Ich eradication vs. Ich management

[mcarroll]

1) It is not a theory that Acanthurus tangs particularly powder blues, Browns, Achilles, and goldrim have significantly less slime coat to protect them than other tangs.

2) I have experience with ich management (mostly successful) over the last 12 years. Horrendous success with Acanthurus tangs, however. See my thread below, actually read it.

3) your logic that the fish can fight the parasite in an aquarium the same as they would in the ocean is flawed at best, with all due respect. In the ocean Acanthurus tangs swim miles and miles each day which means the parasites have a much more difficult time getting to them,

But MOST importantly, being enclosed in a small cage where the parasites can reproduce exponentially faster, is a vast difference. In the ocean, the number of parasites on the fish would not increase exponentially as they do in a small glass cage. The fish can build a resistance to it as the natural population increases very slowly and has far more difficulty reaching hosts.

4) to assume that even the most seasoned hobbyists provide an environment of low stress to this genus of tang (given their swimming needs), or really any fish for that matter (relative to the ocean) is preposterous.

I love this hobby but nothing I can do will be as stable or ideal as their natural environment that they evolved to inhabit. Period.

Here is the thread outlining my experience, that's all that it is. It's pretty astonishing though and you should read it. It will tell you that I didn't qt anything for a decade and relatively successfully managed ich except with regard to these fish.

https://www.reef2reef.com/threads/i...ears-of-experience-and-ich-management.206347/

Tangs that are pelagic and/or schooling would be two of the kinds I was referring to that almost noboby can provide suitable habitat for, in a nutshell because we know so little about them...just enough to know how unsuitable they are for tank life, in fact. A chain of six foot tanks wouldn't do it. Your group of tangs falls into that category. Keeping one of these in a tank is a stunt IMO.

On #1
A thin slime coat just means you need to be even more conservative in dealing with these species...generally not selecting them because virtually any tank would be too small for their lifestyle. "More than theory" implies this has been demonstrated scientifically vs just hearsay. Remember that thin slime coats come from stress and malnutrition...so I'd be curious to see any sources explaining this phenomenon in this genus.

On #2
I did read your post - very common experience and I am glad you shared!

On #3
Exposing a weak fish to outbreak levels of ich implies that several bad things have already happened (See #1 again.), which would sap the slime coat of any similarly treated fish.

Think about this:
If a wild pelagic tang like we are talking about travels a mile in a given day and you put him in a six foot box to live, that environment is about 1/1000th the size. But it's not all that uncommon to see it done.

To put a clownfish from the wild that lives in a single square foot through the same ordeal you'd have to squeeze him into a .3mm box to live. Why is that only obviously ridiculous when we talk about the clownfish?

On #4
If I didn't say that about this genus too, I meant to.

Being conservative (and honest with ourselves) when picking fish would pretty much exclude this whole genus...along with the many other genuseses of marine wish we just don't mess with.

Extrapolating this thinking to all oceanic fish is fallacious as there are obviously many whose lifestyles are not at all pelagic, nor even schoolers, and which do conceivably (if not perfectly) fit inside a typical aquarium. Even some other tangs.

 

[Paul B]

OK, I am babysitting today so as soon as I can

 

[Paul B]

I posted that article in the disease forum if you are interested. I am sure I will get flogged for my opinions

 

[Humblefish]

I posted that article in the disease forum if you are interested. I am sure I will get flogged for my opinions

Reading it now. Thanks for posting. You won't get flogged here, my friend.

 

[Paul B]

Good, getting flogged makes me Sad

 

[Paul B]

I have kept many types of tangs for many years and tangs just like any other fish are immune in the sea and they should be immune in our tanks. I don't remember exactly having an Acanthurus tang because I have a terrible memory for names but I have probably had a few of them. I always had a hipatas tang and they live quite a while, ten years or more in my tank but they almost always get HLLE. I have another theory about that but that is for a different thread. As for parasites, tangs as well as all other fish have an immunity to parasites in the sea and if cared for properly "should" keep that immunity in a tank. As I mentioned, they have more of a problem being confined because of their schooling behaviour and I think that keeping one of them in a semi bare quarantine tank for a long period of time is not a real good thing to do for such a fish. It stresses tangs more than other fish and as I said, their lateral line system must go crazy in such a tank. We have no idea how important that system is for fish such as tangs, but they could not live if it were impared as that is their main sensory organ. They could live fine without an eye or fin, but without their sensory system, they are doomed. We rarely mention this system, or their immune system but I think we need to change our thinking on this and step out of 1972.
http://www.saltwatersmarts.com/fish-biology-lesson-3230/

 

[ca1ore]

I have kept many types of tangs for many years and tangs just like any other fish are immune in the sea and they should be immune in our tanks.

Not a marine biologist, but I don't think fish are immune to ich in the ocean. If they were, ich would not exist. I think they are generally resistant (maybe splitting hairs), and the 'dilution' effect of the ocean means low parasite pressures. We can do something about resistance through feeding and water quality, though not much about 'dilution'.

 

[mcarroll]

Not a marine biologist, but I don't think fish are immune to ich in the ocean. If they were, ich would not exist. I think they are generally resistant (maybe splitting hairs), and the 'dilution' effect of the ocean means low parasite pressures. We can do something about resistance through feeding and water quality, though not much about 'dilution'.

I'm not sure if you're denying there is such a thing as immunity but there is and it works on white spot/ich/Crypto and countless other parasites.

Lack of a chance encounter with a parasite is not what keeps 99.9% of the fish in the ocean healthy.

 

[mcarroll]

Quote from here:

"As is seen with other diseases, general fish health and environmental factors including water quality will affect the status of the fish’s immune system and may worsen the effects of an infection. If the immune status of the fish is compromised or if environmental factors are less than optimal, Cryptocaryon infection will be even more explosive and harmful.

Fish that survive a Cryptocaryon infection develop im- munity, which can prevent significant disease for up to 6 months (Burgess 1992; Burgess and Matthews 1995). However, these survivors may act as carriers and provide a reservoir for future outbreaks (Colorni and Burgess 1997). "​

As usual, things like water quality and stocking density are also critical factors, but in the hobby they are generally ignored or glossed over.

These parasites are an integral part of the ocean environment - they are not the enemy of the fishes.

You can see that even their immune response sees to it that certain parasites - the ones that don't kill them - survive.

Interesting that it's not an eradication response. This increases the odds that the Crypto parasites it will run into in the future are ones it has survived and is or has been immune to. Is that parasitism or a survival strategy?

Disease generally only takes out the weak/compromised individuals. Healthy fish can and do survive infections like this.

So..we need to take care not to trade in or maintain weak/compromised fish.

Keeping fewer fish per gallon (or keeping them in bigger tanks, if you prefer) and feeding properly well, using live foods whenever possible, are two of the easiest things we can do to have healthy fish. (Remember there are a huge assortment of live foods that can conceivably be collected and/or cultured at and around your home....doesn't have to be expensive.)

Another easy thing most reefers - especially ones just starting out - ought to be doing is buying fish that they can watch, in person, for at least a few days (i.e. at a LFS) to personally monitor their condition before buying. This kind of observation (vs instant-gratifiaction purchasing) will go a long way toward "weeding out" diseased fish that may actually require treatment or have the potential to cause issues in the first place. See them eat on more than one occasion if you can. (Try to be there when the store normally feeds vs asking for a special performance.) Watch the fish for more than 10 minutes at a time too - most fish can take that long to get used to your presence and start acting naturally - which can include demonstrating signs of stress or disease for you. $0.02

 

[ca1ore]

I'm not sure if you're denying there is such a thing as immunity but there is and it works on white spot/ich/Crypto and countless other parasites.

Not denying the role of immunity, that would be foolish, just that an absolute statement that all fish are immune must be false. Maybe it's just how I define the term ("protected or exempt, especially from an obligation or the effects of something") as opposed to thinking in term of being resistant.

Lack of a chance encounter with a parasite is not what keeps 99.9% of the fish in the ocean healthy.

Well, you don't know that .... nor do I. So unless you can produce a study with clear findings, it's simply speculation. If you can produce such a study, I have my hat and a jar of tabasco at the ready :lol:. I will be hard pressed to now find it, but I recall a study from years ago that a typical wild caught fish had x number of parasites.

 

[mcarroll]

I think we may actually agree...or I've misunderstood.

The fish with x number of parasites in that example you're trying to remember are probably (e.g.) the same carriers of white-spot in my quote above. At least the same category of fish!

The point about them is that they survive the infection. Not only that, but they assure the survival of the parasites that they survive. (Which will hopefully go into the environment to outcompete the theoretical parasites which the fish cannot survive.)

In large measure they really depend on these parasites for their active immunity. (Surprisingly, in small measure, the active immune system doesn't depend on them!)

 

[Humblefish]

I will be hard pressed to now find it, but I recall a study from years ago that a typical wild caught fish had x number of parasites.

Source: http://www.int-res.com/articles/dao/25/d025p159.pdf

Wild-caught marine fish from 3 sites in SE Queensland, Australia, were examined over a period of up to 13 mo for infections of the parasitic ciliate Cryptocaryon irritans. Infections of C. irritans were found to be common on the fish sampled. Out of a total of 358 fish (14 species), 239 (66.7%) from 13 species were found to be infected.

And this talks about the worms: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3507714/

Since all precautions have been taken to minimize taxon numbers, it is safe to affirm than the number of fish parasites is at least ten times the number of fish species in coral reefs, for species of similar size or larger than the species in the four families studied; this is a major improvement to our estimate of biodiversity in coral reefs. Our results suggest that extinction of a coral reef fish species would eventually result in the coextinction of at least ten species of parasites.

 

[Paul B]

I researched for much of the first post in this thread here. http://www.inmunologia.org/Upload/Articles/6/0/602.pdf

Fish immune system. A crossroads between


innate and adaptive responses

L. Tort, J.C. Balasch, S. Mackenzie

Department of Cell Biology, Physiology and Immunology, Universitat Autónoma de Barcelona, Bellaterra, Spain

Quote"
The complement system


Fish, as other vertebrates and invertebrates, activate

their immune system after recognition of pathogen-associated

molecular patterns (PAMPs) by specific receptors. These

receptors act as soluble forms (LPS-binding protein, pentraxins,

complement, collectins) or are associated to membranes of

immune cells (epithelial, phagocytic, dendritic, granulocytic).

 

[mcarroll]

The Complement System was a part of the immune system I had never even heard of until recent research.

Worth looking up all by itself IMO.

 

[Paul B]

That's why I looked it up. If you search for fish Immunity you will find a plethora of information, much if it to hard for a layman (or electrician) to understand. But the parts I do understand I found out for myself with actual fish keeping.

 

[mcarroll]

Both the depth and breadth of the material on fish immunity has been surprising. You do not exaggerate when you say we're collectively (the hobby) stuck in 1975 on these issues. Science and the fish farming industry - perhaps surprisingly - are not.

The article you linked has a great point of view I think most of us here could relate to. Still reading...

 

[ca1ore]

Fantastic debate .... and some excellent cites sources.

 

[Paul B]

Mcarrol, it boggles the mind (well mine anyway) how little this hobby has advanced since it's inception. Many people had disease problems then, they used copper and quarantine then as now, and the same percentage of people now have problems as then. I think the internet is the blame because of the vast, unlimited amount of information, much of it wrong coming about by rumor, innuendo, supposition, luck, or lack of it.
We humans have discovered ways to eradicate afflictions such as smallpox, polio, tetanus, bubonic plague and the heartbreak of psoriasis. But we do almost nothing for fish except try to cure them because we allowed them to become sick. There is no need for this to happen. We now know something about immunity but we fail to embrace it as we would a Supermodel, if we could. This just doesn't seem that hard to me. The fish come to us already immune, albeit in a weakened state. All we have to do is get them back into a state of excellent health very fast before the parasites have a chance to take over. It is very easy, but many of us fight it and do everything we can to stress the fish to the point where it's immunity is gone, then we attempt to cure an extremely weak creature. It's like the 1700s when "doctors" used to bleed people to make them stronger. Did that ever work? I don't think so but the procedure lasted 100 years. (I am guessing) We still change massive amounts of water to "cure" hair algae. Does that ever work? No, it does not. People still add cleaner fish to cure ich. How does that work out? Many of us use garlic, besides putting it in linguini and clams. I don't even know how that started, but it is silly. Does more flow remove cyano? No. It grows on the output of power heads more than anywhere else.
We take perfectly healthy fish and put them in a practically bare tank except for some PVC elbows and keep them there for two months and wonder why the fish don't eat. Would you eat inside a PVC elbow?
People feed nothing but a "good" quality flake food and wonder why their fish are not spawning. Many of us are thrilled beyond belief if our clownfish spawns. Out clownfish are "supposed" to spawn and do it every few weeks. All our fish are supposed to be pregnant all the time. That is the natural state for "all" fish. I am surprised if my fish don't spawn, that means they are half dead and something is wrong.
If someone says their fish is sick, the most common question is "What are your parameters". Parameters don't make a fish sick. We make them sick. If you have 20 fish in the tank and 19 of them are fine, there is nothing wrong with the parameters, maybe it is RAP music.
I myself am not immune from this. In the beginning me and Noah used to sit next to the Ark looking at the fish, wondering why they have spots. They all had spots, I named some of them Spot. But I learned by doing.
I know how to fly a helicopter because from all the flying I did in Viet Nam I asked the pilot to let me take over, and what do you know? It was simple. Flying, not landing or taking off, I don't know how to do that. That and turning on the radio. (I did crash twice, but I was not piloting the thing then). Now my fish never get sick and the explanation I get from so many people is one of two things. One is that my tank is a time bomb and will crash by Tuesday. The other is I am lucky.
I would be lucky if a Supermodel wanted me to show her around my fish tank and have me as a mentor. Trust me! there are no Supermodels here (not right now anyway). I am also not that smart. I found this out by getting in the mind of fish, by swimming with them and looking them in the eye. But mostly by common sense. If we do something and the fish dies, we did it wrong. But if we do it differently and the fish lives, dozens of times, we have found the answer and we continue to do it that way. If someone gives advice, but all his fish live two or three years then croak. That is not the person to listen to. I may also not be the person to listen to so listen to your fish.
They know how to stay healthy

 

[4FordFamily]

I agree with you Paul for 99/100 fish species and the most esperienced and knowledgable hobbyists. I never had trouble with ich with my tangs or fish. I could drop an infested fish in my tank and everyone would be fine even if the new one died.

That said, velvet ripped apart my angel tank like nobody's business. Ich is a joke compared to velvet.

I feed my fish very nutritious foods small meals every day and have for a long time. I got my acanthurus tangs fat as pigs and in great water in established tanks but eventually Achilles and powder blue would succomb. Slowly but surely waste away despite having fat bellies. Since treating my tanks, I've lost zero (except two that arrived near death). 2 Achilles, 2 PBT, 1 goldrim, and 1 powder blue.

I also sold another PBT and powder brown that were too large that I also successfully fattened up that survived.

 

[omykiss001]

Source: http://www.int-res.com/articles/dao/25/d025p159.pdf

Really like this article and I'd like to pose a couple of ideas regarding the data from this paper.

1st @4FordFamily probably has it right on that each species of fish has varying degrees of susceptibility to infection and extent of infection that will occur. The authors cite their data as well as those from several other studies they referenced that provide evidence not all fish are equal (this study mostly done with emperors and groupers). There are probably fish that have more active innate immune responses, and other species have morphological adaptations that make it difficult or impossible for the parasite to attach or feed on the host. Our own personal observations in our tanks also tend to support this as well given surgeon fish and some other species we tend to like also tend to be much more susceptible to infection and probably also become much more heavily infected when an outbreak occurs and suffer the greatest morbidity.

2nd the authors data also suggest the quality of water (quality indicated by dissolved nutrients in the water) and amount of water exchange have a big impact on infection rates in wild populations. Estuaries tend to be Eutrophic, where as sand bars and coral reef environments tend to be oligotrophic and ultraoligotrophic respectively. Here again the data presented by the authors indicated areas with higher nutrient loads (estuaries) and limited nutrient export in the ecosystem also have higher numbers of infected fish. To bring this back to our tanks. Systems that have been running for long periods and have good nutrient control and or fauna that quickly process the nutrient load may also have less mortality and morbidity if/when they have a exposure to crypto in that environment, my guess and only an educated guess, is the parasite does require some nutrients in the water to successfully complete its life-cycle and may explain why even if an infected fish is introduced the parasite can't get a foot hold in system where the nutrients are limiting. When I speak of nutrients there is probably more to the game than the ones we think of being nitrate and phosphate but also many other small organic molecules some of which may be required for parasite development and maturation that are consumed by specific microbes that may not colonize readily or quickly into our systems. This may be a reason why newer tanks that are still developing a mature microbial fauna may have a tougher time managing an outbreak. I know some will ask about higher levels of water movement being the cause as the author did mention that, but they also mentioned studies that show crypto tends to excyst on a circadian pattern (mostly at night). This parasite does have to swim to a host and given it is a single celled cilliate who can't cover lots of distance evolution more than likely has selected those parasites that swim when the chance of finding a host within it's range is greatest i.e. when the fish has bedded down for the night and is in close proximity to the substrate where excystment occurs.

In addition to this the data also clearly show that wild fish do tend to be infected and carry a "parasite load", but I think the key take away message given fish mostly rely on the innate immune response (see the article posted by PaulB in this thread) is the parasite load at any one time averages about 8-10 individual tomonts (Diggle and Lester, 1996; quote above) that the innate response can keep in check. Key thing to remember about the innate immune response that differs from the adaptive immune response that mammals use more heavily is the innate system can be overwhelmed much more easily. If you didn't already know the innate immune system uses macrophages, phagocytes and granulocytic cells, which you might think of as a police force roaming the body looking for invaders. If the riot is to large they can only attack parasites as fast as they can physically make contact with them and have to be in the same physical location to do so, where as the adaptive immune response involves T and B lymphocytes that take messages from the innate response and then produce very specific antibodies to that particular invader and then leave behind memory B cells that are always ready to mount a massive response to any reoccurrence, they can be thought of more like the air force and the heavy smart bombers. Once the message comes in the B-cells begin synthesizing large number of antibodies and these circulate through the blood so the immune cells themselves do not need to be in physical proximity to do their job and the invader in essence gets carpet bombed and the innate system them mops up the remains. Fish don't do as good with the air force, this part of their immune system is not well developed compared mammals.

Bottom line fish deal with Crypto in the wild, but they have manageable parasite loads their immune systems and physiology can handle. In the closed environments we provide it's probably pretty easy for this balance to turn and why the tenets of ich management are all targeting keeping the parasite as low as possible, which may still doom some fish who bed down where excystment occurs and have little in the way of natural resistance to the parasites themselves as noted by @4FordFamily and the Acanthurus genus which probably share morphology that makes them prone to infection. Ich management probably works because while you may not have success with these very susceptible species the parasite never gets to plague levels (i.e. concentration of free swimmers large enough) that cause massive infection and high mortality rates to a majority of fish species you keep it more in line with what is seen in the wild unless as noted by others an event occurs that shifts the balance to the parasites favor.

Sorry for the long winded comment to this thread, but found it to be a good read and being a biologist by trade I love that scholarly articles are used to support points, also found the articles quite informative given my specialty is mammalian immunology which does differ from that of our finned friends. Love to geek out on this stuff and share ideas