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 11-19-2005, 06:10 PM   #31
SW REEF 18+ YEARS
Community Admin
 
melosu58's Avatar



Tank of the Month Award
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Virginia
Posts: 38,242
I have to respond I agree. You dont know how much I have learned from Steve`s answers. And there have been times that Steve had to correct me on some things I said but I know that like Brenden said Steve is the man and I will continue to learn from this guy. And I`m not going to hide.
__________________

__________________

SITE ADMINISTRATOR

You can view many of my fish and corals in my photo albums in my profile.

View my tank


AA Community Rules|AA TOS

Forums 101 - posting, accounts, basics
melosu58 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-19-2005, 06:23 PM   #32
Aquarium Advice Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Southern California, USA
Posts: 1,538
Thanks for the ref. I checked it out and not even close, but again thanks...it gives me something to search in. The parasite you mentioned is a nematode and one of the bladder. This is more of a skin fluke I'm looking for. It's external and is a trematode. I distinctly remember making a mental note of that. I read about two skin flukes so far on the Amberjack, but can't find photos of them. They are problematic world wide. I'm close, but not quite there yet. I'm certain now it's the Amberjack that was mentioned. Once you wrote that, I confirmed with someone I know who has also read the articles. He did say he thinks the name starts with a 'K'. So far, I haven't come across anything that starts with a 'K', so I'm at a dead end with that.

I know I'm not incorrect on this. I've kept all of what you mentioned in mind, but still you need a FW dip to deny or confirm the presence of this parasite because they are transparent and you really cannot see them until they are exposed to FW...and that's exactly what my approach in that was...as a diagnosis method. We can't expect that people are going to turn a fish in for a necropsy or do skin scrappings for ID. It's way too costly for the average keeper and sure that many would see it as too yukky to deal with. Some might, but most likely the majority would not.

I think the main reason why fish die in the dips is either because they're too weak and would die anyway or the temp in the FW or the pH is off from the tank readings and shocks the fish even further. Also being left in the FW too long is a big factor of fish dying in the dips. That's just from my own experiences of what I've done or seen done. We've never done FW dips until the information on this parasite came about.

We all know a list of symptoms can be one of a number of different things. The process of elimination is what most rely on in trying to diagnose a situation. Dipping the fish for three minutes at the minimum (five max and I've always let this be known to anyone I recommend a FW dip to) would let the keeper know what to do next. If the parasites aren't present, then you know to look elsewhere and if the parasite is present, then you know what you are dealing with. Water quality we all know should be checked regardless of anything. That point doesn't need to be made with me. I'm not that bad. Yet you and whoever else make it seem I'm completely off my rocker and granted personally I can get a bit looney , but hell...I'm not going to post information that I'm not so positive about. This I am confident and positive about. I understand we all don't really know each other from Adam, but I've never posted information I've felt questionable myself.

Those symptoms I've listed are very common with severe infections of this parasite. It's what we've seen over and over again. In those cases, the fish are absolutely overwhelmed with these parasites, which even in captivity takes a little time to happen. The main factor I kept in mind is that this angel in question was only in the tank for a week and the test results the poster did list (though not including nitrate) were fine. So the nitrate factor will show just how much the conditions, whatever they may be...parasitic or bacterial, would progress. It wouldn't be a causing factor, but a factor that would make it more difficult to relieve the problem whatever that problem ends up being. In other words, nitrates would be a secondary factor instead of primary as most of the situations we here at the forums do come across.

... and if you do read back closely, I did mention about the tank being over crowded and that the angel most likely had it's ripped up fins from being picked on. Still waiting on the results of a nitrate test. This person's daughter seems stubborn in taking advice that no more fish should be introduced. She's persistant with our poster on having five fish in this tank. Keep in mind, his daughter is an adult and not a kid as I first thought. Focus on this subject with the poster does continue, but more on trying to give pointers on what to convey to the daughter to make the right choices.

It really irks me how so many people in the hobby see fish as a throw away commodity.
__________________

__________________
http://www.tricitytropicals.com
------------------------------------
We, as a people, know so much more about outer space than we do about our own oceans. This lack of knowledge can very well spell the dangers that lay in wait for us.

The oceans surely would swallow us before a rock comes down to smite the planet of it's life.
Nov/2004
TCTFish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-19-2005, 06:54 PM   #33
Aquarium Advice Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Southern California, USA
Posts: 1,538
Quote:
Originally Posted by melosu58
I have to respond I agree. You dont know how much I have learned from Steve`s answers. And there have been times that Steve had to correct me on some things I said but I know that like Brenden said Steve is the man and I will continue to learn from this guy. And I`m not going to hide.
I've never once doubted Steve's knowledge and it's all good. I've learned things myself from the guy. This is just one thing he doesn't know about...or he does...just hasn't been convinced yet. I understand about the need for refs and I've been working on that for a long time. It's driving me nuts!! LOL.
__________________
http://www.tricitytropicals.com
------------------------------------
We, as a people, know so much more about outer space than we do about our own oceans. This lack of knowledge can very well spell the dangers that lay in wait for us.

The oceans surely would swallow us before a rock comes down to smite the planet of it's life.
Nov/2004
TCTFish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2005, 02:44 PM   #34
steve-s
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by TCTFish
I know I'm not incorrect on this. I've kept all of what you mentioned in mind, but still you need a FW dip to deny or confirm the presence of this parasite because they are transparent and you really cannot see them until they are exposed to FW...and that's exactly what my approach in that was...as a diagnosis method.
Ah you see, now we're getting somewhere. In the beginning you have been eluding to the FW dip as the cure when I have been trying to convey to you it's not usually that effective. Now I ask you, if only a diagnostic tool (which I don't disagree with if supported by the symptoms), what does your company advocate as the cure? Formalin would be my guess as I indicated from the start but you repeated wrote that formalin had no effect? Please clarify!


Quote:
We can't expect that people are going to turn a fish in for a necropsy or do skin scrappings for ID. It's way too costly for the average keeper and sure that many would see it as too yukky to deal with. Some might, but most likely the majority would not.
Actually I was not suggesting the end consumer to take this approach. It was directed at the wholesale company you keep refering to. I would think the cost of identifying an ongoing nuisance would be quite beneficial vs the cost of losses. I am not familiar with US tax laws but I would also think it a deducatble operating expense.


Quote:
I think the main reason why fish die in the dips is either because they're too weak and would die anyway or the temp in the FW or the pH is off from the tank readings and shocks the fish even further. Also being left in the FW too long is a big factor of fish dying in the dips. That's just from my own experiences of what I've done or seen done. We've never done FW dips until the information on this parasite came about.
No arguement on the former but the one thing you need to realize about this type of diagnostic tool is it does not identify the type of parasite as a rule, only that a parasite is present.

Quote:
The main factor I kept in mind is that this angel in question was only in the tank for a week and the test results the poster did list (though not including nitrate) were fine. So the nitrate factor will show just how much the conditions, whatever they may be...parasitic or bacterial, would progress. It wouldn't be a causing factor, but a factor that would make it more difficult to relieve the problem whatever that problem ends up being. In other words, nitrates would be a secondary factor instead of primary as most of the situations we here at the forums do come across.
True if all fish where routinely dewormed prior to introduction to the display, it would not be an issue. If not, the potential for these problems exists and can be exaserbated by poor water conditions. Like other parasites though, they must be introduced so on that we agree. The main reason fish are afflicted by them is moreso a supressed immune response. Immuno responses being directly affected by poor water conditions, high bioload, stress, tank mate aggression and poor diet so poor water quality is definately a factor. If present, a healthy fish can quite often be left unscathed.

Cheers
Steve
__________________
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2005, 06:29 PM   #35
Aquarium Advice Activist
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Pacific Palisades, CA, USA
Posts: 149
Puffer in own tank?

Not in our small house No room.

I'm very aware that our attachment to puffer complicates our tank maintenance and limits our choices of fish & inverts. My choice would be to return him to LFS and get a couple of other small fish such as blenny/goby/mandarin. Then we'd be able to feed far less, and even start getting a few inverts and maybe corals.

But wife & daughter love puffer - he's part of the family I guess.
__________________
bpeitzke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2005, 03:22 AM   #36
Aquarium Advice Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Southern California, USA
Posts: 1,538
see, now we're getting somewhere. In the beginning you have been eluding to the [acronym="Freshwater"]FW[/acronym] dip as the cure

I never stated a FW dip was a 'cure'. It's the only way to rid this parasite off the infected fish. Anything else from this infection still needs to be treated.

what does your company advocate as the cure? Formalin would be my guess as I indicated from the start but you repeated wrote that formalin had no effect? Please clarify!

I never mentioned that formalin doesn't have an effect as a treatment. It just can't kill this parasite. It can, however kill the bacteria left behind from the parasite, if any. So the same basic treatments used for other parasitic treatments can be applied with some success in treating for or preventing the infections of bacteria from the parasite.

Actually I was not suggesting the end consumer to take this approach. It was directed at the wholesale company you keep refering to. I would think the cost of identifying an ongoing nuisance would be quite beneficial vs the cost of losses. I am not familiar with US tax laws but I would also think it a deducatble operating expense.

The biggest thing with this approach for every fish that is suspected of having these parasites, is not economical at all...especailly for small businesses on a retail end struggling to stay afloat in this wonderful state of California which many companies have fled and I highly doubt it is tax deductible. Some wholesalers do have necropsies and scrappings done. Most do not because of the extended costs. Many wholesalers are here in California where the people here have been repeatedly and grossly ripped off by the state in energy costs. Takes a lot of electricty to keep these critters alive. Our warehouse is stricktly for our retail store and internet sales. Fish that are meant to stay at the warehouse for internet sales are also routinely dipped.

Since we have been doing the FW dips, the death rate has decreased dramatically and being we have the knowledge of this parasite, we have it under control. We routinely dip new arrivals to prevent any outbreaks in our systems and that in turn helps keep the parasite out of our customer's tanks. We also routinely ask our customers upon their choice of purchase if they want the fish to be FW dipped before they leave. At that point, we give the choice to them. Most do want the fish dipped. The dips are performed insight of the customer so they witness it. If any of these parasites do fall off the fish, it is shown to them and they are recommended to choose another individual. The fish that was dipped then goes into the back for further treatment, which always include second and third FW dips over a period of about two weeks. They stay in hospital tanks with a formalin mix until they are healthy enough to go back in the main system.

Another reason is that by the time there are results, the fish are dead, so at that point, results would be useless. In just a fraction of the time, and at minimal cost, we can find out if a fish is infected with this parasite with a brief FW dip. if the fish is infested, then we can start the proper treatment immediately, which again, does include a couple of more FW dips.

The only time we've ever lost fish from dipping were wrasses when we first started the practice. We soon stopped dipping wrasses. Unfortunately, those that are infected die. We would love to know a way to help those that cannot be FW dipped. So far, nothing. You can treat them with the same formalin mix, but if the parasite cannot be erradicated off the fish, then the problems persist and the animal gets sick anyway from being so chewed up and overwhelmed.

No arguement on the former but the one thing you need to realize about this type of diagnostic tool is it does not identify the type of parasite as a rule, only that a parasite is present

The parasite is big enough to make an ID by eye and with all the photos of so many different types of marine trematodes of libraries on the net, I've yet to come across one as perfectly circular as this one. They are even rounder than the common greenish FW fish louse that you see mostly on goldfish.

I will confess, the FW dip initially is a diagnostic tool, but if the fish is infected with these parasites then more FW dips are needed to insure erradication off the fish (I mentioned this in a previous paragraph).

If present, a healthy fish can quite often be left unscathed

This would be true if only this parasite behaved like most others. Most parasites rarely kill their own hosts...especially if monogenetic. They rely on the fish to be alive to ensure their own survival. If they annihalated their hosts, eventually there wouldn't be any to host. However, this parasite does kill it's host and may even be a problem for healthy fish in the ocean...not just an amplification due to captive life. I will note this is speculative, but after reading about similar parasite problems in places like Australia and the Gulf, it wouldn't surprise me.

poor water quality is definately a factor.

Absolutely and was never denied. In the case with this type of parasite, it's secondary. A fish with this parasite left untreated will die whether nitrates are under control or not...and can possibly take down all the healthy ones as well if it's in there long enough for the parasites to realize there's more food nearby. It's a vicious bug!! Though, even ich will take down a healthy fish if the infestation isn't brouht under control or erradicated. High nitrates make it happen all the more faster and more persistant. Like fuel for the fire.
__________________
http://www.tricitytropicals.com
------------------------------------
We, as a people, know so much more about outer space than we do about our own oceans. This lack of knowledge can very well spell the dangers that lay in wait for us.

The oceans surely would swallow us before a rock comes down to smite the planet of it's life.
Nov/2004
TCTFish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2005, 03:28 AM   #37
Aquarium Advice Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Southern California, USA
Posts: 1,538
OOps...the quotes didn't come out right and the color is dark...even though I did learn abit of HTML...I'm no expert at it...but I try...LOL.
__________________
http://www.tricitytropicals.com
------------------------------------
We, as a people, know so much more about outer space than we do about our own oceans. This lack of knowledge can very well spell the dangers that lay in wait for us.

The oceans surely would swallow us before a rock comes down to smite the planet of it's life.
Nov/2004
TCTFish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-24-2005, 11:55 AM   #38
steve-s
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
So I guess back to square one then.....

Quote:
Originally Posted by TCTFish
see, now we're getting somewhere. In the beginning you have been eluding to the [acronym="Freshwater"]FW[/acronym] dip as the cure

I never stated a FW dip was a 'cure'. It's the only way to rid this parasite off the infected fish. Anything else from this infection still needs to be treated.

what does your company advocate as the cure? Formalin would be my guess as I indicated from the start but you repeated wrote that formalin had no effect? Please clarify!

I never mentioned that formalin doesn't have an effect as a treatment. It just can't kill this parasite. It can, however kill the bacteria left behind from the parasite, if any. So the same basic treatments used for other parasitic treatments can be applied with some success in treating for or preventing the infections of bacteria from the parasite.
Formalin is actually the last thing you should choose as a remedy for bacterial issues. By and large it is ineffective in this regard. More effectively you should be opting for a gram negative antibiotic like Maracyn II for saltwater if used long term or Nitrofurazone for short term use.

Quote:
Actually I was not suggesting the end consumer to take this approach. It was directed at the wholesale company you keep refering to. I would think the cost of identifying an ongoing nuisance would be quite beneficial vs the cost of losses. I am not familiar with US tax laws but I would also think it a deducatble operating expense.

The biggest thing with this approach for every fish that is suspected of having these parasites, is not economical at all...especailly for small businesses on a retail end struggling to stay afloat in this wonderful state of California which many companies have fled and I highly doubt it is tax deductible. Some wholesalers do have necropsies and scrappings done. Most do not because of the extended costs. Many wholesalers are here in California where the people here have been repeatedly and grossly ripped off by the state in energy costs. Takes a lot of electricty to keep these critters alive. Our warehouse is stricktly for our retail store and internet sales. Fish that are meant to stay at the warehouse for internet sales are also routinely dipped.
I do not wish to belabor the point but it is not for my benefit nor the end consumer but the overall success of your operation. I would think properly identifying this affliction be to your benefit. I am fairly confidant given the available Universities, Mariculture and Public Aquariums in your area, the prospect of identification not all that hard with a little effort. I inevitabley realize that it will not be the same exact problem in each case but if what I suspect is the actual issue here, you would be wise to do so.

Quote:
Since we have been doing the FW dips, the death rate has decreased dramatically and being we have the knowledge of this parasite, we have it under control. We routinely dip new arrivals to prevent any outbreaks in our systems and that in turn helps keep the parasite out of our customer's tanks. We also routinely ask our customers upon their choice of purchase if they want the fish to be FW dipped before they leave. At that point, we give the choice to them. Most do want the fish dipped. The dips are performed insight of the customer so they witness it. If any of these parasites do fall off the fish, it is shown to them and they are recommended to choose another individual. The fish that was dipped then goes into the back for further treatment, which always include second and third FW dips over a period of about two weeks. They stay in hospital tanks with a formalin mix until they are healthy enough to go back in the main system.
Then in actuality the formalin would be the more likley solution (or at least promoting a reduction in the problem) not the FW dips. What you are actually seeing with the FW dips is the immediate relief of loose external worms not the immediate cure. FWIW, in weaker species of parasites, FW dips can be an effective cure but from your explainations here, I do not believe that to be the case. In regards to a worm ectoparasite, I cannot see how FW would prevail over Formalin.

I would also put forth that this problem is most likely not occuring soley with the incoming fish but also an infestation within your own systems. With the exception of Digenean, most worm parasites do not need an intermediary host and jump from fish to fish. It is not unreasonable to assume all fish incoming are affected to some degree but as we discussed and both agree, water quality, stress and diet are a large factor in whether the fish is afflicted by it or simpley lives in coexistance with it.

Given your description of this particular affliction, I believe the fish are being impacted by two possible problems/parasites. Your description of this particular issue in regards to the shape of the worm would highly suggest the probability of a nematode which can have a direct or indirect life cycle and may not need the aid of an intermediate host. Again though, the treatments used thus far would not be the best approach but may relieve immediate symptoms. If a gunshot approach was to be used, Praziquantel would be your best choice.

Quote:
The only time we've ever lost fish from dipping were wrasses when we first started the practice. We soon stopped dipping wrasses. Unfortunately, those that are infected die. We would love to know a way to help those that cannot be FW dipped. So far, nothing. You can treat them with the same formalin mix, but if the parasite cannot be erradicated off the fish, then the problems persist and the animal gets sick anyway from being so chewed up and overwhelmed.
Wrasses are not particular susceptible to FW dips any more than other marine teleost species. I would suspect the manner in which the dip was carried out or the level of stress the factor here.

Cheers
Steve
__________________
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2005, 12:00 AM   #39
Aquarium Advice Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Southern California, USA
Posts: 1,538
Steve...bottom line...you cannot reduce the problem without ridding the parasite off the fish and the only way to do that is to give it a FW dip.

Not formalin, not copper, not anything else will rid the fish of these parasites. You can treat all you want with whatever, if the parasite remains on the fish then you truly haven't taken care of the problem and problems will persist until either the parasites are erradicated off the fish or it dies.
__________________
http://www.tricitytropicals.com
------------------------------------
We, as a people, know so much more about outer space than we do about our own oceans. This lack of knowledge can very well spell the dangers that lay in wait for us.

The oceans surely would swallow us before a rock comes down to smite the planet of it's life.
Nov/2004
TCTFish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2005, 01:05 AM   #40
steve-s
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Obviously you're stuck in this rut of what you have convinced yourself of... no matter. I have given you many avenues which you could easily prove or disprove one way or the other. Some I think would be a very minimal cost if not free.

I see no point in further discussing a topic that has a potential conclusion but unfortunately the lack of evidence supporting your theory is by and large unsubstantiated. If you wish to bring something concrete to the discussion, please post at some later date.

Until then, I wish you well.
Cheers
Steve
__________________
  Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
angel, flame, flame angel, ick, sick

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
Sick Flame Angel echidnanebulosa Saltwater & Reef - Sick Fish or Coral 3 10-15-2005 12:28 AM
please help...my flame angel is sick (updated with pic) itzafugasi Saltwater & Reef - Sick Fish or Coral 17 11-23-2004 10:23 PM
Sick Flame Angel birman Saltwater & Reef - Sick Fish or Coral 3 02-11-2004 07:29 PM
Sick Flame Angel Cando Saltwater & Reef - Sick Fish or Coral 8 08-26-2003 12:26 PM
help; sick flame angel clownfish Saltwater & Reef - Sick Fish or Coral 7 02-20-2003 03:42 PM







» Photo Contest Winners








Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:51 AM.


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