[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- To: <Aquatic-Plants at actwin_com>
- Subject: Re: Equilibrium
- From: Thomas Barr <tcbiii at earthlink_net>
- Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 11:17:25 -0800
- In-Reply-To: <200101310848.DAA14788 at actwin_com>
- User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.02.2022
>> I asked Seachem about this, and was only told that "the extra Mg is
>> thrown in because magnesium is more important for photosythesis." I
>> wonder just how high the
> While this is still true, for a number of different reasons we have
> recently reformulated Equilibrium. The calcium and magnesium ratios
> have been reversed so that there is now more calcium delivered than
> magnesium (2:1 on an equivalent basis, 3:1 on a weight basis). The
> new GA is:
This would be consistent with mean river water ratio's at Mg 1 : Ca
2.25(Tracers in the Sea, 1982, Broecker).
I saw George's comment from Optimum Aquarium of a ratio of 1:4 and went
looking up some figures. I don't know where Optimum Aquarium got their
But the new stuff has a ratio about that of river waters (1:2).
I cannot say personally that Ca causes any problems in excess or high levels
of Mg. I have been bless( :) ) with a ton of both in my tap water. I have
not added lots of Mg in a Ca limited or low Ca level tank though. That may
be interesting to try out. The ratios of each to one another would not seem
to hinder growth aspects in a tank offhand....if it was 5:1 or 1:5 as long
as it/one of them didn't get too low. I cannot say GH affects plant growth
unless it's too low. In many species like Cryptocoryne it helps and a few
> K (potassium): 19.5%; Ca (calcium): 8.06%; Mg (magnesium): 2.41%; Fe
> (iron): 0.11%; Mn (manganese): 0.06%
Most tap waters are richer in Ca than Mg. This is not a bad idea to add more
of the Mg than the Ca IMO.
> Guaranteed Analysis
> K (potassium): 18.9%; Mg (magnesium): 4.3%; Ca (calcium): 2.7%; Fe
> (iron): 0.47%; Mn (manganese): 0.08%
Note an over 20 fold reduction in Fe. Why was this changed more than the
Now there's all kinds of stuff here that can help plants lots. K+ is a big
one and so is Fe. So is it the Ca and Mg or the other nutrients helping?
I'm suspicious of what is doing what here. But the product does work and
does well for tanks with low GH, I cannot argue that issue one bit. We use
it quite a bit out here in the SF bay regions. It certainly helps.