wasp Posted January 5, 2005 Report Share Posted January 5, 2005 Now i doubt you would lose so many coral due to low alk & cal. maybe over time but not within a month. low kh &cal will not crash you tank. i have had my cal down to 300 ppm for a month. not a problem, but the coral did not grow. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Don't know what the Ca went down to, or that he lost much coral, it was not a "crash" -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Using zeovit it is necessary to follow the instructions, with the low nutrient levels close to pristine NSW, there is less safety margin, in particular with alk, and Po4 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Agreed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lduncan Posted January 5, 2005 Report Share Posted January 5, 2005 I don't agree, there are many important organic acids necessary for almost all types of life. They are the building blocks of proteins. I wouldn't be worried about the acid, i'd be worried about the things they don't tell you is in it. Also I don't think my argument was one of semantics. The lowest possible reading on a salifert nitrate test (assuming accurate at low resolution, which is highly unlikely due to the nature of the reactions involved), it is still at least an order of magnitude greater than the levels found in NSW. And greater than levels associated with colour changes. Also, Calcium levels below 320 will start to affect coral growth (in my experience). Corals seem to be more sensitive to changes in alkalinity. I notice when mine drops below 7dKH colours become less vibrant, and when it drops below 6dKH tissue starts receding. Alkalinity drives the calcification process in corals, without it they die. Layton Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reef Posted January 5, 2005 Author Report Share Posted January 5, 2005 Have you thought about moving the inlet hole from the bio balls to the caulerpa down to the bottom and put another strip of glass in to hold the m mud bead so you wont get a dead spot or even a place where waste will collect. The ecosystem sump is specially designed to optimize the filtering and water enrichment functions of the MM mud. There are four chambers and within the 2nd chamber that houses the mm bed, specific inner deimensions allow for the necessary vortex cycling that allows water to be repeatedly flowing over the MM bed so that toxins will be effeiciently filtered out. furthermore the release of essential trace elements and minerals are released into water, thereby enriching the water column and improving the water quality that returns to your tank. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Holiday Posted January 5, 2005 Report Share Posted January 5, 2005 For those of you interested! Inland aquatics had miracle mud analysed and it is basically made of - 7% aliminum - 4% calcium - 4% iron - 2% magnesium - 1% sodium - it showed a reading of 30% silicon, in miracle mud that would be present as silicon dioxide otherwise knowen as quartz, and as silicon has less than half the molecular weight of silicon dioxide that means that miracle mud is made up of 63% Quartz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lduncan Posted January 5, 2005 Report Share Posted January 5, 2005 Kermit posted a comprehensive breakdown of MM from Aluminium to Zirconium, and every element in between, on the first page. Layton Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wasp Posted January 5, 2005 Report Share Posted January 5, 2005 Problem with that kind of analysis is it really does not tell the whole story. In fact, if you used the same method to analyse a human being, you would come out with something that did not look much different. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lduncan Posted January 5, 2005 Report Share Posted January 5, 2005 That's true, but it is difficult to analyse any other way. Mass spectometry is the standard analysis technique. It's hard to detect chemical bonds, due to the fact that there are so many possible combinations. It does give you a fair idea of what it is likely to be made up of though. Layton Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Holiday Posted January 5, 2005 Report Share Posted January 5, 2005 The most common thing you here in debates over miracle mud is "how is something derived from the mountains going to be of any benefit to a reef" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lduncan Posted January 5, 2005 Report Share Posted January 5, 2005 Yeah, but that's like saying how is something like activated carbon going to be of any benefit to a reef. As far as I know there is no activated carbon deposits in the ocean. I think it is a stupid argument to take that, because it doesn't occur naturally in the ocean, we shouldn't use it, or that it is not useful. Also the ocean does have a large sand bed made up of all sorts of sediments which is what MM is replicating. Who knows, it may actually come from the ocean. Layton Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Holiday Posted January 5, 2005 Report Share Posted January 5, 2005 How many sediments have you seen with such high readings of iron and aliminium and of what benefits are these to a reef? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reef Posted January 5, 2005 Author Report Share Posted January 5, 2005 As far as i know MM is made up and vitimins etc added. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kermit Posted January 5, 2005 Report Share Posted January 5, 2005 How much per/Kg is this stuff??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reef Posted January 5, 2005 Author Report Share Posted January 5, 2005 It is good that everyone is aiming for zero phostphates, however some logic you have to laugh at, Collection saltwater from a polluted beach like takapuna which has high organics, phostphates, bactaria. then using it on a tank thus adding all the rubbish, then using ro for top up so you dont add any phostphates and then removing the waste with zeovit. Why use RO if you adding pollutants anyway?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reef Posted January 5, 2005 Author Report Share Posted January 5, 2005 MM is not cheap because the freight is really expensive. i think it retails for about $170 for a 10lb bag, not cheap for a large tank. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetskisteve Posted January 5, 2005 Report Share Posted January 5, 2005 dont ask why- my current parameters are Ca 280 Kh 4.8 & have been for 6 weeks at least, ANYONE who has seen my tank lately will tell you my coral colors are stunning i fact hardly anyone has left without a frag Also i wonder if Brendans prob was high readings not low as we've assumed? I saw his tank on tues & it certainly isnt as bad as you think..............pic coming Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pies Posted January 5, 2005 Report Share Posted January 5, 2005 Yeah, but that's like saying how is something like activated carbon going to be of any benefit to a reef. As far as I know there is no activated carbon deposits in the ocean. I think it is a stupid argument to take that, because it doesn't occur naturally in the ocean, we shouldn't use it, or that it is not useful. Also the ocean does have a large sand bed made up of all sorts of sediments which is what MM is replicating. Who knows, it may actually come from the ocean. Layton - I think, from my perspective, it doesn't matter whay you use e.g. MM, ZEOVIT, Skimmer, Powerheads or carbon. I think the thing to keep in mind is what effect its having on the tank health/water paramaters. Sure there is no activated carbon in the ocean, or skimmers or MM or Zeovit, but its what effect its having on the water thats important. Thats how I look at things anyway. The other thread about garlic for example, the thing I don't like about garlic is that I don't see it doing somthing that happens in nature, its a real external. However MM may be adding valualbe food/nutrients into the water that would be there in nature (or a reasonable supliment for it). Same with activated carbon, vodka, aspartic acid, phosphate remover, filter wool etc. If its effecting the ecology of the water to help provide more 'realistic' paramaters I have an open mind to it, if its a real 'additive' then I become very skeptical. My 2 cents. Pie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan_from_nz Posted January 5, 2005 Report Share Posted January 5, 2005 If you did go skimmerless and the macro algeas crashed (I assume this can happen?) what will be in place to stop a huge bio spike? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetskisteve Posted January 5, 2005 Report Share Posted January 5, 2005 Brendans tank Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pies Posted January 5, 2005 Report Share Posted January 5, 2005 Alois - If you do go skimmerless how about selling me your skimmer? You could even trade in my 902 and put it into the cabinet you have made for it as a backup, lesser skimmer. Pie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reef Posted January 5, 2005 Author Report Share Posted January 5, 2005 If you did go skimmerless and the macro algeas crashed (I assume this can happen?) what will be in place to stop a huge bio spike? My skimmer will still be connected but not running. why would there be a big bio spike??. i will still have a sand bed and my rock in my tank. if the algae dies i will remove it and start again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lduncan Posted January 5, 2005 Report Share Posted January 5, 2005 Pies, I agree, but would go further to include things like garlic, which have been shown to, or have reasonable grounds to be useful. I wouldn't limit myself to exclusively emulating nature. Layton Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZEOvitANZ Posted January 5, 2005 Report Share Posted January 5, 2005 As you can see, my tank is still running and hasn't crashed. So zeovit caused my big crash did it. Next time you get information about me or my tank, try and make sure it's accurate, otherwise you just make a fool of yourself. If the person who told you it had crashed had walked into my garage, they would have seen my corals ( but in a different place ). The display tank in my house now has my blueface angel in it, hence the corals going into the garage. By the way, after 3 years of using zeovit why would it cause a crash ? [edit]cees 11:19 06/01/2004[/edit] Brendan Zeovit New Zealand Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lduncan Posted January 5, 2005 Report Share Posted January 5, 2005 I said that I heard your tank crashed. Then when on to ask anyone if they new whether this was true or not. Obviously it hasn't "crashed", but you have had problems, no? No one said it was zeovit that caused the problems you have had. So before you get all defensive about it, calm down. What do you think the cause was? I can see some recession in the corals in the pic Steve posted. Do you think it was moving them into a new tank? Or something else. Layton Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZEOvitANZ Posted January 5, 2005 Report Share Posted January 5, 2005 Now i doubt you would lose so many coral due to low alk & cal. maybe over time but not within a month. low kh &cal will not crash you tank. i have had my cal down to 300 ppm for a month. not a problem, but the coral did not grow. I put in down to zeovit as i had the same problem 2 yrs ago and so did a friend of mine. you have to really follow the instructions to the letter. Also putting acid in you tank cant be that good either. Hair algae does not mean you high phostphate. i aways had hair algae in my sump but never in my tank.. but today after 12 hours i finally changed sumps and removed the hair algae for good, i hope. Having zero phostphates is not the be end all. with MM it also take out other organics that the skimmer cant take out. Then way waste your money on Zeovit, what did it do for your tank? if anything. here are some updated pics of the new sump and the 3 types of algae. be good to see which algae grows the best. Not saying you said it Layton The recession is a bit of moving and a bit of a naughty blue face angel Also as I said I have lost a bit of interest in keeping my aquarium and are now spending more time in sailing which is my first hobby. Also, as wasp said, i let my calcium get way low and lost my pink pocillopora as the result. That happened a while ago tho. I got rid of most my other coloured corals as i don't really have the time to look after them at the moment. ( sailing) Regards Brendan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lduncan Posted January 5, 2005 Report Share Posted January 5, 2005 Sorry, I didn't read that post. (well I did, but forgot about it) Layton Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.