
https://www.reef2reef.com/threads/bacteria-in-a-bottle-myth-or-fact.403226/page-97Destructing a perfectly documented unassisted marine cycle.


What’s happening here and for the next ten pages exactly matched the first Prime thread, on repeat.

1. What actually happened in Dr. Reef's thread - is that I helped design the study - from beginning to end. So - you're incorrect. I communicated with Dr Reef both in PM's and in the thread. I am a microbiologist - as I think you're aware.

2. I am doing my Prime testing - and will post the results. In case you hadn't noticed - I was actually asking Dan's opinion to help design mine. Using the recommended product (by Seachem) that is supposed to detect ammonia. I did not tear down his work. I asked some questions (which I think were valid questions). Just like you asked questions in my experiment (and - no offense - often changed the topic from the experiment to your usual comments).

3. It's kind of irritating for you to be talking about - 'doing your own work', when as far as I know, you don't own a reef tank, or fish - and merely quote other people's experience. So - I think you're being a little disingenuous.

BTW - your post about me - also 'derails' the thread FWIW

 

[MnFish1]

As for believing Prime claims, recall that last year I used Prime in an attampt to make a 0 ppm ammonia standard and discovered Prime did not remove any ammonia. Subsequently, @taricha did an exhaustive study of Prime and could not find ammonia removal capability. Then I attempted again to detect ammonia removal by Prime and found none. So, I actually did believe Prime claims, but I was disappointed by Prime performance. I then tested, and confirmed my original test results. Prime cannot remove ammonia from artificial saltwater.

My new conjecture is that ammonia removal by water conditioners might not be true across all products. I have only tested two though, Prime and Cloramx.

@Dan_P As I said - in my first post in the thread. Thank you for doing this work. As I know, it is a lot of work - and it should be commended. As I also said - you may be absolutely correct (and quite likely are) that Prime does not remove ammonia. The company itself says that it doesn't remove ammonia - which is why it has to be re-dosed every 48 hours. I have not just commented to 'tear you down' - I have done extensive work also and had multiple conversations with the companies involved to determine the best way to get to the original question - which was 'does Prime detoxify ammonia'. I'm glad the topic has changed to 'does Prime remove ammonia' (or 'does Prime lower free ammonia levels')

It is not just me making up 'questions' out of thin air or criticising you for criticism's sake. My questions are based on comments from the companies themselves (ie. Seneye and Seachem) on how best to measure a change in free ammonia with Prime. EDIT - I.e., I was asking you questions to see if what the companies told me made sense (or not)

I apologize if you felt you were being 'attacked'

 

[brandon429]

Well to move forward on a good track of intention how about this option as a brainstorm:

instead of a publicly posted experiment where someone intentionally stresses clownfish with ammonia boosting in an uncycled holding system, to chart symptomatology and timing of expression, and then the inspection on whether adding prime stops the symptoms— do the experiment anyway and only share the results among the people here in this thread who want to see it.

some form of private only share, such as a linked private chat.

That will save public excoriation for clownfish harm by folks who don’t mind one iota if they’re killed in a new tank by skip preps velvet or brook, hypocrisy noted lol, and it will be a final slam dunk on the matter as clear as day especially when viewed in context with the prior works by Dan and T.

I publicly advocate the test because it contributes to overall fish retention practice and knowledge where we currently just have to guess.


there must be a thousand ld50 tests on marine animals like Randy listed earlier. It’s no grave harm if some of the top reef experimentalists want to run the same lookup, in person.

we can honorably commit to never reveal who did the test or it can just be pinned on me, as a ghost tester, don’t mind. I want the info for the thousands of cycles we are about to produce in the coming years.

I would gladly release the results of the test and we can keep the tester ID anonymous

if I get a chance to do grave harm to the mouse that keeps digging in my wall every nite at 3 am, that will occur. There’s no way I can feel not bad about trapping the mouse with intent to get the others, and then stressing over two clownfish pushed to limits and honorably trying to remove them before harm after charting expression and regression of behaviors. done just one time for the life of my indirect reefing career, where all future intent is to make fish life in captivity better if possible.

 

[brandon429]

we could even be very indirect on the final summary, with pertinent details only known to the linked chatters:

2 common marine organisms within the hobby (two clownfish unstated) were taken to stress induction and level X free ammonia was charted and tied to behavior X and adding prime stopped/didn't stop the behavior and either lowered, or didn't lower, the level that began the behavior.


all the times people dose prime in response to what they perceive to be an ammonia event very likely is not an ammonia event. we have complete fish kills on file now, 3 I can link, where simply adding one simple handful of sand from a prior tank into a new tank effectively skip cycled killed all their fish. there's no way that was an ammonia event, so reactively adding prime doesn't save fish in those settings it only makes people feel better and the hobby is left blind to the action or inaction of that 911 doser. until two unlucky X organisms common to the hobby are tested, we're at a standstill. either that or someone runs the test on a chromatography machine which sounds implausible.

whoever owns one of those devices probably doesn't want free reef testing work ran on it. nobody here owns one, its probably risking someone's employment to run it clandestine, so just score two clownfish and we label them unlucky organisms 1 and 2

 

[LRT]

Great work Dan. It would be awesome to see this same experiment done with Fritz Turbo!

 

[Dan_P]

Great work Dan. It would be awesome to see this same experiment done with Fritz Turbo!

Is that the bottled nitrifying bacteria?

 

[LRT]

Is that the bottled nitrifying bacteria?

Hey Dan its this stuff right here-
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...QQFnoECAUQAQ&usg=AOvVaw0G7eZEOQJiuHUlRzI3eRQ_

 

[brandon429]

I honestly think its going to move the dot down. two fish out there are thanking your engineering even though they're going to die of brooklynella soon 78% chance between trip home and 8 months after install