What are most people doing for QT?

[CHSUB]

TTM with h2o2 and Prazipro, been using method since 2012 with formalin but recently switched to h2o2.

 

[kboogie]

TTM with h2o2 and Prazipro, been using method since 2012 with formalin but recently switched to h2o2.

I'm curious why you chose the tank transfer method with H2O2 instead of chelated copper (e.g. CopperSafe)? Do you frequently deal with fish that can't tolerate chelated copper (sharks, rays, eels, etc)?

 

[CHSUB]

I'm curious why you chose the tank transfer method with H2O2 instead of chelated copper (e.g. CopperSafe)? Do you frequently deal with fish that can't tolerate chelated copper (sharks, rays, eels, etc)?

Think it is easy, nothing constantly running, 2 small tanks go in garage when done, seems easier on fish than copper, no testing, much shorter time…have two fish in qt now. Did a dip this morning, transferred fish to new tank, and they ate immediately; done until Wednesday for a second transfer. I started a long time ago with copper, fish didn’t eat and looked sick most of the time.

 

[Mrcote1]

No QT for me anymore. Maybe I did it wrong but I followed all the advice on the various forums and I lost so many fish in QT or shortly after. Switched over to large UV sterilizer on my main tank and haven't looked back since!

I used to do a 20 gallon tank with PVC and treated everything with prazipro and copper

 

[Tahoe61]

I keep a fully cycled IM 14 gallon for fish observation, for corals a fully cycled pico.

 

[kboogie]

I'm curious why you chose the tank transfer method with H2O2 instead of chelated copper (e.g. CopperSafe)? Do you frequently deal with fish that can't tolerate chelated copper (sharks, rays, eels, etc)?

Think it is easy, nothing constantly running, 2 small tanks go in garage when done, seems easier on fish than copper, no testing, much shorter time…have two fish in qt now. Did a dip this morning, transferred fish to new tank, and they ate immediately; done until Wednesday for a second transfer. I started a long time ago with copper, fish didn’t eat and looked sick most of the time.

Interesting. I’m sorry to hear about the difficulties you had with copper based QT. I ask my questions because I’m really into understanding people behaviors and how misperception plays into behaviors. I’ve been doing a lot research into the effectiveness of various quarantine protocols. One of the incorrect justifications people use as a con to copper based QT is based on the issues with ionic copper vs chelated copper which is 97% as effective as ionic copper while having much lower toxicity to fish.

I find people who struggle with copper based QT do have difficulties with appropriately building up to the proper level and managing ammonia. The management of ammonia is the one item I wish the recommended protocol was different. I can totally see how people can lose fish in the mid to lower level of hardiness because of ammonia. I really wish the protocol was to use an established biological filter and spoke about ways of keeping established biological media thriving without a full setup. I know in my newest QT setup, I would have lost more delicate fish during the higher ammonia period. I keep my QT tanks up because I’m usually adding fish regularly.

The research shows the mortality rate from properly executed copper QT is 4% vs 25% for no QT. I haven’t found peer reviewed stats for TTM or H2O2, but I plan on finding good data.

I know the research says H2O2 has an 80% kill rate where chelated copper is 92% and ionic copper is 95% to 97%. Given you are doing TTM with H2O2 as dip to boost the process the lower kill rate is not important because the true thing being measured is TTM. I need to find peer reviewed scientific observations for TTM. Unfortunately, the overwhelming majority of the information on TTM is from hobbyists which is not reliable and highly vulnerable to perceived results versus scientifically verifiable and quantifiable.

I personally, feel TTM is more stressful on the fish because when executed according to what one should do to avoid mishaps you are doing daily transfers and dips which feels highly stressful but I don’t have peer reviewed stats so I can’t back up the opinion.

At the end of the day you have a process that works for you and you feel good about.

 

[kboogie]

I forgot to answer the original question. I do copper and Prazi based QT using an accelerated version of the current quarantine protocol put out by Jay. I accelerate it by combining the Prazi and copper treatments to cut three weeks off the process. I do this based on the specifics of the fish. If I’m dealing with less hardy fish then those steps are not combined.

My research into the science of QT has found 30 days of therapeutic copper is the shortest time period to get 95 - 99%% effectiveness. I know some people do 14 days and that is only 83% effective.

 

[CHSUB]

Interesting. I’m sorry to hear about the difficulties you had with copper based QT. I ask my questions because I’m really into understanding people behaviors and how misperception plays into behaviors. I’ve been doing a lot research into the effectiveness of various quarantine protocols. One of the incorrect justifications people use as a con to copper based QT is based on the issues with ionic copper vs chelated copper which is 97% as effective as ionic copper while having much lower toxicity to fish.

I find people who struggle with copper based QT do have difficulties with appropriately building up to the proper level and managing ammonia. The management of ammonia is the one item I wish the recommended protocol was different. I can totally see how people can lose fish in the mid to lower level of hardiness because of ammonia. I really wish the protocol was to use an established biological filter and spoke about ways of keeping established biological media thriving without a full setup. I know in my newest QT setup, I would have lost more delicate fish during the higher ammonia period. I keep my QT tanks up because I’m usually adding fish regularly.

The research shows the mortality rate from properly executed copper QT is 4% vs 25% for no QT. I haven’t found peer reviewed stats for TTM or H2O2, but I plan on finding good data.

I know the research says H2O2 has an 80% kill rate where chelated copper is 92% and ionic copper is 95% to 97%. Given you are doing TTM with H2O2 as dip to boost the process the lower kill rate is not important because the true thing being measured is TTM. I need to find peer reviewed scientific observations for TTM. Unfortunately, the overwhelming majority of the information on TTM is from hobbyists which is not reliable and highly vulnerable to perceived results versus scientifically verifiable and quantifiable.

I personally, feel TTM is more stressful on the fish because when executed according to what one should do to avoid mishaps you are doing daily transfers and dips which feels highly stressful but I don’t have peer reviewed stats so I can’t back up the opinion.

At the end of the day you have a process that works for you and you feel good about.

With TTM and according to University of Florida it is very effective. However there are obvious drawbacks that really only make it possible for hobbyists to execute properly. So seems doubtful public aquariums, institutions and fish farms would bother with it. Jay on R2R doesn’t like TTM and I would guess most professional would agree. For a hobby with a small tank and few fish, imo, nothing is better. It works for me almost 100% of the time and can only recall 2 lost fish of nearly ~70.

Some pictures going back more than a decade.

Please see here also two purple tile fish which are imo extremely sensitive and made through TTM easily.

 

[kboogie]

Interesting. I’m sorry to hear about the difficulties you had with copper based QT. I ask my questions because I’m really into understanding people behaviors and how misperception plays into behaviors. I’ve been doing a lot research into the effectiveness of various quarantine protocols. One of the incorrect justifications people use as a con to copper based QT is based on the issues with ionic copper vs chelated copper which is 97% as effective as ionic copper while having much lower toxicity to fish.

I find people who struggle with copper based QT do have difficulties with appropriately building up to the proper level and managing ammonia. The management of ammonia is the one item I wish the recommended protocol was different. I can totally see how people can lose fish in the mid to lower level of hardiness because of ammonia. I really wish the protocol was to use an established biological filter and spoke about ways of keeping established biological media thriving without a full setup. I know in my newest QT setup, I would have lost more delicate fish during the higher ammonia period. I keep my QT tanks up because I’m usually adding fish regularly.

The research shows the mortality rate from properly executed copper QT is 4% vs 25% for no QT. I haven’t found peer reviewed stats for TTM or H2O2, but I plan on finding good data.

I know the research says H2O2 has an 80% kill rate where chelated copper is 92% and ionic copper is 95% to 97%. Given you are doing TTM with H2O2 as dip to boost the process the lower kill rate is not important because the true thing being measured is TTM. I need to find peer reviewed scientific observations for TTM. Unfortunately, the overwhelming majority of the information on TTM is from hobbyists which is not reliable and highly vulnerable to perceived results versus scientifically verifiable and quantifiable.

I personally, feel TTM is more stressful on the fish because when executed according to what one should do to avoid mishaps you are doing daily transfers and dips which feels highly stressful but I don’t have peer reviewed stats so I can’t back up the opinion.

At the end of the day you have a process that works for you and you feel good about.

With TTM and according to University of Florida it is very effective. However there are obvious drawbacks that really only make it possible for hobbyists to execute properly. So seems doubtful public aquariums, institutions and fish farms would bother with it. Jay on R2R doesn’t like TTM and I would guess most professional would agree. For a hobby with a small tank and few fish, imo, nothing is better. It works for me almost 100% of the time and can only recall 2 lost fish of nearly ~70.

Some pictures going back more than a decade.

Please see here also two purple tile fish which are imo extremely sensitive and made through TTM easily.

Looks like you are setup well for TTM. I’ve been looking into the stats. The UF article is a good article on various treatments. Unfortunately, it lightly touches on TTM. I’m finding some interesting information around the assumptions.