Combining tanks and QT

[Kooma]

Hey guys,

I picked up a system with 9 fish, these have all gone through QT (30 days copper, prazi x3, kanaplex).

I also have a system I’ve had running for the past 12 years or so. Clowns that are easily 13 years old and a chromis that I picked up about 8 months ago.

I want to combine both into a new system, with rock that was fallow for 100 days.

Would you put the old clowns and chromis through QT, or simply add them to the new system?

Old system is a 32 biocube. New system is a 270 gallon twv.

 

[KrisReef]

I’m not a QT guy, so I tend towards doing the “Dump & Pray” method of additions. In this case I would worry about the personalities of the fishes and how they will engage in a new environment. The fact that the new system is new, even fallow for days doesn’t make me confident that the new system will function well with an instant fish load and process the waste that comes with all of these fishes. Even qt’d fish are subject to stresses from a move and stress is the first thing that weakens a system and the fish in it that lends itself to outbreaks of disease, usually ich. A UV sterilizer can help prevent outbreaks in these situations. Do you have a properly sized UV for the tank?

 

[Kooma]

I’m not a QT guy, so I tend towards doing the “Dump & Pray” method of additions. In this case I would worry about the personalities of the fishes and how they will engage in a new environment. The fact that the new system is new, even fallow for days doesn’t make me confident that the new system will function well with an instant fish load and process the waste that comes with all of these fishes. Even qt’d fish are subject to stresses from a move and stress is the first thing that weakens a system and the fish in it that lends itself to outbreaks of disease, usually ich. A UV sterilizer can help prevent outbreaks in these situations. Do you have a properly sized UV for the tank?

Thanks Kris.

I don’t run UV on my tanks, the fallow rock and fish in extended QT is to remove the ich from the new system.

Adding in the existing fish I’ve had for many years is my concern, if that will introduce ich potentially to more susceptible fish like my yellow tang.

I’ve added 7 of the 9 fish to the new system this week, the rock that is in with them is rock they were in previous before the ich QT and fallow period.

 

[Euphyllia97]

As this move will put a lot of stress on your fish, I wouldn’t take the chance and do a QT on your old fish aswell. Ich might be there without you knowing and it would be a shame to go through all of this to then introduce it by adding your other fish.

 

[exnisstech]

I wouid never medicate a healthy established fish that I've had for a long time. But my QT method for new fish involves 30+ days in observation only unless signs of disease or parasite are observed.
But your rock is fallowed and new fish have been treated so I understand the delimna. Risk the healthy fish to medication or risk the already medicated fish?

 

[Kooma]

It is harder as the two clowns were my first saltwater fish that I’ve had for over a decade. I don’t want to stress them, they have been in their system for 7-8 years now.

Other issue is the system I’m taking down is full of great growing sps, taking them out to QT will drop nutrients very quickly, I already have trouble keeping them up (why I added a chromis).

Maybe I’ll run it until the new system is in good enough shape to move the corals, and then QT the clowns and chromis.

I’m backwards on my fish adding method as well with some more aggressive in first. Really hopeful the clowns don’t get beaten up. My female is mean but the male is timid.

 

[exnisstech]

Maybe I’ll run it until the new system is in good enough shape to move the corals, and then QT the clowns and chromis.

Are the coral in a tank with no fish?

 

[Kooma]

Maybe I’ll run it until the new system is in good enough shape to move the corals, and then QT the clowns and chromis.

Are the coral in a tank with no fish?

No, 225 is rock and fish no coral. Fish were fully QT here by me, rock was fallow for 100+ days. Biocube is full of sps, rock, and has the clowns and chromis.

 

[Jay Hemdal Verified Community Expert]

Hey guys,

I picked up a system with 9 fish, these have all gone through QT (30 days copper, prazi x3, kanaplex).

I also have a system I’ve had running for the past 12 years or so. Clowns that are easily 13 years old and a chromis that I picked up about 8 months ago.

I want to combine both into a new system, with rock that was fallow for 100 days.

Would you put the old clowns and chromis through QT, or simply add them to the new system?

Old system is a 32 biocube. New system is a 270 gallon twv.

I wouldn't quarantine the existing older fish - any fish that has not shown signs of disease for 6+ months is unlikely to be carrying any external parasites that could cause issues. The quarantine process is basically focused on external parasites.

 

[kboogie]

You pose a good question, and it addresses confusion/disagreement regarding the purpose of quarantine.

It is important to remember that there is no one universal purpose for quarantine. The most common use of quarantine is to prevent the introduction of pathogens into a "sterile" (pathogen-free) display tank. The "sterile" part is a key point. In order to be sterile, you have to either be fallow for 45 to 60 days ( I believe even longer is better) or new with no exposure to substrate or component that where not sterilized (chemically or through a fallow period).

When conducting QT before introduction into a sterile DT, you will conduct a "medicated" QT on any fish that do not come from a known, confirmed sterile environment (which typically means an environment you made sterile and can confirm it has always been maintained as sterile).

Another common purpose of quarantine is to maintain a low (but not zero) pathogen level in a DT. In this flow, you know your DT is not sterile, but you conduct activities to keep your pathogen levels low (e.g. UV, oxidizers, etc). In this process, you conduct a prophylactic QT to avoid adding new pathogens to your DT or increasing the pathogen load. The key difference is that you know/accept that you have pathogens in your DT, but rely on load pathogen levels, low stress, and good diet.

A little less common is observational quarantine, similar to the previous example, you know/accept you have pathogens, you attempt to maintain lower pathogen levels by not introducing down actively sick fish to the DT, which "could" trigger an outbreak.

I don't want to use triggering terms like "wrong" or "ineffective" to describe any of these techniques, I would like to describe each as having "varying degrees of success" when executed properly. I listed them in their order of success when executed properly.

If you are keeping a sterile environment, then you will want to QT your fish from the established tank unless you know that it came from a tank that was "sterile".

There are many misconceptions around quarantine and general care, but the biggest one I see is the belief that "a fish that does not appear to be sick, even after a long observation period, is safe to put into a sterile DT". If you do not conduct a medicated QT on a fish, even when it looks healthy, you are very likely (75%+ chance) are introduce pathogens into your DT. Mathematically, it is less of a chance than if you introduce a known sick fish (which would be 100%), but it is much higher than the 5 sigma chance (0.0001%) you have of introducing a pathogen if you conduct a medicated QT.

At the end of the day, I believe people need to do what works best for them and their situation, but they should be "informed" so they are making these decisions with knowledge.

For the record, I used to be a believer in "it doesn't look sick" but after you have a preventable wipeout of thousands of dollars of fish, the 5 to 8 week delay of medicated QT is well worth it. Also, very few fish have special requirements for medicated QT. The biggest issues are people not properly measuring the medications or ramping up medications too quickly. But that is a conversation for another day/thread.

 

[Kooma]

You pose a good question, and it addresses confusion/disagreement regarding the purpose of quarantine.

It is important to remember that there is no one universal purpose for quarantine. The most common use of quarantine is to prevent the introduction of pathogens into a "sterile" (pathogen-free) display tank. The "sterile" part is a key point. In order to be sterile, you have to either be fallow for 45 to 60 days ( I believe even longer is better) or new with no exposure to substrate or component that where not sterilized (chemically or through a fallow period).

When conducting QT before introduction into a sterile DT, you will conduct a "medicated" QT on any fish that do not come from a known, confirmed sterile environment (which typically means an environment you made sterile and can confirm it has always been maintained as sterile).

Another common purpose of quarantine is to maintain a low (but not zero) pathogen level in a DT. In this flow, you know your DT is not sterile, but you conduct activities to keep your pathogen levels low (e.g. UV, oxidizers, etc). In this process, you conduct a prophylactic QT to avoid adding new pathogens to your DT or increasing the pathogen load. The key difference is that you know/accept that you have pathogens in your DT, but rely on load pathogen levels, low stress, and good diet.

A little less common is observational quarantine, similar to the previous example, you know/accept you have pathogens, you attempt to maintain lower pathogen levels by not introducing down actively sick fish to the DT, which "could" trigger an outbreak.

I don't want to use triggering terms like "wrong" or "ineffective" to describe any of these techniques, I would like to describe each as having "varying degrees of success" when executed properly. I listed them in their order of success when executed properly.

If you are keeping a sterile environment, then you will want to QT your fish from the established tank unless you know that it came from a tank that was "sterile".

There are many misconceptions around quarantine and general care, but the biggest one I see is the belief that "a fish that does not appear to be sick, even after a long observation period, is safe to put into a sterile DT". If you do not conduct a medicated QT on a fish, even when it looks healthy, you are very likely (75%+ chance) are introduce pathogens into your DT. Mathematically, it is less of a chance than if you introduce a known sick fish (which would be 100%), but it is much higher than the 5 sigma chance (0.0001%) you have of introducing a pathogen if you conduct a medicated QT.

At the end of the day, I believe people need to do what works best for them and their situation, but they should be "informed" so they are making these decisions with knowledge.

For the record, I used to be a believer in "it doesn't look sick" but after you have a preventable wipeout of thousands of dollars of fish, the 5 to 8 week delay of medicated QT is well worth it. Also, very few fish have special requirements for medicated QT. The biggest issues are people not properly measuring the medications or ramping up medications too quickly. But that is a conversation for another day/thread.

Brilliant.

I will qt the existing fish.

I don’t plan to use my old rock due to hitchhikers, but want to move the coral over.

Do I need to setup a QT system for the coral and a fallow period of 76 days or longer? And I assume I’ll need to dose ammonia to keep up with nutrients?

 

[kboogie]

You pose a good question, and it addresses confusion/disagreement regarding the purpose of quarantine.

It is important to remember that there is no one universal purpose for quarantine. The most common use of quarantine is to prevent the introduction of pathogens into a "sterile" (pathogen-free) display tank. The "sterile" part is a key point. In order to be sterile, you have to either be fallow for 45 to 60 days ( I believe even longer is better) or new with no exposure to substrate or component that where not sterilized (chemically or through a fallow period).

When conducting QT before introduction into a sterile DT, you will conduct a "medicated" QT on any fish that do not come from a known, confirmed sterile environment (which typically means an environment you made sterile and can confirm it has always been maintained as sterile).

Another common purpose of quarantine is to maintain a low (but not zero) pathogen level in a DT. In this flow, you know your DT is not sterile, but you conduct activities to keep your pathogen levels low (e.g. UV, oxidizers, etc). In this process, you conduct a prophylactic QT to avoid adding new pathogens to your DT or increasing the pathogen load. The key difference is that you know/accept that you have pathogens in your DT, but rely on load pathogen levels, low stress, and good diet.

A little less common is observational quarantine, similar to the previous example, you know/accept you have pathogens, you attempt to maintain lower pathogen levels by not introducing down actively sick fish to the DT, which "could" trigger an outbreak.

I don't want to use triggering terms like "wrong" or "ineffective" to describe any of these techniques, I would like to describe each as having "varying degrees of success" when executed properly. I listed them in their order of success when executed properly.

If you are keeping a sterile environment, then you will want to QT your fish from the established tank unless you know that it came from a tank that was "sterile".

There are many misconceptions around quarantine and general care, but the biggest one I see is the belief that "a fish that does not appear to be sick, even after a long observation period, is safe to put into a sterile DT". If you do not conduct a medicated QT on a fish, even when it looks healthy, you are very likely (75%+ chance) are introduce pathogens into your DT. Mathematically, it is less of a chance than if you introduce a known sick fish (which would be 100%), but it is much higher than the 5 sigma chance (0.0001%) you have of introducing a pathogen if you conduct a medicated QT.

At the end of the day, I believe people need to do what works best for them and their situation, but they should be "informed" so they are making these decisions with knowledge.

For the record, I used to be a believer in "it doesn't look sick" but after you have a preventable wipeout of thousands of dollars of fish, the 5 to 8 week delay of medicated QT is well worth it. Also, very few fish have special requirements for medicated QT. The biggest issues are people not properly measuring the medications or ramping up medications too quickly. But that is a conversation for another day/thread.

Brilliant.

I will qt the existing fish.

I don’t plan to use my old rock due to hitchhikers, but want to move the coral over.

Do I need to setup a QT system for the coral and a fallow period of 76 days or longer? And I assume I’ll need to dose ammonia to keep up with nutrients?

You don’t need to do a traditional QT of the coral unless you have known “pests” on the coral. Keep in mind coral does not count against your fallow because coral won’t host parasites or the types of pathogens you worry about for fish. I’m not an expert on coral QT but if you believe you have pests I would recommend using a dip but be careful because can be very sensitive to these treatments.