Bolus dosing

[BeanAnimal]

How can we scientifically demonstrate that the Bolus method works?

Works for exactly what, as differentiated from what is the question nobody appears to want to nail down,

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

No it’s not. You’ve misinterpreted what they’ve said again.

They didnt say that pure bicarb has the same effects as halogen loaded bicarb.

OK, lets all cool off a bit.

Regardless of what that means for who said what, FM clearly states that:

"The basic principle is that we want a blast of light at the very beginning of the photoperiod, this is possible due to the extra halogens that are dosed with the Bolus dose, these act to protect the coral from the extra light."

Thus, the "bolus method" being described by FM IS NOT simple bicarbonate bolus dosing, but also bolus dosing of other things.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

That’s already all over the internet….. you just need to open your eyes and do your own research, which you don’t want to do, so unfortunately, I doubt you’ll ever keep up…….

Is it? It has not EVER been described in this thread.

1. Bolus dosing is better than what?

2. What exactly is better?

I keep asking. I asked you. No answer other than not bolus dosing.

Your only answer was it worked becuase corals didn't die. No description of what is better than what.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

FM never addresses #1, but the claims are:

• pH improvement and coral growth rate
• availability of halogens for improved coral health
• maximize photosynthesis during the early stages of the photoperiod
• improve overall system stability
• eliminate/reduce detrimental precipitation and accumulation (the depot effect) that leads to long-term problems such as ‘old tank syndrome
• make your tank more reliable and predictable

Higher pH and alk will accomplish #1, however you do it.

Improved coral health is nearly meaningless unless some sort of measure is used to quantify it.

More light early on will help boost photosynthesis, independent of bolus dosing.

Stability? Of what? Compared to what?

The precipitation comment seems to carry opinions without any evidence about old tank syndrome, but it is certainly true that using low pH additives (bicarbonate) and keeping pH low will reduce precipitation.

Make the tank more reliable and predictable? What does that even mean? Reliable at doing what? Compared to what?

 

[Lasse]

The mixing time in my system is around 10 minutes. 300 L DT. Return pump around 1800 L/H. Internal wavemakers - around 40 000L/H. PH meter in the sump measuring water from the DT. KH director intake in the DT. The graph show how fast a pH rise (from the dosed alk (Na₂CO₃)

Can you clarify where you are seeing evidence of a delay in alk meaurement of a dose that is more than either mixing times or fluid in the lines running to the machine time? (I do not know those times for your system) It's a little tricky interpreting the areas you have circled in blue where alk consumption is happening simultaneous to dosing (i.e., it takes a decent amount of dosing just to stop the alk decline), and where alk measurement may not take place frequently enough to see the exact shape of the curves.

Maybe this show what I mean better. Nominal value 7.8

I've always wanted someone to do a reverse experiment where pH is higher at night, and see where most alk demand takes place, but so far I've not see one.

I have thought of two things in the past - keep the pH stable around 8.15 with help of a pH managed CO2 injection system and the one you suggest. But my problem is that I have a high bio load system with a lot of organic and hence a lot of bacteria producing CO2 during night. I do not want to dose kalk but I have thought of NaOH. I can make a system there I dose NaOH up to a given pH during night. However - I would also affect alk this way. My system is build on an automatic rise or decrease of the alk dose from Core7 3a+b (I suspect it is Na2CO3) I have a reversed refugium but its not large enough to consume all CO2 produced.

Any ideas how to rise night pH?

I could test with dosing all Core7 2a+b during night too (and nothing during daytime) but the result would be a higher alk in the morning and the alk would vary around 1-2 dKH a day

Sincerely Lasse

 

[Lasse]

Should also mention that I since February have use a daily tempswing - mimicking real watertemperatures (-2 degree C) in Sulawesi-

Highest daily temp at 16:00 - lowest at 04:00

Sincerely Lasse

 

[Koty]

I think you’re insulting the intelligence of some world class aquarists with this basic nonsense.


They are far ahead of this already if you care to open your horizons a little.

Sorry to say, the lack of insight here is becoming farcical.

Before me move in, show us your tank photos please, so we know you’re credible.

None of you have yet come forwards
With this which tells its own story……

Here is my tank:

Sorry for insulting your inteligence. You just seem to use the word “science” w/o actually understanding what it means. That happene occasionally with MDs move on???

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

I would remind everyone that the science of alkalinity determination is more complicated than is generally recognized by most hobbyists. These complexities are not important for any sort of routine husbandry.

For example, if the alk is really 7.2 dKH or 7.4 dKH, is there any action a reefer would take differently?

However, if one is trying to measure very small changes in alkalinity in an environment where pH and CO2 are changing quite a bit, then one may need to take these into account.

The pH of the endpoint of an alk titration is defined as exactly that pH where the acid added would have converted all of the bicarbonate and carbonate to CO2. That does not mean there is not any bicarbonate present, but that there is an equal amount of H+ present to balance it.

The upshot of that definition is that the actual pH of the endpoint varies with total alkalinity and the CO2 level in the water.

Thus, simple alk titrations are not really so simple, and issues relating to the CO2 level in the water and how much, if any, of the CO2 generated during the titration is allowed to leave during the test will have an effect.

Again, this effect is not important for normal use, but if you make a small alk supplementation (say, 0.1 dKH) during a time when CO2 is changing a lot due to aeration and photosynthesis (a rise of 0.3 pH units is about a halving of the CO2 level),, one may find it difficult to accurately measure that small addition (which is perhaps only 1 or 2 % of the total alk being measured.),

In our current context, one may find it appears as if alk is changing when it is not, and may appear to be stable when it is not, if pH is changing considerably during the time period of interest.

There are ways of dealing with these issues, such as determining the pH titration inflection point for each titration rather than use a fixed pH, but I am not aware of any devices we use that do that. (Jim Welsh did it in an earlier thread where we discussed what the best endpoint would be in seawater).

I’ve discussed these issues in some of my articles, but for folks who want a different source, this paper discusses some of these complexities:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0044848616301430

 

[BeanAnimal]

That’s already all over the internet….. you just need to open your eyes and do your own research, which you don’t want to do, so unfortunately, I doubt you’ll ever keep up…….

Hi - you continue to answer posts directly quoting and responding to other people, and worse deflect in the process.

I will kindly repeat the question you and others keep saying "bolus dosing work". Works for exactly what? There are numerous claims made in the videos.

I think you’re insulting the intelligence of some world class aquarists with this basic nonsense.


They are far ahead of this already if you care to open your horizons a little.

Sorry to say, the lack of insight here is becoming farcical.

Does being "world class" evaluate one's claims, especially those that appear to contradict known science, and or seam fantastical, beyond scrutiny? There is something farcical here, but it is not the people looking to verify claims that appear to be (at best) creative marketing that stretches the truth.

 

[A_Blind_Reefer]

42 pages in and feel like listening to some Abbot and Costello

 

[rtparty]

42 pages in and feel like listening to some Abbot and Costello

About and Costello are more entertaining

 

[Reefering1]

About and Costello are more entertaining

Who's more entertaining than what?

 

[BeanAnimal]

Who's more entertaining than what?

I don’t know and I don’t give a darn.

 

[Reefering1]

I don’t know and I don’t give a darn.

Sometimes I struggle to recognize when you're joking around or being serious... Is this a pay on words related to the video we were joking around or not?

 

[BeanAnimal]

You asked who’s more entertaining than what. I told you, I don’t know and I don’t give a darn. Nobody cares about why, but that is not entertaining.

 

[Reefering1]

You asked who’s more entertaining than what. I told you, I don’t know and I do t give a darn.

Seems out of left field for you Bean. For somebody who doesn't give a darn, you sure seem to care enough to provide your unsolicited, irrelevant response(twice). I'm a fan of your vast expertise, but lately you seem to provide that less and less. Instead we get asinine comments that serve no other purpose than widening the gap between you and others. Don't forget, this is the internet, people are allowed to talk to each other and you don't have to be between every word. Please excuse me if I'm taking this wrong. Much respect

 

[SDchris]

@ Randy.
Bear with me as the post is a little long, but somewhat related.

This is a tank from 13 years ago. The tank was designed to help solve some question at the time.
All the corals were chosen for vary degrees of difficulty in keeping colour and growth. The only aim was to grow them for 10-12 months and then either frag, move them to another spot in the tank or replace them.

Everything that was added to the tank was of known origin. i.e. baking soda, damprid, epsom salts, borax, lugols, seachem strontium, potassium chloride, sugar, vodka, diy seafood mix, fish oil, multi vitamins and a horse amino acid / vitamin supplement, that strangely had the exact same ingredients list a aquarium based amino supp.

There is nothing else but a round tub for a sump with a skimmer, heater and UV. NO gac, gfo, refuge...Nothing. 20% NSW water changes once a week, 100% when I needed to reset after dosing some of the above, approx every 6 months

When I built the LED's there was some stray current in the circuit board that caused the LEDs to remain dimly lit when turned to 0%. So for a year I just switched them on/off manually at the power point.
Being a BB proponent, and having followed the musings of Jerel on RC, the photo period was 2 hours of max and the rest as medium light, similar to his. For reference, peak PAR of the centre blue stag was > 700.
For various reasons the peak par period was at the start of the light cycle. The cycle time varied between 9-14hours depending on when i got around to switching them on/off.

The fish were fed and bi-carb dose when the lights were switched on in the morning. Bi-carb was dosed every morning by simply throwing a couple spoons of powder directly into the weir. Calcium was dosed a couple times a week in the evening, same thing a spoon or two of damprid directly into the weir.
Alkalinity was checked twice a week in the afternoons. pH was read but only sporadically.
It was running like this for about 8 months before some lighting and other changes were made.
Alkalinity measurements always followed what would be expected.

 

[Mo.]

OK, lets all cool off a bit.

Regardless of what that means for who said what, FM clearly states that:

"The basic principle is that we want a blast of light at the very beginning of the photoperiod, this is possible due to the extra halogens that are dosed with the Bolus dose, these act to protect the coral from the extra light."

Thus, the "bolus method" being described by FM IS NOT simple bicarbonate bolus dosing, but also bolus dosing of other things.

Yes, correct.

But that’s because they add balling trace 3, which is fundamental to the balling light method.

But you knew that right? Because it’s the FM method that they have been talking about from the start.

I suspect, thats the reason they said they don’t recommend other brands? I guess.

 

[Mo.]

Ah now I get it, you get your chemistry knowledge based on pretty photos.

No.

But since you’re getting personal.

I get it with the skills I attained from my medical degree, followed by my PhD, followed by my post doctoral diploma and my higher surgical degree.



It all helps.

So do pretty photos.

 

[Mo.]

No.

But since you’re getting personal.

I get it with the skills I attained from my medical degree, followed by my PhD, followed by my post doctoral diploma and my higher surgical degree.



It all helps. It allows me to understand this thread and your approach for example.

And gives me the thick skin and experience to persevere here.

So do pretty photos.