Ca and Mg high and not decreasing.

[AUFishGuy]

So about a week ago I overdosed both calcium and magnesium. I havent tested for either in a week and have kept Alk at around 10 dkh. After testing tonight neither Ca or Mg have dropped at all. I am using a brand new red sea test kit. my numbers are below.

 

 

Ca - 550

Mg - 1560

Alk - 10 dkh

 

 

 

do i need to bump up my Alk? When I look at Ca and Alk balance calculators it says Alk should be 24.6 dkh to balance 550 ppm of Ca. Obviously i cant do that. Will the Ca come down with Alk where it is?

 

 

 

TIA

[greengalaxy]

Did you try water changes?

[Origami]

You say that you "kept Alk at around 10 dKH." How much alk did you add? If you had not added anything, where would your alk be today?

 

Balanced consumption drops calcium 20 ppm for every 2.8 dKH of alkalinity consumed.

 

Leave your alk where it is. Don't try to target balance with such high calcium levels. Let calcium decline through water changes and normal consumption. By the way, what is the calcium level in your newly mixed saltwater?

[AUFishGuy]

You say that you "kept Alk at around 10 dKH." How much alk did you add? If you had not added anything, where would your alk be today?

 

Balanced consumption drops calcium 20 ppm for every 2.8 dKH of alkalinity consumed.

 

Leave your alk where it is. Don't try to target balance with such high calcium levels. Let calcium decline through water changes and normal consumption. By the way, what is the calcium level in your newly mixed saltwater?

Not sure of Ca level in newly mixed water. I will make some tomorrow and find out.

 

I said around 10 dkh because i have been out of town for most of last week and had my fiancee checking on the tank. I think she tested 2 or 3 times and said the Ca and Mg didnt ever change much, just Alk. i just gave her the website to Randys reef calculator so i am not sure how much Alk she added.

[Origami]

The reason that I asked I'd that calcium tests are less sensitive than alk tests. So, while its easy to pick up a 1 dKH drop, you be hard pressed to use a hobbyist calcium test to reliably measure the corresponding 7 ppm drop.

 

Sent from my LG-V510 using Tapatalk

[gmerek2]

the balance thing doesn't seem to matter in my tank as long as Alk is Same number every time. I like to keep calcium above 400. Those are my only two rules as far as balance. I'm sure balance helps. But I had similar problems chasing multiple numbers.

Edited March 30, 2016 by gmerek2

[dpassar12]

I would not panic on any of those numbers. Do your normal water changes.. I keep my ALK at 10 your Mag is ok and Calc is a bit high but it will drop.. If you ever brought your ALK to 24.5 you would crash your tank. I agree with person above about testing your saltwater mix after you make it, there are pretty big differences in mixes and you will have a good idea about how a water change will impact your parameters

 

 

Dan

[Origami]

Let's talk about "balanced" calcium and alkalinity for a moment as it seems to create somewhat of a misunderstanding.

 

First, let's talk just a little bit about "balanced consumption." Balanced consumption is the ratio of calcium to alkalinity that is theoretically consumed by the calcification process that lays down calcium carbonate, the major component of coral skeletons. This ratio is 1 milliequivalent (or 2.8 dKH) of carbonate alkalinty for every 20 ppm of calcium ions present in the water. This ratio can vary slightly in the real world, but it's a good estimate overall.

 

The second point to understand is that prior studies on the composition of seawater have yielded various numbers for what the "standard" ionic content of seawater is - that is, it's an average of many samples of "normal" seawater. One starting point is 412 ppm Calcium and 110 ppm carbonate alkalinity. Note that 110 ppm carbonate alkalinity translates to 6.16 dKH or 2.2 meq/liter. This second point is important only in that it's "normal" and is, by fiat, declared to be "balanced." And, if you were to grow corals in a tank with this water, it is assumed that the level of calcium and alkalinity would fall in accordance with the ratio dictated by "balanced consumption." This sets up the idea of a line on a graph that charts calcium levels against alkalinity levels with all points along this line being considered "balanced."

 

Now, for our purposes, we typically run our tanks at higher levels than this so-called "normal." That is, we supplement both calcium and alkalinity to create a saltwater that is higher in both than average seawater. The theoretical "balance" is, in this situation, is simply a continuation of the line described in the last paragraph, but going in the opposite direction (that is, toward higher levels of calcium and alkalinity, and in excess of average seawater). 

 

Maintaining this "balance" is convenient but does not seem to be necessary. The benefit of targeting a point along the line that defines balance is that, with normal consumption, these ions will generally decrease in an orderly and known manner, allowing you to do more frequent spot-checking of your levels using a single test (e.g. alkalinity) rather than having to measure both calcium and alkalinity. It also helps to keep you within acceptable parameters where you don't get a lot of abiotic precipitation (assuming magnesium levels are good). For example, if you have really high calcium, you may find that you have trouble driving alk levels up because the high calcium results in abiotic precipitation of calcium carbonate. 

 

The bottom line is "balanced" calcium and alkalinity is really a range of numbers. It's good to have an understanding of it but not necessary to chase a specific set of numbers. 

 

You can find more details in this Advanced Aquarist article if you're interested. 

[Der ABT]

Get a second test.....I've had tests expire and really mess me up.....Hannah alk reagent as well.....thinking things were fine and seeing the tank suffer...bought new test kit and a diff brand....they lined up with each other showing alk amd ca were very off (low thankfully)

 

If not just ask tom....that should be it's own forum....."ask Origami"

[AUFishGuy]

So an Update on this.

 

Numbers still haven't moved. I'm using a brand new Red Sea Test kit and it is showing newly mixed SW at over 500ppm, same for my reef tank. This is when I knew something was wrong. I decided to pull out my old test kit as it has a few test left. Tested my tank water with both kits, both Red Sea. New kit still reads over 500ppm, old kit reads 380ppm. The new kit is defective, I bought it from BRS so will be calling them Monday to see what can be done. Also thinking I may switch to a different kit, maybe the Hanna meters.

Edited April 3, 2016 by AUFishGuy

[YHSublime]

Let's talk about "balanced" calcium and alkalinity for a moment as it seems to create somewhat of a misunderstanding.

 

First, let's talk just a little bit about "balanced consumption." Balanced consumption is the ratio of calcium to alkalinity that is theoretically consumed by the calcification process that lays down calcium carbonate, the major component of coral skeletons. This ratio is 1 milliequivalent (or 2.8 dKH) of carbonate alkalinty for every 20 ppm of calcium ions present in the water. This ratio can vary slightly in the real world, but it's a good estimate overall.

 

The second point to understand is that prior studies on the composition of seawater have yielded various numbers for what the "standard" ionic content of seawater is - that is, it's an average of many samples of "normal" seawater. One starting point is 412 ppm Calcium and 110 ppm carbonate alkalinity. Note that 110 ppm carbonate alkalinity translates to 6.16 dKH or 2.2 meq/liter. This second point is important only in that it's "normal" and is, by fiat, declared to be "balanced." And, if you were to grow corals in a tank with this water, it is assumed that the level of calcium and alkalinity would fall in accordance with the ratio dictated by "balanced consumption." This sets up the idea of a line on a graph that charts calcium levels against alkalinity levels with all points along this line being considered "balanced."

 

Now, for our purposes, we typically run our tanks at higher levels than this so-called "normal." That is, we supplement both calcium and alkalinity to create a saltwater that is higher in both than average seawater. The theoretical "balance" is, in this situation, is simply a continuation of the line described in the last paragraph, but going in the opposite direction (that is, toward higher levels of calcium and alkalinity, and in excess of average seawater). 

 

Maintaining this "balance" is convenient but does not seem to be necessary. The benefit of targeting a point along the line that defines balance is that, with normal consumption, these ions will generally decrease in an orderly and known manner, allowing you to do more frequent spot-checking of your levels using a single test (e.g. alkalinity) rather than having to measure both calcium and alkalinity. It also helps to keep you within acceptable parameters where you don't get a lot of abiotic precipitation (assuming magnesium levels are good). For example, if you have really high calcium, you may find that you have trouble driving alk levels up because the high calcium results in abiotic precipitation of calcium carbonate. 

 

The bottom line is "balanced" calcium and alkalinity is really a range of numbers. It's good to have an understanding of it but not necessary to chase a specific set of numbers. 

 

You can find more details in this Advanced Aquarist article if you're interested. 

 

Glad you posted this, Tom. I think as hobbyists, we oft' forget that constancy is key. Not to mention, this was somebody else doing tests that the OP normally does, who's to say this was an instance in which a completely different process was done in order to reach said numbers?

 

So an Update on this.

 

Numbers still haven't moved. I'm using a brand new Red Sea Test kit and it is showing newly mixed SW at over 500ppm, same for my reef tank. This is when I knew something was wrong. I decided to pull out my old test kit as it has a few test left. Tested my tank water with both kits, both Red Sea. New kit still reads over 500ppm, old kit reads 380ppm. The new kit is defective, I bought it from BRS so will be calling them Monday to see what can be done. Also thinking I may switch to a different kit, maybe the Hanna meters.

 

What leads you to believe the old test is right, and the new test is wrong?

[AUFishGuy]

Glad you posted this, Tom. I think as hobbyists, we oft' forget that constancy is key. Not to mention, this was somebody else doing tests that the OP normally does, who's to say this was an instance in which a completely different process was done in order to reach said numbers?

 

 

 

What leads you to believe the old test is right, and the new test is wrong?

Well the big indicator is newly mixed Instant Ocean reading over 500ppm. I can't find any threads on the Internet that have mentioned it being much over 400ppm. Also my numbers using the new test kit haven't moved in over a week and a half and I have a lot of coral. My old test kit works, I tested it against a friends Sailifert kit a little over a month ago and the numbers were similar. Edited April 3, 2016 by AUFishGuy

[Der ABT]

Salifert are my favorite test kits and cost per test ends up alot lower than the Hanna checkers...

 

With Hannah checkers you also have to remember to clean correctly or the curvette gets a build up and reads wrong...there was a good article about that a few years ago

[epleeds]

Salifert all the way!!!

[Origami]

Well the big indicator is newly mixed Instant Ocean reading over 500ppm. I can't find any threads on the Internet that have mentioned it being much over 400ppm. Also my numbers using the new test kit haven't moved in over a week and a half and I have a lot of coral. My old test kit works, I tested it against a friends Sailifert kit a little over a month ago and the numbers were similar.

Just a note: IO or any salt mix will mix up to high calcium if one is using tap water. Not that you're using tap water, but I want people to understand that we have hard water here and that that hardness results in higher calcium numbers than the same mix using RO/DI or distilled water.