What test kits do you use?

[Killamanjaro]

I've been using JBL Smartscan for a while now, but I've had a few readings here and there that have clearly been errors.

Now that I'm running low, I've been thinking of switching. The best ones I can think of have been API Master Test Kit and Salifert. What do you guys use or recommend?

 

[Angus]

i'm using the API master test kit, they are all a bit of a sameness really unless you go for something lab grade, but even then it doesn't really justify the extra price, a lot of fish vets actually use the JBL testlab kit.

 

[Ispookie666]

What are you planning to measure?

Sent from my SM-N950F using Tapatalk

 

[leedsrhinojohn]

Once your tank has cycled I see no need for test kits, your plants will tell you of any deficiancies you have so save your money and spend it on some more plants or fish.

 

[Delapool]

I've been using JBL Smartscan for a while now, but I've had a few readings here and there that have clearly been errors.

Now that I'm running low, I've been thinking of switching. The best ones I can think of have been API Master Test Kit and Salifert. What do you guys use or recommend?

Is that the same as JBL Proscan with the strips and app reader? Was curious as I have that one. I found I got errors with any light shadow, removed that problem and was still a little dubious on it. Really liked the idea though, should dig them back out as such a quick test. Seemed nice for cichlid fish sheds.

Other reports here had people testing twice and getting different results. Not sure how common that was as most people would only post if an issue. I mostly got the same result testing twice but yeah, any shadow stuffed it (I guess that makes sense, I assumed some colours on card are to calibrate it so depending if they were in same shadow or not I guess).

 

[Killamanjaro]

What are you planning to measure?

Sent from my SM-N950F using Tapatalk

I'm not worried about Chlorine or Nitrite so wont really be testing for that. Its mainly Nitrates, GH, KH and PH I test for.

 

[Ispookie666]

I do have a reef tank and use Salifert and tried it on my plated tank.
I use the salifert for nitrate, KH Ca Mg and K. Use Elos for Phosphate .
Use a pH probe attached to my aquarium controller , also havr one of those PH probe pens

Sent from my SM-N950F using Tapatalk

 

[Killamanjaro]

Is that the same as JBL Proscan with the strips and app reader? Was curious as I have that one. I found I got errors with any light shadow, removed that problem and was still a little dubious on it. Really liked the idea though, should dig them back out as such a quick test. Seemed nice for cichlid fish sheds.

Other reports here had people testing twice and getting different results. Not sure how common that was as most people would only post if an issue. I mostly got the same result testing twice but yeah, any shadow stuffed it (I guess that makes sense, I assumed some colours on card are to calibrate it so depending if they were in same shadow or not I guess).

Yes thats it, the one with the strips and app. Its really easy to use and gives you numbers, logs it for you etc so I'm a big fan of it and wish there was other like it. As you've mentioned you can get off readings so you test again and get a more realistic number, so I make sure there is no shadows on the cards and take the picture in the same place to avoid lighting discrepancies. After a while I decided it may be time to try something else I'm leaning towards API Master Test Kit.

 

[Killamanjaro]

I do have a reef tank and use Salifert and tried it on my plated tank.
I use the salifert for nitrate, KH Ca Mg and K. Use Elos for Phosphate .
Use a pH probe attached to my aquarium controller , also havr one of those PH probe pens

Sent from my SM-N950F using Tapatalk

Salifert is one I always hear from reefers and they need to test and be accurate or sps in particular suffer, so I thought Salifert would have been reliable enough for a planted tank. It does work for freshwater right, it isnt exclusively saltwater?

 

[Ispookie666]

I Use it mate and checked it against my water suppliers test results

Sent from my SM-N950F using Tapatalk

 

[kadoxu]

API Master Test Kit for cheap(ish) tests
and Hanna Pocket Checkers (pricey) for accuracy.

 

[ian_m]

Before making any decisions on fresh water test kits and varying your tank husbandry depending on the results please please please read this...

https://www.ukaps.org/forum/threads/what-about-test-kits.52487/

 

[Delapool]

Yes thats it, the one with the strips and app. Its really easy to use and gives you numbers, logs it for you etc so I'm a big fan of it and wish there was other like it. As you've mentioned you can get off readings so you test again and get a more realistic number, so I make sure there is no shadows on the cards and take the picture in the same place to avoid lighting discrepancies. After a while I decided it may be time to try something else I'm leaning towards API Master Test Kit.

Thanks for that - matches my thoughts on it. I don’t know of any others, one of the shops here imported it. Bit of interest from people with racks of 6 footers for cichlids and wanting to quickly keep an eye on things. I was doing the same - found a good place to take photo and that solved a lot of issues I was seeing. Bit too expensive though for me here.

 

[alto]

Before making any decisions on fresh water test kits and varying your tank husbandry depending on the results please please please read this...

https://www.ukaps.org/forum/threads/what-about-test-kits.52487/

From the sticky

1. Hobby grade test kits, for our purposes are inaccurate. That would not be so bad in and of itself but they are also inconsistently inaccurate. This means that one day they can be merely marginally wrong and the next day the same kit can be grossly inaccurate. A simple change in humidity can throw off a kit’s response.

Did you actually carry out any controlled tests?
eg,
Measure standard(s) of known concentration, "blanks" (usually RODI water), various samples on "one day" and "the next day"?

The chemistries in these kits are all aqueous based & the intended sample is also aqueous based
- can you explain how changes in humidity can affect the results


Humidity and improper storage & handling are well documented isssues with test "papers" & "strip" technology

Improper storage & handling can also affect reagents used in these test kits - the main error being the assumption that kits once opened have infinite shelf life

 

[alto]

Salifert is one I always hear from reefers and they need to test and be accurate or sps in particular suffer, so I thought Salifert would have been reliable enough for a planted tank. It does work for freshwater right, it isnt exclusively saltwater?

Some kits are exclusive to salt water OR fresh water
It's best to check with the manufacturer before using the same kit for testing both systems

Salifert, Hach, LaMotte previously supplied kits intended for freshwater and included reference standards (eg, nitrate solution of known concentration), rigorous expiration dates, storage & handling information ... but this meant these kits also sold for considerably more than API & Hagen
Reefers invested, not many freshwater people did ...

Seachem still offers kits that include reference standards, most have been developed for both freshwater & marine application

 

[ceg4048]

Did you actually carry out any controlled tests?
eg,
Measure standard(s) of known concentration, "blanks" (usually RODI water), various samples on "one day" and "the next day"?

Yes and the measuring standards made from RO water may seem adequate, however, you do not have standards water in your tank. Your tank water is loaded with many ions that fool the test kits. Nitrogen test kits are the worst performers, regardless of brand. So for example, Cl- in the water column fools the NO3 test kit. Even small amounts of NO2 will also register in the NO3 kit.

The chemistries in these kits are all aqueous based & the intended sample is also aqueous based
- can you explain how changes in humidity can affect the results

Yes, the paragraph refers to test kits that are NON-aqueous based, such as some of the Fe test kits that use powders and papers.

At the end of the day, if someone likes to test and feels good about spending money for test kits then that's just how it is, however, I doubt that people get into this hobby because they had a lifelong desire to use test kits and to prepare a battery of "standards".

The poor performance of kits combined with the poor understanding hobbyists have of the actual parameters they are measuring leads to the absurdity we observe.
As beginners, we are usually programmed by The Matrix to buy test kits, which has the primary effect of enhancing the revenue stream of whatever shop we enter. Not knowing any better we accept the "wisdom" of the LFS or advice of friends who themselves were programmed to become test kit lovers.

Obviously there are parameters we need to measure, such as temperature, pH and so forth, but we do not need to establish a new religion out of Nitrate test kits.
Armed with a few basic procedures and with patience it's very easy to set up a tank, to have it cycled and to introduce fauna without ever touching a test kit. But hobbyists at large don't really want to hear that, because it's not scientific enough. The test kit is all knowing and all seeing. All Hail...

Cheers,

 

[alto]

Lost my in depth reply but this really says it all

Example: salicyilate method for ammonia, nitrogen determination

Table 2 Interfering substances

Interfering substance Interference level

Cl–, SO42– 1000 mg/L

K+, Na+, Ca2+ 500 mg/L

CO32–, NO3–, Fe3+, Cr3+, Cr6+, Zn2+, Cu2+, Co2+, Ni2+, Hg2+ 50 mg/L

Fe2+ 25 mg/L

Sn2+ 10 mg/L

Pb2+ 5 mg/L

Ag+ 2 mg/L

Table 2 shows that the ions were individually examined to the given concentrations and do not cause interference. No cumulative effects or influences of other ions were found.

Primary amines are found and cause high-bias results. A 10,000-fold excess of urea does not interfere. All reducing agents interfere and cause low-bias results.

Note: An analyte concentration that is larger than the stated range adversely has an effect on color formation, which results in a false reading within the method range.

(apologies as I've no idea how to properly format over a table)

Source Hach Laboratoies
(as I'm far too lazy to dig out the old scientific journal publications for every kit chemistry ... though I did the appropriate research back when I also thought "really, hobby kits, what shite they must be" )


Sorry but only an idjit would do a standard curve using only RODI as the solvent, and not also aquarium water as the solvent ... result: negigible
Guess my tank lacked sufficient mystery compounds
- must be that crazy 50% weekly water change schedule

Note this tank was in the desk area of an organic synthesis laboratory, so certainly sufficient opportunity for contaminating compounds

 

[alto]

At the end of the day, if someone likes to test and feels good about spending money for test kits then that's just how it is, however, I doubt that people get into this hobby because they had a lifelong desire to use test kits and to prepare a battery of "standards".

The poor performance of kits combined with the poor understanding hobbyists have of the actual parameters they are measuring leads to the absurdity we observe.
As beginners, we are usually programmed by The Matrix to buy test kits, which has the primary effect of enhancing the revenue stream of whatever shop we enter. Not knowing any better we accept the "wisdom" of the LFS or advice of friends who themselves were programmed to become test kit lovers.

Obviously there are parameters we need to measure, such as temperature, pH and so forth, but we do not need to establish a new religion out of Nitrate test kits.
Armed with a few basic procedures and with patience it's very easy to set up a tank, to have it cycled and to introduce fauna without ever touching a test kit. But hobbyists at large don't really want to hear that, because it's not scientific enough. The test kit is all knowing and all seeing. All Hail...

Cheers,

Fairly simple to purchase test kits that include reference standards
eg, Seachem

"pH and so forth" - no idea why these measurements would be impervious to the

The poor performance of kits combined with the poor understanding hobbyists have of the actual parameters they are measuring

Aquariums have run successfully long before the advent of test kits
Unfortunately many people would rather test than water change

My disagreement is with the ideology that the kits themselves are bunk, most work just fine within the advertised parameters
User error is NOT a responsibility of the kit chemistries

 

[Edvet]

Unfortunately many people would rather test than water change

 

[ceg4048]

Fairly simple to purchase test kits that include reference standards
eg, Seachem

Yes, but so what? That is one more thing to waste your money on and which would be better spent on buying more plants or better quality equipment. Again, having standards does not help you to get better readings when you actually mix the reagents in the tank water. You have to test the tank water. How does a standard help when the water to be tested is corrupted with ions that fool the test kit?

"pH and so forth" - no idea why these measurements would be impervious to the

pH test kits are not impervious to corruption but they are less sensitive to ions in the test sample that corrupt the readings. Obviously, if the sample vessel itself is corrupted with acids or bases then yes, this will have an effect on the readings. So for example we've had cases where the hobbyist had unwittingly cleaned the test vessel with an acidic or a alkaline solution and the residue corrupted the readings. As you say, this was an error on the part of the hobbyists and not on the part of the test kit per se.

A KH test kit on the other hand is advertised as being able to quantify Carbonate Hardness, yet it doesn't always provide that value, do you agree? It actually measures alkalinity, so only in cases where the alkalinity is due to 100% CO3 does it provide a true Carbonate Hardness value.

The "...poor understanding hobbyists have of the actual parameters they are measuring..." comes into play here because few have a grasp on the differences between the two and they make judgements and poor decisions based on their lack of understanding. So yes, the KH test kit is another one of those kits that is fooled by other ions in the test sample and which does not provide any more accuracy even if standards are provided.

I think this is the point you appear to be ignoring. If the test kit was called an "Alkalinity Test Kit" instead of a "KH Test Kit" then I would not have a problem with it, but the data is false based on the kit nomenclature. You may feel this lack of distinction is OK, perhaps because you understand the difference, but I find this to be deceptive because the target audience is much less aware of the difference.

KH measurement is critical if one intends to use the information to determine CO2 levels for example, so it turns out that hobbyists are forced to outsmart the test kit in order to derive meaningful values from it's results.

I reiterate that it is extremely difficult to measure Nitrogen compounds in aquarium tank water specifically because of the compounds in the water which the reagents are incapable of distinguishing apart from the compounds of interest.

Cheers,