Understanding Vibrant: Algaefix, Polixetonium Chloride / Busan 77

Garf

5000 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Oct 23, 2020
Messages
5,751
Reaction score
6,706
Location
BEEFINGHAM
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I’m not sure what you pointed me to. I have seen both threads but have not seen this question answered despite multiple references in the data to “Vibrant Freshwater”
Post #32 could have nailed it;

 

jafoca11

Active Member
View Badges
Joined
Dec 2, 2020
Messages
116
Reaction score
140
Location
Grand Rapids
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I’m essentially on the same timeline as you, 1 week behind. GHA appears weaker but still all over the tank. Maybe the decline is beginning. Is your GHA gone? Maybe the cyano will just take time. I’m unsure if I will continue dosing Vibrant, but will be stepping up carbon and water changes if I decide I want it out of the tank. Too late now though and some people think carbon might not work (I don’t know anything about this stuff though).
My GHA has weakened and growth definitely slowed, but it is not gone. I just dosed another dose yesterday (per directions) after doing my weekly water change. I am thinking that might be my last dose even though the GHA is still not gone. I might consider doing a 3-4 day blackout to finally knock out the GHA? That was some other advice from one of my LFS...
 

GoVols

Cobb / Webb - 1989
View Badges
Joined
Nov 29, 2016
Messages
13,078
Reaction score
37,567
Location
In-The-Boro, TN
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
How they perceive this space is what I was referring to. And, I can see how that could be their perception seeing that this very thread is not sticking to "Science" but is littered with discussions of litigation, class action suits, EPA reporting, etc. Look at it from an outside perspective. I get how you want it to be, but to be fair, science is not the sole discussion here and it has not been moderated that way.

I will challenge them. I am not one known to roll over. In fact, you are more than welcome to come on the program and challenge them directly - simultaneously, or subsequent to their appearance. Just let me know. The normal livestream time is 5PM PST on Sundays, but we can adjust if necessary for your schedule. I would have reached out to you directly, but your account here does not seem to allow private messages - at least not from my account.

All they need to do is post on Randy's form with the facts.

Are you trying to build up more clicks by using your video channel?
 

ReefBeta

Valuable Member
View Badges
Joined
May 26, 2016
Messages
1,318
Reaction score
1,433
Location
Seattle, US
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
How they perceive this space is what I was referring to. And, I can see how that could be their perception seeing that this very thread is not sticking to "Science" but is littered with discussions of litigation, class action suits, EPA reporting, etc. Look at it from an outside perspective. I get how you want it to be, but to be fair, science is not the sole discussion here and it has not been moderated that way.

I will challenge them. I am not one known to roll over. In fact, you are more than welcome to come on the program and challenge them directly - simultaneously, or subsequent to their appearance. Just let me know. The normal livestream time is 5PM PST on Sundays, but we can adjust if necessary for your schedule. I would have reached out to you directly, but your account here does not seem to allow private messages - at least not from my account.

I expect them to insist that vibrant is a bacteria product. If so, ask them how they do quality assurance. How do they validate that each batch has the right combination of bacteria they intended, and how to validate that they're viable? Ask them for the QA data, which should be available regularly.
 

rtparty

5000 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Jan 19, 2010
Messages
5,388
Reaction score
9,137
Location
Utah
Rating - 100%
4   0   0
Unfortunately suing companies is expensive so unless a person has lost crazy amounts of coral it wouldn’t be worth it. The manufacturer and retailers should be sued though. I’ve personally seen how little BRS stands behind the products they sell and recommend and stopped buying from them.

Lol

Sue the retailers for what? For selling a product that they were duped on as well?

Have fun going after Amazon. I'm sure it will end well ;Hilarious
 

bichosbass

New Member
View Badges
Joined
Jan 10, 2018
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
It works at killing algae, that's what algaecide do.

Some corals are tougher than the other.

If you have difficult time keeping acropora or chalice alive in the future, this might be your reason. The algaecide is not easily bio-degradable. So it can stay in your tank for a long time, like years.
Ooohhhh, had not thought of that. I think nothing has happened because I do my water changes every week.
 

Terence

Valuable Member
View Badges
Joined
Mar 14, 2010
Messages
1,838
Reaction score
3,482
Location
Gilroy, CA
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
All they need to do is post on Randy's form with the facts.

Are you trying to build up more clicks by using your video channel?

My initial thought as well...

Guys, I simply offered a place where the manufacturer may feel is more neutral and people (the OP and/or some of the science guys) could face off and answer questions as another option. Also, this would be helpful to many who do not desire to dig through 30+ pages of back and forth and noise to get to the important stuff. Not everyone in the hobby prefers this long format. The channel is not even monetized at this point. I doubt either the OP or UWC or any other person of scientific authority will even do this - sadly. Even if it was not on ReefingReport.com, and was on another channel, such a livestream would be nothing but good for the hobby - even if that channel made money off of it - like R2R does.
 

LRT

10K Club member
View Badges
Joined
Feb 20, 2020
Messages
10,196
Reaction score
42,161
Location
mesa arizona
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
@taricha - I believe you are correct. I hope some of the suggestions I made led you to do these other experiments. I sincerely appreciate your efforts and also that you listened. As far as vibrant - I've said - it was an extreme success in my tank (freshwater) - and an extreme mess in my reef tank. I do not think - without more info from the company that I would use it again in my reef tank. I also wouldn't use algaefix. I guess it comes down to - in the end - if it sounds too good to be true - it probably is. I would hope that lots of products we use would be tested - side by side with controls. And posted in the 'experiment' section. I still have 2 tanks with live rock waiting for a nitrifying test after not dosing anything for 2 months. And - also we await your final results

I'm a little confused where your actually at as your comments from thread to thread seem to be a little flippy floppy on the back and forth, at best.

First and foremost are you literally attempting to claim success for @taricha findings by implying he "listened" to and heeded your suggestions which lead to the findings in these experiments?

If so why does it appear that your refusing to acknowledge said findings?
Franks are you going to hold two little fishies - to the same standards - etc etc (not picking on them - pick any aquarium suppliment) - if so all good - there shoudl be multiple threads. This to me - is a pile on- WITHOUT AN ADEQUATE RESPONSE FROM THE COMANY - which will hopefully happen

Do you support BRS, lfs and other retailers as victims in all this like you claim to?

Disagree. BRS seems to pride themselves in researching the products they sell. Home Depot does not produce videos about the plusses and minuses of products (AFAIK). BRS does. BTW - I'm a huge BRS supporter.

I believe what BRS 'asked for' was an independent lab test - by an accredited lab, and signed off by the engineer. i.e. an independent lab.

Or do you support what appears to be a real travesty in the reefing industry?

Tempest in a teapot. Everyone can debate the legal, moral, etc things. -but - perhaps some have a long-standing thing - idk. If you dont want to buy vibrant - dont buy it lol. Read the evidence - decide - and buy or not buy.

OR is that actually my (the consumers) fault?, a misunderstanding?, mislabeling?, a great product?, an axe folks have to grind?

This was probably a rhetorical question - but - perhaps just 'don't buy the product'? Report it to whatever authority you want? What exactly is the goal?

The product - according to multiple people works. Worst case (that I have read) - is that there is a similar ingredient in another product that also works - but its alleged that this product is not labeled correctly? Ok - all good. Report it.

Is there a huge downside for the reefing hobby here?? I don't see it. Is this going to cause a sea-change in product labelling overall? Do some people who have apparently (I wasn't aware) have had axes to grind about this topic for several months (not talking about the researcher's) just have to keep nailing it home? IDK. I'm was just saying - beyond the warning - the rest of this seems patently ridiculous.

Or is all this just all ludicrous and patently ridiculous?
BTW- I tried to support all QWATS, flippiants and floppers in this post.
 
Last edited:

kilnakorr

Well-Known Member
View Badges
Joined
Nov 4, 2020
Messages
951
Reaction score
590
Location
Denmark
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I admit I didn't read all 27 pages of this thread, but from the first couple of pages, it seems algaefix and vibrant are almost the same thing.
If so, I wonder why the algaefix with 1ml/10gl every three days had no impact on the few patches of bubble algae I have, but vibrant already seems to work after just two doses, at 1/4 and 1/2 of recommended dose.
 

jda

10K Club member
View Badges
Joined
Jun 25, 2013
Messages
14,343
Reaction score
22,422
Location
Boulder, CO
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
It is already bound to something that was negatively charged. If that thing was able to be skimmed, then it likely already happened. If it was secured, then so is the quat attached to it. It seems that they do break down eventually, but the time is really unknown, but it could be many months. I don't know how water changes would help get the bound stuff out.

I have reading a lot about this stuff as an algaecide and there is not a lot to extrapolate into a reef tank... other than it quickly binds to negatively charged surfaces, stays bound very well and is very stable. There are lots of unknowns. I doubt that you could do much to change what is going on once it is in the tank. Waiting might be the only thing to do.
 

rtparty

5000 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Jan 19, 2010
Messages
5,388
Reaction score
9,137
Location
Utah
Rating - 100%
4   0   0
I admit I didn't read all 27 pages of this thread, but from the first couple of pages, it seems algaefix and vibrant are almost the same thing.
If so, I wonder why the algaefix with 1ml/10gl every three days had no impact on the few patches of bubble algae I have, but vibrant already seems to work after just two doses, at 1/4 and 1/2 of recommended dose.

Possible theory is you finally got past the tipping point since it's highly likely the AlgaeFix has just been sitting in your tank bound to surfaces. Add just enough Vibrant and you tipped the scales. Adding the same amount of AlgaeFix instead of Vibrant could have done the trick.
 

KrisReef

10K Club member
View Badges
Joined
May 15, 2018
Messages
15,227
Reaction score
31,279
Location
ADX Florence
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
The purpose of this post is to look closely at Vibrant to compare its properties to a known algaecide, Algaefix by API. This is intended to shed light on the active ingredients in Vibrant, explain its mechanism of action, and give people insight into its use and what to expect. It is not a recommendation to use or not use either product. (apologies, I'm not a chemist and I hope inaccuracies in my descriptions aren't too distracting.)

Background on Algaefix / polixetonium chloride
Algaefix by API contains 4.5% “dimethyliminoethylene dichloride, ethoxylate” CAS 31512-74-0 per MSDS and EPA documentation. This amount is the same in the various Algaefix Marine, Pond, etc labels. This chemical is a polymeric quaternary ammonium compound. Other quaternary ammonium compounds or “quats” (not polymers), such as benzalkonium chloride are in widespread use as sanitizers, antibacterial soaps etc. The Algaefix chemical is also known by the trade name Busan 77 or the more recently EPA-favored name polixetonium chloride, I will refer to it by these or simply “the polyquat.”
Polixetonium chloride is a well-known algaecide, registered in the U.S. since 1971. The EPA documentation on it is thorough and has a number of useful bits of info. This 65 page EPA draft risk assessment from 2020 covers most relevant info, including the material below. This chart shows the concentrations at which it was found to have an inhibitory effect on various “algae”.

NwSAslRbmC9iOhq-EFOn_x4tGxmEM2vSMN5nP2FdUdprL_9JoKoyPxQHEch-w4b0jg2hLRwJd6yf0PjMNYXha5Hd7SIVifh-EB-cYWKTELn6ymJKRsVcVQ9FKAR-II7s7I-dIHkb

904MYe40dlobzLdhoec8IyOQugFE7IHKBSdk8ZgcNxDXLrkXsTA__nOKU4QVYlgQ9f9rxQLc6Vj7CFlmadRBpWHUm3HrW5imZef6FeJeK2_m_8Ez8ZzOpMu2iEFSI9iAuJxUTI_w


The approximate concentrations for each group are: diatoms and cyano at ~0.1ppm, green algae at ~0.01ppm, and vascular plants at ~1ppm. The label dose of Algaefix results in an addition of ~1ppm per every 3 days. Perhaps unexpectedly, it does not seem to leave the system (though it would be expected to dissipate from the water).
“Polixetonium chloride is miscible in water [study #’s…] and is not expected to degrade by either abiotic processes [...] or biotic processes [...] Sorption to soil, sediment, and sludge is expected to be the primary route of dissipation, based on the fact that polixetonium chloride is a quaternary ammonium compound that has a positive electrical charge.
A ready biodegradability study […] demonstrated stability to microbial degradation in a WWTP [wastewater treatment plant], which is consistent with the results of other non-WWTP microbial degradation. Therefore, for polixetonium chloride, there is no apparent route of chemical or microbial degradation.”

One final note on known properties and uses of polixetonium chloride is that this same chemical(nih.gov) under the name Bubond 60 is also used as a coagulant / flocculant. This helps shed light on reports of increased water clarity with aquarium usage of the product.

A paper shared by @jeffww illustrated the use of a distinctive Bromphenol Blue color response (non-pH) to detect quats dried on surfaces. I noted a quat-like color change with both Algaefix and Vibrant, but in none of almost a dozen bottled bacteria hobby products or saltwater. After that, a more thorough investigation of Vibrant and Algaefix properties was undertaken. Below is the first part of those results.


Part 1: Professional Lab Tests indicate indistinguishable principle ingredients in Vibrant and Algaefix - polixetonium chloride
Samples of Algaefix and Vibrant were poured from the product bottles into labeled 50mL centrifuge tubes and shipped to a lab for NMR testing. 1mL of each was vacuum-dried and the residue taken up in heavy water for analysis by 13C and 1H NMR. A separate partially-used bottle of Vibrant was sent to @jeffww for FTIR comparison to Algaefix in another lab. Those samples were also dried under vacuum for FTIR analysis.

A) 13C NMR
This is a test that generates a magnetic resonance response from Carbon atoms in the sample. The resonance refers to the frequency at which certain carbon atoms will oscillate when pushed around by magnetic fields. Their preferred frequency depends on their local environment - that is, what they are bonded to. Thus a 13C NMR is a probe of the chemical structure of the compounds, with each Carbon atom in the compound being shifted to a different place in the graph by what it is bonded to. More thorough intro for 13C NMR in this text, and a follow-up.
C16dHaUioEVk0GbjL5HbuqAtq1uZg1CAwdd0PDtFVcsgfheBBnMFEIBuDVV6IIYG8wI2C6D9-QK8sFrErsa8Ki8wAbjgjKLyvu_ki-jtHxtjSFgf_XqW4OohDh0qvyGvjIZqpz28

In the above graph you can see that the samples of Algaefix and Vibrant possess only Carbon in the same bond environments as each other, and the Carbon atoms are in those environments in the same ratios.

A wider view shows the blank around 170 ppm chemical shift where aspartic acid (and any other amino acid) would have a peak, if there were any in the samples.
gBzbrg2n4HHqpKJZUBpI_PrW4zz85EAXTBTXYEmzV_-2BJ_Py5y8Tecbxg7BfZTXy_pnp3fI7DUjfH4FRKp95LwGC9uow1kjS-aNZN8jXok96ElC8pUAaaEj2P2_Ff3aA5Q4u9fZ



B) 1H NMR
This is the same process described above but for Hydrogen instead of Carbon. In the below data you can see that the hydrogen atoms in each sample also exist in the same bond environments and are in those particular environments in the same ratios.
fp6HDDZVlnqweOtJUOIzUQpTmjsKfS6stsoTfbZ-_EGtrh9LPU1-invwpYguiHKmaVdLjSUEswfkfhrYdmQ_nfouf3Hs98S1_9tgZg_PT006Yjf7YBS6_h7ZWxxnHG1OJOV6-pfq


Since both the Carbon and Hydrogen atoms are bonded in the same way in these vacuum-dried samples of AlgaeFix and Vibrant, this covers all possible organics in the residue.

C) FTIR
This process generates an absorption spectrum in the infrared region where chemical compounds are distinctive in what wavelengths they absorb.
uHsH1WBMlJgau3lOIZOhzgtk1yaehUtGXAxXjjz23thQ-UgBRuF0GftG8P7R3mSvZdLPlxLILlypWxGA0m9iJov3GTGMLFUVr2izE9eYyDLlbhdggOQg84JEizgRjY7R3oPZ-IKD

Again, the precise alignment of the absorption peaks and the consistency of their peak height ratios between the vacuum-dried samples of Algaefix and Vibrant tells us that the residues are the same compounds with no additions. (The addition of aspartic or other amino acids would be very obvious in this data as well).
In addition to being able to say that Algaefix and Vibrant contain only the same compounds in their dried residues, we can further compare that to a given FTIR spectrum for polixetonium chloride “Busan 77” (posted online).
yz9cA8UWj_-VzdeBJne4R_OWNFmCF9JJaBK2heOYlGg_RS9QYzxDSCdPzSEy7uNLSpHuoOBZB6xDHxNPmp1QblO8l5FlA10a88uRqfv6W06eAb7v7oTUYl50FcoEM3LoHrdh-90O

This level of agreement confirms further that what was measured by the above tests in samples of Vibrant and Algaefix is indeed the polyquat that is the well-documented label ingredient in Algaefix, polixetonium chloride.

next...
Part 2: quantification / comparison of the amount of polyquat in Vibrant and Algaefix
@taricha

That was very weak attack upon the providers of the best algae control that a reef tank ever had. No where did you demonstrate that Vibrant was not effective you attacked them for there description of what is in the product. Protection of intellectual property is a treasured and legally protected activity in America….

How can you make sure a cowardly attack when there’s a war going on?

————————————
I am going to use this post in my application for Press Secretary.

(Thanks for the information- I added my own diss information in honor of your fine work and because I am weary of the culture of lies that we have been subjected to. Sorry for the confusion and Hyjjack. The situation has rendered me unstable as a bottle of snake oil that actually contains nitroglycerin .)

What should people with Vib do with their bottles of unused products? The lfs are going t disappear from the earth with all of the lies about and in the pet industry. Welcome to Petco.
 

I.AM.MR.MIKE

Active Member
View Badges
Joined
Jan 5, 2020
Messages
382
Reaction score
260
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
That was very weak attack upon the providers of the best algae control that a reef tank ever had. No where did you demonstrate that Vibrant was not effective you attacked them for there description of what is in the product. Protection of intellectual property is a treasured and legally protected activity in America….
LOL - what are you saying... If I read the label on the product and it doesn't mention an algicide is in the product than it should not have an algicide in it period. If I use a product with no ingredients listed that is on me. If they listed ingredients as magic potion it would be different.
 

shwareefer

Valuable Member
View Badges
Joined
Jun 29, 2020
Messages
1,195
Reaction score
1,315
Location
The Shwa of course!
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
LOL - what are you saying... If I read the label on the product and it doesn't mention an algicide is in the product than it should not have an algicide in it period. If I use a product with no ingredients listed that is on me. If they listed ingredients as magic potion it would be different.
I have to assume it was sarcasm or the DT's.
 

sghera64

Valuable Member
View Badges
Joined
Sep 20, 2013
Messages
1,074
Reaction score
1,154
Location
Fishers, IN, USA - 3rd rock from the sun
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
How effective would carbon or ozone be in removing this from the water? Are water changes the only option?
See here https://www.reef2reef.com/threads/u...etonium-chloride-busan-77.893292/post-9945821

I have used a LOT of Vibrant over the years and do not do regular water changes. I worry about this chemical building up in my system. I suspect Rox0.8 carbon might adsorb it to some extent. I also am working on the theory of using a sacrificial algae (chaeto). I will put chaeto in my fuge for 4 weeks, remove it and add fresh chaeto from my off-line chaeto farm.

Another possibility is that micro algae cells might be poisoned by this algaecide. As those cells die and break down, they and the molecules of polixetonium chloride attached to them will get foam fractionated out.

Just sharing some potentially helpful theories.
 

MnFish1

10K Club member
View Badges
Joined
Dec 28, 2016
Messages
24,326
Reaction score
23,111
Location
Midwest
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
I'm a little confused where your actually at as your comments from thread to thread seem to be a little flippy floppy on the back and forth, at best.

First and foremost are you literally attempting to claim success for @taricha findings by implying he "listened" to and heeded your suggestions which lead to the findings in these experiments?

If so why does it appear that your refusing to acknowledge said findings?


Do you support BRS, lfs and other retailers as victims in all this like you claim to?





Or do you support what appears to be a real travesty in the reefing industry?



OR is that actually my (the consumers) fault?, a misunderstanding?, mislabeling?, a great product?, an axe folks have to grind?



Or is all this just all ludicrous and patently ridiculous?
BTW- I tried to support all QWATS, flippiants and floppers in this post.
You're taking multiple comments out of their original context and its probably a waste of time to specifically address each one, But I will make a couple general responses.

1. I have said multiple times that I believe that there is at least a similar product in Algaefix and Vibrant. I have said my main question was 'the quantities' of the products' and the possibility that there were additional ingredients as well (it does not make sense to me that they would list xxx as an ingredient when it is not there - and I'm not talking about bacteria).
2. I agree with Randy's comments that the NMR experiment - and the warning post - certainly supports the idea in # 1. Which I've said at least a couple times.
3. No - I'm not trying to claim success for Taricha's experiments. I did make a couple suggestions to him via PM and the much earlier thread - and I was glad that he went ahead and did a more confirmatory NMR test (which I believe multiple people mentioned way back when) - I certainly don't take credit for it.
4. I am truly disappointed that the company has not been more forthcoming about these issues.
5. I have posted completely consistently - that Vibrant seemed to be harmful in my reef tank - (possibly due to my dosage) - and extremely successful in my freshwater discus tank. I completely believe those who have said problems have occurred. I guess I also believe when BRS says 9/10 tanks are successful.
6. I have changed my philosophy in reefing from adding chemicals - to just trying to fix the problem. Thus - I probably wouldn't use Vibrant etc etc etc again. However, IMHO - in many tanks - it works, so - thats probably where you're seeing the apparent flip-flopping. I wouldn't use it - but I wouldn't dissuade someone else from using it (or chemiclean or algaefix, etc etc)
7. Victim is a specific word which can have a lot of nuanced meanings. So - I would not support the use of that word in the examples you listed. Anymore than I would call BRS or an LFS or a reefer that had a negative experience after using chemiclean 'a victim'. But - if the question you're asking is something like "Do I think companies should be required to list their ingredients accurately if they fall under EPA regulations" The answer would be a firm 'yes'.
 

HAVE YOU EVER KEPT A RARE/UNCOMMON FISH, CORAL, OR INVERT? SHOW IT OFF IN THE THREAD!

  • Yes!

    Votes: 32 45.7%
  • Not yet, but I have one that I want to buy in mind!

    Votes: 9 12.9%
  • No.

    Votes: 26 37.1%
  • Other (please explain).

    Votes: 3 4.3%
Back
Top