Current Quarantine Protocol

[vittpsu21]

So this is the method I am trying to follow for QT

Some context from me:

I preseeded my sponge for about 1.5-2months in my display before moving it over to my QT
I continued to ghost feed to keep the bacteria alive
40 gal breeder (my plan was for this to be able to house all fish going forward I plan to add to my 200g which includes multiple tangs, hence the size)
I have the sponge on 1 side, airstone on the other, 2 heaters hooked up to an inkbird and and HOB with just the default media in it (nothing bad as you suggested)
I added the fish as ammonia was looking good to me (14 days ago) and waited to start copper until I observed and was sure that the ammonia would stay down.

Fast forward: 14 days later the ammonia is still moving all over the place despite the pre seeded sponge (perhaps I did not allow this to go long enough, which, is my fault but I can't change now)
I have been performing 10 gal worth of water changes daily to keep the ammonia down, and using prime if I am ever slightly concerned. When doing water changes I try to get out all the poop/detritus/uneaten food I can, however, even after 14 days my ammonia still seems to jump around quite a lot. My Seachem never turns off yellow (safe) but my Hanna tells a different story. I am yet to start copper as I wanted to make sure the ammonia was under control so I didn't overwhelm myself.

My question is 2 fold, at what point should I expect the filter to actually catch up? Am I missing something? The hob was not seeded but was added with idea that the media in there would give more space for the bacteria to grab on to. I did a little bit of reading online though kind of confusing to me and have read that seachem alert only measures NO3 and that hanna measures both NO3 and NO4 and that, NO4 at a certain ph/temp is less toxic then NO3? Thanks in advance for any fill in the blanks here, I don't mind continuing to do the water changes, but I just want to make sure I am not missing something large that is making things harder on myself then needs to be. I would love to start copper, but also don't want to stress myself or the fish out more if I can't trust the ammonia!

I should also note, all these fish are eating and come running up to me as soon as I go to the tank lol

 

[gbroadbridge]

So this is the method I am trying to follow for QT

Some context from me:

I preseeded my sponge for about 1.5-2months in my display before moving it over to my QT
I continued to ghost feed to keep the bacteria alive
40 gal breeder (my plan was for this to be able to house all fish going forward I plan to add to my 200g which includes multiple tangs, hence the size)
I have the sponge on 1 side, airstone on the other, 2 heaters hooked up to an inkbird and and HOB with just the default media in it (nothing bad as you suggested)
I added the fish as ammonia was looking good to me (14 days ago) and waited to start copper until I observed and was sure that the ammonia would stay down.

Fast forward: 14 days later the ammonia is still moving all over the place despite the pre seeded sponge (perhaps I did not allow this to go long enough, which, is my fault but I can't change now)
I have been performing 10 gal worth of water changes daily to keep the ammonia down, and using prime if I am ever slightly concerned. When doing water changes I try to get out all the poop/detritus/uneaten food I can, however, even after 14 days my ammonia still seems to jump around quite a lot. My Seachem never turns off yellow (safe) but my Hanna tells a different story. I am yet to start copper as I wanted to make sure the ammonia was under control so I didn't overwhelm myself.

My question is 2 fold, at what point should I expect the filter to actually catch up? Am I missing something? The hob was not seeded but was added with idea that the media in there would give more space for the bacteria to grab on to. I did a little bit of reading online though kind of confusing to me and have read that seachem alert only measures NO3 and that hanna measures both NO3 and NO4 and that, NO4 at a certain ph/temp is less toxic then NO3? Thanks in advance for any fill in the blanks here, I don't mind continuing to do the water changes, but I just want to make sure I am not missing something large that is making things harder on myself then needs to be. I would love to start copper, but also don't want to stress myself or the fish out more if I can't trust the ammonia!

I should also note, all these fish are eating and come running up to me as soon as I go to the tank lol

If it's a new ammonia alert badge and it says safe, then ammonia is fine.

The badge measures free toxic Ammonia which is all you need to worry about.

I'm not sure about the Hanna, but most ammonia test kits read total ammonia which needs to be converted to toxic ammonia using a pH conversion chart.

BTW, Seachem prime does nothing to detoxify ammonia, it is only useful as a chlorine remover.

 

[vittpsu21]

If it's a new ammonia alert badge and it says safe, then ammonia is fine.

The badge measures free toxic Ammonia which is all you need to worry about.

I'm not sure about the Hanna, but most ammonia test kits read total ammonia which needs to be converted to toxic ammonia using a pH conversion chart.

BTW, Seachem prime does nothing to detoxify ammonia, it is only useful as a chlorine remover.

oh really? I read on the bottle it detoxifies ammonia, nitrite, and nitrate... is this not true?

 

[gbroadbridge]

oh really? I read on the bottle it detoxifies ammonia, nitrite, and nitrate... is this not true?

What the bottle says is nonsense.

Many of the science folks here have tested it exhaustively.

 

[vittpsu21]

oh really? I read on the bottle it detoxifies ammonia, nitrite, and nitrate... is this not true?

What the bottle says is nonsense.

Many of the science folks here have tested it exhaustively.

Ah. I had not realized that well ty for that!

 

[Jay Hemdal]

So this is the method I am trying to follow for QT

Some context from me:

I preseeded my sponge for about 1.5-2months in my display before moving it over to my QT
I continued to ghost feed to keep the bacteria alive
40 gal breeder (my plan was for this to be able to house all fish going forward I plan to add to my 200g which includes multiple tangs, hence the size)
I have the sponge on 1 side, airstone on the other, 2 heaters hooked up to an inkbird and and HOB with just the default media in it (nothing bad as you suggested)
I added the fish as ammonia was looking good to me (14 days ago) and waited to start copper until I observed and was sure that the ammonia would stay down.

Fast forward: 14 days later the ammonia is still moving all over the place despite the pre seeded sponge (perhaps I did not allow this to go long enough, which, is my fault but I can't change now)
I have been performing 10 gal worth of water changes daily to keep the ammonia down, and using prime if I am ever slightly concerned. When doing water changes I try to get out all the poop/detritus/uneaten food I can, however, even after 14 days my ammonia still seems to jump around quite a lot. My Seachem never turns off yellow (safe) but my Hanna tells a different story. I am yet to start copper as I wanted to make sure the ammonia was under control so I didn't overwhelm myself.

My question is 2 fold, at what point should I expect the filter to actually catch up? Am I missing something? The hob was not seeded but was added with idea that the media in there would give more space for the bacteria to grab on to. I did a little bit of reading online though kind of confusing to me and have read that seachem alert only measures NO3 and that hanna measures both NO3 and NO4 and that, NO4 at a certain ph/temp is less toxic then NO3? Thanks in advance for any fill in the blanks here, I don't mind continuing to do the water changes, but I just want to make sure I am not missing something large that is making things harder on myself then needs to be. I would love to start copper, but also don't want to stress myself or the fish out more if I can't trust the ammonia!

I should also note, all these fish are eating and come running up to me as soon as I go to the tank lol

What type of copper medication are you using? Coppersafe and copper power both have bonded amines that cause a false positive of aroun 0.50 ppm ammonia.

 

[vittpsu21]

What type of copper medication are you using? Coppersafe and copper power both have bonded amines that cause a false positive of aroun 0.50 ppm ammonia.

It will be copper power, but none has been added yet, all of this is pre copper, I have been holding it off because I wasn't sure if I would make things worse with the ammonia and copper

 

[MnFish1]

So this is the method I am trying to follow for QT

Some context from me:

I preseeded my sponge for about 1.5-2months in my display before moving it over to my QT
I continued to ghost feed to keep the bacteria alive
40 gal breeder (my plan was for this to be able to house all fish going forward I plan to add to my 200g which includes multiple tangs, hence the size)
I have the sponge on 1 side, airstone on the other, 2 heaters hooked up to an inkbird and and HOB with just the default media in it (nothing bad as you suggested)
I added the fish as ammonia was looking good to me (14 days ago) and waited to start copper until I observed and was sure that the ammonia would stay down.

Fast forward: 14 days later the ammonia is still moving all over the place despite the pre seeded sponge (perhaps I did not allow this to go long enough, which, is my fault but I can't change now)
I have been performing 10 gal worth of water changes daily to keep the ammonia down, and using prime if I am ever slightly concerned. When doing water changes I try to get out all the poop/detritus/uneaten food I can, however, even after 14 days my ammonia still seems to jump around quite a lot. My Seachem never turns off yellow (safe) but my Hanna tells a different story. I am yet to start copper as I wanted to make sure the ammonia was under control so I didn't overwhelm myself.

My question is 2 fold, at what point should I expect the filter to actually catch up? Am I missing something? The hob was not seeded but was added with idea that the media in there would give more space for the bacteria to grab on to. I did a little bit of reading online though kind of confusing to me and have read that seachem alert only measures NO3 and that hanna measures both NO3 and NO4 and that, NO4 at a certain ph/temp is less toxic then NO3? Thanks in advance for any fill in the blanks here, I don't mind continuing to do the water changes, but I just want to make sure I am not missing something large that is making things harder on myself then needs to be. I would love to start copper, but also don't want to stress myself or the fish out more if I can't trust the ammonia!

I should also note, all these fish are eating and come running up to me as soon as I go to the tank lol

You are making the mistake of not just following the protocol.

 

[vittpsu21]

You are making the mistake of not just following the protocol.

Sorry do you mean by just not starting copper right away? Or do you mean by the filter not having completed the nitrogen cycle (though I thought it did because it was seeded in my sump) sorry just trying to follow your train of thought here

 

[MnFish1]

yes. it would help to start a new thread

 

[kboogie]

@Jay Hemdal I've been involved in a conversation in another thread about the appropriate length of QT with therapeutic levels of copper. All my original research strongly supports 30+ days of copper at therapeutic levels to account for the tomont stage, which the research shows can last 21 to 28 (excluding outliers). The opposing argument says only 14 days is needed because copper "immediately kills theront (or at least damages them). As a result, you only need to wait 7 days for the tomonts to drop and a 7-day grace period after that for stagglers. At this point, the argument for a 14-day copper treatment says you should have parasite-free fish. I've done research on the possibility for parasites to exist in the fish's mucus protected from copper, extending the timing before tomont, but the research says we are talking two or three days.

I feel like I'm missing something because the 30-day copper treatment makes complete sense from a 99.999% effectiveness perspective, but I'm struggling to find a hole in the 14-day copper treatment argument. Can you help me understand why the 14-day copper treatment protocol is not the recommended one?

 

[winxp_man]

@Jay Hemdal I've been involved in a conversation in another thread about the appropriate length of QT with therapeutic levels of copper. All my original research strongly supports 30+ days of copper at therapeutic levels to account for the tomont stage, which the research shows can last 21 to 28 (excluding outliers). The opposing argument says only 14 days is needed because copper "immediately kills theront (or at least damages them). As a result, you only need to wait 7 days for the tomonts to drop and a 7-day grace period after that for stagglers. At this point, the argument for a 14-day copper treatment says you should have parasite-free fish. I've done research on the possibility for parasites to exist in the fish's mucus protected from copper, extending the timing before tomont, but the research says we are talking two or three days.

I feel like I'm missing something because the 30-day copper treatment makes complete sense from a 99.999% effectiveness perspective, but I'm struggling to find a hole in the 14-day copper treatment argument. Can you help me understand why the 14-day copper treatment protocol is not the recommended one?

I had two purp tangs show them nasty white sport critters after 2 ‘n a half weeks while in copper. 2.30 was the lowest. So the little guys stayed in copper for the full 30 days, then 45 of observation nothing else showed up after. So made up my mind nope, 30 it is. And 30 seems to go by so fast. You can experiment with fish that you know have ich 100% and see what happens with 14 days. Also let’s remember that it takes for the copper to work a solid 2-3 days.

My brothers small 40g cube got ich. The maroon and the yellow tangs got hit hard. Got the fish in 2.36, if I’m recalling correctly, and it took about 3 days for the fish to clear somewhat. But fully cleared up at about 4-5 days. And no more spots since then. The QT is almost up for them. We shall see. But they are looking good.

I took scraping off the maroon clown. And this was with copper at 2.36 ppm. The little suckers where moving around under the microscope like no tomorrow. It was temp drop that got them to slow down. Which shows that high heat gets them going as we know and cooler temps get them to hibernate if they are encrusted into tomites in the substrate, and hold on off from doing much. Of course temps can’t be that low because even other marine life has issues. What I did notice take them out fast was rubbing alcohol. I wish I had a few extra arms to do the video recording haha. Or someone around when it did all of this. Would have been fun to get a video of them dying from running alcohol. Can’t remember if it was 70 or 91.

I just advocate for 30 days, just to be sure, unless something new comes out that kills this rabid disease faster and effectively without harming the fish much. One thing about chelated copper as stated here and other places, it’s not as bad for fish, but still not the best to have fish in it. But it does ensure no disease.

 

[Jay Hemdal]

@Jay Hemdal I've been involved in a conversation in another thread about the appropriate length of QT with therapeutic levels of copper. All my original research strongly supports 30+ days of copper at therapeutic levels to account for the tomont stage, which the research shows can last 21 to 28 (excluding outliers). The opposing argument says only 14 days is needed because copper "immediately kills theront (or at least damages them). As a result, you only need to wait 7 days for the tomonts to drop and a 7-day grace period after that for stagglers. At this point, the argument for a 14-day copper treatment says you should have parasite-free fish. I've done research on the possibility for parasites to exist in the fish's mucus protected from copper, extending the timing before tomont, but the research says we are talking two or three days.

I feel like I'm missing something because the 30-day copper treatment makes complete sense from a 99.999% effectiveness perspective, but I'm struggling to find a hole in the 14-day copper treatment argument. Can you help me understand why the 14-day copper treatment protocol is not the recommended one?

There really is no justification for a 14 day copper treatment. Back in the old days, using ionic copper was risky to some species, so we would treat for as short of a time as possible - 21 days.

Amine chelated products are much safer, but slower to work. The 30 day slot is the sweet spot. I will add the caveat that this is just for quarantine treatments. When using it to treat ACTIVE disease, you need to treat 30 days beyond when the last spots were seen.

 

[MnFish1]

I feel like I'm missing something because the 30-day copper treatment makes complete sense from a 99.999% effectiveness perspective, but I'm struggling to find a hole in the 14-day copper treatment argument. Can you help me understand why the 14-day copper treatment protocol is not the recommended one?

If you re-read the first sentence you typed, you have the answer. It's more likely to work than a 14 day treatment. I mean some people succeed with no quarantine at all - so you could also ask that question - why use copper at all - it works for some people

 

[kboogie]

There really is no justification for a 14 day copper treatment. Back in the old days, using ionic copper was risky to some species, so we would treat for as short of a time as possible - 21 days.

Amine chelated products are much safer, but slower to work. The 30 day slot is the sweet spot. I will add the caveat that this is just for quarantine treatments. When using it to treat ACTIVE disease, you need to treat 30 days beyond when the last spots were seen.

Thank you for talking about iconic copper vs chelated copper. I need to see if I can find research information on the speed at which chelated copper impacts the free swimming stage. I might play with a simple Monte Carlo Simulation using Markov Chains to see if I can create something that shows the impact of extending the time. I haven't built this type of simulation in a while.

 

[kboogie]

If you re-read the first sentence you typed, you have the answer. It's more likely to work than a 14 day treatment. I mean some people succeed with no quarantine at all - so you could also ask that question - why use copper at all - it works for some people

I hear you. Because of this, I'm trying to find research that explains why not all theronts are killed by exposure to therapeutic levels of chelated copper.

 

[Jay Hemdal]

I hear you. Because of this, I'm trying to find research that explains why not all theronts are killed by exposure to therapeutic levels of chelated copper.

It’s all about dose versus toxicity. You could raise the dose to get 100% kill rate in a week, but the fish would be harmed.

There hasn’t been any peer reviewed research on amine chelated copper. I think I’ve seen just one study that even used this type of product.

 

[kboogie]

I carved out a little bit of time to create a simulation algorithm. It's been a while since I made a Monte Carlo from scratch, but there are lots of tools to help accelerate the process.

It appears the key assumption being made by the 14-day quarantine protocol is that any theronts from tomonts have a 100% kill rate, which is not true for iconic copper and definitely not true for chelated copper. The research I've done suggests 92% kill rate for chelated copper.

Below is output from my first gen algorithm assuming 99% kill rate:

Here is what is looks like at 92% kill rate:

Here is an example with some aggressive assumptions; 95% kill rate, 20% attach success rate, 2% theront contact rate, 10% chance of a multi-wave release pattern, 5 days average tomont attachment:

Here is an example using the aggressive assumptions with a 92% kill rate:

This really confirms for me why a 30 day to 45 day copper treatment is necessary.

I put this together to help me wrap my head around some concepts and it really has solidified things for me.

 

[Jay Hemdal]

I carved out a little bit of time to create a simulation algorithm. It's been a while since I made a Monte Carlo from scratch, but there are lots of tools to help accelerate the process.

It appears the key assumption being made by the 14-day quarantine protocol is that any theronts from tomonts have a 100% kill rate, which is not true for iconic copper and definitely not true for chelated copper. The research I've done suggests 92% kill rate for chelated copper.

Below is output from my first gen algorithm assuming 99% kill rate:

Here is what is looks like at 92% kill rate:

Here is an example with some aggressive assumptions; 95% kill rate, 20% attach success rate, 2% theront contact rate, 10% chance of a multi-wave release pattern, 5 days average tomont attachment:

Here is an example using the aggressive assumptions with a 92% kill rate:

This really confirms for me why a 30 day to 45 day copper treatment is necessary.

I put this together to help me wrap my head around some concepts and it really has solidified things for me.

Thanks - statistics elude me (grin). I think your 20% attachment success rate might be a little high for most aquariums. Is a 5 day tomont attachment time frame accurate? I thought it was more like 3 days.

 

[ga2040]

Not sure how you came up with a kill rate and extended the days in the first place.Yes if you decrease kill rate its going to extend the days.
Did you go about putting a few tomonts in copper and observe how many tomites got killed in an hour or something to get a kill rate(?) .
Temperature also plays a factor in cyst hatching and the number getting killed which doesnt seem to be a factor accounted in the simulations.