Cheap Flourish Excel (registerd) substitue.

[TechAquaria]

They CAN be used for exactly the same purposes.

Fluorish excel IS NOT Glutaraldehyde, it is an isomer that SeaChem lists as Polycycloglutaracetal which is much less reactive and they claim it as being more acessible to plants. So in fact the two should not be handled exactly the same.

Absolutely incorrect, bordering on the edge of, or perhaps crossing into the realm of, disinformation. I have handled both of them EXACTLY alike, and for years now.

SeaChem acts very "secretively" about commenting EXACTLY what are the contents of Excel, even the MSDS sheet leaves out the percent of active ingredient, this surpises me, I would think the chemicals' safety questionable enough to demand it. I think one can deduce the ONLY active ingredient in it, which is/are responsible for its' effectiveness for the claimed benefits AND the unclaimed benefit of an algaecide is glutaraldehyde. Anyone can see the monetary gains/benefits for doing so--big dollars selling unwitting hobbyists chemicals worth pennies, and all one needs is a bit of disinformation going on (plausible deniability anyone?)

Any literature, including SeaChems', which I have been able to find, focuses on the 5 carbon chains, which DOES EXIST in the glut, when commenting on effectiveness/actions/benefits/etc., here is but one example: http://www.seachem.com/Products/product_pages/FlourishExcel.html

There is also a "sexing up" of the name of glut used in Excel (Polycycloglutaracetal), they add 'poly' to its' name.

Isomer = a compound that exists in forms having different arrangements of atoms but the same molecular weight.

Acetal = any organic compound formed by adding alcohol molecules to aldehyde molecules.

Most likely, its' mixture with water is how they can justify this claim; and, some loose bonding of the glut atoms occurs. However, this is pure conjecture on my part, since I lack the means to test this. Perhaps a bit of some type of sugar/alcohol would allow one to make this claim also. Do I think it is any more hazardous than Excel, NO! Do I think the plants can tell the difference? NO!

Not only have I tested glutaraldehyde, side-by-side, under exact conditions in seperate aquariums--there is NO apparent difference between Excel and a solution of 2.5% glut in distilled water.

However, if you have anything other than your personal opinion, such as even 1:1 tests carried out by yourself, I would be more than happy to duplicate them and report back.

NOW:
Open a bottle of Excel and smell, now open a bottle of 2.5% glutaraldehyde and smell it; note the fact that both smell alike. Now pour a bit of each into separate glass containers and view that they both look alike. Now set up identical aquariums and apply each to separate aquarium and observe the results, etc., etc. Get back to me after you experiments ...

I would not question that fact that SeaChem could/would have 'doctored' the glut so that claims can be that is a 'totally different chemical', however, for the purposes in our aquariums, I have yet to see these difference/advantages.

Why some are so anxious to defend the myth(s) that Flourish Excel is not replaceable with glutaraldehyde is unknown to me. However, cost between the two does spring to mind, but unless you, your friends, or your family owns a fish store--the purpose simply escapes me.

I do know one thing, if I owned a fish store, I would sell watered-down bottles of homemade "organic carbon" and make a bundle!

Regards,
TA

 

[Dr. Awkward]

I read online about an Indian study that shows Excel contains a 1.5 percent solution of glutaraldehyde.

TA, do you take any safety precautions when mixing your solution? The only reason I had heard of glutaraldehyde before reading this post was because my mom is a lab tech in a hospital and she was telling me about how people get asthma like symptoms from accidentally inhaling it. It sounds like a good deal to me but I don't want to get sick trying it out. Thanks.

 

[TechAquaria]

I read online about an Indian study that shows Excel contains a 1.5 percent solution of glutaraldehyde.

TA, do you take any safety precautions when mixing your solution? The only reason I had heard of glutaraldehyde before reading this post was because my mom is a lab tech in a hospital and she was telling me about how people get asthma like symptoms from accidentally inhaling it. It sounds like a good deal to me but I don't want to get sick trying it out. Thanks.

Me, take precautions? Well, yes, at first I was very careful. After noting that I had no allergic responses to glutaraldehyde and that skin irritation did not occur to me, my precautions are minimal--and include, don't get it in my eyes, don't inhale it, don't drink it, wash my hands after use, etc. Exactly the ones I would take when using Excel.

Now, if you are asking, am I a fool? Or, do I live dangerously? Or, do I injure myself often? No, not at all. For example, gasoline, propane, finger-nail-polish-remover, solvents, paint remover, spray paints, some glues, bleach, ammonia, etc. can all be harmful or fatal if NOT used correctly. And, think about peanut butter, people have died from eating it. Indeed, violent reactions of people to peanut butter are somewhat common. And, from what I have studied, peanut butter is a carcinogen! Seems that has something to do with a type of mold or fungus which a large percentage of the peanut butter exhibits contamination from; yet, I still, stupidly perhaps, consume it. Someday I may end up dead from this, hopefully, no sooner than if I didn't eat it!

So, if you mean to ask if glutaraldehyde is the most dangerous/toxic chemical in my home, no, indeed, far from it! (If you really want to fry your noodle, worry about the mercury in the CFL's I am using on the aquariums!)

Frankly, I believe your mother, on her statement. It would not surprise me if some or even a lot of people have reactions, respiratory, skin, etc. to glutaraldehyde. I mean, bleach burns my eyes and skin if I use it to disinfect tanks, my shower, my toilet, etc. I wear gloves when using bleach, and I provide ventilation, such as a fan when cleaning the shower. And, I never, and I mean NEVER mix it with ammonia! Bleach and Glutaraldehyde are both disinfectants--I am sure many of the same properties are common to both, other than sensitive/allergic reactions. Seems to me, I once read that chlorine itself can-be/or-is a carcinogen--but it is in many drinking water systems.

If you have any lack of confidence at all, either in your ability to use glutaraldehyde safely (I mean it could be as dangerous as fireworks used incorrectly on the 4th of July!), leave it alone! The really complex and technical aspects which aquarium keeping can lead one into is not for everyone.

And, if your mom didn't already warn you, DON'T DRINK GLUTARALDEHYDE! (probably best to keep it off your clothes and skin too--same for Flourish Excel.)

Now, I have had 'a bit of fun' in the above. Don't let this lead you to believe that I don't always take sufficient precautions. Indeed, when mixing the 50% glutaraldehyde, it might be wise to use safety glasses! And, please appreciate the humor for what it was meant to be, fun to read, and NOT disrespectful.

Regards,
TA

 

[dinosue]

Totally agree with TA.

I am a chemist myself working in the lab for 10 yrs now, and to me, handling glutaraldehyde is not much different from handling salt at home. Of course, some of chemicals can induce severe form of allergic reaction, but it is extremely rare. With proper precautions, it is usually very safe to handle most of chemicals. I would more worry about mercury in CFL, just like TA mentioned.

From chemistry perspective, something poly- or cyclo- usually means that it is more stable form/soluble form of certain chemical, so flourish excel might have longer shelf life or might last longer in the water column, but its chemical property should be the same.

I have been using flourish excel and thanks for the tip. I will probably try glutaraldehyde next time, since my lab has a ton.

 

[excuzzzeme]

Found this article.

In part reads the following:

. . . The bottom line is that yes, there is a positive effect on plant growth by judicious addition of Glutaraldehyde to aquariums as an apparent supplemental carbon source, especially in combination with gaseous C02. For proprietary reasons, Seachem has been understandably coy about disclosing the actual formulation, but it appears that the actual chemistry is not as mystical as it would seem. ‘Polycycloglutaracetal’ is likely a rather stable, and safe, formulation of aqueous glutaraldehyde with one or more undisclosed organic compounds that will undoubtedly continue to have a measurable benefit of promoting vigorous plant growth in aquariums. . . .

I read this and other found articles to mean that they are one in the same. Seachem names it slightly differently as it is mixed with a proprietary component and has applied the concoction for patent.

 

[TechAquaria]

Totally agree with TA.

I am a chemist myself working in the lab for 10 yrs now, and to me, handling glutaraldehyde is not much different from handling salt at home. Of course, some of chemicals can induce severe form of allergic reaction, but it is extremely rare. With proper precautions, it is usually very safe to handle most of chemicals. I would more worry about mercury in CFL, just like TA mentioned.

From chemistry perspective, something poly- or cyclo- usually means that it is more stable form/soluble form of certain chemical, so flourish excel might have longer shelf life or might last longer in the water column, but its chemical property should be the same.

I have been using flourish excel and thanks for the tip. I will probably try glutaraldehyde next time, since my lab has a ton.

Hello Dinosue!:

Great to hear from a chemist. Please re-post with your results, if and after you have had some experience in the use of glut; that is what I am after--what others find from this substitution. I would like feedback from others, all I have is what I can find on Google and my own experiences.

I really can't tell you how great it is to hear from a chemist. I once had a high school chemistry lab, and had to repeat the inorganic chemistry lab in college--however, my degrees are in other fields, but I loved chemistry--and, I respect those who are in the field. I lost my only friend who was a chemist for Dow, in a car accident <frown.>

I certainly would NOT encourage you to try its' use if I had any negative results at all in this substitution. So, I have a high degree of confidence you will see beneficial results, i.e., duplicating the results from the use of Excel.

What amazes me is this: If I pour three shot glasses, one of ethyl alcohol, one of methyl alcohol and one of isopropyl alcohol, then smell each of them, separately--they ALL smell differently! If I repeat the same experiment using three different types of sugars, say: glucose, sucrose, fructose--they ALL taste differently (actually, some kinda smell differently when mixed with water also, or I imagine they do!)

So, just to comment on this, I would expect glutaraldehyde to smell differently than Excel, and I am loathe to taste 'em :silly: (if Excel does justify its' 'sexed up' name, I would expect to note some type/kind of difference)--it DOES NOT SMELL DIFFERENTLY.

Now, this is far from 'scientific' evidence, however, it does make me wonder ... me thinks the dollar gain is afoot!

Regards,
TA

 

[theredchaser]

Hmm... well theory aside, I personally think handling concentrated solutions of potentially hazardous chemicals should be reconsidered for the average? hobbyist. Considering all the numbnuts I see in my chem lab with a science degree (i.e. laboratory) background, I can't imagine what might happen. Diluting something to the right concentration isn't exactly rocket science, but many are probably unprepared for any potential hazards. Maybe I'm being overcautious, but I'm imagining a scene with a guy in a tshirt and shorts with no goggles or gloves, trying to pour concentrated solution in one hand to another mug cup in another... opcorn:


I'm still curious as to which intermediate glutaraldehyde is substituting for. I don't *think aquatic plants use C3, C4, or CAM carbon fixation so that leaves us with plain 'ol Calvin cycle. The 5 carbons seem to be a little bit of a stretch. Either way glutaraldehyde has to go through an array of enzymes to even make it to the Calvin cycle as one of the intermediates. Anyone have an idea?

 

[TechAquaria]

Found this article.

In part reads the following:



I read this and other found articles to mean that they are one in the same. Seachem names it slightly differently as it is mixed with a proprietary component and has applied the concoction for patent.

That patent application should have enough details in it to give us a better picture of what Flourish Excel really is; I cannot find that patent application, after much searching in patent data bases.

Regards,
TA

 

[TechAquaria]

Hmm... well theory aside, I personally think handling concentrated solutions of potentially hazardous chemicals should be reconsidered for the average? hobbyist. Considering all the numbnuts I see in my chem lab with a science degree (i.e. laboratory) background, I can't imagine what might happen. Diluting something to the right concentration isn't exactly rocket science, but many are probably unprepared for any potential hazards. Maybe I'm being overcautious, but I'm imagining a scene with a guy in a tshirt and shorts with no goggles or gloves, trying to pour concentrated solution in one hand to another mug cup in another... opcorn:


I'm still curious as to which intermediate glutaraldehyde is substituting for. I don't *think aquatic plants use C3, C4, or CAM carbon fixation so that leaves us with plain 'ol Calvin cycle. The 5 carbons seem to be a little bit of a stretch. Either way glutaraldehyde has to go through an array of enzymes to even make it to the Calvin cycle as one of the intermediates. Anyone have an idea?

I will never fault one for being overly cautious; it that is a fault, it is a good one!

I frequently work with concentrated sulfuric acid. I use the sulfuric acid to make zinc sulfate, ferric sulfate, etc., and usually for making micro-nutrient solutions--sometimes to lower PH, and sometimes to remove mineral deposits on the glass of aquariums. At times, I also find use for a bit of concentrated hydrochloric acid.

Now, if one does not know to pour the concentrated acid SLOWLY INTO A SUFFICIENT AMOUNT OF WATER to control the exothermic reaction which occurs a very dangerous situation results, when diluting the acid; as doing the opposite, or pouring water into a concentrated acid can result in an almost explosive event, and great danger exists in the acid being splattered into the eyes, on the skin, clothing, equipment, etc. Safety glasses or a face shield is absolutely necessary under ALL conditions!

If ever I forget to add proper warnings and cautions to my post(s), please correct me immediately!

However, in my humble opinion, the 'idiots' in the world who would harm themselves, and/or others, are NOT sufficient enough reason to halt everyone else from the knowledge or ability to use these things for their own personal gain(s.)

We simply have a great responsibility in protecting ourselves from harm, whether from a self-inflicted danger or a danger from another or others--indeed, this is the price of liberty and freedom, and, again, in my humble opinion, is a very worthwhile trade-off. Knowledge and a good understanding of the materials, methods and dangers we would use/apply is/are our best weapons in our defense.

Regards,
TA

 

[TechAquaria]

Check out this persons' analysis!

I found this rather impressive research/study/analysis/logic/text:

"Having recently stumbled across various discussion threads relating to the use of Glutaraldehyde in the aquarium to promote aquatic plant growth, I thought I would research the topic a little more for my own edification. This is what I came up with. The commercially available product by Seachem called Flourish Excel TM has a rather oddly termed compound called ‘Polycycloglutaracetal’. Based on the curiously formulated name, it appears that Seachem just made it up to describe a concoction of aqueous Glutaraldehyde with one or more chemicals of undisclosed nature. It therefore follows, that you will not find this fictitious compound on any MSDS or official chemical register of compounds. Of course it is widely known that glutaraldehyde has algicidal properties at specific concentrations, along with uses as a fixative for electron microscopy. Glutaraldehyde is a small compound made up of a short carbon chain with an aldehyde functional group at each end. The chemical formula is HCO-(CH2)3-CHO. The terminal aldehyde groups are quite reactive and in aqueous (i.e. in water) form (> pH 7.0) glutaraldehyde molecules readily forms cross-links to form polymers of varying length. These oligo-/polymers also readily combine with nitrogen groups in proteins to form additional cross-links. Hence, this is the likely origin of ‘Poly-‘ and ‘–cyclo-‘ in the name ‘Polycycloglutaracetal’; the rest of the name is self-evident. So, as it would appear, Seachem has formulated the name to describe the behaviour of glutaraldehyde in water with the additional of some type of protein or other organic compound. The polymerisation capacity of glutaraldehyde to proteins is widely used in biomedical fields in regeneration of collagen and ligaments. Moreover, cross-linking of aqueous Glutaraldehyde with proteins involves more than a dozen different forms (e.g. isomers) depending on solution conditions (e.g. pH, temperature, etc.). These isomers are in equilibrium, so whatever isomer predominates in solution will depend on ambient conditions, and appears not to influence the beneficial net effect of the compound to plant growth. The figure provided by Seachem to describe the general structure of ‘Polycycloglutaracetal’ also corresponds well to the rationale proposed here (see [url=http://www.seachem.com/support/Articles/CO2PlantedAquarium.html).
The bottom line is that yes, there is a positive effect on plant growth by judicious addition of Glutaraldehyde to aquariums as an apparent supplemental carbon source, especially in combination with gaseous C02. For proprietary reasons, Seachem has been understandably coy about disclosing the actual formulation, but it appears that the actual chemistry is not as mystical as it would seem. ‘Polycycloglutaracetal’ is likely a rather stable, and safe, formulation of aqueous glutaraldehyde with one or more undisclosed organic compounds that will undoubtedly continue to have a measurable benefit of promoting vigorous plant growth in aquariums. I hope this helps dispel some prevailing misconceptions and I would be very interested if anyone has found out anything to the contrary or in addition to my conclusions about glutaraldehyde and Seachem’s products for promoting plant growth in aquaria."

on this link: http://www.barrreport.com/co2-aquatic-plant-fertilization/4196-glutaraldehyde.html -- you can read the entire thread there, if you have interest.

If he/she does not know what they are talking about, they have me fooled!

Regards,
TA