Ni is proven results in planted tanks? Really? Forget light intensity and CO2, it's all about some hyper minor trace? I agree with what Zapins stated. This would be incredibly difficult to demonstrate for a researcher, let alone a hobbyists.
CMS does fine, I think finding another product or source is fine also, particularly if it is cheaper and more available. If it has these other minor minor traces just to be sexy, well hunky dory.
I've yet to find any plant species that I cannot grow quite well using CMS.
In fact, I have long offered challenges to others making such claims for various nutrients, ppm's and I've never lost yet after 20 years now. Name the plant that has trouble specific to these traces and is improved by this?
You need to be able to state this, otherwise it's pie in the sky and you have no clear hypothesis to test.
So the real issue is one that offers another product that is similar, does the same type of job and is cheap/more available etc. I'm on board there. The rest is speculation/wishful thinking I would argue.
Tom i have never claimed that we need to have those Traces, CSM+B works fine i have already stated it in my post, if things can improve it further why not try it, if Nickel have no effect on plant growth then why does Seachem Flourish Trace uses it? i have seen other traces don't use it beside seachem, could this be because seachem uses Urea in their Nitrogen? Nickel is beneficial when you use NH4/Urea Nitrogen. i could be wrong on whatever i have said but Kekon at APC have added it and he claim it does help the plant.
i cannot confirm his claim because i haven't tried it yet, until then we should wait.