Bolus dosing

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

That was my first thought too.
But ultimately this train of thought makes his supply ideal.
Hydroxide/Carbonate dosing = higher pH BUT preciptitates that dont dissolve + broken buffer system, which leads in many cases to old tank syndrome.
Bolus with his bicarbonate = higher pH + dissolution of precipitates + repair of the buffer system.
Sounds great!

The crux of the matter is that something is being declared a problem, which in most cases it is not. Of course there are precipitations. Everyone can see that when you clean the pump, for example.
He also says that there are people who have great tanks with every system, even in the long term. They have the "blue thumb", but they are in the absolute minority.
There is always an answer that suits you.

At least I now understand how he derives his theses. You can believe it or not, but in any case the story about the missing bicarbonate is complete nonsense. It is simply not included in the stated quantity.
It is quite bizarre. In a youtube video, where 99% of the followers have no idea about chemistry, technical terms and explanations are thrown around. But in other social media, where there are people who have enough knowledge to understand the thoughts and theories, nobody from FM appears and discusses.

Yes, I agree.

FYI, you have a PM from Daniel/admin that you should respond to.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Since this quote was just posted in this forum minutes ago in another thread, it stands as a perfect example where even if there are issues with precipitation when driving pH up high with hydroxide (not saying that is true, just accepting it for the moment), it by no means always happens, and serves up the question for FM:

Is hydroxide perfectly suitable to dose in this scenario where those precipitates will supposedly redissolve because his pH is much lower than the tank posted above purporting to show the effects of bolus bicarbonate dosing?

Low pH with Kalk and CO2 scrubber

Having issues getting my pH up (7.38 at night, 7.75 during the day). Corals look good, but not really growing. Dose Kalk (in sealed ATO) and have a CO2 scrubber installed as well. Good surface water exchange, could be better though. 90 gallon tank Any thoughts or suggestions?

www.reef2reef.com

Kalk has been working for me. I am now at 7.9 (low) and hitting 8.13 at peak and I'm just trying to raise it slowly. Alk went high at one point (around 9.7) and I did a 10% water change and resumed kalk dripping. Corals look puffy now and happy at higher pH.

 

[danimal1211]

There was a claim in the video that the halogens in balling light are necessary to protect the corals from such an abrupt increase in light intensity. For newcomers who may not understand how aquarists for years prior to dimmable features abruptly turned on their full intensity lighting every day without burning their corals.
The other point I think may be important is once again dosing elements arbitrarily without knowing levels of such elements that can become toxic if overdosed. As well as tying there dosage to calcium and alkalinity usage.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

There was a claim in the video that the halogens in balling light are necessary to protect the corals from such an abrupt increase in light intensity. For newcomers who may not understand how aquarists for years prior to dimmable features abruptly turned on their full intensity lighting every day without burning their corals.
The other point I think may be important is once again dosing elements arbitrarily without knowing levels of such elements that can become toxic if overdosed. As well as tying there dosage to calcium and alkalinity usage.

It’s a good and complex question, and I do not know if this has any reality behind it.

I am not aware of any reason to think the light ramp up speed has any bearing on the potential for light induced oxidation at the highest light levels. It’s like saying one would be burned more from holding a pot as it heated to 500 deg F fast as opposed to slow to the same temp. The time at peak temp seems the most damaging.

Here are the halogens present and my comments behind them.

1. Fluoride cannot provide any useful antioxidant effects since it is much too hard to oxidize it.

2. Chloride is neither depleted nor dosed and is not a consideration in this context.

3. Nearly every reef tank has adequately high, natural levels of bromide, which theoretically may provide some antioxidant benefits, although high oxidation states of bromide are also generally toxic. Dosing a significant amount of it daily would not seem useful or necessary in most tanks since the daily boost would be quite small.

4. That leaves iodide, which can readily be oxidized to iodate without being toxic, in part due to the very low levels naturally present. A number of folks do claim this is an advantage of iodide, but I am not aware of any data supporting such assertions. In any case, maintaining natural levels regardless of exactly when you dose it is certainly not going to hurt anything.

 

[Garf]

I cannot understand this,

Join the club. So precipitates caused by bicarb are re-dissolved during the periods of high pH (reclaiming the lost Alk) whereas precipitates caused by high pH additives are not? In tank water of similar pH, or even lower pH? I must be missing something as it's not logical to me. This theory would imply that everyone dosing kalk, hydroxide would be losing Alk at a tremendous rate (at least half). This simply does not happen.

 

[GARRIGA]

Something which hasn’t flown over my head. Absent carbon dosing or plants adding base back base there’s got to be a reduction in alkalinity due to nitrification which in each tank would be different. Without accounting for that then can’t see how one gets accurate measurements. Water changes throw out alkalinity with the bath water.

My two cents which in these discussion likely heavily discounted but I try my best to grasp the conversation hoping to glean something useful. Such as new appreciation for how I might best apply formate.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Something which hasn’t flown over my head. Absent carbon dosing or plants adding base back base there’s got to be a reduction in alkalinity due to nitrification which in each tank would be different. Without accounting for that then can’t see how one gets accurate measurements. Water changes throw out alkalinity with the bath water.

My two cents which in these discussion likely heavily discounted but I try my best to grasp the conversation hoping to glean something useful. Such as new appreciation for how I might best apply formate.

I agree that interpreting small changes in alkalinity are fraught with complexity since a number of processes can add or remove alk in addition to dosing or calcification.

These values are usually small, but if the alk changes being measured are small (like the 0.4 dKH mentioned above, they may not be insignificant.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

One fact relating to pH that some folks mention, but usually gets swept under the rug, is that when one considers the tank over the course of a full day, the ONLY alkalinity additive that boosts pH is hydroxide.

The reason is that calcification to form calcium carbonate consumes carbonate.

If you add carbonate and consume carbonate the net effect on pH must be zero. It boosts pH when added and reduces pH when consumed.

If you add bicarbonate and consume carbonate the net effect on pH must be production of H +, reducing pH.

HCO3- —> CO3- - + H+

If you add hydroxide and consume carbonate the net effect on pH must be consumption of CO2/carbonic acid, raising pH.

2OH- + H2CO3 —> CO3- - + 2H2O

 

[Court_Appointed_Hypeman]

One fact relating to pH that some folks mention, but usually gets swept under the rug, is that when one considers the tank over the course of a full day, the ONLY alkalinity additive that boosts pH is hydroxide.

The reason is that calcification to form calcium carbonate consumes carbonate.

If you add carbonate and consume carbonate the net effect on pH must be zero. It boosts pH when added and reduces pH when consumed.

If you add bicarbonate and consume carbonate the net effect on pH must be production of H +, reducing pH.

HCO3- —> CO3- - + H+

If you add hydroxide and consume carbonate the net effect on pH must be consumption of CO2/carbonic acid, raising pH.

2OH- + H2CO3 —> CO3- - + 2H2O

Then I am going to consider a safe way to dose sodium hydroxide on a doser. My PH gets so low when we shut our house up it's absurd.

 

[Garf]

I like to take a positive out of a thread. So far I've increased my lighting period as I detected no photo inhibition, and bought a doser for a song and am dosing kalk at night and bicarb in the day, relative to consumption. Thanks Claude and Doug

 

[Orito]

Took me a lot of days to go through the 54 pages of this topic and just as I've been suspecting Claude wants to be thought as the Jesus of reefkeeping, everything is misterous and only he can provide the answer. He can solve Dinos just by adjusting traces, but he also sells Dino-x, wich also nobody knows what it is...
Then when people start to study his new miracles we discover that his revolutionary coral dip uses the exact protocol the perioxide dip, but his product costs 20x more.
Now the bolus acts in misterious ways that only the initiateds will accept.
If you build it, they will come!

 

[carbl]

Then when people start to study his new miracles we discover that his revolutionary coral dip uses the exact protocol the perioxide dip, but his product costs 20x more.

To be fair, this applies to all manufacturers. I recently made myself a silicate solution following instructions from the forum here. It cost me a few cents and contains the same as in Sponge Excel.
It is understandable that the manufacturers keep a low profile here (for economic reasons). And I think it's perfectly okay to advertise that you use good raw materials, test the products beforehand, etc. etc.
But when you start talking nonsense, deliberately unsettling people, leading them on the wrong track, that's when it stops for me.

 

[SaltyArms]

So… I’ve skimmed most of the thread here. What got my attention here were the original claims around pH. That’s my biggest battle in my particular tank. I’m running a large skimmer, outside airline, AND a CO2 scrubber and at night I still drop into the 8.1-8.15 territory, and during the day will rocket up to 8.45 where I have my skimmer set to cut off. (Interestingly I don’t seem to have as big a problem with a frag tank and a smaller nano.)

I started dosing Kalk at night instead of two part, to get the pH benefit. I originally dosed it the way Chris Meckley describes (dose saturated Kalk until pH is above 8.29) and that works well, until we leave the house. Then dosing amounts drop dramatically because pH remains high. I’m also not thrilled with keeping a 20gal vat next to the tank. I’ve also found it much less stable than consistently dosing 2 part on a regular schedule.

The scrubber works ok, again until we leave the house for the weekend and pH goes through the roof. Then I have to contend with the diminishing returns as media exhausts.

So the claims that going with this bolus method helps stabilize pH while also being able to get rid of Kalk and the scrubber, seemed awesome.

I’m gathering that everyone had pretty well believes that to be a fairy tale? Has anyone actually conformed this doesn’t work or are we still mostly arguing about semantics on how this has been described and what FM chose to say in their videos?

 

[GARRIGA]

This thread is like a car crash… you want to just keep driving but still you must look…

 

[Pod_01]

Has anyone actually conformed this doesn’t work or are we still mostly arguing about semantics on how this has been described and what FM chose to say in their videos?

So I tried it and pH behaviour didn’t change, if I open windows use scrubber or no one is home pH is in upper range.
Close windows, disconnect scrubber and fill the house with CO2 pH crashes.

One of the documents stated Bolus works well when tank is ventilated.

Nothing new from my observation.

Hope that helps.

 

[Garf]

pretty well believes that to be a fairy tale?

In my view, there certainly appears to be no evidence of any pH benefit that cannot be attributed to increasing the amount of light during the photoperiod.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

I’m gathering that everyone had pretty well believes that to be a fairy tale? Has anyone actually conformed this doesn’t work or are we still mostly arguing about semantics on how this has been described and what FM chose to say in their videos?

I certainly believe that bolus dosing of bicarbonate will add nothing in terms of attaining high pH compared to any other method of attaining the same alk by the start of the day. My confidence in this is very high. It’s not at all speculation as all of the processes impacting alk and pH are perfectly well understood.

 

[DCR]

I think the question remains if there is any empirical evidence that the corals benefit from a one-shot bolus does of bicarbonate in just before the lights come on versus dosing over a longer period. I think FM's explanations of why they believe it is better have been debunked here, but Claude initially claimed that he discovered there was a benefit to the corals by simple trials of bolus. I think the mechanisms of how corals use CO2/HCO3/CO3 are not so well understood that there might possibly be a benefit even if we do not currently understand why.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

I think the question remains if there is any empirical evidence that the corals benefit from a one-shot bolus does of bicarbonate in just before the lights come on versus dosing over a longer period. I think FM's explanations of why they believe it is better have been debunked here, but Claude initially claimed that he discovered there was a benefit to the corals by simple trials of bolus. I think the mechanisms of how corals use CO2/HCO3/CO3 are not so well understood that there might possibly be a benefit even if we do not currently understand why.

I agree that one cannot prove or disprove whether a coral likes a sudden boost in alk right before lights come on without testing it, but I’ll just add that it still is not clear what this method is being compared to that it is better than, and whether anything else changed, such as the lights going full bore right away, the halogen dosing, the peptides in the bolus (if any are present), etc.

If someone told me corals do better with lights on full intensity for longer than shorter, it would not surprise me in the least.

 

[Moe K]

Been lurking here and read through all the pages. If there was not a noticeable improvement in coral health after testing for about 2 years as they say, why go on a campaign promoting it if it doesn't show noticeable improvement?

I do think they are going over the top with the explanations and rather than saying they do not yet understand why and need help by the scientific community to better understand they seem to be making up words and throwing out theories as possibly fact. They also claim to have many customers on the Bolus method. Where is the data from more users and why do we have to beg for it?

I am glad I looked into the Bolus method as I learned a few things about alkalinity dosing I never paid attention to before. Looking back my best tanks with the least problems ran on bicarbonate. Anecdotal yes but do not think we should dismiss any aspect of possible new methods because the delivery was questionable.