I switched trace supplement regimens a couple of months ago, and so I decided to test whether I am in the correct ballpark with my dosing. I am not trying to solve any particular issue. I decided that for this first go at ICP testing, I would choose two labs and send parallel samples for comparison. I chose Triton (based on general reputation in the aquarium industry) and ICP-analysis.com (easily available to me and less expensive). For both tests, I rinsed the collection vial with tank water half a dozen times and collected near simultaneously from the main display.
Based on these tests, I am definitely adding too much Iodine. However the reported values vary by nearly 2-fold (Triton: 543 ppb, ICP-analysis.com: 276 ppb). I have no idea which one is correct, but since both show very high Iodine (and I have been dosing quite a bit of Iodine), I think this is a useful result and I will back down on the Iodine supplementation.
Other results show variable agreement. Some are pretty close (e.g. Sodium-11,027 vs 10,945 ppb). Some are off quite a bit in relative value, but the absolute values are very low and non-toxic so the error is not surprising or really concerning (e.g. Aluminum 62 vs 105 ppb). Some results show more variation than I had hoped for but still within a 'safe' range (e.g Magnesium 1429 vs 1337 ppm, Potassium 452 vs 407 ppm, Calcium 533 vs 492). The difference on Phosphorus was pretty high relatively speaking (9.7 vs 21 ppb). My expected values, based on common test kits, were Magnesium 1440 (Red Sea Magnesium Pro), Potassium 420 (Salifert), Calcium 520 (Red Sea Calcium Pro), Phosphorus 10 (Hanna ULR Phosphorus). I already knew my calcium is on the high side and am working on a gradual decrease.
The results were somewhat reassuring, as there is no evidence I have high levels of any toxic metals etc. I had hoped for more precise and consistent results that I could use to 'calibrate' my regular test kits, but that does not seem to be a reasonable expectation based on these results. The Iodine result is actionable, but I am not sure if my elevated Iodine was really hurting anything. Both kits were easy to collect and mail, access to results on the web worked well, no issues with usability. Overall the Triton results were slightly closer to my expectations, but this may just be chance. The ICP-analysis.com kit was less expensive, and they also tested my RODI water which was nice. The RODI results were close to 0 for everything except phosphorus which was surprisingly high (33 ppb). I have not checked phosphorus in my RODI for several months, so I have no idea if this result is reasonable or not.
I will probably repeat the same testing in a few months for another comparison. My interpretation would be that this testing is probably most useful to identify grossly abnormal values, e.g. contamination, rather than for precise tweaking of parameters that are commonly tested with titration kits etc.
Raw results attached for those interested.
Based on these tests, I am definitely adding too much Iodine. However the reported values vary by nearly 2-fold (Triton: 543 ppb, ICP-analysis.com: 276 ppb). I have no idea which one is correct, but since both show very high Iodine (and I have been dosing quite a bit of Iodine), I think this is a useful result and I will back down on the Iodine supplementation.
Other results show variable agreement. Some are pretty close (e.g. Sodium-11,027 vs 10,945 ppb). Some are off quite a bit in relative value, but the absolute values are very low and non-toxic so the error is not surprising or really concerning (e.g. Aluminum 62 vs 105 ppb). Some results show more variation than I had hoped for but still within a 'safe' range (e.g Magnesium 1429 vs 1337 ppm, Potassium 452 vs 407 ppm, Calcium 533 vs 492). The difference on Phosphorus was pretty high relatively speaking (9.7 vs 21 ppb). My expected values, based on common test kits, were Magnesium 1440 (Red Sea Magnesium Pro), Potassium 420 (Salifert), Calcium 520 (Red Sea Calcium Pro), Phosphorus 10 (Hanna ULR Phosphorus). I already knew my calcium is on the high side and am working on a gradual decrease.
The results were somewhat reassuring, as there is no evidence I have high levels of any toxic metals etc. I had hoped for more precise and consistent results that I could use to 'calibrate' my regular test kits, but that does not seem to be a reasonable expectation based on these results. The Iodine result is actionable, but I am not sure if my elevated Iodine was really hurting anything. Both kits were easy to collect and mail, access to results on the web worked well, no issues with usability. Overall the Triton results were slightly closer to my expectations, but this may just be chance. The ICP-analysis.com kit was less expensive, and they also tested my RODI water which was nice. The RODI results were close to 0 for everything except phosphorus which was surprisingly high (33 ppb). I have not checked phosphorus in my RODI for several months, so I have no idea if this result is reasonable or not.
I will probably repeat the same testing in a few months for another comparison. My interpretation would be that this testing is probably most useful to identify grossly abnormal values, e.g. contamination, rather than for precise tweaking of parameters that are commonly tested with titration kits etc.
Raw results attached for those interested.
