Epsom salts to raise GH!! Good or Bad?

[BigRock]

Ok so after a few weeks of using Epsom salts to raise GH i started to get a little iffy on it, due to a few things.

#1 It has a laxative effect on fish, and on humans, its used to treat dropsy aswell because it draws fluid from the body which if your not sick that's a bad thing.

#2 fish,just like people become dependant on laxatives,its not a good thing in the long run for both ppl and fish, the muscles associated with moving waste through the gut quit working as efficiently because the laxative does alot of the job for them. Apparently if you don't know exactly how much Epsom salts is too much or if you use it to often (e.g. every water change) the salts build up.

#3 it also has a sedative effect along with the laxative effect, which might be useful in some cases but its all very un-natural and when you think about it you wouldn't like being on laxatives 24/7 esp if it wasn't necessary! So why would the fish like it? Lastly I'll admit I thought the fish were going good on the whole Epsom salt thing but I think they were just going good because of the small amount of sea salt I was adding to boost iodine in the water which apparently is extremely important for fish and the mineral quickly depletes from the water and the bad effects of iodine deficiency on fish are proven to be numerous.

But in general I wasn't happy with the way my featherfins started to look and act after a couple weeks using Epsom salts and a few days ago I started using riftlake salts again and their looking better all round in general (and if you want an indicator of good or bad water conditions that effect colour and active behaviour in fish you cant get a better one than cyathopharynx as you'll get far from decent colour from these fish if general good water conditions are off!) or atleast they wont be coloured for long. So yeh I for one am NOT gonna be using anymore Epsom salts to raise GH and recommend ppl who do use it to take a close look at the facts of its effects etc and take a close look at wether your fish are actually doing as well as they could or should be while living in a sedative/laxative state 24/7. Theres many who debate this and say that their fish do well on the Epsom salt/bi-carb/marine salt D.I.Y. buffer but theres many more who consider it a no go, and now that I think of it the issue of the laxative effect alone is enough for me to consider epsom salt a no go for my fish. Cheers ;

[The Tech Den]

Good to see you gave it a go and did the test for yourself.

[efc]

Good call bigrock. Lake tang water chemistry is extremely complex and impossible to replicate. (I believe thats a direct quote from the Ad man himself)

Aquasonic buffers in combination with heaps of crushed coral bones and oyster shells is about as close as you can get

[Rod]

Have you had a look a Tang chemistry....

It's high in Magnesium ions....

My additives Epsom salt, bi carb soda, KCl

My brevis like it!

So do my occys

Edited July 29, 2013 by Rod

[BigRock]

Have you had a look a Tang chemistry....

It's high in Magnesium ions....

My additives Epsom salt, bi carb soda, KCl

My brevis like it!

yeh well again more hobbiests agree and say that their fish don't like it compared to the amount of ppl who think their fish do! and not only does it seem a better idea to me to go with the majority but again when you consider that it ''IS'' a laxative its just absurd to think one can justify why a laxative should be used on the fish or how it can be a good thing, esp in the long run, and just coz they might like it doesn't mean they wont get dependant on it and end up with all the issues that come with prolonged laxative use which we all know isn't a good thing for us so how can it be good for any other animal?

Edited July 29, 2013 by BigRock

[BigRock]

just a quick quote from one of the many threads i been looking up on Epsom salts since last week to decide if im goin back to riftlake. >>>> ''At the PCCA meeting last Saturday, our speaker cautioned against

using Epsom salts (magnesium sulfate). He claimed that the

carbonate form of magnesium is far superior, as the sulfate

form is likely to cause a condition "akin to acid rain". I'm

not a chemist, and I sure don't want to take a chance of

making my tanganyikan tank water acid, so I'll heed his

advice.''

but btw I cant stress this enough, theres a big issue in regards to the over-use of Epsom salts, that's what most ppl are considering to be a problem, maybe you just got the amount down pat but its still a laxative so its out of the question for me esp when its mainly done as a D.I.Y. to begin with just to cheap out a bit on buffers, so obviously its easy to fool yourself into thinking its good because its cheaper and it ''seems'' to be working coz the fish aren't dead lol ,....nah something fishy with this whole Epsom thing and as I mentioned I noticed my featherfins weren't doing as good as they were b4 the Epsom nor as good as they ever were during keeping them for most of the 20+years of being into the hobby, so yeh it just didn't cut it for the furcifer anyway and the negative effect of Epsom was clear to me as a red bus on the street, not to mention the negative facts listed about Epsom salts and its workings etc ;

Edited July 29, 2013 by BigRock

[gingerbeer]

I have been comparing the commonly used DIY formula with a reported breakdown of the lake chemistry, and the magensium is high and we need to hit that, but we are putting in a lot of sulphates compared with lake chemistry, similarly a lot of chlorides. Do they gas out?

[Rod]

Ahhhh....the beauty of keeping fish

Personally I've never subscribed to the majority rules theory....once everyone thought the world was flat

I read, experiment, find what works or me and share.....I really don't care if it complies with others or doesn't

Sorry if my disagreeing with your theory upsets you....but I do disagree

Just the same......it's ok with me if you disagree with me....you are not the first

[BigRock]

Ahhhh....the beauty of keeping fish

Personally I've never subscribed to the majority rules theory....once everyone thought the world was flat

I read, experiment, find what works or me and share.....I really don't care if it complies with others or doesn't

Sorry if my disagreeing with your theory upsets you....but I do disagree

Just the same......it's ok with me if you disagree with me....you are not the first

Lol true but I don't go with the majority for the hell of it or let the majority sway my decisions I go with the majority hands down after and only after I see that it confirms my opinion of the matter to begin with, I knew all this about Epsom b4 I started using it ok coz I done the research, so tried it myself because I also don't give a damn about majority opinions to a certain extent, and the end result was me seeing that my fish simply weren't doing well on the Epsom as they do with the riftlake or other buffers

[BigRock]

I have been comparing the commonly used DIY formula with a reported breakdown of the lake chemistry, and the magensium is high and we need to hit that, but we are putting in a lot of sulphates compared with lake chemistry, similarly a lot of chlorides. Do they gas out?

true and although the lake is high in magnesium ions its coupled with heaps of other ions and things like calcium all at proper ratios etc and I cant see how Epsom duplicates that even when mixed with marine salt, and apparently magnesium sulphate is NOT a salt but a naturally occurring pure mineral compound of magnesium and sulphate. Im no chemist lol but who knows what type of magnesium is in the lake as there are many forms of it and who knows what its at work with, and the only thing that spouts a decent replica of all this lake chemistry is the riftlake salts, (we need to find out if theres Epsom salts in that stuff coz if there isn't that shoud raise more red flags about using it and prove its not needed etc)

[Donny@ageofaquariums]

You normally shouldnt dose anything without being able to test for it.

I mean those dosing epsoms, do you check your GH or magensium levels to ensure you are not over dosing?

I know I am going to sound hypocritical saying I use the aquasonic riftlake salt AND dont test........

but thats why I use it, because its blended to be under dosed at the reccomended dose rate.

That said if I had mineral rich bore water, you can be sure I would be testing before adding any more minerals!

[Rod]

A few days ago somebody was asking about Tanganyikan Water Chemistry. I

was pretty busy. Now I've got some time. Hope it's not too late to help.

Here goes...

Malawi water chemistry is fairly straightforward, and, truth to tell,

pretty boring. Tanganyika is around all sorts of (non-basaltic)

volcanoes, and as such picks up so quirky chemistry. Also, Tanganyika is

incredibly stable in most ways, and never really "turns over," like most

lakes. As such, its depths are completely anaerobic and (recent theory

holds) is currently forming a petroleum deposit (that will be ready to

drill in a few million years).

Tanganyika is huge. When we discuss water chemistry we assume we're

talking about the lake's upper 20 or so meters, and far away from a river

(which changes the local chemistry greatly). PH of Tanganyika is 7.3 -

8.0, which is sorta basic. Malawi, by comparison, is 7.7 - 8.6, which is

getting up there. Tanganyika is 10 - 12 *dH (German degrees

hardness--don't have the right symbol on my terminal), which is slightly

to moderately hard (= about 150 - 200 mg/L CaCO3 or equivalent). Malawi

is 6 - 10 *dH, with is moderatly soft to slightly hard. Most aquarists

think these lakes are "very extremely hard" water. This is not so.

Hardness is defined as the concentration of multivalent metallic cations

in solution. This DOES NOT include Na+, since it's NOT multivalent).

Hardness is composed of carbonate harness and non-carbonate hardness. If

your kit tests for carbonate hardness ONLY, you won't be getting a true

reading of TOTAL hardness, which in Tanganyika is important. Check this.

CaCO3, for example, would contribute to carbonate hardness, but CaCL2

would not, since it has no carbonate. The term "carbonate" hardness can

be somewhat misleading. Remember--MULTIVALENT only.

In solution, each cation "+" is matched by an anion "-", so the "equation"

balances out. Here is the (more or less) exact compositions:

Cations Anions

Tanganyika 35% Na+ 25% Cl-

30% Mg++ 2% SiO3--

10% Ca++ 13% SO4--

25% K+ 60% CO3--

Malawi 73% Ca++ 88% CO3--

27% Mg++ 12% SiO3--

Where: Cl- is Chloride Na+ is Sodium Mg++ is Magnesium

CO3- is carbonate K+ is Potassium SO4-- is Sulphate

Ca++ is Calcium SiO3-- is silicate

Clearly, Tanganyika is much more complex than Malawi, especially since 60%

of its Cations do NOT contribute to its hardness.

There is no simple recipe for "making" tanganyikan water (unless, I

suppose, you start with distilled water). You must first know what your

local water contains--most likely in the States a high degree of limestone

or dolomite (probably both), which means you're starting with some

magnesium and calcium cations, and lots of carbonate anions. Some easy

sources of various compounds are:

"Gravel"--non safe, riverine (river washed) gravel--CaCO3 and/or MgCO3

Gypsum: CaSO4.2H2O (two waters) --or-- Anhydrite CaSO4 (no waters)

Dolomite: MgCO3

Limestone: CaCO3

Olivine MgSiO3 (this is rare and won't readily enter solution, however).

Note that adding just MgSo4 (magnesium sulfate) will NOT make tanganyikan

water, but assuming that you're starting with CaCO3 in your water, it

comes sorta-kinda close. Adding ENOUGH SiO3 for Malawi water would be hard.

(In fact, I'd like some feedback on this--I feel this might be incorrect,

as this seems like a HUGE amount of silicates to be in solution.)

Other sources: Adding KOH (potassium hydroxide) or NaOH (sodium

hydroxide) would add the appropriate cation (not enough, but some) while

having the added benefit of raising pH. NOTE, however, that as pH rises,

bicarbonate dissociates into H and CO3 (carbonate). Since carbonate is

not as soluble (or even close) as bicarbonate, it will precipitate out,

taking the divalent metallics with it, such that the water will "soften"

very quickly. This starts at pH 8.3 and higher, and is especially

pronounced at pH values of 9. At pH 10, carbonate concentration exceeds

bicarbonate!

Also, as pH rises, the percentage of metabolites dissolved as ammonium

goes down, and those dissolved as ammonia go up. This is why cichlids

can't handle ammonia (higher pH values). Note that ammonia is NH3, and

NH4+ is correctly termed "ammonium." Most/many aquarium books call NH4+

ammonia, which is incorrect.

Finally, don't confuse any of this hardness business with Alkalinity,

which is simply any concentration of ions that neutralize H (simple, once

you think about it). This includes CO3--, HCO3-, and OH-. There are

other rare ones, but if you have these you probably don't have fish.

There are also a few other multivalent metallic cations that affect

hardness, but these should be rare in aquaria. They are Fe++ (reduced

iron), Mn++ (reduced manganese), Sr++ (strontium), and Al+++ (aluminum).

I wouldn't recommend using these to increase hardness, however, as they

are mostly toxic to fish.

In metrics, 100 mg/liter = english 100 ppm (so 1 mg/L = 1 ppm). These

concentrations can help you to get your dH right, and hence to make sure

that your dissolved solids are correct.

And then, after all this work to approximate tanganyikan water you should

be aware that some studies on tanganyikan fish indicate that a few of

the species

studied do BETTER, grow BIGGER, spawn MORE frequently, spawn LARGER

clutches, and have HIGHER infant survivability in water which is more like

Malawi water, and LESS like tanganyikan water. By and large, it is my

personal opinion that pH is the most important factor, and dissolved salts

are secondary considerations.

Note that it will be virtually impossible to "make" tanganyikan water,

because of some of the "weird" combinations of anion/cation you would need

to get. You could do it, given a sufficiently large wallet, but it would

be hard. This is what makes Tanganyika such a fascinating lake, eh?

Good luck with those cichlids. Beautiful fish, aren't they?

Any other questions? We know all, we tell all, we are the:

*----------------------------------------------------------*

| |

| UTAH TROPICAL AQUARIUM HOBBYISTS |

| |

| Brad Lauchnor Clark Timmins |

| internet account Clark.Timmins-at-m.uu.utah.edu |

| pending -- will |

| post shortly |

| |

| UTAH TROPICAL AQUARIUM HOBBYISTS |

| |

*----------------------------------------------------------*

This has been written by someone who has an idea what they are saying

IMO

[Donny@ageofaquariums]

This has been written by someone who has an idea what they are saying

IMO

and by someone who uses up their test kits before they have a chance to go out of date!

[BigRock]

''This has been written by someone who has an idea what they are saying

IMO''

I thought you don't listen to other ppl's opinions about this kinda stuff? lol never mind about what I or any of these ppl are saying coz I think none of us or them have the real info on riftlake chemistry and how to best match it esp with using Epsom salts, but there are many facts put out about the negative side effects from the laxative sicho etc and they are common sense plus they aren't rocket science like the lake chemistry basicly, that thread wont help anyone get their water closer to rift conditions its too complex, what isn't complex though is understanding that laxative = bad.

and btw can any of those brainiacs tell us if the magnesium ions and all the other minerals etc that are in the rift lake cause a laxative effect on the cichlids in the lake like Epsom causes in the home aquaria? I think not. But I bet it doesn't and if it does I bet the magnesium ions in the lake would have nowhere near the major laxative effect on the wild fish as Epsom does on the fish we house. And that cant be a good thing either that's a given. But bottom line is that if you think your fish are actually doing better with Epsom salts then that's your strong point to hell with what I or they say ''as you mentioned'' and my strong point is the opposite to yours simply because I myself noticed my fish weren't doing well on the Epsom ;

Edited July 29, 2013 by BigRock

[BigRock]

and by someone who uses up their test kits before they have a chance to go out of date!

lol donny was that a wisecrack at me coz you read my comment about testkits that I posted on an fbook group a few hours ago or? lol

[liljohn_83]

i tryed the diy mixes for african's and it gave me bad luck ,back on rift lake salts and bad luck is gone ? go figure

[BigRock]

i tryed the diy mixes for african's and it gave me bad luck ,back on rift lake salts and bad luck is gone ? go figure

well there you have it peeps, another person unhappy with Epsom salt, (and liljohn none the less) definitely more hobbiests agree its bad, I think its a matter of putting aside the fact that its cheaper and put aside the hope that it'll work good then actually take a proper note of how the fish are really doing on it compared to when using riftlake etc,....ive heard of Epsom being used and saw it being used well over a decade ago but I was more then happy with using store bought buffers esp the riftlake salts so definitely didn't wanna try Epsom, and there were more ppl against using it than for it at that time aswell.

this was the first time I tried it in 20years of using brand buffers and part of the reason I tried was because not a single damn lfs on the gold coast that ive been to sells riftlake in bulk 20kg buckets so I kinda got sick of paying through the ears for the small tubs and thought if the fish seem healthy and proper using Epsom and don't show any negative signs or behaviour I could cheap out on buffers lol, well stuff that its time to order bulk riftlake from the den or age of aquariums and be sorted with piece of mind to boot, IMO theres noway we're gonna make any D.I.Y. buffer with Epsom that will match lake conditions like the riftlake does anyway

and in the end my point and the cornerstone issue with Epsom is its laxative effect, and unless they can either prove somehow that it DOESNT act as a laxative or prove that theres a benefit to the fish (or any animal for that matter) in being unnecessarily laxatised 24/7 for the duration of their lives lol then I don't want another bar of it for those reasons and more, including moral ones.

Edited July 29, 2013 by BigRock

[Rod]

What commercial brand do you use?

The locally produced ones contain magnesium sulphate....

I get your point.....but I don't agree

It's a matter of getting an idea of your local water chemistry...and supplementing it with a few additives....being careful not to overdose

My experience doesn't back up your assumption....I use Epsom salts (not in isolation) and haven't noticed any problem....??

I've used commercial brands....but they are designed to be used with pure water.....not tap water

and they are expensive compared to alternatives

There are many who add nothing and are very Happy with that choice.....

For many....it's probably a smart choice

Enough said

Edited July 29, 2013 by Rod

[liljohn_83]

i get what rod is saying also , as in thair is alott of vairable factor's ,, to many for me to comprehend

aquasonic rift lake conditiner/salts work for me , probably because my variable factors , go well with the pre pacaged mix

as wear others that can play chemist should be able to diy in thair way and it works for them ,,no one tank ,is the same ie town/tank/ water diferent subs ,

end rant

[gingerbeer]

I have been having a look into this, following some discussion on Friday. I have been adding salt, bicarb and epsom salts to my water assuming that the coral sand will give me the calcium and that should work. It is not working. Also I am specifically talking about lake tang cichlids, lake tang has crazy parameters, whereas lake malawi is relatively simple, mostly calcium carbonates.

So this is the reported chemistry of the lake:

Mg/L

KCl 59

KNO3 0.5

Li2CO3 4

CaCO3 30

MgCO3 144

Al2(SO4)3*18H2O 5

K2SO4 4

Na2SO4 1

FeCl3*6H2O 0.5

Na3PO4*12H2O 0.4

Na2SiO3 13.5

The commonly reported DIy is 3 sodium bicarb, 1 potasium chloride, 3 epsom salts, 1 CaCl2 pool hardener. Pulling apart the chemistry of the two I get the following cations and anions.

cation/anion lake DIY (Mg/L)

K 31.9 52.5

Li 0.03 0

Ca 12.0 36.1

Mg 41.5 29.6

Al 0.4 0

Na 5.5 83.1

Fe 0.1 0

Cl 27.3 111.5

NO3 0.3 0

CO3 124.2 246..9

SO4 5.04 117.0

PO4 0.2 0

SiO3 8.4 0

I have not been able to find any breakdowns of buffer mixes to do some comparisons.

[Donny@ageofaquariums]

lol donny was that a wisecrack at me coz you read my comment about testkits that I posted on an fbook group a few hours ago or? lol

I dont use facebook as the latest studies have confirmed what I always feared.

Facebook causes testicle cancer.

I may be getting my tubes tied

but I am attached to the balls mate.

Edited July 30, 2013 by Donny@ageofaquariums

[Yoshi]

hey my balls are still good, no cancer from what i know of. however i do correct a few people on facebook for other people so they dont get ripped. and my balls have been kicked pretty bad lately with my tank issues.

[Donny@ageofaquariums]

It's a matter of getting an idea of your local water chemistry...and supplementing it with a few additives....being careful not to overdose

Correct.

In fact people often forget the 2 most simple things that seperates water with lots disolved in it, from water with very little disolved in it.

1) the more disolved in it, the more pressure on your fish. Try pickup a 20L bucket of freshwater, compared to a 20L bucket of saltwater! Its heavier!!!

2) totally pure water trys to suck minerals OUT OF fish, and concentrated solutions of minerals try to put minerals INTO fish.

The key thing is its more important to match the effect of the disolved minerals than it is to match the disolved minerals.

of course the best way to match the effect is to match the minerals!

But thats not the only way.

Hence why your method of roughly matching GH and KH is giving good results.

I just reccomend people test and record.

That way when they find what works, they KNOW what works and can continue on with it!

I've used commercial brands....but they are designed to be used with pure water.....not tap water

and they are expensive compared to alternatives

I actually find the aquasonic stuff to be cheaper to buy than to make, but then once again it comes down to a time/bulk ingredient trade off.

I dont have enough fish to warrant buying all the ingredients in 20kg sacks, nor the room to store them and certainly not the time to be bothered with it.

But thats personal situation.

You are correct in saying that all mixes are formulated to be used with pure water.

However Aquasonic has ensured that the dose rates they reccomend will work with the commonly encountered tap water types in Australia. Never forget that this is an aquaculture company, and they factor in such things. Obviously its always best to test, then add then retest. Work out a routine using science.

But at the same time, it has been designed to work off the KISS principle. Where close enough, offers enough benefits to be worth doing.

If I was mixing this rift mix up using RO water (or even rainwater if its not concrete tiles or tank) I would add extra KH generator.

Our tapwater is pretty crap though, but convincing marine people of the benefits of using RO water is hard.

Let alone convincing African keepers, who in all likely hood went african over marine because they wanted to escape all the fiddly crap.

the small amount of sea salt I was adding to boost iodine in the water which apparently is extremely important for fish and the mineral quickly depletes from the water and the bad effects of iodine deficiency on fish are proven to be numerous.

I dose a bit of slow release iodine (continuum) into my shrimp tanks, to help them shed etc

As well as into the reefs to help corals get rid of oxygen in their tissues.

[Donny@ageofaquariums]

I had to do a bit of a dig, but this thread is from a few years ago and still relevant today

http://www.qldaf.com/forums/african-cichlid-discussion-16/lake-malawi-lake-tanganyika-water-comparison-22276/

Worth a look.

[efc]

Where do you get continuum from Donny?