A Hypocrites View on Not Using Quarantine

[MnFish1]

It has been years since I have been into a fish and invert wholesale facility. But I have noticed that the disease complaints seem to have increased since the "old guard" have retired and the mass merchandising pet companies have bought out the major players in the distribution chain. Then there was the death of the local aquarium store brought on by the internet. This increased the leverage for the mass merchant and internet sellers thus changing the market channel and not for the better. Correlation or causation you decide.

The older companies (pre-mass merchant owners) did an excellent job at providing great quality livestock for the hobby. I just think the new corporate owners did not and still do not have a clue how to manage the distribution of livestock. The new owners have changed system design and seem to have employed people with less experience at a lower cost per hour. Let's face it Walmart type practices do not lead to highly skilled employees.

Also during that time frame you had an increase in farmed fish entering the distribution system. Then there was the advent of designer fish which are genetic mutations caused by successive cross breeding which may be a possible gate way to increased disease. They have no immunity in the natural environment since they have for several generations only been exposed to lab grade breeding facilities. It would not suprise me if these were possible disease vectors that have helped increase the as yet unproven resistant forms of disease. Again is that correlation or causation? How much has this contributed to the current state of the distribution system? No one knows or has even researched the question.

This in my opinion are some of the possible problems of fish health in the pet sector in the U.S. today. In Thailand where poor water quality is a fact the fish seemed healthy in every tank and bag at the largest indoor/outdoor fish and invert market in the world. You had dozens of merchants each with their own ways of dealing with fish and yet the quality seemed on the surface to be some what consistant. Drugs are very cheap there by U.S. standards and no scrip is needed so is that their go to method? If so there is another possible link in drug resistance. Given the wide range of sellers all the way from collector to breeder it is hard to say if they would even use drugs due to the cost relative to their incomes.

This is interesting - its also interesting that One of the largest retailers of fish in the US uses no chemicals....

 

[MnFish1]

General Cure, Metroplex and Kanaplex are no longer an option in Canada. All antibiotics for use in the aquarium hobby now require a veterinarians prescription there. It's only a matter of time before that ban happens in the US.
This is one major reason why I feel we hobbyists need to work hard to help each other find methods to keep our fish healthy without relying on medications. Hopefully our friends in Europe can lead the way on this since they have had very limited medication options for years. The more information we can share on what works and what doesn't the better imo.

It may take an antibiotic ban in the US to finally get our wholesalers to clean up their systems but I'm not counting on that.

This makes sense. One problem - and its widespread here - is that people see 'something' and start treating with these broad spectrum multiple antibiotics - and are likely doing more harm than good - but the fish 'gets better' and its thought its because of whatever cocktail of antibiotics were used. IMHO - a prescription is absolutely the 'correct' thing to do to prevent resistance - for the simple reason - that a 'DVM' or even a pharmacist will know which antibiotics kill which bacteria (gram positive vs negative etc) - and if you're using 2 antibiotics that do the same thing - you're doubling the chance of resistance. Also - some antibiotics that 'bactericidal' ( like penicillins/cephalosporins) will actually work LESS well when mixed with other types of antibiotics that are 'bacteriostatic'. So having a professional opinion is. better for fish, the environment and the owner.

 

[ngoodermuth]

The problem I see with waiting to use medications for “emergencies” is that fish tend to decline very quickly in emergent situations.

Often times, by the time we realize it is an emergency the fish are already past the point of no return. And then you have people taking days or longer to tear apart their tank and set-up a QT... meanwhile losing more fish each day.

By the time they get everything ready and start moving over whatever fish are left, those fish have already been aggressively attacked and the medication DOES add stress to the already stressed and weakened fish. It’s a downward spiral.

And I can’t fathom that all of these folks who bring their emergency situations to the disease forum for help (often after they’ve already lost more than one fish - to parasites, not QT) are not feeding their fish well or keeping them in less than desirable conditions?

We’ve had seasoned reefers and knowledgeable aquarists with significant losses due to velvet and uronema just recently. I think there’s just more to it than just “feed your fish well and they won’t get sick”.

It’s much easier to treat the fish before they are on death’s door... than to wait until it’s an emergency.

 

[bluprntguy]

I don't QT. From the amount of threads I see on QT, it would appear the likelihood of fish survival is pretty low when thrown into a QT. I attribute this to stress. The way I see it, stress is the number one killer for all these fish. Stress is the reason they get infected in the first place. Stress is the reason they don't eat. I'm just stressed talking about stress.
Cure the stress, cure the fish. That's my two cents.

My experience is the opposite. Putting a fish into quarantine when they arrive gives them a chance to acclimate to new surroundings by themselves without the additional stress of being in a community tank. It also allows you to feed them generously without worrying about water quality issues. Once you have a full tank, quarantining new arrivals helps insure you bring fewer diseases into your display tank and helps protect your existing fish.

When I quarantined my clownfish, I did the tank transfer method. They were completely unfazed by it. By the last tank transfer, they were practically jumping in the container that I used to move them as soon as I put it in the water. I've never lost a fish in quarantine and I've battled both ich and velvet with my previous tank (and have lost fish to both diseases in my display tank).

It's a serious JOB to pull all your fish out of the display tank if you accidentally infect the tank with ich or velvet. I'd much rather quarantine new arrivals and try my best to avoid infecting my display tank. It's way easier for me and it seems to be better for them,

 

[MnFish1]

The problem I see with waiting to use medications for “emergencies” is that fish tend to decline very quickly in emergent situations.

Often times, by the time we realize it is an emergency the fish are already past the point of no return. And then you have people taking days or longer to tear apart their tank and set-up a QT... meanwhile losing more fish each day.

By the time they get everything ready and start moving over whatever fish are left, those fish have already been aggressively attacked and the medication DOES add stress to the already stressed and weakened fish. It’s a downward spiral.

And I can’t fathom that all of these folks who bring their emergency situations to the disease forum for help (often after they’ve already lost more than one fish - to parasites, not QT) are not feeding their fish well or keeping them in less than desirable conditions?

We’ve had seasoned reefers and knowledgeable aquarists with significant losses due to velvet and uronema just recently. I think there’s just more to it than just “feed your fish well and they won’t get sick”.

It’s much easier to treat the fish before they are on death’s door... than to wait until it’s an emergency.

I would suggest that for the most part - it doesnt have to become an emergency. You take the fish you bought, put them in a QT tank - and observe them - carefully. with plenty of PVC, etc to hide in. If there is a problem - treat. You can't (responsibly) no offense - treat for every possible disease without significant chance of causing further side effects. (Ie copper, kanaplex, etc etc all in one bath -is more likely to cause a problem (long or short term) - than. a disease that might develop again - just the way I look at things.

 

[User1]

I think this is a balancing act. I support the concept of having a isolation or observation tank available for many reasons many of which are emergency related. Much like you would have a crate for a dog or a flashlight for your home. It is a tool to use when the brown stuff hits the whirly thing. Having said that I do not QT.

Primary reason why I personally believe a QT or process such as TTM is not for me is similar to taking antibiotics or medicine without a medical diagnosis (excluding shots / immunization of course). Medicating just because is why we are starting to see strains of viruses immune to treatments. It is also why we are starting to see signs of outbreaks we had cured in the US years ago although that is another story all together.

I just received a lavender and scopus tang from LA/DD on Friday. The only thing I do is acclimate them to my tanks salinity then after that I do a 5 to 15 minute fresh water dip using Mr. Fenners Methylene Blue instructions, rinse, then place into the display tank. The only fish that I have ever excluded from the baths would be a wrasse many years ago because I feel leopards are something that don't ship very well.

Now there is always a gotcha, a-ah moment, or otherwise side bar and that is simply not isolating or following a QT process is similar to playing Russian Roulette with a semi-automatic or gambling. Sooner or later Mother Nature is going to throw down the dead mans hand and you will lose everything. This is always in the back of my mind and comes back to treating fish like a pet and not a commodity.

So when threads like this come up it does make me check myself and what I do and that is when I ask myself:

Self...would you just drop a Clarion Angelfish into the display without any of these practices?

Edit: Forgot to say GJ @Brew12

 

[nereefpat]

I’m about 99% sure my initial bout of crypto in my current display tank was brought in by a mandarin fish. It was the only fish I had not QT’d and treated prophylactically. Honestly, due to the delicate feeding habits, initially, I was afraid to QT her.

The mandarin never had symptoms. Even when the outbreak was in full swing.

When I decided to pull all of the fish for treatment and run my tank fallow, she went into her own tank and sat untreated through the entire ordeal. It took me some time to procure CP to treat her, so she was there much longer than the other fish. Finally, I was able to treat her and transfer her back into my main tank.

That fish never had a single spot, never seemed bothered by the ich, and if I had run an observational-only QT... she would not have been treated. But, that didn’t stop her from bringing parasites into my tank.

Mandarins are a tough situation. I want one, and it's one of my wife's favorite fishes. I have a 125 with lots of rock and a sump with a fuge area, and this tank has been running for 7 years and full of pods. But, I don't have a way to qt one. I don't want to starve it while doing TTM. I've read that they don't handle copper well either. It stinks.

 

[FlyPenFly]

The difference is huge (IMHO). The reason that bacteria become 'resistant' is more statistical than anything - i.e. the doubling time for E coli is 20 minutes. In about a day - 1 E coli cell would result in 19 followed by 21 zeros) E coli cells when you consider that each of the new cells can also divide the potential for 1 or 2 cells to become resistant to a low concentration of an antibiotic is HUGE. CI - for example is much much more slow growing - and thus is far less likely to develop resistance. Velvet has a more quick doubling time - but even with that there is only 1 report of resistance to copper treatment in the literature - and its never been repeated (and the author was not sure it was 'true resistance' - but called it that nonetheless.

Question - Why would a 'wholesaler' run sub-lethal copper (by definition it isn't working) except by mistake. They are thus risking ALL of their livestock to save the cost of a 'little copper'. I hate to say I don't believe the oft repeated myth that this is 'widespread' - if it was lots of fish would have visible CI on them or at least be sick. I know you'll disagree with this last point - but that's ok

They run a little bit of copper to suppress the disease and suppress external signs but not eradicate it. If they run a therapeutic dose that actually can eradicate they will lose a much greater percentage of their livestock and hold stock much longer. Most aquarists will ask for a proof of eating for higher priced fish and fish getting full copper are much less likely to eat.

The two biggest LFS in my area both run low levels of copper.

 

[bluprntguy]

Mandarins are a tough situation. I want one, and it's one of my wife's favorite fishes. I have a 125 with lots of rock and a sump with a fuge area, and this tank has been running for 7 years and full of pods. But, I don't have a way to qt one. I don't want to starve it while doing TTM. I've read that they don't handle copper well either. It stinks.

I quarantined two mandarins using tank transfer (I had only planned on quarantining one, but a mix-up with shipping got me two). They were both biota captive bred mandarins and arrived about 1/2" - 3/4" long (tiny). They both ate live baby brine, frozen brine, and decapusulated brine shrimp eggs while in quarantine (too small to eat much else). I had a culture of pods set up before they arrived and would populate the quarantine tank after transfers. However, it seemed like they both preferred prepared foods. They both got fatter and bigger during the three weeks I had them in quarantine. I gave one of them away, but the female is in my display tank and continuing to grow.

If you get a captive bred mandarin, I think it's possible (maybe even advisable) to quarantine them in this manner to make sure they are eating prepared food. If you purchase a wild caught fish, it's still possible to quarantine them and use that time to re-train them to eat prepared food.

 

[nereefpat]

I quarantined two mandarins using tank transfer (I had only planned on quarantining one, but a mix-up with shipping got me two). They were both biota captive bred mandarins and arrived about 1/2" - 3/4" long (tiny). They both ate live baby brine, frozen brine, and decapusulated brine shrimp eggs while in quarantine (too small to eat much else). I had a culture of pods set up before they arrived and would populate the quarantine tank after transfers. However, it seemed like they both preferred prepared foods. They both got fatter and bigger during the three weeks I had them in quarantine. I gave one of them away, but the female is in my display tank and continuing to grow.

If you get a captive bred mandarin, I think it's possible (maybe even advisable) to quarantine them in this manner to make sure they are eating prepared food. If you purchase a wild caught fish, it's still possible to quarantine them and use that time to re-train them to eat prepared food.

I just looked. Those Biota mandarins are 90$, and I'm not crazy about raising foods for them while in QT. Would you have to qt a Biota captive-bred mandarin anyway?

 

[MnFish1]

They run a little bit of copper to suppress the disease and suppress external signs but not eradicate it. If they run a therapeutic dose that actually can eradicate they will lose a much greater percentage of their livestock and hold stock much longer. Most aquarists will ask for a proof of eating for higher priced fish and fish getting full copper are much less likely to eat.

The two biggest LFS in my area both run low levels of copper.

I know the theory - but it doesnt make sense. Nothing will suppress 'just the external signs'. It may keep the amount of infectious particles 'lower' than they would be without copper - but they cant prevent 'external signs'. Running a therapeutic level of copper would cause them to lose a much greater percentage of their stock (at least you have no way to prove that - or is there something I'm not aware of). What is a low level of copper? 1 ppm - .5 ppm. 1.5 ppm? CI theronts will be killed at probably every level listed there - but the percentage killed will be much higher as the level goes up....

BTW - I might suggest to the LFS in your area that are doing this - that they are doing a huge disservice to the hobby and their customers (and besides that it doesnt make sense to do so). By the way - I dont know of any shops here that use any copper except therapeutic levels - and most of them only when a fish has active disease.

 

[EmdeReef]

I´m not 100 % sure of this. The specific immune system of fishes is more developed that we know of before. These fish have not been out for any diseases or pathogen before and the result can be catastrophic. I have an example when adding captive breed fish to a large tank with lot of larger fish (even sharks). We had many times add wild caught fish of the size 3-5 cm to this tank. It was always the same - we did not see any of the new fish for a month or so - suddenly they were everywhere – coming up from their hideaway´s. But we was not pleased with wild caught fish – we want captive breeds if we could get it. We got access to 100 small clowns (the same size as fish we have introduce with success before) and add them. We could spot them from the first day – thriving in a school just above the stone formations we put them in. The second day we could spot them again – but not so many. After a week they had disappear totally. Months later I spot 1 at a certain place and 5 years later – I still could see that fish if I know where to look. What´s happen? The captive bread fish had not idea of what a predator was and become a very good food source for other fish. A total unexpected effect of captive breed fish.

Sincerely Lasse

Is there any evidence of immunity being suppressed in F1 or F2 captive bred fish or later generations? I’ve been looking into this and struggle to find much.

I’m familiar with research into farmed fish and there’s not abundance of evidence to point out significant suppression of immunity which I assume would result due to inbreeding?!

For the 3, arguably, most common aquarium fish ailments - ich, velvets and flukes - it’s highly unlikely that wild fish actually acquire immunity considering that infections in the wild would be predisposed to be mild and relatively short at least for the first 2 to provoke strong immune response.

As far is instinctive behaviors I can’t imagine none would be inherited but your anecdote stands.

 

[brandon429]

There is only one action that turns all these quarantine threads into a measure vs a theory exchange for a hundred pages:

One person starts and runs a no med fish approach for new tanks. To be an entrant in the thread, posters coordinate with the author about locally available substrates/corals and fish, then they make an executable game plan from the tank all the way from first purchase to final stocking

Feed
Water change
Dsb no dsb
Filthy or clean dsb/how to maintain
Fish origination, qt if any, all posted and guided by the thread author.


New tankers get pro advice and to be part of documented aquarium evolution, a big deal

With the thread author making all calls, consistency and pattern develops

By having remote proxy reefing + willing participants you can test theories in the thousands now, live time, actual tanks

Safe zoning/gone

Ok who's the ump

 

[MnFish1]

Is there any evidence of immunity being suppressed in F1 or F2 captive bred fish or later generations? I’ve been looking into this and struggle to find much.

I’m familiar with research into farmed fish and there’s not abundance of evidence to point out significant suppression of immunity which I assume would result due to inbreeding?!

For the 3, arguably, most common aquarium fish ailments - ich, velvets and flukes - it’s highly unlikely that wild fish actually acquire immunity considering that infections in the wild would be predisposed to be mild and relatively short at least for the first 2 to provoke strong immune response.

As far is instinctive behaviors I can’t imagine none would be inherited but your anecdote stands.

Actually - most 'wild' fish are at least partly immune - and there is a huge concern that once captive bred fish (with no immune exposure to CI, velvet, etc) are put into tanks with fish - that interestingly - and paridoxically - that the 'non-immune' fish will become infected - allowing the normally (in check levels) low parasite burden to explode.

 

[bluprntguy]

I just looked. Those Biota mandarins are 90$, and I'm not crazy about raising foods for them while in QT. Would you have to qt a Biota captive-bred mandarin anyway?

Yeah. My entire tank is captive bred. I'm happy to spend more to support captive bred endeavors like ORA and Biota. I also have a smaller tank, so it's pretty imperative that she is eating frozen for long term health.

As far as quarantining, it comes down to your aversion to risk I guess. For me, it was the last fish I was adding to a fully stocked tank, so I wasn't willing to risk infecting an entire tank with ich/velvet/brook/etc. Having gone through quarantine for the Biota mandarin, they LOVED the decapsulated brine shrimp eggs. If you had those on hand, I'd suspect you'd be fine for a few weeks just feeding that and maybe some frozen baby brine.

 

[FlyPenFly]

I know the theory - but it doesnt make sense. Nothing will suppress 'just the external signs'. It may keep the amount of infectious particles 'lower' than they would be without copper - but they cant prevent 'external signs'. Running a therapeutic level of copper would cause them to lose a much greater percentage of their stock (at least you have no way to prove that - or is there something I'm not aware of). What is a low level of copper? 1 ppm - .5 ppm. 1.5 ppm? CI theronts will be killed at probably every level listed there - but the percentage killed will be much higher as the level goes up....

BTW - I might suggest to the LFS in your area that are doing this - that they are doing a huge disservice to the hobby and their customers (and besides that it doesnt make sense to do so). By the way - I dont know of any shops here that use any copper except therapeutic levels - and most of them only when a fish has active disease.

It's not really a theory, it's definitely a practice in place. They have signs on their display tanks and have warned me when I buy fish. It's not very uncommon and actually, I would say its more widespread than not.

And actually if you have some experience in adjusting copper levels you would know that higher levels leads to fish that look unhealthier and eat less or at all as levels go up.

 

[EmdeReef]

Actually - most 'wild' fish are at least partly immune - and there is a huge concern that once captive bred fish (with no immune exposure to CI, velvet, etc) are put into tanks with fish - that interestingly - and paridoxically - that the 'non-immune' fish will become infected - allowing the normally (in check levels) low parasite burden to explode.

That’s a few hypotheses that cannot be proven.

I don’t want to hijack the thread but genuinely curious of the actual research into this.

 

[MnFish1]

It's not really a theory, it's definitely a practice in place. They have signs on their display tanks and have warned me when I buy fish. It's not very uncommon and actually, I would say its more widespread than not.

Yes - I know some people use it - ie. I don't doubt that some LFS or distributors use lower dose copper. But the 'theory' that it helps do anything beneficial doesn't make sense. Like many things we in forums in general - its never 'specific' - what is the dose thats recommended? Is it from a trade group? Is it something someone just thought would be a good idea with no rationale behind it? Is there some kind of industry standard? If so I would think there would be research provided if this were as widespread as it seems to be (and if I owned an LFS - I certainly wouldn't be adding chemicals based on 'word of mouth'. Again - there may be information out there on this - but after trying to look this up for months - I haven't come up with any standard protocol for the use of low dose copper.

 

[FlyPenFly]

I think you're giving the hobby fish industry too much credit...

 

[bluprntguy]

Actually - most 'wild' fish are at least partly immune

I don't know that I've ever seen any research that indicates that any fish are immune to ich/velvet. Source?