Alkalinity

[alazo1]

Just wondering if alkalinity on the high side is recommended (11-13 dkh)?. I know it's higher then nsw but I seem to remember some years ago that folks were recommending it claiming to get better growth of sps.

I've read some of the articles that recommend nsw, just wanted to get folks opinions.

Anyone tweaking their alk to higher levels getting better then usual results?.

thanks,
Albert

 

[comatose]

personally i don't like going above 10 dKh, and like to stay around 9-9.6 dKh.
i've had it higher and seen no extra growth from it being higher.

 

[MACH5]

I keep my system at around 12dkh. I've had as high as 14 with no ill effects on my acros. The coloration and growth on my acros is very good, no problems whatsoever. However, there are those of us that keep the alkalinity a lot lower with also great results. I believe Calfo recommends a higher dkh level for SPS culture.

 

[Anthony Calfo]

cheers, Albert/all

you'll notice in most aquariums that when calcium is on the high end of its (recommended) range, alkalinity tends to be on the lower end and vice versa. I generally favor a higher ALK than Ca... but stability of both is far more important than reaching some (often unrealistic) high end of either or both ranges.

Your system/corals really don't 'care' if they draw Xppm of calcium daily off of 350ppm or 425ppm... indeed stable chemistry is far better for calcification IMO.

Please do take the time to reed Dr. Farley's extensive articles (and posts in his forum) on water chemistry. Amazing/extensive... authoratative and reliable.

kindly, Anth-

 

[Serioussnaps]

10-11 is good stuff. 9 is fine. I stay away from extremes like 8 and 12. This keeps it so if i need maintenance im not to far off and can easily fix it. Also, it gives me piece of mind.

 

[MiddletonMark]

I tend to run close to NSW in the 7-9 dKh range. Provided it's stable, there's no reason to run it higher IMO in most cases.

Ideally, stability is more important than the #, though some claim better success [and others more RTN/issues] when at higher dKh.

 

[alazo1]

Your system/corals really don't 'care' if they draw Xppm of calcium daily off of 350ppm or 425ppm... indeed stable chemistry is far better for calcification IMO.

Is this meaning that it is really useless to try and get numbers any higher in calc?. At times I've strived for higher numbers in calc, from your comment Anthony I guess I was wasting my time. Good info.

Thanks for the replies everyone. I use TM Pro. I tested the other day and gave favorable readings of 420 calc. and 8dkh (fresh mix). I like those numbers and will try to keep them stable.


thanks again,
Albert

 

[MiddletonMark]

Albert - as I understand from Randy + other's writings - your impression of Anthony's statement is correct.

As mentioned before - Randy's old articles contain a few on this subject - and some very fine reading IMO.

 

[SunnyX]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7045439#post7045439 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Anthony Calfo
cheers, Albert/all

you'll notice in most aquariums that when calcium is on the high end of its (recommended) range, alkalinity tends to be on the lower end and vice versa. I generally favor a higher ALK than Ca... but stability of both is far more important than reaching some (often unrealistic) high end of either or both ranges.

Your system/corals really don't 'care' if they draw Xppm of calcium daily off of 350ppm or 425ppm... indeed stable chemistry is far better for calcification IMO.

Please do take the time to reed Dr. Farley's extensive articles (and posts in his forum) on water chemistry. Amazing/extensive... authoratative and reliable.

kindly, Anth-

WHEN DID YOU GET BACK!!!!:eek1: :eek1: :eek1: :eek1: :eek1: :eek2: