The BRS 160: 10 Weeks of the Triton Method | BRStv Investigates

[Greaps]

Well if its the larger particles would not a micron sock or filter roller and then an algae refugium be an effective approach? Would seem to good to be true.

 

[Scott.h]

The above is both debatable & confusing. I don’t necessarily like the idea of letting algae die & rot within the fuge. Apart from other issues, this is adding humic compounds to the water?


An algae scrubber does remove co2 from the water, and my pH is never below 8.1 (using a scrubber). But what happens to the co2 the fuge algae has taken up when its allowed to ‘die off’ (break down) within the fuge ?
The carbon is released & I imagine through natural processes, is converted back to co2 then carbonic acids.


Algae’s release about 10% of their daily take up of carbon back into the water as DOC – proteins, carbs – aminos-vitamins, etc…. without dying.


Apparently Triton’s method is meant to act as a closed system, which might be ok if the fish were eating the fuge algae as their only source of nutrition. But they’re not. Fish food is externally introduced to the system continuously.

I don’t understand how inorganic nitrogen & phosphate are controlled in this system if a reasonable amount of the fuge algae is not being exported regularly.

Surely if the PO4 and NO3 levels are getting above desired levels the fuge algae would not be left to die & rot away in the bottom of the fuge, rather than harvesting it?

I don't necessarily think it does, or needs to rot. I see very little die back. I also still use filter socks to catch the big stuff. I seen a noticeable amount of detritus building up not using them potentially causing an issue down the road so I put them back in. My thoughts on that is if the macro is thriving there's no issue with having them. The skimmer pulls roughly 30% of the organics out with bubbles. Carbon pulls some, and gets changed out too. It's going somewhere because I've added a lot of extra into the system regularly. Bacteria on the rocks perhaps. Macro..

 

[Mark Derail]

How about a "Rate My Sump" ? It's been 5 weeks now, things are finally being stable (as in, not doing tri-weekly WCs).

My Triton based hybrid. I plan to turn off the skimmer soon, as all the fish in QT right now, and to keep things a bit dirty.
The sump is 48 x 18 x 18h and water reaches about 15" high. The main display is tiny, I plan on building a 60 x 24 x 16h during the winter, and this sump will be the sump for it. The current display is 48 x 12 x 20h. I have two QTs, a 36x12x18 and 24x12x16.

In the last pic, the big white thing, that's the top half of the DIY algae reactor, being built. The recirculate pump will pump into that, either a Y to make water redo the whole course (like now) or just the reactor. I don't know yet.

 

[Servillius]

I think it is wise to challenge anything new like this. Like anything it has it's flaws. I think the question is does it add enough value to justify the cost and effort? I don't know the answers to all your questions but based off what I have read I can take a shot at a few.

1. I believe ICP is designed or at least in this case configured to test very low levels of elements and is less accurate with higher levels. Meaning it may not be the best tool for calcium and magnesium because +/- 10% 400 could mean 360 to 440.
2. I wouldn't test your test kit against a checker or against a ICP test. The hobby grade test kit and your procedure could easily be off +/- 10% . The only thing that would be accurate is testing against a standard.
3. The ICP in many causes is testing into the parts per billion and for some elements pretty accurate and for others less so. However, collectivly across all elements is much more accurate than a complete mystery or lack of knowledge.
4. I would wager the differences between the different ICP test providers out there is the machine itself, how it is configured, knowing and following proper procedure, cleaning, machine care and general benefits that come with time, expertise and related learning curve.

I know we all want lab-level accuracy with our test kits, checkers, and ICP but almost no one is willing to pay for it so we have to understand all of these things are simply designed to get us close or into an acceptable range where the corals will thrive. I think we can get totally lost trying to identify perfection and absolute accuracy or we can use the tools as designed which is to get us close. Just like selecting a brand of test kit, I think you are likely best off using a team who has demonstrated competence in that field for a prolonged period of time and seems dedicated to the process. The overnight "me toos" and lowest cost options may be just as good but if they are giving different readings you have to decide who is worthy of your trust.

The problem with the whole experiment is that the flaw in the system is some percentage of tanks, due to unknowns we, err, don’t know, will crash and burn. I don’t know what the percentage is and it may even be the case the percentage is less than not following Triton (I’m a big fan of sticking to a plan). If I’m setting up a new tank the result is a great chance of a good tank and a small one of a crash. Pretty good odds in this hobby. If on the other hand my tank is working with water changes, switching to Triton to get rid of “the bucket” could end with your livestock kicking it. Unless we know their extent of their gamble (oh well, we know some 10% of the bad stuff out there killing tanks we can’t test for... 90% success rate is fine), we can’t measure the risk of getting rid of the water changes.

Your tank is not likely to be in the 10%. With all the tanks around you, chances are you’ve eliminated a lot of household risks in your environment already. If you hadn’t, you’d be dealing with it on other tanks. It’s a percentage of the rest of us that get to sit around muttering “but my tests were perfect.”

My experience. I actually had an organic leeching into my tank and not being stripped by carbon. Lost lots of corals without ever showing a seriously negative Triton result. Not blaming anyone but me, just making the point.

 

[Mark Derail]

I think that Triton & no more WCs is a lofty goal, that if I never attain, I honestly don't care.

With my sump setup, and the future 140g tank, if I can do an easy weekly WC, I'll be happy.

Like changing 20g out of 140g once a week, and if life makes me skip a week, or I go on vacation for 2 weeks, everything will be ok.

 

[Antics]

Water changes are also kinda fun. The work of doing it is boring and tedious, but it just feels great to do a large one and feel like everything is rejuvenated. I known its all a matter of perception, but I like to think of a water change for my fish or coral like if I'm in a stuffy room and then open the door to some brisk/fresh air!

 

[Ryanbrs]

Algae takes up 'nitrogen (nitrate)' and 'phosphorous (phosphate) after its broken down from other molecules (protein amino acids, fish waste, fish food, etc). The skimmer removes larger molecules entirely before they break down into compounds usable by algae (as well as some particles)

Yeah, the question is more related to after everything has been either broken down or removed how much different is the net result of the refugium + activated carbon VS skimmer + refugium + activated carbon? I personally don't know the answer.

 

[Scott.h]

You make great points, but honestly, like Triton is new to the states, it’s not in Europe, either is ATI or Aquaforest, I would bet there ICP testing machines are pretty much identical , I thought to be totally honest , u guys could compare ICP tests, since this thread has started, I watched the video with mike paletta, he abandoned the Triton method after a year, I think Sanjay also, if there is anyone who knows reef tanks, it’s those two, just hope that beautiful 160 fares well!

Do you have a link to that? I seen the video where Sanjay was setting up the 75 with mike, planning on going triton, but there is no follow up video that I can find.

 

[blebs]

what what the refugium lighting settings? 12 on 12 off? reverse night cycle?

 

[Scott.h]

@Ryanbrs sort or related, but beat on whoever makes the orders and decides how much volume stays on the shelves for the triton stuff. So much stuff has been fluctuating out of stock, especially the test kits, since you guys started carrying it. Beef it up the stock at least until this "newly" found craze settles down!

 

[randyBRS]

what what the refugium lighting settings? 12 on 12 off? reverse night cycle?

Currently the fuge light schedule is from 5pm to 7am.

-Randy

 

[Bouncingsoul39]

@Ryanbrs After watching this one, couple things: You mention only 3 reasons for doing a water change. I would add two more that I think you missed: maintaining ionic balance and reducing the acidic effect of dissolved organics that will drive down Ph. I haven't notice you mention anything about Ph on the 160? Maybe I missed it. I want to add a sixth thing but I'm not aware of any science backing it up but this: people that have been keeping fish for a long time have noticed that after a partial water change the results on the fish is like "a breath of fresh air" for them. I've often noticed that fish perk up and appear more vibrant afterwards.

The next thing I want to point out is that technically speaking, the Triton method is not a zero water change method. Randy Holmes Farley pointed out this fact recently. Those white bottles are full of.....wait for it.....water and you dilute them with more water. Whatever Triton part you are dosing, is top-off water you wouldn't be adding. You are still doing tiny daily water changes. Theoretically, this will result in a long term build of up salts.

Now getting into the value of Triton vs regular partial water changes. I'm not one to run the numbers, but my general impression is that the larger the tank is, the better value you can realize from running Triton instead of water changes. Even then it is debatable after all things considered and really depends on the daily consumption of elements.
What I just realized in your video, you show the contents of the Triton bottle being directly poured into the Apex dosing containers whereas the instructions state to dilute with 9L of RO? Are you guys dosing 40ml of pure solution straight from the bottle on the 160 or 40ml the diluted mixture? Or not even using those Apex reservoirs period on the 160 since they only hold 2L?

Another thing I'd like to mention for discussion is how messy a chaeto refugium is. I haven't seen much mention of that but after having one and seeing how tiny bits of chaeto go everywhere it drove me nuts. I like to keep an immaculately clean sump and display and keeping chaeto out of your return pump strainer and keeping it from going into the display is a whole other issue, that probably requires mechanical filtration at multiple points.

All in all, I'm not at all sold on the Triton method though I do like to learn more about it just to know if it truly is an advancement in the hobby. In my opinion, it is not. It's just a different way to do the same thing we have been doing for a long time. An expensive one to boot. To my eye based on what is seen in the clips the BRS 160 looked 10 times better with Zeo than it does with Triton. Part of that may be due to the shock the system went through and is still recovering from the switch. If money was not an issue, Zeo still seems to be the best method. If money is an issue, carbon dosing with regular small partial water changes + 2 part or Kalk is the way to go.

To your comments about "ughh hauling buckets of water is the worst!" haha, man if you are still hauling buckets you are doing it wrong. There are a number of easy ways to not haul buckets and still do your water changes.

 

[TbyZ]

@Ryanbrs You mention only 3 reasons for doing a water change. I would add two more that I think you missed:
maintaining ionic balance and reducing the acidic effect of dissolved organics that will drive down Ph.
I want to add a sixth thing but I'm not aware of any science backing it up but this: people that have been keeping fish for a long time have noticed that after a partial water change the results on the fish is like "a breath of fresh air" for them. I've often noticed that fish perk up and appear more vibrant afterwards.

Triton is an ionically ballanced dosing supplement. That's it's intention, to maintan the ionic balance.
dissolved organics are removed by sponges, microbs, skimming, activated carbon & you can use ozone to great effect.
DOC's also breakdown into ammonia, which is taken up by the algae fuge.
The algae in the fige take out CO2 & replaces it with O2, maintaining pH at optimum levels.

Placebo effect; people feel good by simply doing a water change & the fish are probably more spritly because of the attention, just as they are every time you go near the tank; they are expecting food.
If what you say is true in some cases, that the fish perk up after a water change, then there's probably some deficiency with the systems filtration.

 

[TbyZ]

@Ryanbrs

Another thing I'd like to mention for discussion is how messy a chaeto refugium is. I haven't seen much mention of that but after having one and seeing how tiny bits of chaeto go everywhere it drove me nuts. I like to keep an immaculately clean sump and display and keeping chaeto out of your return pump strainer and keeping it from going into the display is a whole other issue, that probably requires mechanical filtration at multiple points.

You only need to filter at one point; either stopping it getting out of the fuge, or getting into the return pump inlet

 

[Zondebok]

Can I tell you how many arguments I had with my wife because we had to plan around time for me to do a water change?

#1 reason to try for the goal of less, even if not zero, water changes, IMO.

 

[TbyZ]

@Ryanbrs

The next thing I want to point out is that technically speaking, the Triton method is not a zero water change method. Randy Holmes Farley pointed out this fact recently. Those white bottles are full of.....wait for it.....water and you dilute them with more water. Whatever Triton part you are dosing, is top-off water you wouldn't be adding. You are still doing tiny daily water changes. Theoretically, this will result in a long term build of up salts.

Supplementing major, minor & trace elenents is not mutually exclusive to water changes. People do both.
Any build up of salts is monitored & diluted with RODI. It's really a non issue.

 

[MnFish1]

Triton is an ionically ballanced dosing supplement. That's it's intention, to maintan the ionic balance.
dissolved organics are removed by sponges, microbs, skimming, activated carbon & you can use ozone to great effect.
DOC's also breakdown into ammonia, which is taken up by the algae fuge.
The algae in the fige take out CO2 & replaces it with O2, maintaining pH at optimum levels.

Placebo effect; people feel good by simply doing a water change & the fish are probably more spritly because of the attention, just as they are every time you go near the tank; they are expecting food.
If what you say is true in some cases, that the fish perk up after a water change, then there's probably some deficiency with the systems filtration.

How do you control the amount of 'chaeto' or other 'macro algae' in your sump? How do you control the number of sponges? How do you control (ensure) the amount thats skimmed? How much ozone to use? People also feel good about 'a method' and 'testing'. I'm not trying to pick on you - but the triton method is not a completely controlled 'system' where there are no variables, in fact there are several variables - that are not controlled.

What happens when the chaeto in your sump dies for some reason? or 1/3 dies? What happens when you go on vacation? I just don't see it as any more - or less complex than what everyone else is doing - and I've seen enough Triton reports recommending 6x15% water changes - to realize that - water changes are not 'useless'.

 

[Scott.h]

How do you control the amount of 'chaeto' or other 'macro algae' in your sump? How do you control the number of sponges? How do you control (ensure) the amount thats skimmed? How much ozone to use? People also feel good about 'a method' and 'testing'. I'm not trying to pick on you - but the triton method is not a completely controlled 'system' where there are no variables, in fact there are several variables - that are not controlled.

What happens when the chaeto in your sump dies for some reason? or 1/3 dies? What happens when you go on vacation? I just don't see it as any more - or less complex than what everyone else is doing - and I've seen enough Triton reports recommending 6x15% water changes - to realize that - water changes are not 'useless'.

Triton doesn't claim "water changes are useless". Nobody does for that matter. Water changes are necessary to eliminate contaminants that we add to the water, either by food, or bulk dosing elements, or some other form. If you don't have contaminates there is no need to change water. Just because 200 other people on a forum say they do a 10% weekly water change just because. Because it makes them feel good, or someone else told them that's the number doesn't make it the correct amount either. Some claim it's what it takes to eventually change out trace elements. But if you've done any kind of testing you'll see sat mixes all lack trace elements anyway. Compared to natural sea water that is.

Most of the things you mentioned are self regulating. Low nutrients, macro won't grow as fast. I'm yet to see the stuff die too. If it does you are doing something wrong. Sponges won't grow either if the conditions aren't right.

 

[bh750]

Whatever Triton part you are dosing, is top-off water you wouldn't be adding. You are still doing tiny daily water changes. Theoretically, this will result in a long term build of up salts.

I'm not sure I agree. Yes you are adding as top off water, which is not the same as tiny daily cater changes. If its added to a top-off system the same amount of water will still be used to replace evaporated water regardless of using the Triton system or not. Or are you saying the dosing is being added to SW which doesnt sound right at all.

[QUOTE="Bouncingsoul39, post: 4153929, member: 17113"][USER=73701]
Another thing I'd like to mention for discussion is how messy a chaeto refugium is. I haven't seen much mention of that but after having one and seeing how tiny bits of chaeto go everywhere it drove me nuts. I like to keep an immaculately clean sump and display and keeping chaeto out of your return pump strainer and keeping it from going into the display is a whole other issue, that probably requires mechanical filtration at multiple points.
[/QUOTE]

Hmmm, I've never experienced this myself. I would think you should have very little pieces breaking off unless something is wrong.[/user]

 

[bh750]

I'm curious how much detritus accumulates in Triton sumps without mechanical filtration? If you don't regularly do water changes what happens to all of the sediment?

I used to be obsessed with vacuuming out all detritus from my sump. I've since subscribed to the belief that it adds to balance. There are organisms that break all of that down that, I always believed, contribute to the overall balance of life in the system. So I leave it alone and no longer obsess about it.