A lot of known people dont QUARANTINE!!!

[Righteous]

I totally disagree - it is your interpretation of an old diagram - How in heck can you say that something in the diagram says that a tank needs to lay fallow. The diagram was original not according fish diseases - it was about general diseases in animals - including humans. It is your interpretation that only the part H is no diseases - The intersection H-P is the situation there a pathogen and host can co exist without a disease outbreak - very common among fishes there most fish pathogenic bacteria is facultative. Note the P does not stand for Parasite - it stands for Pathogen

I prefer to follow the science in this matter - expressed in this article as an example - from the article

​

If you can´t read the small text


Sincerely Lasse

I really think the confusion may come from what “environment” means. If you include the hosts immune system, then this is very clearly true.

However there are just too many cases in which environment (defined to exclude host immune system) plays no role in disease outbreak.

There’s no environment (again excluding immune system in the definition) that would prevent an Ebola outbreak. It’s simply too virulent and to novel to most human immune systems. It’s why without mass vaccination, Ebola is so heavily quaritined by the WHO when outbreaks occur.

 

[Paul B]

They pump water right from the Atlantic into most but not all of their tanks. I don't know what they do to their large coral reef tank as I never worked on it yet and have not been there in 2 years. They had me explaining starfish, horseshoe crabs and snails to toddlers which is why I don't go there any more except to my boat because the marina and aquarium is the same owner

 

[Lasse]

Obvious CI on a fish 'a disease' - or a temporary problem.

I prefer to define a disease like this

I really think the confusion may come from what “environment” means. If you include the hosts immune system, then this is very clearly true.

However there are just too many cases in which environment (defined to exclude host immune system) plays no role in disease outbreak.

There’s no environment (again excluding immune system in the definition) would prevent an Ebola outbreak. It’s simply too virulent and to novel to most human immune systems. It’s why without mass vaccination, Ebola is so heavily quaritined by the WHO when outbreaks occur.

Note - the diagram I refer to is based on individuals not community - in that case immunity is in the host part - IMO. It could be used in a population too - and in that case immunity is surly a environmental factor IMO. Herd immunity have come in bad company these days but the vaccination programs and theories about this is fully based on herd immunity

Also - we often see the diagram with that rather small interception named disease - in reality - IMO - it can differ in size mostly depended on the virulence of the pathogen, the immune system of the host and the environment, In the Ebolas case - I think that the three circles nearly become one but if you change the isolation factor (read QT in the environment) - the disease will die out on population level.

Sincerely Lasse

 

[Righteous]

The same issues are true for disease like polio, measles etc. Those diseases cause outbreaks again regardless of environment (excluding host immune system history), which is why mass vaccination programs were created.

Immune systems and pathogens are best understood as Nash Equilibriums, and are often engaged in what evolutionary biologist term “arms races”. The simple description is that these things are in constant flux, and are effected by a whole host of variables. At times one side wins the arm race temporarily, until an equilibrium is established. Sometimes environment can tip the scales. Often evolution (mutations, perhaps defined as environment) can also tip the scales.

I do think it’s fair to say that by moving fish into an aquarium out of the ocean we are tipping the scales and effecting the equilibrium. In fact I think you have to acknowledge this must happen.

So the question is then what is the consequence and how do we proceed. It’s possible as @Paul B has talked about, attempting to create an environment at close to that of the ocean mitigates a lot of disease issues.

It’s also possible that there are pathogens where no attempts to maintain environment will have any effect.

So again, to me it’s a balance, not a black and white answer on how to proceed. Personally I attempt to create as little stress as possible, mimic the ocean environment where and when I can. I then observe fish closely within my display tank.

I take for a real possibility that I might introduce a novel pathogen that infects all my fish. Or perhaps marine velvet which my fish can’t handle. However, because it’s a balance, I’m calculating that my fish are healthier in the long run than constant QT prophylactic treatment with each new fish. I take as part of the calculation, the rarity of novel and virulent diseases as are talked about by the aquarium hobby at the current time. (If a novel pathogen emerged, my calculations would change, just like they should for us facing a pandemic)

It’s possible that if you calculate the number of fish lost from novel pathogen introduction, non QT procedure, to fish lost from enhanced stress and reduced immunity things are a wash. We just don’t know.

As I’ve stated throughout this thread there are valid reasons on all sides. What’s important is not what we do, but the reasons for doing those things.

Someone throwing new fish into a new tank, without paying attention to diet, or prior fish health isn’t creating an immune tank, any more than someone putting all fish into a barren badly cycled QT tank with lots of copper isn’t enhancing fish health or reducing loses.

 

[MnFish1]

I prefer to define a disease like this


Note - the diagram I refer to is based on individuals not community - in that case immunity is in the host part - IMO. It could be used in a population too - and in that case immunity is surly a environmental factor IMO. Herd immunity have come in bad company these days but the vaccination programs and theories about this is fully based on herd immunity

Also - we often see the diagram with that rather small interception named disease - in reality - IMO - it can differ in size mostly depended on the virulence of the pathogen, the immune system of the host and the environment, In the Ebolas case - I think that the three circles nearly become one but if you change the isolation factor (read QT in the environment) - the disease will die out on population level.

Sincerely Lasse

So - just to be clear then - a fish - with a couple white spots (CI) on its body does not have 'a disease' is that correct? (Based on the link/definition you showed a minute ago)?

 

[Paul B]

Jay, Lasse and anybody else. The big, enormous problem with that circle chart is not how you are reading it. Just like that Burgess parasite life cycle Chart in the 80s or 90s and almost any other chart.

The problem is that that big "host" circle on the left should be depicted by at least two circles. Host means, in our case a fish. But all fish are not the same. Not even close and I don't mean by species.

Some fish are totally, 100% immune from your little disease triangle in the center and will never get sick no matter how large your Pathogen circle is on the right.

The majority of fish kept in this hobby are very susceptible to your pathogen circle and yes, they will die in that scenario. Even if your pathogen circle was much smaller, most fish will die if exposed to a pathogen because they are not kept in such a way as to allow their immune system to do anything.

The "environment" circle can be so variable that it can't even be depicted on a chart. Many people keep fish in a bare tank and those will become infected no matter how large that pathogen circle is.

Fish in semi bare quarantine tank or medicated tanks are so susceptible to not only pathogens but other internal and neurological issues that I think that renders that chart totally useless. Neurological issues do not need a pathogen factor and is a "huge" factor in fish illness. Even bigger than pathogen issues. Unfortunately we cause all of the neurological issues in home tanks.

 

[Righteous]

Here are a couple articles - that address some of the issues - that are a little more recent than some of yours. I don't think we're disagreeing that much, in general.

1. The first article discusses the prevalence of CI in Vietnam - and its seasonal variation. If you read the whole article it discusses that large die-offs of fish have occurred (I believe this is the article).

2. The second article describes how USUALLY in the wild CI is not an issue, but - that it is an issue where fish are held in high stocking density - which has been shown over and over, and when in marine aquaria. The last sentence is interesting - that they feel that CI would be even more important in the wild - except for velvet.

3. As to the question of 'levels of immunity' in 'fish in our hobby' - almost be definition this would be an impossible study to do the number of variables that would need to controlled for would be sky high. 1. Its widely known that some fish are naturally resistant to CI. If you have a tank full of those fish - the results will be different than tanks with other fish. 2. Its also well known that there is a lethal dose (LD50) of CI that will kill about 50 percent of fish. 3. Its also well known that there is both innate (slime, non-specific chemicals) as well as specific immunity (antibodies, T cells, etc) that are active in fish. Its well known that fish that survive CI have at least some immunity. 3. Its also well known that the numbers of CI present in an aquarium with average stocking density (during a period of active infection - as compared to 'there is one fish with 2 spots on it eery so often) is thousands of times higher than that in the wild. So - when you're asking a question about 'our hobby' and 'specific antibodies' thats not going to happen - but there are plenty of articles out there concerning fish that are common in the hobby, and the mortality of CI.


"Wild-caught ornamental marine fish from NhaTrang (Khanh Hoa) and Ha Long (Quang Ninh) in Vietnam were examined over the three sampling batches corresponding to the spring, summer and autumn times for the prevalence of Cryptocaryon irritans. Out of a total of 211 fish (15 species), 143 (67.7 %) were found to be infected with the mean intensity of 7.67 parasites per field of view (x4 magnification). The prevalence of C. irritans in fish caught during the spring (91.0 3% on average) was significantly higher than that of the fish caught during the summer (39.29 %). A wide variation in the prevalence of the parasite was shown among the fish species. The highest prevalence and intensity of the infection occurred in Plataxteira, Diodon holocanthus, Paracanthurus hepatusat 100 % of infection and density of 12 parasites/field of view (x4 magnification) while and the lowest prevalence of C. irritans appeared on Rhinecanthus aculeatus, Zancluscornutus, and Zebrasoma veliferum with less than 50% of fish infected. Clinical signs of fish infected of C. irritans showed such as tiny white spots on skin, gills, and fins; ragged fins, changes in skin colour, cloudy eyes and increase mucus production."

Radware Bot Manager Captcha

iopscience.iop.org

"The holophryid Cryptocaryon irritans could be an important pathogenic ciliate in the Gulf, but it seldom has been known to cause mortality in wild fish. It has been reported from red drum cultured in ponds in Palacios, Texas (Overstreet 1983b), and caused problems in some marine aquaria. It is the counterpart of the well-known freshwater Ichthyophthirius multifiliis, and both have a similar cycle involving feeding trophonts that inhabit the basal layer of the epithelial cells on the skin and gills, a free-living tomont, and an encysted tomont that produces tomonts, which in turn develop into infective theronts that bore through the gelatinous cyst wall and infect a variety of fishes. The histophagus trophonts feed on the epidermis. Dickerson (2006) discusses both ciliates. A few different strains of C. irritans have been differentiated. Diggles and Adlard (1997) reported sequence differences among isolates from Moreton Bay and Heron Island, Queensland, Australia; Israel; and the United States. The strain from wild fish in Moreton Bay remains unchanged with that maintained in the laboratory for over 10 years. In Queensland, Australia, when fish are brought into the laboratory aquaria, infections often build up and fish die. The ciliate was considered rare in nature until Diggles and Lester (1996b) showed with critical, sensitive examination for encysted tomonts that 13 of 14 fish species exhibited infections with no seasonality in prevalence or intensity of infection in water temperature between 15 (59 °F) and 27 °C (80 °F). They (Diggles and Lester 1996a), however, showed in experimental temperatures of 20 (68 °F) and 25 °C (77 °F) that trophonts stayed on fish longer and tomonts took longer to excyst, producing larger theronts at 20 °C (68 °F) than at 25 °C (77 °F). The host of origin played a role in tomont incubation period and tomont size. These data suggest that C. irritans might play a more important role in the health of Gulf fish, if it was not for the abundance of the equally pathogenic dinoflagellate Amyloodinium ocellatumdiscussed below."
"https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4939-3456-0_6"

This is awesome. Thanks @MnFish1. I’ve bookmarked this for future reference! (If anyone doesn’t know, there’s a little button in the upper right, very useful feature)

 

[Righteous]

Here’s a real world example! Checking my fish like I do about everyday my rabbitfish (I call him Peter) has this on his side just today, which given is a circle is almost certainly an injury (I have no idea what he got into).

My treatment is going to be to feed him more algae, and some selcon soaked food.

Sometimes I see stuff like this in other forum posts and people immediately move the fish or begin treating. I don’t think that’s a great idea.

I’ve had other fish develop problems, like my fairy wrasse developed pop eye. The blue chromis showed a few spots shortly after introduction that I couldn’t identify. Powdered blue tang had Ich. In all cases I simply made sure to keep the fish well fed, check them every day and make sure I minimized stress (like no intense tank cleaning etc).. and every one healed.

I think part of the issue is that sometimes we don’t talk about how hardy these fish can be. I know when I first started I was terrified thinking my fish would all be covered with spots and die because of reading so many disease threads.

I don’t know what the answer is, but I do believe a lot of it comes down to experience. Getting into the hobby is easy. Really knowing what it takes to make a thriving healthy tank can be a lot harder.

 

[Paul B]

That looks like a bite to me.

 

[mike89t]

It means that Paul B with his parasites and I with the bacteria are in the red area - it means that if the environment change ar/and the pathogens strength increase or/and the fish defence decrease we will have a disease. Changes in environment is water chemistry, social reactions, light and other environmental factors. Change in the pathogen strength is mostly number: change in fish defence is energy and immune system decrease (stress).

Do you have any links here

Sincerely Lasse

I'm pretty sure if you take the Host (H) and Pathogen (P) out of the Environment (E) that the Host and Pathogen live in, everything dies.

 

[Righteous]

That looks like a bite to me.

Maybe my starry blenny… don’t know what else has a mouth that big! That rabbit fish is a good 5-6 inches for scale.

 

[Reefer_punk]

We never quarantaine our fish. But we buy it from trustworthy lfs who definitely quarantaine their fish before they are getting sold. Never had any outbreak in over 4 years. #knocksonwood

 

[MnFish1]

Here’s a real world example! Checking my fish like I do about everyday my rabbitfish (I call him Peter) has this on his side just , which given is a circle is almost certainly an injury (I have no idea what he got into).

My treatment is going to be to feed him more algae, and some selcon soaked food.

Sometimes I see stuff like this in other forum posts and people immediately move the fish or begin treating. I don’t think that’s a great idea.

I’ve had other fish develop problems, like my fairy wrasse developed pop eye. The blue chromis showed a few spots shortly after introduction that I couldn’t identify. Powdered blue tang had Ich. In all cases I simply made sure to keep the fish well fed, check them every day and make sure I minimized stress (like no intense tank cleaning etc).. and every one healed.

I think part of the issue is that sometimes we don’t talk about how hardy these fish can be. I know when I first started I was terrified thinking my fish would all be covered with spots and die because of reading so many disease threads.

I don’t know what the answer is, but I do believe a lot of it comes down to experience. Getting into the hobby is easy. Really knowing what it takes to make a thriving healthy tank can be a lot harder.

I agree. It seems like more problems are caused by panic than the problem itself. Animals are designed to 'heal'. The better condition they are in - seems to me the more likely a wound, etc - will heal. That said - I would not sprinkle vibrio or cholera into a salad at a the Olympic village training camp (where presumably most people are well nourished and health - maybe not lol) - and expect a good outcome.

 

[Jay Hemdal]

I totally disagree - it is your interpretation of an old diagram - How in heck can you say that something in the diagram says that a tank needs to lay fallow. The diagram was original not according fish diseases - it was about general diseases in animals - including humans. It is your interpretation that only the part H is no diseases - The intersection H-P is the situation there a pathogen and host can co exist without a disease outbreak - very common among fishes there most fish pathogenic bacteria is facultative. Note the P does not stand for Parasite - it stands for Pathogen

I prefer to follow the science in this matter - expressed in this article as an example - from the article

​

If you can´t read the small text


Sincerely Lasse

Lasse, sorry - That simply doesn't work as they describe. If that were true, then the intersection between fish and pathogen, not intersecting the environment would mean that no fish can ever develop disease in the natural system (the best environment). We know this isn't true. Likewise, I can demonstrate disease in cases where the only two observable intersections are pathogens and fish. Now, if the conclusion is "you will only see diseases in fish where the pathogen and fish must reside in the same environment, then that works. However, you don't use a Venn diagram to say that. The benefit with a Venn diagram is the expression of the double overlaps.....showing less of an effect.

I wish I had better skills with Photoshop - what there needs to be is a red circle over the center, fading in color as you move outwards, that would better demonstrate the relative chance of a disease outbreak.

Jay

 

[Lasse]

I'm pretty sure if you take the Host (H) and Pathogen (P) out of the Environment (E) that the Host and Pathogen live in, everything dies.

Sorry - I do not understand this.

So - just to be clear then - a fish - with a couple white spots (CI) on its body does not have 'a disease' is that correct? (Based on the link/definition you showed a minute ago)?

Exactly my standpoint as long as it not harm its normal life or you can . If I get a tick on me - I have not automatically a disease even if the ticks around my home carry at least 3 - 4 different pathogens. I have a lot of streptococci and staphylococci. on my skin. I normally do have a lot of wounds on my body - but i normally not get erysipelas - I have get it twice when I was treatíng my skin with strong (very strong) cortisone ointments (cortisone is known for suppressing the immune response)

Jay, Lasse and anybody else. The big, enormous problem with that circle chart is not how you are reading it. Just like that Burgess parasite life cycle Chart in the 80s or 90s and almost any other chart.

The problem is that that big "host" circle on the left should be depicted by at least two circles. Host means, in our case a fish. But all fish are not the same. Not even close and I don't mean by species.

Some fish are totally, 100% immune from your little disease triangle in the center and will never get sick no matter how large your Pathogen circle is on the right.

The majority of fish kept in this hobby are very susceptible to your pathogen circle and yes, they will die in that scenario. Even if your pathogen circle was much smaller, most fish will die if exposed to a pathogen because they are not kept in such a way as to allow their immune system to do anything.

The "environment" circle can be so variable that it can't even be depicted on a chart. Many people keep fish in a bare tank and those will become infected no matter how large that pathogen circle is.

Fish in semi bare quarantine tank or medicated tanks are so susceptible to not only pathogens but other internal and neurological issues that I think that renders that chart totally useless. Neurological issues do not need a pathogen factor and is a "huge" factor in fish illness. Even bigger than pathogen issues. Unfortunately we cause all of the neurological issues in home tanks.

I´ll think that you describe that chart in an excellent way. It is a individual chart - it is valids for individual fish/pathogens/environment and their individual demands - not the whole population - it could be valid for a population but if so - you need to count in herd immunity in the environmental circle IMO. (among other things)

It could easily explain why a schooling tang can manage bare bottom but a sand sleeping wrase will get a disease in that tank. Just use the chart on an individual level.

has this on his side just today, which given is a circle is almost certainly an injury (I have no idea what he got into).

My direct response was - do you have a fish from the family Petromyzontinae in the aquarium Do you have a cleaner wrasse in your aquarium? There is one blenie that mimic the common cleaner wrasse bit is a scale eater.

Sincerely Lasse

 

[Jay Hemdal]

I totally disagree - it is your interpretation of an old diagram - How in heck can you say that something in the diagram says that a tank needs to lay fallow. The diagram was original not according fish diseases - it was about general diseases in animals - including humans. It is your interpretation that only the part H is no diseases - The intersection H-P is the situation there a pathogen and host can co exist without a disease outbreak - very common among fishes there most fish pathogenic bacteria is facultative. Note the P does not stand for Parasite - it stands for Pathogen

I prefer to follow the science in this matter - expressed in this article as an example - from the article

​

If you can´t read the small text


Sincerely Lasse

Lasse,

Here is a clearer description of the diagram:

 

[Lasse]

Lasse, sorry - That simply doesn't work as they describe. If that were true, then the intersection between fish and pathogen, not intersecting the environment would mean that no fish can ever develop disease in the natural system (the best environment). We know this isn't true. Likewise, I can demonstrate disease in cases where the only two observable intersections are pathogens and fish. Now, if the conclusion is "you will only see diseases in fish where the pathogen and fish must reside in the same environment, then that works. However, you don't use a Venn diagram to say that. The benefit with a Venn diagram is the expression of the double overlaps.....showing less of an effect.

Sorry - this is nothing they have come up with - it has been scientific described this way for decades - we get education of this back in the eighties. But this is a chart that is valid for individuals not populations directly. it can be used for populations too but in that case the environmental part must include immunity - IMO.

And its is not true that natuter give a stable environment - just look at spring bacterial disease in goldfish and its cause. I can also say that the connection with immune system, bacterial growth and rate of temperature rising is valid for all coldwater fish. Own experiences with swedish coldwater species. The environment for reef fish can vary a lot -storms, temperature changes, heavy rain over reefs and atolls, predator pressure, availability of food, upwelling, el nino and many other factors that stress fish in different way and lower their immune system. A stressed fish do not need to be the one that is chased - among the most stressed fish I know is male defending their territory . Put this together with lack of food and you will get a lower immune system at once.

Note the environmental circle does not only include water chemistry - it include all things in the environment including social interactions with other individuals

This diagram is not an analog diagram - it is digital - all three factors must be there if any disease should happen. And it is an individual chart

I can demonstrate disease in cases where the only two observable intersections are pathogens and fish.

Please do that and exclude the few obligate pathogen that exist in fish

Lasse,

Here is a clearer description of the diagram:

Is there a link?

Sincerely Lasse

 

[LatinoHeat]

I don't know who any of those people are.... I've been in the hobby close to 20 years.... I haven't ever qt'd either.

 

[ReefGeezer]

I firmly believe that overall health and stress levels of the livestock impacts whether a pathogen can propagate into an outbreak (disease). That's pretty much what the chart expresses. I don't QT, but I take some steps to minimize the risk.

I only buy fish locally that have "The Look"... Clear eyes, fat bodies, clear fins, no spots or specs visible, easy respiration, eating like a pig, and exhibiting the right attitude for the specimen. I have refused to buy many specimens I really wanted because they didn't have "The Look". I also buy fish on-line but always WYSIWYG and only if quarantined. It takes me a long time to stock a tank.
I do the old school formalin bath and fresh water dip during acclimation on fish I buy local to reduce the number of parasites being introduced. I also run a UV in hopes it will reduce viral and possibly bacterial pathogens.

I am at the end of the stocking process now. I have maybe three fish left to add. These will be more expensive and sensitive so I'll buy them all from a site that Quarantines.

 

[CrunchyBananas]

@inappropriatereefer buys his fish from a lfs that qt's their fish before selling them. He has said it a few times in some of his videos

Not too sure about that, I used to work at one of his LFS's, talked with him a few times when he'd come in, and am familiar with his other LFS's, and none of them quarantine. I haven't seen every single video, but none of the LFS's in this area offer that.