I think (my sole opinion) - is that Seachem states on their website - that the multitest will 'ignore' (i.e will measure) - free ammonia in the presence of Prime. Seneye says (for what ever reason) - dont use it with prime, etc etc Theoretically @Dan_P is correct - the alert badge should measure a change. My only comment is it would be an extremely small change - state 'toxic' vs 'detoxified. The levels in the test were barely over the safe level. No offense to Dan
Maybe Seachem‘s comment about “not designed to detect low levels of ammonia” applies to a visual assessment of their products. The color in the multi-test can be quite dark compared with the Alert at the same concentration of free ammonia. So, it is definitely the better choice.
there is no documentation that you have chosen the correct nm to analyze - right? I agree that you think you're right - I have bo evidence other than that to believe you're right
Scientific literarure explains how ammonia sensors are made, how they work and the type of dye molecules embedded in the film. They are known as optodes. I would guess that Seachem buys these sensors from a third party. Seneye uses this same sensing technology, though a different sensing film, and has a photometer similar to Hanna Checker but water proof, measure the color change. Finally, months of firsthand experience testing this technology also informs.
www.reef2reef.com
The wavelength (nm) to observe the color change of the ammonia sensor is determined in a few steps. The visible spectrum of light reflected from the sensor is recorded when the sensor is fully recovered, i.e., not exposed to ammonia, and another after it is exposed to ammonia. The two spectra are overlayed to identify which part of the spectrum intensity changes the most when the sensor is exposed to ammonia. It is from that region of the spectrum that the wavelength to monitor the sensor was selected.
Style might be at the heart of many email and social media confrontations that would otherwise not be confrontational. Social media has no filters like there are in face to face communication to smooth out the rough patches in the message. Social media ”road rage” wastes precious time as you point out.
Sometimes the desire to be right overtakes the all other forms of reason. This makes it very difficult to make sense of reasonable debate or skepticism....It becomes "noise" both to the sender and the receiver....Just my observation
1. What actually happened in Dr. Reef's thread - is that I helped design the study - from beginning to end. So - you're incorrect. I communicated with Dr Reef both in PM's and in the thread. I am a microbiologist - as I think you're aware.Dr. Reefs bottle bac thread was wrecked for ten pages by MN in exactly this manner, from the sidelines, its constantly unfortunate.
I prefer when his constant belittling of other peoples work comes in the form of his own test, from his own thread, his own findings, on a given matter.
see below for examples on how to wreck someone else’s efforts for fifteen pages:
Destructing a perfectly documented unassisted marine cycle.Bacteria in a bottle, Myth or Fact
Did the online calc indicate to use one mil in the tank for your gallonage
What’s happening here and for the next ten pages exactly matched the first Prime thread, on repeat.
@Dan_P As I said - in my first post in the thread. Thank you for doing this work. As I know, it is a lot of work - and it should be commended. As I also said - you may be absolutely correct (and quite likely are) that Prime does not remove ammonia. The company itself says that it doesn't remove ammonia - which is why it has to be re-dosed every 48 hours. I have not just commented to 'tear you down' - I have done extensive work also and had multiple conversations with the companies involved to determine the best way to get to the original question - which was 'does Prime detoxify ammonia'. I'm glad the topic has changed to 'does Prime remove ammonia' (or 'does Prime lower free ammonia levels')
