Marine Ich and Temperature

[Paul B]

Yes, but the ones that so, have a nice clean scent :rolleyes:

 

[Jamie7907]

I personally use ttm that I found outlined by you and others on all my new additions but I still sterilize heaters, air stones etc in boiling water with no ill effects seen so far. I personally have had little success with chloroquine and question it's effectiveness, I especially question the dose once methodology with it as this is where I experienced the most failure. Admittedly this is the first year I've used chloroquine so my inexperience may play a role, but I've learned that 5g in a bare bottom 75g qt with 20g sump maybe 80g total water volume dosed once will not eradicate ich. I've had better luck dosing it every 3 days though still not 100% success and it's effect on nitrifying bacteria is significantly detrimental at that dosing regiment. I used to use cupramine however I noticed problems months later with unexpected fish loss showing no signs of disease that has went away since I started using ttm as my primary method of preventative care. I still keep cupramine and chloroquine on hand along with other medications but always start with ttm first and use other medications on an as needed basis. As a side note on heating tanks to eliminate the encysted stage do so with caution, 99% of the time nothing will happen but I have had a seam blow out on a 600g acrylic tank doing this. The seam failure happened at 115f according to apex temp probe and infrared heat gun.

 

[melypr1985]

Where are you sourcing your CP from. This might be the problem.

 

[Humblefish]

Where are you sourcing your CP from. This might be the problem.

^^ This. I've had nothing but success using pharmaceutical grade CP.

However, I've read mixed reviews from those using other sources. o_O

 

[Jamie7907]

The source may well be the issue. So far it has come from National Fish Pharm and another spinoff company from that one. However read earlier this week about a company, diamondback if I recall correctly that I'm going to give a shot. I'm pretty sure that my dosage amount is good. At 40mg per gal I came up with 3.4g to which I dosed 5g for 85g total water volume which I believe to be on the high end.

 

[Jamie7907]

As a side note sometime in January I will be able to test for chloroquine to see how fast it degrades in different marine environments. I'm not familiar with the machine but will be trained on it It's being installed before xmas and training will take place in January. So I hope to learn how long it lasts as well as the likely effectiveness of different sources from a purely quantitative nature.

 

[Sistawolf]

I recently reexamined some of the literature I have on Marine Ich, paying closer attention to what it says about temperature and its effect on the parasite’s known life cycle. As with most studies, precise conclusions can be somewhat ambiguous, but I wanted to share what I have learned and open a discussion regarding this topic.

The first article I reread was the 1997 Colorni and Burgess study, where it states: “Theront excystment is very asynchronous, occurring between 3 and 72 days.” This is the study which the infamous 72 day fallow period is based upon, and it has been suggested it took up to 72 days only because the original experimentation was done in cold water. Indeed, this excerpt from the article seems to support that:


For the reader’s reference, 20C=68F and 25C=77F.

However, later in the article (see red highlights below) it states that that the reason for the asynchronous excystment is "unclear". Wouldn't they just say the prolonged excystment (72 days) was due to cooler water temps if they were confident that was the case?


I wouldn’t think they’d label it a “phenomenon” if the simple explanation was that cooler water temps were a contributing factor for asynchronous excystment. It could be because later on they discuss “cold water intraspecific variants” which only adds to the confusion:


Can a cold water variant infect a reef fish typically found in warmer waters? And vice versa? :eek: With regards to temperature, the study was actually more focused on its correlation to trophont/tomont/theront size:




The next “article” I reread was a 332 page PDF, written by Peter Burgess in 1992, where he conducted a series of experiments to partially fulfill the requirements for his PhD. Some of the information contained therein is now considered outdated/obsolete, but it still lays the groundwork for most of what we know about the parasite. One such example of possible outdated info is this excerpt:


I know from reading more recent studies that it has been proven ich can go dormant (for up to 6 months, I believe) if temp is lowered, but then become infectious again once the temp is returned to normal. I do not know if the same applies if you were to raise aquarium temperature above 30C/86F. According to “Table 2” from this source, it would take 40C/104F for 1 hour to disinfect SW ich from your aquarium: https://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/fa164. However, I would think 104F would eradicate even nitrifying bacteria thus “uncycling” your tank. I don’t believe most fish/corals/inverts could handle > 86F (they would ALL need to be removed beforehand), but I do believe bacteria could survive that. The question is how long would you need to keep the aquarium > 86F to eradicate ich from it?

Next up is this table which outlines the development of C.irritans trophonts at different temperatures:



However, I found nothing above to be useful for our purposes since most of the animals we keep couldn’t survive in 17C/62.6F water.

Finally, the study had this to say regarding temperature and immune response to SW ich:



Two other articles I have not read on the subject, so I will just copy & paste their abstracts below:

Studies on cryptocaryoniasis in marine fish: effect of temperature and salinity on the reproductive cycle of Cryptocaryon irritans - Journal of Fish Diseases Volume 2, Issue 2, pages 93–97, March 1979


Influence of Temperature and Host Species on the Development of Cryptocaryon irritans
B. K. Diggles and R. J. G. Lester
The Journal of Parasitology
Vol. 82, No. 1 (Feb., 1996), pp. 45-51



Conclusions: Some of the information above is unusable for our purposes, as many of the animals we keep will not live in the experimental temperatures shown to have a negative impact on ich’s life cycle. Although, those with cold water SW tanks battling ich might find it useful. The main thing I was looking for was whether or not the recommended 72 day fallow period is greatly exaggerated due to experimentation being conducted at cooler water temps. And while I admit there is some evidence to support it is, I also believe there are other variables in play which determines how long it can take for all the theronts to be released (or rupture) from their respective tomonts. I also cannot discount the numerous anecdotal accounts of 72 day fallow failures, or chalk every single one of them up to cross contamination or some other mental error on the part of the hobbyist. In short, we probably don’t know as much about ich as we think we do. ;)

I do think, however, that it would be prudent to monitor aquarium temp while going fallow. You probably want it to be at least 77F, and it is possible that running it at 80-82F will speed up ich’s life cycle and increase your chances of having a successful fallow period. At the very least, it does no harm as most corals/inverts handle 80-82F just fine (except for possibly certain SPS.)

Whether you decide to go fallow for the entire 72 days (actually 76 if you factor in more than just the tomont stage), or roll the dice on a shorter duration is entirely up to you. For those who opt for the latter, Table 1 (below) provides some useful info taken from here: http://atj.net.au/marineaquaria/marineich.html



It shows lengths of stages of C. irritans from various studies before the 1997 Colorni and Burgess Study. In these listed studies, 35 days was the longest time it took for theront release (Burgess and Matthews, 1994a). So, 45 days fallow should be sufficient for most garden variety strains of ich so long as temp is 77F or greater during the entire fallow period.

One last thing I wanted to mention is something I said previously - about ich going dormant in lower temps and then becoming infectious again once the temp is returned to normal. That information is quoted below and was extracted from here: https://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/fa164



So let’s now begin a lively discussion, debate, more info presented, etc. on Marine Ich and Temperature! :)

I need no articles or books to reinsure me that when I call you for help.. I am getting the exact help I need..:)

 

[HOOPDEEZ]

I think Ich could certainly take longer to be eliminated than 72 days, and that it could certainly be gone in far less time. The longer you wait the less likely Ich will be present, and I don't think you would go wrong with 72 days. I think Corlini was right in saying that there are other unknown mechanisms that make the excystment asynchronous. However temperature could definitely play a role in the process. Heres why I have this stance:

I wrote a thesis paper on phenotypic plasticity. -wish I could find it right now, but this was 11 years ago!- (Defined by wikipedia:p) "Phenotypic plasticity can be defined as the ability of one genotype to produce more than one phenotype when exposed to different environments. Phenotypic plasticity is the ability of an organism to change its phenotype in response to changes in the environment."

Phenotype meaning the observable characteristics of an organism.
Genotype meaning the genes of the organism.

A good example of Phenotypic Plasticity would be this scenario:
If you were to take two identical trout (Twins:rolleyes:) and put one in a river and one in a lake, as they develop the lake trout will generally become larger and laterally compressed, where as the river trout will be more rounded and smaller. Same genes, different looks

The paper I wrote was based on 3 different studies done on eggs of various salamanders, frogs, and spiders. What all 3 studies had in common is that when there were egg eating predators around, the eggs could detect the chemical cues of those predators and in all organisms studied the incubation period of the eggs with predators around them was shortened versus eggs with no predators. Also (and I can't remember if all the studies had this info or just one) eggs where there were predators that preyed on juveniles (and not eggs), the eggs would extend their incubation period. (this is very simplified for brevity's sake!)

I Believe Ich could respond to temperature due to phenotypic plasticity. Also I think Ich in its various stages could respond to chemical cues from predators and especially hosts in our tanks. It makes sense that Ich could vary its phenotype based on the conditions of our tanks, this could account for the asynchronous excystment. Hypothetically it is possible that Ich could extend its encystment stage because there are no hosts nearby. We certainly don't know everthing about Ich and its mechanisms, but I hope this tid bit gets some wheels turning for a good disscusion! Meanwhile I'm gonna look for that paper I wrote years ago
-Jeff

 

[cmcoker]

I think Ich could certainly take longer to be eliminated than 72 days, and that it could certainly be gone in far less time. The longer you wait the less likely Ich will be present, and I don't think you would go wrong with 72 days. I think Corlini was right in saying that there are other unknown mechanisms that make the excystment asynchronous. However temperature could definitely play a role in the process. Heres why I have this stance:

I wrote a thesis paper on phenotypic plasticity. -wish I could find it right now, but this was 11 years ago!- (Defined by wikipedia:p) "Phenotypic plasticity can be defined as the ability of one genotype to produce more than one phenotype when exposed to different environments. Phenotypic plasticity is the ability of an organism to change its phenotype in response to changes in the environment."

Phenotype meaning the observable characteristics of an organism.
Genotype meaning the genes of the organism.

A good example of Phenotypic Plasticity would be this scenario:
If you were to take two identical trout (Twins:rolleyes:) and put one in a river and one in a lake, as they develop the lake trout will generally become larger and laterally compressed, where as the river trout will be more rounded and smaller. Same genes, different looks

The paper I wrote was based on 3 different studies done on eggs of various salamanders, frogs, and spiders. What all 3 studies had in common is that when there were egg eating predators around, the eggs could detect the chemical cues of those predators and in all organisms studied the incubation period of the eggs with predators around them was shortened versus eggs with no predators. Also (and I can't remember if all the studies had this info or just one) eggs where there were predators that preyed on juveniles (and not eggs), the eggs would extend their incubation period. (this is very simplified for brevity's sake!)

I Believe Ich could respond to temperature due to phenotypic plasticity. Also I think Ich in its various stages could respond to chemical cues from predators and especially hosts in our tanks. It makes sense that Ich could vary its phenotype based on the conditions of our tanks, this could account for the asynchronous excystment. Hypothetically it is possible that Ich could extend its encystment stage because there are no hosts nearby. We certainly don't know everthing about Ich and its mechanisms, but I hope this tid bit gets some wheels turning for a good disscusion! Meanwhile I'm gonna look for that paper I wrote years ago
-Jeff

This makes sense to me. Fleas also have variable hatch time, up to like 6 months, from the pupae stage. They will stagger hatch, and use cues that a host may be nearby such as vibration and the presence of co2. We (veterinary field) have people vaccum excessively to help stimulate the hatch, since they are impervious to pesticides during this stage.

I wish we knew if this was a factor and what they are triggering from. It would be interesting if you could put a Molly in the fallow tank in an acclimation box or something for 70 hour periods to encourage the Tomonts to hatch, and then remove the fish to freshwater... And somehow shorten the fallow period this way, or shorten snail/coral qt time..

 

[jeff williams]

Based on table one above ,http://s1276.photobucket.com/user/Humblefish123/media/LARC/Table1_zpsfwf5goxj.jpg.html
7 days is the longest recorded time the ick remained on the fish, in your research have you seen any longer times that 7 days? In not then theoretically the 7 days in cu then transferred to a sterile tank you've spoke of should work. The only thing I can think of that could foil this is I have heard the ick can encyst on the fish or in its gills. However the data above suggests this is not possible because the tomont usually cannot encyst on a soft surface and if is does it probably won't be successful in "hatching so to speak"

 

[Humblefish]

Based on table one above ,http://s1276.photobucket.com/user/Humblefish123/media/LARC/Table1_zpsfwf5goxj.jpg.html
7 days is the longest recorded time the ick remained on the fish, in your research have you seen any longer times that 7 days? In not then theoretically the 7 days in cu then transferred to a sterile tank you've spoke of should work. The only thing I can think of that could foil this is I have heard the ick can encyst on the fish or in its gills. However the data above suggests this is not possible because the tomont usually cannot encyst on a soft surface and if is does it probably won't be successful in "hatching so to speak"

I've personally never encountered a strain of ich where trophonts remained on a fish for longer than 7 days before dropping off. Every study I've ever read has reported the same. So, 10 days (wiggle room) worth of therapeutic copper or CP, and then a transfer should do it. I don't talk about this method often because, quite frankly, I'm worried about people half-assing it. :p

There is no margin for error, no mistakes can be made, everything must be precise when QTing this way. These are things that are right up my alley, but I can see how it might not work for everyone.

 

[drstardust]

I've personally never encountered a strain of ich where trophonts remained on a fish for longer than 7 days before dropping off. Every study I've ever read has reported the same. So, 10 days (wiggle room) worth of therapeutic copper or CP, and then a transfer should do it. I don't talk about this method often because, quite frankly, I'm worried about people half-assing it. :p
There is no margin for error, no mistakes can be made, everything must be precise when QTing this way. These are things that are right up my alley, but I can see how it might not work for everyone.

Can you please elaborate on this method? What about it leaves no margin for error (more so than any other QT method)? What about it is so challenging?

 

[4FordFamily]

Can you please elaborate on this method? What about it leaves no margin for error (more so than any other QT method)? What about it is so challenging?

Cross contaminate with a net, qt too close to the original qt, a non completely sterile tank, sharing of any equipment at all or anything wet from the other tank, sharing arms with another tank (reaching in to one then reaching in to the other), sharing drain hoses or fill hoses, using buckets with water from another tank that have not dried, etc.

Essentially it’s very easy to cross contaminate and make a mistake.

 

[drstardust]

Essentially it’s very easy to cross contaminate and make a mistake.

Indeed. But this can be said for all QT scenarios, no?

 

[4FordFamily]

Indeed. But this can be said for all QT scenarios, no?

Yes but if 10 days is a good amount of time and you mess up you have 20 more days of cushion — smaller margin of error.

 

[drstardust]

Certainly true. So let's say I'm up to the challenge. If I can assure strict biosecurity for those 10 days, do I do anything differently than for a typical CP or copper protocol?
Let's say I put in a fish, put in some Coppersafe and take a couple days to crank it up to therapeutic levels. I then keep things as they are with meticulous checking of copper levels for 10 days. I then plop the fish into a separate (ich-free lol) tank for observation, for say 30 days (I suppose I'd do a couple rounds of prazi here). If all is well, fish goes to DT. Is this the gist of it? Or is there more to it to make sure I don't half-butt it, as @Humblefish said

 

[Humblefish]

Cross contaminate with a net, qt too close to the original qt, a non completely sterile tank, sharing of any equipment at all or anything wet from the other tank, sharing arms with another tank (reaching in to one then reaching in to the other), sharing drain hoses or fill hoses, using buckets with water from another tank that have not dried, etc.

Essentially it’s very easy to cross contaminate and make a mistake.

^^ This; plus you must ensure copper or CP remains therapeutic for the entire 10 days. If it drops even once, all bets are off. This is challenging because: a) Copper should be tested twice daily (most people don't want to take the time to do this.) b) It is best to use a professional grade test kit (like this one) every few days to confirm the hobbyist grade test kit you are using on a daily basis is providing an accurate reading.

30 days of copper/CP treatment allows more wiggle room to make mistakes and thus, is more suitable for the casual hobbyist. Not everyone is OCD and hardcore about fish quarantine. ;)

 

[drstardust]

^^ This; plus you must ensure copper or CP remains therapeutic for the entire 10 days. If it drops even once, all bets are off. This is challenging because: a) Copper should be tested twice daily (most people don't want to take the time to do this.) b) It is best to use a professional grade test kit (like this one) every few days to confirm the hobbyist grade test kit you are using on a daily basis is providing an accurate reading.
30 days of copper/CP treatment allows more wiggle room to make mistakes and thus, is more suitable for the casual hobbyist. Not everyone is OCD and hardcore about fish quarantine. ;)

Well thankfully I am OCD with these things and this is my favorite part of the hobby ;)

Seems, however, that using CP would be easier and idiot proof so long as pharma-grade product is used and dosed adequately. Have you personally used CP for such a short duration?

P.S. Thank you both for the discussion. I'm really into studying fish infectious disease and love to learn all I can.

 

[jeff williams]

I would believe cp would have just as much chance for error because light affects cp and there is no way for hobbyists have to measure it in the tank

 

[drstardust]

I would believe cp would have just as much chance for error because light affects cp and there is no way for hobbyists have to measure it in the tank

Chance for error, of course. But as we can't measure it, the course would consist of trusting the dosage and moving forward i.e., less work for the hobbyist :rolleyes: