vinegar/vodka?
- Thread starter chris1292
- Start date
cmaxwell39
New member
You can use the guide for vodka dosing, except use 8 times more vinegar than you would vodka.
NeilFox
New member
Thank you. I was leaning more towards vinegar because k read vodka has a better chance of starting red slime. Should I wait until I get rid of my current red slime before I start dosing one of these?
This is the first I've read of this but I can confirm - Vodka does indeed promote the grown of cyano bacteria - in my tank at least.
Had no idea where it was coming from, thanks!
saltyair
New member
Here is my experience: http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2284583
I would highly suggest vinegar and start slow. Do you run carbon? gfo? or a refugium?
Here is the chart I used
I would highly suggest vinegar and start slow. Do you run carbon? gfo? or a refugium?
Here is the chart I used
hoaglanddiver
New member
they can both cause issues.. I find that vinegar is more forgiving in case of error
MammothReefer
Active member
Are you already running GFO? What are your phosphate levels.
No carbon or gfo. Just a fuge
Read some where vinegar would help. Ill see if I can find the article again. Tank is 1.5 years
No gfo. Phosphate undetectable but its a bad test only reads .25+. Looking into who sells red sea kits around me.
MammothReefer
Active member
Well if that is the case. I would just run GFO it's much simpler and instead of the red sea kit pickup a hanna phosphate checker. I still run GFO even though my phosphate reads 0 most of the time. I get small cyano outbreaks now and then and it helps keep things in check.
saltyair
New member
Carbon dosing with vinegar will not really help with PO4. I have seen a definite positive results once I found the sweet spot.
NeilFox
New member
If I wasn't so lazy I would read through the article again but I believe carbon doseing is more effective at removeing nitrate. The ratio is something like 8 to 1. That being said; if you are depleteing all the nitrates in your tank doseing carbon, but still showing measurable Po4, you are going to have a problem running GFO. It won't work, something to do with Redfields ratio and all that. In that situation you would need to start dosing nitrate (People are doing this BTW) to return to an equilibrium so you can get your phosphate down.
ampemployee1
Member
My understanding is the carbon dosing will effectively deplete the Nitrate and leave the phosphate levels relatively unchanged because of Redfield's ratio (C:N
= 106:16:1). That's precisely why you need to run GFO which will preferentially bind the excess phosphorous that accumulates through bacterial consumption of the N via the C dosing. I'm no chemist, but that's what I gathered from the threads on the chemistry forum.
IMO, carbon and nitrate dosing to reduce phosphate levels would be a pretty ineffective means of reducing phosphate compared to running GFO in a reactor. IME, the carbon dosing helps maintain levels of Nitrate under 5ppm, and GFO and good maintenance to keep p under 0.06.
I could see the use of nitrate dosing where someone already has ultra low levels of phosphate, and doesn't want/need to run GFO, but wants to maintain low levels of p...unfortunately, that isn't the case for me :spin2:
= 106:16:1). That's precisely why you need to run GFO which will preferentially bind the excess phosphorous that accumulates through bacterial consumption of the N via the C dosing. I'm no chemist, but that's what I gathered from the threads on the chemistry forum.IMO, carbon and nitrate dosing to reduce phosphate levels would be a pretty ineffective means of reducing phosphate compared to running GFO in a reactor. IME, the carbon dosing helps maintain levels of Nitrate under 5ppm, and GFO and good maintenance to keep p under 0.06.
I could see the use of nitrate dosing where someone already has ultra low levels of phosphate, and doesn't want/need to run GFO, but wants to maintain low levels of p...unfortunately, that isn't the case for me :spin2:
mos90
New member
i have to agree with piper. i dont think vinegar is going to help with slime algae.
i recently started vinegar in my 300g to help stabilize, not remove nitrate.it is hovering around 3-4ppm. i started at 10ml and have kept it there for about 3 weeks. so far no drop in nitrate but no rise either. my phos is under control with gfo at .01ppm.
i am not running a fuge anymore just 2 small algae scrubbers. but i do run my fuge led for a few hours a day to help grow coraline on the rocks in there.
i recently started vinegar in my 300g to help stabilize, not remove nitrate.it is hovering around 3-4ppm. i started at 10ml and have kept it there for about 3 weeks. so far no drop in nitrate but no rise either. my phos is under control with gfo at .01ppm.
i am not running a fuge anymore just 2 small algae scrubbers. but i do run my fuge led for a few hours a day to help grow coraline on the rocks in there.
NeilFox
New member
My understanding is the carbon dosing will effectively deplete the Nitrate and leave the phosphate levels relatively unchanged because of Redfield's ratio (C:N
IMO, carbon and nitrate dosing to reduce phosphate levels would be a pretty ineffective means of reducing phosphate compared to running GFO in a reactor. IME, the carbon dosing helps maintain levels of Nitrate under 5ppm, and GFO and good maintenance to keep p under 0.06.
I could see the use of nitrate dosing where someone already has ultra low levels of phosphate, and doesn't want/need to run GFO, but wants to maintain low levels of p...unfortunately, that isn't the case for me :spin2:
That isn't really correct? I am trying to think of a good answer but in a nutshell; Redfield is just a wee bit wrong. If you look at his findings he will also say so. I think we need to keep looking? That is the most fun part!!!
The consumption doesn't follow the Redfield ratio exactly. Different organisms are comprised of different ratios. As far as I know they all do skew towards more nitrate than phosphate which seems to be corroborated with the results we see from carbon dosing. I imagine the exact ratio would vary substantially from tank to tank depending on the bacteria present.
If you aren't having a nitrate problem I'd probably try GFO first.
If you aren't having a nitrate problem I'd probably try GFO first.
Similar threads
