Test Kit for planted aquarium

[SparKy697]

I just came across some discussion in another thread and it got me thinking. Here I go heading into the whole planted tank world and I'm thinking that I will need more test equipment.

At the moment I have the basic AP Master test kit. Also a phosphate, KH, and GH kits.

EI dosing dictates that I will be overfeeding most nutrients but I'm starting to wonder if I should be testing for things like Iron and what else?

Or, is this a sure way to insanity? Do I really want to know the levels of such things? Or should I just rely on the math and keep everting high?

 

[dapellegrini]

Don't buy an FE test kit. I have heard others refer to FE kits as the mark of a novice. I have one and it is not very helpful. I think if you have your emergency kits for NH3/4, NO2 then your standard NO3 PO4, kH/gH and pH you should be set. The only two I use anymore are for NO3 and PO4, and only when something looks wrong.

NO2 and NH3/4 kits are really things you never use (if they are wrong, you will know anyways, and a PWC or two will fix those)... Still can be nice to prove what your problem was, if you would like.

I have a pH meter and use a Drop Checker with reference kH to double check my CO2, thus eliminating the need for a kH test...

HTH

**EDIT** As a side note, I find most NO3 kits hard to read anyways. The Red Sea kit has the best color differences to see what range you fall in IME. I use a Hagen/Nutrifin PO4 kit. The Hagen kits are nice, but I am not sure if it is the best one around. Works good enough for me.

Of course test kits are tricky things. These hobby grade things are rarely very accurate, and a good professional-grade one will cost too much to be worth it. Once you get into the swing of things with EI you shouldn't have to test much if at all. That is the whole premise.

If you do want to test and are concerned about accuracy, you would want to make a reference solutions from Distilled water with a premixed NO3 or PO4 for instance to the level you want, then do you test on your tank water and compare the with your reference color.

Good luck.

 

[Glenc]

I've tried just about every test kit out there, even spent the dough and got LaMotte kits. These days I only really test N03 and P04. Still use Lamotte for pin point testing, then I'll use the AP kit for N03, Seachem kit for P04 when I don't need the acuracy of the LaMotte kits. I have compared alot of the cheaper N03 and P04 kits to LaMotte, the AP N03 kit and the Seachem P04 kit are the closet to LaMotte. The Seachem P04 kit in particular is just as good.

 

[SparKy697]

That sounds good.

I like the idea of making a standard to reference. I do agree with some of the color charts being hard to read, but most the time I find I'm looking for the presence or absence of a chemical, I try not to get too freaked out about the absolute value.

I too use a pH meter, the handheld type. I find my pH to be right in the middle of the two scales and that kind of bothers me so the meter helps.

Thanks

 

[Zezmo]

I have the red sea master kit, and it works OK. Though, I almost never do any testing anymore. I use EI and large water changes, this lets me skip most testing. I use mist CO2, this lets me skip monitoring CO2 levels. In fact, I judge CO2 by algae growth more than anything.
My larger tanks have the Seachem in tank Ph tester, these seem to work well enough to monitor overall stability. Other than that I occasionally test the Kh to verify it's stability.
Now, if there is a problem, I will test everything possible. I should mention that I keep a notebook of observations and test results with over a year of data in it. It is the review of this data that has given me the confidence to skip the constant testing.
I think for most people who do not have lab or other specific metrological experience that most of the test results will be heavily skewed by the tester (reproducibility).

A few things that can influence tests:
time of day sample was taken, Consistent location and depth in tank for sample, Time from tank to test, Age of test chemicals, Accuracy of sample water size, Accuracy of the test chemical volume as added to test tube, Color of light used to observe test, Background color used to observe test, Distance to background used to observe test, Color sensitivity of viewer, Angle and Distance of viewer to tube and reference card, Time from application of test chemicals to observation time, temperature of sample water, and test chemical, and room, etc..... this list could go on for a while.

Interested in how accurately you can use a test? There is a simple study called a Gage R&R (repeatability, and reproducibility). It will take some work, but you only go through this series once and it will tell you a lot.

In it's simple form a GR&R basically consists of taking 5 consecutive measurements on 2-9 separate occasions, and then plugging the results into a formula. (the link below has a spreadsheet that does all the math for you).

Taking Ph as an example because it is the most common test most folks use. Ideally, you would buy a gallon of bottles spring water from the store and use it for the entire series of tests. This should give a reasonable constant sample to work with so that you are only focusing on accuracy of the test and the tester.

You would using this water do 5x Ph tests in a row and record the results. Do this at least 2 days in a row to get a total of 10 measurements. (minimum)
To really get good data, you should do this 3 days in a row, on 3 consecutive weeks. Sounds like a lot, but again you only ever need to do this once.
Plug these results into the spreadsheet. The results in yellow at the bottom of the spreadsheet will give you an idea of how closely you can rely on your test results.
http://webpages.charter.net/zezmo/Gage_R&R_for_aquarium_v1.xls


Note: A gage R&R looks at variations in the test and tester, not the actual test accuracy. Accuracy can only be verified against a reference solution (calibration). However, without repeatability, and reproducibility the actual accuracy of the test does not even come into play.