[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[APD] Dirt & Rocks & Grumps & Mocks -- or - Is coke the real thing?

The iportant distinction between "Flourite" and "soil", at
least as the terms tend to be used n APD when talking about
substrates is that soil tends much finer textured and rich
in organic compounds and plant nutrients, while Flourite, a
commerical product trademark for a particualr porous
calcined (i.e., heated a lot) claylike (or something much
like hardened clay) material, which contains a number of
diff minerals but not, e.g., NO3 or PO3 or organics to any
appreciable degree.

It's sort of like the diff between dirt and rocks (small
porous rocks.

"Flourite", and a brand name, specifies a very particualr
product while "soil" and "dirt", as a part of the
vernacular, cover a whole lot (sorry for the pun) of

"Flourite" is homonymical with a certain mineral, as
self-avowedly grumpy Bob explained. I don't know if you
find flourite on a river bank but you can bank on it being
a diff stuff than the Flourite you find in the lfs, known
as "Flourite", a brand name in keeping with an extensive
product line from SeaChem. As is often the case with
homonyms, any semantic connection between the terms is
extremely remote at best.

Similarly, "malachite green" is the name for an alanine dye
that contains none of the mineral that goes by that same
name and shares a similar color. The dye is used in
preparing some woodworking stains and as medicinal
treatment in aquaria. It's an unfortunate borrowing of a
name, which was undoubtedly done as an allusion to the
minearl's color. It's unfortunatel because the mineral has
copper in it and the dye does not. And that has been a
source of confusion for some time now.

Otoh, when you hear a geologist talk about plates, he or
she might not be inviting himself/herself to dinner, but
merely being serious about the earth cracking up.

I understand Bob's grump. In wordsmithing, it seems the
geologists' language is perhaps being coopted, bit by bit.
But it's not clear that the geologists can throw the first
stone ;-)  

regards all,
Scott H.
--- Robert Flory <wyogeo at astound_net> wrote:

> > Message: 3
> > Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 01:42:42 -0700
> > From: "Robert H" <robertph3 at comcast_net>
> > Subject: [APD] Re:Flourite vs. Soil
> > To: <aquatic-plants at actwin_com>
> >
> >
> > But James, you went on to support the idea in what you
> said that Flourite
> > and soil are not the same thing. Flourite is clay, pure
> clay.
> >
> > Best regards
> >
> PLEASE ....
> Fluorite is NOT clay.  It may have been once but it isn't
> clay anymore.
> A clay is a soft thin platy mineral.  If it is hard it's
> been altered and is
> something else.
> Fluorite looks like clay that has been altered either by
> fire or
> mineralization.
> Despite having more luck with it than other substrates
> ...
> I must admit personally as a geologist I find the name
> it's self
> objectionable.
> fluorite is calcium fluoride a mineral.
> Bob
> Grumpy old gray bearded geologist
> _______________________________________________
> Aquatic-Plants mailing list
> Aquatic-Plants at actwin_com
> http://www.actwin.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/aquatic-plants

Want to get dirty but stay clean? 

Diana Walstad, author of _Ecology of the Planted Aquarium_ will discuss soil supplemented aquarium substrates at the 2004 AGA Convention.

Convention Details/Registration at aquatic-gardeners.org & gwapa.org
Aquatic-Plants mailing list
Aquatic-Plants at actwin_com