Chelation

Maybe? At the very least any positive effect is severely diminished, since the primary effect listed is increased availability for minerals and those minerals more easily traversing roots. The molecules that are chelated already have that "enhanced" bio availability effect... these molecules are already plant ready and 100% available and easily enter the plant. i wouldn't use myco in a soilless/hydro context either. the effect it has on phosphourous is redundant for 100% chelated context and then you are only left with partially damaged roots and potentially minor bump to water absorption rates, but that is more strongly dictated by local VPD in any healthy plant context. If you water with good habits early, you have more robust roots later on. If anything i have more roots than i should have by the end of a grow relative to pot size, so just how much more can it drink? 3%? probably some minute figure since roots are quite effective at their jobs and environment is going to dicate rate of drinking possible. This stuff is more useful (not sure if ever proven beyond a doubt, but let's go with it) for nutrients that aren't plant-ready. "Soil" nutes or products labeled with "organic" marketing term this stuff or might benefit from it. the myco is definitely a maybe even in soil. human eyes are not sufficeint to resolve the effect... so anecdotal info on this is 100% suspect. need some precision and consistency along with a proper sample size to be certain of it's effect.. and the fact no one seems to do it is a giant red flag in most cases. manufacturer's wont for fear they'd hurt their own sales.. if you can make more off of perceived benefits than proving anythign, that's what we get in the current economy. It's easy to deceive average people, unfortunately. Best i;ve found is more marketing material that reads more like a commercial thana proper research paper. Definitely not the 33% boost or whatever they often say for myco. it's a maybe at best, which means small effect. Then, you have this giant fog of war trying to figure out.. is this info a manipulation for greater profit or based on real evidence... lol.. just muddies the water for everything else.. even the good info. zero integrity in large portions of the information out there. i wouldn't bother.. if you ever run clones of same plant and have some lab-precise controls over all variables, i'd love to see the side-by-side.. this would not be incontrovertible, but it'd by nice to see... i'm sure sample size would be insufficient to be confident in what we see, but it'd be a glimmer.

I remember when there was no humic or fulvic products for the hydroponic market. Thats how far back i go with growing. I already had grow houses when Advanced Nutrients hit the scene. Their nutrients were shit back then and they didn't have 10,000 bottles of snake oil. Humic's and Fulvic's (which is derived from Humic's) are nature's chelator. but if your nutrient already come in a chelated form, then what's the use of spending money on humic acid? Perhaps there's a beneficial quality for microbs within it, i don't know. I might need to dive deeper to find the correct answer. Thought it was an interesting and thought provoking question, which no one had a response or opinion about......shocking........... other than Organoman...

Humic acid will help with the assimilation of potassium. Fulvic acid will do the same with trace elements. Both worthy attributes that will aid plant health and vigor. I have used both for decades and would not grow without them..........they certainly won't do any harm, only benefits! I believe the results are real and worth every cent. Mycorrhizae are the "other" wonder ingredient.