Magnesium gluconate
- Thread starter j_mazzy
- Start date
disc1
-RT * ln(k)
You don't need bioavailability with magnesium in a fish tank. In the tank the magnesium dissolves. The nature of the counterion to it doesn't matter anymore at that point. The two never see each other again. It's just the naked magnesium ions that you need.
You CANNOT apply human health claims to a tank full of water. They're two completely different things.
You CANNOT apply human health claims to a tank full of water. They're two completely different things.
Yes you are correct. I realized that after I posted and was researching molecular weights. I should have edited the posT to include something else. Having said that I do think it could be better than magnesium sulfate but after looking I was thinking magnesium oxide would be best.
disc1
-RT * ln(k)
How could gluconate be better? The magnesium there is the same. If you want gluconate in your water then just add that by itself.
How would MgO be better? How well would that dissolve in water? What would it do to alkalinity?
You're trying to overthink something basic that some great minds that really know chemistry have already thought through. Keep that in mind. If something like MgO was better for us then someone like Randy wouldn't have missed it.
disc1
-RT * ln(k)
BTW: Gluconate is NOT glucose. Glucose is an aldohexose. It has an aldehyde group at one end. Gluconate is the conjugate base of gluconic acid which is glucose with that aldehyde group oxidized to the carboxylic acid. Similar, but technically no longer a carbohydrate.
edited
yes it is gluconic acid a breakdown and byproduct of a sugar yet it still has the 2:1:2 carbon, hydrogen, oxygen property of a carbohydrate C6H12O7 (+1 on the O). more importantly it acts a food source for bacteria just like a standard sugar and lends to the tank as such increasing carbon load while raising magnesium levels.
I was unaware that everything stated here was to be of a complete technical nature, utilizing field of study jargon and increasing the difficulty of understanding to the layperson. My statements were made in "generalities" which, in my experience, allows for greater understanding in a larger population.
yes it is gluconic acid a breakdown and byproduct of a sugar yet it still has the 2:1:2 carbon, hydrogen, oxygen property of a carbohydrate C6H12O7 (+1 on the O). more importantly it acts a food source for bacteria just like a standard sugar and lends to the tank as such increasing carbon load while raising magnesium levels.
I was unaware that everything stated here was to be of a complete technical nature, utilizing field of study jargon and increasing the difficulty of understanding to the layperson. My statements were made in "generalities" which, in my experience, allows for greater understanding in a larger population.
Last edited:
I just add magnesium sulfate and magnesium chloride in the amounts suggested in Randy's articles which maintain the chloride /sulfate ratio.
Adding gluconate may be harmful with buildups overtime and I can't think of a good reason to use it at all. Execessive organic carbon is harmful to corals, particualry excess glucose. and sugar dosing IME. I've dosed soluble organics ethanol and acetic acid for over 6 years with precisely controlled doses. The magnesium dosing need or lack of it shouldn't drive the organic carbon dosing which requires precision,IMO.
Adding gluconate may be harmful with buildups overtime and I can't think of a good reason to use it at all. Execessive organic carbon is harmful to corals, particualry excess glucose. and sugar dosing IME. I've dosed soluble organics ethanol and acetic acid for over 6 years with precisely controlled doses. The magnesium dosing need or lack of it shouldn't drive the organic carbon dosing which requires precision,IMO.
disc1
-RT * ln(k)
Sorry! Didn't realize that technical information wasn't appreciated. Good luck with your tank.
C6H12O7 is not 2:1:2. Not a carbohydrate. It's been oxidized. It was just information. If you don't like more information, then I'm sorry. Was trying to help. Forgive me for offending you with truth.
certainly not offended, again a generality. I actually wrote 2:1:2 (+1 on the O) in my haste but meant 1:2:1 as the general rule of a carbohydrate. Perhaps as it was my first time in the chemistry section I did not realize the answers would be of the strictly technical nature vs a generalizable version. I have a degree in science so I am able to understand the lingo and chemistry so it is appreciated.
