A Hypocrites View on Not Using Quarantine

[Brew12]

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.

The research I have seen shows that the parasite can continue to reproduce in it's normal timeline only without significant damage to the immune fish. The largest CI trophont I am aware of is 0.45mm long with the majority being under the skin of the fish. The mean is around 1/2 that size. A trophont on an immune fish would be substantially smaller. When the parasite enters the fish the entry wound is completely closed after the first day. As the trophont feeds and grows it creates a small bump with a part of it's body barely visible. The majority of what we see visually the fish response to the parasite. With a very small trophont creating little damage to an immune fish there would be little to no visible indication of infection. In this way, they act as an asymptomatic carrier while the parasite stays consistent to its life cycle.
This may not be the latest science, and it could be wrong, but this is how I understand it based on what I have read.

 

[MnFish1]

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)



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

Yes - I agree with you about CP - (I wasn't recommending CP per se) The point was - that in that Article (from the University of FL) - both recommend treating for longer than many here do. 3-6 weeks at MINIMUM (with CP or Copper) - So - while you can probably get away with 14 days 80 90 percent of the time (who knows) - its not what research seems to show. If you look at zoo quarantine policies - after treatment they observe for much longer than 2 weeks. I'm not arguing against @HotRocks or anyone else. I'm just pointing out information from reputable sources that's widely out there.

When people using different protocols - perhaps its not user error or levels or cross contamination - perhaps its a problem with the protocol - (ANY PROTOCOL - Seachems, Seattle Aquarium, or the 10 varieties seen here).

 

[MnFish1]

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.

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.

Right - I agree with both points - The interesting thing about the temperature thing is that its not like the life cycle of 4-5 months at 53 degrees immediately changes to 3-7 days when the temperature is 80. So - if you run your QT tank at 75 degrees for example (and don't some people run them at relatively lower temps - I saw a thread recently where some people were recommending 72-74 degrees. Is it possible that this results on more CI on the fish for longer periods? (and thus not killable by copper)? Again - this is said not in the sense of arguing - but merely pointing out that depending on the temperature, salinity, etc etc of whatever study is being looked at - the conventional wisdom may be 'wrong' - I tend to trust the CI studies a bit more - but with velvet and some of the others its even more murky.

I was amazed to see that the observation QT at the National aquarium is 90 days - because they found velvet after 65 days in QT (observation). How many people here use a 90 day observation period? Pretend you get a fish you put it in the tank after watching it for a month or 2 weeks. Then a month later you CAN have a situation where all the sudden there's velvet in the tank and people say 'how could it happen - it must have been a snail or a net or whatever' - but in reality its just poor protocol potentially.

BTW - to me this is a reason potentially (if one wants to QT) - to use a medication (which I personally do not want to do)

 

[HomeSlizzice]

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.

So essentially basically just make sure your TTM temperature is 78F+ and you should be good to go, correct?

 

[MnFish1]

So essentially basically just make sure your TTM temperature is 78F+ and you should be good to go, correct?

You are probably safe at 75. The issue is that for a very many years - it was not thought that CI (who knows about velvet) can last on the fish longer than the 'usual timeframe' at any temperature. The study quoted said that resumed normal lifecycle began again (I think) within 2 days after being at 80.6. I'm not sure why they chose to test the 2 temperatures - but I'm trying to get the original article to verify. The point being is that it may very well be that 'odd strains' of CI or velvet dont behave like the studies say they should.

 

[Brew12]

The point being is that it may very well be that 'odd strains' of CI or velvet dont behave like the studies say they should.

Temperature aside, this should always be a concern. Scientists can only test the strains of a parasite that they have available. They test this limited number of strains on a limited number of host fish species. The then hope that the results hold close to true for every other combination of strains and hosts. No promise that it will be the same.

 

[Lasse]

One conclusion only - if they can get dormant for low temperatures - can it be any more triggers that can trigg dormancy - active immunerespons as an example?. That they go dormant in low tempersture is probably an answer to the fact that therir metabolism will be going down. Not so good for the following stages.

In the freshwater world - there is a fish that you always know for sure that this fish will have FW ich if the transport temperature drops some degrees. It is Chromobotia macracanthus. It have happens in empty aquaria, in new empty aquaria, in spite of the fish from the first aquaria is symptom free, in old aquaria and so on. Temperature drop - ich.

Sincerely Lasse

 

[HomeSlizzice]

Question for y’all. I think this is relevant to our discussion as it’s a potential variation of methods, but if you feel it’s off topic then I can make a thread and ask separately.

So micron/DE/Sediment filtering has been mentioned as a type of disease management in fisheries and as an option for med free QT. The obvious downside is you don’t get every single dinospores / theronts, but with a high turn over rate you should be able to get a majority of them.


While focusing on the observation style of QT, what are your thoughts on running a BRS dual media reactor but with two 1 micron sediment filters?

The BRS kit pump is 300gph, so on a 20G Long, that would be 15x turn over per hour. That should remove a vast majority of ich and velvet dinospores/theronts from the water and without using meds, or doing transfers for TTM.

Obviously if a TTM treatment was needed, I could still do that but I’m thinking this would possibly help me avoid it.

Lastly, what about using it to filter the water I just used for TTM to put in a BRUTE, for later use in the TTM?

Anyone ever used this?

 

[Lasse]

Question for y’all. I think this is relevant to our discussion as it’s a potential variation of methods, but if you feel it’s off topic then I can make a thread and ask separately.

So micron/DE/Sediment filtering has been mentioned as a type of disease management in fisheries and as an option for med free QT. The obvious downside is you don’t get every single dinospores / theronts, but with a high turn over rate you should be able to get a majority of them.


While focusing on the observation style of QT, what are your thoughts on running a BRS dual media reactor but with two 1 micron sediment filters?

The BRS kit pump is 300gph, so on a 20G Long, that would be 15x turn over per hour. That should remove a vast majority of ich and velvet dinospores/theronts from the water and without using meds, or doing transfers for TTM.

Obviously if a TTM treatment was needed, I could still do that but I’m thinking this would possibly help me avoid it.

Lastly, what about using it to filter the water I just used for TTM to put in a BRUTE, for later use in the TTM?

Anyone ever used this?

Worth a try IMO - but a large UV-C of the right sort would work too

Sincerely Lasse

 

[Brew12]

One conclusion only - if they can get dormant for low temperatures - can it be any more triggers that can trigg dormancy - active immunerespons as an example?. That they go dormant in low tempersture is probably an answer to the fact that therir metabolism will be going down. Not so good for the following stages.

I think we know that multiple parameters can cause dormancy. Temperature, salinity (prior to cell rupture, anyway), O2 levels... it's absolutely possible that other factors come into play. Only that I haven't seen one that affects trophonts at conditions we keep our tanks and that trophonts can continue their cycle normally while the fish is asymptomatic.

 

[Brew12]

Question for y’all. I think this is relevant to our discussion as it’s a potential variation of methods, but if you feel it’s off topic then I can make a thread and ask separately.

So micron/DE/Sediment filtering has been mentioned as a type of disease management in fisheries and as an option for med free QT. The obvious downside is you don’t get every single dinospores / theronts, but with a high turn over rate you should be able to get a majority of them.


While focusing on the observation style of QT, what are your thoughts on running a BRS dual media reactor but with two 1 micron sediment filters?

The BRS kit pump is 300gph, so on a 20G Long, that would be 15x turn over per hour. That should remove a vast majority of ich and velvet dinospores/theronts from the water and without using meds, or doing transfers for TTM.

Obviously if a TTM treatment was needed, I could still do that but I’m thinking this would possibly help me avoid it.

Lastly, what about using it to filter the water I just used for TTM to put in a BRUTE, for later use in the TTM?

Anyone ever used this?

I'd suspect that flow rate would be much less than 300gph with 1 micron filters.

 

[HomeSlizzice]

I'd suspect that flow rate would be much less than 300gph with 1 micron filters.

Yeah when I talked with BRS, the guy I spoke to said that the flow is reduced but only a little bit. He said that a guy in the office uses it on his office tank, and has it inline with the return line. So there is a little bit of a reduction, but not much according to them.

 

[Softpaws]

I don't understand how they would develop a resistance considering they come from various sources. Unless they are all captive breed?

I guess I have the same thought about ich/copper. It doesn't make sense that it would develop a resistance to copper, when the the only place its being exposed to such high levels of copper, is in our tanks, lfs, breeding facilities, ect ect. I'd image the number of captives are a drop in the bucket relative to what's in the wild.

It seems strange to think an entire species is going to evolve based on what's being done to the few in captivity.

I agree with this 100% How are any type of biological being start to evolve a resistance if the testing population isn't constantly in copper? Evolution isn't spotty. Its a constant flow between being and environment. Not a random being in a multi random setting.

Please let me know where I'm wrong.

 

[Lasse]

I agree with this 100% How are any type of biological being start to evolve a resistance if the testing population isn't constantly in copper? Evolution isn't spotty. Its a constant flow between being and environment. Not a random being in a multi random setting.

Please let me know where I'm wrong.

Is not the fish that become resistance - it is the parasite. If a system has constant copper - every new fish with the parasite deliver new parasites to the system. If not all will be killed and some come into the reproduction stage - and it is only the ones resistant to copper that will reproduce, hence the evolution will favour the copper resistance genes and a resistant parasite population will be formed in that system. New fish enter the system and get infected of the resistant population of parasites - comes to the next place (your tank) and suddenly you have a resistant population of parasites in your tank too. This is evolution in its most beautiful form :)

Sincerely Lasse

 

[Softpaws]

Is not the fish that become resistance - it is the parasite. If a system has constant copper - every new fish with the parasite deliver new parasites to the system. If not all will be killed and some come into the reproduction stage - and it is only the ones resistant to copper that will reproduce, hence the evolution will favour the copper resistance genes and a resistant parasite population will be formed in that system. New fish enter the system and get infected of the resistant population of parasites - comes to the next place (your tank) and suddenly you have a resistant population of parasites in your tank too. This is evolution in its most beautiful form :)

Sincerely Lasse

I appreciate the response. This is where I get confused. So, overtime, our individual tanks create an environment, long enough, to change the resistance in a population of parasite? I understand the Darwinism of Survival of the Fittest, but can we really see evolution, well evolve, in such a short amount of time?
With all due respect of course. I can understand if there was a large "system" reproducing over long periods of time, similar to bacteria, but in Crypto, so soon?

Or, is this parasite able to create a response to the copper during its short reproduction stages?

Thank you.

 

[Lasse]

I appreciate the response. This is where I get confused. So, overtime, our individual tanks create an environment, long enough, to change the resistance in a population of parasite? I understand the Darwinism of Survival of the Fittest, but can we really see evolution, well evolve, in such a short amount of time?
With all due respect of course. I can understand if there was a large "system" reproducing over long periods of time, similar to bacteria, but in Crypto, so soon?

Or, is this parasite able to create a response to the copper during its short reproduction stages?

Thank you.

Evolution is not a slow process during time, evolution is more a chain of fast short time revolutions. If the environmental will change drastically - evolution will happens instantly. An organism can always carry genes that not penalizes them - they can live with them - they give the organism no favour at that time - they just are there according to chaos theory. Suddenly - the environment change (we add copper in a certain level as an example) - the individuals carrying genes that get them sensitive for copper will die - the other lacking that gene or have a combination of genes that is a favour in that situation will survive and reproduce and their genes will spread into the population. Mutations (change in genes) happens mostly at reproduction too. Humans may reproduce itself only a few times during its lifespan - parasites have a much faster reproduction cycle (bacteries down to every 10 minutes or faster). Ich may have a short cycle - sometimes as short as 10 - 15 days - this favour a fast revolution if they carry genes favourable for that situation. Because of fast reproduction cycle – they will get a lot of mutations and the gen diversity can be huge. Note – a mutation that not will lead to any disadvantage in any ways will be left in the organisms gene pool and could be a favour in a new situation (and of cause a disadvantage too) An example - coyotes with genes that make them more used of humans will move into our cities survive but the one with genes that is the opposite will die cause lack of environment for their surviving. Further, the current loss of species all around the world is also a loss of gene pools that are lost for ever. This have led to a fast evolution at the species level.

Let us say it this way - if you by lottery tickets every 10 minutes - the chanse that you will get 1 billion win (surviving) is much, much likely compared with if you by a ticket every 20 year


As faster the reproduction cycle is - as faster will a species adapt to new environmental conditions. I.e. in this case - resistance occur. If there is 2 survivor (or even one in some cases) – their genes will be in the gene pool – the ones that dies – they are lost for ever. Death or surviving – that’s the most important evolution factor IMO

Sincerely Lasse


Of cause this is not the whole truth, it is a little bit more complicated but it is a way to understand how things fit together


Sincerely Lasse

 

[Brew12]

I appreciate the response. This is where I get confused. So, overtime, our individual tanks create an environment, long enough, to change the resistance in a population of parasite? I understand the Darwinism of Survival of the Fittest, but can we really see evolution, well evolve, in such a short amount of time?
With all due respect of course. I can understand if there was a large "system" reproducing over long periods of time, similar to bacteria, but in Crypto, so soon?

The size of the system doesn't matter. You can develop resistant strains of bacteria in a Petri dish. As for time, there have been wholesalers and retailers that have run copper in their systems for years. That is potentially hundreds of generations of parasites that are forced to adapt to that copper. The nature of the hobby allows them to spread all over. You buy a fish from the LFS and introduce the resistant strain to your tank. You share a frag with a parasite encysted on it with a buddy spreading it to their tank. They have an upgrade plan and have another LFS care for their fish while they tear down and rebuild their system. If we weren't so good at sharing things we don't want with each other we wouldn't have aptaisia or vermitids in so many reef tanks.

 

[ngoodermuth]

I just want you all to know, while I might not be ready to completely "change my ways" As a member of the Reef Squad, I've decided to try to be more conscientious with my suggestions in the disease forum.

Particularly, offering ich-management threads/advice more frequently as a second option. Pushing nutrition more often, in conjunction with medications or otherwise. Offering nutrition as a second option to antibiotics in the case of "mild" secondary infections. And, trying to be more conservative with recommendations which include mixing medications.

Even though I'm not completely on board with running without QT and use of meds, I do think there is room to include more of both sides in the disease help forums. And @Lasse, I've noticed you've jumped in and have been doing the same to try to help - and I'm happy you took my invitation seriously :)

 

[Brew12]

I just want you all to know, while I might not be ready to completely "change my ways" As a member of the Reef Squad, I've decided to try to be more conscientious with my suggestions in the disease forum.

Particularly, offering ich-management threads more frequently as a second option. Pushing nutrition more often, in conjunction with medications or otherwise. Offering nutrition as a second option to antibiotics in the case of "mild" secondary infections. And, trying to be more conservative with recommendations which include mixing medications.

I haven't changed my ways, either. I feel like I am still in the information gathering phase. I don't know enough to make a switch away from full QT although I feel like I do know enough that I would try it if I were starting a new tank.
More than anything, I want to try and find out how to use R2R to gather more information along these lines, organize it, and make it more readily available. I don't feel anyone should ever give recommendations they aren't comfortable with. But I feel we do very little, as a forum, to help those who either can't or don't want to use meds prophylactically.

Not much information in yet, but it seems like a new forum section would be preferred over expanding out in this Fish Disease section.

 

[Brew12]

So if we start a new forum section on how to safely keep fish without prophylactic treatment, what would we name it?

Organic Reefkeeping - Might give the impression we are raising them as a food source. ;Yuck
Holistic Fish Care - Better, but still not great. ;Bored
Natural Fish Care - Not much natural about a reef tank. ;Meh

Honestly.. I'm at a loss on this one. I can't think of a new section title that isn't misleading.