Low Kh

[Meyer Jordan]

@Meyer Jordan , when I opine next time, I will leave your references with no response.

And why would you do that?

 

[Mitakuye]

I think that the problem in this discussion has, as is often the case, definition of terms.
The original discussion was about GH (carbonate and agnesium) not Carbonate hardness or any of the other possible Hardnesses.
In scientific papers, terminology is usually quite specific. If an author is intending to address Carbonate Hardness that is what they will write. They will not use the generic term Hardness unless they are speaking of GH.

Every instance the term "hardness" has been made in this discussion has been in reference to GH.

I only mentioned "carbonate hardness" once in my second post in an effort to define the terms. After this post, I utilized either alkalinity or KH and, thereafter of the second post, every reference of hardness referenced GH.

Generally, unqualified "hardness" is assumed to be a reference of GH. I rarely read "hardness" to be in reference to alkalinity, unless the article is referencing the type of alkalinity or explaining the terms. "Temporary hardness" is also a synonym of alkalinity, except I rarely read it used..


Odd, I thought this discussion involved alkalinity as well as hardness.

 

[Mitakuye]

Yeah, ok, I am done with this since appears the effort here is to push me into a corner again..

 

[Meyer Jordan]

Only asking that you support you statements....references, links, etc.

 

[Mitakuye]

I took time to reflect on this, as I do with most material I read or hear, and felt compelled to reply.

I do honestly believe you are asking much more than just "you support your statements" thus reflecting an attempt to discredit those whom disagree with you by issuing the more "righteous" position.

Much is done by professionals in the fields of engineering that contradict prevailing studies.

Only asking that you support you statements....references, links, etc.

I do wonder if you ever give any advice that runs counter to prevailing studies.

 

[Mitakuye]

...or more preferably double your carbonate hardness.

This is a quite general rule, as it obviously lacks specificity, that I have derived myself. Unfortunately, as can happen with generalities, the extreme scenarios can be used so to discredit the rule, as appears is what is happening here. Also, as with any rule, limitation of aquatic organisms should not be ignored, which this should be common sense for any owner of an aquatic system.

I have observed an increase in specifically free calcium, which often brings along other elements, significantly improves the resiliency of fish, such as more likely to survive a contamination event or a temporary biological crash. This improved resiliency has equated to better long term food conversion ratios. Also, the increase in this free calcium also incurs a reduction of phosphorous and a reduction of turbidity, which the calcium must be "free" so to achieve this. Alum achieves the same, except requires additional caution thus less forgiving to mistakes.

What is the worst that can happen?

Hardness can be increased to a limit that is detrimental to the organism, except these limits are at very high volumes. Also, any synthetic product or mineral increasing phosphorous precipitation will also decrease the proliferation of plankton; however, plankton are quite diverse and resilient so this should not be a concern unless specifically producing very high densities of fish.

In my lacking to write as a lawyer to cover all basis, I should have attached this to my previous post.

I hope this brings comfort so that differences can be placed aside, which I have my doubts to some it may not.

 

[Mitakuye]

I am glad, at the least, there was agreement in the first part of my post in that, hardness should at least be approximate to alkalinity to maintain a healthy environment in context of a relatively stable pH.

 

[Meyer Jordan]

I do wonder if you ever give any advice that runs counter to prevailing studies.

I do not if the vast majority of scientific studies agree.