lduncan

There is plenty of evidence to suggest this is true. Don't get me wrong sandbeds have there uses. I run one myself. They do wonders in reducing nitrate. But the fact is they absorb phosphate which does get released eventually. Whether or not it "crashes" your tank or not is irrelevant. The release is undesirable. Given another couple of months I'll dump the sand in my DSB and start again, to avoid this potential problem. Layton

Phosphate storage in live rock works like a creek (river). Once you full up the dry bed, there is a continual and steady trickle. ie. It will absorb phosphate to around the phosphate level in surrounding water. Then ,through bacteria turgor, it is pushed out (and replaced to approximately match water levels) over time at a relatively constant rate. Running a sand bed, however, is like putting a sub-standard dam across the creek. It will work for a while storing phosphate. Then it will fail, releasing this pent up phosphate relatively quickly. The point is the continual trickle from the live rock is able to be processed by a skimmer, where as the sudden release from a sand bed can easily saturate the skimmers ability.

I agree, you could end up with some hot wires, and a melted socket if you're not careful. Layton

I don't think thermocouple, more a metal with a high thermal expansion coefficient. Yip Maybe. Water has a relatively high specific heat capacity, and glass (or whatever they use for the viewing window), has a relatively low heat transfer coefficient. Layton

I think it uses the expansion of a metal to alter the distance of the reading lines with temperature. Once the water sample reaches the same temp as the refractometer, then it is temperature compensated. (water's optical density changes with temp, which changes how much the light refracts (bends) when entering the sample) Layton

I'm not going there. How does live rock store phosphate?

One thing, live rock does not store phosphates like sand beds. Bacterial turgor insures that live rock is continually purged of phosphate. Where as in a sand bed it is largely stored, and then released into the water column once saturated. Duke, do you have a problem with either phosphate or nitrate at the moment? If not, I would not change anything. You can run a successful reef without using macro algae, zeovit, and phosphate removers. Only use them as a last resort. Also, remember tanks take time to stabilise and reach an equilibrium, any change you make can prolong the time it takes for a tank to settle. So give things a chance. Layton

Check out the growth sequence here: http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showt ... did=533037 Layton

I've added a "Frag List" forum to my website (which hasn't had any work done on it for a month or two) here http://www.nzreefs.com/phpBB2/index.php It will let you start a thread. But the only person who can post and edit, is the person who started it. Hopefully this will keep things cleaner than allowing replies from any old person. Also it will allow you to upload pics directly from your hard drive, if you want. Layton

The questions I would ask is what do you want to achieve by using it? Do you have problems with your tank at the moment? Read the zeoguide pdf posted here: http://www.korallen-zucht.de/ front to back and see if your comfortable with those possibilities. It's no secret that I think zeovit can be dangerous, even when used as instructed, and that I would never use it again. But the results you get are real. Layton

Are you sure that is what it is? If it is, don't waste your time. It will die.

Petworld has Solomon Island stuff release next week too.

I'm done with this thread. Have fun. Layton

That's true. I am not using my alternate theory as a reason why some of the manufacturers claims just don't happen, or work. You seem to be unwilling to understand that i'm not doing that.

No I don't. I don't know what is in there, so how can I say why or if it makes a difference. That's why I asked the question "How do you know that something else is not having an effect?" Don't tell me you haven't read the zeoguide? Depends under what conditions. And also because they are the most effective ammonium absorbers available, does not imply anything about how effective they are at absorbing ammonia in saltwater when covered in bacteria. Yip, they preferentially absorb ammonium, like I said. How strong is this preference relative to calcium? Also what happens when the surface is covered with bacteria? So you don't have faith in the manufacturer in this claim then. They seem to know for sure. Hmm... why does this only happen when zeolites are used? Hmm... maybe it's not the drop in "nutrients".

So you are saying you disagree with what the manufacturer says?

What's Randy got to do with what I said? Sure: "It permanently absorbs ammonium (NH4+) and ammonia (NH3) the first two chemicals..." More qualified than who, and in what? Careful what you read Arthur. What does this show? No miss here.

Yip, but my point is, is that your are not JUST adding bacteria when you add zeobac. Do you know what else is in it? How do you know that something else is not having an effect? Done can you read?

What were the prices on those acros wasp?

Because I have not proved anything, nor attempted to. I have explained. Wasp you have not proved anything either. What is your point.

I tried to get some from you, but for whatever reason i got no response. The fact is, it is not isolated to myself. Clearly the manufacturer knows of these problems, and has been making adjustments to their guide as they go. Pies had problems at the same time as starting zeovit. AgedSalt (RC Member) also had problems when starting zeovit. And there are other reports as well. And the problems are clearly stated in the zeoguide. Why does it cause these problems? To me it is not acceptable to say, "well if you start to see tissue recession, reduce the dosage", my response to this would be to say wait a minute, something doesn't add up here, why am I adding stuff to my tank, which results in tissue loss? What is it really doing. Because the guide gives no plausible explanation.

Yip. Alois shipped stuff down to Organism today. A lot of us were there and got the stuff almost straight out of the box.

Ok. Ask boomer on RC (or preferably do some research), who is an expert in this field. He will tell you that there are two natural zeolite groups which have been shown to have marginally higher affinities for ammonia in saltwater than the calcium interference (Clinoptilolite and Heulandite). And that this weak affinity is reduced even further by bacterial interference. It is his view that zeolites (in there traditional use) are of little use in saltwater. This makes sense to me. Yet the manufacturer claims the zeolites are used for their ion exchange properties to remove ammonia. So you are saying you disagree with what the manufacturer says?

is this true? do you think this is why?

Your joking right? Last time I checked bacteria were not liquid, nor did they form crystals. Been done. That's the point, it's not as simple as what you presented. Two years ago. Parts of it were recommended reading for a biology paper. Yip. I've explained why. I don't need to show why.