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

Re: Aquatic Plants Digest V3 #1117

Hello Dave,

You are right! There is much misinformation on the 'Net, but usually
somebody will correct it.
> Date: Sun, 27 Jun 1999 07:14:40 -0700
> From: Dave Gomberg <gomberg at wcf_com>
> Subject: Misinformation and non-information
> To correct some misinformation on the list:
> Sulfate, sulfite and sulfide all refer to DIFFERENT anions,

The chemistry of all three anions is completely different. Here are the
(formal) differences:

SO4=  is sulfate (sulphate) anion  (2 negative charges)

SO3=  is sulfite anion

S=    is sulfide anion

> none of them is a British spelling of another.   Source:     > Handbook of Chemistry and
> Physics, 1959 edition but I don't think it has changed since > then.
> Moral:  Don't believe everything you read on this list.
> Someone assured us that gluconate is inactive as far as plant > nutrition goes.   I would say this is not proven.  

I don't have any data on glucose/gluconic acid as a PLANT nutrient, but
BACTERIA will certainly love it! Gluconate will definitely increase both
the BOD (biological oxygen demand) and COD (chemical oxygen demand) of
the water. 
In my mind it is an open question which is more harmful -- the added
anions (such as sulfate, chloride or bicarbonate) that would come with
addition of potassium in that form, or the food for bacteria that
gluconate (and possibly the binder) will provide.

> Others believe that plants do a
> lot better with certain organics, including amino acids and hormones.  I
> would say not proven to that too.   I would love to see literature
> references in support of this idea if there are any.
> BTW, gluconate is the anion of gluconic acid (an organic acid similar
> (generally) to glucose).  C5H6(OH)5COOH is gluconic acid, C5H6(OH)5COO- is
> gluconate.  At least I believe this is correct, my biochem was from long
> long ago.