Another "Get off my lawn" moment from the washed-up: ULNS??

[Moser]

Apologies for the diversion.

You used the magic word. :uzi:

A lot of people in the UK are wondering how you can sustain a reef tank without water changes in long term using this method. They also wonder how leaving macro algae in sump to rot without nutrient export can possibly help a reef tank in long term. I am sure there are also some among them who are curious about the ingredients of those three bottles, but I am not one of them.

That depends on if the algae actually is rotting?……

It also depends on whether the small continuous water change is sufficient to keep the tank thriving. i.e., there is a water change done, contrary to popular mistaken opinion!.

As we all know, there are some SPS keepers that claim to have done no water changes for several years using conventional methods, without issue. A continuous small water change, dosing uncertain substances that claim to make the algae/ corals and fish thrive, with the excesss being removed partly ( or wholly?) by very heavy skimming may prove to work?!.

Jumping on the bandwagon with a few reefers with a hidden agenda seems to be the current trend….. But nobody explains why two of the best tanks in Europe are thriving having claimed to use this method. Saying it's the reefers and not their technique is a copout!.

Here's one of the tanks in question…… Ehsan developed the Triton method that is in question…




Sorry to divert the discussion….
Mo

 

[jazzman7838]

Oh!, really?!. We have you to thank for your curiosity??. :lolspin:

Yes, that's exactly what I said. :sad1:

Unfortunately, as with many things in life, you take faith in claims and use them, or you disbelieve and walk away..... It's that simple. Asking users questions that nobody has answers to is pointless!.

Are you new to this planet? People discuss things to try and learn more about them. If you have a problem with that, maybe internet discussion boards are not for you?

It would be a pretty simple matter to learn more about your magic potions by doing a mass spec analysis on them. These aren't unanswerable questions. My suspicion is that solutions of heavy metals are what cause the coral to expel the zooxanthellae. Copper, zinc, cobalt might do this. Coloring up blue, red, and green might be iodine, iron, etc. It doesn't interest you at all to know what they are?

AND WHEN I FIND OUT THEN I CAN SELL THEM TO PEOPLE! :spin2:

 

[Moser]

Yes, that's exactly what I said. :sad1:



Are you new to this planet? People discuss things to try and learn more about them. If you have a problem with that, maybe internet discussion boards are not for you?

It would be a pretty simple matter to learn more about your magic potions by doing a mass spec analysis on them. These aren't unanswerable questions. My suspicion is that solutions of heavy metals are what cause the coral to expel the zooxanthellae. Copper, zinc, cobalt might do this. Coloring up blue, red, and green might be iodine, iron, etc. It doesn't interest you at all to know what they are?

AND WHEN I FIND OUT THEN I CAN SELL THEM TO PEOPLE! :spin2:

YOUR Curiosity has helped nobody thus far!…..

Thomas Pohl won't give out his recipe's. That doesn't mean they don't work!.
Mass spec all you like, you still won't have a full recipe!. However, that seems to be some acknowledgement from you that some of these elements may have the effects that are described in ZEO. Therefore, maybe the method can work??!!!….. and maybe you have just agreed that there may be something to it?!.

However, if you are still curious, then continue to ask the question that have been asked for many years, with no answers forthcoming……

i.e. save your breath, dude!..

Mo

PS, to answer the last bit, we do already know the effects of a few of the elements. Zeo has specific iodine, potassium, Iron products. There is no secret to those. Things like Pohl's Xtra, ZeoSpur, B balance are a little more of a mystery... We know they have copper, zinc etc, but not in what proportions and mixtures or the complete recipe.

 

[DiscusHeckel]

What I would like to know is whether or not some or all of the blue bottles can somehow be integrated in other dosing methods, such as RHF's two-part, if so, to what extend?

I supposed the extend to which this can be achieved must depend on nutrient and alkalinity levels. For example, if my reef tank has low nutrients (as opposed to ULNS) and fairly low alkalinity (e.g. ~8 dKH), can I use some blue bottles and achieve some of those nice colours we see earlier in this thread.

Thanks

 

[MammothReefer]

What I would like to know is whether or not some or all of the blue bottles can somehow be integrated in other dosing methods, such as RHF's two-part, if so, to what extend?

I supposed the extend to which this can be achieved must depend on nutrient and alkalinity levels. For example, if my reef tank has low nutrients (as opposed to ULNS) and fairly low alkalinity (e.g. ~8 dKH), can I use some blue bottles and achieve some of those nice colours we see earlier in this thread.

Thanks

Yes I ran a hybrid of Zeo with Vodka dosing on my 500g system. I ran Vodka + Bacteria, AA's and Coral Vitalizer and I think Phols. It's been a while. Others have done it with prodibo some do it with Biopellets for example adding zeobac. What you get with zeo that you don't get with the other methods really is the community. So if you are running a hybrid method and something is off you will have a much harder time finding answers on how to adjust your system to fix the issue then if you were running the full zeo method.

 

[Moser]

What I would like to know is whether or not some or all of the blue bottles can somehow be integrated in other dosing methods, such as RHF's two-part, if so, to what extend?

I supposed the extend to which this can be achieved must depend on nutrient and alkalinity levels. For example, if my reef tank has low nutrients (as opposed to ULNS) and fairly low alkalinity (e.g. ~8 dKH), can I use some blue bottles and achieve some of those nice colours we see earlier in this thread.

Thanks

You certainly can share methods and even Thomas Pohl will say that you can use certain elements of Zeo to improve coral appearances without running full Zeovit.

The key is that nutrient levels HAVE to be poor to benefit from any of the supplements, otherwise, all that happens is you preferentially grow pest algae and all the supplements then do is feed the pests. This is why some Zeovit tanks can look overgrown with algae and slime.

Once you get nutrients very low, then everything you add (within reason) feeds your corals directly and there is little/ no nutrient to feed or allow pest algae to grow. This is where the skill of the reefer comes into it, to be able to recognise when they have undesirable elements and to adjust Zeovit basics to keep those elements away. The key is usually to introduce every step very slowly, so the effect of each and every additive can be assessed in each system. This effect is different in each system as elements are utilised variably and thus dosing varies between tanks.

Mo

 

[Thales]

Anyone have any links to a side by side zeo/non zeo test?

 

[galleon]

Anyone have any links to a side by side zeo/non zeo test?

This has to happen. Frags from the same corals...

 

[karsseboom]

Way to many variables to be considered.

 

[Thales]

Super simple test.

2 identical set ups, except one runs a version of Zeo. Document for 3 -6 months. Report.

 

[karsseboom]

Super simple test.

2 identical set ups, except one runs a version of Zeo. Document for 3 -6 months. Report.

Every system is different no matter how hard to try to replicate. You could do somthing similar with lighting fixtures using the same water and split the tank but not with water chemistry.

 

[Thales]

Every system is different no matter how hard to try to replicate. You could do somthing similar with lighting fixtures using the same water and split the tank but not with water chemistry.

That seems to be the point - the water chemistry in both tanks is different only due to the Zeo. All other husbandry methodology is done the same way and each tank is set up the same way. This is how a whole lot of science is done.

 

[Thales]

2 10 gallon tanks
2 light fixtures
6 lbs substrate from the same bag, dry, split between tanks
10 pounds of the same shapes of artificial rock (or Marco Rock), split between tanks
2 skimmers
2 water motion devices
2 heaters
2 calicum reactors, media split to both from the same package
2 GAC reactors
2 sets of frag stands, with plugs, one for each tank
2 pairs of clownfish from the same batch of eggs
2 sets of frags taken from the same mother colonies
2 sets of janitor inverts.

Water from the same source, and salt mix from the same bucket. Spike with the same bacteria source, let tanks cycle.
All husbandry identical except for zeovit

I think the above is overkill and that negligible differences in initial set ups will still yield interesting results.

I am not sure I understand the resistance to such a test, and actually am unsure why consumers shouldn't demand it of reef hobby companies they way they demand it from almost every other industry.

 

[galleon]

Very easy to do a traditional double blind (photographer/photo processor is first blind, observer is second blind). Or a single blind if you got enough people to come see them in person. With a little effort, it could even be triple blind if you just had a maintenance guy doing general stuff (feeding fish, cleaning glass, etc.) and wasn't involved with the dosing/reactor pumping and therefore didn't know which was Zeo. One person is allowed to do zeo-related maintenance/dosing, and that person is only allowed to touch the zeo stuff on the zeo tank.

I don't get how this is complicated or confusing. This is a very simple, valid, falsifiable hypothesis. Zeo either has that extra something special that make people go wow, and therefore make them statistically able to identify it as a zeo tank next to an otherwise identical non zeo tank, or it does not. This is trial design 101. As repeatable as many times as you like.

 

[Thales]

For such a basic, broad brush, starting point experiment I think those differences are negligible. This is really no different than any experiment done with live animals. If you wanted more accuracy, you would get a larger sample size, but as I said earlier, the smaller sample size would give some interesting data.

 

[Thales]

That's the beauty of keeping Sps, nobody has answers for anything. We can only speculate.

But that is just not true. We have a great deal of answers from chemistry to reproduction to husbandry to nutrition to ecology to growth to respiration - the list goes on and on. We also have a whole lot of questions, but the only thing that guarantees not getting answers is giving up on the questions.

 

[galleon]

But that is just not true. We have a great deal of answers from chemistry to reproduction to husbandry to nutrition to ecology to growth to respiration - the list goes on and on. We also have a whole lot of questions, but the only thing that guarantees not getting answers is giving up on the questions.

You said it much better than I.

 

[Moser]

Super simple test.

2 identical set ups, except one runs a version of Zeo. Document for 3 -6 months. Report.

It's not practical to do it, particularly double blinded!.
Who would waste their time?.

Mo

 

[Moser]

Very easy to do a traditional double blind (photographer/photo processor is first blind, observer is second blind). Or a single blind if you got enough people to come see them in person. With a little effort, it could even be triple blind if you just had a maintenance guy doing general stuff (feeding fish, cleaning glass, etc.) and wasn't involved with the dosing/reactor pumping and therefore didn't know which was Zeo. One person is allowed to do zeo-related maintenance/dosing, and that person is only allowed to touch the zeo stuff on the zeo tank.

I don't get how this is complicated or confusing. This is a very simple, valid, falsifiable hypothesis. Zeo either has that extra something special that make people go wow, and therefore make them statistically able to identify it as a zeo tank next to an otherwise identical non zeo tank, or it does not. This is trial design 101. As repeatable as many times as you like.

I'm not sure, who in their right mind would want to set up this experiment?.
I would be interested to hear that you found somebody ( or 3) to do it!.

Also, you have introduced bias, in that you need to find a Zeo expert to maintain one tank and a traditional Reefkeeper ( whatever that means, macro algae, or DSB, or both/ other) to maintain the other, unless you can find an expert in both systems?. so, how do you define a suitable expert to maintain either system?. A single individual may be inherently biased towards one method!, and two separate individuals may not be equally skilled in their methods..... And so the bias goes on......

Fundamentally, who will want to do something like this?. Easy enough to demand somebody else do it, but if you asked say Thomas Pohl, I'm sure he'd just walk away laughing....

Mo

 

[Thales]

It's not practical to do it, particularly double blinded!.
Who would waste their time?.

Mo

I never said double blind, just a simple side by side. I don't see how two or three 10 gallon tanks is not practical. I would think the people making the claims about the efficacy of the products would spend a little time running such a test.