P04 removers in the market

[Achilles Tang]

Some tests of phosphate absobers was done by was a few German aquarists and here are the results. Translation to english is not that great: Some key points are highlighted:

It does seem that Rowaphos/Contraphos is a good product after all. ps - hoping to see another test with Salifert's version soon!

---------------------------------

Phosphate absorber....

How quickly do they absorb phosphate, and how the photograph capacity is?

In the Meeresaquaristik is with the time the rising and therefore very often vorhande phosphate content one of the largest problems. Particularly with unwanted growth of algae is usually present too high phosphate contents. By the entry of fodder (above all frost fodder) and by eliminations of the fish phosphate comes into our water. Duch water change, particularly with large basins, can be worked here only insufficiently against.

How however do the available products behave? How quickly do you take up phosphate, and above all how much?

For this reason we made ourselves the trouble and some the most usual phosphate absorbers procured. Helpful were here above all Michael Mrutzek of www.meeresaquaristik.de , Thomas Pohl of wwww.korallen zucht.de and Joachim Woschnik of www.korallenfarm.de . They put us or to other absorber free of charge at the disposal. The remainder was acquired available in the specialized trade.

Michael Mrutzek put Contraphos (Aquaconnect), ElimiPhos (Tropic marine) and PhosEx (JBL) to us at the disposal. Thomas Pohl made us available its bio Phos II, Joe Woschnik the absorber phosphate Reduct of Amtra.

Note: With Amtra, Korallenzucht and JBL are data on the packing and/or in the InterNet, how much phosphate with the respective quantity can be taken up. With JBL stands as instruction 12,000 mg/630gramm, with Amtra 22,000 mg/500ml and with Korallenzucht.de 60,000 mg/Kilos. On the other absorbers no visible data find how much phosphate to take up itself can.

Test 1:

It was set seawaters with a density of 1.022. It was used Tropic marine sea salt. To exclude the seawater on nitrate and phosphate examined around faulty measurements. Nitrate and phosphate were not provable.

A litre of seawater was stopped now to 1 mg phosphate.

Each absorber was washed before the use with osmose water, in order to remove carrier materials and such a thing.

Subsequently, 50 was taken ml water by the 1 litre phosphate solution and led by 5 gram of the respective absorbers. The water was led thereby twice by the absorber.

Here 50 was led ml test water by an absorber

For the phosphate measurement the Merck Aquaquanttest was used. This phosphate test measures extremely exactly, however only within the range of 0 - 0.43 mg. Must in order to be able, diluted to exactly determine a value.

We could measure the following results:

Product Company approx.. Price Package size/weight Suppl.-smooth-eat Absorbtion

Phospaht Reduct Amtra 13,70 € 500 ml/2 x 176.3 gram 0,34 mg 0.66 mg

Green x Hagen 9,99 € 3 x 100 gram n. measurably none *

Antiphos OFF 15,00 € 1000ml 0.43 mg 0.57 mg

Contraphos Aquaconnect 49,90 € 1000 ml 0.046 mg 0.954 mg

PhosEX JBL 9,79 € 2 x 315 gram 0.34 mg 0.66 mg

ElimiPhos Tropic marine 18,00 € 2 x 100 gram 0.069 mg 0.931 mg

BioPhos II Korallenzucht 29,00 € 1000 ml 0.34 mg 0.66 mg

Remarkablenesses:

ElimiPhos showed an easy white clouding after washing with the first passage. During passage number 2 was likewise clear the water however then. Rowaphos/Contraphos showed an orange clouding and it fine components was washed. These did not sink to soil (sedimentieren) Antiphos showed when flushing any clouding.

* Note to the test with Green x: It was to be accomplished us not possible one precise measurement, since the value and/or the colour lay over 0,43 mg phosphate content. Became estimated no or hardly a Absorbtion took place. The color change became estimated on scarcely 1 mg phosphate. Without dilution rows one did. The absorber separated thereby after the first test row.

Result to test passage 1:

This first test showed the Contraphos of Aquaconnect as well as ElimiPhos of Tropic marine at the fastest phosphate absorbs.

Note: The products Contraphos and Rowaphos are identical our knowledge. Therefore only Contraphos was tested by the company Aquaconnect. As the reduction in a long term test behaves cannot unfortunately yet be clarified at present. Possibly other absorbers need simply longer.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Test 2 - Photograph capacity:

After the Erstmessung interested us how much phosphate is taken up. Since this not simply to measure is we the following test sequence considered.

We set a phosphate solution for 6 mg. Then came exactly 2 gram of each absorber into a syringe planned for it. In addition 50 ml the phosphate solution admit-admitting that keep-eats was swivelled the mixture two hours long, regularly and measured then finally.

The results:

Product Company Augang Suppl.-smooth-eat Absorbtion

Phospaht Reduct Amtra 6 mg/L 0,86 mg/L 5,14 mg/L

Antiphos OFF 6 mg/L approx.. 2,0 mg/L approx.. 4,00 mg/L *

Contraphos Aquaconnect 6 mg/L 0,25 mg/L 5,75 mg/L

PhosEX JBL 6 mg/L approx.. 2,0 mg/L approx.. 4,00 mg/L *

ElimiPhos Tropic marine 6 mg/L 0,25 mg/L 5,75 mg/L

BioPhos II Korallenzucht 6 mg/L 0,86 mg/L 5,14 mg/L

* The two absorbers PhosEx and Antiphos do not liesen themselves with the Merck Aquaquant despite dilution with test 2 exactly determine. The colour leaves the conclusion to a residual value by 2,0 mg with both products remained remaining.

Also permits this somewhat higher values, opposite the other absorbers, no genuine conclusion. Because none can say like the further admission at phosphate would have behaved. It is quite in the range of the possible some the absorber slow phosphate absorbs in last consequence however then on similar stocktaking values to come can.

Thus as locking result only one remains for us:

All absorbers in the test, Green x naturally excluded, make exactly which them to do are: Phosphate absorb. Green x makes that probably also, but absorber conditionally can it probably one while last, until a noticeable suppl.-smooth-eat to be measured had. However Green x within the sea water range hardly plays a role.

The results which we so far obtain could to rate are as quite positive. It can be in the long run seen the absorbers differently to behave and then crucially with the admission to add be able. Thus we come not and make in the next time the sustained testing to get evenly in order clarity over the photograph capacity of the individual absorbers.

We find however that those available to absorbers already very good are at present. Above all they are important in the Aquaristik, why one should never forget regularly the phosphate content in the own aquarium to measure. Most alga problems attribute evenly not rarely to too high phosphate content.

some test of phostphate absobers was done by was a few german aquarist and here are the results

[Achilles Tang]

I personally think that its quite hard for the average reefer to determine how good a P04 removal product is because every tank is different at different times.

These lab tests will give a better idea of the actual properties rather than personal observations.

Water changes, diff amounts of food fed, diff types of food fed, addition/loss of livestocks... all may change the bioload and amount of phosphates added to water. Even the bag you place the P04 removal media in and how you position the bag affects the absorption rate and effectiveness. Sometimes the presence of macro/microalgae that absorbs phosphates for fuel will also affect perception.

I would personally recommend that fluidised reactors be used for your P04 removal media so that every single grain will be in full contact with your tank water and this will maximise the effectiveness.

(Placing it in a bag will mean a reduction in effectiveness because water will always choose the easiest & fastest passage with the least amount of resistance... so it will go around the bag rather than THROUGH the bag. The bag surface will also tend to clog over time, reducing again the amount of water going into the filter bag).

My 2 cents.

AT

[tineng]

Green x Hagen 9,99 € 3 x 100 gram n. measurably none *

No wonder my Green X didn't work!!!!

[roidan]

in short...

can we conclude that weight to weight, contraphos/rowaphos absorbs more phosphates than biophos2?

Contraphos Aquaconnect 49,90 € 1000 ml 0.046 mg 0.954 mg

BioPhos II Korallenzucht 29,00 € 1000 ml 0.34 mg 0.66 mg

if so, if biophos2 is cheaper than contraphos/rowaphos by an equivalent proportion, then it's worth it..

otherwise, its better to pay slightly more for contraphos/rowaphos

[FuEl]

I swear by rowaphos already...for me I turn the filter bag everyday.

[giantbicycle]

so...its better to flush the water direct into the position where the bag is then to let water flow cross it..cous it may pass your absorber without even going through the media ..