Poly-Bio-Marine----Polyfilter - Holmes-Farley

[CapitolsRock]

Mr. Holmes-Farley,

Has anyone done any scientific/semi-controlled tests on Polyfilters to verify whether this product performs as advertised?

Polyfilter claims

The POLY-FILTER is for filtering and purifying both fresh and salt water aquariums. It is a formulation of a special patented material bonded to a synthetic matrix. By means of a unique proprietary process, the POLY-FILTER is made impervious to salt and is also organic loving to certain materials. It can absorb and adsorb contaminants and other toxic materials found in nature or added to fresh and salt water with or without fish and invertebrates. Medication added to fresh and salt water aquariums for treatment of diseased fish will automatically be removed by the POLY-FILTER after serving their intended purpose before the medication can produce a toxic effect on the fish.
The POLY-FILTER is non-toxic and harmless to biological filtration because it allows a sufficient amount of ammonia to reach the biological filter in order to sustain the bacteria culture. The POLY-FILTER provides a supplemental means for removal of ammonia when the biological filter is unable to break down the excess ammonia and its concentration increases rapidly. Then the POLY-FILTER adsorbs the excess ammonia while the biological filter readjusts to higher ammonia input levels

On Phosphate removal:

Yes, Poly-Filter® will sorb Ortho phosphate + Hydrolyzable phosphates + Organic-bound phosphates producing an ultimate Total Phosphorus level of 0.100 mg/L the limit of detection for visual color reactions. No, Poly-Filter® is unique in its function as U.S. Patented sorbent media.
Basically, Poly-Filter® sorbs a percentage of the total phosphates per passage through the media. Other Phosphate removal media flocculate and precipitate Ortho phosphate+Calcium, Magnesium, Strontium, Barium and /or Alkalinity. This means those products actually remove valuable synthetic salt components. Poly-Filter® actually sorbs both PO 4 (ortho phosphate) + Hydrolyzable phosphates without removing Calcium, Magnesium, Strontium, Barium, Alkalinity or trace elements. The other Phosphate removers either alter seawater chemistry or produce leachable i.e. (Red) Iron Filter leaches ammonia and heavy metals. Activated Alumina leaches aluminum while sorbing bicarbonates and trace metals.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

What do you want it to accomplish?

I've not seen any independent testing that I'd rely on, but it clearly can bind metals like copper when they are substantially elevated (but not in normal reef conditions where it will not) and I would not expect it to bind any appreciable inorganic phosphate or ammonia from seawater. No organic polymers are likely to be able to do that at the phosphate and ammonia concentrations we care about.

It will also likely bind organic mater, but probably not as efficiently as GAC. That organic matter will contain some nitrogen, organic phosphate, and metals.

 

[CapitolsRock]

Thanks for the quick response

What do you want it to accomplish?

That's a good question. Is a polyfilter a possible alternative to GFO/Carbon for a tank of size X with an approximate load of Y?

Why would you want to switch out GFO/Carbon in the first place? What's the advantage of a different passive removal system?

Are you solving a problem that doesn't exist?

Questions I was hoping Mr.Holmes-Farley could answer.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

No, it is not an alternative to GFO at all. It is a partly effective replacement for GAC, but may bind a slightly different subset of organic matter.

IMO, its utillity to reefers is largely limited to situations where copper or other toxic metals are overdosed somehow.

 

[Bugger]

They refer to it as an absorbent.
Randy do you not agree that it does indeed take up or absorb more dirt then GAC. Its my opinion GAC only removes the minuet amounts of organics and other compounds floating around. GAC removes coppper aswell and medication just like the pads but the pads does it better.
Testing a comparason between the two cannot cost that much will we ever see it done.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Sure, polymers will absorb some organic matter, as I stated above. I've not seen data on the absorptive capacity for polyfilters, but I do not see a reason to assume it is going to be higher than or as broadly useful as GAC in a reef aquarium setting. Other competing products are also potentially interesting, such as Purigen.

FWIW, I am very familiar with things binding to organic polymers. I have led teams of folks studying such things for 20 years and I have co-invented polymers that bind ions (such as phosphate) and organic compounds which sell more than a billion dollars worth each year.

 

[jason2459]

Does GAC really bind all forms of copper? I believe coprisorb or a polyfilter would be more useful for that.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

What forms are you referring to?

In natural seawater, the small amount of copper present is almost completely bound to organics, and many organics will bind to GAC, so GAC will bind many organic bound copper ions.

I do not know how much, if any, free Cu++ will bind to GAC from seawater.

In a hospital tank where copper is put in in large excess of the natural levels, much will be free and I doubt if GAC will be very effective at removing that relative to things designed to specifically bind copper, like Cuprisorb or polyfilters.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

One addition point is that the polyfilter folks have designed polyfilters to not remove copper below 40 ppb, because they preload it with copper to that level. They reiterated that recently. So if the goal is to reduce a tank concentration form, say, 10 ppb copper to natural levels of less than 1 ppb, polyfilters are not seemingly up to the task. Cuprisorb might be. GAC and skimming may also help.

Some of these issues are discussed in the copper sticky thread at the top of this forum.

 

[j tavares]

While I respect your credentials as a Medical pathologist and avid aquarist for thirty years I have only used polyfiters in all sorts of laboratory and aquarium conditions and find it far superior to any other single media on the market and have done so for the last twenty or so years. I find it does indeed adsorb organics and most other by products not wanted in the home aquarium environment. Skimming very small water exchanges and polyfilters are what I have come to rely on. Other aquarists may feel differently but the color changes in both fresh and marine environs and the ease of use is what sold me yesrs ago. Good carbon and specific media will benefit some situations but I personally have never used PO4 remover and always have low phosphates and low organics though I believe ultimately it is the skill and husbandry of any aquarist that will overrule any one media. Best wishes.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

j tavares,

please don't be offended, but can you please state for the public record that you have no association with the manufacturers or resellers of poly-filters and that they did not ask you to post here? People making posts under such scenarios without identifying themselves defeat the purpose of our forums.

 

[j tavares]

I understand of course I HAVE NO affilation with POLYBIOMARINE. I am and have been for 31 yrs a Medical physician trained in multiple disciplines including Clinical Laboratory Medicine. Marine Aquaristics is my Passion. Best Wishes.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

OK, thanks. I'm glad you like it and find it useful. I don't beleive that it binds any substantial amount of ammonia, nitrate, or phosphate from seawater, but like other polymers, it will bind organic matter, and that may be a fine reason to use it.

Many people have kept fine reef aquaria with nothing more than organic removal by skimming (and, of course, the various biological processes taking place in the tank). So I do not doubt you could do so using only a polyfilter and skimming.

IMO, the color changing is also a very useful way to diagnose metal overdoses that are otherwise hard to identify as the cause of tank problems.

 

[j tavares]

Yes ,I agree You still need a strong Biofilter and live rock when properly seasoned will supply that process efficiently and naturally. I have used multiple media over the years and polyfilter in my opinion performs well over multiple conditions, Purigen is also a great media but I find the small size beads a pain to work with w my busy schedule. NOTHING willl ever replace good skills and husbandry and often the novice aquaarist will be duped into thinking Snake oils or the latest and greatest new media will be the end all and be all to a great lookinf Tank. Of course the more experienced Aquarist KNOWS better. We are all in this together and sharing reliable Info is what it should really be about. I respect all opinions and while I might disagree I realize Their are many true roads to a successful Aquarium. As always KNOWLEDGE and Study is the key, Best Wishes.

 

[Bugger]

So if the goal is to reduce a tank concentration form, say, 10 ppb copper to natural levels of less than 1 ppb, polyfilters are not seemingly up to the task. Cuprisorb might be. GAC and skimming may also help.

Our tanks usually have what concentration or level of copper? Or at least what does the test on new mixed salt for lets say IO.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

My tank when I measured it years ago was about 13 ppb. Some salt mixes are much lower, like 0.3 ppb (Aquavitro Salinity guarantees that value), which is close to the NSW value.

 

[Bugger]

A little history may help understand the copper level in our tanks. Dr. Craig Bingman has studied this in the past. His findings were that our tanks range between 10 ppb - 80 ppb copper. Dr. Randy Holmes-Farley tested his tank and his copper level was around 15 ppb. Bingman’s study on salt mixes years ago found they averaged around 7 ppb copper contrary to what some manufacturers claim. The copper form in salt mixes is a toxic inorganic form in most cases. Keep in mind we are talking ppb (part per billion), which is a very small amount, well below what we as hobbyists can measure. The ocean averages around 0.25 ppb total copper. This includes both the organic and inorganic forms of copper.

Randy you wer talking about how the poly filter is saturated with copper at 30ppb. Why do they do that it dosent seem like they really understand salt water from the ocean

 

[Bugger]

The coppper thread at the top covers everything polyfilter related. Except if they leach copper into tank water or not. Why do you believe they add copper to the filter Randy

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

The coppper thread at the top covers everything polyfilter related. Except if they leach copper into tank water or not. Why do you believe they add copper to the filter Randy

They publicly say they do, and recently confirmed it in an email. They do it by soaking the polyfilters in a seawater solution with substantial copper in it (so they say).

The idea was that they do not want to "deplete" trace elements, and some guideline from an FDA toxicology paper (or some such thing) gave them that figure. They also claim that salts contain this level. See this post of their email:

http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showpost.php?p=19646454&postcount=25

This article of mine discusses it:

Reef Aquaria with Low Soluble Metals
http://www.reefkeeping.com/issues/2003-04/rhf/feature/index.php

from it:

Export of Metals: Poly-Filters

Many aquarists have heard that Poly-Filters (made by Poly-Bio-Marine) absorb copper and other heavy metals. Poly-Filters are essentially comprised of an organic polymer that is designed to bind to a wide variety of chemical compounds in aquaria. As with all materials that bind metals, the higher the concentration of metal in solution, the more metal will be bound. Unfortunately, this fact has lead many aquarists to misunderstand whether Poly-Filters might actually help them reduce metal levels below that present in typical reef aquaria (10-40 ppb). In this section I am not discussing whether one can make a polymer that will bind copper and other heavy metals from aquarium water (that's a different discussion for elsewhere in this paper and others, but it is possible that modified Poly-Filters might work in that context). What we are interested here is in whether there is any information to suggest that currently available Poly-Filters are effective at reducing the copper concentrations below the 10-40 ppb copper reported for all of the marine aquaria in Shimek's study, and in my own aquarium (10-13 ppb copper).

It turns out that, unlike most manufacturers, Poly-Bio-Marine provides some nice data and makes the results especially clear for us. Unfortunately, what they say is that it won't work for many metals in artificial seawater. In fact, they have specifically designed these filters to not take out copper below 30 ppb. Here's a series of quotes from their website:

ASTM Standard D 1141 lists only six (6) trace elements which are : Barium (99.4 ug/L), Manganese (34.0 ug/L), Copper (30.8 ug/L), Zinc (9.6 ug/L), Lead (6.6 ug/L) and Silver (0.49 ug/L).

Note: ug/L is the same as ppb (parts per billion)

Then they note:

"Our next section will go into details of how Poly-Bio-Marine, Inc.'s special manufacturing process prevents Poly-Filter from sorbing those trace elements and other major or minor synthetic seasalt components."

"In order to make a Poly-Filter not capable of sorbing trace elements we must first saturate each Poly-Filter with the trace elements found in synthetic seawater."

"Upon completion Poly-Filter will not sorb trace elements nor calcium, magnesium, strontium or fluoride."

So they add the metals listed above to the Poly-Filters during manufacturing in order to prevent them from bringing down these metal concentrations when used in aquaria. In reality, I don't know whether their statements are accurate or not in relation to real aquaria, because all of the tests were in freshwater and synthetic seawater, not in aquaria where some of these metals (especially copper) will be largely bound to organics. Nevertheless, taking their claims at face value, one is forced to conclude that Poly-Filters will not be generally useful in reducing metal concentrations below the levels shown in Table 8 when used in raw artificial seawater. In this case, only zinc appears to be at a level such that Poly-Filters will remove substantial amounts from aquaria.

It is entirely possible that these filters will be more effective than described below at removing metals when the metals are bound to organics in real aquaria. After all, these filters claim to remove organics as well. However, it is also possible that they won't be effective, and testing them under actual reef aquarium conditions is something that I hope to provide in future articles.

Table 8. Removal of Metals by Poly-Filters.
Metal..........Lower Limit of Removal (ppb)..........Levels Found in Aquaria (ppb)3

Barium..........99..........5-33

Manganese..........34..........None Detected (less than 0.5 ppb)

Copper..........31..........18-38

Zinc..........10..........190-260 ppb

Lead..........7..........None Detected (less than 10 ppb)

Silver..........0.5..........None Detected (less than 10 ppb)


Here' are their archived web pages:

http://web.archive.org/web/200012142025/http://www.poly-bio-marine.com/te2.htm

 

[Bugger]

Why is it we can't keep our tanks runinng at low coppper concentreations lets say 0.3 ppb. Is it because of feeding or because the carbon does not take out enough and the salt we start with contains 0.7ppb.