Poll: Do You QT? See where you stack up!

[brandon429]

a quick tally of posts so far, correct if wrong:

any form of non quarantine success is begat only by two factors, luck and living near the ocean so that all of the tank is made from the ocean and not a lfs. if it wasn't luck, then all the quarantiners could just repeat the setup arrangement and fish sourcing, and come out fish disease free

but from that mix, we see quarantiners posting the trends of fish surviving, to a high statistical degree.


if you are not reefing under those conditions, we'd better QT in order to be able to have fish at all.... as the non qt group has nothing to offer your tank from the pet store in terms of what can be predicted in a new keeper's tank. whatever happens is what happens

how many ich invasions do we see after following the right quarantine>? I personally don't keep fish so I don't know firsthand, only going off posts. the stat significance weighs heavily on the qt process for any new keeper it seems





I value non quarantining approach when it comes with six links of tanks guided and matured that way, not just a home tank. The quarantiners do provide that standard.

As I read, there is a way to not QT the substrate nor the corals nor the inverts.

Set all that up as we do in fishless reef tanks, then go fallow w no fish 76 days, then introduce only fish that went through QT.

The non QT of the substrates is the dinoflagellates/bryopsis risk and we have post facto's for most of those.

the fallow part prepped the tank that wasn't originally substrate quarantined, only to accept fish that went through qt somewhere else.

 

[iemsparticus]

Number 1. Relax bud. I can post my opinion whether repeated on here or not. So can everyone on here.

Number 2. The reason it’s shocking to me is if you're not going quarantine your corals and or inverts, you’re essentially not quarantining at all. The reason one would quarantine to begin with is to have a healthy fish and to not bring in any kind of disease into the display. Corals and inverts can equally bring in any of the diseases that can affect fish. They might not host the parasite but they do in fact carry them. Some of the most well known members on here have made it quite appearent that corals and inverts can carry over diseases. Which is where my post came from. If you’re going to quarantine half why do any to begin with. You’re just taking as much of a risk as not quarantining at all.

Number 3. This topic always gets people offended in all types of ways. I really don’t care what you do or how you do it. It was my opinion. If you disagree, sounds good as I will disagree with you and continuing you doing it my way :D

I understand your argument, but I think it’s fair to point out that you are oversimplifying things. Inverts CAN carry parasites in cyst form, it’s true... but when you QT fish you are not JUST worried about parasites. You are also looking to make sure your fish don’t have bacterial or fungal infections, worms, etc... all of which are NOT brought in by inverts. So while it’s true that you run the risk of introducing parasites to your DT even if you QT all fish and not inverts, you still eliminate a lot of other fish ailements by only QTing fishes. So you aren’t undoing EVERYTHING you did by QTing fishes if you don’t QT inverts.

Tl;dr... your concern isn’t unfounded, but it is overstated. :)

 

[Denisk]

I understand your argument, but I think it’s fair to point out that you are oversimplifying things. Inverts CAN carry parasites in cyst form, it’s true... but when you QT fish you are not JUST worried about parasites. You are also looking to make sure your fish don’t have bacterial or fungal infections, worms, etc... all of which are NOT brought in by inverts. So while it’s true that you run the risk of introducing parasites to your DT even if you QT all fish and not inverts, you still eliminate a lot of other fish ailements by only QTing fishes. So you aren’t undoing EVERYTHING you did by QTing fishes if you don’t QT inverts.

Tl;dr... your concern isn’t unfounded, but it is overstated. :)

No I completely understand. I 100% agree there. I think it’s a matter of then going the whole 9 yards then. I am not opposed to anyone quarantine lol. I’m 100% for whatever works for that person. I think looking at people’s builds on here when you spend 15k plus on your tanks, you’ll want to quarantine. These people also have dedicated fish rooms haha. But there are definitely people who don’t have the funds to do so either. I know people throw around it’s just a tank, hob, and a heater but it’s also time consuming.

There really is no right or wrong. I say everyone should do they feel is right. Some people learn the hard way and that’s also part of the hobby. I also don’t quarantine but that works for me. I also have 10 tanks in my garage that I can tear it down and quarantine if all the fish were getting sick or dying.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley Verified Community Expert]

DD don't actually claim to quarantine .... I believe they call it 'conditioning' and do still recommend a period of quarantine. I had a trio of DD anthias come in with uronema (or maybe marine tuberculosis) on one occasion. Uronema is one parasite you REALLY don't want in your display. Ich is a walk in the park by comparison.

I'm not sure what you are referring to, but they repeat the word quarantine many times in the description, and it is far more extensive than I would be doing myself. Perhaps you do more.

http://www.liveaquaria.com/general/general.cfm?general_pagesid=425

 

[Brew12]

If we, as people, kept ourselves in a completely sterile environment, the moment we were introduced to a disease we would have no built up immune system to fight it and more than likely would quickly succumb. I see this in my own life. As a bank teller, I encounter who knows what germs on a daily basis (cash has got to be one of the dirtiest things ever!) but I firmly believe it is that constant contact with germs that keeps me healthy. I get sick maybe once a year, and usually just a cold.

I have no problem with people not wanting to quarantine and even encourage some people not to based on a system of maintaining a fishes natural immunity.

I do have to reject this part of the discussion. The purpose of QT is not to produce a sterile environment. The vast majority of people who QT do it to target 3 main parasites. It is impossible to run a sterile reef tank and we do not worry about most bacteria. A better way of looking at it would be if your child has lice. Do you leave it on their head and let them live with it or do you try to eradicate it?

 

[MnFish1]

A few posts have repeated this, without any kind of rationale ..... I've pointed out why I don't QT corals/inverts. Make the argument!

Here you go. http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2003/11/mini

>>Hard surfaces such as sand, rock, glass, equipment and even some invertebrates (invertebrates do not become infected) can serve as attachment sites for tomonts (Burgess, 1992). If any of these objects are removed from an infected tank or system and placed into another aquarium they may carry some tomonts or cysts. It is also theoretically possible to import an infection when using live foods of marine origin.<<

As I said in my post, If a tank from which you obtained live rock/coral/etc has contained fish (which may carry ich asymptomatically and be shedding) within the 76 days prior to purchase, not quarantining these items may lead to problems.

Many people say quarantining fish is overkill for the same reason you say its overkill to QT inverts/coral. That doesn't make their (or your) logic correct. The point is if you are going to spend all the time quarantining your fish properly, it doesn't make sense to me not to quarantine everything properly. Just IMHO.

 

[MnFish1]

I understand your argument, but I think it’s fair to point out that you are oversimplifying things. Inverts CAN carry parasites in cyst form, it’s true... but when you QT fish you are not JUST worried about parasites. You are also looking to make sure your fish don’t have bacterial or fungal infections, worms, etc... all of which are NOT brought in by inverts. So while it’s true that you run the risk of introducing parasites to your DT even if you QT all fish and not inverts, you still eliminate a lot of other fish ailements by only QTing fishes. So you aren’t undoing EVERYTHING you did by QTing fishes if you don’t QT inverts.. :)

Part of the discussion is also whether a person's 'quarantine' system includes empiric treatment for the problems you are talking about above. For example, Fish can have ich or velvet and be asymptomatic. If you just monitor them for a week - what are you really accomplishing? Bacterial and fungal infections that might be found on new fish are not usually 'contagious' to other fish in a display tank (those bacteria are already in the tank anyway). Worms - you may or may not see just by observation. Seems to me the MAIN goal of quarantine is avoiding ich velvet and other parasitic infections.

As to coral - I think there is some evidence (at least its posted often here) that bacterial infections on coral CAN spread to other healthy tissue/specimens - so seems like that would be a reason to quarantine coral.

As to 'live rock' this would perhaps be the most likely cause for an ich outbreak - without leaving that rock 'fallow' for 76 days. (By live rock, I mean live rock that has been in a fish containing aquarium) not in a cycling bin.

 

[want2bsleepy]

I have no problem with people not wanting to quarantine and even encourage some people not to based on a system of maintaining a fishes natural immunity.

I do have to reject this part of the discussion. The purpose of QT is not to produce a sterile environment. The vast majority of people who QT do it to target 3 main parasites. It is impossible to run a sterile reef tank and we do not worry about most bacteria. A better way of looking at it would be if your child has lice. Do you leave it on their head and let them live with it or do you try to eradicate it?

But you are treating your child for lice, which is very stressful and unpleasant, without any evidence of lice. True, the child cannot fight off lice on his own once he gets it, but fish can and do fight off Ich all of the time without treatment. I get your point, but that is an unfair comparison.

 

[MnFish1]

But you are treating your child for lice, which is very stressful and unpleasant, without any evidence of lice. True, the child cannot fight off lice on his own once he gets it, but fish can and do fight off Ich all of the time without treatment. I get your point, but that is an unfair comparison.

The Mortality of Ich is >50% close contact (like a fish farm) - and likely quite a bit higher in a tank (unless some of the tank members have been exposed at some point previously and have some immunity). Children don't die from lice. So - its a little more like giving your kids a measles vaccination - even though most people survive measles, some die and the rest are miserable

 

[brandon429]

by default

if your kid goes to kindergarten, they get lice. default

I myself went through a series of denials, culminating in this is not just dry scalp. after that point, even dry scalp looked to be mobile, it was weird. the way we react must make things 10x harder that was a funny point. poor kids lol.

 

[botheboss]

Everyone disagrees on this subject. I believe some ppl won't reply to this thread because they don't want to be hate shamed into someone else's beliefs on what is right or wrong. I think another good thread would be comparison on ppl who qt and lose fish in qt. Compared to ppl who don't and the number of fish they lose.

I have a buddy of mine who just qts fish. He has lost 2 purple tangs in his qt. I have a separate tank that I condition fish that I think need it and treat if I see something that needs it. My main goal with this is to get fish eating and ready for aquarium life. I don't count this as a qt but I have a purple swimming around in my tank and he doesn't. It was the first purple I purchased, he is now on his 3rd.

 

[Brew12]

But you are treating your child for lice, which is very stressful and unpleasant, without any evidence of lice. True, the child cannot fight off lice on his own once he gets it, but fish can and do fight off Ich all of the time without treatment. I get your point, but that is an unfair comparison.

If a fish has Ich, they don't really fight it off. They remain infected. Their immune system limits the damage the parasite can do but it is still there feeding on the fish. So I agree that it isn't a perfect comparison, but it is much closer to reality than saying it is a sterile environment. I'm confident my fish have very healthy innate immune systems even if they don't have an adaptive immunity towards these common parasites.

I can also say that I know that every LFS by me has Ich in their systems and run copper in their fish systems to mask the symptoms. So even though I may not see signs, I know if it was in that water it was infected.

I actually see a day coming where QT completely falls out of favor and no one does it. I think the hobby needs to get much more expensive before we hit that point. When fish become so expensive that no one in the hobby would consider feeding low quality flake/pellet foods, run large UV systems and only use high quality reliable equipment with redundancy the need for QT will be greatly reduced. The issue is that if you have Ich or Velvet in your system and have a heater failure you can wipe your tank.

 

[MnFish1]

Everyone disagrees on this subject. I believe some ppl won't reply to this thread because they don't want to be hate shamed into someone else's beliefs on what is right or wrong. I think another good thread would be comparison on ppl who qt and lose fish in qt. Compared to ppl who don't and the number of fish they lose. I have a buddy of mine who just qts fish. He has lost 2 purple tangs in his qt. I have a separate tank that I condition fish that I think need it and treat if I see something that needs it. My main goal with this is to get fish eating and ready for aquarium life. I don't count this as a qt but I have a purple swimming around in my tank and he doesn't. It was the first purple I purchased, he is now on his 3rd.

Hate shamed? Editorial comment: To me hate is something quite different from disagreeing with a person's point of view on a message board. Like so many other words in our culture, 'hate' which to me should be reserved for 'really bad negative feelings' is now described as 'disagreement' (IMHO)

There are lots of different ways that people say that they 'QT' - but there are only a couple 'right' ways (if you want to absolutely ensure that you do not have pathogens in your tank). That is not based on my opinion, that is based on science. That said, most people have neither the time, resources, equipment, money, patience to do it the 'right way'. As I posted already - I myself do not have a QT set up - I purchase my livestock (all of it) from a dealer who does it the 'right way' and have never had a problem.

 

[ca1ore]

I'm not sure what you are referring to, but they repeat the word quarantine many times in the description, and it is far more extensive than I would be doing myself. Perhaps you do more.

http://www.liveaquaria.com/general/general.cfm?general_pagesid=425

Hmmn, maybe they do more now. Personal conversation with KK some years ago left me with a somewhat different perspective than the page you referenced.

 

[AcanthurusRex]

Ich/velvet is more analogous to lice that suck your blood in your lungs. There is no immunity involved aside from a resistance to a secondary infection caused by thousands of holes on the victims gills. Ich/velvet are external parasites.
The wholesalers are doing the hobby a great disservice keeping fish in sub-thereputic levels of copper. Chances are good that the parasites have already developed some tolerance of copper.
So far I've purchased fish from SA, ORA, DD and AquaBox. All went through a month of QT with CP.
I don't have a QT system capable of supporting acros for 3 months. I risk the corals and am very selective on where I purchase. I stress when I add corals even from these vendors. This is a big issue for most of us and could be mitigated by a thoughtful R2R vendor.
There are CUC vendors that run fishless systems.

 

[ca1ore]

The reason it’s shocking to me is if you're not going quarantine your corals and or inverts, you’re essentially not quarantining at all. The reason one would quarantine to begin with is to have a healthy fish and to not bring in any kind of disease into the display. Corals and inverts can equally bring in any of the diseases that can affect fish. They might not host the parasite but they do in fact carry them. Some of the most well known members on here have made it quite appearent that corals and inverts can carry over diseases. Which is where my post came from. If you’re going to quarantine half why do any to begin with. You’re just taking as much of a risk as not quarantining at all.

Of course you can post your opinion, I just find those kinds of throw away comments unhelpful. So thank you for sharing your rationale - always open to reconsidering my approach. Corals and inverts certainly can bring in a fish parasite or disease, though not 'equally'. Fish are far more likely carriers, that seems intuitively obvious even if my own long experience in this hobby hadn't largely borne that out for me. I would also suggest that many instances where somebody was 'convinced' that ich came in on a coral, they may in fact have had latent ich in their system all along just waiting for a 'trigger'. It's an un-reconcilable debate, of course, because there is no scientific data one way or the other.

I would also suggest that QT is often misunderstood by the novice reefer ... and fish diseases often over-reacted to. Quarantine protocols are not 100%, never will be and never can be. So it's up to the individual reefer to decide what constitutes appropriate risk. If, and I will make up numbers for illustration, there is a 20% chance of a fish carrying in a disease, the odds are high of a problem becoming significant after a relatively short period of time. After adding only 3 successive fish, you have a 50% change of a disease problem. If, however, there is only a 1% chance of a fish disease being carried in on a coral, the odds after 3 successive introductions are only 3%. It's about risk. So to say that 'if you're not going quarantine your corals and or inverts, you’re essentially not quarantining at all' is patently false. But, we all do what experience and knowledge instructs us to do.

Probably overthinking the whole thing though LOL ........

 

[botheboss]

I was jokingly referring to ppl having to defend themselves but if you wanna take it literally go for it. I agree that qting everything wet is not possible for most, me included. So I do the best I can for my fish.

 

[Jennie]

New to reef tank; what is QT?

Quarantine tank

 

[ca1ore]

If a fish has Ich, they don't really fight it off. They remain infected. Their immune system limits the damage the parasite can do but it is still there feeding on the fish.

A healthy fish will produce a slime coat that allows them to be resistant to varying degrees. I know that I have ich in my system; have had for 5 years now, yet the only fish that has ever shown any symptoms (beyond a few initial spots on newcomers) was my Achilles tang, and he only occasionally. I QT still because there are far worse things than ich.

 

[ca1ore]

If a fish has Ich, they don't really fight it off. They remain infected. Their immune system limits the damage the parasite can do but it is still there feeding on the fish.

A healthy fish will produce a slime coat that allows them to be resistant to varying degrees. I know that I have ich in my system; have had for 5 years now, yet the only fish that has ever shown any symptoms (beyond a few initial spots on newcomers) was my Achilles tang, and he only occasionally. I QT still because there are far worse things than ich.