Red Sea Comparison of various methods for Nitrate and Phosphate Reduction Chart

[rygh]

There has been speculation that Nopox contains some nitrogen compounds as the proprietary ingredients.
If so, that could make a difference in phosphate reduction, depending on a given tanks nitrate levels.

The old redfield ration idea:
The bacteria you are growing take up both nitrate and phosphate at some ratio.
As nitrate becomes limited, phosphate reduction slows, so you may want to add nitrate.

Now, many (most) tanks have plenty of nitrates, so this usually has little effect.
Which may explain why it works well for some and not others.

Of course, Nopox containing nitrates is pure speculation...

My bet is that they add it in the form of Ketchup!

 

[Kungpaoshizi]

There has been speculation that Nopox contains some nitrogen compounds as the proprietary ingredients.
If so, that could make a difference in phosphate reduction, depending on a given tanks nitrate levels.

The old redfield ration idea:
The bacteria you are growing take up both nitrate and phosphate at some ratio.
As nitrate becomes limited, phosphate reduction slows, so you may want to add nitrate.

Now, many (most) tanks have plenty of nitrates, so this usually has little effect.
Which may explain why it works well for some and not others.

Of course, Nopox containing nitrates is pure speculation...

My bet is that they add it in the form of Ketchup!

You have a very valid point, but the Reef Energy line is the nitrates.. I think many don't understand this as well, and then write off nopox as not working when things stall and phosphate wins. (as redfield is seen to be similar from plankton info iirc)
The aspect I'm talking about Red Sea has said specifically, 'a blend of carbons and minerals' iirc. So it's not JUST carbon sources, which vodka+vinegar would be, let alone not methanol.
The original thread of the analysis (which was also done by students remember, that's gotta be considered) had quite a lot of info, but several peculiar spots I find most interesting. (just google 'I had a student take an NMR of NOPOX')

The basis for my speculation is:
1. they tell us there's extra elements/minerals in it
2. (from the post) There are a couple impurities around 3 ppm (3ppm could be a lot depending on what it is)
3. (from the post) Those are the two different proton signals for ethanol. There are two peaks my student labeled as "mystery peaks" but those are minor impurities of some sort.
4. (from the post) Someone speculates iron as being added, someone else comments that iron wouldn't show up in an NMR, but dismisses the concept because of some random speculation(but says he doses it himself)
5. (from the post)Yes, anything with a proton will show up in the 1H-NMR. There is no glucose or other sugar in NOPOX. And while Fe won't directly show in a 1H-NMR, I can tell you that there isn't any significant amount of iron in NOPOX. Iron is paramagnetic and will cause tremendous line broadening (due to increasing the T1 relaxation of the organic molecules) in a proton NMR (which is not seen in the spectrum my student took). There could be trace Fe in NOPOX, but there is very little, if any.
6. (from the post; asked about manganese content) Mn is also paramagnetic, so there isn't a lot of it in there. But how much would you expect there to be, if any? I can tell you NOPOX doesn't have >1% Fe or Mn, but it could have ppm levels that wouldn't mess with the NMR.Weak additional evidence for a lack of metals in NOPOX (in any appreciable amounts) is that NOPOX is a clear liquid. But again, if you are talking about ppm levels of metals, then it could be possible.(lawl, did he say ppm?)

I could continue, but you get the idea. There's 3ppm of something(s) and it's pretty much dismissed, yet he mentions it in point 6.
But this is also aside from other things that will not show up on the NMR, but again, nobody even considers what they could be. I also find it funny they use 12-14ml as a low dose of nopox in 100 gallons as a reference point to compare cost. I myself found that after bacteria was established in my own 75 gallon tank after a couple months, I had to back down to .5 ml a day. (that's not anywhere close to 12-14 per 100 gallons; so again, things are skewed towards non-nopox)

I find it pretty much the routine and mood of these conversations in that post, concerning any company made item.
(someone says a valid statement; and oh look, more than myself and red sea that have luck with nopox lol)
I don't think you can equate the NO3O3 x with vodka and vinegar since the ingredients are proprietary. It smells like alcohol (ethanol? methanol?) an vinegar;may have some sugar ,all guesswork. I know my friends have good luck with the NO3;PO4x product as well as vodka and/or vinegar.

And the expected comment later:
FWIW, many people assume (incorrectly) that manufacturers know more than we do about what is good and what is not good for a reef tank.

I wonder if that applies to medicine? Because holistic medicine is completely better for you than pharmaceuticals. Those big drug manufacturers think they know more than we do about what is good and not good for our bodies. (har har har)

In a nutshell, the probability that Red Sea is being honest about extra ingredients is in their favor. I too avoided them for years because of the "I hate big companies" mentality. Only until I put my pride aside did I find out it's a great system. (and Reef Energy is really needed imo for nopox to work as it's intended; same can be said for vinegar+vodka though, you NEED nitrates otherwise the same happens)
The real funny part, is how people (even fellow reefers) react when they see my tank in person, because it's pretty amazing if I do say so myself. And I want to be able to share the experiences of how I got there, and not be labeled a kook because someone who hasn't tried it, or someone who thinks they know it all, has a limited viewpoint and experience with it. I was once there myself too.

 

[Rybren]

Because holistic medicine is completely better for you than pharmaceuticals.

Where is your proof to support this rather bold statement?

 

[Kungpaoshizi]

Because holistic medicine is completely better for you than pharmaceuticals.

Where is your proof to support this rather bold statement?

lol you miss my point..
I'll tell you about my proof if you show me your proof for this statement!
FWIW, many people assume (incorrectly) that manufacturers know more than we do about what is good and what is not good for a reef tank.

There will always be truths one way or another, but never 100% in one direction. To believe so shows a person who has stopped accepting the world changes, and change is the only constant.

 

[TD13]

Can I tell you a joke? Do you know why RS don't compare vodka/vinegar mix with NOPOX in their chart? Because is hard to compare the same things.
Seriously, did you notice that? This tells you a lot. They compare NOPOX with vodka/sugar/vinegar, vodka OR vinegar, but not vodka /vinegar.

New to the Vodka scene, I am on my 3rd day of vodka dosing. I haven't seen a vodka/vinegar regimen. Can you point me in the right direction? Can't seem to get Po4 down enough to kill GHA.

 

[Rybren]

lol you miss my point..
I'll tell you about my proof if you show me your proof for this statement!
FWIW, many people assume (incorrectly) that manufacturers know more than we do about what is good and what is not good for a reef tank.

There will always be truths one way or another, but never 100% in one direction. To believe so shows a person who has stopped accepting the world changes, and change is the only constant.

Huh? You're right. I did miss your point and I still don't know what it was.

As for me showing proof for a statement that Randy made, why would I do that?

 

[redfishbluefish]

I was biting my tongue with this thread until I saw this:

Because holistic medicine is completely better for you than pharmaceuticals.

Yes, certain pharmaceuticals are over prescribed and over advertised......but just naming a few; antibiotics, vacines, ace inhibitors.....show me the holistic cures and I'll show you a bunch of dead people.

Otherwise, this thread is very amusing, and starting to get a bit childish.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

2. (from the post) There are a couple impurities around 3 ppm (3ppm could be a lot depending on what it is)

....

There's 3ppm of something(s) and it's pretty much dismissed, yet he mentions it in point 6.
.

The 3 ppm statement in the original study comments means a 3 ppm shift in the proton NMR signal, it is not a concentration. So please do not treat it as such in your presentations here.

The main "impurity" peak in the spectrum at about 3.4 ppm shift is almost certainly the small amount of methanol that Red Sea says is in the product (since they say it is present and it is in exactly the right location for methanol). There is a very small peak at about 4 ppm shift which is not identified.

Here's the proton NMR spectrum for folks to see for themselves. The area under the peaks corresponds to the concentration of protons of that type on the product:

which is from (http://reefcentral.com/forums/showpost.php?p=23041401&postcount=51)

That aside, I have never denied that Red Sea adds other stuff than the two main organic ingredients (acetic acid and ethanol) and the methanol they list on the MSDS. Why would I dispute that?

My main point, however, is that the performance in an aquarium is what we are concerned about, and it does not appear to me that NOPOX performs any better than other organic carbon dosing products, such as vodka plus vinegar. I know you claim otherwise, and that is fine.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

FWIW, many people assume (incorrectly) that manufacturers know more than we do about what is good and what is not good for a reef tank.

I wonder if that applies to medicine? Because holistic medicine is completely better for you than pharmaceuticals. Those big drug manufacturers think they know more than we do about what is good and not good for our bodies. (har har har)

Excellent point. Every time a pharma company tries to market something, they need to prove it works as described. Reef companies, unfortunately, do not.

If Red Sea provided a data package showing test results for their product and the products they claim superiority to in many hundreds of reef tanks for six months to two years, as I had to do in people to get my drugs approved, I too might be convinced that Red Sea was on to something special.

If you doubt that big name reef manufacturers sometimes don't fully understand their own products, you can look to a thread from just yesterday where I was finally able to get Brightwell to agree to remove an impossible Guaranteed Analysis and product description for one of their products. I am sure there are many people who just accepted Brightwell's word for it, as you do Red Sea's.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

lol you miss my point..
I'll tell you about my proof if you show me your proof for this statement!
FWIW, many people assume (incorrectly) that manufacturers know more than we do about what is good and what is not good for a reef tank.

There will always be truths one way or another, but never 100% in one direction. To believe so shows a person who has stopped accepting the world changes, and change is the only constant.

I gave it below in the case of Brightwell. It was a case of them being 100% wrong and misleading customers as to the potency of a product..

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

There has been speculation that Nopox contains some nitrogen compounds as the proprietary ingredients.
If so, that could make a difference in phosphate reduction, depending on a given tanks nitrate levels.

The old redfield ration idea:
The bacteria you are growing take up both nitrate and phosphate at some ratio.
As nitrate becomes limited, phosphate reduction slows, so you may want to add nitrate.

Now, many (most) tanks have plenty of nitrates, so this usually has little effect.
Which may explain why it works well for some and not others.

Of course, Nopox containing nitrates is pure speculation...

Yes, that is a reasonable hypothesis, IMO. I've not seen anything to suggest it isn't true.

 

[Kungpaoshizi]

New to the Vodka scene, I am on my 3rd day of vodka dosing. I haven't seen a vodka/vinegar regimen. Can you point me in the right direction? Can't seem to get Po4 down enough to kill GHA.

No doubt, this is where the Reef Energy comes into play. If you spend a little time looking into the ingredients, you'll see a commonality, that each of the cited sources can be sourced to lack phosphorous. Which is one of the reasons some use lanathum chloride in addition to carbon dosing, but RE is easy enough to know you're adding a nitrate source to offset the imbalance. I've tried to find a food source that contains a majority of nitrates (such as amino's) but when comparing cost, it's kinda a win-win because RE is a broader-spectrum of foods for corals. I found nutricell to work quite well but again, the negative is it contains a fair degree of phosphates.

 

[Kungpaoshizi]

Huh? You're right. I did miss your point and I still don't know what it was.

As for me showing proof for a statement that Randy made, why would I do that?

I was just comparing the hypothetical statement with a hypothetical statement. Neither can be proved to an extent which deems either statement true in ALL scenarios. (which is inferred by the "tone" of the direction)

 

[Kungpaoshizi]

I was biting my tongue with this thread until I saw this:

Yes, certain pharmaceuticals are over prescribed and over advertised......but just naming a few; antibiotics, vacines, ace inhibitors.....show me the holistic cures and I'll show you a bunch of dead people.

Otherwise, this thread is very amusing, and starting to get a bit childish.

I was poking at the assumptions made. Just as you say 'show me the holistic cures and I'll show you abunch of dead people' it's just as easily stated, 'show me the pharmaceutical cures and I'll show you abunch of dead people'. Each can be examined to show their inadequacies.
I myself tend to lean towards the power pharmaceuticals vs holistics, but when the "cure" can cause a list of side-effects, it can't be said that in every scenario pharma wins. Even passing FDA regulations allows for a certain percentage of deaths. (they just label those "rare" side-effects)

You might say it's childish, but you can't focus on only SOME of the facts while ignoring others. That's could be deemed childish as well. Just as a child grows, there's many situations they'll regret because they ignored the truth along the way.

 

[Kungpaoshizi]

As I think on the subject and how debatable it is, I thought I would google some terms.. Interesting results

"nopox doesn't work" 1 result
nopox doesn't work 7,730 results
nopox sucks 1,290 results
"nopox sucks" 0 results
nopox isn't working 6,580 results
"nopox isn't working" 2 results
nopox had no effect 1,060 results
"nopox had no effect" 1 result
nopox is bad 13,500 results
"nopox is bad" no results
nopox is not efficient 13,300 results
"nopox is not efficient" 0 results
=43,464 in a negative light

"nopox works" 319 results
nopox works 30,800 results
"nopox is awesome" 1 result
nopox is awesome 46,300 results
nopox is efficient 11,500 results
"nopox is efficient" 0 results
nopox is working 7,600 results
"nopox is working" 8 results
nopox had an effect 33,700
"nopox had an effect" 1 result
nopox is good 10,400
"nopox is good" 9 results
=140,629 in a positive light

 

[redfishbluefish]

My final say in this thread is that, of the two primary combatants in this thread, it now reminds me of the kindergarten debate of, "My mom can beat up your mom." In the end, we never found out whose mom would prevail, and I believe that would be the case here as well with NoPox versus vodka/vinegar argument, without an independent scientific study showing otherwise. So continue using the anecdotal information to make your argument, but here's the important part.....use whatever you find works for you, regardless of what others say. Just ask @Paul B about undergravel filters....it shouldn't work, but it does for him!

 

[Kungpaoshizi]

My final say in this thread is that, of the two primary combatants in this thread, it now reminds me of the kindergarten debate of, "My mom can beat up your mom." In the end, we never found out whose mom would prevail, and I believe that would be the case here as well with NoPox versus vodka/vinegar argument, without an independent scientific study showing otherwise. So continue using the anecdotal information to make your argument, but here's the important part.....use whatever you find works for you, regardless of what others say. Just ask @Paul B about undergravel filters....it shouldn't work, but it does for him!

I'm sorry you think so little of our words as to compare them to a kindergarten debate.. But in defense of PaulB (and science) why the heck shouldn't an undergravel filter work? heh..
Sorry, gotta say it, it makes perfect sense in the ways of combatting accumulation of detritus in the sandbed and those negative effects..

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

As I think on the subject and how debatable it is, I thought I would google some terms.. Interesting results

"nopox doesn't work" 1 result
nopox doesn't work 7,730 results
nopox sucks 1,290 results
"nopox sucks" 0 results
nopox isn't working 6,580 results
"nopox isn't working" 2 results
nopox had no effect 1,060 results
"nopox had no effect" 1 result
nopox is bad 13,500 results
"nopox is bad" no results
nopox is not efficient 13,300 results
"nopox is not efficient" 0 results
=43,464 in a negative light

"nopox works" 319 results
nopox works 30,800 results
"nopox is awesome" 1 result
nopox is awesome 46,300 results
nopox is efficient 11,500 results
"nopox is efficient" 0 results
nopox is working 7,600 results
"nopox is working" 8 results
nopox had an effect 33,700
"nopox had an effect" 1 result
nopox is good 10,400
"nopox is good" 9 results
=140,629 in a positive light

That's certainly a reasonable result for a product that we think works.

But since no one in this thread doubts that it works, I'm not sure I understand why you spent the time to do those searches and post the results.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

I was poking at the assumptions made. Just as you say 'show me the holistic cures and I'll show you abunch of dead people' it's just as easily stated, 'show me the pharmaceutical cures and I'll show you abunch of dead people'. Each can be examined to show their inadequacies..

Let's stuck to the topic at hand.

I can easily refute this but will not waste reef chemistry forum space to do so since it has no bearing on any reef related topic.

 

[Kungpaoshizi]

Randy, I'm sorry I have faith that the company might be telling the truth. My experience and very hard work in determining what works for my tank, has shown me that nopox is the best choice I have come across.
I have tried absorbents, zeovit, vinegar, vodka, vsv, vv, and numerous other methods, backwards, forwards, combined, singularly, and I could keep describing the number of my fails over the years.
I'm sorry you have a different opinion of how things work despite my trying to share them. Please do not demean my experience and what it is I'm trying to share, as I said, I have found it works brilliantly and have a very positive appreciation and I only wish to share it.