Reefers Moonshine Method - Let's discuss

[Randy Holmes-Farley Verified Community Expert]

I'm really intrigued by this response especially calling it part of your "dream method". (high praise from someone with your knowledge and background)

The fact that this method is even possible due to the availability of ICP testing is pretty amazing, but as you've pointed out there are definitely flaws in the testing and method. Hopefully we can see further progress on the testing front to answer some of the questions/complications you pointed out (assuming that's even possible).

Here's a thread from 2018 describing my dream method. I'll copy and past the first post here, with a newly bolded section that is particularly related to this thread:

Randy's Dream Methodology

What husbandry would I do in a dream tank? (some of this may look familiar as some was posted elsewhere in other threads) In terms of water chemistry maintenance, I'd maintain calcium and alkalinity with limewater/kalkwasser (maybe pH limited to pH 8.55 or less to prevent overdose; probably on...

www.reef2reef.com

What husbandry would I do in a dream tank? (some of this may look familiar as some was posted elsewhere in other threads)

In terms of water chemistry maintenance, I'd maintain calcium and alkalinity with limewater/kalkwasser (maybe pH limited to pH 8.55 or less to prevent overdose; probably on dosing timer rather than ATO) and a two part (if needed; maybe also pH limited to pH 8.55 or less). I'd like a continuous alk monitor, and if Mindstream or Seneye comes on line with reliable data, I'd monitor ammonia 24/7 and in different system locations (main tank, exit from refugium, etc.) for interests sake.

I would do substantial and repetitive ICP testing of the water to guide dosing and exporting.

There are some ions I would dose essentially independent of measurement because I don't think measurement is particularly useful for them (e.g., iron because it is typically below detection limits; silicate because it depletes so fast).

There are a bunch of ions that I do not consider important at the levels reefers typically have (e.g., lithium, maybe barium, I'd need to think through this list) and I would make no substantial effort to control those either by export or by dosing.

I would likely experiment on the tank over time to re-verify for myself that my longstanding opinions on certain chemicals are not particularly useful if dosed to maintain natural levels, despite the fact that many reefers do. If they showed a positive effect, I'd rethink dosing them. These include iodide and strontium. I'd certainly continue dosing them if they appeared useful to my system.

There are a whole bunch of biologically active trace elements that I'd likely measure and dose which I did not in the past, but which previously tested low in my system (e.g., molybdenum) and I'd likely dose these to roughly NSW levels. I might experiment on these in a variety of ways (e.g., allowing one to go undosed for a long time and then restart and see if anything apparently changed).

I'd probably do automatic water changes, but again, might also experiment on the amount, from none to a couple of percent a day.

As to other "methods", I'd likely do some or most of these that I partly copied from another post:
Ato
Temperature control (temp controller to kick on heaters or cooling system)
Skimmer (for aeration if nothing else)
Rodi unit with inline tds
Nutrient export (macroalgae, gfo, organic carbon dosing, GAC, maybe experiment with organic resins like Purigen)
Might try LED lights to save electricity, but I'm not yet convinced I'd like the look

 

[Radman73]

And if that's what you want to do as your method, awesome

For me, 20% waterchanges on the 1st and 15th of each month with a great salt mix is my method. Ive yet to kill anything using a WC.

I've automated my WCs to where start2finish is around 10mins.

I drain the sump prior to adding water thru a pvc pipe into my floor drain with a ball valve.

55g rodi water in a drum ready to dump thru a gravity hose while mixing salt in my 100g sump with the pump O F F

5mins to drain
5mins to refill and add salt
Wait 1hr and turn recirculation pump back on refeeding the tank

Easy peasy.

I used to do AWC with my 60 cube. Unfortunately my cervical and lumbar spine have encouraged me to find a way to do things without water changes if possible. Mine take me about 15-20 minutes, but requires that I do some work with my hands above my head and that's just a non-starter these days.

I'm also a fan of efficiency, so the idea of not wasting water when I can control elements and nutrients with this method intrigues me. I'll be adding an ATS if my nutrients warrant it, though a 75 gallon fuge with plenty of space for macro should handle it just fine. Just like I'll be starting my CalcRx back up as well.

My system is 200gal taking into account rock and sand. Not exactly big, but not small either. 80gal of salt water each month adds up. Then you get a bad box of salt, or two, and it gets really old lol!

I also work from home now. So I have the time to dedicate to the dosing and monitoring. While the ICP analysis might not be perfect, for the purposes of this system, I feel it's more than adequate. Truthfully, I expect it to get better over time.

Nobody is saying this method is a silver bullet. It's not even radical in its approach as it's very similar to other methods, it just breaks it down to individual elements vs a one size fits all approach. As to those who criticize it as simply a way for the founder to make $, well that applies to all companies right? What matters is whether the method has the hobbyist's best interests at heart. And FYI, you're free to make up and use your own trace elements, you aren't locked into his. I do feel if people have concerns, attack the method, not the person.

Water changes alone used to work for me. If they still did, I wouldn't be looking for a better way for me and my tank.

 

[fushi]

I really like the RM method, I believe it really is the cheapest approach to dialing in specific trace elements, just dose what you need.
Yes you can have a beautiful tank with premixed trace elements too but I see it like buying a gaming computer off the shelf vs building one yourself. Some of us like to do it our selfs and tinker with the details.

There are arguments for and against both methods but it is clear they both can produce great tanks so you just gotta decide what method fits your personality.

I like the method, I find it pretty simple, I ICP test every 2 months now and will probably go to every 3 next year. I also don't mind dosing a couple drops elements everyday, I do it wile I drink my coffee and check out how my tank is looking in the morning. Its looking great by the way.


To rebuttal @Randy Holmes-Farley "against arguments":

1. There is an assumption that ICP is accurate (tests suggest that is not always the case).
This is true and is why triton or ati is recommended as the anecdotal evidence has shown them to be better than the others. In general you can say ICP tests are not accurate but aren't they are more accurate than your at home test kits? And some salt companies state that their salt mix is checked using ICP so wouldn't dosing elements according to an ICP test be in the same ballpark of accuracy standard.

2. There is an assumption that a simple number for, say, iron, tells you what you need to know. Untrue. Chemical form matters a large amount, and that may vary from tank to tank even if you dose the same form.
Agreed but don't salt mixes and pre-mixed trace elements provide the same chemical form of elements that the RM elements? There are only so many forms of elements that are safe, shelf stable, cost effective, readily available, etc. for companies to make their salt mixes and trace elements with so it is hard to say that this applies.

3. Some ions deplete very fast (hours to days), requiring quite frequent testing, at least once, to see how fast they are depletingCost and effort.
This is accounted for by daily dosing small amounts of elements that deplete fast.

4. Dosing every individual ion can be tedious and costly.
RM is defiantly cheaper than triton and as someone stated previously water changes with tropic marin salt isn't cheap either. I see the RM cost like a calcium reactor, the is a large upfront cost (for the initial big correction) but the value is in the long term.

5. What to do for, say, elevated ions, organics, and skewed ion profiles is often not clear without water changes.
The method does not discourage water changes but instead suggests you don't need to do water changes for the purpose of adding trace elements. The RM calculator even recommends water changes for elements that are too high. The RM method also makes it clear that the way you deal with organics is up to you and that the method guidelines are for trace elements replenishment.

 

[Radman73]

I'm happy to oblige...some things can be more complicated then they seem. Doesn't mean this isn't a good method, or even the best method, but to suggest it has no downside is not true.

It is likely a very fine method, and I like it in principle, but I already gave some cons and will repeat them in case you didn't see them:

1. There is an assumption that ICP is accurate (tests suggest that is not always the case).

2. There is an assumption that a simple number for, say, iron, tells you what you need to know. Untrue. Chemical form matters a large amount, and that may vary from tank to tank even if you dose the same form.

3. Some ions deplete very fast (hours to days), requiring quite frequent testing, at least once, to see how fast they are depleting. Cost and effort.

4. Dosing every individual ion can be tedious and costly.

5. What to do for, say, elevated ions, organics, and skewed ion profiles is often not clear without water changes.

I saw them but didn't feel the cons were as much of a worry to me. My response is below but I doubt there's anything there you haven't already thought of lol! It's simply my reasoning.

1. Agree, wholeheartedly. But home testing isn't always accurate either. The most significant risk, IMO, will come at the beginning of any of these programs. Once you have 4 or 5 ICP tests submitted it will be much easier to spot an outlier and question what changed. It's much like my Trident. I love it more as a way to see trends than perfect accuracy.

2. Also true, but true for every method out there that doses trace elements correct? It's why with any method, even water changes alone, it's important to pay attention to the tank and see how it responds.

3. One thing I like about the RM method is it at least acknowledges this and is why some elements are dosed daily. And this is why the frequent ICP tests are important. If I dose rubidium monthly and the ICP shows consistent numbers then we can feel comfortable that it's available to corals in roughly the correct amounts. If I dosed quarterly and still found it depleted, I would most likely try a monthly dose first vs upping the dose. It's all about finding the right balance of when and how much. We're trusting with this system, like all the rest, that much of that legwork has been completed.

4. For sure. But again, all of these system cost money. This system gives me a little more peace of mind that I'm addressing specific values with specific elements vs spray and pray with a mixed element solution.

5. Water changes are still allowed, though not necessarily encouraged, but they are called for in certain cases such as these. Though the idea of course is to maintain levels that don't necessitate the water change.

We all know it's impossible to perfectly replicate the ocean in our aquariums. But we do have the responsibility to try and create the best home possible for the creature we take into our care. That's why I'm jumping on this system. I can keep fish alive with almost no issue. I've become very adept at quarantining fish thanks to all the help on this site. But I haven't been able to effectively keep coral alive for years now. I mean, sure, I have a few that are limping along, but none are thriving and that's 100% my fault. I'm hoping this system not only corrects what's wrong with my tank to keep corals alive and thriving but hopefully what's wrong with me too lol!

I'm very honest and forthcoming in my build threads. I want others to learn what to do, or not do, based off of my experiences. It's the best way for all of us to help each other. Some people need to read "I got in 6 anthias and lost all of them because I hadn't researched what diseases they most commonly arrive with." Followed up by "I got in 6 more and was able to save 3 using X." And finally, "I got 3 more and saved them all by treating them immediately with X." And so on. I've learned so much by reading and we all need to be more forthcoming with our successes but also especially our failures.

Sorry, off my rant/soap box. I'm tired of killing coral through my own negligence. It's my belief that adopting the Reef Moonshiners method will assist me in not being stupid or as ignorant anymore. Follow my build thread to see if it holds true lol!

 

[Radman73]

I really like the RM method, I believe it really is the cheapest approach to dialing in specific trace elements, just dose what you need.
Yes you can have a beautiful tank with premixed trace elements too but I see it like buying a gaming computer off the shelf vs building one yourself. Some of us like to do it our selfs and tinker with the details.

There are arguments for and against both methods but it is clear they both can produce great tanks so you just gotta decide what method fits your personality.

I like the method, I find it pretty simple, I ICP test every 2 months now and will probably go to every 3 next year. I also don't mind dosing a couple drops elements everyday, I do it wile I drink my coffee and check out how my tank is looking in the morning. Its looking great by the way.


To rebuttal @Randy Holmes-Farley "against arguments":

1. There is an assumption that ICP is accurate (tests suggest that is not always the case).
This is true and is why triton or ati is recommended as the anecdotal evidence has shown them to be better than the others. In general you can say ICP tests are not accurate but aren't they are more accurate than your at home test kits? And some salt companies state that their salt mix is checked using ICP so wouldn't dosing elements according to an ICP test be in the same ballpark of accuracy standard.

2. There is an assumption that a simple number for, say, iron, tells you what you need to know. Untrue. Chemical form matters a large amount, and that may vary from tank to tank even if you dose the same form.
Agreed but don't salt mixes and pre-mixed trace elements provide the same chemical form of elements that the RM elements? There are only so many forms of elements that are safe, shelf stable, cost effective, readily available, etc. for companies to make their salt mixes and trace elements with so it is hard to say that this applies.

3. Some ions deplete very fast (hours to days), requiring quite frequent testing, at least once, to see how fast they are depletingCost and effort.
This is accounted for by daily dosing small amounts of elements that deplete fast.

4. Dosing every individual ion can be tedious and costly.
RM is defiantly cheaper than triton and as someone stated previously water changes with tropic marin salt isn't cheap either. I see the RM cost like a calcium reactor, the is a large upfront cost (for the initial big correction) but the value is in the long term.

5. What to do for, say, elevated ions, organics, and skewed ion profiles is often not clear without water changes.
The method does not discourage water changes but instead suggests you don't need to do water changes for the purpose of adding trace elements. The RM calculator even recommends water changes for elements that are too high. The RM method also makes it clear that the way you deal with organics is up to you and that the method guidelines are for trace elements replenishment.

Beat to most of it lol!

 

[BeltedCoyote]

I saw them but didn't feel the cons were as much of a worry to me. My response is below but I doubt there's anything there you haven't already thought of lol! It's simply my reasoning.

1. Agree, wholeheartedly. But home testing isn't always accurate either. The most significant risk, IMO, will come at the beginning of any of these programs. Once you have 4 or 5 ICP tests submitted it will be much easier to spot an outlier and question what changed. It's much like my Trident. I love it more as a way to see trends than perfect accuracy.

2. Also true, but true for every method out there that doses trace elements correct? It's why with any method, even water changes alone, it's important to pay attention to the tank and see how it responds.

3. One thing I like about the RM method is it at least acknowledges this and is why some elements are dosed daily. And this is why the frequent ICP tests are important. If I dose rubidium monthly and the ICP shows consistent numbers then we can feel comfortable that it's available to corals in roughly the correct amounts. If I dosed quarterly and still found it depleted, I would most likely try a monthly dose first vs upping the dose. It's all about finding the right balance of when and how much. We're trusting with this system, like all the rest, that much of that legwork has been completed.

4. For sure. But again, all of these system cost money. This system gives me a little more peace of mind that I'm addressing specific values with specific elements vs spray and pray with a mixed element solution.

5. Water changes are still allowed, though not necessarily encouraged, but they are called for in certain cases such as these. Though the idea of course is to maintain levels that don't necessitate the water change.

We all know it's impossible to perfectly replicate the ocean in our aquariums. But we do have the responsibility to try and create the best home possible for the creature we take into our care. That's why I'm jumping on this system. I can keep fish alive with almost no issue. I've become very adept at quarantining fish thanks to all the help on this site. But I haven't been able to effectively keep coral alive for years now. I mean, sure, I have a few that are limping along, but none are thriving and that's 100% my fault. I'm hoping this system not only corrects what's wrong with my tank to keep corals alive and thriving but hopefully what's wrong with me too lol!

I'm very honest and forthcoming in my build threads. I want others to learn what to do, or not do, based off of my experiences. It's the best way for all of us to help each other. Some people need to read "I got in 6 anthias and lost all of them because I hadn't researched what diseases they most commonly arrive with." Followed up by "I got in 6 more and was able to save 3 using X." And finally, "I got 3 more and saved them all by treating them immediately with X." And so on. I've learned so much by reading and we all need to be more forthcoming with our successes but also especially our failures.

Sorry, off my rant/soap box. I'm tired of killing coral through my own negligence. It's my belief that adopting the Reef Moonshiners method will assist me in not being stupid or as ignorant anymore. Follow my build thread to see if it holds true lol!

appreciate this response! And I’m approaching my build journey in a similar way to you: as a means to share experiences and thus help others learn.

thus, I will be reading your build.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley Verified Community Expert]

1. There is an assumption that ICP is accurate (tests suggest that is not always the case).
This is true and is why triton or ati is recommended as the anecdotal evidence has shown them to be better than the others. In general you can say ICP tests are not accurate but aren't they are more accurate than your at home test kits? And some salt companies state that their salt mix is checked using ICP so wouldn't dosing elements according to an ICP test be in the same ballpark of accuracy standard.

There aren't home test kits for most trace elements. ICP may be better than nothing for this purpose, but with the other caveats to it (such as lack of chemical form), I'm not certain it is better than dose and observe.

My concern with fast depletion was not that it is hard to offset by dosing, but that it is hard to determine without rapid testing, how much dosing is needed to offset the fast decline. If something declines in a day, you might need multiple tests over 24 h to properly see what is happening.

The concern about chemical form relates to the concern about matching a concentration number since you might be matching someone else's different chemical form. It is not an issue if you do the old fashioned approach of dose and observe.

As to cost of water changes, they accomplish different tasks than dosing (like export of accumulating chemicals), so a cost comparison is not really useful. I also do not think water changes are an especially good way to dose trace elements.

Salt mixes do not likely contain all of the same chemical forms as are present in existing reef tank water. Ferrous iron is a perfect example, and may be why a water change drops ORP. It is present in many dosing solutions and likely salt mixes, but is not likely the form present in a stable reef tank.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley Verified Community Expert]

I saw them but didn't feel the cons were as much of a worry to me. My response is below but I doubt there's anything there you haven't already thought of lol! It's simply my reasoning.

1. Agree, wholeheartedly. But home testing isn't always accurate either. The most significant risk, IMO, will come at the beginning of any of these programs. Once you have 4 or 5 ICP tests submitted it will be much easier to spot an outlier and question what changed. It's much like my Trident. I love it more as a way to see trends than perfect accuracy.

2. Also true, but true for every method out there that doses trace elements correct? It's why with any method, even water changes alone, it's important to pay attention to the tank and see how it responds.

3. One thing I like about the RM method is it at least acknowledges this and is why some elements are dosed daily. And this is why the frequent ICP tests are important. If I dose rubidium monthly and the ICP shows consistent numbers then we can feel comfortable that it's available to corals in roughly the correct amounts. If I dosed quarterly and still found it depleted, I would most likely try a monthly dose first vs upping the dose. It's all about finding the right balance of when and how much. We're trusting with this system, like all the rest, that much of that legwork has been completed.

4. For sure. But again, all of these system cost money. This system gives me a little more peace of mind that I'm addressing specific values with specific elements vs spray and pray with a mixed element solution.

5. Water changes are still allowed, though not necessarily encouraged, but they are called for in certain cases such as these. Though the idea of course is to maintain levels that don't necessitate the water change.

We all know it's impossible to perfectly replicate the ocean in our aquariums. But we do have the responsibility to try and create the best home possible for the creature we take into our care. That's why I'm jumping on this system. I can keep fish alive with almost no issue. I've become very adept at quarantining fish thanks to all the help on this site. But I haven't been able to effectively keep coral alive for years now. I mean, sure, I have a few that are limping along, but none are thriving and that's 100% my fault. I'm hoping this system not only corrects what's wrong with my tank to keep corals alive and thriving but hopefully what's wrong with me too lol!

I'm very honest and forthcoming in my build threads. I want others to learn what to do, or not do, based off of my experiences. It's the best way for all of us to help each other. Some people need to read "I got in 6 anthias and lost all of them because I hadn't researched what diseases they most commonly arrive with." Followed up by "I got in 6 more and was able to save 3 using X." And finally, "I got 3 more and saved them all by treating them immediately with X." And so on. I've learned so much by reading and we all need to be more forthcoming with our successes but also especially our failures.

Sorry, off my rant/soap box. I'm tired of killing coral through my own negligence. It's my belief that adopting the Reef Moonshiners method will assist me in not being stupid or as ignorant anymore. Follow my build thread to see if it holds true lol!

I'm not trying to dissuade anyone from trying it, I'm just being the devils advocate and providing counterpoint to what at face value, sounds like a perfect system, but isn't.

 

[Radman73]

I'm not trying to dissuade anyone from trying it, I'm just being the devils advocate and providing counterpoint to what at face value, sounds like a perfect system, but isn't.

Understand and support completely. And for full disclosure, I don't think there is a perfect system. We just have to pick the system that we will follow and feel gives us the best chance of success.

 

[Utubereefer]

Mulm is beneficial in a reef , my tank thrives if mulm is accumulating in sump - this is what miracle mud is. My nutrients are the most stable after I got an inch or so of mulm in the sump , pods , brittle stars , sponge explosion and my nitrate/ phos is about 20 ppm and .08 ppm, I try to create an environment where the tank does the cleaning not me , my sand stays white - I do have to clean the glass a lot snails are lazy lol but my reef is also mixed mainly softies

Your tank is nice but I’m centering my tank around sps which is very picky with nitrates and phosphate which I believe are built up in the “mulm” detritus. I don’t have friends that reef no one showed me what to do. I watched YouTube and put together a method that works for me. WWC has stated many times in videos how they like to keep their sumps clean and even attribute it to their long term success. Even the fact that you use filter socks shows that you think removal of at least some “mulm” detritus is good. Ugh this is my longest post ever and I’m not trying to sound like a jerk or tell you you’re wrong these are just my observations.

 

[dvgyfresh]

Your tank is nice but I’m centering my tank around sps which is very picky with nitrates and phosphate which I believe are built up in the “mulm” detritus. I don’t have friends that reef no one showed me what to do. I watched YouTube and put together a method that works for me. WWC has stated many times in videos how they like to keep their sumps clean and even attribute it to their long term success. Even the fact that you use filter socks shows that you think removal of at least some “mulm” detritus is good. Ugh this is my longest post ever and I’m not trying to sound like a jerk or tell you you’re wrong these are just my observations.

Beautful tank!! Sps is a different ball game forsure , I just like explaining my method to show that you can be a “lazy / hands off reefer” every tank is different and I’m glad you’ve found what works for you!

 

[Utubereefer]

Beautful tank!! Sps is a different ball game forsure , I just like explaining my method to show that you can be a “lazy / hands off reefer” every tank is different and I’m glad you’ve found what works for you!

Same here man you’re tank looks great.
I tried the lazy method. Definitely didn’t work for me…

 

[dvgyfresh]

Same here man you’re tank looks great.
I tried the lazy method. Definitely didn’t work for me…

If my tank was all sps , I’d probly have a saltwater cemetery lol , spiked alk to 20+ dkh when I first tried all for reef, my tank does better when I do very little

 

[fushi]

There aren't home test kits for most trace elements. ICP may be better than nothing for this purpose, but with the other caveats to it (such as lack of chemical form), I'm not certain it is better than dose and observe……….

To keep it short I agree, just wanted to keep the debate up.
I also think it is important with any method to dose and observe as you can usually pick up on a problem way before its time for an ICP lol

 

[minus9]

 

[minus9]

We’re talking chemistry here people and this is another way of doing it. Once your familiar with your tanks consumption, monthly ICP can be extended to every six weeks or so. These are guidelines and you can certainly alter them to your needs. Download the handbook for free and give it a read or two. Also, ATI ICP kits are $45ea and sometimes you can buy multiples for less. So it’s less than $600 a year and for those with large tanks who do water changes, this is probably cheaper. Use can use this method/chemistry on any size tank. You only dose what you need. For those skeptics, just read the handbook, you just may learn something new?
Happy reefing!

 

[X-37B]

Glad I found this thread. I had a discussion with another reefer about this method.
I went and read the manual.
It is very similar to Glenn Fongs DSR method, imo.
I researched his method for a year while gathering all my equipment for my 120.
I ened up going with the EZ version and it has worked well.
I do run a carx

I went 18 months without a WC with good results. Now at 2.5 years I do 10% WC once a month with regular IO and honestly the tank looks better after one.

I am sending out my first ICP test next week.

I feel my tank is mature at this point with good growth and color.

So as for RM. If I have some low trace elements I will dose one element at a time of RM and see if their are any noticable differences with my system.

My system is 95% acros.

 

[Scdell]

Well..........to each their own. Every tank is different. Some people may benefit from Moonshiners and some may not. I started this method about a year ago. I was depending on bi weekly water changes to replace elements, trusting it was doing that. My acros never really did anything but survive. I ran across a moonshiners thread. What was there to lose trying it? A few $100? I was spending more than that replacing corals that weren't getting what they needed. The premise seemed good and I dove into it. What a difference! My acros are thriving now and growing like crazy. Absolutely one of the best things I've ever done for my tank. Water changes may do your tank ok and not another's tank. My tank uses a lot of these e!ements. Boron, barium, manganese, flouride, zinc, potassium and bromine. I can tell the difference when it needs and when it flourishes. I have no idea why a certain tank will use more elements than another.

An ICP test once a month is nothing compared to lost corals $ wise. It's not even a viable argument. We waste money on a ton of stuff in this hobby trying to fix issues that we are just guessing at. Moonshiners gets to the point of what you need and what you don't need. I agree that over dosing a certain element will bring catastrophic results. Potassium for one. The right elements ones tank needs is for more than corals alone. Bacteria need the same elements to do their job also. Bash it all you want, praise it all you want...... It just plain works for me and that's all that matters. I was living with RTN on a regular basis before Moonshiners. I have had two finicky tenuis that I believe we're wild specimens RTN in the time I've been using it. And it took many months for that to happen. Money well spent in my book.

We all know the analogy about opinions. What most people have lost in these times is the inability to not talk about something they haven't tried or have an ounce of experience in.
I've never read one opinion from someone that has tried it and it did bad things for them.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley Verified Community Expert]

Once your familiar with your tanks consumption, monthly ICP can be extended to every six weeks or so. These are guidelines and you can certainly alter them to your needs

Since you have presumably been through the process, can you elaborate on what you found for a depletion rate for iron and manganese? What levels are you targetting and how stable are they between doses?

 

[Utubereefer]

I can’t believe you would talk to the master like that