What's new

Cal-Mag + or CALiMAGic?

Cal-Mag + or CALiMAGic?

  • Total voters
    37
B

BettaBudda

Member
I have never seen Calimagic. Im currently using CalMag+, but will be changing to MagiCal when its finished. Im changing primarily because I have read of so much variance in the calmag product on this and other boards. The labels are very similar and I would rather have a product that potentially has higher quality control.
 
TGT

TGT

Tom 'Green' Thumb
Veteran
I was given a small bottle of 'Magical' from my home-town hydroponic store. It was one of those permotional give-aways I obtained about a year or two back. I usually use 'cal-mag' only when I have problems, but it seems the Magical works just as well. I would suggest going with what ever is cheapest at the time. Both are almost the same and had given me the same results.

TGT
 
T

TheBioMaster

Member
Ive used Magical from Technaflora and Cal/Mag Plus from Botanicare...never heard of the other one. I like Magical better as it is cleaner and cheaper.
 
G

greenduck

Member
camg from Botanicare...why? because my friend that has been growing for 8+ years has a house, 2 boats, and a big penis.

im not joking about the BP, he has Magnums laying around. but really, when a friend is that confident in using a product for a long long time, it was easy to convince, me
 
T

TheBioMaster

Member
@greenduck- Not sure what your buddies large penis or boat has to do with plant nutrition but ummm....well, whatever floats your boat!! LOL!!

If you like large penis and boats far be it from me to say anything.......
 
spurr

spurr

Active member
Veteran
EDTA sucks ass ... DTPA is WAY better, and it doesn't bond to Ca like the very strong bond from EDTA. EDTA has a lower pH range than DTPA, that is, Fe will fall out of solution at a lower pH with EDTA than DTPA. And EDTA is phytotoxic when used in sufficient quantity, eg., when all micros are chelated with EDTA!

EDIT: lolz, I was the only one so far to vote for DTPA vs EDTA. Common folks, get with it~! ;)
 
Last edited:
MIway

MIway

Registered User
Veteran
spurr said:
EDTA sucks ass ... DTPA is WAY better, and it doesn't bond to Ca like the very strong bond from EDTA. EDTA has a lower pH range than DTPA, that is, Fe will fall out of solution at a lower pH with EDTA than DTPA. And EDTA is phytotoxic when used in sufficient quantity, eg., when all micros are chelated with EDTA!

EDIT: lolz, I was the only one so far to vote for DTPA vs EDTA. Common folks, get with it~! ;)
Click to expand...

didn't know this tid bit... would've voted on the higher CA content & lower N... just on the raw numbers. but dolomite lime is still the way to go, imo.

outta curiosity... cm+ has been a mainstay forever... why did GH wait until now to release this supplement??? u'd think they would've tried to compete w botan long ago...?
 
P

Player2

Member
spurr said:
...Fe will fall out of solution at a lower pH with EDTA than DTPA
Click to expand...

In the equilibrium dance of organic plant acids, things aren't quite so black and white.

Generally speaking this might hold true. I don't know.

To say that this weak carboxylic acid is weaker than this weak carboxylic acid, and that makes it better, might not be the best argument.

You probably have sci lit to back this. I have none to the contrary. But to just say this one is weaker so it is better isn't valid.

Also, Treg and friends are good people. If you have proof that EDTA is a poor choice, call them up! Help us all out(more than you already have).
 
spurr

spurr

Active member
Veteran
Player2 said:
In the equilibrium dance of organic plant acids, things aren't quite so black and white.

Generally speaking this might hold true. I don't know.

To say that this weak carboxylic acid is weaker than this weak carboxylic acid, and that makes it better, might not be the best argument.

You probably have sci lit to back this. I have none to the contrary. But to just say this one is weaker so it is better isn't valid.
Click to expand...

Sure it is, well, if you reverse the statement it is. The whole reason to use a chelating agent is to keep the ion(s) in solution with respect to pH (and temperature). The problem is that of pH (and temperature) in the reservoir and/or soilless solution. With Fe-EDTA the Fe will fall out of solution (become unavailable to the plant) at a lower pH, starting at ~6.0, because the EDTA can no longer 'hold onto' the Fe. It's not an all or nothing situation, the Fe gradually become unavailable as the pH increases. That means less Fe for the plant, and depending upon the state of the EDTA (re degradation) it's free to 'bind' to Ca, etc. (AFAIU)

A big issue with EDTA is its affinity for Ca, which isn't a good thing in terms of Ca uptake. Ca happens to be one of the slowest ions for roots to absorb, because water must 'pull' in Ca at the root apical meristems (tips), it's a passive action dependent upon transpiration.

Below is a good web page and image on the topic. The web page is not an .edu site, but the information is correct I made sure. Smart! Fertilizer software is the head honcho in fertilizer software, it's a couple grand USD to buy:


iron%20chelate.png

​
Also, Treg and friends are good people. If you have proof that EDTA is a poor choice, call them up! Help us all out(more than you already have).
Click to expand...
It's well known EDTA is the worst choice for the reasons I wrote about above, better is DTPA or EDDHA. Most cannabis centric fertilizer companies use EDTA because it's the cheapest. Organic chelating agents are an option, ex., amino acid, citric acid, etc. However, organic chelating agents don't last as long as synthetic chelating agents (they're called synthetic but there organic in nature).

Below is another good web page and image from Smart! Fertilizer software web site:P.S. I don't know who Treg is, sorry.
 
Last edited:
spurr

spurr

Active member
Veteran
No problem. I just noticed a couple of glaring typos I made, they'll be fixed shorty.
 
P

Player2

Member
Your first graph shows what I am saying, and you mentioned it, around our pH 5.6 - 5.8 - 6.0, iron is doing the dirty with both the cheleating agents. 100% isn't even required. As the reaction changes due to Fe being removed(or other ions jumping in) the equilibrium is pushed to one side or the other, but in our pH range there is little difference between the two as far as iron is concerned. They are both weak carb acids.

The other graphs, however pretty, are for copper and zinc.

How does the first graph look with our plants own acids added? I don't know. I was just bringing it up.

Now, EDTA being toxic to our plants at the required dosage? If that is correct, all of the above doesn't matter and it is a bad choice.

pwnd? I am already part of the cult of spurr.

Discussion moves all of us forward.
 
I

Ichabod Crane

Well-known member
Veteran
If you need more from other people to back up what spurr said, you can find it on aquarium sites. Lots and lots of forums.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Latest posts

Top