Wanted Fish Hydrolysate does not equal Fish Emulsion

  • Thread starter tomatoesarecooltoo
  • Start date
  • Tagged users None
tomatoesarecooltoo

tomatoesarecooltoo

I see fish hydrolysate and fish emulsion conflated alot so I wanted to share my own understanding of why fish hydrolysate does not equal fish emulsion.
I personally think each of these can be a useful additive, this thread is not supposed to be an advert nor a diss on either.

Before I talk about the NPK differences, I want to share my understanding of the processes that lead to the two products

Fish Emulsion
Fish are harvested from the ocean for food
The left over bits, mostly guts, are then inherited by companies that sell fish oil supplements
Those companies extract the fish oils for their supplements and give their left overs to the emulsion industry
the emulsion industry generally uses chemicals decomposition to extract the nitrates, ammonium, micronutrients etc from those spent guts
this results in an organic liquid formula that is around 5,1,1 has micronutrients, has small amounts of calcium, is not biologically active, but is attractive to biologicals none the less


Fish hydrolysate
Fish are harvested from the ocean for food
The smaller fish that are not worth gutting are separated (human time is expensive)
those smaller fish are digested entirely including bone usually through biological decompompostition
this results in a semi liquid formula (chunky), that is around 2,3,1 has micronutrients, and more substantial amounts of calcium, this product is already biologically active and may explode when opened (according to negative amazon reviews, never had this experience myself)

If my understanding is correct, fish emulsion is a veg only nutrient, while fish hydrolysate is more of a base nutrient and biological inoculant. They both smell gross and make yellowing plants happy. What are your thoughts, opinions, questions etc?
 
jollycanna

jollycanna

New,Gwan the keeper of the trees...available soon.
Supporter
I see fish hydrolysate and fish emulsion conflated alot so I wanted to share my own understanding of why fish hydrolysate does not equal fish emulsion.
I personally think each of these can be a useful additive, this thread is not supposed to be an advert nor a diss on either.

Before I talk about the NPK differences, I want to share my understanding of the processes that lead to the two products

Fish Emulsion
Fish are harvested from the ocean for food
The left over bits, mostly guts, are then inherited by companies that sell fish oil supplements
Those companies extract the fish oils for their supplements and give their left overs to the emulsion industry
the emulsion industry generally uses chemicals decomposition to extract the nitrates, ammonium, micronutrients etc from those spent guts
this results in an organic liquid formula that is around 5,1,1 has micronutrients, has small amounts of calcium, is not biologically active, but is attractive to biologicals none the less


Fish hydrolysate
Fish are harvested from the ocean for food
The smaller fish that are not worth gutting are separated (human time is expensive)
those smaller fish are digested entirely including bone usually through biological decompompostition
this results in a semi liquid formula (chunky), that is around 2,3,1 has micronutrients, and more substantial amounts of calcium, this product is already biologically active and may explode when opened (according to negative amazon reviews, never had this experience myself)

If my understanding is correct, fish emulsion is a veg only nutrient, while fish hydrolysate is more of a base nutrient and biological inoculant. They both smell gross and make yellowing plants happy. What are your thoughts, opinions, questions etc?
nice info... i think ill steer clear of both now thanks.
 
Top Bottom