A Hypocrites View on Not Using Quarantine

[WVNed]

I have a 240 coming and you all really have me questioning myself.

Thanks, I guess.

 

[MnFish1]

I was going to disagree with this since fish can loose their adaptive immunity in 6 months after last contact with a parasite, but it looks like others beat me to it. I'm slacking today.

You're taking what I (meant) a bit out of context (the comment was addressed to those who feel the more life in the tank the better) - on the surface - there is no advantage to having these parasites in a tank. I was replying to the comment that the more life the better. Just like with smallpox, malaria, etc there is no advantage to humans to have these parasites. However - if you go this route (ie. the route of extreme QT) - if they are re-exposed - they are certainly at higher risk of a more severe infection.

There are some comments out there that even without re-exposure - there still is some immune 'memory' though it does decrease somewhat between 3 and 6 months. Another common misconception - at 6 months -1 day - there is not immunity and at 6 months +1 day - the immunity is gone. No one knows how long the immunity lasts - only that it starts to wane.

 

[MnFish1]

I agree with this, when it comes to Ich and Velvet anyway. The actual exposure to copper to kill the freshly hatched parasite is measured in seconds, not hours. Certainly not weeks. If the concentration is high enough, 10 days is more than enough and 14 days provides a 35% margin. Most of the variables in timing of the lifecycle have no impact while on the fish.

This is definitely true - but - I disagree with you on the timing. The 10 days you're quoting is 'the norm'. But - So was @HotRocks idea about 1.75 ppm and 14 days being sufficient for velvet - but it was proven incorrect (because I don't believe @HotRocks made a mistake in his QT practices). Perhaps its time to start listening to 'new information' (myself included) - rather than resort to data collected in the 1990's?

If you don't believe me - its fine - its my opinion after talking to a couple people in the copper industry and reading multiple new bits of information - about how parasites in the wild are tracked, etc. For example - I reported that at the National zoo - they had velvet show up 65 days after starting an observational quarantine - yet some people here may say '14 days' or '30 days' observation is good enough - then wonder 'how did I get velvet after QT.

 

[ngoodermuth]

See, this is why I don’t do long posts or get riled up. ;Sorry

Now i fell horrible. I am shunned by the reefsquad and i have insulted a good portion of some most knowledgeable and giving people. I myself in my short time have turned to you guys in times I doubted myself or if someone else could use the help.

Especially @ngoodermuth and @Frtdrmrose7 . If there is an emergency you guys are always there. When I read, and re-read your posts to learn there is always a tone of let’s help and see what we can do. You guided @Mjrenz thru 50 years of fish keeping in one thread, and did it successfully, and something to be celebrated.



I agree with this, but (and I’ll keep it short:)). Why must there be a “cure”? If there is a parasite in the tank, (except velvet and brook) it is in the tank.People call it management. I think a better term is a balancing the ecosystem we have. Replicate nature. We can’t manage ich expect QT, we can manage the fish by providing them the same tools as what they would get in the wild.

To sum up, this is getting into the long area I stay away from. So sorry to all, I do not like being controversial. The whole point I was going for was spurred on not by any illness thread but someone in the new section being schooled on QT.

Ps. Please don’t take away my hospitality badge

You haven’t been shunned! Please don’t feel bad, I just wanted to make sure the disease team - and I don’t mean myself, but humblefish, hot rocks, 4fordfamily, and many others who have devoted very large amounts of time there- get the credit they deserve. They’ve been so helpful to me and countless others. It’s hard not to get a little protective ;)

You’ve been very courteous overall since joining, and I appreciate what you contribute to the community. I’m not upset and I don’t hold it against you :)

 

[Mjrenz]

You haven’t been shunned! Please don’t feel bad, I just wanted to make sure to give the disease team - and I don’t mean myself, but humblefish, hot rocks, 4fordfamily, and many others who have devoted very large amounts of time there- get the credit they deserve. They’ve been so helpful to me any countess others. It’s hard not to get a little protective ;)

You’ve been very courteous overall since joining, and I appreciate what you contribute to the community. I’m not upset and I don’t hold it against you :)

So brutal! Lol:). You are the true definition of a professional

 

[Brew12]

You're taking what I (meant) a bit out of context (the comment was addressed to those who feel the more life in the tank the better) - on the surface - there is no advantage to having these parasites in a tank. I was replying to the comment that the more life the better. Just like with smallpox, malaria, etc there is no advantage to humans to have these parasites.

I'm not sure this is a good analogy. A person can get a smallpox vaccine and be protected for life. Let's say a person needed to be exposed to smallpox at least once a year to keep their immunity. Any contact with smallpox after that one year greatly increased their odds of dying from smallpox. Would it benefit them to be exposed at least annually? I feel so. This is more how the fish immune system works.

There are some comments out there that even without re-exposure - there still is some immune 'memory' though it does decrease somewhat between 3 and 6 months. Another common misconception - at 6 months -1 day - there is not immunity and at 6 months +1 day - the immunity is gone. No one knows how long the immunity lasts - only that it starts to wane.

Very true... when I have seen this referenced it is the mean time where re-exposure to the parasite is more likely to cause a statistically significant chance at increased mortality rates. For some fish this process began in under 4 months. Some still had a strong immune response at almost a year. And the immunity gradually fades, it isn't instant.

This is definitely true - but - I disagree with you on the timing. The 10 days you're quoting is 'the norm'. But - So was @HotRocks idea about 1.75 ppm and 14 days being sufficient for velvet - but it was proven incorrect (because I don't believe @HotRocks made a mistake in his QT practices). Perhaps its time to start listening to 'new information' (myself included) - rather than resort to data collected in the 1990's?

Is there "new information" that says either parasite can stay on a fish for over 9 days?

 

[fishybizzness]

I hope that some day a process or set of procedures to follow, that can be reproduced by almost any new reefer easily, to start and stock an aquarium without the use of multiple medications or extended quarantining of coral and fish is discovered. I've been on the saltwater side of the hobby for a little over 2 years now and have had my share of problems. Everything from fish jumping, being eaten by bigger fish, having trouble keeping any new additions alive for more than a week or two to 2 cat 5 hurricanes! My tank has finally stabilized since last year after adding a uv system and running ozone. I also went back to feeding fresh food to Include live mycid shrimp and doing nsw water changes. I have also added some sea whips/gorgonians to the tank. I've added several new fish over the last 6-8 months and everything seems to be doing well. I don't quarantine and never have. I decided to go that route after almost shutting down the tank and getting out of the hobby. The reason I was getting out is the fact that I work 6 days a week and don't have enough free time to even do a observation quarantine, much less maintaining levels of medication and doing multiple water changes a week. I religiously do a 10% water change weekly and feel that my current success is due to multiple factors, not just any one or two things. I feel that if it got to the point of going fallow and maintaining a separate quarantine tank for the required 70+ days and having to go through that process with every new addition I would definitely not continue in the hobby,. I keep a saltwater aquarium because it is my stress release when I get home from a tough day and anytime it's gets to be something that is causing me constant additional stress, that will be my cue to give up the hobby.

 

[Lowell Lemon]

Wow what a thead. Now that we are all friends how are we going to handle the rest of the world? ;)

 

[Mjrenz]

Wow what a thead. Now that we are all friends how are we going to handle the rest of the world? ;)

QT!:)

 

[Mastiffsrule]

I've never understood why proper QT & proper nutrition need to be mutually exclusive. You can soak food in fish oil (and feed other vitamin enriched foods) whilst in QT just as easily as you can in a DT. :p Take my advice when it comes to QT, but listen to people like @atoll @Paul B @robert once your fish is in the DT ... and you & your fish will be happy happy happy. :D

This quote is from a similar thread back in ‘16 by humblefish. This is where I was trying going before the train in my head derailed.

I had no intention of bringing in the great work done in the disease thread by reefsquad and others.

It was intended to discuss the period of introduction of a fish where QT and meds are not the only way. Quarantine in its pure form means just that, seperate for observation. What I see at times is a horse with the blinders on. Not talking at a disease stage where meds are needed, but at the introduction phase.

What if there was an alternative method from the very beginning, starting at fish 1. I just purchased my first fish. I have that QT set up, but no meds. Unless there is visible, or very mild signs no meds are given. Diet is the only thing given. After say 2 weeks of proper diet and no signs he goes in the DT. If he survived anything he had in QT then reasonable that it would not change when moved. Not saying that the first fishy was sterile/disease free, but is healthy. Then mr fish #2 arrives. Same thing. QT, observe and feed. No sign he then goes in, now if he does bring in something new the first guy has a better chance of surviving the newly introduced pathogen.. The second will be fine sine he is eating healthy and nothing has shown up during observation. Again not saying parasite free, but build an environment where immune systems do what they are supposed to. Than add fish 3,4,5 and so on.

I can drink all the protein shakes I want. If I am not pushing it at the gym all those shakes will not help mey deadlift. I need to keep working at it to hit that goal. What if the protein is the fish diet, the workout is the observation period, and that 405 deadlift is the fish living long in the tank.

There is always an opportunity for developing other methods or we are letting that opportunity just go by.

 

[laverda]

I’ve MANY times provided links to ich management articles and threads, to try to help someone if they can’t or won’t QT and are in crisis. I’ve also addressed nutrition many times as well, so have many others I’ve seen, especially with cases involving HLLE and bacterial issues. The only goal for me, is helping the fish the best way that I feel I can, in the order, in my own opinion, of what I think is most likely to save the fish.

Not every thread is an emergency, but many times by the time the issue has reached the disease forum... it’s beyond the issue of QT or not QT, or how much or how well you are feeding. If something isn’t done, they will die.

I commend you for what you are doing with managing ich in your tank, your purple tang does look better!

But, if you’d already lost half of your fish and the rest were breathing fast and covered in velvet..you’d be past the point of being able to manage the parasites. At that point, it’s a crisis... and in my personal experience... requires intervention.

I don’t think it’s fair to bash the disease forum team for offering advice on treating sick fish. There are many fish that have survived because of the advice we offer, too.

The big issue is most people do not search and read/research when they have an issue. They just start a new thread without enough real information to be able to even help them without asking 20 questions. Then they reply with all parameters are good, yet when asked specific questions they do not even know what their basic parameters are. I have gotten tired of have to ask 20 questions to be able to try to help someone. Sometimes I just don't have the time to do so.

 

[MnFish1]

I'm not sure this is a good analogy. A person can get a smallpox vaccine and be protected for life. Let's say a person needed to be exposed to smallpox at least once a year to keep their immunity. Any contact with smallpox after that one year greatly increased their odds of dying from smallpox. Would it benefit them to be exposed at least annually? I feel so. This is more how the fish immune system works.


Very true... when I have seen this referenced it is the mean time where re-exposure to the parasite is more likely to cause a statistically significant chance at increased mortality rates. For some fish this process began in under 4 months. Some still had a strong immune response at almost a year. And the immunity gradually fades, it isn't instant.


Is there "new information" that says either parasite can stay on a fish for over 9 days?

"Tomites actively feeding at this point are in the trophont stage. In controlled experiments, the parasite has remained in the fish's gills or just under the skin for 4 to 5 months at reduced temperatures (12 C (53.6 F), then developed and infected other fish when the water temperature was raised to 27 C (80.6 F)."

So - it appears that there is a temperature dependence (to me) does this mean that at 74 degrees that its 7 days or 13 days? How do I know ?... My point was merely that as @Lasse and others have alluded to - that these studies might be 'wrong' - that there might be strains that have different timelines as compared to what we commonly read. I'm saying - as I thought you were - maybe its time to 'think outside the box' so to speak.


As to the smallpox - and as to this thread - I think it makes sense (hypocritical though it may be:):)) to take a partial stand. Because you literally can't have it both ways - and argue both sides constructively - or? Take the typhoid fever vaccine or the rabies vaccine in dogs etc - there are many many examples of needing more than one exposure to maintain immunity. And I agree with you that IF a fish is exposed to CI - its better that it has been exposed multiple times. (PS - the experiment where immunity starts to wane - one problem is that (at least I cant find) I dont see any studies about what happens to fish that are exposed more than once or 3 or 4 times. It would make sense that the second time - the effect will be more quick - and perhaps stronger - and perhaps longer lasting - IDK. BUT unless one is planning to re-add fish with CI - for example - there is no advantage to having it in the tank (was my point).

 

[laverda]

What if there was an alternative method from the very beginning, starting at fish 1. I just purchased my first fish. I have that QT set up, but no meds. Unless there is visible, or very mild signs no meds are given. Diet is the only thing given. After say 2 weeks of proper diet and no signs he goes in the DT. If he survived anything he had in QT then reasonable that it would not change when moved. Not saying that the first fishy was sterile/disease free, but is healthy. Then mr fish #2 arrives. Same thing. QT, observe and feed. No sign he then goes in, now if he does bring in something new the first guy has a better chance of surviving the newly introduced pathogen.. The second will be fine sine he is eating healthy and nothing has shown up during observation. Again not saying parasite free, but build an environment where immune systems do what they are supposed to. Than add fish 3,4,5 and so on.

This is basically what I do, except I usually QT 3-5 fish together and I keep them there for 90 days typically. I QT several fish together as I never add just one fish at a time to my display. Adding 3-5 fish at once decreases the likely hood of a fish being bullied. The last time I added fish 4 of them were chased around a bit and 2 of the fish were bullied for a bit by 2 established fish. Surprisingly the smallest fish was not bothered by anyone. If it had been just one fish added there is a good chance it might have been bullied by both of the other fish and others as well. That alone could have been enough to kill it or make it susceptible to disease.

 

[MnFish1]

Is there "new information" that says either parasite can stay on a fish for over 9 days?

There is also 'this': http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/pdffiles/FA/FA16400.pdf

Chloroquine, a quinine derivative, and other related compounds have been recommended for use againstCryptocaryon and other protozoan parasites includingAmyloodinium (Dickerson 2006; Stoskopf 1993; Noga 1996; Roberts et al. 2009; I Berzins, pers. comm.; T. Clauss, pers. comm.). One recommended treatment regimen is 10 mg/L chloroquine diphosphate as a prolonged bath; duration of 2 to 3 weeks or more may be required. Chloroquine appears to be fairly stable. If water changes are necessary, redose in amounts proportional to quantity of water removed.

Copper:
Because of the prolonged life cycle of Cryptocaryon, affected systems should be treated for a minimum of 3–6 weeks (Noga 1996; C. Innis, pers. comm., T. Clauss, pers. comm.).
Chelated copper (copper that has been bound or “com- plexed” to other substances, such as citrate or EDTA, to increase its stability in water) has also been used, but safety and effectiveness are more variable than with copper sulfate pentahydrate (Noga 1996).

 

[Lasse]

Is there "new information" that says either parasite can stay on a fish for over 9 days?

Somewhere in the literature citied in this thread - it was a line about "passive infestation" or something like that. The parasite attached to the fish – but not feeding. Logically – if we accept immune carriers without any symptoms (I.e. white spots)– we must accept longer periods on the fish or at least that it could happens. I do not have much experiences of SW ich – but huge experiences of FW ich after working a lot in FW LFS:s In this case – my experiences says that without a dormant, not visible stage on the fish – many of these events of ich is impossible. Total impossible. However – science say something different. I can be wrong but there is a chance that science can be wrong too. Science is not a set up of laws that not will be changed during time, Science change every day after new observations and surprisingly often due to thinking outside the box. There is very few Nobel prize winners that get that price because the think inside the box (exceptions authors and economical theories where this is more or less the rule)

There is also 'this': http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/pdffiles/FA/FA16400.pdf

Chloroquine, a quinine derivative, and other related compounds have been recommended for use againstCryptocaryon and other protozoan parasites includingAmyloodinium (Dickerson 2006; Stoskopf 1993; Noga 1996; Roberts et al. 2009; I Berzins, pers. comm.; T. Clauss, pers. comm.). One recommended treatment regimen is 10 mg/L chloroquine diphosphate as a prolonged bath; duration of 2 to 3 weeks or more may be required. Chloroquine appears to be fairly stable. If water changes are necessary, redose in amounts proportional to quantity of water removed.

Because of chloroquines lipophilic properties – this is IMO – a huge overdosing – please see this thread It was you that dig up that article that change the game.. :)

Sincerely Lasse

 

[MaccaPopEye]

One other item that hasn’t been discussed is whether we should be removing fish from the ocean and putting them in our tanks anyway. It seems a majority of the fish most people keep in their aquariums are available as captive bred specimens at this point in time. The ones that haven’t been captive bred tend to be more difficult to keep. We don’t get dogs and cats from the wild. Why should “pet fish” be any different.

Most companies that are captively breeding fish have already eliminated most if not all of the problematic diseases/parasites from their systems and have staff to accurately treat new specimens. If the entire supply chain switched to using captive bred fish (and inverts) instead of wild caught fish, many diseases could easily be significantly reduced or eliminated.

Eliminating parasites completely from the hobby is a nice thought. But there is way more to it than just captive fish and I just don't see it being possible, even long term. And significantly reducing the numbers wouldn't be enough to convince people to stop prophylactically treating fish.

I don't know about the US, but at least in Aus there is only a couple of species that get captive bread, most common fish certainly aren't. But even if all or the vast majority of fish were captive bread (and I really do hope we get there one day - for coral as well), just eliminating parasites on the fish before they enter the supply chain wouldn't solve the issue.

What about coral coming from the ocean? What about people who use NSW? What about live rock? Even TBS live rock would be a no go because as far as I am aware even though it is not harvested from the ocean it still gets cured in the ocean. You could say that all of those things can be kept in fallow tanks before they enter the supply chain but we have established that current suggested fallow periods are not 100% effective. And would it really be profitable for suppliers to keep everything they collect / propagate for that long before selling it?

Even if all new fish and all new coral comes from a captive, disease free environment and all tanks are started with dry rock or LR that has been kept fallow then you would still have the issue of coral, fish & rock that are already in the supply chain and as we have seen, if everything in your tank is parasite free, then something sneaking through QT can be devastating to your tank. It could sneak through via medication resistance, or by a fallow period not being long enough but it can and would still happen.

Like I said, it's a nice thought, but I don't see it happening.

 

[MaccaPopEye]

For example - I reported that at the National zoo - they had velvet show up 65 days after starting an observational quarantine - yet some people here may say '14 days' or '30 days' observation is good enough - then wonder 'how did I get velvet after QT.

This right here is a big reason why people should be worried and why this thread is important. Medication access is going to get harder (and already is for a lot of people), medication resistance may already be here and if it is will only increase, fallow periods may not be long enough. You can QT everything as strictly as you want, but the chance of a devastating outbreak is always still there. Why not try to find methods that might be able to stop or mitigate any possible outbreaks?

You can do TTM for ich and then observe for a month but there is still no guarantees you aren't introducing velvet into your tank.

 

[soflmuddin]

This right here is a big reason why people should be worried and why this thread is important. Medication access is going to get harder (and already is for a lot of people), medication resistance may already be here and if it is will only increase, fallow periods may not be long enough. You can QT everything as strictly as you want, but the chance of a devastating outbreak is always still there. Why not try to find methods that might be able to stop or mitigate any possible outbreaks?

You can do TTM for ich and then observe for a month but there is still no guarantees you aren't introducing velvet into your tank.

I asked this question in another thread but got no response. Has anybody thought of or tried to use a product like dino x to rid velvet? I already ordered some so I guess I will see soon enough. Anybody know what is the active ingredient in Dino X? At $30 for 250ml, 6ml/26 gallon treatment and up to 10 treatments to kill dinoflagellants, it could get a bit expensive in a 250 gallon system.

 

[MaccaPopEye]

I asked this question in another thread but got no response. Has anybody thought of or tried to use a product like dino x to rid velvet? I already ordered some so I guess I will see soon enough. Anybody know what is the active ingredient in Dino X? At $30 for 250ml, 6ml/26 gallon treatment and up to 10 treatments to kill dinoflagellants, it could get a bit expensive in a 250 gallon system.

I can't answer if it would work for velvet or not. But I would be very interested to know though! I would still not use it as a prophylactic treatment or even use it to eradicate it from a tank, but it could be a game changer if it worked in smaller hospital tanks to treat individual fish if required :)

 

[Brew12]

"Tomites actively feeding at this point are in the trophont stage. In controlled experiments, the parasite has remained in the fish's gills or just under the skin for 4 to 5 months at reduced temperatures (12 C (53.6 F), then developed and infected other fish when the water temperature was raised to 27 C (80.6 F)."

So - it appears that there is a temperature dependence (to me) does this mean that at 74 degrees that its 7 days or 13 days?

Ah, I am familiar with this. I was thinking there may have been a new study where it had been documented to happen at more normal tank conditions. I'm not saying it isn't possible only that I haven't seen it confirmed yet, either.

BTW... if this is true, then TTM would not be an effective treatment, either.

Because you literally can't have it both ways - and argue both sides constructively - or? Take the typhoid fever vaccine or the rabies vaccine in dogs etc - there are many many examples of needing more than one exposure to maintain immunity.

I don't think I am inconsistent. In the cases where an immunity won't last we provide those boosters.
Slightly different topic, but somewhere I have a link to a paper explaining how reproductive rates are tied to immunity. I didn't understand the science behind it, but the conclusions were interesting. Since elephants only have one or two baby's every few years they have a very strong immune system. Fish lay thousands of eggs at a time, but at the cost of a much weaker immune system.