Possible solution to end RTN forever?!?

[Reefahholic]

I would not expect another attitude, at all times you were absolutely ethical.

My regards!

Ethical...but pushy...

 

[Jose Mayo]

Ethical...but pushy...

Hard science!

 

[Reefahholic]

Hard science!

I had a good time! I learned a lot and really appreciate every person that contributed here. Without you guys...we wouldn't have had a 20 pager!!!

 

[Jose Mayo]

I had a good time! I learned a lot and really appreciate every person that contributed here. Without you guys...we wouldn't have had a 20 pager!!!

This gives a good idea of the seriousness of this subject for reef lovers and the seriousness with which we expect it to be handled ... there may be no greater disappointment in the life of an aquarist than seeing his reef being devastated and have little to do to try to save it.

May the water gods allow the treatment to work and be the definitive solution to this problem as serious as it is unexpected, although we never know how this result was achieved ...

As the ancients say: "It does not matter if the cat is male or female, as long as it catches the mouse"!

Regards

 

[MnFish1]

In the end, all that will matter is whether the treatment works. Only time will bring such an answer, but ... yet on science, disregarding the premises is not a good practice; there is no hierarchy in the facts when all the facts are contributing to a whole. It has been proven in well-conducted (and already mentioned) experiments that simply eliminating the pathogen Philaster lucinda is not able to halt the progression of RTN, so if the treatment we are discussing is capable of stopping the progression of RTN, the probable, from this statement, is that it is also capable of eliminating other factors involved, in addition to eliminating the pathogen Philaster lucinda.

Starting from wrong premises leads us to null results.

Regards

Btw my interpretation was that eliminating ciliates does not halt progression but merely slows it is that your interpretation also? Thanks

 

[Jose Mayo]

Btw my interpretation was that eliminating ciliates does not halt progression but merely slows it is that your interpretation also? Thanks

Yes, it is what all the information leads to conclude ... which imposes many other possibilities for the affirmed results, if they are confirmed.

Regards

 

[Reefahholic]

This gives a good idea of the seriousness of this subject for reef lovers and the seriousness with which we expect it to be handled ... there may be no greater disappointment in the life of an aquarist than seeing his reef being devastated and have little to do to try to save it.

May the water gods allow the treatment to work and be the definitive solution to this problem as serious as it is unexpected, although we never know how this result was achieved ...

As the ancients say: "It does not matter if the cat is male or female, as long as it catches the mouse"!

Regards

Amen. Let this stuff work!

 

[Scott Campbell]

I am not trying to persuade you in the areas of documents just the concept of how to treat each other in the discussion. I gave an example of two known researchers who were ignored by their professional associates until they were "discovered" to have something of value. They had something of value to offer all along but many discounted them for various reasons.

So from what I am learning in this discussion. I see the possibility that the causitive agent is unknown but the greatest amount of destruction is caused by the ciliates. What I mean by that is we may not know the triggering event that pushes the first domino over but the ciliates seem to take opportunity to finish off the host. This is similar to my experience with Tricodina in marine fish.

This still presents the aquarist the opportunity to limit the destruction caused by ciliates and perhaps prevent the total collapse of the colony and or aquarium. So while intervention may be late in the game it still might be the game changer for many at this time. If that is the case then the doctor has still given us an important tool to prevent total wipe outs when used properly. He has still demonstrated an advancement that merits further study and understanding. So as you mentioned he has advanced our fight against the disease and increased our awareness of possible solutions. He may have even found the cure for aquarist but I agree that us to early to be determimed.

I have many friends in the field of medicine and two if them are Nero surgeons. If you understood their training and what their jobs required of them you might cut the good doctor here some slack. I will say this, surgeons in general must be large and in charge to do what they do every day. You would not want them any other way because they save countless lives due to their mind set and training. A word to the wise is sufficient.

I am responding to your post simply because you seem especially supportive of out-of-the-box theorists. (And despite everyone's obvious efforts to wind this thread down. <lol>)

My two experiences with RTN were both similar - I clearly did something stupid that compromised the holobiome of my corals, within 48 hours I lost a grapefruit sized area of SPS corals, no SPS coral seemed any more resistant than others to the progression, and the progression ceased as suddenly as it began. There was no apparent reason to me why the progression stopped. I did nothing to change tank parameters. I did not remove or frag corals. The blast area could easily have been 10 times larger. I just assumed I was luckier than I deserved to be.

Now I am wondering if the Philaster ciliates in my tank limited the overall scope of damage. I doubt few people run as "dirty" a tank as I do. I feed liquid and powdered foods especially heavy with a great deal of live phytoplankton. If any tank has a higher than normal population of ciliate protozoans, it would be my tank. The ability of ciliates to immediately scour clean an area of compromised coral might be the difference between losing a grapefruit-sized patch of coral and losing every SPS coral in the tank. Cleaner tanks with a much lower level of sustained protozoan life might face a greater risk of total loss.

So I have to wonder - would eliminating the ciliates with the Prime product prevent further progression or instead allow the actual causative agent sufficient fuel (and an absence of competition for that fuel) to continue the progression. I am starting to think the Philaster ciliates might be the good guys in all of this.

 

[Lowell Lemon]

I am responding to your post simply because you seem especially supportive of out-of-the-box theorists. (And despite everyone's obvious efforts to wind this thread down. <lol>)

My two experiences with RTN were both similar - I clearly did something stupid that compromised the holobiome of my corals, within 48 hours I lost a grapefruit sized area of SPS corals, no SPS coral seemed any more resistant than others to the progression, and the progression ceased as suddenly as it began. There was no apparent reason to me why the progression stopped. I did nothing to change tank parameters. I did not remove or frag corals. The blast area could easily have been 10 times larger. I just assumed I was luckier than I deserved to be.

Now I am wondering if the Philaster ciliates in my tank limited the overall scope of damage. I doubt few people run as "dirty" a tank as I do. I feed liquid and powdered foods especially heavy with a great deal of live phytoplankton. If any tank has a higher than normal population of ciliate protozoans, it would be my tank. The ability of ciliates to immediately scour clean an area of compromised coral might be the difference between losing a grapefruit-sized patch of coral and losing every SPS coral in the tank. Cleaner tanks with a much lower level of sustained protozoan life might face a greater risk of total loss.

So I have to wonder - would eliminating the ciliates with the Prime product prevent further progression or instead allow the actual causative agent sufficient fuel (and an absence of competition for that fuel) to continue the progression. I am starting to think the Philaster ciliates might be the good guys in all of this.

I am out of the box in some ways but like you it is based on life experience. That said I have watched RTN on LPS in the past...more like a brown jelly as some describe. Once it started it became over powering to the exposed LPS.

I do believe there is a lot of evidence to prove that many of the micro fauna we see are both commensal and pathogenic given the right conditions. That is why I am struck by the symbiosis of many organisms and the evidence that some viruses help to spill the guts of bacterial populations that in effect release food to the water column which other organisms exploit. Coral communities may function the same way and require many populations in balance to stay healthy. This is of course is the reason to look before you leap so to say in management of those populations. I am still struggling with all the information on fish disease and here comes coral lol.

In medicine sometimes doctors can only treat the symptom until the under laying cause is detected and a possible cure developed. Just suggesting the doctor may have found a way to buy time for many aquarist until the preventative measure is uncovered.

 

[MnFish1]

I am out of the box in some ways but like you it is based on life experience. That said I have watched RTN on LPS in the past...more like a brown jelly as some describe. Once it started it became over powering to the exposed LPS.

I do believe there is a lot of evidence to prove that many of the micro fauna we see are both commensal and pathogenic given the right conditions. That is why I am struck by the symbiosis of many organisms and the evidence that some viruses help to spill the guts of bacterial populations that in effect release food to the water column which other organisms exploit. Coral communities may function the same way and require many populations in balance to stay healthy. This is of course is the reason to look before you leap so to say in management of those populations. I am still struggling with all the information on fish disease and here comes coral lol.

In medicine sometimes doctors can only treat the symptom until the under laying cause is detected and a possible cure developed. Just suggesting the doctor may have found a way to buy time for many aquarist until the preventative measure is uncovered.

I thought this as well - until I read the articles that RTN did not stop until antibiotics (other than metronidazole) were added. I think its a very hard thing to dissect. Here are some things I dont understand:

1. I have had coral that started to 'RTN' and have fragged off that piece - and it stops. If the ciliates were in fact attacking everywhere after a stress event - it makes no sense to me that you can take a piece that looks 'ok' and break it off and it doesn't become infected. In fact - the disease appears to progress from one area to the next - its not a broad based attack and the ciliates are only found in that border zone of damage. This suggests that they are not attacking 'healthy coral'. It also suggests that stress alone (i.e. the whole piece of coral is stressed) - can't be the initiating factor because if it were - the cut frag would eventually be affected as well (wouldn't it?)
2. I have broken off pieces of coral - those edges are clearly 'damaged' - and the ciliates are ubiquitous. Why would they not attack every damaged section of coral?
3. What is the real definition of 'RTN'. Any sudden death of coral (which can be caused by lots of things) - or is there a real 'syndrome' - that we can describe - and diagnose? As some here have said - many things the average hobbyist might call RTN - could be multiple other things.

 

[Lowell Lemon]

I thought this as well - until I read the articles that RTN did not stop until antibiotics (other than metronidazole) were added. I think its a very hard thing to dissect. Here are some things I dont understand:

1. I have had coral that started to 'RTN' and have fragged off that piece - and it stops. If the ciliates were in fact attacking everywhere after a stress event - it makes no sense to me that you can take a piece that looks 'ok' and break it off and it doesn't become infected. In fact - the disease appears to progress from one area to the next - its not a broad based attack and the ciliates are only found in that border zone of damage. This suggests that they are not attacking 'healthy coral'. It also suggests that stress alone (i.e. the whole piece of coral is stressed) - can't be the initiating factor because if it were - the cut frag would eventually be affected as well (wouldn't it?)
2. I have broken off pieces of coral - those edges are clearly 'damaged' - and the ciliates are ubiquitous. Why would they not attack every damaged section of coral?
3. What is the real definition of 'RTN'. Any sudden death of coral (which can be caused by lots of things) - or is there a real 'syndrome' - that we can describe - and diagnose? As some here have said - many things the average hobbyist might call RTN - could be multiple other things.

Now I think you are asking the right questions. Now how to find the answers? I hope you read the long post here from the OP. It raised the same questions.

 

[MnFish1]

Now I think you are asking the right questions. Now how to find the answers? I hope you read the long post here from the OP. It raised the same questions.

Im not sure it did - I did try to read it - I thought it was a quote from the same article I had already read - can you point me to that post. BTW - the question everyone here should have been asking (IMHO) - is 'what is the success rate of this treatment' - and prove that. Showing ciliates eating a very small piece of coral shows very little (again in my opinion - and I'm not a marine microbiologist)

 

[chris85]

The way I see it is.... The ciliates are just opportunistic at most, I think what is going on is inside the coral skin(bacterial infection).

Think of the flesh-eating bacteria(vibro) How long does that take to eat your hand off? How long does it take to kill you? Then when it started rotting and you lived outdoors the flies would lay eggs and you get maggots(ciliates).

It doesn't take much of an environment change for bacteria to take advantage. They multiply in hours and minutes not days.

@Prime Coral How did you i.d. the ciliates?

 

[Frogger]

The way I see it is.... The ciliates are just opportunistic at most, I think what is going on is inside the coral skin(bacterial infection).

This is a solid theory and could be possible. Next step in the process is proving your theory. If you can show that the disease progresses in the absence of Philaster lucinda that would help. There is some previous research using metronidazole that seems to suggest that. I am not sure it has gone far enough. What if the P lucinda actually starts the decline and the bacterial counterpart takes over once it has started or P. lucinda is actually a vector.
The next step after that could be to prove that RTN can begin on corals (in a non stressed environment) in the absence of Philaster lucinda. The final step may be to isolate the actual pathogen if it is not the ciliates in all cases.

Unfortunately all this research takes time and money. I do not see anyone stepping up to volunteer to do this research.

According to Dr. Deukmedjian (Prime Coral) he has already proven his theory. I think what I am seeking is validation to his research.

 

[MnFish1]

This is a solid theory and could be possible. Next step in the process is proving your theory. If you can show that the disease progresses in the absence of Philaster lucinda that would help.

I think this has been shown

 

[Scott Campbell]

I thought this as well - until I read the articles that RTN did not stop until antibiotics (other than metronidazole) were added. I think its a very hard thing to dissect. Here are some things I dont understand:

1. I have had coral that started to 'RTN' and have fragged off that piece - and it stops. If the ciliates were in fact attacking everywhere after a stress event - it makes no sense to me that you can take a piece that looks 'ok' and break it off and it doesn't become infected. In fact - the disease appears to progress from one area to the next - its not a broad based attack and the ciliates are only found in that border zone of damage. This suggests that they are not attacking 'healthy coral'. It also suggests that stress alone (i.e. the whole piece of coral is stressed) - can't be the initiating factor because if it were - the cut frag would eventually be affected as well (wouldn't it?)
2. I have broken off pieces of coral - those edges are clearly 'damaged' - and the ciliates are ubiquitous. Why would they not attack every damaged section of coral?
3. What is the real definition of 'RTN'. Any sudden death of coral (which can be caused by lots of things) - or is there a real 'syndrome' - that we can describe - and diagnose? As some here have said - many things the average hobbyist might call RTN - could be multiple other things.

But the RTN can stop progressing without antibiotics. Not everyone uses antibiotics and not everyone loses all of their coral. I certainly did not use any antibiotics. That said - a working theory that (to me) seems consistent with the data is that:
1) It may require a very large zone of damage for a small amount of ciliates to control the progression
2) It may require a much smaller zone of damage for a large amount of ciliates to control the progression
3) It may require antibiotics to stop the progression on a single piece of coral

But I do find the progression of the disease baffling. For me it was a perfect spherical orb of destruction. A coral with a single branch within the orb lost that one branch but no other damage. A coral with a single branch outside the orb completely died except for that one branch. From above the tank it looked like one of those "alien" crop circles. Actually rather beautiful in the symmetry. Like someone took a school compass and drew a perfect circle of death through a swath of different corals. I should have taken pictures but honestly I was too sad.

So I have no clue how the progression occurs but I am still inclined to think the ciliates / maggots are helpful. And that a large reserve of ciliates might be better than a more sterile environment.

 

[Flippers4pups]

I thought this as well - until I read the articles that RTN did not stop until antibiotics (other than metronidazole) were added. I think its a very hard thing to dissect. Here are some things I dont understand:

1. I have had coral that started to 'RTN' and have fragged off that piece - and it stops. If the ciliates were in fact attacking everywhere after a stress event - it makes no sense to me that you can take a piece that looks 'ok' and break it off and it doesn't become infected. In fact - the disease appears to progress from one area to the next - its not a broad based attack and the ciliates are only found in that border zone of damage. This suggests that they are not attacking 'healthy coral'. It also suggests that stress alone (i.e. the whole piece of coral is stressed) - can't be the initiating factor because if it were - the cut frag would eventually be affected as well (wouldn't it?)
2. I have broken off pieces of coral - those edges are clearly 'damaged' - and the ciliates are ubiquitous. Why would they not attack every damaged section of coral?
3. What is the real definition of 'RTN'. Any sudden death of coral (which can be caused by lots of things) - or is there a real 'syndrome' - that we can describe - and diagnose? As some here have said - many things the average hobbyist might call RTN - could be multiple other things.

Yes, there are a great deal of holes in the Dr's claims.

Yes, historically when RTN events have happened, the go to has been to frag above the damaged/RTN site to save the coral. Removing the dead and dieing tissue from the system. This has been hit or miss with hobbyist, but there has been many accounts of this being successful.

So with that said, why is it that there is a positive outcome sometimes? If ciliates are the reason for RTN and would be potentially still be on the healthy saved coral frag and most certainly still in ones tank, then based on the Dr's claim, why isn't the RTN continuing on the healthy frag or attacking other corals?

Based on his claims, the entire tank would be wiped out without his treatment.

I'm squinting at all of this like Richard Ross would.

 

[MnFish1]

Whatever he's using appears to be stopping both RTN and STN in the videos. So for FWIW...I will still be using and testing the products if anybody is interested in seeing my findings. I'll be observing the fish for any adverse reactions and will document the entire process. Things like water volume, time, dosage, fish observations, coral observations, etc.

Like @Jose Mayo stated above....the only thing that matters in the end is if the product is working. Even without a causative agent identified- if the treatment is working....well....the treatment is working.

It certainly appears that what he's using in the videos is working pretty well and stopping both RTN and STN. The only thing that should matter to us is if we can control it. We do not necessarily need to eradicate it from the system.

Can you point me to that video where RTN/STN is being stopped? thats what I asked for pages ago - I didn't see it - but there are multiple videos - and I didnt have time to look at all of them?

 

[Jose Mayo]

Well ...

From my first post on this topic, my doubt was the patent contradiction in attributing the responsibility, by RTN, to the protozoan Philaster lucinda when, in all the work on this subject that I had read, and especially in experimental work with antibiotics (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4083779/), which I had already brought to your appreciation, that even after the eradication of the Philaster lucinda from the environment with metronidazole, RTN progressed.

In this same paper, quoted by at least 15 other authors so far (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4083779/citedby/), the same authors note that RTN could be interrupted by 2 antibiotics, one of them experimental and of high cost and the other the ampicillin that, although it did not include in its action spectrum the mentioned protozoans, was in itself capable of interrupting the progress of RTN.

Therefore, based on these observations and considering the nosological conditions reported in this same experiment, it does not seem acceptable to me that the Philaster lucinda is the cause or even the pillar of support for the RTN event, although it may be a beneficiary and a strong collaborator in the speed of its progress.

That said, if the product @Prime Coral is indeed capable of delivering what its idealizer promises, what is clear is that it must have other effects beyond the control or eradication of the Philaster lucinda, which, certainly, deserves more studies to elucidate how it works, and, even if it deserves, I would not hesitate to use it if I were surprised by this type of event (WBD) in my aquarium.

Regards

 

[Flippers4pups]

Jose,

From what Ive read in all current study white papers is that bacteria are the culprit. Based on the anecdotal reports from hobbyist on fragging infected RTN coral would back up the white papers on bacteria, not ciliates as the cause.

The Dr's claims and video of eradicating the ciliates is on the surface factual, but what's not explained or shown on the videos is whether or not the RTN event stopped completely. This is where I "squint".