Go Back   Aquarium Advice - Aquarium Forum Community > Saltwater and Reef > Saltwater & Reef - Sick Fish or Coral
Click Here to Login

Join Aquarium Advice Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Please support our sponsors and let them know you heard about them on AquariumAdvice.com
 
Old 03-08-2005, 11:12 PM   #21
steve-s
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by midiman
Quote:
Please do not confuse "infest" with "infect". In regards to parasitic infestations, it's either there or it's not, no amount of stress or other influences outside of another fish addition will change that. So the species of teleost is irrelevent. Infections on the otherhand are a completely different matter altogether

I'm not clear what YOU are trying to say. Are you saying that ALL teleosts (i.e. "fish") are equally susceptible to infection by ich? If that is your point, why am I reading so many warnings against acquiring certain fish because they are more prone to ich?
Teleost = boney fish, so I am not saying that all fish are susceptible. I am saying that all teleost fish are susceptible. What fish you where warned against I have no idea but to stay clear of them for that reason seems a bit rash IMO. If QT'd for an appropriate amount of time and properly treated if necessary with an effective proven remedy and proper methodology, there is no foundation for that line of thinking. The only one exception possibley being Synchiropus sp. and the like.

Quote:
My point (and I think datto's as well) is that the mere PRESENCE of pathogens in the system is not sufficient to guarantee that ALL fish will become infected. Some fish are more resistant than others. Are you saying that this is not the case?
First and foremost it's a parasite, not a pathogen. All fish will become infested sooner or later if left in an infested tank without treatment. If you plan on leaving a fish in an infested environment simpley because they are suggested as being highly resistant, you will most likely end up disapointed. Aquired immunity in teleosts means they will have had to come in contact with a rather high theront count and survived. Usually more than once. The risk in assuming that a particular species is safer than another is far from the truth.


Quote:
Of course it is obvious that the life cycle of the pathogen ITSELF is independent of the fish species it infects, but the life cycle cannot be completed WITHOUT infection.
It must infest a fish to complete it's lifecycle, yes.

Quote:
It's equally obvious that the pathogen has to be PRESENT to cause infection,
Agreed in terms of a parasite yes, not a pathogen.

Quote:
but if certain fish can resist better than others, why is it inaccurate to characterize infection as "species specific" in this more narrow sense? Certainly "species related" isn't far off the mark, is it?
As I said, an infested fish is just that, infested. If adding a healthy uninfested fish to a QT it will remain uninfested, period. If a parasite presents itself, then that fish transported it in and was therfore already infested so again the species makes no difference. To suggest that a fish that has a higher or lower natural immunity for fending of the parasitic infestation doesn't matter one way or the other.

Cheers
Steve
__________________
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2005, 03:14 AM   #22
Aquarium Advice Apprentice
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: sydney australia
Posts: 43
pathogen: a disease causing organism.

white spot/itch: an organism.

I MAY BE WRONG but isnt a fish which has died from white spot considered to have died from a disease causing parasite. its my understanding that in some cases itch attacks the host and weakens the hosts immune system, allowing other secondary diseases to attack. is this not a disease causing organism? hense my use of the word pathogen.
__________________

__________________
cheers mate
datto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2005, 03:32 AM   #23
Aquarium Advice Apprentice
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: sydney australia
Posts: 43
it seems steve may agree.... fom another post thats what it seems like...????

Quote:
The parasite itself is not what usually kills the fish. It's the suffocating and damaging effect it has on the gills and in some cases SECONDARY INFECTIONS caused by it's burrowing into the skin. It makes it pretty hard not to know it's there if the infestation is at a level high enough to kill the fish.
INFECTIONS are caused by? things like bacterial infections.... BACTERIA is that a disease causing organism???? a pathogen.

so white spot/itch according to steve allows secondary PATHOGENS to attack the host.. so could i not argue that steve agrees that itch is a disease causing organism???

im confused
__________________
cheers mate
datto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2005, 04:31 AM   #24
Aquarium Advice FINatic
 
flanque's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 740
I have many thoughts on this, but not enough time at the moment to respond. I will attend to this thread tomorrow.
flanque is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2005, 07:09 AM   #25
Aquarium Advice FINatic
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Poughkeepsie, NY
Posts: 602
Quote:
As I said, an infested fish is just that, infested. If adding a healthy uninfested fish to a QT it will remain uninfested, period. If a parasite presents itself, then that fish transported it in and was therfore already infested so again the species makes no difference. To suggest that a fish that has a higher or lower natural immunity for fending of the parasitic infestation doesn't matter one way or the other.
OK, I have your point. Of course I don't disagree with it, but it rests at least in part on a SEMANTIC distinction between the words "infest" and "infect". I think the common usage has us using the word "infect" to cover both (similar to how most seem to use 1.023 as the "salinity" of water, when it fact is is not salinity but specific gravity)

OF course it is also inarguably true that ich has to be brought in by an infested fish (I'll use that term from now on ) or perhaps in the water in the fish bag, and that it doesn't matter which fish brings it IN to the QT.

I still think that the issue of degrees of SUSCEPTIBILITY is not resolved. However, I think I'm satisfied with my own level of understannding of this topic to move on. I'll use QT because it simply makes sense to do so. The way I've been doing it is this: if no white spots or other problems emerge in 10 days in water with slightly lowered salinity (to ease fish stress), I schedule entry day into the main tank for 1 week from that point. In that time, I can slowly raise salinity to normal and continue to observe the fish. If there are white spots in that time period, well, then I have the infestation and have to do the full blown treatment.

So my min QT is 17 days. If no white spots are present in that time, I'm pretty confident that there is no ich. Would a longer period help? If I ever get ich in my main tank using this technique, I'll let you know.
__________________
30 gal standard 55 lbs LR, 60 lb live sand, 10 gal sump/refugium. Urchin skimmer, mag7 pump, 3 x 96W PC combination 10,000K/actinic bulb, 2 blue LED moonlights
SG 1.024, temp 79.5, pH 8.4

Livestock I added:

1 skunk cleaner. 12 hermits: red, scarlet, blue. 15 or so assorted snails. Discosomas, Ricordia, Rhodactis mushroom corals, chaetomorpha (sump), 1 feather duster, Montipora digitata, Montipora capricornis, Montipora hispids. assorted zoos, Xenia, Kenya tree coral, green Sinularia, green star polyps, branching hammer coral, bubble coral, Devil's hand leather. Yellow chromis, purple firefish.

Hitchhikers: the usual suspects :crabs, bristles, urchin, mantis shrimp (now in exile in mantis tank)

List of possible/likely newcomers:

Feather duster. PJ cardinal, Bangghai cardinal, Firefish goby, Clownfish, Neon goby, Yellow watchman goby, Orchid dottyback. Various corals.
midiman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2005, 11:46 AM   #26
steve-s
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by datto
so white spot/itch according to steve allows secondary PATHOGENS to attack the host.. so could i not argue that steve agrees that itch is a disease causing organism???

im confused
You could look at it that way and I could very well be wrong. My understanding is that the parasite is the catalyst that opens doors for bacteria and fungal infections which are the pathogens. The parasite doesn't actually produce them.

Is there a PHD in the house? 8O

Cheers
Steve
__________________
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2005, 11:57 AM   #27
steve-s
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by midiman
So my min QT is 17 days. If no white spots are present in that time, I'm pretty confident that there is no ich. Would a longer period help? If I ever get ich in my main tank using this technique, I'll let you know.
Given the time the parasite can encyst and multiply (up to one month) and the time it takes for the spots to be visible on the fish (up to 5 days), it would be a high probability that an infested fish is being introduced to the main sysstem. You won't know your wrong until it happens to you which would be very unfortunate but since you seem quite firm in your belief, I'll leave you to it. I only hope that you study the proven science behind what has been said to you and consider what's more important. Your belief, or the facts that have been proven time nd time again.

Many things in this hobby are through sheer observation or trial and error. Parasites for the most part are not one of them. They are well documented and studied.

Cheers
Steve
__________________
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2005, 02:12 PM   #28
Aquarium Advice FINatic
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Poughkeepsie, NY
Posts: 602
Quote:
You won't know your wrong until it happens to you which would be very unfortunate but since you seem quite firm in your belief, I'll leave you to it.
I'm not really firm in my belief about QT length, and I tend to agree with you more than it appears from my posts, perhaps. (One tends to get better info by playing the Devil's Advocate, I've learned). For me, it's more of a managed, calculated risk factor with my new tank and still only two fish.

I'll be more cautious with subsequent entries than I was with the earlier ones, since I have the room for a QT and my main tank is now looking pretty good.

In addition (and in closing, finally!! ), I read over on reef central that a hyposalinity treatment of 14 days is sufficient to kill ich, so, at least according to that study, the 30 day rule is not absolute.

Thanks for your consistent patience and thoroughness in your responses to this and other issues raised by all of us on this board. It is much appreciated.
__________________
30 gal standard 55 lbs LR, 60 lb live sand, 10 gal sump/refugium. Urchin skimmer, mag7 pump, 3 x 96W PC combination 10,000K/actinic bulb, 2 blue LED moonlights
SG 1.024, temp 79.5, pH 8.4

Livestock I added:

1 skunk cleaner. 12 hermits: red, scarlet, blue. 15 or so assorted snails. Discosomas, Ricordia, Rhodactis mushroom corals, chaetomorpha (sump), 1 feather duster, Montipora digitata, Montipora capricornis, Montipora hispids. assorted zoos, Xenia, Kenya tree coral, green Sinularia, green star polyps, branching hammer coral, bubble coral, Devil's hand leather. Yellow chromis, purple firefish.

Hitchhikers: the usual suspects :crabs, bristles, urchin, mantis shrimp (now in exile in mantis tank)

List of possible/likely newcomers:

Feather duster. PJ cardinal, Bangghai cardinal, Firefish goby, Clownfish, Neon goby, Yellow watchman goby, Orchid dottyback. Various corals.
midiman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2005, 03:20 PM   #29
Aquarium Advice Addict
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 5,832
Send a message via Yahoo to quarryshark
Quote:
I read over on reef central that a hyposalinity treatment of 14 days is sufficient to kill ich, so, at least according to that study, the 30 day rule is not absolute.
Don't see any reason to shorten the treatment period. The main tank need a fallow period of at least 6 weeks anyway. The life cycle also is frequently longer than 14 day.
I have used hypo several times, it causes absolutely no stress in the fish whatsoever. In fact it seems like there are more and more cases of recurrence with shorter treatment periods. I would err on the side of caution and choose the longer period. Why take the chance on reinfestation?
__________________
quarryshark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2005, 06:31 PM   #30
steve-s
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by midiman
I read over on reef central that a hyposalinity treatment of 14 days is sufficient to kill ich, so, at least according to that study, the 30 day rule is not absolute.
If you come across that thread, please post a link. I would very much like to read that as I highly disagree with it. Hyposalinity mainly attacks the tomont stage so there is a possibility the tomont could be erraddicated in that short of a span. It is however not recommended due to the mainy stages and conditions both fish and parasite where at when treatment level (16 ppt) was eventually reached.

Cheers
Steve
__________________
  Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
long

Please support our sponsors and let them know you heard about them on AquariumAdvice.com

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
How Long? sarahsunshine Freshwater & Brackish - General Discussion 4 11-18-2009 10:01 PM
How Long does it take? flushingfish Freshwater & Brackish - Planted Tanks 11 11-01-2006 11:57 AM
How long until I see nitrite? (a bit long) Conesus_Kid Freshwater & Brackish - Getting Started 3 09-29-2005 06:42 PM
How long?? Saltwater Man Saltwater Reef Aquaria 3 11-26-2004 11:16 PM







» Photo Contest Winners








Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:00 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.