Reasons for Doing Water Changes?

[dz6t]

Have you seen any evidence NOPOX contains molybdenum?

I think it is unlikely that Nopox contains molybdenum, at least not in any significant amount.
Nopox is a mix of vinegar and alcohol.

 

[Scott Campbell]

Have you seen any evidence NOPOX contains molybdenum?

I noticed my molybdenum levels started to increase immediately after beginning to use NOPOX. I have since cut back on NOPOX and started using two other commercial brands in conjunction with NOPOX which has stabilized my molybdenum levels. I recognize the needless complexity of mixing 3 commercial products but I didn't want to just stop NOPOX cold turkey. I contacted Red Sea about the issue and the response follows. The customer service response seems to indicate to me that molybdenum is clearly a part of NOPOX and probably exists at levels above normal sea water. But feel free to interpret yourself.


Good morning,



The levels of Molybdenum are well within safe parameters and No3Po4-X has been used successfully for over 6 years by thousands of hobbyists.


In a reef aquarium we are not trying to maintain NSW levels. Extensive testing has shown that Corals benefit from elevated level of some elements. In the case of molybdenum we have absolutely no concerns at the levels and neither should hobbyists.





Best Regards,




Amanda Klawender


Customer Service


Red Sea North America


Email: [email protected]


Office: 281-447-0205


Toll Free: 888-733-7329


Fax 281-447-1153


4687 World Houston Pkwy #150


Houston, TX 77032

USA

 

[dz6t]

Good to know that you find molybdenum in Nopox. I am not sure they intentionally add that in it.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

I noticed my molybdenum levels started to increase immediately after beginning to use NOPOX. I have since cut back on NOPOX and started using two other commercial brands in conjunction with NOPOX which has stabilized my molybdenum levels. A

Thanks. :)

Based on their response, I'm still not sure if it does contain it or not, but it might. Red Sea is vague on the ingredients, but it is possible that molybdenum is one of the "other organic-bonded elements".

 

[Newb73]

I incorporated super bright lights and larger chateo ball along with added trace elements WITH water changes. Nothing new really, just reinforced and magnified by Triton craze.

I do everything I can for my tank and try every trend.

More water changes = doing less for a tank.

I keep a running list of what works and what doesn't.

My personal findings run counter to many common opinions.

Example..Edit: .biopellets dont work, other forms of carbon dosing do but managing it is more trouble than it's worth (to me).

Heavy stocking and heavy feedings do work.

Ozone does actually work.

Nitrate reactors do actually work.

Skimming isn't absolutely necessary.

Filter socks actually do work.

2 part is easier than ca reactors.

Smaller frequent water changes seem to be better than large ones.

LEDS do grow sps.
Take the manufacture Suggestion of the number of LEDs needed and double it and turn them down

Take the manufacture Suggestion of the number of wave makers and double it...and turn them down.

I suspect no water changes will be on the same level of bust as biopellets but won't criticize those who try.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Example...carbon dosing doesn't work.

.

What does it mean to you to say it doesn't "work"?
What did you want to happen that didn't?

 

[Newb73]

What does it mean to you to say it doesn't "work"?
What did you want to happen that didn't?

I actually was editing before I saw your response. See edit.


But the bacteria it fed was cyano...

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

I actually was editing before I saw your response. See edit.

Ok. :)

 

[Scott Campbell]

Thanks. :)

Based on their response, I'm still not sure if it does contain it or not, but it might. Red Sea is vague on the ingredients, but it is possible that molybdenum is one of the "other organic-bonded elements".

Ha - yes, the response seemed deliberately vague. And there seemed to be a bit of "Don't worry your pretty head over these things...."

My molybdenum levels rose from roughly 4 to 48 on the Triton test over a 6 month period after starting NOPOX. NOPOX was the only variable I could identify. After cutting my use of NOPOX by 2/3rd's my levels have capped out at 50. My salt tests out at 8 - but I only change 15% of my water monthly. So clearly the NOPOX I am still using is offsetting my water changes. Or maybe the other two commercial products also contain molybdenum. Who knows. The long term plan now is to just phase out NOPOX and see what happens. I am not terribly worried about a reading of 50 and I have not noticed any ill effects in the tank - but it did worry me as it kept increasing.

 

[MnFish1]

You can go forever without water changes & have zero NO3 & PO4 as measured on a hobbie test kit .
You can go forever without water changes & have an ionically balanced system via dosing & ICP testing. & there's a case for ICP testing even with, or especially if doing water changes.
You can go forever without water changes & have a low DOC content.
The only possible negative in a no regular water change system seems to be the possibility of a buildup of toxic (or maybe not all that toxic) organics that aren't removed by skimming or activated carbon or purigen, for example.
But it can be dealt with, at the least, with ozone. Or even a water change, say at six, or twelve month intervals.

Let me try again:

1. Where you get the idea that a water change every 6-12 months is 'enough' or needed at all?
2. what percent of water would you change?' and why?
3. In many of these tanks with no water changes, there seem to be limitations as to what will survive and what will not. Sanjay mentions this in the video - and Scott Campbell alludes to the fact that his corals/etc didnt do as well without water changes. I have looked at alot of the tanks with 'no water changes'. Many look great - but - the problem is would they look better with water changes - or would they be able to have a more diverse population.
4. Ozone, Skimming and Carbon will certainly remove some Dissolved organics - but each of these have drawbacks (according to various sources). Some people dont recommend using carbon (at all), Same with Ozone.
5. There is a large amount of chemicals in our environment, house, etc in addition to chemicals present after 'coral wars', waste breakdown, etc that we cant measure. Some of these are organic and some are inorganic. None of them are 'measurable' per se to the average person. Thus, any use of skimming/ozone/carbon would be guesswork as to whether these chemicals are optimally removed or whether they are slowly building up. On the other hand - it is relatively easy to calculate the amount of organics removed with regular water changes.
6. If a person uses a food with a high amount of 'trace element x' - with water changes this will be mitigated. (ie trace element x will not build up). With no water changes, one element will rise and will then require water changes to fix.

So at the end of all this - a reefer can have a system of regular water changes likely requiring a skimmer, and some dosing equipment, salt and clean water. A system that takes a little time every couple weeks.
-OR-
A reefer can spend money on an ozonizer and the inherent risks of this, carbon, a skimmer, testing protocols, trace element supplements, specialized sump and equipment etc. At the end of which he/she will still not be sure that dissolved organics are in a correct balance - and buildup of trace elements - and the eventual necessary water changes. This seems to be 'guesswork' changing water regularly is not.

If you want to go down that road, you have conveniently ignored the fact that there is no evidence that any tank necessarily has any toxins in it to adapt too.you're guessing, & such, making a strawman.

There is lots of evidence for this. Sanjay alludes to it in his video, additionally http://www.saltwatersmarts.com/signs-allelopathy-might-be-agitating-your-inverts-5865/. There are certainly toxins in tanks.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

FWIW, my Triton test said I was quite low on molybdenum despite 1% daily water changes, so it was something I was considering dosing before I decided to tank the tank down for other reasons. :)

 

[Scott Campbell]

FWIW, my Triton test said I was quite low on molybdenum despite 1% daily water changes, so it was something I was considering dosing before I decided to tank the tank down for other reasons. :)

Then I would recommend NOPOX! :)

 

[ksed]

I don’t know if this has been posted here but a good read about Triton method.
http://packedhead.net/2015/triton-lab-icp-oes-testing-of-a-certified-artificial-saltwater-standard/

 

[TbyZ]

I would caution that selectively removing many inorganic trace elements that are elevated is beyond our current capabilities.

Hi Randy; I don't get how your comment relates to my post you quoted & regular water changes?

Yes, to selectively reduce an elevated inorganic trace element(s) a water change is the way. But, if regular water changes are the cause of the elevated inorganic trace element then that slightly complicates things by needing to use a different salt mix & hoping the new salt mix doesn't contain high levels of that trace element or some other element.

 

[Oldreefer44]

As someone who runs a business and does not have time to do constant testing etc, my experience is that water changes are beneficial. I tried the Triton method because it would be more convenient. I was OK with the results but had invasive algae issues and was not satisfied with the growth of my SPS's. Switched to the Red Sea system and started bi-weekly water changes. Algae issues are non-existent and coral growth has increased significantly. So while my observations are surely not scientific I am convinced that water changes are beneficial so will keep doing them.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Hi Randy; I don't get how your comment relates to my post you quoted & regular water changes?

Yes, to selectively reduce an elevated inorganic trace element(s) a water change is the way. But, if regular water changes are the cause of the elevated inorganic trace element then that slightly complicates things by needing to use a different salt mix & hoping the new salt mix doesn't contain high levels of that trace element or some other element.

I just now edited down your post in my reply to the exact sentence I was replying to:

"The only possible negative in a no regular water change system seems to be the possibility of a buildup of toxic (or maybe not all that toxic) organics that aren't removed by skimming or activated carbon or purigen, for example."

What I mean is that there is another possible negative:

The other possible negative in a no regular water change system seems to be the possibility of a buildup of inorganics that are added in various ways and aren't adequately removed by other aspects of the aquarium husbandry, for example.

 

[TbyZ]

The other possible negative in a no regular water change system seems to be the possibility of a buildup of inorganics that are added in various ways and aren't adequately removed by other aspects of the aquarium husbandry, for example.

What inorganics are you thinking of ?

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

[QUOTE="Randy Holmes-Farley, post: 4088201, member: 45227"

The other possible negative in a no regular water change system seems to be the possibility of a buildup of inorganics that are added in various ways and aren't adequately removed by other aspects of the aquarium husbandry, for example.


What inorganics are you thinking of ?

If you scroll through the complaints people have posted based on Triton results, they include zinc, nickel, tin, silicon, iodine, and more. :)

 

[TbyZ]

If you scroll through the complaints people have posted based on Triton results, they include zinc, nickel, tin, silicon, iodine, and more. :)

Were the people making those complaints all actually using the Triton Method, & not doing regular water changes ? Or were they just people that had the Triton ICP test performed?

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Were the people making those complaints all actually using the Triton Method, & not doing regular water changes ? Or were they just people that had the Triton ICP test performed?

Just a test, typically. Most, however, would be worse without water changes, since salt mixes are not typically the cause of those elements being too high.