[jvharding]

Ok There has been lots of Debate in our forum over the best Salts to use in our Reef! So there is now posted A very detailed report on sea salts in our Blog Area. I know that most of you use Instant Ocean or Reef Crystals. I have Debated the fact that just mere Saltwater changes do not supplement the tank enough, and according to these test results. The salts have an area of fluctuation in lots of areas. Please check out this article and tell us how you think your salt product of choice measures up. I have always like to use Tropic Marin But I switch my salts occasionally. Oh is this a bad thing? Maybe not Since most of the salts are in Flux anyway.

Check it out here:

http://www.aquariumwatertesting.com/...lysis_0208.pdf

[stacef]

This is very interesting, Thank you for sharing!!! !

[e_baer]

That is great! I use Kent, and I like it, but Iodine always seems to be a tad on the low end. Reef crystals seems to be a very good all around salt, especially for reefs because it "scored" well with all the trace elements as well as the trates.

I will have to do some more research about verious salt brands and why people do and dont use them before/if I switch.

[pogodzib]

Overall, I like the salt that I use, Reef Crystals, the best, both from the test results and from how my tank performs with it. I looks to be a very nice study, but I'd like to see them add a few more samples overtime to make the results more reliable.

The one thing that I don't like about how they did the tests is that the chemicals tested were after using 7.0g of salt in 200 ml of water, which as the first results page shows, leads to a different salinity for each salt mix. I think it would have been been better to show how many grams of salt it takes to get a typical reef tank salinity and then test all of the salts for their chemical totals. This would essentially make all of the results higher in every category since every salt listed had a salinity lower than what most reef keepers keep their tanks. It would have also made the results easier for saltwater aquarists to read since it would have been comparing results from mixes made up at the same salinity. A couple examples are as follows:

When you initially compare the Calcium levels of the two Seachem mixes, you'd think that the Seachem Marine has more calcium. Why would Seachem make their Marine mix to have higher calcium levels than their Reef mix? If you do some simple math, you'll find out that, according to the samples tested, once the mixtures are adjusted up to a standard salinity of 35ppm as most reef tanks are, Seachem Reef has 542ppm versus 536ppm for their Marine mix.

Another example would be comparing the Magnesium levels of Reef Crystals and Red Sea Coral Pro. Upon looking at the results initially, you'd think that Red Sea Coral Pro has more magnesium, but once you adjust the numbers up to 35ppt, as a typical reef tank has, you'd find out the Reef Crystals has a higher Mg level, 1264ppm:1224ppm

As you can see, once you start adjusting the numbers as if they had the same salinity, the results will appear different when comparing them against one another.

[sgarron]

I switched to reef crystas when I started my 180 and have had low calcium and magnesium ever since. I just switced back to red sea coral pro and my levels are on the rise. I tested a fresh mix of reef crystals at 35ppt. and found 320 calcium and 1125 mag. using salifert and elos tests. Using the same tests I got 420 cal. and 1300 mag from the coral pro. Maybe it was a bad batch ( last 6 buckets?). But I don't think I'll be using rc again.

[e_baer]

Originally Posted by pogodzib

Overall, I like the salt that I use, Reef Crystals, the best, both from the test results and from how my tank performs with it. I looks to be a very nice study, but I'd like to see them add a few more samples overtime to make the results more reliable.

The one thing that I don't like about how they did the tests is that the chemicals tested were after using 7.0g of salt in 200 ml of water, which as the first results page shows, leads to a different salinity for each salt mix. I think it would have been been better to show how many grams of salt it takes to get a typical reef tank salinity and then test all of the salts for their chemical totals. This would essentially make all of the results higher in every category since every salt listed had a salinity lower than what most reef keepers keep their tanks. It would have also made the results easier for saltwater aquarists to read since it would have been comparing results from mixes made up at the same salinity. A couple examples are as follows:

When you initially compare the Calcium levels of the two Seachem mixes, you'd think that the Seachem Marine has more calcium. Why would Seachem make their Marine mix to have higher calcium levels than their Reef mix? If you do some simple math, you'll find out that, according to the samples tested, once the mixtures are adjusted up to a standard salinity of 35ppm as most reef tanks are, Seachem Reef has 542ppm versus 536ppm for their Marine mix.

Another example would be comparing the Magnesium levels of Reef Crystals and Red Sea Coral Pro. Upon looking at the results initially, you'd think that Red Sea Coral Pro has more magnesium, but once you adjust the numbers up to 35ppt, as a typical reef tank has, you'd find out the Reef Crystals has a higher Mg level, 1264ppm:1224ppm

As you can see, once you start adjusting the numbers as if they had the same salinity, the results will appear different when comparing them against one another.

I completely agree with you! I would definately like to find some more research comparing all the brands.

[pogodzib]

I'll be the first to agree that calcium and magnesium levels are typically low on RC and IO salt so you do need to use calcium, alk, and Mg additives, but the salt tests good for everything else. Your results are in line with what most people get. I think buckets or test method used in the article has something different happening. There was a note about calcium and free calcium in the article. Maybe their test method does a better job of picking up the calcium than our test kits or maybe their sample wasn't a representative sample of what most people get. That's why I think they need to go more tests if they want their results to be deemed reliable.

[pogodzib]

Originally Posted by e_baer

I completely agree with you! I would definately like to find some more research comparing all the brands.

There are a bunch of studies available, but they ALL have their flaws. You need to look at who is paying for the tests, sample size, test methods, etc...but since you want to find some more research, here is a couple of the more popular test results. As you'll see if you compare this study to those and those against one another, they all end up with different results.

http://www.instantocean.com/sites/In...Vol21_2004.pdf

Advanced Aquarist's Online Magazine - Feature Article: Inland Reef Aquaria Salt Study, Part I & Advanced Aquarist's Online Magazine - Feature Article: Inland Reef Aquaria Salt Study Part II

And an article on what studies have been done.
Sea Salts: Part I - Reef Hobbyist Online Magazine

[e_baer]

Thanks, that is exactly what I was looking for!

[jimw369]

I dont thinks its important what brand you use. I think its important to know whats in the brand you use and how your tank responds to it and water changes on a chemical level. I have used 3 brands of salt over the past 10 mos and the only difference I see is in water params after I do a water change. No big swings though. With minimal testing and dosing water params are back to where I want them regardless which brand I use. Makes me stop and think why I do water changes unless there is a problem of sorts and with good husbandry why should there be any problems?(knock on wood) Just went to 1 water change every month.

IMO this way makes the brand salt I use a little less important.

So much in this hobby is about some one making a buck. Im placing salt in this category.

[gimmito]

I was using reef crystals for a while until I was told by a fellow hobbyist that the quality contol is not always reliable.

Just a little while later my tank broke out with cyano...coincidence ?

I just bought a bucket of seachem.

[Jer77]

The one thing that I don't like about how they did the tests is that the chemicals tested were after using 7.0g of salt in 200 ml of water, which as the first results page shows, leads to a different salinity for each salt mix. I think it would have been been better to show how many grams of salt it takes to get a typical reef tank salinity and then test all of the salts for their chemical totals.

I agree that this may make more sense for some people for calcium, alkalinity, and the other elemental parameters, but for such readings for conductivity, ammonia, nitrite, nitrate and phosphate having the samples at the same salinity would produce incomparable results. If they did set the salinities at a certain point they should go by the recommended salinity for the specific salt mix.

I also agree that mixing such small amounts and doing only one or two tests for each salt mix isn't enough and will most definitely produce results that may be true for one person but not an accurate average or a good representation of the salt mix in general.