Alex’s IM 150 EXT

[Alexander1312]

Just added the last batch of aquacultured live rubble from Aquabiomics.

Very disappointing that they were not able to sustain their business model.

Hopefully someone equally passionate will fill the void.

 

[Alexander1312]

Copperband is still surviving. But I think he looks skinnier.

There seems to be visibly less aggression - but there is still aggression from the whitetail and yellow tang..

He is getting a large clam every other day.

And I just received the custom build acrylic feeder that Matt from Octo aquatics made for me to try out (for free!). Outstanding quality as all of his products.

I added a cube of mysis shrimp into it, and I like how it slowly releases little pieces just where he is located. Still, not sure if he will be eating it.

View attachment 81004View attachment 81005View attachment 81006

The Copperband left my tank today and I brought him to Kenny.

I was too concerned about his well-being, as I have not seen him eating (i.e., a lot, only picking the sand to some extent, not all the other food).

There was very little to no aggression from the tangs anymore, but the fact that he was forced into the bottom corner and the absence of him chasing after his allegedly favorite food made me too sad to continue observing this.

Also, his beak was slightly damaged.

Hopefully, he will be able to survive, but the chances are slim, but they were probably 0 in my tank.

 

[Alexander1312]

Interestingly, they did admit procedural errors in their result validation practices. Not instrument failures.

Apparently, one of the tubes I submitted had 37.9 PSU salinity, the others 35.8 PSU. Evaporation would be a reasonable explanation, but how could this have happened?

They use an algorithm to do plausibility checks of all results before they release them, not only salinity, and this was not properly called out.

To my surprise, they sent me now a revised ICP result, which looks better, but raises other questions as to why specifically dynamic and other elements (non salinity related) changed quite drastically from the previous test.

Also, the RODI analysis is crazy - but there is an explanation to this: I could have used the wastewater to fill the vial, not the filtered water. Never happened, but I was a bit stressed when I took that sample and it is not impossible I made that mistake. But a coincidence that I made a mistake and they did both at the same time?

Overall, I suggested to ignore this test now and I will just send out another one.

ICP is about trust.

I did trust them - I was in their lab, touched their machines (bias), there are a number of German speaking videos where they explain their process, and I know other folks who are not from their company who have insight into the quality of their lab work, which appears solid.

But everyone makes mistakes. Still, I might more lean into getting a second opinion more frequently going forward - still waiting for the OCEAMO results.

I must say, despite my frustration with the results accuracy, I did appreciate how much attention was given to figuring out the issue and communicating them with me in a very professional way, recognizing that they get a lot of folks who complaint why their ICP does not match their hanna checker results.

At the end, we agreed that this was an outlier, and I received a voucher which almost offsets the price of an ICP (granted, that I might have messed up the RODI sample - pending OCEAMO test).

 

[alazo1]

I've had this protein skimmer from fish-street running for 6 years. No problem on about 150 total gallon. I dropped the skimmer cup a few years ago and broke on one of the ends. I carefully glued it and it's been fine since. Really, I don't have any experience with high end type of skimmer such as the one you chose so I can't compare. Pulls quite a bit of scum though. It has a float valve for the cup but I've never used it. Figure it would add another step in cleaning. https://m.fish-street.com/coral-box-d700-plus-dc-skimmer

 

[alazo1]

LOL. I didn't realize this thread was 3 years old.

 

[Alexander1312]

LOL. I didn't realize this thread was 3 years old.

Talking about a good skimmer never gets old.

I am in camp DELTEC though.

Simple, silent, ultra easy to clean.

 

[Alexander1312]

FarmerTy Lava Lamp Goniopora

This amazing colony I got from @dandemeyere a few weeks ago has finally ‘arrived’ in my tank.

It took a while, and I had elevated CA and other traces, which probably made it harder to acclimate.

 

[Alexander1312]

Not sure who claimed OCEAMO ICP turnaround was so fast.

I sent mine on Tuesday morning with their pre-paid shipping label - and it arrived in Houston (moonshiners) only yesterday - 6 days within the US.

Hopefully it is already on its way to Austria by now.

 

[Royce023]

Is there an ICP vendor that is in California? I would assume you would get more accurate results since the turnaround time would be shorter. Again, delayed shipping times possibly leads to pre-analytical error due to sample stability. In a clinical setting, if a sample gets delayed, the test usually gets cancelled and has to be recollected. Do these ICP labs mention the optimal temperature for shipping and time limitations for testing?

 

[Alexander1312]

Is there an ICP vendor that is in California?

Triton has a lab here, and many BAR members have sent their sample to them.

I would assume you would get more accurate results since the turnaround time would be shorter.

Both OCEAMO and Fauna Marin claim that shipping time if within reason does not matter for most elements.

Again, delayed shipping times possibly leads to pre-analytical error due to sample stability. In a clinical setting, if a sample gets delayed, the test usually gets cancelled and has to be recollected. Do these ICP labs mention the optimal temperature for shipping and time limitations for testing?

This is the translation of a response the Head of Fauna Marin's ICP lab gave me in response to my observation that some elements do seem to change depending on the shipping time.

Shipping time has little to no effect on the elemental composition: while elements can change chemical forms, a calcium ion, for instance, remains a calcium ion and is always measured as a total sum by the ICP regardless of its form. What can slightly change, however, are nitrate, nitrite, phosphate, pH, and alkalinity.

Since both use the syringe filter when taking two of the three samples, they claim that this would keep the sample stable.

 

[Royce023]

Triton has a lab here, and many BAR members have sent their sample to them.


Both OCEAMO and Fauna Marin claim that shipping time if within reason does not matter for most elements.


This is the translation of a response the Head of Fauna Marin's ICP lab gave me in response to my observation that some elements do seem to change depending on the shipping time.

Shipping time has little to no effect on the elemental composition: while elements can change chemical forms, a calcium ion, for instance, remains a calcium ion and is always measured as a total sum by the ICP regardless of its form. What can slightly change, however, are nitrate, nitrite, phosphate, pH, and alkalinity.

Since both use the syringe filter when taking two of the three samples, they claim that this would keep the sample stable.

Ok sounds good. I hope those claims have been extensively validated.

 

[Alexander1312]

Ok sounds good. I hope those claims have been extensively validated.

Haha, that’s a good point.

What I believe they would say is that a typical lab grade test would cost much more than the 30-50 USD we typically pay, so the deviation in accuracy is very well offset which much lower cost.

And the results are less live and death (hopefully) too, with these aquarium tests.

 

[Alexander1312]

Finally received the OCEAMO ICP Results (OES only). But it took too long (shipped in the morning of Aug 25, results on Sep 4).

Two key takeaways are:

1. Pretty much all parameter almost exactly match the (revised) Fauna Marin ICP - I know many folks have tried this in the past and came to the same conclusion, but I could not believe how close they were.

2. RODI is still fine, so I must have accidentally filled the waste water in the Fauna Marin sample tube (as I had suspected).

But the real insight is that:

I CANNOT GET SALINITY RIGHT!

And as a story twist, I will go back to the dreaded Tropic Marin Hydrometer, which was from all 4 devices I used when taking the OCEAMO sample the closest (36.1 vs 35.9, and only because I used a wrong conversion tool).