Trace Element Additives contain copper?

[Customtank]

From my understanding there are small traces of copper in a reef system. Small amounts is acceptable and will not hurt your inverts

 

[Graffiti Spot]

The only copper that is used to lighten coral colors deliberately is copper sulphate that will be found in products like af energy (less harsh product used every few days) or kz zeospur 2 (very potent harsh one time dose). The copper in two part dosing jugs will not be for anything but keeping trace amounts available for the tank to be healthy and won’t lighten coral colors or hurt anything. The dosing suppliments like kz or af are normally used in uln systems to get pastel colors on acropora.

 

[rhastareefer]

I had the same concern when I switched to ESV B-Ionic but HOLY WOW have I been happy with the results. Wouldn't worry about it

 

[Angelwolf21203]

Very interesting read! I just recently noticed a couple if good trace elements supplements available at my LFS contain copper and I was under the same knowledge as the OP. Any copper=death! I feel much better about it now.

 

[C. Eymann]

Im still hoping @Randy Holmes-Farley can elaborate a bit more as Im concerned on the levels of Cu I have tested on established reefs as well as newly mixed SW are far above .0000015 ppm, maybe Im not taking molar equivalent into consideration?

Not saying he is wrong by any means, Im not a chemist, so I hope he can dumb it down so I can understand why a hanna checker is giving me much higher readings than NSW is supposed to be at?

explain it like Im five? lol

 

[Aardvark1134]

Many of the reef supplements have a small amount in there. But look at how little. For example this one:

Seachem - Reef Plus

seachem.com

Minerals (min. values)
Ascorbic Acid (Vit C)	5.0 mg
Thiamin (B1)	0.02 mg
Riboflavin (B2)	0.02 mg
Niacin (B3)	0.25 mg
Pantothenate (B5)	0.07 mg
Vitamin B12	0.9 µg
Choline (B4)	0.004 mg
Inositol	0.011 mg
Arginine	0.16 mg
Glutamate	0.9 mg
Lysine	0.3 mg
Tyrosine	0.19 mg

Vitamins & Lipotropic Factors (min values)
Boron	0.096 mg
Iodine	0.18 mg
Iron	0.009 mg
Copper	0.001 mg
Zinc	0.005 mg
Manganese	0.062 mg
Bromide	0.3 mg
Cobalt	0.004 mg
Molybdenum	0.16 mg
Vanadium	0.0003 mg
Nickel	0.00035 mg
Tin	0.001 mg
Rubidium

 

[chipmunkofdoom2]

I didn't Google that, Im going off of what a hanna checker reads fresh mixed blue bucket Redsea salt at, which is supposedly natural sea salt via evaporation.

Red Sea salt is a very capable mix, but their marketing is misleading. The base of their mix is evaporated seawater, but it's not as if they simply evaporate seawater and shovel it into a bucket. Some elements precipitate as seawater concentrates while drying out. Many of these elements will not separate when rehydrated. Most notable among these are probably calcium and carbonate to form calcium carbonate, but there are likely others.

At the end of the day, Red Sea has to add additional elements to their mix to make up for deficiencies caused by the drying process. It's not pure evaporated seawater. From a "synthetic" vs "natural" standpoint, there's probably not a significant difference between Red Sea and something like Instant Ocean.

 

[rhastareefer]

Red Sea salt is a very capable mix, but their marketing is misleading. The base of their mix is evaporated seawater, but it's not as if they simply evaporate seawater and shovel it into a bucket. Some elements precipitate as seawater concentrates while drying out. Many of these elements will not separate when rehydrated. Most notable among these are probably calcium and carbonate to form calcium carbonate, but there are likely others.

At the end of the day, Red Sea has to add additional elements to their mix to make up for deficiencies caused by the drying process. It's not pure evaporated seawater. From a "synthetic" vs "natural" standpoint, there's probably not a significant difference between Red Sea and something like Instant Ocean.

I'd expect more contaminants from the 'natural' product (the ocean is humanity's biggest dumping ground) but I could be very wrong (depending on grade of synthetics used).

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

I didn't Google that, Im going off of what a hanna checker reads fresh mixed blue bucket Redsea salt at, which is supposedly natural sea salt via evaporation.

The Hanna checker is inaccurate at those levels. It is a false reading. Several folks have verified this by icp on the same water that showed the Hanna reading.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Now you have me concerned, and researching a bit more, several sources are stating copper NSW concentration is .09ppm, molar concentration is .0000014

Im assuming you are referring to molar equivalent?

? can you elaborate?
Thanks!

I am stating that the level of copper in seawater is what is claimed in that link. It is very low.

Thst does not mean that higher is a Tox issue. My tank had 13 ppb copper at one point and I perceived no problem. That said, The exact level where copper becomes toxic is highly variable depending on what organics are binding the copper.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

From my understanding there are small traces of copper in a reef system. Small amounts is acceptable and will not hurt your inverts

Far more than that, copper is absolutely essential, not just acceptable.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Im still hoping @Randy Holmes-Farley can elaborate a bit more as Im concerned on the levels of Cu I have tested on established reefs as well as newly mixed SW are far above .0000015 ppm, maybe Im not taking molar equivalent into consideration?

Not saying he is wrong by any means, Im not a chemist, so I hope he can dumb it down so I can understand why a hanna checker is giving me much higher readings than NSW is supposed to be at?

explain it like Im five? lol

Why? Because it doesn’t work at those levels. I cannot explain how it fails, but it does. There are many threads with folks buying this device, seeing copper, freaking out even though the tank is fine, and posting here in a panic. Some have followed up with icp texting and seen none at much lower levels.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

I had the same concern when I switched to ESV B-Ionic but HOLY WOW have I been happy with the results. Wouldn't worry about it

A two part with copper is an even more complicated issue. It may actually lower copper in your tank despite having it in the mix. I know it is not intuitive, but it is simple chemistry. I’ll show a section of one of my articles in a minute.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

The Many Methods for Supplementing Calcium and Alkalinity - REEFEDITION

There is no aspect of reef aquarium chemistry more important than calcium and alkalinity. Many of my previous articles have described various aspects of these systems in detail. In reading those articles, aquarists will note one pervasive theme: that maintaining appropriate levels of each are...

www.reefedition.com

From it:


One issue that has confused some reef keepers, however, is the presence of trace elements. Assuming that these products are actually formulated with every ion such that a true natural seawater residue remained (let’s call this the “ideal” product), then it will necessarily contain such ions as copper. Since copper is elevated in some reef tanks, and is toxic to many invertebrates, reef keepers have wrongly criticized this method as adding more copper. That’s actually not what would happen. Since these products leave a natural seawater residue, and since copper may be elevated in concentration in many reef tanks relative to seawater, then using these “ideal” products will actually LOWER copper levels because when the increase in salinity is corrected, the copper will drop.

For example:

You have copper in your aquarium at 4 ppb and salinity of S=35.

You add a two part additive that over the course of a month raises salinity to S=36, and raises copper to 4.02 ppb.

Then you correct the salinity back to S=35 by diluting everything in the tank with fresh water, and you get a final copper concentration of 3.9 ppb.

Does this happen in real products and not “ideal” products? I have no idea. But the statement by manufacturers that it contains all ions in natural ratios, including copper, should not be viewed as a concern that it is exacerbating a heavy metal problem.

The rise in salinity of these products over time can be very roughly calculated, though there are several reasons why this calculation is only an estimate. For every 1000 meq of alkalinity added in this fashion (and the matching amount of calcium) these products will deliver on the order of 60 grams of other ions to the tank. In a tank with a low calcification demand (defined later to be 18.3 thousand meq of alkalinity per year in a 100 gallon tank (0.4 dKH/day)) this effect will raise the salinity by 3 ppt per year (compared to a normal salinity of S ~35). In a high demand tank (defined later to be 219 thousand meq of alkalinity per year in a 100 gallon tank (4.4 dKH/day)), the salinity will rise by 35 ppt in a year, or approximately doubling the salinity

 

[rhastareefer]

The Many Methods for Supplementing Calcium and Alkalinity - REEFEDITION

There is no aspect of reef aquarium chemistry more important than calcium and alkalinity. Many of my previous articles have described various aspects of these systems in detail. In reading those articles, aquarists will note one pervasive theme: that maintaining appropriate levels of each are...

www.reefedition.com

...

For example:

You have copper in your aquarium at 4 ppb and salinity of S=35.

You add a two part additive that over the course of a month raises salinity to S=36, and raises copper to 4.02 ppb.

Then you correct the salinity back to S=35 by diluting everything in the tank with fresh water, and you get a final copper concentration of 3.9 ppb.

...

So good reason to keep up on occasional water changes (even with an 'ideal' product)? Thanks for the info, always appreciated!

 

[C. Eymann]

After digging more I found that some sources are stating Cu concentration of NSW to be .25 ppb , which would be .00025ppm correct?

so .00025ppm if converted correctly? taking into account the molecular weight of copper? does that equate out to be the the .0000015ppm that you suggested?

However Hanna states the ULR Cu checker HI747 has a range of 0-999ppb with a resolution of 5%

On the HI747, I get ~70-90 ppb on thriving reef aquariums as well as fresh mixed salts
so = .07ppm of Cu?


Is the hanna just plain wrong? why do we as aquarists put so much trust in their instruments then?

I also remember a ICP "review" where someone sent out samples to 3 different companies and got back 3 wildly conflicting results.
What can we actually trust these days?

Im pretty confused

 

[Bernie King]

Wouldn’t it be better to supply and maintain a natural level? You are falsely assuming tanks generally need to lower copper. It is uncommon to see any copper in ICP tests of tank water.

I did an icp test and saw copper in my tank! Then I questioned where it had come from, as I have never added any
Then I asked my LFS for a break down on the salt they used (Tropic Marin Pro) and it had copper as an additive. So that is my concern. I also searched the internet to find any other sources of copper! And found out that some foods that we feed or can possibly feed to our fish and coral have some level of copper in them

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

I did an icp test and saw copper in my tank! Then I questioned where it had come from, as I have never added any
Then I asked my LFS for a break down on the salt they used (Tropic Marin Pro) and it had copper as an additive. So that is my concern. I also searched the internet to find any other sources of copper! And found out that some foods that we feed or can possibly feed to our fish and coral have some level of copper in them

How much? Please don’t assume all copper is bad.

I had 17 ppb copper at one point and did not have apparent issues nor did it concern me.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

After digging more I found that some sources are stating Cu concentration of NSW to be .25 ppb , which would be .00025ppm correct?

so .00025ppm if converted correctly? taking into account the molecular weight of copper? does that equate out to be the the .0000015ppm that you suggested?

However Hanna states the ULR Cu checker HI747 has a range of 0-999ppb with a resolution of 5%

On the HI747, I get ~70-90 ppb on thriving reef aquariums as well as fresh mixed salts
so = .07ppm of Cu?


Is the hanna just plain wrong? why do we as aquarists put so much trust in their instruments then?

I also remember a ICP "review" where someone sent out samples to 3 different companies and got back 3 wildly conflicting results.
What can we actually trust these days?

Im pretty confused

The Hanna device IS NOT ACCURATE for Low copper levels in an operating reef tank. No one should use it for that purpose.

Copper in the ocean is variable, but the whole ocean average is about 400 ng/L, or 0.4 ug/L or 0.00004 ppm. it can be up to ten fold lower.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

So good reason to keep up on occasional water changes (even with an 'ideal' product)? Thanks for the info, always appreciated!

It is a reason to maintain salinity.