Thoughts on methods of eliminating water changes ?

[Dizzirn]

Following

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley Verified Community Expert]

Their theory is simple, SPS thrive in NSW, NSW has particular parameters, you maintain those parameters with our method, therefore your SPS will also thrive. But this is just a theory without any hard proof or explanation. What I want to know is why exactly SPS thrive in those parameters and what exactly causes problems when those parameters change.

You need proof the corals thrive under conditions that match the ocean?
They are not claiming (or should not be claiming) that it is the absolute optimal condition, but it is somewhat self evident that they will thrive, isn't it?

 

[SharkLaser]

You need proof the corals thrive under conditions that match the ocean?
They are not claiming (or should not be claiming) that it is the absolute optimal condition, but it is somewhat self evident that they will thrive, isn't it?

I need to know why they thrive and the proof that the parameters listed and only those parameters is what makes them thrive. What they are claiming is that WCs will no longer be necessary. Which implies that their method provides optimal conditions without WCs. Also, given that there is no wide adoption of the method yet, the evidence of its success is indeed questionable. But I'm not here to bash Triton, I'm just pointing out that there is not enough knowledge yet that would let us fully understand how exactly water changes (or lack of) affect SPS growth and why. Triton just happens to advertise no WC's with their method without providing a solid basis for the claim.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley Verified Community Expert]

I need to know why they thrive and the proof that the parameters listed and only those parameters is what makes them thrive.

No one is saying that they "only" thrive under those conditions, and that obviously isn't true anyway. And no one is saying no other parameters are important. Lots obviously are (temperature, lack of millions of different organic toxins, foods, lighting, predators, pathogens, excessive flow, etc.).

But it is reasonable to claim that for things you can measure (assuming you do so accurately and completely; FWIW, I'm not saying whether this is true or not for Triton or anyone else), that matching the ocean or the range present in the ocean where corals thrive, will allow them to thrive.

As to the why, the obvious simple answer is that to take up what they need and excrete what they do not, they have adapted to do so in the conditions encountered in the ocean, and may have a harder time getting what they need if there is much less of something in the water, and might possibly get too much of something if there is too much present.

Why do you thrive in 21% O2 in the air, and not so well in 2%? Do you require a highly sophisticated answer to accept that as a reasonable assertion that 21% is good for people, and that much higher or lower levels are not? Do you know why? Do you need to know exactly why?

 

[tsav87]

Why do you thrive in 21% O2 in the air, and not so well in 2%? Do you require a highly sophisticated answer to accept that as a reasonable assertion that 21% is good for people, and that much higher or lower levels are not? Do you know why? Do you need to know exactly why?

Well dang. lol

 

[SharkLaser]

Why do you thrive in 21% O2 in the air, and not so well in 2%? Do you require a highly sophisticated answer to accept that as a reasonable assertion that 21% is good for people, and that much higher or lower levels are not? Do you know why? Do you need to know exactly why?

I certainly would if I wanted to colonize Mars and had limited variables and resources at my disposal. As long as I can grow SPS in the ocean, I don't think the why part would bother me much indeed.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley Verified Community Expert]

I certainly would if I wanted to colonize Mars and had limited variables and resources at my disposal. .

OK. I'm sure folks colonizing mars will study it.

 

[tsav87]

 

[justingraham]

I need to know why they thrive and the proof that the parameters listed and only those parameters is what makes them thrive. What they are claiming is that WCs will no longer be necessary. Which implies that their method provides optimal conditions without WCs. Also, given that there is no wide adoption of the method yet, the evidence of its success is indeed questionable. But I'm not here to bash Triton, I'm just pointing out that there is not enough knowledge yet that would let us fully understand how exactly water changes (or lack of) affect SPS growth and why. Triton just happens to advertise no WC's with their method without providing a solid basis for the claim.

U do realize triton has been in Europe for quite sometimes and has just came over here to the states. Because as with almost everything in this hobby America is always last. And the triton method really has nothing to do with the triton testing

 

[SharkLaser]

U do realize triton has been in Europe for quite sometimes and has just came over here to the states. Because as with almost everything in this hobby America is always last. And the triton method really has nothing to do with the triton testing

I've known about triton since around 2009, before they switched from HPLC to ICP testing. That's what triton was always known for in Europe, zeovit was the "method" at the time. You would probably find it useful to read up on their method and how it depends on ICP testing.

 

[Scarybo]

I think a better question to ask is what SPS need to thrive and why. If this is the ultimate goal. And the problem is that we don't have the answer to that question yet. We have anecdotal evidence, frequent observations and best guesses. One of those is what I also hear frequently is that our SPS seem to feel/look better every time we do a water change. But we don't fully understand why, they just do.
If we could definitively answer why stable alkalinity is important, why nutrient levels are important, and so on, only then will we definitively say to what extent water changes benefit the SPS. Until then, all we can do is keep guessing based on prior experience and observations.

To that end, Triton seems to have developed a theory that if certain parameters are maintained, then it replicates the parameters of a system with frequent water changes. It happens to also conveniently follow what their ICP is capable of detecting. There is no solid fundamental science behind it. Nothing that explains why parameters are the way they are, other than that's what is typically found in NSW. Their theory is simple, SPS thrive in NSW, NSW has particular parameters, you maintain those parameters with our method, therefore your SPS will also thrive. But this is just a theory without any hard proof or explanation. What I want to know is why exactly SPS thrive in those parameters and what exactly causes problems when those parameters change.

I think I'm missing something in this statement. SPS live and grow in NSW. We are attempting to replicate the natural conditions SPS grow and thrive within our tanks. Triton and all other methods are driven toward that goal. We can get somewhat close to NSW but no tank matches NSW completely and accurately. There are too many variables (trace elements. etc.) that we cant test for and dont understand. When you state "optimal" conditions that is a fallacy in my opinion. NSW and the conditions of the reef are optimal conditions. We cant match the stability , and dilution of a massive ocean. Even large aquariums run by zoo's and with the guidance of experts cannot completely replicate the natural conditions. Hobbyist are not able create a natural environment. Not that we dont have the desire. We just dont have the knowledge.

 

[justingraham]

I've known about triton since around 2009, before they switched from HPLC to ICP testing. That's what triton was always known for in Europe, zeovit was their "method" at the time. You would probably find it useful to read up on their method and how it depends on ICP testing.

Ur right shark laser
I know nothing

And I am running the triton method so nowhere in the actual method does it tell u u need icp testing they recomend it to see what metals are being built up but is not needed.

Because with the icp testing it gives u the natural seawater values and what ur tank is compared to nsw. It then tells u the best way to get ur tank back to nsw. That's the whole idea of triton is that nsw obviously works at growing corals so try to mimic it. And let's think about it we will go off ur remark so u can't dodge it with some other dumb answer. They have been icp testing since 2009 almost ten years of icp test at there fingertips with countless tanks including there own that is unbelievable so maby they have it right. But according to u u need to know why keeping a tank at nsw would be a smart thing to do.

 

[SharkLaser]

We just dont have the knowledge.

And this pretty much sums up the point I'm trying to get across.

 

[Scarybo]

And this pretty much sums up the point I'm trying to get across.

But shouldnt we try to improve. When I started in this hobby everyone used bio balls. We learned that these processed waste too fast and were nitrate factories. The hobby has evolved since then. Our goal has always been to replicate the ocean on a small scale. I have not used Triton and cannot advocate for the system. I do understand the logic behind the system and it appears to make sense. I think everyone is only focusing on the fact that we have been recommending for years to do water changes. But we need to view that in the context of why they were recommended. We had limited knowledge of what was happening in our tanks to the water. It made sense to on a regular basis add new water that had not been affected by the reactions in our tank. Most times it was a good thing. But sometimes it created a new problem. ICP testing allows us to have a view into the condition of our water. Is it perfect..No. Is it better then the hobby kits we use a home...dramatically better. It is my belief that we will continue to improve testing and get closer. Until then I would use a system that gets me closer to that ultimate dream.

 

[Scott.h]

Or potentially no skimmer. If your ATS or fuge is managing nutrients well enough do you need one? I'm not sure I buy into a skimmer being a major source of containments but if that's the case you can build a system that doesn't require one.

Or build a skimmer inlet box where the air passes through carbon. The same as a 3m paint resporator would.

 

[SharkLaser]

But shouldnt we try to improve. When I started in this hobby everyone used bio balls. We learned that these processed waste too fast and were nitrate factories. The hobby has evolved since then. Our goal has always been to replicate the ocean on a small scale. I have not used Triton and cannot advocate for the system. I do understand the logic behind the system and it appears to make sense. I think everyone is only focusing on the fact that we have been recommending for years to do water changes. But we need to view that in the context of why they were recommended. We had limited knowledge of what was happening in our tanks to the water. It made sense to on a regular basis add new water that had not been affected by the reactions in our tank. Most times it was a good thing. But sometimes it created a new problem. ICP testing allows us to have a view into the condition of our water. Is it perfect..No. Is it better then the hobby kits we use a home...dramatically better. It is my belief that we will continue to improve testing and get closer. Until then I would use a system that gets me closer to that ultimate dream.

We absolutely should, and we are improving. We are so far ahead than we were 15 years ago, or 10 for that matter, that it's not even funny. We are going from a theory to a theory, some prove to work better than others. But what's missing is the understanding behind those theories. Bioballs that you've mentioned was a theory, it was looked at like it was a great thing at the time. And it made perfect sense. Then the views changed. Then came ULNS, again sounded great and considered to be a must. They made perfect sense as well. Those views have been slowly changing. What else? LEDs? Great. Nope, we should have some old school T5. Go with zeovit? yes! or maybe aquaforest? sounds even better, they must have done their research and know what they are doing! What about triton? sure, forget those other methods, this is it. And all of this is done with little to no understanding of how it gets us to our goals. Just a theory, which sounds like it makes sense, yet to be crushed later by another commonly adopted theory with similar fundamentals. Yet, we seem to be improving. I can keep SPS I wouldn't even dream of having 10 years ago. At least until the next crash. But I can only imagine how much more successful we could be if methods we use were based on knowledge and not on hype.

 

[SharkLaser]

Ur right shark laser
I know nothing

And I am running the triton method so nowhere in the actual method does it tell u u need icp testing they recomend it to see what metals are being built up but is not needed.

Because with the icp testing it gives u the natural seawater values and what ur tank is compared to nsw. It then tells u the best way to get ur tank back to nsw. That's the whole idea of triton is that nsw obviously works at growing corals so try to mimic it. And let's think about it we will go off ur remark so u can't dodge it with some other dumb answer. They have been icp testing since 2009 almost ten years of icp test at there fingertips with countless tanks including there own that is unbelievable so maby they have it right. But according to u u need to know why keeping a tank at nsw would be a smart thing to do.

I see your post got trimmed quite a bit. That's good

 

[Scarybo]

We absolutely should, and we are improving. We are so far ahead than we were 15 years ago, or 10 for that matter, that it's not even funny. We are going from a theory to a theory, some prove to work better than others. But what's missing is the understanding behind those theories. Bioballs that you've mentioned was a theory, it was looked at like it was a great thing at the time. And it made perfect sense. Then the views changed. Then came ULNS, again sounded great and considered to be a must. They made perfect sense as well. Those views have been slowly changing. What else? LEDs? Great. Nope, we should have some old school T5. Go with zeovit? yes! or maybe aquaforest? sounds even better, they must have done their research and know what they are doing! What about triton? sure, forget those other methods, this is it. And all of this is done with little to no understanding of how it gets us to our goals. Just a theory, which sounds like it makes sense, yet to be crushed later by another commonly adopted theory with similar fundamentals. Yet, we seem to be improving. I can keep SPS I wouldn't even dream of having 10 years ago. At least until the next crash. But I can only imagine how much more successful we could be if methods we use were based on knowledge and not on hype.

You have heaped a lot of things in the same boat and they arent the same. Bio balls werent a theory. They did what they were designed to do . They just did it too well. Equipment (skimmers and other nutrient reduction equipment) has improved since then and most people dont use them. ULNS has issues because it requires stability and feeding corals. People push the system too fast and shocks the corals. The theory is to try and get close to NSW. Even UNLS is high nutrients compared to NSW. LED-T5 is equipment evolution not unproven theory. People have issues with Zeovit because the science/ingredients arent known. However, Zeovit has been proven to work and work very well. Most problems with any of these systems has been the hobbyist. We tinker. Nature hates tinkering. Do you realize how stable the conditions in the ocean are on a daily basis. We stick our hands in the tank. Change equipment. Change systems because we arent happy with growth. Zeovit, UNLS, Triton, Aquaforest are all based on knowledge and a goal to replicate NSW. I dont see the hype. Because tanks crash or fail is usually not because of a flawed system. It is usually our impatience to allow the system to mature and do what it is designed to do. Number one rule of this hobby. Nothing good happens fast.

 

[MartinWaite]

Ur right shark laser
I know nothing

And I am running the triton method so nowhere in the actual method does it tell u u need icp testing they recomend it to see what metals are being built up but is not needed.

Because with the icp testing it gives u the natural seawater values and what ur tank is compared to nsw. It then tells u the best way to get ur tank back to nsw. That's the whole idea of triton is that nsw obviously works at growing corals so try to mimic it. And let's think about it we will go off ur remark so u can't dodge it with some other dumb answer. They have been icp testing since 2009 almost ten years of icp test at there fingertips with countless tanks including there own that is unbelievable so maby they have it right. But according to u u need to know why keeping a tank at nsw would be a smart thing to do.

With the Triton system you need the ICP testing and yes it relies on the ICP testing as it's from the results from the ICP testing that tells you what elements are depleting so you can top them up rather than doing water changes to top them up. You'd have a hard time getting a basic test kit for some of the elements your LFS will not stock them so we're will you get the knowledge of what to dose and how much to dose from if the ICP isn't needed.

 

[Scarybo]

With the Triton system you need the ICP testing and yes it relies on the ICP testing as it's from the results from the ICP testing that tells you what elements are depleting so you can top them up rather than doing water changes to top them up. You'd have a hard time getting a basic test kit for some of the elements your LFS will not stock them so we're will you get the knowledge of what to dose and how much to dose from if the ICP isn't needed.

My understanding ICP testing is encouraged. But how often is enough and how much testing is excessive? I think people add too many additives to their tanks. It makes us feel like we are doing something. Triton recommends letting the refugium die back periodically. This also adds elements and food to the tank.