Triton labs analysis of my nano

[DavidS]

Hello Everyone,

I recently received an analysis of my 30 gallon Nano that was done by Triton Labs in Germany.
I will quickly summarize the results and why I had it done.
My primary reason was to find out if I might have an abundance of heavy metals in my tank.
Mr. Ron Shimek has suggested that old tanks may be prone to accumulating heavy metals.
Although I had gone to a DSB 4 years ago, essentially, the tank has been up & running for well over 10 years. So this was a concern.
Secondarily, I was curious to validate my hobby test kits for Calcium, Magnesium, Phosphate & Potassium (they don't test for alkalinity) against their testing.

I was relieved to find I do not have a heavy metal issue with my tank.
For the sake of brevity, I won't go into their test results as compared to mine, other than the fact that my kits understated the amount of C, MG & K in my tank and in the case of PO4, my testing probably overstated the amount.
Based on their results I had ideal levels of C,MG. K- but perhaps too good for PO4.
Sounds good right?
Well I'm not so sure. Triton listed several elements I have in my tank which is above the "normal" amount. They were designated in red, which I assume to mean it requires attention. They suggest doing water changes. But I'm curious to know what caused it, if it's really bad, and what can be done going forward.
Below is a list of the elements with their baseline compared to what was found in my tank:

ELEMENT BASELINE MY TANK

Boron - 4.5 mg/l 9.18 mg/l
Sulphur 900 mg/l 1260 mg/l
Lithium 200 microg/l 560.9 microg/l
Silicon 100 microg/l 893.5 microg/l
Phosphorus 6 microg/l 2.81 microg/l

I haven't a clue as to why Boron & Lithium are much higher in my tank.
I'm wondering if the Sulphur is due to the 4" DSB (I don't stir the sand but I do have snails, crabs & a brittle star). The other possibility is the Magnesium (Seachem's Reef Advantage) which includes Magnesium Sulfate. I read that this actually contributes more Sulphur than Magnesium. Since their testing indicated my Mag level was relatively high (1450 mg/l), I figure I'll reduce my dosing which should reduce my level of Sulphur.
The thing that really surprised me was the amount of Silicone found in my tank- almost 9 times normal. I don't think this refers to silicates. You will notice my one "seriously" deficient element is Phosphorus. Same with my PO4 which came in at .009 mg/l. Some may consider this desirable, but perhaps it is too low.
In any event, the low PO4 is undoubtedly due to the running of Rowaphos in a Media Reactor. I would assume it is taking care of any silicates, as well.
It occurred to me, however, that Silicon is the (main?) component of sand and since I have a DSB in a relatively small tank, is it possible this results in the high SI reading?
If anyone has suggestions, feel free to comment.
I'm also wondering if anyone has had this analysis done?
It would be interesting to compare results moving forward.

DavidS

 

[rookie07]

Very interesting!

Would you mind telling us how much the testing cost?

 

[piranhapat]

Just a thought . Are you using any rubber hoses?

 

[DavidS]

No, I am not using any rubber hoses.

The analysis costs $49, although sometimes they may knock a few bucks off.

It can be purchased at uniquecorals.com here is the link.

http://uniquecorals.com/dry-goods/triton.html?p=1

 

[lnevo]

Following, I just sent my sample in this weekend.

 

[DavidS]

Great

So in a few weeks we can compare results.

As far as any rubber tubing or hoses. I do have 90 degree elbow fasteners that attach to my Phosban Reactor. They may be made of rubber, but I doubt that would cause such a spike in Silicon.
I also use an Aqualifter to dose kalk during the night. Could that be a factor?

 

[prattreef]

FYI be on the look out for an in-depth review of the Triton testing in the next issue of Reefs Magazine --which will be available in the next week......

 

[greg 45]

There have been lot's of mixed reviews on this testing.
I sent out my sample and the only issue that was found was low iodine.
Will I send out a second time probably not
just my 2 cents

 

[BioMan]

Lithium is there to keep fish happy. ALSO maybe which kind of salt are you using?
This is a useful info bit
Large amounts of silicon can be found in various minerals and it is abundant in oceans and nearly all other waters as silicic acid. In the surface layers of oceans silicon concentrations are 30 ppb, whereas deeper water layers may contain 2 ppm silicon. Rivers generally contain 4 ppm silicon. Silicon is usually not ionized when dissolved; it is present as ortho silicic acid (H4SiO4 or Si(OH)4). These compounds are the result of slow dissolution of silica in water. Rivers transport large amounts of silicon to sea. Most likely, less than 20% of dissolved silicon is removed from rivers by means of biological or chemical transformation processes.

Read more: http://www.lenntech.com/periodic/water/silicon/silicon-and-water.htm#ixzz3RShf68FB

 

[DavidS]

I contacted Dr. Ron Shimek and showed him the Triton analysis. Below are his comments concerning the elements that needed addressing, according to Triton.

"First Comment: It is really difficult (= impossible) to assess chemistry of a system with only one set of measurements for the simple reason that in our tanks, the chemistry can bounce all over the place. The first set of measurements needed are those from a batch of freshly mixed artificial sea water. I haven?t been following the seawater wars for several years, but it used to be that one of the commonly sold sea salt mixes was extraordinarily high in boron, as they used it to buffer the alkalinity. Others were all over the place, with the exceptions of Crystal Seas.

All of the measurement will vary with salinity.

B = Boron as boric acid is part of the alkalinity buffering system in the real world, and the concentration value will vary with pH. pH, of course, varies throughout the day and night in a cyclic manner. As far as the chemistry is concerned, chemical oceanographers deal with this element as B(OH)3 and at a salinity (= S) of 35.000 PSU, where normal seawater has a B(OH)3 concentration of 0.735 mgkg-1S-1, gives a B concentration of 4.49, which is obviously where their baseline value of 4.5 mg/l is derived from.

So, actually, their baseline is not BORON, it is the boron in boric acid measured as B(OH)3. Howsoever, at normal temperatures and pressures, boric acid alkalinity adds a small, but measureable amount.

Given that boric acid is defined component of the alkalinity cycle, as long as your total alkalinity is okay, and given you don?t know what the boron value is in your freshly made salt water, I would consider this boron reading as inconsequential.

S = Sulfur is a nutrient in sea water. It is present in innumerable ionic forms as well as being found in all sorts of dissolved covalent forms. It is exceptionally difficult to measure as one needs to specify the chemical moeity that it exists in. It will, seriously, vary from minute to minute in a reef tank depending on who is eating whom and what is defecating what. This is of academic interest only. Ignore it.

Li = Lithium, sigh.... About 15 years ago one of the more inexpensive salts produced by a California producer whose name will go unmentioned was found to use abnormally high concentrations of lithium. These concentrations were well into toxic ranges for some inverts, and this got pointed out at a MACNA I believe. The salt manufacturers gathered a stack of bibles and swore upon them and at the researcher (not me) who found this information that they never, ever, ever, ever would do this. About a month later their salts were tested again and, lo, the lithium values were low. In a normal sea water range, as a matter of fact. Ever since then, lithium has been tested for. For a number of reasons, lithium chemistry in sea water is difficult to deal with, and it has largely been ignored. The standard base line value for lithium in sea water is 25 micromoles, or about 174 micrograms per liter. Your tank?s value is about 3.23 times this amount. I would ignore this value as inconsequential.

Si = Oooooh boy... silicon. This is an essential element of life, many of the organisms in your system need it. It is essentially impossible to give your system too much of it it. Diatoms, sponges, snails, and some other microorganisms use it directly; while some other animals may use it indirectly. Personally, in my systems the higher the better. But... go with what you want.

P = Phosphorus is a major nutrient in sea water. It is present in innumerable organic and inorganic forms as well as being found in all sorts of dissolved covalent forms. The standard rule of thumb, and it is a good one, is to keep it at or near 1 microgram/liter. That is what it is measured at in water over reefs. Personally, I?d call your values really good and go from their. "

Needless to say he saved me from doing an aggressive water change this weekend

 

[lnevo]

Would be good if that was in a guide somewhere on their site or something....great info

 

[BioMan]

I agree totally that one random sample isn't enough data... In my opinion you (anybody) having a test like this should be something like 3 consecutive days worth of samples ex. Monday before lights on, Tuesday mid day, Wednesday night. To me something along those lines is a good baseline.

 

[prattreef]

As promised avery detailed analysis of Triton testing. It long, but read it carefully:

http://www.reefs.com/magazine/?do=wp_post&articleId=159

 

[lnevo]

My results:

Unwanted heavy metals were all good.

Under Macro elements:
Calcium was 473.5 a little high (which I knew)
Magnesium was was 1443 (they consider baseline 1370) which I also knew, but good to see confirmed.
Potassium was a little low they recommended dosing some.
Bromide it considered high (not sure why or if I should care)
Strontium was low and they recommended dosing.
Sulphur was a little high

Under Li-Group
Lithium was red high but based on what you wrote earlier, I think I'll ignore it
Nickel and Molybdenum were also low and they recommended some dosing

Now the I-Group was all low. They recommneded dosing and a maintenance dose which I'll assume is a daily dose... This covers Vinadium, Zinc, Manganese and Iodine.

Everything else was a little low but no recommendations and too many more to cover. One thing I was disappointed was they didn't give a Nitrate reading. I'm currently untrusting of my reagents and was hoping to see their measures.

I think I need to find a good supplement mix for the trace metals in the I group and the Potassium and Strontium. Anyone have a good recommendation in that front? I've never dosed any of these things. Not looking to setup more dosers either. Their stuff looks nice, but it's either use their 4-part mixture instead of current 2 part or buy the individual elements for like $30 a bottle.