A Hypocrites View on Not Using Quarantine

Lasse

10K Club member
View Badges
Joined
Mar 20, 2016
Messages
11,262
Reaction score
30,666
Location
Källarliden 14 D Bohus, Sweden
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
That fish never had a single spot, never seemed bothered by the ich, and if I had run an observational-only QT... she would not have been treated. But, that didn’t stop her from bringing parasites into my tank.

You assume this - but you can´t be sure. There can be other explanations that could be as likely as this was the fish that bring it in. Everybody assume that the dormant stage of the ich parasites only can be 72 days - not longer. This 72 days is based on one investigation and only show that the parasite can be dormant at least 72 days. Not that it is the maximal dormant time. Knowing something about parasites and their way of surviving time - I would not be surprised if ich parasites could be dormant for years. My background is fish farming. In an recirculated eel farm we had problems with flatworms from the genera Dactylogyrus (your common name for these is flukes and in this case gill flukes) In the beginning – it was enough with formalin treatment every third to second week. – this become down to lesser than 1 week. This flatworm is an egg layer and the eggs hatched in our biofilters. We developed a method with an anthelmintic (if I remember right – it was Fenbendazole). We use a second treatment after known period of hatching and in order to be safe – a third just after the second. It works for 2-3 months – suddenly new parasites start to hatch with much longer dormant stage than previous known. This say two thing – flukes can develop and stay in closed system and you can´t have a safe period.

How do you prevent these full tank wipe-outs if fish can carry parasites without obvious symptoms? My mandarin is not the first fish to be a carrier. Certain wrasses, rabbitfish, and other hearty fish with thick slime coats have also been known to carry parasites with little or no symptoms.

An observation QT is effective in this case. If the fish have one or two parasites you miss. It will be between 200 and 400 in a week and between 40 000 to 80 000 in two or three weeks. This you will notice. TT in 7 to 10 days is also effective in this case.

And let us put it this way – if you have not prophylactic treated your old fishes, don´t try to extinct the system from pathogens – had one or two ich parasites caused this outbreak?

Hi Lasse,

What do Europeans use to treat fish disease and what QT procedures do they follow?

During the last 15 years – I have helped a friend of mine and around 20 000 (or more) SW fishes have passed my hands – direct imported from Asia and maybe 2 – 3000 fish from other European vendors and some from the US. Brook and ich have been the diseases I have seen. Never ever seen any flukes – and not velvet. We never treat prophylactic – just observe and treat if needed. Ich is treated with copper and brook is so seldom that a fast sorting out of infected fishes helps. My friend’s system have two very effective UV-C (TMC manufactured pro systems) and he run a little bit lower salinity. Its all. In my SW aquaria I have seen ich once (in two clowns) Solved it with taking out the two with symptoms and run TT (or in my case BT – bucket transfer method) and run rather much ozone in the main display for three weeks. Never come back – and there was a tang in that system!


Nowadays I always let my newcomers be in my refugium for 1 to 2 weeks in order to just relax and have a smooth transfer to my DT. With this way of handling – they also get the same smell as the other fishes and I have notice that much of the earlier bullying has disappear. They also get a stress-free environment and that favour their possibility to adapt to the microorganisms of my DT – without being sick. If I should run an observation DT – it would be in a normal aquarium with hiding places and a few other friendly fishes and I would do WC with help of my DT water. This will be as a slow vaccination

Sincerely Lasse
 

MnFish1

10K Club member
View Badges
Joined
Dec 28, 2016
Messages
24,326
Reaction score
23,111
Location
Midwest
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
That’s a few hypotheses that cannot be proven.

I don’t want to hijack the thread but genuinely curious of the actual research into this.

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1755-1315/137/1/012094/pdf

Well - if you look at the article (posted many time about the incidence of CI in reef fish in Vietnam - you'll see that at various times of the year - up to >80& of certain species kept show active CI infection - yet 80 percent of the fish aren't dying on the reef...

From this article (Burgess, 1997): (there are others more recent am just on the way to an appointment will try to pm you later)
Cryptocaryon irritans Brown 1951, the cause of ‘white spot disease’ in marine fish: an update
Any event which subsequently diminishes the ®sh's immunity, such as physiological stress due to adverse environmental conditions or the introduction of non-immune ®sh to the aquarium, could enable the parasite population to increase rapidly, causing a renewed outbreak of cryptocaryonosis. A similar association between acquired immunity and epidemics has been described for I. multi®liis (Dickerson and Dawe, 1995).
 

MnFish1

10K Club member
View Badges
Joined
Dec 28, 2016
Messages
24,326
Reaction score
23,111
Location
Midwest
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
I don't know that I've ever seen any research that indicates that any fish are immune to ich/velvet. Source?

http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/pdffiles/FA/FA16400.pdf

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).

More targeted development of a vaccine to protect againstCryptocaryon irritans has been ongoing for a number of years (Yambot and Song 2006; Hatanaka 2007; Luo et al. 2007; Bai et al. 2008), and preliminary results are encourag- ing. However, vaccine development is a lengthy process, and no commercial vaccines are currently available.
 

ReefWithCare

Valuable Member
View Badges
Joined
Mar 3, 2016
Messages
1,059
Reaction score
723
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
You assume this - but you can´t be sure. There can be other explanations that could be as likely as this was the fish that bring it in. Everybody assume that the dormant stage of the ich parasites only can be 72 days - not longer. This 72 days is based on one investigation and only show that the parasite can be dormant at least 72 days. Not that it is the maximal dormant time. Knowing something about parasites and their way of surviving time - I would not be surprised if ich parasites could be dormant for years. My background is fish farming. In an recirculated eel farm we had problems with flatworms from the genera Dactylogyrus (your common name for these is flukes and in this case gill flukes) In the beginning – it was enough with formalin treatment every third to second week. – this become down to lesser than 1 week. This flatworm is an egg layer and the eggs hatched in our biofilters. We developed a method with an anthelmintic (if I remember right – it was Fenbendazole). We use a second treatment after known period of hatching and in order to be safe – a third just after the second. It works for 2-3 months – suddenly new parasites start to hatch with much longer dormant stage than previous known. This say two thing – flukes can develop and stay in closed system and you can´t have a safe period.



An observation QT is effective in this case. If the fish have one or two parasites you miss. It will be between 200 and 400 in a week and between 40 000 to 80 000 in two or three weeks. This you will notice. TT in 7 to 10 days is also effective in this case.

And let us put it this way – if you have not prophylactic treated your old fishes, don´t try to extinct the system from pathogens – had one or two ich parasites caused this outbreak?



During the last 15 years – I have helped a friend of mine and around 20 000 (or more) SW fishes have passed my hands – direct imported from Asia and maybe 2 – 3000 fish from other European vendors and some from the US. Brook and ich have been the diseases I have seen. Never ever seen any flukes – and not velvet. We never treat prophylactic – just observe and treat if needed. Ich is treated with copper and brook is so seldom that a fast sorting out of infected fishes helps. My friend’s system have two very effective UV-C (TMC manufactured pro systems) and he run a little bit lower salinity. Its all. In my SW aquaria I have seen ich once (in two clowns) Solved it with taking out the two with symptoms and run TT (or in my case BT – bucket transfer method) and run rather much ozone in the main display for three weeks. Never come back – and there was a tang in that system!


Nowadays I always let my newcomers be in my refugium for 1 to 2 weeks in order to just relax and have a smooth transfer to my DT. With this way of handling – they also get the same smell as the other fishes and I have notice that much of the earlier bullying has disappear. They also get a stress-free environment and that favour their possibility to adapt to the microorganisms of my DT – without being sick. If I should run an observation DT – it would be in a normal aquarium with hiding places and a few other friendly fishes and I would do WC with help of my DT water. This will be as a slow vaccination

Sincerely Lasse

I feel a lot better seeing how I have a TMC Vecton UVC and Oxygentator in my display.

I have been thinking about going back to observe only for 30 days. I’m starting to question the procedures after I had a wrasse go blind on me (at least it seems blind)
 

bluprntguy

Well-Known Member
View Badges
Joined
Dec 18, 2013
Messages
877
Reaction score
1,316
Location
San Francisco
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1755-1315/137/1/012094/pdf
Well - if you look at the article (posted many time about the incidence of CI in reef fish in Vietnam - you'll see that at various times of the year - up to >80& of certain species kept show active CI infection - yet 80 percent of the fish aren't dying on the reef...

In nature almost every fish will have exposure to ich. They usually just get one or two trophonts because the ich has a much harder journey to find a host in nature. In our captive systems, we confine ich outbreaks to a very small number of fish, in a very small volume of water, which makes it a much larger problem for the fish involved.

The paper calls it an immunity, but it sounds more like a suppression of the symptoms as it clearly says they continue to be carriers, which means that the trophonts must still be infecting the fish in order to survive and complete the lifecycle.
 

Lasse

10K Club member
View Badges
Joined
Mar 20, 2016
Messages
11,262
Reaction score
30,666
Location
Källarliden 14 D Bohus, Sweden
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Is there any evidence of immunity being suppressed in F1 or F2 captive bred fish or later generations? I’ve been looking into this and struggle to find much.

I’m familiar with research into farmed fish and there’s not abundance of evidence to point out significant suppression of immunity which I assume would result due to inbreeding?!

You misunderstand me. I did not mean to say that captive bread fish have suppressed immunity. I only say that it has been shown that fish have a specific acquired immune system too – as we human have. But this system has to be activated by a specific pathogen first in order to produce specific antibodies for that specific pathogen. So even if captive breed fish can form these specific antibodies – they have not meet any of these pathogens and therefore could be very sensitive to normal bacteria that wild fish can handle with help of the specific defence system. There is a lot of literature of fish specific immune system – just google and there is in aquaculture even vaccines developed. For the book – I do not see vaccines as a prophylactic treatment.

A couple of years ago we had two major wholesales of fresh water fish here in south of Sweden. The LFS was divided into two groups of favourite suppliers – saying that the other (that they did not use) delivered sick fishes. The problem was that the mixed the fishes from different suppliers in the same aquaria and they were used of different microbial floraWhen LFS start to have fishes from different suppliers in different aquaria and slowly mix the water during time – it works out and the fish get used of a greater microfauna.


It’s like me going to Spain and drink their water – I get sick. And the other way around.

For the 3, arguably, most common aquarium fish ailments - ich, velvets and flukes - it’s highly unlikely that wild fish actually acquire immunity considering that infections in the wild would be predisposed to be mild and relatively short at least for the first 2 to provoke strong immune response.

Tihs is exact the way a specific acquired immune system works – low contact with pathogens activate the inherent production of antibodies designed to fight just that microorganism – and the fish is prepared for a massive attack. This is the natural vaccine model

As far is instinctive behaviors I can’t imagine none would be inherited but your anecdote stands.

All I can say is that we all get very surprised when we saw how the captive bred fish react when they come down to the other fishes. We thought that the behaviour to seek cover was a genetic coded behaviour – but these 100 fishes show another thing – seeking cover for these three species of Clown fish was certainly a learned behaviour.

Sincerely Lasse
 
Last edited:

Lasse

10K Club member
View Badges
Joined
Mar 20, 2016
Messages
11,262
Reaction score
30,666
Location
Källarliden 14 D Bohus, Sweden
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
In nature almost every fish will have exposure to ich. They usually just get one or two trophonts because the ich has a much harder journey to find a host in nature. In our captive systems, we confine ich outbreaks to a very small number of fish, in a very small volume of water, which makes it a much larger problem for the fish involved.

The paper calls it an immunity, but it sounds more like a suppression of the symptoms as it clearly says they continue to be carriers, which means that the trophonts must still be infecting the fish in order to survive and complete the lifecycle.

There is vaccines developed for Ich but the problem is that it looks like it had to be adapted for every strain of ich - and there is many

Sincerely Lasse
 

MnFish1

10K Club member
View Badges
Joined
Dec 28, 2016
Messages
24,326
Reaction score
23,111
Location
Midwest
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
In nature almost every fish will have exposure to ich. They usually just get one or two trophonts because the ich has a much harder journey to find a host in nature. In our captive systems, we confine ich outbreaks to a very small number of fish, in a very small volume of water, which makes it a much larger problem for the fish involved.

The paper calls it an immunity, but it sounds more like a suppression of the symptoms as it clearly says they continue to be carriers, which means that the trophonts must still be infecting the fish in order to survive and complete the lifecycle.
With all due respect you’re incorrect. Check out the recent article regarding seasonal incidence of ci in Vietnam.
 
OP
OP
Brew12

Brew12

Electrical Gru
View Badges
Joined
Aug 14, 2016
Messages
22,488
Reaction score
61,061
Location
Decatur, AL
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I understand the concerns with prophylactic treatment... but I feel like there is no really good way to protect my tank otherwise.
I don't disagree, which is why I label myself a hypocrite. I have continued to treat and it has worked with me. I do struggle with the fact I have lost so many fish in the QT process. Would I have lost fewer had I skipped the prophylactic treatment? I can't say, but it is possible.

Until I can find another method to be SURE a new addition won’t take out my entire community with an unseen pathogen... I’m just not sure I see an alternative?
I guess I would ask this... what will you do when the US joins the rest of the world and bans the use of antibiotics and possibly copper without a vet prescription? This isn't an if, it is a when. Do we wait until prophylactic treatment stops working or the medications become banned before we start figuring out a way to care for fish without them?

I would suggest that we need to start aggressively studying how to keep fish without relying on medications. Let's start sharing information and experience now. Let's try to figure out what has been working and what hasn't before we are forced into it.
 
OP
OP
Brew12

Brew12

Electrical Gru
View Badges
Joined
Aug 14, 2016
Messages
22,488
Reaction score
61,061
Location
Decatur, AL
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
The paper calls it an immunity, but it sounds more like a suppression of the symptoms as it clearly says they continue to be carriers, which means that the trophonts must still be infecting the fish in order to survive and complete the lifecycle.
The immunity works by greatly reducing the parasites ability to feed, which reduces its reproductive rate. So the fish isn't likely to be harmed by the parasite, but it can still serve as a host.
 

bluprntguy

Well-Known Member
View Badges
Joined
Dec 18, 2013
Messages
877
Reaction score
1,316
Location
San Francisco
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
The immunity works by greatly reducing the parasites ability to feed, which reduces its reproductive rate. So the fish isn't likely to be harmed by the parasite, but it can still serve as a host.

I wouldn't call that an immunity. It's a resistance at best.
 
OP
OP
Brew12

Brew12

Electrical Gru
View Badges
Joined
Aug 14, 2016
Messages
22,488
Reaction score
61,061
Location
Decatur, AL
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
You misunderstand me. I did not mean to say that captive bread fish have suppressed immunity. I only say that it has been shown that fish have a specific acquired immune system too – as we human have. But this system has to be activated by a specific pathogen first in order to produce specific antibodies for that specific pathogen. So even if captive breed fish can form these specific antibodies – they have not meet any of these pathogens and therefore could be very sensitive to normal bacteria that wild fish can handle with help of the specific defence system. There is a lot of literature of fish specific immune system – just google and there is in aquaculture even vaccines developed. For the book – I do not see vaccines as a prophylactic treatment.

A couple of years ago we had two major wholesales of fresh water fish here in south of Sweden. The LFS was divided into two groups of favourite suppliers – saying that the other (that they did not use) delivered sick fishes. The problem was that the mixed the fishes from different suppliers in the same aquaria and they were used of different microbial floraWhen LFS start to have fishes from different suppliers in different aquaria and slowly mix the water during time – it works out and the fish get used of a greater macrofauna.


It’s like me going to Spain and drink their water – I get sick. And the other way around.



Tihs is exact the way a specific acquired immune system works – low contact with pathogens activate the inherent production of antibodies designed to fight just that microorganism – and the fish is prepared for a massive attack. This is the natural vaccine model



All I can say is that we all get very surprised when we saw how the captive bred fish react when they come down to the other fishes. We thought that the behaviour to seek cover was a genetic coded behaviour – but these 100 fishes show another thing – seeking cover for these three species of Clown fish was certainly a learned behaviour.

Sincerely Lasse
Thank you Lasse, this is an excellent explanation!
 
OP
OP
Brew12

Brew12

Electrical Gru
View Badges
Joined
Aug 14, 2016
Messages
22,488
Reaction score
61,061
Location
Decatur, AL
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I wouldn't call that an immunity. It's a resistance at best.
I do agree that it sounds more like a resistance to me also, but immunity is the more commonly accepted term and is what is used by the scientists who study it.
 

bluprntguy

Well-Known Member
View Badges
Joined
Dec 18, 2013
Messages
877
Reaction score
1,316
Location
San Francisco
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
With all due respect you’re incorrect. Check out the recent article regarding seasonal incidence of ci in Vietnam.

I did. It shows an average intensity of around 7-8 of the fish that were infected. It also showed seasonal changes where ich was significantly less prevalent.

"In fact, Cryptocaryon irritans is rare in the wild, and even more unlikely to be lethal (Bunkley-Williams & Williams, 1994). Ich is truly a disease that exploits the conditions of captivity to reproduce and easily find suitable hosts."
http://www.reefkeeping.com/issues/2003-08/sp/index.php
 
OP
OP
Brew12

Brew12

Electrical Gru
View Badges
Joined
Aug 14, 2016
Messages
22,488
Reaction score
61,061
Location
Decatur, AL
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I don't see how copper could be banned?
Well, copper itself isn't banned. I believe you can still get pure copper sulfate. Copper based fish medication has been banned in Canada. That shocked me. The antibiotics not so much.
 

MnFish1

10K Club member
View Badges
Joined
Dec 28, 2016
Messages
24,326
Reaction score
23,111
Location
Midwest
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
I do agree that it sounds more like a resistance to me also, but immunity is the more commonly accepted term and is what is used by the scientists who study it.
Your both not quite correct. It’s immunity. And it’s dicumented Acquiredimmuniry That said the higher the infection level likely the more immunity that’s developed. When a fish is no immune and has its first infection if it survives it becomes i mu e. Over time that immunity drops off. But with a secondary infection it will be much less. Unless the parasite numbers are overwhelming. I. Which case it acts like an initial infection again.

Edit sorry this was from my phone
 
Last edited:
Back
Top