How’s my method to get hermits in my tank faster?!

[kartrsu]

I’ve setup a new tank, and would like to get some hermits in there to help with cleaning up leftover food and algae. New hermits currently have been in a fallow tank for 25 days, so not long enough for ich to be truly eradicated. I was thinking if I had a safe “solution” to quicker display introduction.

I have a lot of empty hermit shells. If boiling water kills ich and velvet encysted stage, then I can boil the empty shells and let dry to kill anything on them. Then, I would take my current hermits, use superglue to mark their shells, and move them and sanitized empty shells to a new sterile tank. Assuming they move to new shells, can those then be safe to add to the display? And then can I just remove the marked shells as they move homes?

Would love thoughts. Thanks!

 

[Copingwithpods]

Nope, unless you pull the hermits from their shells, sterilize them and then place them in the new clean shells that will not work, too many variables. Best to just wait.

 

[kartrsu]

Well the hope is that they’ll switch into clean new shells. And as they do, id take out the old shells. Since it’s fishless qt, the most I’d be of risk of are free swimmers. It’s kind of like shrimp quarantine with molting.

 

[ThRoewer]

While there will be a remaining risk, the likelihood of Cryptocaryon encysting on the shell of living crab is rather low, especially on the rather clean shell of a hermit. Empty shells of dead snail are a different story because you don't know when the hermits picked them up. And a dead resting snail shell is definitely something Cryptocaryon and Amyloodinium would encyst on.
So I think your plan isn't without merit if you can tolerate a small remaining risk.

 

[kartrsu]

Makes sense. The crux of this all was the boiling water part to sterilize the empty shells. If that doesn’t kill encysted ich or velvet, then this all falls apart.

 

[Flippers4pups]

Don't think the effort would result in any difference. Respectfully.

 

[homer1475]

As soon as you drop the sanitized shells into the tank for them to switch, it's possible that they would become infected. Or the length of time it would take for them to change shells, would also infect the sanitized shells.

I have some scarlet hermits that have not changed shells in years, even though I give them new larger ones.

Valid idea, but you would have to physically remove the shells and insert the hermit into a new sanitized shell.

 

[topjimmy]

Nope, unless you pull the hermits from their shells, sterilize them and then place them in the new clean shells that will not work, too many variables. Best to just wait.

Mmmmm hermit crab..

 

[kartrsu]

But if it is a fallow fish system, the sanitized shells cannot be reinfected because there is no fish host to complete the cycle.

 

[ThRoewer]

Don't think the effort would result in any difference. Respectfully.

No, but that's due to the fact that the likelihood of them being infected is fairly low to begin with.

Makes sense. The crux of this all was the boiling water part to sterilize the empty shells. If that doesn’t kill encysted ich or velvet, then this all falls apart.

Boiling the shells for an hour should kill everything on and in them. For Cryptocaryon it would actually be enough to keep them at 50 °C for long enough so that each part of the shells has gotten to that temperature.

As soon as you drop the sanitized shells into the tank for them to switch, it's possible that they would become infected. Or the length of time it would take for them to change shells, would also infect the sanitized shells.

Of interest here are the cysts and without fish in the tank there simply can't be any new cysts. So it is impossible for the sanitized shells to be (re-)infected.

 

[Copingwithpods]

But if it is a fallow fish system, the sanitized shells cannot be reinfected because there is no fish host to complete the cycle.

It could, although highly unlikely, be on the crabs themselves. That's why I said unless you physically pull the crabs from their shells, sterilize them (most likely kill them in the process) and put them in clean shells in a new tank there is always the possibility of contamination.

 

[kartrsu]

It could, although highly unlikely, be on the crabs themselves. That's why I said unless you physically pull the crabs from their shells, sterilize them (most likely kill them in the process) and put them in clean shells in a new tank there is always the possibility of contamination.

Yes, I agree that’s probably the risk. That the encysted stage is on the crabs exoskeleton and not just on their shells. I suppose there are no risk free shortcuts here. Risk mitigation perhaps but still need to accept window of error.

 

[kartrsu]

Thanks for the inputs everyone! Patience wins in the long run as always.

 

[ZipAdeeZoa]

It could, although highly unlikely, be on the crabs themselves. That's why I said unless you physically pull the crabs from their shells, sterilize them (most likely kill them in the process) and put them in clean shells in a new tank there is always the possibility of contamination.

Why not just wait for the crab to sterilize itself via molt?

What if you did both the shell sterilization and then waited for the hermit crab switch into a new disinfected shell (removing the old shell once it does) and then waited for it to molt, would that not remove any risk of introducing a cysts?

 

[Copingwithpods]

Why not just wait for the crab to sterilize itself via molt?

What if you did both the shell sterilization and then waited for the hermit crab switch into a new disinfected shell (removing the old shell once it does) and then waited for it to molt, would that not remove any risk of introducing a cysts?

Again way too many variables and potential contamination scenarios all of which yes are extremely small but not zero.

The old cyst carrying shell will undoubtedly come in contact with the new shell and possibly transfer a cyst.

The cyst carrying crab can dislodge a cyst while molting and transfer it to the new shell or his new carapace.

Waiting for the crab to molt can take longer than 76 days which defeats the purpose

Even with all of this mitigated no amount of water no matter how small can be transfered from one tank to another without the small possibility of infecting the sterile tank. I suppose it's like that tank transfer method but even that has its inherent risks if done incorrectly.

 

[Mikeltee]

So a coral or invert can bring in velvet and ich to a sterile tank? How do you qt them properly if so? I just started my 76 day fallow period and plan to get some coral next week.

 

[Copingwithpods]

So a coral or invert can bring in velvet and ich to a sterile tank? How do you qt them properly if so? I just started my 76 day fallow period and plan to get some coral next week.

I'm far from an expert but I've seen the same questions asked and the answer is always restarting the 76 day period to the date of last addition. So if you keep adding stuff you'll have to restart your 76 days every time.

 

[ZipAdeeZoa]

So a coral or invert can bring in velvet and ich to a sterile tank? How do you qt them properly if so? I just started my 76 day fallow period and plan to get some coral next week.

Check out this link https://www.reef2reef.com/ams/how-to-quarantine-coral-and-inverts.228/