The usefulness (or uslessness)of a test kit

[MitchM]

Charles, you're asking Meyer Jordan to prove a negative, which you know can't be done.

 

[MitchM]

Opinions I've read here so far regarding test kits sound more like the issue is proper education as to how to use the test kit results, not that having the numerical results are the problem.
That gets back to how important proper education about the nitrogen cycle in the first place, doesn't it?
We are always asking people that post problems here, for actual numerical test kit values.
- so why all this negative opinion about test kits?

(let's not get off on some tangent about how too much algae deprives a pond of oxygen)

.

 

[Lisak1]

Here's how I feel about test kits - get one if you're having problems that won't resolve. And by problems I mean sick, dying, or dead fish. Too often though the test RESULTS become the problem. "My ph was high so I added blah blah blah...and now I have eleven more problems plus my fish all packed up and moved out." Or the problem (generally green water or excess algae) isn't really a problem that requires testing. Observe the condition and correct the factors that exacerbate it. Use your plants, fish, and water as the "test".

When we first started ponding I was frustrated by my slow growing, yellow, sickly looking pond plants. The garden center told me "your ph is too high - you need to bring it down". Thankfully the same day we stopped at a pond store where the owner - way more experienced in ponding than the guy at the garden center - said "nah. Your pond just needs time to develop. The plants depend on the fish to fertilize the water - give em time!" And he was of course absolutely right. Same pond, same ph, following year - beautiful green plants. I'm so thankful we didn't start testing and dosing. We knew what our ph was and knew it was high but in the range that was fine for our fish. Had we started tinkering who knows what would have been next.

So - not negative on testing at all, especially for newly established ponds. Know what you're working with... But then put the kit away.

DISCLAIMER - as I said in an earlier post, the little I know about ponds apples to garden style Eco-ponds. If you have a dedicated koi pond full of expensive fish, IGNORE ME! Ha!

 

[Usman]

If you are experienced you can tell alot by observing fish behaviour and appearance of water and take some precautionary measures , even if u hv kit and reading you would do similer so not much difference , may b helful for starters or if ur in a new house or new environment for start

 

[crsublette]

Charles, you're asking Meyer Jordan to prove a negative, which you know can't be done.

Sorry, that's just a cop-out... Of course a negative can proven, by simply disproving the positive. It is just that people normally think in the positive.. This doesn't mean a negative can't be proven.

 

[Usman]

If you are experienced you can tell alot by observing fish and appearance of water and take some precautionary measures , even if u hv kit and reading you would do similer so not much difference , may b helful for starters or if ur in a new house or new environment for start

 

[Mucky_Waters]

We are always asking people that post problems here, for actual numerical test kit values.
- so why all this negative opinion about test kits?
.

That was my exact thought when reading this thread.

I think test kits are great for beginners to have if for no other reason then to make them aware of the different parameters of water. To a lot of people water is just water. It's very educational to test different water sources, not just the pond water. If a person is in possession of a test kit I'd recommend not just testing their pond water, but test their tap water, and test rain water too. Then try and understand why their rain water may be so acidic compared to their tap water, and why it's has such a low GH and KH, but why their tap water likely is much higher. Testing a pond's PH frequently (twice a day) can also be informative as well as testing in early spring (right after the ice thaw). These sorts of tests can help people understand that the pond goes through cycles and that certain parameters are not always stable and "balanced?". Of course it's good to check ammonia levels in new or heavily stocked ponds, even though it is one parameter that generally remains unchanged for me at 0 in my pond, however when I had aquariums that was not the case as it might not be for people with small heavily stocked ponds.
So as others have said education is the key, this leads to an understanding of when to act on the results of the test reading and when not to.
Although ponds seldom need PH adjusting, when I had a swimming pool I would check and adjust the PH levels daily. By keeping the pool cover on when ever it wasn't being used, and by always keeping the PH at exactly 7, I was able to use the minimal amount of chlorine in the water to the point where it was undetectable to most people, which makes for a much more enjoyable swimming experience.
Also I have a little heated water greenhouse thing I use to mass grow water hyacinth early in the spring when my pond water isn't warm enough for them to grow very fast. I have found that by monitoring the PH and keeping it right around 7 I get the fastest and best (greenest) growth. By adding fertilizer and keeping the PH perfect I can go from this

to this.... in about a month

and from there I just start removing them from this little water hyacinth breeder and dumping them in the pond. But if I don't test the PH and adjust it every day or two they will all just turn yellow and stop growing.

 

[bettasngoldfish]

Very interesting about the hyacinth

 

[MitchM]

Sorry, that's just a cop-out... Of course a negative can proven, by simply disproving the positive. It is just that people normally think in the positive.. This doesn't mean a negative can't be proven.

Perhaps then you could prove that Santa Clause does not exist?
I can't.
You know how we do things here, someone expresses an opinion and then should be prepared to back it up with a study that the rest of us can understand.
If you don't have any backup, just say so, don't turn around and insult the person please. (boorish, really?)

You could have just said that because of the lack of oxygen, bacteria conversion of nitrogen is slowed, so in that case nitrite levels can rise. That's something we can all understand without a study.
Isn't that what you were trying to say?

.

 

[crsublette]

Perhaps then you could prove that Santa Clause does not exist?
I can't.

@MitchM , sure I can... You prove that Santa Clause doesn't exist by simply talking about how the symbolism of Santa Clause was born and how the symbolism is continued today through its symbolism rather than through the present existence of a physical entity.

Now, if you need physical proof that anything exists... then... you can never prove the immaterial... since, by definition, the immaterial can not be physically proven by material means.

You know how we do things here, someone expresses an opinion and then should be prepared to back it up with a study that the rest of us can understand.
If you don't have any backup, just say so, don't turn around and insult the person please. (boorish, really?)
.

Don't know how a fella provides a citation for what he has been told by another... Unless you think everything you are told is simply just "made up" whenever people can not cite nor you can not find the study that verifies it..

Astounding people can talk to experienced people in their field without these people constantly citing studies for others to believe them!!


...and yes, if I approached these people with the constant demand for citations so for me to simply trust what they say, then this would be boorish.

They would view me as an egotistical, know-it-all, hobby brat! ...which...unfortunately...too many hobbyists actually do think they know more than they actually do, simply due to them grasping onto what little they can understand from studies...

You could have just said that because of the lack of oxygen, bacteria conversion of nitrogen is slowed, so in that case nitrite levels can rise. That's something we can all understand without a study.
Isn't that what you were trying to say?.

No, but I bet that is part of it as well.

From what I recall of being told... When denitrification occurs (reducing nitrogen to gas), this can actually be disrupted so then just Nitrites are created, rather than the expected nitrogenous gas. From what I was told, whenever oxygen lowers in what was a very aerobic environment, then particular dimorphic microbes change their mode of function and so there is a change in C:N (carbon to nitrogen) demand.... C:N amount becomes inefficient to continue with denitrification... since sufficient C:N was not initially provided except for what little is provided by organics... this causes denitrification to be disrupted, preventing nitrogen to reduce to nitrogen gas... eventually, if the oxygen problem is not resolved, nitrites will accumulate.

I have observed this occurring quite often in MBBRs within the aquaponics since many underestimate the volume of aeration and/or oxygen needed for their MBBR... once aeration and/or oxygen increased in the MBBR, then the Nitrites very quickly disappear.

There is ALWAYS denitrifrication occurring, although in a very limited capacity, in the most aerobic systems when significant volume of organics are involved...

I don't recall offhand... but even in the best designed MBBRs in aquaculture... for a system highly loaded with organics... there is an expectation of a very small percent of denitrification occurring in the MBBR... this is why MBBRs can actually be carbon dioxide neutral... meaning, MBBRs can produce just as much carbon dioxide as is being degassed from aeration... This is one reason why degassing columns or trickle towers are often incorporated in lieu with MBBRs.


@MitchM , no reason, that I am aware of, why the same would not occur in an "eco" pond as well ... unless you have study citations that state otherwise...

 

[crsublette]

@MitchM , the more polite tact would be... rather than accusing or implying people of "making stuff up" ... start by engaging in a conversation with your line of thinking, provide the studies that prove your case, and then see where there maybe a misunderstanding or a middle ground where the participants meet.... and that is not what happened...

 

[crsublette]

and from there I just start removing them from this little water hyacinth breeder and dumping them in the pond. But if I don't test the PH and adjust it every day or two they will all just turn yellow and stop growing.

Yeah, in aquaponics, when utilizing just hydroponic grow methods (like what you did would be similar to "rafts")... pH control is huge.... Once pH goes above 7.0~7.2, then there starts be all sorts of nutrient precipitation of iron and phosphates and a few other nutrients... This precipitation can be better reversed by microbial activity when planted in a medium..

...but wherever there are plant roots... there are excretion of root exudates, these exudates persuade microbial growth on the roots, and then there will be some chelation occurring to make nutrients available to the plant. This is probably why the Hyacinth was still able to simply survive when the pH got "off", although being yellow and no growth.

Of course, nutrient precipitation can also be offset by simply adding more fertilizing... so there are workarounds...

On my farm.. our soil is 7.8 pH and water is 8.6 pH... this forces us to put down much humic acids, sulfates, and around 20% more fertilizer.... improving organic presence in the soil helps, but properly hydrating and feeding the organics is not cheap.

 

[cas]

I have found that by monitoring the PH and keeping it right around 7 I get the fastest and best (greenest) growth.

Thanks. I think that is why I can't seem to grow water hyacinths. - I have a test kit so I know my PH.

 

[crsublette]

Your pond just needs time to develop. The plants depend on the fish to fertilize the water - give em time!" And he was of course absolutely right. Same pond, same ph, following year - beautiful green plants. I'm so thankful we didn't start testing and dosing.

@Lisak1 , plants transitioning through its transplant stage and increased microbial maturation on the plant's roots are likely what allowed your plants to be beautiful green plants in an unfriendly pH...


...people need to realize that any non-selective chemical (like algaecides and oxidizers) can also attack the plant beneficial microbes, which allows the plant to better tolerate less friendly pH environments...


...but now... just to warn ya'll... I don't have any study citations to validate that...

 

[Meyer Jordan]

Anytime there is an increase of Nitrite in a mud pond aquaculture system or a tank culture... then the reason is due to poor oxygenation...

An entirely too broad of a statement as the window of Oxygen levels for this to occur is not only very low but also very small.

"Setting DO concentration in the reactor at 0.7 mg/L,it was possible to accumulate more than 65% of the loaded ammonia nitrogen as nitrite with a 98% ammonia conversion. Below 0.5 mg/L of DO ammonia was accumulated and over a DO of 1.7 mg/L complete nitrification to nitrate was achieved."

Nitrification with high nitrite accumulation for the treatment of wastewater with high ammonia concentration
G. Ruiza,D. Jeisonb,R. Chamya,*

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12598199

At levels this low any living resident of a pond would have long since expired.
It should be pointed out, however, that Nitrite toxicity increases as Oxygen levels decrease.

 

[crsublette]

An entirely too broad of a statement as the window of Oxygen levels for this to occur is not only very low but also very small.

...btw... you are extrapolating much from that study to suggest it invalidates what I wrote... and I never stated the entire mud pond nor MBBR would have to be within this low oxygen levels for an increase of Nitrite to occur...

Actually, from what I am told by others much more experienced than I, the entire water environment does not have to be equally, significantly oxygen deprived for this occurrence to begin.

 

[crsublette]

@Meyer Jordan , I guess just what they have told me is just all completely wrong, being misstated, and the fact you can extrapolate from a study(ies), to fit what you think, proves you are right...

If ya want to continue to debate that post of mine... then it is all good! ...but I won't be contributing to it anymore...

 

[Meyer Jordan]

...btw... you are extrapolating much from that study to suggest it invalidates what I wrote... and I never stated the entire mud pond nor MBBR would have to be within this low oxygen levels for an increase of Nitrite to occur...

Actually, from what I am told by others much more experienced than I, the entire water environment does not have to be equally, significantly oxygen deprived for this occurrence to begin.

No, but for the entire water column to be affected and high Nitrite levels to be detected by a test kit, this small window of extremely low DO would need to be pond wide.

 

[Meyer Jordan]

@Meyer Jordan , I guess just what they have told me is just all completely wrong, being misstated, and the fact you can extrapolate from a study(ies), to fit what you think, proves you are right...

If ya want to continue to debate that post of mine... then it is all good! ...but I won't be contributing to it anymore...

I, at least, produced a source.And there are others out there.

 

[MitchM]

I did come across a nice surprise when I was shopping for test kits the other day.
My preferred brand, Elos, has come out with a smaller version that retails for $19.99.
I like Elos, Salifert then API.
I prefer Elos because they have larger test tube vials that are easier to stir the reagents in.
Salifert kits are ok, but I don't usually use the reagents before they expire and the price is about $35.00.
I find the API test tubes to be too small to easily mix in, but the kits are the least expensive at about $15.00 each.