Best magnesium test kit?
- Thread starter thatindonesianreefer
- Start date
- Tagged users None
BillFish Coral Lover
Most Excellent Member
Try the Randy Test Method (RTM).
Randy’s Magnesium Method. I’ll trust the chemist on this one.
Just say NO to magnesium testing: RMM is born
OK, this thread has been many years in the making, and I'm posting it here since folks in the chem forum are probably already tired of all the threads relating to problematic magnesium testing. I'm going to propose a method, let's call it the Randy Magnesium Method, or RMM for short. All good...
www.reef2reef.com
Dburr1014
10K Club member
I use aquaforest for mag.
I do get pretty constant results with this kit and it will test over 1500ppm. The only test kit I've seen that does that.
I do not test mag often but I think it is useful to know the number from time to time. If it's low and you don't know that it's low, you need to test.
It's always been said... Don't add things if you can't test for it.
I do get pretty constant results with this kit and it will test over 1500ppm. The only test kit I've seen that does that.
I do not test mag often but I think it is useful to know the number from time to time. If it's low and you don't know that it's low, you need to test.
It's always been said... Don't add things if you can't test for it.
Randy Holmes-Farley
Reef Chemist
Staff member
Super Moderator
Excellence Award
Expert Contributor
Article Contributor
R2R Research
My Tank Thread
What do you add? Many magnesium additives contain ammonia. That’s why Seachem would not use magnesium chloride for years. Maybe they like the ammonia or other trace elements in it.
Neoma369
Community Member
Yes, I scale it out. My alk was 22! Mag and Calc were below 400! At that time, I had a few corals and plants- a few more fish and calcarious algae. All but one cardinal and pair of occilarus are gone.
Randy Holmes-Farley
Reef Chemist
Staff member
Super Moderator
Excellence Award
Expert Contributor
Article Contributor
R2R Research
My Tank Thread
This stuff. Is it something else in there the coral loves? Maybe? They don't talk so I can't tell ya. But I know my mag goes from 1200 to 1400 and they fluff back up.
Magnesium supplements have lots of other things in them, such as essentially all trace metals at some level.
Randy Holmes-Farley
Reef Chemist
Staff member
Super Moderator
Excellence Award
Expert Contributor
Article Contributor
R2R Research
My Tank Thread
I’m highly skeptical of magnesium below 400 ppm. That’s exactly why I recommend not measuring it.
Reef Puncher
Active Member
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2024
- Messages
- 474
- Reaction score
- 225
So i just went through this. I had different readings on my kits. So i went through EXTENSIVE EXTENSIVE experiments. I bought every single test kit i know of. I then obtained not 1, not 2, but 3 different calibration liquids. Calibration liquids are liquids preset to certain mineral/nutrient/salinity levels so you know if you test kit is accurate. These levels are determined through icp. but because different ICP companies have slightly different results, i bought 3 to be sure. After using the 3 calibration liquids, 1, Fauna marin standard, 2, some random companys calibration liquid, ill have to check when i get back home, and 3, aquaforest magnesium calibration liquid. ( i also tested calcium and nitrate phosphate too)
Here are the results.
Most accurate magnesium- Aquaforest was the most accurate.
After that with close and only slightly off results was salifert. Red sea was off by a decent chunk, it was supposed to be around 1310 as the standard but read about 80 off. I also used NYOS which was about 70mg off. And the worst, by far was hannah. it gave wildly different results.
Most accurate Calcium- Tie between aquaforest and Salifert.
Both were on the dot accurate to the exact ppm. Hannah was off slightly, and red sea was off just slightly. It was supposed to read 420 and red sea showed 450.
Most accurate phosphate and nitrate- Hannah.
While the salifert kit worked, i much much preferred the instant number reading of hannah. Just spitting out a number was awesome. I used a low range phosphate, not ultra low range. If only the hannah calcium and mag was as accurate as their phosphate and nitrate reader.
I also compared my water sample and readings to an ICP test to verify.
Here are the results.
Most accurate magnesium- Aquaforest was the most accurate.
After that with close and only slightly off results was salifert. Red sea was off by a decent chunk, it was supposed to be around 1310 as the standard but read about 80 off. I also used NYOS which was about 70mg off. And the worst, by far was hannah. it gave wildly different results.
Most accurate Calcium- Tie between aquaforest and Salifert.
Both were on the dot accurate to the exact ppm. Hannah was off slightly, and red sea was off just slightly. It was supposed to read 420 and red sea showed 450.
Most accurate phosphate and nitrate- Hannah.
While the salifert kit worked, i much much preferred the instant number reading of hannah. Just spitting out a number was awesome. I used a low range phosphate, not ultra low range. If only the hannah calcium and mag was as accurate as their phosphate and nitrate reader.
I also compared my water sample and readings to an ICP test to verify.
UtahReefer
Active Member
Aquaforest....
Reef Puncher
Active Member
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2024
- Messages
- 474
- Reaction score
- 225
yep. its the new gold standard.
OP
OP
thatindonesianreefer
Active Member
Thanks!So i just went through this. I had different readings on my kits. So i went through EXTENSIVE EXTENSIVE experiments. I bought every single test kit i know of. I then obtained not 1, not 2, but 3 different calibration liquids. Calibration liquids are liquids preset to certain mineral/nutrient/salinity levels so you know if you test kit is accurate. These levels are determined through icp. but because different ICP companies have slightly different results, i bought 3 to be sure. After using the 3 calibration liquids, 1, Fauna marin standard, 2, some random companys calibration liquid, ill have to check when i get back home, and 3, aquaforest magnesium calibration liquid. ( i also tested calcium and nitrate phosphate too)
Here are the results.
Most accurate magnesium- Aquaforest was the most accurate.
After that with close and only slightly off results was salifert. Red sea was off by a decent chunk, it was supposed to be around 1310 as the standard but read about 80 off. I also used NYOS which was about 70mg off. And the worst, by far was hannah. it gave wildly different results.
Most accurate Calcium- Tie between aquaforest and Salifert.
Both were on the dot accurate to the exact ppm. Hannah was off slightly, and red sea was off just slightly. It was supposed to read 420 and red sea showed 450.
Most accurate phosphate and nitrate- Hannah.
While the salifert kit worked, i much much preferred the instant number reading of hannah. Just spitting out a number was awesome. I used a low range phosphate, not ultra low range. If only the hannah calcium and mag was as accurate as their phosphate and nitrate reader.
I also compared my water sample and readings to an ICP test to verify.
Reef Puncher
Active Member
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2024
- Messages
- 474
- Reaction score
- 225
yep my own experiments came up with the same conclusion as BRS. aquaforests standard solution was determined through ICP testing. but then you run the risk of not knowing how accurate their ICP based on how often they calibrate it and how. So to be sure i used multiple standard reference solutions from multiple ICP machines. all experiments concluded aquaforest to be the most accurate. and the fact they are only company to offer tailored reagent drop quantities to your specific system and include a free reference solution, all adds up to make them the king.BRS concluded AF best and which includes in the kit a reference solution although how does one know that solution is correct
GARRIGA
2500 Club Member
That also appeared to be the easiest to test based on fact multiple users had similar results. With Hanna it appears user's adherence to testing protocol greatly affects end results.
Reef Puncher
Active Member
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2024
- Messages
- 474
- Reaction score
- 225
yep and how clean the bottles are, did they miss any powder, did they wait the exact times etc. i think ill still stick with hannah for phosphates and nitrates for now though. it came out accurate there but i cant figure out why their mag and calc had odd readings. i seriously think the mag kit i bought might be defective. aint no way one reading was 1250 and the next 1800. makes no sense.
GARRIGA
2500 Club Member
Saw their video on calcium and seems user error heavily impacts results and perhaps same with mag. If accuracy based on my ability to follow strict protocols then that's not a test for me although I don't struggle shaking bottles and getting similar repeated drop results using a magnetic stirrer and timer on my iPhone. Perhaps best each get what they are confident using and focus on trends vs exact figures. Latter likely futile.
Neoma369
Community Member
This is marvelous info!So i just went through this. I had different readings on my kits. So i went through EXTENSIVE EXTENSIVE experiments. I bought every single test kit i know of. I then obtained not 1, not 2, but 3 different calibration liquids. Calibration liquids are liquids preset to certain mineral/nutrient/salinity levels so you know if you test kit is accurate. These levels are determined through icp. but because different ICP companies have slightly different results, i bought 3 to be sure. After using the 3 calibration liquids, 1, Fauna marin standard, 2, some random companys calibration liquid, ill have to check when i get back home, and 3, aquaforest magnesium calibration liquid. ( i also tested calcium and nitrate phosphate too)
Here are the results.
Most accurate magnesium- Aquaforest was the most accurate.
After that with close and only slightly off results was salifert. Red sea was off by a decent chunk, it was supposed to be around 1310 as the standard but read about 80 off. I also used NYOS which was about 70mg off. And the worst, by far was hannah. it gave wildly different results.
Most accurate Calcium- Tie between aquaforest and Salifert.
Both were on the dot accurate to the exact ppm. Hannah was off slightly, and red sea was off just slightly. It was supposed to read 420 and red sea showed 450.
Most accurate phosphate and nitrate- Hannah.
While the salifert kit worked, i much much preferred the instant number reading of hannah. Just spitting out a number was awesome. I used a low range phosphate, not ultra low range. If only the hannah calcium and mag was as accurate as their phosphate and nitrate reader.
I also compared my water sample and readings to an ICP test to verify.
Court_Appointed_Hypeman
Valuable Member
I haven't noticed anyone mention this, but testing procedure has a lot to do with it.
As to why, I assume it's becayse in such small samples we are measuring a fairly high quantity using a drop as a unit. Also 1% difference test to test could be a 150ppm difference.
I have only used the aquaforest test kit, which is less nice than red seas equipment. But is supposedly the most consistent. The first time I rested it, I was surprised at the results as I had not yet dosed, or had anything in the tank that should consume it. So I tested the standard they include, and my results were wildly off I felt, varying by 100ppm each time. I kept testing it and testing it trying to figure out what I wad doing wrong as when googled, it's commonly blamed that it was testing practice at fault for this particular product. After 10 to 12 runs of it, I could get a consistent within 20ppm of the standard. I bought another standard that had a known calcium and magnesium content for a simulated sea water and was able to accurately get within 30ppm at my largest variance. Knowing your calcium is important for your test results too, I do not know if red sea has a reagent adjustment for different calcium levels, but that is a factor as the way we test relies on its ratio to calcium.
But randy is the man and his philosophy on mag testing rings true to me, and while I test it just because sometimes while I do the full gambit, I've not once had to adjust and I dose in direct relation with my calcium dosing.
As to why, I assume it's becayse in such small samples we are measuring a fairly high quantity using a drop as a unit. Also 1% difference test to test could be a 150ppm difference.
I have only used the aquaforest test kit, which is less nice than red seas equipment. But is supposedly the most consistent. The first time I rested it, I was surprised at the results as I had not yet dosed, or had anything in the tank that should consume it. So I tested the standard they include, and my results were wildly off I felt, varying by 100ppm each time. I kept testing it and testing it trying to figure out what I wad doing wrong as when googled, it's commonly blamed that it was testing practice at fault for this particular product. After 10 to 12 runs of it, I could get a consistent within 20ppm of the standard. I bought another standard that had a known calcium and magnesium content for a simulated sea water and was able to accurately get within 30ppm at my largest variance. Knowing your calcium is important for your test results too, I do not know if red sea has a reagent adjustment for different calcium levels, but that is a factor as the way we test relies on its ratio to calcium.
But randy is the man and his philosophy on mag testing rings true to me, and while I test it just because sometimes while I do the full gambit, I've not once had to adjust and I dose in direct relation with my calcium dosing.
