# Sources of LaMotte Test Kits



## Raul-7 (Feb 4, 2004)

I plan on purchasing LaMotte test kits for gH and wanted to know what is the cheapest online retailer. So far I've found three good retailers:

1) http://www.aquaticeco.com/index.cfm/fuseaction/product.detail/iid/463/cid/3937

2) http://pollardwater.com/EMarket/pages/LaMotteHardnesstks.asp (But I am not sure which one is useful for our hobby purposes)

3) http://www.reefsplendor.com/pages/lamotte/lamotte.1.html (Source #1 has cheaper prices)


----------



## MatPat (Mar 22, 2004)

I purchased my Alkalinity and Calcium kits from 
http://www.marinedepot.com/aquarium_test_kits_lamotte.asp?ast=&key=
I'm not sure how the prices are compared to your other sources but it's worth a look.

They also accept PayPal as a form of payment 

Edit - Silly me, they don't have a GH kit at Marine Depot


----------



## Edward (May 25, 2004)

Why? Isn’t local fish store test kit good enough for our hobby? 

Edward


----------



## Raul-7 (Feb 4, 2004)

Edward said:


> Why? Isn't local fish store test kit good enough for our hobby?
> 
> Edward


But how can you trust the readings on the more readily available test kits? Especially since most of the lower brand test kits use the color comparison method, as opposed to the titration method.


----------



## Edward (May 25, 2004)

The lfs test kits are not that bad. I think the problem is with the users. We need to learn how to use them properly first. The best method is to prepare our own solution of known concentration and test it. Make 10 ppm NO3 and test it. Look at the colour and compare it to the supplied chart. I called it 'calibration' here in this article. It is a simple process worth the time.

Edward


----------



## Raul-7 (Feb 4, 2004)

Great article! But why go through all this trouble when there is a much simpler and more accurate solution to testing?


----------



## Edward (May 25, 2004)

I didn’t know that pouring 4ml into a kitchen bucket was too difficult.

Thank you
Edward


----------



## plantbrain (Jan 23, 2004)

An accurate scale is not a cheap item, nor do many have a graduated millliter cylinder. These are not items sold at the LFS are they?
None I've ever been in.

Give the cost for those, hassle to obtain them elsewhere, unless you already have them, the Lamotte kits start looking fairly reasonable.

Many folks like a nice test kit that offers more repeatable accuracy. 
Then you still need to see if the ranges are accurate by looking at the R^2 values to see if the calibration is accurate.

So you are still left with a cheap test kit from the LFS's that is at best, offers a wide range of error. For all the talk of precision, this is not that precise.
But you suggest it's good enough, close enough....

That is something I've suggested before, but often the arguement is that the EI method is a "guess", "wildly dumping nutrients in" well so is this using this method. There is no regression and R^2 values to check the calibration curve. How far should we take this? How much checking should we do?

Even with the calibration, +- 4-5ppm NO3 is not that accurate (larger at higher concentrations, gradations). 
No more than EI.

Folks also have variation in their testing methods as you suggest(mls, gram weights etc), color interptations and many simply will ride the coat tails of others rather than going through the trouble of calibrating a test kit and assume all AP test kits are accurate rather than doing it themselves.

All this compounded error is not much more precise than EI. Which was one of my orginal points. And with so many folks having used EI for for many years, the results speak for themselves and at a reduce cost and hassle for many. Still, some calibration is still much better than none assuming they do it correctly. If they use kits, I do agree they should also calibrate, but I've found very little variation in the Lamotte kits I've tested. So have many others and most reef aquarist who do much more testing and fewer water changes than FW folks do as a rule.

Lamotte kits did well against a regression curve for a set of calibrating solutions (R^2 values at .99 or higher for NO3 and PO4 models). I have not tested the cheap test kits like AP, SeaChem etc.

If you plan of such reliance on test kits, it pays to get something nice and easy to to read.

I can use pH 4$ kits, but I greatly prefer the pH pens or monitors. They are more accurate and easier to use. Like Lamotte, they cost more also.

But given the color scales they provide, the variation of reading we hear about on line, I am very leery at suggesting them w/o calibration. Hach, Hanna meters have done well in wetland science, as have most lab spects, these are what I use for testing these days(But cost the hobbyist an arm and a green thumb), but the Lamotte and Hach test kits are certainly worth while for both FW and Marine aquarist (Most marine folks swear by them) and other environmental testing companies often will use Lamott and Hach field kits like the ones we suggest.

If DIY and cost are an issue, making your own reagents should be considered.
I've done more of that than I care to admit. Few hobbyist really want to get into all this, nor calibrating, nor testing in general if they can avoid it.

That solution rather than suggesting calibration is a wiser path for most, and if they do test, they can go either direction(DIY and cheaper kits, or more $$ and better nicer kits), as long as they have an idea of the limitation of each.

But if you take the idea of less cost and work to the logical conclusion, why not phase out the test kits completely?

If you take the idea of reduced water changes as well as no testing to the end point, many go non carbon enrichment.

PPS is somewhere in the middle of each.
It has issues, so does any method, but looking at people's habits and explaining all this to a new plant tank owner is bad enough, adding testing, calibration and such is even that much more overwhelming.

Some medium/advanced skill level aquarist find it interesting, at the advanced levels, many no longer want to bother with testing, they want a nice tank with less work and for some, that means less water changes (some use auto water changers, some use PPS to avoid that, others go non CO2), but for many, it means simpler methods and work. It's tough to have folks test consistently for years. Anyone that's had tanks for several years know how they are. Yep, there are few that will always test, but we all know they are in the small minority.

In the past, I use to tell folks to test and other issues, but folks had funny readings I knew where wrong and could not be right given the readings they provided. Rather than running them through all that, I simply had them use the water change and dose there after.

Solved many issues for any skill level, no calibration issues, no making them, no testing. That has a very wide appeal and the results are easy to see. 
ADA uses large frequent water changes weekly and then doses there after.
So does EI.

Overall, if I bought a kit kit today as a hobbyist, I would buy a Lamotte/Hach.
They are all I have suggested folks buy for the last decade, you take your chances and do the calibrations with the others.

Regards, 
Tom Barr

www.BarrReport.com


----------



## Edward (May 25, 2004)

Luckily we do not need the expensive test kits to run the PPS method. 

Edward


----------



## gnatster (Mar 6, 2004)

Just as a Kia will get you to work or to the store so will a Bentley. Different strenghts and weaknesses. Pick by what suits your needs and wallet.


----------



## MatPat (Mar 22, 2004)

gnatster said:


> Just as a Kia will get you to work or to the store so will a Bentley. Different strenghts and weaknesses. Pick by what suits your needs and wallet.


Very well put


----------



## Salt (Apr 5, 2005)

I would suggest Aquatic Ecosystems for "click to buy" kits... Clarkson Lab should be able to get you any Lamotte kit that you can't find anywhere else (like the Potassium test kit for example).


----------



## plantbrain (Jan 23, 2004)

Edward said:


> Luckily we do not need the expensive test kits to run the PPS method.
> 
> Edward


True.

But you still need a scale, a fairly accurate milliliter container. 
No luck about it, we don't need *any test kits* for EI (other than pH/KH for CO2 perhaps).

Nor any kits at all for non carbon enriched methods.

Nor calibration

Nor a lengthy explaination about how.

Simple.

Regards, 
Tom Barr

www.BarrReport.com


----------



## plantbrain (Jan 23, 2004)

MatPat said:


> Very well put


Originally Posted by gnatster
"Just as a Kia will get you to work or to the store so will a Bentley. Different strenghts and weaknesses. Pick by what suits your needs and wallet."

Agreed.
I'll take my Mt bike

Regards, 
Tom Barr


----------



## Milan (Jul 6, 2005)

Plantbrain said:


> But you still need a scale, a fairly accurate milliliter container.


I don't think this is a valid argument. You can find an accurate enough scale at any Office Depot or Staples for about $30, and a 5 or 10 ml syringe at any pharmacy for a couple of cents. Furthermore, using Nutrafin and AP test kits myself, I have never come across so erroneous test kit. I realize they are occasionally, but the "calibration", as detailed in PPS, would pick it up with a little effort. And if you are not happy with it, take it back to the lfs. Simple as that ...
So, I really can't see a justification for high end, pricey test kits, such as LaMotte.

But hey, ... as mentioned above, some people like Bentley, some are comfortable with KIA, and some prefer using muscles to move from A to B. No arguing here ...


----------

