Supplementing With Red Sea ABC+ A conservative approach

[ShooterRick]

Since I wish to keep a mixed reef system I was looking for a simple, measurable method of maintaining the basic and trace elements of the tank at optimum levels. I already had the Red Sea foundation test kit for Ak,Mg, and Ca. It seemed logical to use their supplements. After doing some reading I purchased the ABC+ powder for the purpose.

RS ABC+ supplement is for small tanks of 75 gal or less. I have a 72 gal bowfront with a 20 gal sump and estimate after substrate and rock about 75 gals total in the system. It is dosed based on two primary considerations. First the type of tank being maintained, ie soft corals and frags, Lps, Sps corals and so on. Secondly the dose is measured and administered based on the Ca uptake of the system. It is recommended as a daily dose being measured by testing once a week.

My approach: After some reading I felt I understood the system to do a controlled testing of the supplement. After testing for Ak, 10.5, Mg, 1150, and Ca 435 tonight I felt I had enoeph breathing room to administer a dose of 1/3 the recommendation based on the Ca reading. This way I should be able to test tomorrow evening and get a feel for how the total base elements are changed from tonight. It seems logical that this approach will give me an idea if I am understanding the sytem correctly.

Any thoughts welcomed.

[Chasman]

Just a quick thought as it is late, but Bulk Reef Supply has some good info on dosing and such. I only say that because I've learned it there. I don't rep them or anything. They have some good vids on dosing and chems and such.

[ShooterRick]

After 2 days dosing with the RS ABC+ I ceased the applications. I was about to freak out when Mg levels reached 1500 tonight and began researching to see if I had done harm to my tank. Thankfully it did not take long to discover as reported by Salifert that natural sea water contains Mg levels between 1300 and 1500 and that in one article it was referenced that a diliberate elevated Mg level of 1600 was used to control a specific algae problem and was maintained at that level for 3 months with no ill effects. (I apologize for not writing down the sources to my findings but I was not thinking of this post at the time.)

A couple of considerations I had not taken into account was that just a few days ago I had done a 15% water change and Mg levels were most likely at a exceptable level. Secondly I had been trying to increase my Ca levels and while researching the Mg I discovered most Ca supplements either by accident or design have Mg in them. Mg it seems coats the Ca crystals to prevent percipitation of the Ca. It can be confusing when major supplement companies do not list the Mg as a ingredient but is there. Again I appologize for not referencing the sources.

My Kh is 10.8 and Ca levels around 400 and I was trying to increase the Ca to about 450 for my few frags. I have decided to not add any supplements to the tank until waiting and testing this weekend. My Kenyan tree leather frag shows significant growth in 10 days. My green star gregorian is full and open, my green stripe mushroom may be showing signs of dividing. The candy cane looks nice and full but no new heads of yet.


comments welcome

[chrisfont23]

Studies show that striving to achieve a dKH level at (an acceptable, within range) level between 8 and 12 or striving to do the same with Calcium (again, at an acceptable, within range level) between 380 and 450 have no effect whatsoever on your corals. So "aiming" for 9.8 and 420 will not make a difference than if you were at 8.6 and 431. Out of those ranges is a different story.

Here's the study: Chemistry And The Aquarium: Solving Calcium And Alkalinity Problems — Advanced Aquarist | Aquarist Magazine and Blog CTRL + F and search for "inherently"

Here is what I was paraphrasing:

"If you are anywhere within these ranges for both parameters, you do not need to perform any correction on your tank chemistry, though you may choose to do so for other reasons. In this sense it makes no difference what the relationship is between the two values. If alkalinity is 4 meq/L, it is not inherently any “better” forcalcium to be at 380 ppm or 450 ppm. Also, these ranges are somewhat arbitrary, especially at the high end. In fact, the primary reason for having a high end at all is that it is often difficult to keep one of these parameters above the minimum end of the range if the other is over the top end. So if one of these parameters is slightly above the high end, and the other is OK, that is not a problem worth worrying about.
One of the reasons that you may find compelling to adjust values even when within the recommended range (or outside but close to it) relates to test kit errors. All measurements of calcium and alkalinity have some uncertainty associated with them. Even if the kit is a reliable one, you may still want to strive to be in the center of the range to make it less likely that you are actually outside of it and only appear to be inside of it due to uncertainties in the measurement. This issue is especially important at the low end of the ranges, and not so important at the high ends."

Happy Reefing..and reading.

[chrisfont23]

I have decided to not add any supplements to the tank until waiting and testing this weekend. My Kenyan tree leather frag shows significant growth in 10 days. My green star gregorian is full and open, my green stripe mushroom may be showing signs of dividing. The candy cane looks nice and full but no new heads of yet.

comments welcome

Call me crazy, but if your corals are showing growth AND your fish are not showing any ill signs of stress, I wouldn't upset the apple cart. Achieve balance. ie, add 'x' ml a day per week. And to take it a step further, don't mess with the water change. Leave it alone. Larger tanks are more forgiving and I am using that to an advantage. Now I am not saying run a tank where your nitrate levels are in the 100s but why break something if you don't need to fix it?

[ShooterRick]

Studies show that striving to achieve a dKH level at (an acceptable, within range) level between 8 and 12 or striving to do the same with Calcium (again, at an acceptable, within range level) between 380 and 450 have no effect whatsoever on your corals. So "aiming" for 9.8 and 420 will not make a difference than if you were at 8.6 and 431. Out of those ranges is a different story.

Here's the study: Chemistry And The Aquarium: Solving Calcium And Alkalinity Problems — Advanced Aquarist | Aquarist Magazine and Blog CTRL + F and search for "inherently"

Here is what I was paraphrasing:

"If you are anywhere within these ranges for both parameters, you do not need to perform any correction on your tank chemistry, though you may choose to do so for other reasons. In this sense it makes no difference what the relationship is between the two values. If alkalinity is 4 meq/L, it is not inherently any “better” forcalcium to be at 380 ppm or 450 ppm. Also, these ranges are somewhat arbitrary, especially at the high end. In fact, the primary reason for having a high end at all is that it is often difficult to keep one of these parameters above the minimum end of the range if the other is over the top end. So if one of these parameters is slightly above the high end, and the other is OK, that is not a problem worth worrying about.
One of the reasons that you may find compelling to adjust values even when within the recommended range (or outside but close to it) relates to test kit errors. All measurements of calcium and alkalinity have some uncertainty associated with them. Even if the kit is a reliable one, you may still want to strive to be in the center of the range to make it less likely that you are actually outside of it and only appear to be inside of it due to uncertainties in the measurement. This issue is especially important at the low end of the ranges, and not so important at the high ends."

Happy Reefing..and reading.

Thanks for the info. I was trying to get these to as close as Red Sea suggests for a specific tank population (frags). Their ABC+ supplement is dosed based on current Ca levels listed for specific tank type. If I understand your position these basic tank elements listed by them as a goal for certain tanks is a myth? Lots to learn! LOL

[ShooterRick]

Call me crazy, but if your corals are showing growth AND your fish are not showing any ill signs of stress, I wouldn't upset the apple cart. Achieve balance. ie, add 'x' ml a day per week. And to take it a step further, don't mess with the water change. Leave it alone. Larger tanks are more forgiving and I am using that to an advantage. Now I am not saying run a tank where your nitrate levels are in the 100s but why break something if you don't need to fix it?

Since Mg is 1500 tonight and the ABC+ supplement contains significant Mg, would it be prudent to continue dosing Mg?

[chrisfont23]

Lets put it this way...at some point you will find balance in your tank. For me it's measurable - I dose TLF Two Part Solution at 10 ml of Calcium and 20 ml of Alk daily. My levels stay in the mid ranges. I can't remember the last time I scuffled keeping them between acceptable levels...and since the days of my 29g have given up on the perfect balance (ie. harmony between the big three). Maybe that is crappy advice, who knows. For me, I just know they're there in the mid range. It cuts down on the testing. And most of all it cuts down on the fretting!

[chrisfont23]

Since Mg is 1500 tonight and the ABC+ supplement contains significant Mg, would it be prudent to continue dosing Mg?

Nah

[ShooterRick]

Ok I am stepping back and taking a deep breath. LOL Red Seas ABC+ supplement is an all in one product. I have decided to take the later approach offered by Red Sea for this supplement.

Besides the daily doseing schedule offered for this supplement they also provide a weekly schedule. I am going to opt for the weekly dose schedule based on testing Ca, and see how all the basic foundation elements testing goes that way. I will continue my current once a month water changes since my Nitrates and trites always read a solid 0.00. I think this is as simple as I can make it and not drive myself crazy!

Cristoff I think you offer some common sense when you state to strive for a level where all is in the norm and not to try to hard to get the levels perfectly balanced. I work in a technical field for almost 40 years and that makes me a bit of a perfectionist. I also have learned that perfection is never always achievable but satisfactory is! I am breathing easier already.

[chrisfont23]

I hear you. I am in a similar field (tech/programming) and have long since decided to enjoy this hobby rather than tinker with it to perfection.

[ShooterRick]

After taking a deep breath and ignoring the tank levels for 1 week things seem to have stabilized and a better balance of the foundation elements has been noted. I am using the ABC+ Red Sea supplement and last week based on the calcium uptake I applied the recommended dosage and walked away.

One week today and levels are Ak 10.9, Mg 1600, Ca 425. I am on a weekly dosing schedule based on the recommendations of the RS instructions for LPS corals. Compared to last weeks recommended dosage of 120 grams of supplement todays readings only required about 20 grams. Walking away for another week.

I do plan on buying the individual Ca and Ak Red Sea supplements in order to adjust each individually if needed. Mg seems to always run on the high end with the ABC+ product.

[chrisfont23]

Now that's good advice

[ShooterRick]

Thanks. Things are alot less stressful with this approach. We are enjoying the tank more and plan on adding a nem in April. The tank will be more mature then. I am adding the nem before any more corals to give the critter the choice of location without creating a territorial concern of it stinging the corals. I should make comment the ABC+ supplement though easy to understand and apply is really not suitable for a tank over 100 gal. It works well for me in the 72 bowfront but would be problematic and not very cost effective in larger tanks as stated by Red Sea.

[chrisfont23]

Thanks. Things are alot less stressful with this approach. We are enjoying the tank more and plan on adding a nem in April. The tank will be more mature then. I am adding the nem before any more corals to give the critter the choice of location without creating a territorial concern of it stinging the corals. I should make comment the ABC+ supplement though easy to understand and apply is really not suitable for a tank over 100 gal. It works well for me in the 72 bowfront but would be problematic and not very cost effective in larger tanks as stated by Red Sea.

Cool man, and I am glad to hear you are happier. Be careful with that nem. From what I read, a lot of them are more trouble than they are worth. Again, this is probably opinion fueled by reading too many forum posts on the web, but I would do some homework before you stick one in there.

[ShooterRick]

The tank seems to be responding well to the weekly dosing schedule with Red Sea ABC+ supplement. Numbers this week on the foundation elements are similar to last weeks with Kh,10.5, Mg,1500, Ca,430. The recommended dosage for this week based on Ca uptake was 21gms. This was about the same dose as last weeks so things seem stable. Mg while 1500 was down from last weeks 1600 and I am hoping it will continue to fall to at least 1400.

All in all I think these numbers are reasonable for a weekly testing and dosage schedule.

[Reefing Madness]

The tank seems to be responding well to the weekly dosing schedule with Red Sea ABC+ supplement. Numbers this week on the foundation elements are similar to last weeks with Kh,10.5, Mg,1500, Ca,430. The recommended dosage for this week based on Ca uptake was 21gms. This was about the same dose as last weeks so things seem stable. Mg while 1500 was down from last weeks 1600 and I am hoping it will continue to fall to at least 1400.

All in all I think these numbers are reasonable for a weekly testing and dosage schedule.

Yup, pretty good numbers there.

[chrisfont23]

Sounds like u found a good routine.