Was never interested in Zeo. Didn't know tanks using carbon dosing to reduce the dissolved inorganic nutrient fraction to lower levels than are typically found in aquaria water columns had gotten a qualitatively incorrect and stupid, cheesy moniker (ULNS). The correct term is oligotrophic. You should be able to find it in any first semester ecology text.
The levels people get when they say ULNS are undetectable on a standard trident est kit. The ocean has pretty low nutrients so I wouldn't say zeovit drives them down lower then what found in areas the corals are found in. The idea is to match NSW levels.
Please provide a primary reference stating that polyp extension is a reliable proxy for coral nutritive needs being fulfilled. I would also like quantitative results that zeo leads to better growth. Your aggressive post has highlighted that even if you really want to go to the level of
argumentum ad hominem, with respect to the topic at hand: the burden of proof is in your court. Now provide objective, quantitative evidence to support your hypotheses.
We all now that polyp extension is not always the best way to monitor a corals health but it can be a good indicator. From a personal experience I have watched my Sps closly and I can tell when things are not right my polyps will be retracted. The following is usually stn. What conclusion should I make based on that experience?
You claimed in your post that the corals looked starved and unhealthy. Would and unhealthy coral be growing and thriving? Would a tank full of unhealty, starved corals be granted TOTM I'm various forums?
Does this looked starved and unhealty?
How can you make that claim when you have no idea what is in the solutions? What strains are used in the solutions and why? "Balanced" has zero scientific or quantitative merit or meaning as a husbandry term. You, my friend, are drinking kool aid.
Why would zeovit have an reason to reveal what in there products? How would that being it there market share? Do we know what's in everything we add to our systems? We do know there is a carbon source which reduces no3 and po4, we know there is zeobak which is a bacteria source (microorganisms) that is used to colonize the stones we place in the reactor. We do know the other additives contain amino acids and other various coral food. The system isn't a secret. All those additives are already proven to lower po4 and no3. We already know amino acids can help feed our corals.
I see a lot of what we refer to in science as possible confirmation bias. I see meticulous husbandry that leads to pretty tanks with live and growing corals or coral success regardless of method.
Oh you mean like this one? Looks pretty unhealthy
If you want to try to get nutrient levels down to the concentrations they exist in the mid Pacific reefs, unless you can match the level of heterotrophy that corals receive their C, N and P from in such low dissolved nutrient condition...