glutaraldehyde

[Sheraaz Essak]

Has anyone got any feedback on this product from "Aqua design" I usually look at the % of glutaraldehyde in a product I'm buying, as nothing was stated on the label or website, I emailed the company asking for some basic information, I.e the glutaraldehyde percentage used in their product. Unfortunately they weren't willing to disclose the % claiming their formula is a secret which has raised doubts on the effectiveness of their product.

Anyone that's actually used this and has some feedback, I'd really appreciate it, thank you in advance.

 

[_Maq_]

In ours, hobbyists purchase 25 % solution from lab-tools shops. O course, they prepare diluted solutions for direct use.

 

[Oldguy]

"Aqua design" I usually look at the % of glutaraldehyde in a product I'm buying,

Have not used this product. Most over the counters products of this nature are 1.5% glutaraldehyde (mysteriously activated or changed in some way) which I think is stretching the truth.
Gluderaldehyde in aqueous solution contains many dynamic molecular forms from 'straight chain' to 'cyclic'. Still some controversy in this in this area.
Not found it any good as 'liquid carbon'

purchase 25 % solution from lab-tools shops.

Yes I bought mine at approx 50% as it was the cheapest per ml. Use it diluted as a spray for BBA and as a general algaecide in the the courtyard 'bucket ponds'
In the UK its used in the equestrian world as a biocide. Was also used when mixed with formaldehyde as a clean up disinfectant after fowl pest outbreaks.

 

[oreo57]

Has anyone got any feedback on this product from "Aqua design" I usually look at the % of glutaraldehyde in a product I'm buying, as nothing was stated on the label or website, I emailed the company asking for some basic information, I.e the glutaraldehyde percentage used in their product. Unfortunately they weren't willing to disclose the % claiming their formula is a secret which has raised doubts on the effectiveness of their product.

Anyone that's actually used this and has some feedback, I'd really appreciate it, thank you in advance.

You really need to know the % glut or it is nigh impossible to dose correctly.
Never found the "recommended dose" for "CO2 replacement" to be near strong enough.
Do you have anything equivalent to this over here?

MetriCide 14 Day Sterilizing and Disinfecting Solution at HealthyKin.com

MetriCide 14 Day Sterilizing and Disinfecting Solution from HealthyKin.com is a 2.6% buffered glutaraldehyde that can be used and reused as a sterilant and high-level disinfectant on immersible, lensed and delicate instruments for up to 14 days.

www.healthykin.com

Comes with an activator which you DO NOT use. There is a Metricide "25" (? close) that contains a surfactant (eg soap) which you don't want.

Glut dosing can be a bit tricky due to some plants not tolerating it well. Vals in particular though some say one can acclimate them. mostly they just melt though.
Also some fish like Discus and trout hachlings may have issues at the higher levels .

Seachem Excel has reformulated their concentration to now be equiv. to Met 14 which makes things easier.
As you can see though at $14/gal it is a lot cheaper than Excel.
Yes there is still the "discussion" as to is this glut = to that glut.

Typical algae effective doses can go up to at least 1ml/gallon. Some have used a lot more.
Not done every day for forever btw.
For my 40 I'd do 40ml every other day for a week. YMMV.
BBA really hates it.
Breaks down in water/light very fast.

Dennerles dose:
1-3 ml per 100 l aquarium water, per day
Or in my terms 1-3ml / 26.4 gallons !!!!!
I doubt if it a very effective algae-cide at that level, well my experience showed me it isn't.
At least not for me.

Yes " nobody" believes it can substitute for CO2.

The story of liquid CO2 fertilisation – The Reliability

In the fourth part of the series “The story of liquid CO2 fertilisation” we examine what we consider to be the most important aspect. The health of your animals but also of you, the aquarium owners is our number one priority.

www.jbl.de

As a general rule it is something that needs to be used with respect (if you search enough you will find a "thesis" on why not to use it ever...
and it is a patch till one can figure out what is out of balance causing the issue in the first place.

 

[Malarky]

This is horrible stuff and the risks are well documented, is this really appropriate for hobbyist use where contamination onto skin either neat or diluted is probably unavoidable? Also, the continual selling of glutaraldehyde as 'liquid carbon' or similar is irresponsible of the manufacturers. Pesticides and the like in gardening (at least in the EU, less so in the UK post-Brexit) are reasonably well monitored, not so much for aquatic gardening it seems.

 

[oreo57]

Glutaraldehyde in air will be degraded by light within a! relatively short time period; that is, half will be
gone from air in 16 hours.......
6.3.2 Transformation and Degradation
Glutaraldehyde is a hydrophilic compound and is considered to be readily biodegradable in both water
and soil (EPA 2007; IPCS 1998; Jolibois et al. 2002; Leung 2001). It is not expected to bioaccumulate in
aquatic organisms at an appreciable rate (IPCS 1998), based on an estimate bioconcentration factor (BCF)
value of 3.2 calculated from its log Kow of -0.18 (EPA 2007). Glutaraldehyde is considered toxic to fish,
aquatic invertebrates, oysters, and shrimp (EPA 2007; IPCS 2000; NIOSH 2000); however, dilution
mitigates the risk to the aquatic environment. The risk to aquatic organisms is thought to be low under
typical, non-drought conditions and there are no appreciable risks to the terrestrial environment from
release of glutaraldehyde (IPCS 1998).

.

It was noted that glutaraldehyde is a Class D substance under the
Merchant Shipping Regulations (Control of Pollution by Noxious Liquid Substances in Bulk), Schedule I
(1987) for Great Britain, under which discharge into the sea is prohibited and discharge of residual
mixtures is subject to restrictions. Glutaraldehyde is also regulated under OSHA (U.S. Coast Guard
2004). However, since it was found to have a relatively quick half-life in water (<2 days) and has limited
regulatory concerns, the study found that glutaraldehyde has a potential for use in ballast water treatment
for marine water and freshwater use (U.S. Coast Guard 2004).

I can think of much worse household items including drain cleaners and lithium button batteries.

 

[tiger15]

Do not use any glut without knowing the concentration as you have no way of calculating the right dosage. I’m sure if you do some search you can discover the concentration from the material safety data sheet. In US, I bought the generic glut Metricide 14 and adjust the dosage based on 2.6 % versus 1.5% concentration as in Seachem excel. I have been using it after weekly water change dosing at the initial high dosage per Seachem for years. I have administered the full dosage before the tank got filled up to attain higher temporary conc of 2 to 3 times per Seachem and found no ill effect to fish. I have also used Metricide 28 by mistake for one year that contains a foamy surfactant, an unnecessary messy addictive but found no harm to fish at such low dosage. But don’t ever add the activator, nitrite, which is a toxic to fish.

 

[John q]

Do not use any glut without knowing the concentration

That's the take home piece of info. For those that don't know Api and Seachem excel is 2% easylife carbo is 2.5% apt fix is???? I'm guessing 2.5~3.0 .

 

[tiger15]

That's the take home piece of info. For those that don't know Api and Seachem excel is 2% easylife carbo is 2.5% apt fix is???? I'm guessing 2.5~3.0 .

Excel used to have 1.5% Glut years ago but now raised to 2% without changing the dosing receipt. API Carbon Booster used to have 1.6% Glut., but now probably 2%. Glut has low toxicity to fish and shrimp, and need many times over dosing to be harmful. I have compiled toxicity test results from various studies below. The initial dosing amount after water change from Seachem is 2 ppm based 1.5% Glut in the bottle.

Toxicity of glutaraldehyde

96h acute Bluegill sunfish LC50 = 11.2 mg/L

Bluegill sunfish NOEC = 10 mg/L

48h acute Oyster larvae LC50 = 2.1 mg/L

96h acute Green crabs LC50 = 465 mg/L

96h acute Grass shrimp LC50 = 41 mg/L

48h acute Daphnia magna LC50 = 0.35 mg/L

Daphnia magna NOEC = 0.32 mg/L

96h algal growth inhibition Selenastrum capricornutum ILm = 3.9 mg/L

Algal inhibition Selenastrum subcapitata IC50=1 to 1.8 mg/L

96h algal growth inhibition Scenedesmus subspicatus EC50 = 0.9 mg/L

Bacterial inhibition Sewage microbes IC50 = 25-34 mg/L

96h O. mykiss (Trout hatch rate) IC50 = 1.82 mg/L

96h C. dubia (Daphnia reproduction) IC50 = 4.7 mg/L

*EC=Effective concentration; IC=Inhibition concentration; LC=Lethal concentration;

NOEC=No observed effect concentration

 

[_Maq_]

Toxicity of glutaraldehyde

Any data for aquatic plants?
I've used glutaraldehyde only once in my life. I don't know the concentration but I'm sure I followed manufacturer's instruction. It killed Egeria and seriously damaged Sagittaria subulata.

 

[zozo]

Any data for aquatic plants?
I've used glutaraldehyde only once in my life. I don't know the concentration but I'm sure I followed manufacturer's instruction. It killed Egeria and seriously damaged Sagittaria subulata.

Yes, it is already known that Glutaraldehyde can damage the cell tissue of certain true aquatic plants. Egeria is only one of them Vallisneria, and some Potamogeton sp. can be added to this list as well... But there aren't many true aquatic plants, the majority of plants we use in the hobby are bog plants. It seems true aquatics followed a different path in evolution and has a much more sensitive cell structure than the bog plant that is forced into submerged form. In technical terms, we could say a submerged form bog plant is already terrestrial-ready to revert to the next step, the true aquatic doesn't need this.

Glut is a disinfectant and damages organic cell walls, hence it's an algaecide, true aquatic plants are very close to how algae are built and are the follow-up from the Chara sp. as the intermediate hydrophyte form from sporophyte to macrophyte. 🙂

It's never stated on the label but I bet if glut kills algae cells and cells from true aquatic plants it will definitively not aid other single-cell aquatic organisms that might be beneficial. And I also bet they know it does but it's swept under the carpet for commercial reasons. They don't tell... What you don't know doesn't hurt...

If used for spot treatment to kill algae it also can kill a bog plant such as Sagittaria sp. and all others. Or if for some reason the concentration was temporarily a tad too high with adding it the the tank. (Unintentional spot treatment)

 

[Mortis]

I just dose regularly as an algae inhibitor and for spot treatment. Dont buy 25% solution if you dont have a fume cabinet or equipment to dilute it safely. The easiest option is to buy something like Cidex from Johnson & J which is at 3.5% conc and dilute it 50-50 with water and dose that. Make sure it doesnt already have an activator or other ingredients and if the activator comes separately then discard it.

 

[tiger15]

Any data for aquatic plants?
I've used glutaraldehyde only once in my life. I don't know the concentration but I'm sure I followed manufacturer's instruction. It killed Egeria and seriously damaged Sagittaria subulata.

Glut is used widely as a biocide, not herbicide. It has plenty of toxicity test data on aquatic organisms but don’t expect to find any data on higher plants. I use glut for systemic water treatment , not spot treatment as it is much cheaper to spray with peroxide on exposed plants during water change.

 

[tiger15]

Any data for aquatic plants?
I've used glutaraldehyde only once in my life. I don't know the concentration but I'm sure I followed manufacturer's instruction. It killed Egeria and seriously damaged Sagittaria subulata.

I used glut for years at high initial dosage after weekly water change, and it has no effect on Sag subulata. Sag is a bog plant not expected to be sensitive to Glut. Egeria, hornwort, Val’s and all mosses are sensitive, but repeated uses may develop resistant strain if a few survive. Lately, to my disappointment, a few patches of unwanted Java moss popped up after years of Glut usage.

 

[Genahanney]

Hi.
Why is glutaraldehyde called liquid CO2?
Do bacteria feed on this form of carbon (if in small, non-lethal concentrations)?

 

[dw1305]

Hi all,

Why is glutaraldehyde called liquid CO2?

Sleight of hand really, they have nothing to do with CO2, or any form of Dissolved Inorganic Carbon (D(T)IC).

The vendors make use of the fact that some of the long chain carbon (C) compounds are similar to some of the intermediate compounds found in photosynthesis.

If you look at the advertising blurb for <"Seachem Flourish Excel"> it says

Flourish Excel is a source of bioavailable organic carbon............

.... The reason plants need CO2 is to produce longer chain carbon compounds also known as photosynthetic intermediates. Photosynthetic intermediates includes compounds such as ribulose 1,5-bisphosphate, and 2-carboxy-3-keto-D-arabinitol 1,5 bisphosphate. Although the names are complicated, the structures are quite simple (5 carbon chains). Flourish Excel™ does not contain these specific compounds per se, but one that is quite similar. By dosing with Flourish Excel™ you bypass the involvement of CO2 and introduce the already finished, structurally similar compounds. It is in its structural similarity that Flourish Excel™ is able to be utilized in the carbon chain building process of photosynthesis. Simple chemical or enzymatic steps can easily convert it to any one to any one of the above named compounds (or a variety of others).

Which is either a <"work of genius"> or making 2 + 2 = 5.

cheers Darrel

 

[si walker]

I thought that someone the other day said that APT Fix was different in some way to Glut?
Maybe it was me?
In my own head.
Again.
Must get out more.....

 

[dw1305]

Hi all,

I thought that someone the other day said that APT Fix was different in some way to Glut?
Maybe it was me?
In my own head.
Again.
Must get out more.....

We have a thread <"APT Fix">........... @jolt100 says

...... A possible candidate would be 2,3 epoxy propan 1 al ( also known as Glycinaldehyde; 2,3-Epoxy-1-propanal; 2,3-Epoxypropanal; 2,3-Epoxypropionaldehyde; Epihydrinaldehyde; Epihydrine aldehyde; Epoxypropanal; Formyloxiran; Glycidal; Oxirane-carboxaldehyde; Propionaldehyde, 2,3-epoxy-; Oxiranecarboxaldehyde😉
This is basically Glutaraldehyde with an epoxy linkage. I don't know how they get away with bypassing health and safety if it is this as both the aldehyde and epoxy groups would make this irritant at the least and more likely toxic .
I haven't been able to find an EU source, possibly its because of the REACH regulations, but it is available in China.
Unfortunately after retiring I no longer have access to any analytical equipment so its just hypothesis. If anyone has any other ideas?

cheers Darrel

 

[Andy Pierce]

Hi.
Why is glutaraldehyde called liquid CO2?
Do bacteria feed on this form of carbon (if in small, non-lethal concentrations)?

The general observation is that submerged plants grow better in the presence of water-column glutaraldehyde which is at least observationally reminiscent of what happens when you inject CO2 gas. We pretty much now understand these work by different mechanisms: glutaraldehyde has algaecidal properties, and anything that reduces the algae burden in the aquarium will indirectly benefit plants through reduced competition for nutrients and light etc. Unlike injected CO2 gas, glutaraldehyde is not meaningfully used as a carbon source by plants (and probably not bacteria either). I'm mostly willing to give companies selling 'liquid carbon' the benefit of the doubt that they are not deliberately trying to mislead the consumer, but rather have taken some 'poetic license' with their description.

 

[ian_m]

Unlike injected CO2 gas, glutaraldehyde is not meaningfully used as a carbon source by plants (and probably not bacteria either)

There have been experiments done using carbon 13 versions of glutaraldehyde based compounds and mass spectrometer of plant material reveals it contains carbon 13. Not sure if quantities taken up are meaningful but there is some science behind liquid carbon.

The Seachem versions of liquid carbon just last longer in the water column than straight glutaraldehyde.

I dose small quantities of liquid carbon (as well as CO2 injection) and it certainly keeps algae at bay, especially after a major water dirty during major plant re-arrangements.