PSA: Ditch your API test kit

[MnFish1]

Are we talking about the API ammonia kit? If so, see this thread with a poll by @MnFish1 :

Poll on water testing (for ammonia only)

There is widespread commentary out there that certain (API) test kits for ammonia are notoriously inaccurate. 1. I thought it would be interesting to see how common this thought is, in general - and compared to other tests. 2. At the start I will list several testing errors that I have seen...

www.reef2reef.com

The poll shows that there 4x as many people who think the kit shows false positive then people who have actually used the kit and had a problem.

Post #4 sums up my thoughts on the API ammonia kit.
"The kit has one issue, and that issue is that zero can look like 0.25 ppm to some of our eyes.

It drives me bonkers when someone posts a 1ppm reading with this kit and people say it's a false positive because this kit gives high readings.

The kit works fine. I can test freshly made saltwater, and it reads zero. I can test my cycled tanks, and it reads zero. I can calculate how many mLs it will take to cycle my quarantine tank, and the reading will be close after I add the ammonia. People who say this kit doesn't work either haven't used it, don't know what they are talking about, or both."

I completely agree. I have used the tests extensively - during my research project - and only ONCE did I have a discordant value - and thats when I messed up on the directions.

Some issues:
1. The directions have to be followed 'exactly' - if it says shake for 30 seconds do that etc etc.
2. It (for me) is difficult to hold the solutions directly straight above the tube - and that can result in different drop sizes, etc.
3. If you look at the actual directions of the test - "The tube should be viewed in a well-lit area against the white area of the card. The closest match indicates the ppm (mg/L) of ammonia in the water sample." - this I think leads to a lot of the supposed 'false readings' - for example - If the color looks just a small bit green - the result is 'Zero'. If its closer to the .25 ppm green its read as 0.25 ppm. Reading under incandescent lighting - or if the tube is 'standing up' - its easy to 'see' green - when in reality the reading is zero.

Even with these 'caveats' - I find the tests easier to read than many of the others - and though you might not know that the alkalinity (for example) is 8.5467 as compared to 'somewhere between 8 and 9' - I'm not altogether sure that it makes a difference in day-day reef care.

 

[MnFish1]

I've seen many post of individuals asking for help and they are using API test kits. These test kits are unreliable and make it difficult for experienced aquarist to help. Please look into at least Salifert test kits or better.

Please don't cheap out on the test kits that measure the most important thing in this hobby

WATER QUALITY.

To decide whether a test is 'good or bad' - you need a 'gold standard' by which to measure. So - in contrast to others - who say 'I want an exact number' - or 'hanna is more accurate', etc - I'm not sure that there are a lot of studies actually comparing any of them to EACHOTHER - as well as a 'gold standard' (except for the published margin of error posted in the FAQ sections of most of their websites and the post posted earlier - which seemed to suggest little difference.

BUT - its human nature to look at a 'result' lets say an alkalinity from a Hanna checker that says 8.3 - and assume that the result is exactly '8.3'' - because there is a number there - so it must be correct. Or look at a salifert test that says x.x. and think its better than another test that gives a range.

IMHO - in reality - all of the tests - including hanna, etc - are estimates - and then only if done correctly. IMHO - API tests have functioned in my tank over years just fine - and compared to the others (I've tried them - including hanna) - are equivalent - and in some ways easier to read, use and more cost effective.

 

[MnFish1]

I think that there is one universally accepted fact in the hobby; the API ammonia test is not accurate. It always shows .25 ammonia.

This may be 'universally thought' - its definitely not a fact in the hobby.

 

[MnFish1]

Yes, the accuracy could be better. But API has its place in the hobby...

I use API for routine, frequent testing. I use Red Sea to back up questionable API results.

One suggestion (to everyone). It is a mistake (IMHO, in general) - to take lets say an API test - and compare it to any other 1 test. There is no data out there (of which I'm aware) - that says a given Redsea test is 'better' than an API test. The best option when you have 2 tests that have different (i.e. outside the margin of error for the tests) - is to get a third test and compare all 3. (Note @Dom- this was an educational point - not a criticism of you)

 

[CryptoNautical]

https://www.reef2reef.com/threads/new-cycle-seneye-vs-api.859493/

I have a link posted above that show a comparison of API up to another test kit.

I'm really impressed to see how far this thread has came, and I agree that API has it's place in this hobby. Seeing all the replies it looks like it comes down to user error and or not as accurate as other test kits. I see a lot of simile to other test kits (ect. best car to normal car/ best helo to normal helo) they are being compared to the same thing.

You wouldn't by a unreliable heater for your reef tank would you and risk $1000s? When their are better heaters on the market.

I would love to see more tests on this forum to compare these kits not just API but even Salifert or Hannah checkers or seneye ect.

 

[mindme]

API TEST ARE NOT GOOD ENOUGH IN MY OPINION THE ACCURACY IS OFF BIG TIME IF YOU COMPARE THEM WITH HANNAH CHECKERS......

Hannah checkers aren't the end all. I just ended up doing a series of water changes on my tank about 2 months ago due to faulty readings for my alk on the hannah checker.

I believe the reason had to do something with the reagents. I think over time something happened with the reagent. I like to keep my alk between 8 and 8.5. I did some alk tests and it said I was down in the 7's.

So I increase my dosing. I do this multiple times and just keep adding more and more. It gets to the point where as soon as the soda ash hits the water, it condensates. I'd never seen this happen before, but my parameters appeared way lower than would be needed to do that. In the future, that will be a clue for me, at the time I trusted the hannah test.

My coral started to look unhappy. I did an ICP and had high aluminum, so I thought that might be the issue. So I do a bunch of water changes to help that(I normally do not do water changes).

Doesn't really seem to help. Then I run out of reagent, and go to a new bottle of it. Readings come back with the alk over 13. Turn off my dosing and let it come back down to the 8's over time. Things are much happier now.

Needless to say, that was a bit unnerving and the next time my readings start looking low I'm going to use another test kit to confirm it.

 

[damsels are not mean]

I don't think it matters that the test is super accurate. Ease will translate to consistency which will translate to an ability to sample trends. And trends are what is important in parameters with the exception of maybe salinity, pH and temp.

 

[Dom]

Well, not always.

Left: distilled water, presumed ammonia-free
Right: 0.04 mg/L NH3-N

Looks indistinguishable to me.

My point exactly... it shows ammonia when there shouldn't be.

 

[nereefpat]

My point exactly... it shows ammonia when there shouldn't be.

What? Find me an ammonia kit that can differentiate between 0.00 and 0.04 ppm. That yellow color (lack of green) means zero ammonia.

 

[Dom]

What? Find me an ammonia kit that can differentiate between 0.00 and 0.04 ppm. That yellow color (lack of green) means zero ammonia.

And to me, the color looks like .25

 

[nereefpat]

And to me, the color looks like .25

The left and the right? Or just the right? Either way, you can calibrate your eye by checking against a cycled tank or freshly made saltwater.

 

[polyppal]

Hanna:

Mastertronic:

Yes, Mastertronic uses API reagents - for Ca.

I like this trend

 

[Unitylover]

I like this trend

api:

hannah:

 

[Unitylover]

Api is pretty accurate. just gives a small range, and when you not keeping expert corals, it should be fine using it.

 

[polyppal]

Hanna

API

Mastertronic

 

[polyppal]

While we’re at it:

Tropic Eden Morroca rock


Carribsea Life Rock

 

[ying yang]

Ummm used api freahwater and saltwater amnonia test and never got 0.25 reading.
I dont own any hannah checkers as close to double the price of what I see americans say they pay for theres,and started off with api but kept reading not accurate so get at least salifert so I did but on the tests I got same of api and salifert,I pretty much get same reading so if spent £ 430/ just short of $600 for 6 hannah checkers and got same readings as api and salifert I ne doubly annoyed pffft
I not got api phosphate test but read its either 0 or 0.25 and no inbetween so imo that's not good,but the 3 or 4 colours from 0-0.25 on salifert isn't much difference at all so very annoying .
But my personally opinion is I read often on this forum, stability is key so if follow api instructions exactly and get consistent results ( which I do,tested multiply times right after each other) then for me it tells me if I'm in my target range,it's to low,it's to high.

But I'm only 1 year Into reefing and tank not full off corals and doubt I ever get any " high end " very expensive corals as lots of beautiful cheap corals out there,which I'm happy enough with .

I have no proof on this but I think alot of stuff in life in general ,alot just say what others say because that's what majority says so dont want to go against the grain and stand out,rather than just say " alot of people say api isn't very accurate/ reliable,but I have no experience using api and not even sure if true"

And I'm not saying op is saying/ doing this or anyone in this thread ,just my experience in life when questioning people as I'm very curious and go into stuff in depth ( anyone who reads my threads will surely agree I go on and on and on,I bore myself sometimes lol,) just want be clear and no misunderstandings

Aw and to add when cycled my tank with doctor tims amnonian chloride,adding x amount of drops equated to what it stated it should be on the bottle using api amnonia tester so that read exactly what it should

 

[Rmckoy]

APIs work. Are they as easy to read/administer as other brands? Prob not. You get what you pay for…

Seems like most of the people who complain about API are new hobbiests cycling a tank. Or someone who breaks out an old test kit that expired years ago… Not that testing kits are rocket science, but I would chalk a lot of ‘false readings’ up to newbie user error.

And a few days later resignation from reefing ….

 

[Stang67]

I am of the school of thought that as long as you are consistent in the way you perform the test then your results will be consistent. And consistency is better then chasing numbers correct? If your out of range I agree it helps to understand how far out you are so that you can take proper steps to correct and avoid swings.

 

[hotdrop]

API tests suck because they cannot accurately show a trend. What you need to know most of the time is are your values going up down or stable and you can’t get that from api