tank over 4 years - tear it down

[rshimek]

Originally posted by myron

Hi,

However, the many posts above seem to infer that it may be the salt mix that may be adding the wrong balance of metals and trace elements. Perhaps.

Not "Perhaps," and not "infer." They do and they are.

In the past year, I was away alot. Thus flake foods were introduced in my tank via an autofeeder 5 day per week. Could this process food be the culprit for toxic buildup in my sandbed?

Take a look at the food compositions here and pick the one closest to what you add, and also take a look at my article in the April issue of [rk] and you will see that foods also add signficant amounts of toxic trace metals.

You could, indeed, be seeing OTS in your system - it really doesn't matter where the chemicals are coming from - the final effects of the build up will be the same.

:frog:

 

[rshimek]

Originally posted by Acrotech

Hi Mike,

Even better 99.9% pure and talks about removing trace elements.

We need analytical grade salts, on the order of 99.99999% pure.

 

[rshimek]

Originally posted by JSM

Hi Janna,

You mentioned a recipe for making our own salt mix, where would we find this?

The recipes come from texts dealing with the embryology and larval rearing of marine invertebrates. As these are the most delicate stages of animal growth, any salt mix that would allow this would likely be fine for our systems. I will post a recipe in a while, if I can't find an acceptable alternative salt mix.

 

[Acrotech]

Hi Mike,

Even better 99.9% pure and talks about removing trace elements.

We need analytical grade salts, on the order of 99.99999% pure.

Ok, but if this is ocean salt that started out as NSW, where in the process are things being added that we dont want? From reading through their process, they do nothing but evaoprate out the water, collect the salt, rinse in drinking water, dry etc.

Have you done any of the tests from your article using a NSW salt like the grade Cargil produces?

 

[dave750gixer]

Hi Mike,

Even better 99.9% pure and talks about removing trace elements.

We need analytical grade salts, on the order of 99.99999% pure.

mmmmmm. The problem is that this sort of purity is incredibly expensive. As an example take sodium chloride. Listed in the BDH catalogue are several grades. I have chosen 3 for demonstration. GPR (general purpose reagent), AnalaR and ARISTAR. The latter 2 are different analytical grades. All 3 are listed as 99.5% pure minimum (you need to look at the certificate of analysis for each batch for the exact figures), all 3 list water content upper limit as 0.5%, taking water into account this gives the 99.9's you are looking for. So far so good. Price....Ã"šÃ‚£9.35, Ã"šÃ‚£12.70 and Ã"šÃ‚£219.30 respectively for 1 Kg. The first 2 can be bought in up to 50 kg sizes which reduces the price, as does purchase of multiple units but its still expensive. ARISTAR can only be bought in 500g or 1 kg containers and there is no bulk purchase reduction. Prices vary between suppliers but this should give an indication of the problem.

listed maximum impurity levels are as follows (all in ppm) not listed means not analysed for, it does not mean not present!

GPR
hexacyanoferrate (100ppm), sulphate (100), iron (2), potassium (200), heavy metals assayed as lead (5), ammonium (20)

AnalaR
bromide (50), hexacyanoferrate (1), iodide (10), nitrogen compounds (5), phosphate (5), sulphate (10), barium (10), calcium (20), copper (2), iron (1), magnesium (10), potassium (50), heavy metals as lead (5), arsenic (0.4)

ARISTAR
bromide (10), hexacyanoferrate (1), iodide (10), nitrogen compounds (10), phosphate (5), sulphate (10), aluminium (0.01), barium (2), cadmium (0.05), caesium (5), calcium (0.1), chromium (0.01), cobalt (0.005), copper (0.005), iron (0.005), lead (0.005), lithium (0.5), magnesium (0.05), manganese (0.01), nickel (0.01), potassium (5), rubidium (0.5), strontium (0.1), thallium (0.005), zinc (0.005)

oh yeah, and for a laugh fancy some analytical grade fake seawater for EPA tests, ready made up at just over Ã"šÃ‚£100 for 2 litres

 

[Fredfish]

There are a lot of organic materials that accumulate in a tank and polyfilters don't seem to remove these.

Are we talking disolved organics?

Would these organic materials be removed by carbon filtration? Skimming?

Based on the polution research you have quoted, it sounds like removing these metals is a very good idea, even if the "average" aquarium organism tollerates them at elevated levels.

I am not sure yet if this complicates things from a tank maintenance perspective or not.

Do you know if the Poly-Filter has a "preference" in what it adsorbes? On their web site, they mention that it adsorbs organics as well as metals. In the presence of high organic and metal loads which might it adsorb first or most of?

Fred.

 

[rshimek]

Originally posted by Acrotech

Hi,

Have you done any of the tests from your article using a NSW salt like the grade Cargil produces?

The salt data come from a study published about 3 years ago by Marlin Atkinson and Craig Bingman.

I have analyzed one sample of one salt.

In some actual toxicity tests that I hope to complete prior to my presentation at MACNA, I will test 4 different salts, but the Cargil product isn't among them.

 

[rshimek]

Originally posted by dave750gixer

Hi,

oh yeah, and for a laugh fancy some analytical grade fake seawater for EPA tests, ready made up at just over Ã"šÃ‚£100 for 2 litres

Fortunately, there appears to be at least one commercially available salt made up for EPA bioassay standards. It is not marketed for aquarists, and I will be trying to find out just how much it would cost. However, I don't think it costs anywhere near that much (as the sales rep is sending me - freebie - enough to make 150 gal). As soon as I can, I will post the name and vendor for this product.

I suspect, however, that won't help you folks that are not in the US.

 

[rshimek]

Originally posted by Fredfish

Hi,

Are we talking disolved organics?

Dissolved, suspended, colloidal, etc., organics.

Would these organic materials be removed by carbon filtration? Skimming?

Yes and no. I have some data, but I haven't concentrated on these simply because it was cheaper to analyze for the metals.

Based on the polution research you have quoted, it sounds like removing these metals is a very good idea, even if the "average" aquarium organism tollerates them at elevated levels.

The organism doesn't tolerate them well. Pollution-tolerant simply means the organism survives. All of these animals are stressed when placed in such solutions. Stresses are cumulative, and stresses from this sort of pollution makes the animals more prone to being harmed by other stresses.

I am not sure yet if this complicates things from a tank maintenance perspective or not.

You are NOT sure? Come on!

Basically what I have shown is that many of our animals are poisoned from the outset of being put into our tanks. Any further minor stresses that they normally would "shrug off" may kill them. Furthermore the longer the tank is set up, the more of this material is in the tank. All of these should seriously be considered when you consider what you do and how often you do it, for maintenance.

Do you know if the Poly-Filter has a "preference" in what it adsorbes? On their web site, they mention that it adsorbs organics as well as metals. In the presence of high organic and metal loads which might it adsorb first or most of?

These are questions I have yet to ask them, but the fellow I was discussing things with has gone on a trip for another week or so. The discussion will resume upon his return.

 

[400M1963]

there is at least one commercially available salt mix that packages the salt separate from the trace elements. it may go by the name of marinemix or something like that. i don't know much about it, but that may mean that the salt is of suitable purity and free of trace elements enough to be a candidate ...

 

[Fredfish]

You are NOT sure? Come on!

If it is as simple as an alternative salt mix, carbon and poly filtration, that does not really complicate things at all.

These are questions I have yet to ask them, but the fellow I was discussing things with has gone on a trip for another week or so. The discussion will resume upon his return.

I really appreciate your efforts in this.

Great article by the way. Gets the little grey cells going.

Fred

 

[rshimek]

Originally posted by Fredfish

Hi Fred,

If it is as simple as an alternative salt mix, carbon and poly filtration, that does not really complicate things at all.

No, it doen't complicate things much, but it means we need to be careful of which salt we use, and our filtering protocol.

And... you can bet, it will cost more...

 

[matt_rogers]

there is at least one commercially available salt mix that packages the salt separate from the trace elements. it may go by the name of marinemix or something like that. i don't know much about it, but that may mean that the salt is of suitable purity and free of trace elements enough to be a candidate ...

I believe you might by thinking of Marine Environments, but if not, here is a link about Marinemix:

http://www.aqcraft.com/w0012.html

Here is one for Marine Environments salt:

http://www.aqcraft.com/w0018.html

These are from Aqua Craft.

I would love to hear what Dr. Ron has to say about Aqua Craft's assertions and the S-15 report.

 

[rshimek]

Hi,

For the time being, I am not going to get into discussing the merits of any of the specific salts.

 

[Ninong]

Matt,

You can find a lot of discussion of Aqua-Craft's claims and the S-15 report by doing a search on this board. This topic was "beat to death" more than a year ago, but it keeps coming up every few months. FWIW, that S-15 report, which was funded by Aqua-Craft, is more than 17 years old.

 

[matt_rogers]

17 years old? :eek1:
Thanks Ninong. I'll look it up.

For the time being, I am not going to get into discussing the merits of any of the specific salts.

Heh. I wonder why.

 

[Ninong]

Matt,

The operable phrase in Dr. Ron's statement is "for the time being."

:eek2:

 

[matt_rogers]

I understood that Ninong.

Perhaps I was being too subtle, I am just infering that when Dr. Ron is ready to pipe in - the salt will really hit the fan, so to speak.

 

[Ninong]

Matt,

The S-15 report threads go back more than two years on this board and on other boards. Just search under "S-15 report."

BTW, here is what Dr. Craig Bingman had to said in a discussion group way back on Sept. 3, 1999:

This S-15 report is old news. There is really no reason to believe that it applies to contemporary versions of these brands of salts, except in some generalities (e.g. many salts omit bromide and have only traces of Br- that comes in as impurities in other ingredients.)

Craig

Here is another colorful quote, something Dr. Bingman said about that S-15 report: There is a lame-assed score that was constructed to favor the salt being advertized.

P.S. -- I may be a little off on that 17-years old number, it may be only 14 years old.

 

[Ninong]

Matt,

My reply was the only way I could get my little :eek2: emoticon on the board. I believe we are both saying the same thing, only you put it in words.