Mr.Fulvic / Mr.Humic has been extensively tested for fulvic acid content. Until recently, there was no accepted standard method for determining fulvic acid concentrations in commercial products and the raw materials from which they originate. Today there is a quantification method that has been accepted, as the standard, by the IHSS (International Humic Substances Society) and AAPFCO (American Association of Plant Food Control Officials), both entities being a conglomerate of soil scientists.
In order for our visitors to better understand the differences between the various products on the market, customers need to be able to compare apples to apples. To accomplish this, we have tested several batches of Mr.Fulvic / Mr.Humic with the three most accepted and accurate methods for determining fulvic acid concentrations.
|Quantification Method for Fulvic Acid*||Result %||Lab Number||Lot Number||Lab Report|
|Verpleugh and Branifold (V&B)||12.8||916505-02||916505-02||View Report|
|The V and B method has been widely employed in the past and many companies are still basing their fulvic acid claims on the results acquired by this method. Unfortunately it is among the most inaccurate ways to determine fulvic acid content. The method includes not only the fulvic acid weight but the humic acid, ash content and other organic acids as the fulvic acid result.|
|Modified Larry G. Butler (LGB)||5.6||33504-01||160626||View Report|
|The LGB method is far more accurate and gives results very similar to the new standardized method. It tends to include some of the humic acid content as fulvic acid weight. The primary benefit to using this testing method is that it does include the weight of both the free form fulvic acid (fulvic acid not molecularly bound to a mineral) and the mineral fulvate form of fulvic acid.|
|Lamar Standardized (LS)||4.5||717||18039||View Report|
|The Lamar Standardized Method produces the lowest fulvic acid values. This method first removes impurities and other constituents from the product being tested. This allows for a more accurate fulvic acid reading than previously achievable by other methods. This also makes this the most expensive form of testing to date.|
* Other methods still being used today include:
California Method: This method is a modification of the V&B method and produces similarly inflated fulvic acid results.
Colorimetric: Another inaccurate method, now obsolete.
Classical: Obsolete and inaccurate method producing inflated fulvic acid content readings. No longer accepted by the IHSS.