Current Quarantine Protocol

[kboogie]

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.

Finding good information on the attachment success rate is hard. I agree, I should look at lower values there.

Regarding the tomont stage, there is a good article from the University of Florida (pains me as an FSU grad) that says the tomont stage is 3 to 72 (Poisson distribution, long tail), with most (the fat part of the distribution) being 4 to 8 days. I frequently mix up the names of the stages, so there is always a chance I say tomont, meaning trophont, which the UF article says for the trophont stage is 3 to 7 days.

I'm going to look at the simulation over the next few days to make sure I'm accounting for each stage appropriately.

Keep the feedback coming!

 

[kboogie]

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.

Thank you for your question. The simulation is based on an aggregation of findings from several research papers on marine ich. The purpose of the simulation is to take the findings from these research papers, apply well established statiscal principles from what we know of distributions, and "approximate" the average quarantine.

Kill was one of the hardest items to find good research around. The limited research I found basically says the only way to achieve 100% kill rate is to have the copper concentration so high that it is not viable for the fish. I did find some research that said ionic copper is far more effective from a statistical perspective, but chelated copper is very effective. That research inferred a 92% kill rate for chelated copper.

The coolest things I found from various research papers are the impact of the mucus layer on the effectiveness of copper. In short, a free-swimming ich parasite that makes it to the mucus layer gets an extra 2 to 6 hours of protection from the copper, increases its chance of becoming a cyst, which is statistically immune to copper.

As it relates to temperature, the research I did found that you need 7 degree fareinheight increase above normal temperatures of around 77 degrees to shorten the trophont stage by one day. Once you get above 82 degrees, you are meaningfully reducing the survivability of most fish at 88 to 92 degrees, which would cut 2 days; you are basically creating almost unsurvivable conditions for the fish. The general point is that increasing temperatures by a few degrees has no significant impact regardless, it is accounted for in changes to the mean length of each stage.

I constructed this simulation algorithm to help me wrap my brain around the concept of a 14-day copper treatment. What the simulations and research have shown me is that the 14-day copper treatment meaningfully reduces the likelihood of ich, but nowhere near the level you should expect from a quarantine, and 14-days is vastly inferior to 30 days of copper (17% vs 1% probability of parasites on the fish).

I like combining the human element in my research to help explain why certain beliefs are held. Experts like Jay, VetteGuy, and others are very helpful in understanding that one of the key drivers of people's desire to shorten copper treatment are the struggles of using ionic copper, which had a significant increase in fish mortality the longer the fish were exposed to it. Where chelated copper is significantly less toxic to the fish. Unfortunately, people hear "copper" and think ionic when that is just not the case these days. I always thought that people were just impatient, which is probably still true, but they justify their impatience using inappropriate facts about ionic copper. Research is fun! Knowledge is power!

 

[Jay Hemdal]

Finding good information on the attachment success rate is hard. I agree, I should look at lower values there.

Regarding the tomont stage, there is a good article from the University of Florida (pains me as an FSU grad) that says the tomont stage is 3 to 72 (Poisson distribution, long tail), with most (the fat part of the distribution) being 4 to 8 days. I frequently mix up the names of the stages, so there is always a chance I say tomont, meaning trophont, which the UF article says for the trophont stage is 3 to 7 days.

I'm going to look at the simulation over the next few days to make sure I'm accounting for each stage appropriately.

Keep the feedback coming!

Sorry - I said tomont, but I meant trophont (I had just woken up). Tomonts can rest encysted for 3 to 76 days (but anything over 45 days is an outlier, under laboratory conditions - low temperature and a xeric culture - no bacteria to degrade them).

 

[ga2040]

"14-days is vastly inferior to 30 days of copper (17% vs 1% probability of parasites on the fish)."
Agree with that. I was under the impression you were extending beyong 30days .

Thank you for your question. The simulation is based on an aggregation of findings from several research papers on marine ich. The purpose of the simulation is to take the findings from these research papers, apply well established statiscal principles from what we know of distributions, and "approximate" the average quarantine.

Kill was one of the hardest items to find good research around. The limited research I found basically says the only way to achieve 100% kill rate is to have the copper concentration so high that it is not viable for the fish. I did find some research that said ionic copper is far more effective from a statistical perspective, but chelated copper is very effective. That research inferred a 92% kill rate for chelated copper.

The coolest things I found from various research papers are the impact of the mucus layer on the effectiveness of copper. In short, a free-swimming ich parasite that makes it to the mucus layer gets an extra 2 to 6 hours of protection from the copper, increases its chance of becoming a cyst, which is statistically immune to copper.

As it relates to temperature, the research I did found that you need 7 degree fareinheight increase above normal temperatures of around 77 degrees to shorten the trophont stage by one day. Once you get above 82 degrees, you are meaningfully reducing the survivability of most fish at 88 to 92 degrees, which would cut 2 days; you are basically creating almost unsurvivable conditions for the fish. The general point is that increasing temperatures by a few degrees has no significant impact regardless, it is accounted for in changes to the mean length of each stage.

I constructed this simulation algorithm to help me wrap my brain around the concept of a 14-day copper treatment. What the simulations and research have shown me is that the 14-day copper treatment meaningfully reduces the likelihood of ich, but nowhere near the level you should expect from a quarantine, and 14-days is vastly inferior to 30 days of copper (17% vs 1% probability of parasites on the fish).

I like combining the human element in my research to help explain why certain beliefs are held. Experts like Jay, VetteGuy, and others are very helpful in understanding that one of the key drivers of people's desire to shorten copper treatment are the struggles of using ionic copper, which had a significant increase in fish mortality the longer the fish were exposed to it. Where chelated copper is significantly less toxic to the fish. Unfortunately, people hear "copper" and think ionic when that is just not the case these days. I always thought that people were just impatient, which is probably still true, but they justify their impatience using inappropriate facts about ionic copper. Research is fun! Knowledge is power!

Knowledge is power but reinventing the wheel isnt!
Most people agree on 30days and its well established, so whats the point of all these repainting.

 

[kboogie]

Finding good information on the attachment success rate is hard. I agree, I should look at lower values there.

Regarding the tomont stage, there is a good article from the University of Florida (pains me as an FSU grad) that says the tomont stage is 3 to 72 (Poisson distribution, long tail), with most (the fat part of the distribution) being 4 to 8 days. I frequently mix up the names of the stages, so there is always a chance I say tomont, meaning trophont, which the UF article says for the trophont stage is 3 to 7 days.

I'm going to look at the simulation over the next few days to make sure I'm accounting for each stage appropriately.

Keep the feedback coming!

Sorry - I said tomont, but I meant trophont (I had just woken up). Tomonts can rest encysted for 3 to 76 days (but anything over 45 days is an outlier, under laboratory conditions - low temperature and a xeric culture - no bacteria to degrade them).

I figured that was the case. :-)

 

[christinna77]

Finding good information on the attachment success rate is hard. I agree, I should look at lower values there.

Regarding the tomont stage, there is a good article from the University of Florida (pains me as an FSU grad) that says the tomont stage is 3 to 72 (Poisson distribution, long tail), with most (the fat part of the distribution) being 4 to 8 days. I frequently mix up the names of the stages, so there is always a chance I say tomont, meaning trophont, which the UF article says for the trophont stage is 3 to 7 days.

I'm going to look at the simulation over the next few days to make sure I'm accounting for each stage appropriately.

Keep the feedback coming!

Sorry - I said tomont, but I meant trophont (I had just woken up). Tomonts can rest encysted for 3 to 76 days (but anything over 45 days is an outlier, under laboratory conditions - low temperature and a xeric culture - no bacteria to degrade them).

I figured that was the case. :-)

I'm curious - does this account for the fact that most people who only do 14 days in copper then transfer the fish to a sterile observation tank for another 14 days? So I guess the question is whether a trophont has ever been observed to stay attached on the fish for more than 2 weeks while in therapeutic copper.

At least this is how most pre-quarantined fish are treated, and I think the post copper 14 day observation period is the key to success here (some use black mollies during this step as well).

 

[kboogie]

Finding good information on the attachment success rate is hard. I agree, I should look at lower values there.

Regarding the tomont stage, there is a good article from the University of Florida (pains me as an FSU grad) that says the tomont stage is 3 to 72 (Poisson distribution, long tail), with most (the fat part of the distribution) being 4 to 8 days. I frequently mix up the names of the stages, so there is always a chance I say tomont, meaning trophont, which the UF article says for the trophont stage is 3 to 7 days.

I'm going to look at the simulation over the next few days to make sure I'm accounting for each stage appropriately.

Keep the feedback coming!

Sorry - I said tomont, but I meant trophont (I had just woken up). Tomonts can rest encysted for 3 to 76 days (but anything over 45 days is an outlier, under laboratory conditions - low temperature and a xeric culture - no bacteria to degrade them).

I figured that was the case. :-)

I'm curious - does this account for the fact that most people who only do 14 days in copper then transfer the fish to a sterile observation tank for another 14 days? So I guess the question is whether a trophont has ever been observed to stay attached on the fish for more than 2 weeks while in therapeutic copper.

At least this is how most pre-quarantined fish are treated, and I think the post copper 14 day observation period is the key to success here (some use black mollies during this step as well).

The short answer is yes but not in the way you expect. I was trying to understand how a 14-day quarantine can possibly work. If a 14-day quarantine works we would see a large window of zero or near zero probability just before the 14 day mark. The only time that occurs is when we use a 100% kill rate which we know is not what occurs.

 

[Michael Hughes]

Generally, if the fish came through quarantine fine, and the QT is expected to be used again within a few months, it is best to keep the tank running. If you lose fish during the process, but release the remaining fish to a DT, then anything those fish had, if contagious, will likely have moved into you DT with the new fish. The only time I sterilize a QT is for the following reasons:

1) all fish died from some unknown issue.
2) the QT isn't expected to be needed again for 4+ months
3) praziquantel has been used in the QT for multiple runs of quarantine fish. What happens there is that bacteria grows that "eat" prazi. That means subsequent prazi treatments become less and less effective. At some point (after 5+ doses) it really stops working. Then, I'll sterilize the QT in order to kill off that bacteria.

So if I'm following this correctly, the QT tank needs to be sterilized after every 2 quarantine cycles (assuming 3 prazi treatments per cycle) to ensure prazi remains effective?

If replacing the QT sponge filter with a "new" fully cycled sponge filter from the DT sump each cycle, does that eliminate this need?

 

[Jay Hemdal]

So if I'm following this correctly, the QT tank needs to be sterilized after every 2 quarantine cycles (assuming 3 prazi treatments per cycle) to ensure prazi remains effective?

If replacing the QT sponge filter with a "new" fully cycled sponge filter from the DT sump each cycle, does that eliminate this need?

Yes, that's best to do. Using a sponge that has been fully cycled in the DT sump helps, but there may still be prazi-consuming bacteria living on other surfaces in the tank. You might get away with 3 cycles before needing to sterilize everything.

I wish hyposalinity handled velvet, then you could just run that to handle ich and flukes, that handles flukes better than prazi does, but hypo can make uronema and velvet worse.

You may hear advice to sterilize the QT after every run - to "keep diseases from entering your DT". That, however, is not needed because if any disease make it through the QT run, the new fish will have carried it into your DT anyway.

 

[Bubule]

Hello,

After reading all pages of this subject, I decided to prepare a QT before buying new fish.

In preventive, I introduced a flame angel with some other fish in a QT. After a week of observation with no symptoms, I administered a three-week preventative treatment with Cupramine. (Easy to find here)

Then, I changed 50% of water and neutralized the remaining copper with activated carbon. Few days later, I performed another treatment with Kanaplex.
Kenaplex because my flame angel started a Popeye (only one cloudy eye).

After 8 days and third dose of Kanaplex, i noticed that my other fish become less greedy. Si I decided to transfert hem to my main tank and leave the flame angel alone in the QT (I already have another flame angel in my MT, and prefer to make sure it's healthy and well-fed before transferring it).

15 days after last Kanaplex treatment, its eye is still cloudy (probably more), He's hiding more and more. I fear the worst if I don't do anything.

I have an antibiotic on hand (Erythromycin). Do you think that could help?
If so, do you know the appropriate dosage ?

Franck

 

[Jay Hemdal]

Hello,

After reading all pages of this subject, I decided to prepare a QT before buying new fish.

In preventive, I introduced a flame angel with some other fish in a QT. After a week of observation with no symptoms, I administered a three-week preventative treatment with Cupramine. (Easy to find here)

Then, I changed 50% of water and neutralized the remaining copper with activated carbon. Few days later, I performed another treatment with Kanaplex.
Kenaplex because my flame angel started a Popeye (only one cloudy eye).

After 8 days and third dose of Kanaplex, i noticed that my other fish become less greedy. Si I decided to transfert hem to my main tank and leave the flame angel alone in the QT (I already have another flame angel in my MT, and prefer to make sure it's healthy and well-fed before transferring it).

15 days after last Kanaplex treatment, its eye is still cloudy (probably more), He's hiding more and more. I fear the worst if I don't do anything.

I have an antibiotic on hand (Erythromycin). Do you think that could help?
If so, do you know the appropriate dosage ?

Franck

Cloudy eyes can be very slow to heal. For some reason, erythromycin works better than kanaplex on that issue.

I didn't see where you did any fluke treatment.

 

[Bubule]

Thank you Jay :)
I didnt have time when I saw its cloudy eye. I prefered first treat it before.

Do you have any idea for Erythromycin dosage ?

 

[Bubule]

My pills

 

[Jay Hemdal]

Thank you Jay :)
I didnt have time when I saw its cloudy eye. I prefered first treat it before.

Do you have any idea for Erythromycin dosage ?

So - the strange thing is that although we often recommend erythromycin in the water to treat bacterial eye infections or to reduce cyanobacteria, in food fisheries, it is most always used orally.

Then, erythromycin is formulated in different ways, and have different amounts of excipients/binders in it. That makes comparing dosages very difficult.

I just use Maracyn 1 and go with the label instructions....treat for 5 days.

If you are using pure Erythromycin, bulk powder, I would dose it at 12.5 mg/gallon, which is the value I use for large scale cyanobacteria control, and I know it is safe for a variety of fish.

 

[gqlee]

可能不行——我们真的需要一个实验室来研究这个问题，科洛尼的研究有点缺陷，要做好这项研究还需要付出更多努力……
杰伊

Hello, Jay Hemdal.

I am an aquarium hobbyist from China and have learned a great deal from your articles. Thank you for sharing your knowledge.

I understand that you do not recommend hobbyists use formaldehyde for quarantine at home due to the potential hazards. I share your concern in avoiding these risks.

However, as we know, while parasites like Uronema are relatively uncommon, they do exist, and there is always a possibility of encountering them. Furthermore, from your writings, I understand that chloroquine phosphate can be effective in preventing Uronema outbreaks.

Given this, why is it not standard practice to begin quarantine procedures with a 1-2 day immersion treatment using it from the outset?

--


Is it because "In 2020, misuse of chloroquine as a 'treatment' for the Covid virus caused it to be removed from the open market. Currently, the only way to obtain this material is through a prescription from a veterinarian, and that is rarely given"?

 

[Jay Hemdal]

Hello, Jay Hemdal.

I am an aquarium hobbyist from China and have learned a great deal from your articles. Thank you for sharing your knowledge.

I understand that you do not recommend hobbyists use formaldehyde for quarantine at home due to the potential hazards. I share your concern in avoiding these risks.

However, as we know, while parasites like Uronema are relatively uncommon, they do exist, and there is always a possibility of encountering them. Furthermore, from your writings, I understand that chloroquine phosphate can be effective in preventing Uronema outbreaks.

Given this, why is it not standard practice to begin quarantine procedures with a 1-2 day immersion treatment using it from the outset?

--


Is it because "In 2020, misuse of chloroquine as a 'treatment' for the Covid virus caused it to be removed from the open market. Currently, the only way to obtain this material is through a prescription from a veterinarian, and that is rarely given"?

I’m not convinced that chloroquine will treat internal Uronema. My opinion is that once the external lesions are seen, it is too late to treat anyway. However, I have NOT tried a preventative treatment before symptoms are seen. Marine fish do drink water, so some chloroquine could get inside the fish that way. Maybe your idea would work?

Yes, Chloroquine is difficult to get now in the United States. It is also fairly expensive. We used to be able to buy it is pet stores, but no longer. Veterinarians won’t prescribe it unless they are actually treating the patient, and they don’t usually treat fish.

 

[mmodo]

Yes, that's best to do. Using a sponge that has been fully cycled in the DT sump helps, but there may still be prazi-consuming bacteria living on other surfaces in the tank. You might get away with 3 cycles before needing to sterilize everything.

To what degree is sterilizing required? After initial set up of a tank, most are not pulling out a QT tank unless someone in the DT is sick. I imagine breaking down and cleaning a tank would count as sterilizing without using boiling water or bleach because it would be dry for long enough to kill anything on the surface that might linger.

 

[Jay Hemdal]

To what degree is sterilizing required? After initial set up of a tank, most are not pulling out a QT tank unless someone in the DT is sick. I imagine breaking down and cleaning a tank would count as sterilizing without using boiling water or bleach because it would be dry for long enough to kill anything on the surface that might linger.

These are typical heterotrophic bacteria, so soaking in 100 ppm bleach water overnight would be sufficient. I don’t think drying or freshwater soaks would kill enough of the prazi eating bacteria.

 

[gqlee]

我并不认为氯喹能治疗体内的尿囊虫病。我的看法是，一旦出现外部病变，治疗就为时已晚。不过，我还没有尝试过在症状出现前进行预防性治疗。海水鱼会喝水，所以一些氯喹可能会通过这种方式进入鱼体内。也许你的想法可行？

是的，氯喹现在在美国很难买到，而且价格也相当昂贵。以前宠物店里还能买到，但现在买不到了。兽医只有在需要治疗病人时才会开这种药，而且他们通常不会给鱼用这种药。

thank you , jay

 

[Mac8128]

Jay, I read the first few pages and without going thru 45 or so more pages, might you have a link to your most up to date QT procedures? By the way, thank you very much for the time you put into documenting this process and answering folks questions.