Vibrant Liquid Aquarium Cleaner review

[A.m.P]

1 hour ago, brandon429 said:

I bet fully new market ventures on retailed bottled sellers have that label absolutely ironclad and triple-reviewed by the labeling team and then reviewed thrice more by in house lawyers before final print n stick. UWC has changed the labeling landscape for aquarium products is the bet. Changed by their dime.

I hope so, maybe we can even get seachem to own up to prime just messing with hobby-level kits and not actually touching ammonia.

[seabass]

13 hours ago, A.m.P said:

I hope so, maybe we can even get seachem to own up to prime just messing with hobby-level kits and not actually touching ammonia.

Do you mind expanding on this a bit?  I don't feel that I know exactly what you are referring to.  The following is my understanding of the subject (which based on your post, makes me think that I might be missing something).

 

Prime and other ammonia detoxifiers don't actually lower total ammonia, they just temporarily convert free ammonia (NH3) to ammonium (NH4), which is thought to pass through a fish's gills more easily, supposedly making the ammonia less toxic to fish.

 

Most ammonia test kits report total ammonia.  They do this by raising the pH of the sample which converts ammonium to free ammonia.  Then they test for NH3 (which actually reflects the total ammonia in the sample).  I believe that the test kit reagent eventually breaks Prime's bond and the test kit still reports total ammonia.

 

In addition, Prime and other ammonia detoxifiers can affect the color of liquid based reagent (Nessler) test kits, which further complicates things.   However, Seachem's Ammonia Alert Badge and MultiTest discs supposedly aren't affected by this complication.

 

Historically, we've been told to expect inaccurate ammonia test results when using Prime.  So I typically recommend using a Seachem Ammonia Alert Badge, or their MultiTest (which uses an Alert Badge disc) to test for NH3 when using Prime.

 

It's not unusual for reef tanks (especially newer tanks) to contain small amounts of total ammonia.  API's test kit seems especially sensitive to these lower total ammonia levels, sometimes showing slight color changes which some report to be 0.25 ppm (the lowest positive reading on API's color chart).  This positive reading (actually somewhere between 0.0 and 0.25 ppm) isn't usually a false positive; however, it might not indicate a fatal concentration of NH3 either.

 

Without Prime, the actual amount of NH3 is typically associated with pH (as well as temperature and salinity):  http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2007-02/rhf/

 

[brandon429]

https://www.reef2reef.com/threads/prime-does-not-remove-ammonia.885857/page-9#post-9811234

 

SB

 

They're claiming about as well as they've shown vibrant to be in question that actions attributed to prime are a sales ploy only

 

They claim it literally does nothing, and that the lower ph range most reef settings are at handled ammonia safety anyway... it's rare for systems to run low 8s in ph vs the ones running high sevens and that trending afforded natural protection such that prime never saved anyone's reef tank/ omitting it would have the same ends, is what they’re claiming 

[seabass]

4 hours ago, brandon429 said:

They claim it literally does nothing, and that the lower ph range most reef settings are at handled ammonia safety anyway... it's rare for systems to run low 8s in ph vs the ones running high sevens and that trending afforded natural protection such that prime never saved anyone's reef tank/ omitting it would have the same ends, is what they’re claiming

Hmm... interesting.  I didn't read through that entire thread, but I wasn't aware that the performance of Prime was in question.  Detoxifiers are basically a bandage for an improperly cycled aquarium (with a weak biofilter) anyway; so Prime is of limited interest to most reef keepers.  But I'll try to keep that in mind before recommending its use in the future.

 

Assuming the above chart is correct, I'd agree that there is a relatively small percentage of free ammonia at pH levels below 8.  That said, I still hesitate to discount the importance of a positive test result for total ammonia (as the presence of total ammonia indicates an anemic biofilter).  However, this might help explain why livestock can appear unaffected in spite of slight color changes when using API's ammonia test kit.

 

Toxic ammonia levels are often defined by levels of NH3, and not total ammonia (or TAN).  But, despite claims that ammonium is non-toxic, I'm not sure if there has been enough study on the safety of higher levels of NH4 on marine life (possibly another reason not to completely discount a positive test for total ammonia).  So I often state that ammonium is "less toxic" than free ammonia (versus NH4 is non-toxic).

 

Sorry for the sidetrack, but this topic (insignificant as it is to most) is of particular interest to me.

[brandon429]

The vibrant thread and that one above for Prime share two outstanding characteristics: excellent plaintiff preparations before the court of public opinion, and nota dang response from the manufacturer/defendant lol. so, we're in limbo but dang Taricha and Dan can make some convincing arguments. From now on, any company releasing anything needs to hire them on before release to test for back doors. black hat reefing will soon emerge, for cost.  

 

I don't know how we can ever shut the door on either product until the builder weighs in. if they never do, we get open-endedness only. Don't think I bought into non-prime on first post, Dan and I talked for months in chat as he was prepping the post and I played complete doubter relaying every time in person or in chat I thought Prime arrested some sort of decline from a sandbed stirred up or a crappy rip clean ran where smell and stress accompanied the outcome. Nowadays I do not buy into the guess that sandbeds contain unoxidized pockets of ammonia, I'm now of the opinion causative agents are bacterial compounds and other waste gasses but not ammonia, its too in-demand among bioslicks to sit there unused much like a gold bar will not last long sitting on the sidewalk in front of anyone's house in a dense city.

 

 

I have been able to see some pretty funked sandbeds stirred up in the presence of calibrated seneye units as a raw test and nh3 never spiked from the few I've seen. I made it a point to reach out the last 4-5 years to most all the seneye owners on RtR and run all kinds of crazy tests w them via chats and posts, that way I don't have to buy one and can simply gain the patterns out of the collective jobs logged.

 

ability to see at least precision changes in stasis is drastically changing what I think about ammonia dynamics in reefing. 

[A.m.P]

There have been a handful of threads but the gist of it is that NH3 is a very stable molecule, their claim is that they can somehow alter it with a chemical additive, no heat, no catalyst, nothing; and they have provided no actual evidence to back up their chemistry past known interference with certain hobby grade tests. Beyond that Seachem has changed their story multiple times, at one point even using an imaginary molecule in a process which doesn't exist to justify their claim.
https://aquariumscience.org/index.php/5-5-3-2-1-prime-safe-and-ammonia/

Nitrogen fixing bacteria have a very specialized process for oxidizing NH3 and I haven't seen any convincing evidence that you can just dump prime in and cause free H to bind to a molecule (and transfer +charge) which previously existed in equilibrium, especially without creating a bunch of heat, ph swings, etc.
(NH3 to NH4+ ratio -as mentioned above- is almost entirely determined directly by PH, or if you pump a ton of HCL into the water you'll also get NH4+ and free Cl- gas, and dead fish)

Been a while since Chemistry but it has never sat well with me and probably never will.

Unfortunately many of the best trials were conducted years back and talked about on forums which no longer exist, tldr better equipment for measuring free ammonia still finds it no matter how much prime you dump in and sensitive organisms still die.
https://www.reef2reef.com/threads/does-prime-actually-detoxify-free-ammonia-nh3.849985/

[seabass]

That's crazy.  I swear that Seachem used to claim that Prime temporarily converted NH3 into NH4.  Maybe that was just my interpretation of the following:  "Prime™ converts ammonia into a safe, non-toxic form that is readily removed by the tank’s biofilter."

 

I'm amazed.

 

It still works as a dechlorinator, right?

[A.m.P]

2 hours ago, seabass said:

It still works as a dechlorinator, right?

Absolutely, a great one at that, it's just the dubious claims which started when people found out it messed with ammonia kits that are suspect.
It's probably just the marketing team refusing to back down and I still use their other products.

[less than bread]

So I'm now 3 weeks into using Vibrant at half dose (1ml per week for my 20 gallon). So far it seems to be doing a great job. There is noticeable improvement in my algae problem (bubble and sea lettuce). I'd say the algae has reduced by about 40% so far, especially lower in the tank. There have not been ill effects to any of the livestock. I'm going to keep doing half doses to see if that completely takes care of it over the next few weeks.

[brandon429]

and remember: that's still the unideal way to use any form of algae control though if it works, you're not going to mind. the correct way for all nanos is: rip clean the system so that no waste mass persists in the system (sand and rocks that cloud when disturbed, which is directly algae feed as it rots further) and while disassembled, you scrape off all the algae and install back a perfectly clean, algae free system (that is potentiated to regrow we know) and then in the clean condition, apply the Vibrant or fluconazole or Nitrate/Phosphate changes or install the clean up crew or the other nine different things we can do for invasions...all in the clean condition which is opposite of what the perpetually-invaded masses do.

 

in the current approach, all dead material will remain in the tank even if you are able to remove a small portion, and it fills up the filtration gaps in the system that should remain open with rotting waste, though you won't see any actual algae. result: in 5 months, dinos or cyano massive outbreak for about 60% of users who choose the common mode...the majority. this is why I feel vibrant or any other doser used via directions results in tradeoff invasions nearly always, it's just delayed. Rip cleaning is never, ever harmful for any nano and has the highest retention rate for cleanliness of any possible approach we can find. 

[brandon429]

they have banned UWC from rtr for no follow up by the way, that poor guy looks like some serious EPA and legal troubles is coming his way. Welp, home brew chemists were able to take down another business, I guess that's the outcome. he will be scorned for good for the mislabeling, it appears. 

[Jakesaw]

15 minutes ago, brandon429 said:

Rip cleaning is never, ever harmful for any nano and has the highest retention rate for cleanliness of any possible approach we can find. 

Been reading your advocation for Rip - Clean - never tried it but open to idea. 

 

The main benefit I can gain from reading your posts is getting clean sand in there which feeds algae.  Would vacuuming sand bed be next best thing?

 

Whenever sand is disturbed, you can see a bit of cloudiness that enters water column before settling back down into sandbed.  I would guess it's a combination of old food leftovers, detritus, Poop, etc.  

 

Would it be advisable to periodically siphon / vacuum the sandbed to remove these tiny particles from sand - maybe a small patch at a time over several weeks?  I haven't touched mine in over a year.  Gets an occasional dustup from fish activity but that's about it.  My Sandbed is pretty shallow ( about an inch )

[less than bread]

@brandon429 Wouldn't regular water changes and equipment/sandbed cleaning help remove that dead material as the Vibrant works though? 

[Murphs_Reef]

4 hours ago, Jakesaw said:

Would it be advisable to periodically siphon / vacuum the sandbed to remove these tiny particles from sand - maybe a small patch at a time over several weeks? 

Yes .. you would need to get right down to the glass on big chunks of sand each time to get the crap out... AND you need to get under the rock... As well as the rock itself.. you would not believe what the rock harbours.. see my rip clean on my build thread for the result of a rock clean down.. rough water left over.. 

 But keeping a clean vacuumed sand bed isn't a bad idea.. 

 

 

2 hours ago, less than bread said:

@brandon429 Wouldn't regular water changes and equipment/sandbed cleaning help remove that dead material as the Vibrant works though? 

Water changes won't do much. In fact why change the water? Anything suspended gets sucked into the overflow?

 

To keep the sand bed clean (and I do keep mine very clean.. with sand sifting stars, 10+ Nass snails and 3 x a week raking..)when you rip the sand out and spend an hour clean water rinsing it... You'll see the small bit of in tank cleaning you do is futile... It really is..

 

 

[Jakesaw]

24 minutes ago, Murphs_Reef said:

As well as the rock itself.. you would not believe what the rock harbours.. see my rip clean on my build thread for the result of a rock clean down.. rough water left over.. 

 But keeping a clean vacuumed sand bed isn't a bad idea.. 

I've already been amazed at the crud I see blown out of my rocks.  I use a turkey baster in there a few times per week and see a whole cloud of crud in the water column afterwards.  Always wondered if that was good / or bad.  

 

So far, just left it alone.

[Murphs_Reef]

2 minutes ago, Jakesaw said:

I've already been amazed at the crud I see blown out of my rocks.  I use a turkey baster in there a few times per week and see a whole cloud of crud in the water column afterwards.  Always wondered if that was good / or bad.  

 

So far, just left it alone.

Yeah indeed.. imagine pulling the rock and washing it in clean salt water.. it's amazing... And you know what? My flow is incredibly good.. I have a Nero on one side, a sow 8 on the other and a TMC reef pump 4000 pushing water from the sump .. not one dead spot BUT our rock is a detritus net by its very nature of being porous..

[Jakesaw]

1 hour ago, Murphs_Reef said:

not one dead spot BUT our rock is a detritus net by its very nature of being porous..

Yes indeed.  

 

I don't run any mechanical filtration most of the time on my tank.  That probably has alot to do with it too.

[less than bread]

Not sure if this is completely related to using Vibrant but it does align with what others have said. So a quick recap: I started using Vibrant at half dose in mid March to deal with sea lettuce and bubble algae that were getting out of hand. It worked very well, tank got clear of it fast and I continued to dose Vibrant each week. However, I must report now that I have a bad outbreak of red cyanobacteria which I've heard others dealing with after using Vibrant. I would say, while Vibrant does seem to help immediately, chances are algae will return in just a different form until you address the root cause of your algae problems (which I am still working to lower my nitrates and phosphates). It feels like it more just puts a mask on your tank and hides issues more than eliminates them.

[seabass]

13 minutes ago, less than bread said:

However, I must report now that I have a bad outbreak of red cyanobacteria which I've heard others dealing with after using Vibrant. I would say, while Vibrant does seem to help immediately, chances are algae will return in just a different form...

Yeah, Vibrant kills algae.  It's an algaecide so...

 

Unfortunately, it doesn't just kill algae, it can also kill sensitive inverts (pods, micro-brittle stars, etc).  Plus, the dying algae and animals cause excess organics, which fuels the cyanobacteria blooms.  In addition, the loss of these lower life forms (plankton, algae, and small sensitive inverts) lessens competition for more sinister pests like dinoflagellates.

[Jakesaw]

19 minutes ago, less than bread said:

 I would say, while Vibrant does seem to help immediately, chances are algae will return in just a different form until you address the root cause of your algae problems (which I am still working to lower my nitrates and phosphates). It feels like it more just puts a mask on your tank and hides issues more than eliminates them.

Vibrant, my understanding is a algacide.

 

Killing off algae in your tank will undoubtedly throw your tank off balance in some areas.  

 

I'm about to dive into the Vibrant as I have some on the way.  If I didn't have Bubble algae I'd not even attempt to use it, but BA has infested my entire rockwork and is well beyond the manage it phase.

 

I'm close to starting over anyway as a  FOWLR, so there is not much risk to me if it goes sideways.  I'm hoping that the Vibrant does it's job and I can get life going again with new sand and a tank refresh.  

 

I've got my Nitrate / Phos supplement ready as I've read the product can bottom our your tank nutrients and assume 

 

< wondering if I should have just gone fish / rock and can the entire reef experiement for now. > - Oh Well !!!

[mcarroll]

I know this was mostly just a side discussion, but....

 

Ammonia in water is anything but stable.

 

Experimentally speaking, the first thing that is likely to happen when you put NH3 in water is that it releases heat, gains a hydrogen atom and becomes NH4.

 

Ammonia's exact ionic composition (NH3/NH4) in water is dependent (at least!) on the water's pH, salinity and temperature.  

 

Standard charts like this can help you (based on you knowing pH and Temp in this case) to determine the amount of NH3 in a sample, relative to the amount of total ammonia:

 

BTW, this situation with ammonia is slightly similar to the state of (bi)carbonates in water, which folks tend to be more familiar with vs ammonia.  The exact ratio of carbonates:bicarbonates is totally dependent on other aspects of water chemistry.

 

This is the magic of dissolved substances vs stable molecules.  Di-solve....solve into two.  Water (H + O₂) makes stable things dynamic.

 

Anyway, the best discussion about ammonia that puts it in our context (saltwater reef tanks!!) is Sustainable Aquatics' white paper on fish acclimation.   Seabass also has a great article on ammonia more generally.   Both of these sources dispel most of the outlandish notions about ammonia.   Both are A MUST-READ, IMO!   Completely scientific and grounded!!

 

There's a lot of myth and semi-truth floating around out there about ammonia.....this stuff about detoxifiers is a good example.  They work as advertised IMO...but like everything else, not everyone uses them according to the directions, and not everyone really understands what they do...and to complicate things further  it is a product intended for use when there's already a problem happening.  Predictably, there are plenty of "unhappy reviews" where the fish died anyway.  (Less predictably, there are apparently even conspiracy theories. 🤷‍♂️ None needed!)

 

Thankfully I don't think most folks use Prime for anything other than treating tap water, and they do that rarely.  So it's really a non-issue for the most part.  Still useful to have better info about ammonia....it can matter a lot when you're acclimating fish....plus, lots of processes in/on the reef revolve around nitrogen.

 

[Dmmitchell]

I've used Vibrant with success -- it was recommended to me by a local aquarium service company who uses it in a number of their client tanks. No adverse reactions or side effects if dosed properly.

[Tired]

I'm sure it works out for some people, but putting an algaecide in your aquarium should only ever be a last-ditch effort, with awareness of the risks, rather than a go-to. 

[seabass]

3 hours ago, Dmmitchell said:

I've used Vibrant with success -- it was recommended to me by a local aquarium service company who uses it in a number of their client tanks. No adverse reactions or side effects if dosed properly.

Vibrant was misrepresented as a bacterial solution.  That misrepresentation convinced lots of people to try the product who normally wouldn't have, if they knew that it was just an algaecide.  Yes, it helps prevent algae and kills many types of algae.  Unfortunately, it also has some side effects (mainly the loss of micro-inverts, a.k.a. bio-diversity, but also some corals).  This loss of fauna can even result in new pests (like cyano and dinos).  So there might be legitimate uses for it, if you know what you are putting in your tank.  But it's still basically just an overpriced version of API AlgaeFix.

[A.m.P]

49 minutes ago, seabass said:

Vibrant was misrepresented as a bacterial solution.  That misrepresentation convinced lots of people to try the product who normally wouldn't have, if they knew that it was just an algaecide.  Yes, it helps prevent algae and kills many types of algae.  Unfortunately, it also has some side effects (mainly the loss of micro-inverts, a.k.a. bio-diversity, but also some corals).  This loss of fauna can even result in new pests (like cyano and dinos).  So there might be legitimate uses for it, if you know what you are putting in your tank.  But it's still basically just an overpriced version of API AlgaeFix.

Plus, there's the whole misrepresentation bit and their doubling-down on it at first didn't inspire great confidence.