I have plenty of reagent to play with, but I think it would be a moot point for me to do it. But I may just for my own curiosity. Thanks!
API tests really are not reliable. Nothing wrong with trying to inform others that there are better alternatives.
Actually not any detailed study. We did do some work on the Nitrate test to demonstrate the difference in the "shaking" in the results as well as temperature differences in the Iodine test development. I think @taricha did some on the development of the Potassium test. My focus in testing protocol has been how to I do the test so as to reduce the variability....Time, temp reagent measurement, mixing etc. not so much of failure mode analysis but it might be an interesting project.
When you say "not reliable" what specifically are you referring to? ..precision, accuracy...is it from one kit to the next...would be helpful to the nature of the variability
Ammonia test didn't read correctly when I was dosing ammonia to cycle tank. Nitrate test works okay but I prefer the Hanna number rather than broad range. Phosphorus test read consistently too high. Copper test super painful to administer especially if you need to test copper levels every day during fish quarantine. Much better alternatives for every single test I was doing so I switched away the first chance I got.
Not reliable based on what? The internet? That's my point. Internet regurgitates that said without performing confirmations. That's not informing. That's proliferating an opinion.
I've create a sample source of ammonia and validated that against the API test strip. Was spot on. The other test strips, not at all. Haven't done so with the other test strips because I don't need precision and yet to see an aspect of our hobby where precision is required since so many run tanks at different values and only the internet requires it. Gladly I don't listen to the internet
Didn't work for me unfortunately.
That doesn't then confirm it doesn't work. Too many variables involved and how long you shake it or how vigorous affects the results. Especially with API phosphates and nitrates. Same can occur with Hanna if those packets aren't added correctly or the timer not adhered to. Good thing NASA level tolerances aren't required for most we keep. I'm just going to avoid that which might.
As I said, the various API tests did not work for me for the reasons outlined. I have used various tests from Salifert, RedSea, Hanna without any issues whatsoever, other than Hanna salinity probe which I didn't find too reliable despite limited steps. I therefore do not recommend API to anyone unless it is the only one available. Other more reliable and/or easier to use alternatives out there. I am not the only person to have this kind of experience with API---see the many warnings against it.
This is part of what keeps the hobby entertaining. The opportunity for constant tinkering and experimentation. The unsolvable puzzle!
I view the hobby grade test kits like children’s science experiments kits. They are good enough to get a general idea, but maybe not good enough for professional applications. But sometimes a general idea is all that is needed in reefing.
Easy to read and less chance of error would be my guess why… I only use Hannah for alk, p04 and n03 the rest I don’t test but if I decide to I have salifert kits in my cabinet.
