# Kocide or phyton27 ?



## Frankie (Dec 13, 2022)

Hello,
I am trying to figure out which of these fungicides is more effective. 
I am asking people with experience using them. I know all the literature, like phyton 27 is copper sulfate /tannic acid and they say it's systematic . Kocide Is copper hydroxide. I know Kocide works well and has a long track record. But I just started using photon 27, so I'm not sure yet how it compares. The literature on it makes it sound really good, but is it that good in practice? Is it really systematic?
Or should I just stick with kocide?

I was wondering if anyone has found that one works better than the other in actual practice?


----------



## Ray (Dec 13, 2022)

Based upon my limited experience and a bit of studying, I think the copper concentration in the as-applied treatment is the important part, not the particular chemical that provides it.

I see no tannic acid in Phyton 27.


----------



## Ozpaph (Dec 15, 2022)

I believe they work as 'topical' sprays.


----------



## Ray (Dec 16, 2022)

My understanding is that the copper ions are readily absorbed, making them systemic.


----------



## richgarrison (Dec 16, 2022)

Martin Motes has assertions (i forget if he referenced studies to back up his assertions) that he has shared in speaking forums ... in summary Phyton is no more systemic than Kocide, and Kocide is a simpler, way less expensive chemical to use... 

That may be worth tracking down...


----------



## Ray (Dec 16, 2022)

I agree:

Kocide - 46.1% copper hydroxide = 30% Cu
Phyton - 21.27% copper sulfate = 5.4% Cu
Southern Ag Liquid Copper - 27.15% copper diammonia diacetate complex = 8% Cu
Bonide Liquid Copper - 10% copper octanoate = 1.8% Cu

I have no doubt that there are marketing claims that one form is better than another, but once they're in solution the copper species absorbed is probably identical.


----------



## Ozpaph (Dec 16, 2022)

chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://cdn.nufarm.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/28/2018/09/11014750/NufarmCopperChamps_iPad_REV10.18.pdf


----------



## Ozpaph (Dec 16, 2022)

chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/138171/Using-copper-sprays-to-control-disease-in-citrus.pdf


----------



## Frankie (Dec 17, 2022)

richgarrison said:


> Martin Motes has assertions (i forget if he referenced studies to back up his assertions) that he has shared in speaking forums ... in summary Phyton is no more systemic than Kocide, and Kocide is a simpler, way less expensive chemical to use...
> 
> That may be worth tracking down...


Thanks Rich, this is the kind of info I was looking for .I will search for that guy .
According to Phyton, the normal rules of particles size, copper concentraction, etc, do not apply. They say it's the first ever systematic copper fungicide. It's not particles in suspension. Its soluble. Its only 5% copper, but they say that is all that is necessary because it is systematic. (So less toxic copper build up in soil over time). I don't know if that's all true, but that's what they say.
But that's interesting that you say kocide is also systematic. I always wondered if the Phyton literature was overblown. I really need to do a side by side comparison. I've been just alternating between them lately just to control an issue . I will report back after I do.


----------



## werner.freitag (Dec 17, 2022)

Ray said:


> Based upon my limited experience and a bit of studying, I think the copper concentration in the as-applied treatment is the important part, not the particular chemical that provides it.
> 
> I see no tannic acid in Phyton 27.


Ray, in the MSDS they exchanged Tannin Acid by Picric Acid.


----------



## werner.freitag (Dec 17, 2022)

the 2 MSDS 
any opinoin ?


----------



## Ray (Dec 18, 2022)

Ah yes.

Supposedly, the acids help with uptake.


----------



## richgarrison (Dec 18, 2022)

Frankie said:


> ….
> But that's interesting that you say kocide is also systematic…..


Not a hugely important correction. But 1.). I was merely passing on Martin’s assertion and 2.) Martin’s assertion was that phyton was not systemic.. basically saying what you were getting at about their documentation being overblown. 

‘My’ experience has given ‘me’ the results he suggests. Saying all that in precisely those words to be clear that your results may or may not be the same. 

This goofy hobby we’ve embarked on is such a complex system of moving parts that communicating all the dimensions of our own ongoing experiments is just about impossible. 

In short. Your mileage may vary.


----------



## Ray (Dec 18, 2022)

There are three potential modes: topical (stays on surface), translaminar (is absorbed through the leaf surface) and systemic (is absorbed through the roots). As far as I'm aware, all of the copper products listed earlier meet the first and third definitions.


----------

