Triton/ Ati water test comparison

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Thanks Randy. I was just thinking about snagging some lithium from my crazy aunt while she is at bingo. Thanks to you she will be safe.

lol

 

[CDavmd]

Lithium has no known positive biological role in any known organism. I would not spend money to add it.

**** sapient suffering from bipolar affective disorder [emoji6][emoji12]

 

[Scott.h]

Thanks for doing the test. I was very curious to the comparison myself. More skepticism to ponder! It kind of makes you feel like it's an expensive hobby grade test kit now doesn't it?

So with the phosphate I'm surprised the results are double with ati. I've tested my water with all my test kits to learn the inaccuracies as well. Ill say that my Hanna ultra low phosphorus has matched triton exactly. Cal and mg always read low on Salifert. Does ati give you a nitrate reading? Did you compare that to a hobby grade kit by chance?

It also makes me think that if you were to do two triton tests at the same time you'd probably get two different results as well.

You are probably the only American to have low lithium!

 

[smokin'reefer]

ATI gave me nitrate and alk. My Red Sea's test gives me 0 and ATI was 0.01.
That was the surprising part was Triton doesn't do the main three we test at home. Salinity, Alkilinity and Nitrate.
I like having these to compare to my test. I do the same taking a sample to my life from time to time to compare. And I can get different readings there depending on who I give the water to.

I posted my test I had done in the thread above. Both tests came back with a higher calcium than I get. Magnesium was lower than my 1400 reading I get. Alk came back with ATI at 6.99 to my 7.5. I'll make adjustments to how I read mine based on this.
But, yes. These are very subjective. Makes me wonder if they are testing with a hobby kit and charging the 40 to 50 bucks.

 

[ReefingwithO]

Quick Tip about Triton Tests - I've noticed that if you can get it to California by Thursday you'll have the results Monday night or Tuesday morning. I've done this with a number of tests and it still rings true. I think they mail a batch on Thursday/Friday and if you miss that day you'll have to wait until the following week.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

It also makes me think that if you were to do two triton tests at the same time you'd probably get two different results as well.

That's been done:

http://packedhead.net/2015/triton-l...fied-artificial-saltwater-standard/#more-3309

calcium: 422.7, 423.8, 421.3
magnesium: 1308, 1295, 1294
potassium: 398.8, 393.4, 391.4

 

[Danny Venditti]

That's been done:

http://packedhead.net/2015/triton-l...fied-artificial-saltwater-standard/#more-3309

calcium: 422.7, 423.8, 421.3
magnesium: 1308, 1295, 1294
potassium: 398.8, 393.4, 391.4

Randy,

Are the differences in results possibly due to "pockets" of different concentrations of elements?

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Randy,

Are the differences in results possibly due to "pockets" of different concentrations of elements?

No. Those are test variations. They had a standard that they split, and such a standard (really, and simple solution of ions in solution) will have only incredibly small concentration differences unless they accidentally allowed it to evaporate to different extents.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

I'd also note that the tightness of the values is not an indication of the accuracy, just the reproducibility. The actual values (this was a known standard that was tested) often fell well outside of the range suggested by the multiple test results.

 

[Scott.h]

That's been done:

http://packedhead.net/2015/triton-l...fied-artificial-saltwater-standard/#more-3309

calcium: 422.7, 423.8, 421.3
magnesium: 1308, 1295, 1294
potassium: 398.8, 393.4, 391.4

That's pretty close if you ask me. Close enough for me anyway.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

That's pretty close if you ask me. Close enough for me anyway.

Yes, but I'm just pointing out that three values from 421 to 424 ppm calcium doesn't mean quite as much if you know the actual value was 410 ppm.

 

[filbie70]

Lithium has no known positive biological role in any known organism. I would not spend money to add it.

Unless you feel your coral or fish have schizophrenia.

...following

 

[Scott.h]

Yes, but I'm just pointing out that three values from 421 to 424 ppm calcium doesn't mean quite as much if you know the actual value was 410 ppm.

Was that the case? I know Ehsan has mentioned issues with calcium, magnesium, and iron, but I never heard specifics on how far off those values were.

 

[aquariumspecialtyDane]

We sell Triton at Aquarium Specialty in Columbia SC. We also ship anywhere in the US. I have had great results with Triton and we are the East Coast distributor for them now. For all the people that don't want to do water changes it really helps out. The results are spot on too!

 

[Danny Venditti]

We sell Triton at Aquarium Specialty in Columbia SC. We also ship anywhere in the US. I have had great results with Triton and we are the East Coast distributor for them now. For all the people that don't want to do water changes it really helps out. The results are spot on too!

Yes I am alternating between Triton & ATI every quarter. Are the triton tests going to be shipped from you now or do they still go to CA first?

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Was that the case? I know Ehsan has mentioned issues with calcium, magnesium, and iron, but I never heard specifics on how far off those values were.

It was in the link I posted, which sent in three samples from one commercial standard sample. Might the standard itself be off? I suppose that is possible.

 

[John Lohsr]

Following

 

[Scott.h]

It was in the link I posted, which sent in three samples from one commercial standard sample. Might the standard itself be off? I suppose that is possible.

I see that now. The article makes sense, and I get the need for skepticism. With me utilizing the triton system fully, and dosing the most minor trace elements, this will cause me to be a little more aware of what and how much I add.

One other thing that comes mind. They've taken many measurements from the sea. It really doesn't matter what the numbers are as long as they match the sea water. For instance if ICP tests calcium at 420, and the original sea water sample tested 420, 420 being the set point, it doesn't matter if the real number was really 410. See what I'm getting at? Unless the machine doesn't test high every time for calcium. Then it's a problem. I guess for now I'll look for the close ones and not over dose the ones that test low.

 

[Alexander serrano]

Keep us posted

 

[Shaun Sweeney]

Following. Very interested.