Alastair said:I'd have thought when it came to changing the carbon, it would be a chore in itself seperating it out from the purigen and vice versa when it came to recharging the purigen
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
easerthegeezer said:Im curious why people have started to add carbon and phosphate remover?
I know Mark evans does on his current tank but said himself he was just trying it... we dose phosphates so why then remove it and the speculation that carbon removes goodness from the water that plants will use?
My 2 pence would be to take out the rowaphos and carbon, problem solved.
Antipofish said:Iain. Apparently (and Im no expert) there are phosphates and then there are PHOSPHATES. The ones we add do not get removed by the phosphate removers. Beyond that you will have to find the thread that covers it. Something to do with organics ? I was as confused as this reply sounds, but there is more to it than removing what we put in 🙂
easerthegeezer said:Antipofish said:Iain. Apparently (and Im no expert) there are phosphates and then there are PHOSPHATES. The ones we add do not get removed by the phosphate removers. Beyond that you will have to find the thread that covers it. Something to do with organics ? I was as confused as this reply sounds, but there is more to it than removing what we put in 🙂
I have never heard of PHOSPHATES having a negative effect on a planted aquarium..?
Sounds like a marketing ploy to me
I would be interested to know what the science behind it is, if any.
Technically not quite, between pH5 - pH8 you mainly get a mix of HPO4-- and H2PO4- ions, below that pH you get H3PO4 and at high pH PO4--- . I don't think this makes any difference, and I would be fairly surprised if there is any validity inPretty sure that in solution, all phosphate ions are equivalent.
Without being overly cynical if I knew that phosphates were known to be a major cause of the eutrophication of fresh waters, even at extremely low levels, and almost impossible to test for without lab grade kit, I might be quite keen on selling a product that you can make all sorts of claims for, but that no-one can test.if Apparently (and Im no expert) there are phosphates and then there are PHOSPHATES. The ones we add do not get removed by the phosphate removers.
Agree, in fact I can't see the point of any chemical filtration media, unless there is a specific solute that needs removing (carbon after medication etc).And seriously, who can be ar*ed using a media that needs replacing every month?
If it is Rowaphos it would. This is another one I'm a bit agnostic about however. Diatoms can only incorporate orthosilicic acid (H4SiO4) to make their "skeletons" (Frustule), so silica is a bit of a red herring.actually i think the phosphate remover doubles as a silica remover
dw1305 said:If it is Rowaphos it would. This is another one I'm a bit agnostic about however. Diatoms can only incorporate orthosilicic acid (H4SiO4) to make their "skeletons" (Frustule), so silica is a bit of a red herring.
Yes, but silicic acids are formed by acidification of silicate salts (such as sodium silicate) in aqueous solution, not from the silicon (SiO2) in diatom shells. Diatom shells don't dissolve, they accumulate in huge amounts in sediments. This is the biogeochemical cycle for marine environments:orthosilicic acid just a dissolved form of silica, which as I understand isn't very soluble but when it does dissolve it can result in other silicic acids as well
"......This family of compounds have the general formula [SiOx(OH)4-2x]n.[1][2] Some simple silicic acids have been identified, but only in very dilute aqueous solution, such as metasilicic acid (H2SiO3), orthosilicic acid (H4SiO4, pKa1=9.84, pKa2=13.2 at 25 °C), disilicic acid (H2Si2O5), and pyrosilicic acid (H6Si2O7);....."The use of silicon by diatoms is believed by many researchers to be the key to their ecological success. In a now classic study, Egge & Aksnes (1992)[16] found that diatom dominance of mesocosm communities was directly related to the availability of silicic acid — when concentrations were greater than 2 mmol m-3, they found that diatoms typically represented more than 70% of the phytoplankton community. Raven (1983)[17] noted that, relative to organic cell walls, silica frustules require less energy to synthesize (approximately 8% of a comparable organic wall), potentially a significant saving on the overall cell energy budget. Other researchers[18] have suggested that the biogenic silica in diatom cell walls acts as an effective pH buffering agent, facilitating the conversion of bicarbonate to dissolved CO2 (which is more readily assimilated). Notwithstanding the possible advantages conferred by silicon, diatoms typically have higher growth rates than other algae of a corresponding size.[12] Diatoms occur in virtually every environment that contains water. This includes not only oceans, seas, lakes and streams, but also soil.