Flourish

[Matt W]

So I have been using the 250mL size flourish bottles. I decided, what the heck, and got the 2L version. They have different amounts of nutrients in them!

Examples:

(250mL -vs- 2L)
Soluble Potassium .37% -vs- .06%
Ca .089% -vs- .1736%
Cu .00005% -vs- .0001%

The list goes on.....and on...

And the directions are different as well. The 250mL bottle says 5mL per every 50 gallons. The 2L says 1-2 mL per every 50 gallons. That is quite a difference as well! So, what is one to do? How do I know that I am dosing properly?

Oh, and one other thing. I noticed that the 250mL stuff seemed quite a bit darker and thicker than the liquid from the 2L....

[Slappy*McFish]

If it were me, I would just follow the directions on the respective bottles.

[Matt W]

And that I did....but wouldn't one expect the two solutions to be the same? For example, the Coca Cola I buy is the same in a 20oz as a 2L...

[Brambler]

Looks like the big bottle is twice as concentrated based on the Ca and Cu amounts and the smaller reccomended dosage, maybe the potassium is a misprint meant to be .6% instead of .06% ? (to stick with the double concentration theme.)

[Slappy*McFish]

Before assuming anything, you may want to contact Seachem and ask them.

[125gJoe]

SeaChem is good at replying to customers... Good idea to ask them about this...

[DIYMatt]

I noticed the same thing on an older 250ml versus a new 500ml bottle. The labels were physically different also. Maybe they changed the formula or something.

BTW- if someone heres back from Seachem on this they should post what they find out. Otherwise, a lot of us who use large bottles could be recommending excessive dosages of Flourish to those using the smaller bottles. It's interesting at least.

[RTR]

I just posted an email to Seachem's Support to please clarify for this thread - they have done such in the past, they are a very helpful group there.

I expect there may well be delay due to the holiday.

[RTR]

Seachem's response:

"Please feel free to post this:

The formulation has not changed, however the manner in which we
report some of the components did change somewhat. The original
Guarantees were based on the "theoretical" quantities that should be
in there. By theoretical I mean that based on the formula and the
exact chemical makeup of the components used that is what should be
in there. In practice there are slight variations from batch to batch
which in turn depend on the source material and of course the "human"
factor. For the intended purposes of the product application these
variations are acceptable within a + or - 10% tolerance) so we had
always left them at where on average they would be found. However the
requirements of state agricultural agencies basically encourage one
to bias the reporting downward in order to avoid getting fined for
not having enough (most states require a "minimum" guarantee). A few
of the components actually went up because we decided it would best
to analyze those items that are difficult to determine
"theoretically" because of numerous variables. For example the NPK
numbers typically changed because we don't actually add an NPK to
Flourish directly. It all comes from the yeast/protein extracts we
use... so we analyzed it and used those numbers since they are
"safer" since that is how a state agency would test it also. Even
though they went up, overall they are still negligible. These
components are commonly analyzed by ICP/MS but that technique and
similar ones have limitations (in the boundaries we were testing) so
although we might actually only have 0.00005 Cu the test can't
resolve to that resolution and so reports the next closest number.
So, again, it's safer to report what the test says since that is how
a state agency would check it. With regards to the calcium, the 0.089
was a typo on just that label size... the correct value is 0.14% and
you should see labels with that shortly.

With regards to the question concerning the dosing: This is simply a
refinement of the original recommended dosage. The 1-2 mL for every
200 L (53 gallons) was recommended up to twice a week, so at twice a
week the upper range of recommendation was 5 mL/66 gallons (i.e. 2
mL/53 gallons gallon twice a week is the same as 4 mL/53 gallons). We
simply shifted this upper range to be the starting point (adjusted
down a touch (5 mL/60 gallons)).

The formulation is still the same, but since we released this product
many years ago we have continued to do long term testing at various
dosing levels. We found basically that while the original dosing is
certainly adequate it was probably a bit too much on the
conservatives side... and that coupled with customer feedback
indicating that higher dosing was not only safe but very effective as
well we felt it would be to the customer's benefit to increase the
recommended dosing. Keep in mind of course that this is what we
recommend as safe and effective for the majority of planted aquaria,
but that doesn't mean one cannot use less or more if they desire.

So if you are currently using a dosage that works for you, then
continue to use that dosage. The product has not changed."
--

HTH

[Slappy*McFish]

Interesting...thanks for getting in touch with them and posting that, Robert.

[Matt W]

Great! Thanks RTR and thanks Seachem!

[Cearbhaill]

I'd like to take a moment and recognize Seachems outstanding product support.
I've had occasion to email them a few times and have always received a helpful reply in very little time.
In this day and age it is remarkable to find a company willing to take the time to answer each and every consumer question so thoroughly. Seachem really does it right!

[RTR]

I'll second everyone's positive things about Seachem. The company in general, and in particular the CEO Greg Morin, has from my first contact been completely open and honest about their products. This is IME completely different and in fact the polar opposite of the other companies whose product lines have some overlap with theirs.

The line has not been totally free of issues, but when issues arose, the Seachem folks gave us plenty of info and the reasons behind the issue, along with whatever the company's resolution of the issue was. None of the issues I have noticed has ever gone on without notice, recognition, and correction by the company when technically and legally possible - as with the labelling issue in this thread. That alone is worth my loyalty to them. They are responsive to their customer base - which IMHO should be a general case, but is all too rare today.

Do note that even on New Year's Eve I quite quickly got a full response from my request to their Support line in very short time - that level of service and customer awareness is hard to find.

[125gJoe]

Originally posted by RTR
I'll second everyone's positive things about Seachem. The company in general, and in particular the CEO Greg Morin, .... ...and actually posted here on AC... :D

Link: gmorin (http://www.aquariacentral.com/forums/member.php?action=getinfo&userid=2545)

[Captain Hook]

Good work! I really like companies that respond to customer concerns and do so promptly.

Thought I would add a more general question to this thread. I am going to start dosing Flourish in about a week and was wondering what everyone's thoughts are on the product. Seems to be pretty popular.

[Slappy*McFish]

I use it, good stuff.

[125gJoe]

I use it too, and recommend it.... :)

[RTR]

I use a lot of the Seachem line, from Flourish down through many of the individuals - Flourish Iron, ...Potassium, ...Phosphate, ...Nitrogen, ...Excel, etc.

My only issue with Flourish itself is that I have to refrigerate it ot it gets funky - which supposedly does no harm, but I don't like the smell, so I keep it in the refrigerator. But I do use it routinely.

For a period of time, Flourish Nitrogen would mold unless regrigerated also, but that issue has been solved and the formulation re-done to avoid the problem.

[Captain Hook]

Good to hear of all these positive results. I kind of figured I would hear good things anyway due to the Flourish line's popularity here at AC. I am dosing Flourish Excel now and plan to start adding Flourish soon.

[beviking]

That is an impressive company! It's good to hear that even though they have a great product and it works, they were still testing it to increase the benefits to their customer. This only makes sense, but amazing how so many companies get the product out there and quit.
Loyalty, absolutely! They deserve it!!!

I would recommend Flourish too!