Common Misconceptions In the Hobby

[Paul B]

quote: my LFS says that all wild-caught fish have it. It's just inherent, with cysts essentially hanging out in the fish's mucus until a period of stress arises. This is why some fish, like the tangs - which are easily stressed, are more prone to it. Their immune systems just can't keep it at bay. Makes sense to me.

Ich does not hang out on fish until stress causes it to infect but ich can live happily in your tank (as it does in mine). The paracites hatch depending on temperature, and actively move around looking for another (or the same) fish to complete their life cycle on. If the fish are very healthy and for reasons not fully understood (even though many people think the life cycle of this paracite is well understood) you can have ich in your tank continousely for years, or decades if you keep adding fish, without having an outbreak.
Or of course, you can quarantine and keep ich out of your tank.
I now have a bottom dwelling goby that has ich. He is in my reef with about 15 other fish which do not have it. This particular gobi has always had a problem competing with other fish for food and he peridocally gets very thin and floats at the surface near death. At this point he becomes covered in paracites. I rescued him and transfered him to another tank where he is fed well and he will recover with no treatment. This has happened to this fish three times already and it has happened to other fish that I keep. About 8 months ago my hippo tang was also covered in ich as was my fire clown. When the stressful event is removed and the fish is fed well a diet that is natural to it, it recovers.
I do not know why this happens but it has been happening for over 25 years. There is obviousely ich in my tank but it never appears until the fish are either dying from an accident like jumping out, heater malfunction or an accidental poisoning.
In any event, when the fish are in breeding condition (which captive fish rarely are) they never exhibit ich (in my tank anwway)
I don't care how many experts study ich and report on it's life cycle. There is something about this paracite that is not completely understood. It certainly can live in a tank and not be a problem although in many tanks it is fatal almost always if not treated. I hope someday we figure this out along with that hair algae and cyano problem, two more pet peeves of mine :smokin:
Have a great day.
And sorry, experts

 

[Ninong]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=11128560#post11128560 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Paul B
...ich can live happily in your tank (as it does in mine). The paracites hatch depending on temperature, and actively move around looking for another (or the same) fish to complete their life cycle on. If the fish are very healthy and for reasons not fully understood (even though many people think the life cycle of this paracite is well understood) you can have ich in your tank continousely for years, or decades if you keep adding fish, without having an outbreak.

The operative phrase is "if you keep adding fish."

You cannot maintain a viable population of Cryptocaryon irritans without adding new infected fish to your system on a regular basis. Even if you say that a few of the fish in your system have very low levels of infestation that aren't noticeable and go undetected and are thus maintaining the parasite's life cycle, it will die off within 12 months due to senescence.

The life cycle of C. irritans has been extensively studied at this point. Burgess and Matthews (1994) were attempting to maintain a viable population of C. irritans which could be used in later studies. To maintain the parasite populations, they needed host fish in order for the trophonts to feed and continue the life cycle. Each host fish was only used once in a process of serial transition such that none of the hosts would die or develop an immunity. While the procedure worked very well and enabled them to maintain populations for some time, the viability of the populations decreased with time and none of the 7 isolates they used survived more than 34 cycles, around 10 to 11 months. They suggest this is due to senescence and aging in cell lines is well recognised in Ciliophora.

The presence of aging cell lines in C. irritans suggests that an aquarium that has been running for longer than 12 months without any additions is unlikely to have any surviving "Ich" parasites. Here.

 

[Philwd]

Ninong - I found a different study claiming that after 2 years the ich lines were still going strong. I posted it a while back on other ich threads. Maybe different strains. I don't have the link handy.

 

[Ninong]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=11128865#post11128865 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Philwd
Ninong - I found a different study claiming that after 2 years the ich lines were still going strong. I posted it a while back on other ich threads. Maybe different strains. I don't have the link handy.

I just googled "Cryptocaryon irritans senescence" and came up with the following.

A Standardized Method for the In vivo Maintenance of Cryptocaryon irritans (Ciliophora) Using the … - all 3 versions »
PJ Burgess, RA Matthews - The Journal of Parasitology, 1994 - JSTOR
... here was associated with a de- cline in viability, suggestive of senescence. ... Hypersaline
and chemical control of Cryptocaryon irritans in red snapper, Lutjanus ...
Cited by 11 - Related Articles - Web Search - BL Direct

Two year study on the infectivity of Ichthyophthirius multifiliis in channel catfish Ictalurus … - all 4 versions »
DH Xu, PH Klesius - Diseases of Aquatic Organisms, 2004 - int-res.com
... fac- tors may be considered when addressing the senescence of the ... HW, Dawe DL (1995)
Ichthyophthirius multifiliis and Cryptocaryon irritans (Phylum Ciliophora ...
Cited by 2 - Related Articles - Web Search - BL Direct

The I-antigens of Ichthyophthirius multifiliis are GPI-Anchored Proteins - all 6 versions »
TG CLARK, YAN GAO, J GAERTIG, X WANG, G CHENG - The Journal of Eukaryotic Microbiology - bioone.org
... However, the G1 isolate was lost due to senescence (Clark, Lin, and Dickerson 1995 ...
Ichthyophthirius multifiliis and Cryptocaryon irritans (Phylum Ciliophora). ...
Cited by 16 - Related Articles - Web Search - BL Direct

The first reference is the one I'm citing. Are you talking about the second reference? If so, I'm not familiar with that study and I can't access it online. Did it cover C. irritans as well as Ichthyophthirius multifiliis?

P.S. -- As you probably know, C. irritans is only distantly related to I. multifilius in spite of their similar life cycles.

 

[greenbean36191]

The only mention of Cryptocaryon in the last two is the title of one of the references cited (the same reference in both papers).

 

[Ninong]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=11129194#post11129194 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by greenbean36191
The only mention of Cryptocaryon in the last two is the title of one of the references cited (the same reference in both papers).

Does that mean you're familiar with them and they don't cover C. irritans senescence? Maybe they just studied I. multifilius? Can you access them online?

 

[greenbean36191]

Yes, to all of those questions.

Here's the paper Philwd posted in an earlier thread:
Yoshinaga, T. & H.W. Dickerson. 1994. "Laboratory Propagation of Cryptocaryon irritans on a Saltwater-Adapted Poecilia Hybrid, the Black Molly" Journal of Aquatic Animal Health 6:197-201, 1994.

 

[Paul B]

The operative phrase is "if you keep adding fish."

Ninong, thats why I purposely added that line.
I know all about Burgess's study of ich and I am not sure if I agree with him or disagree since I have not done scientific studies myself. In any case it has no bearing on my above statement. Most people add something at least once a year.
I personally add animals all the time, some from stores and a lot from the sea. For some reason, sometimes, ich can live in a tank full of fish without causing harm. I have proof of that but I don't know why. I wish I did.
I am fairly certain that no one else knows why either.
I have been following Burgess work for many years, since he was a fresh water "Expert"
Take care.
Paul

 

[Aquarist007]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=11129479#post11129479 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Paul B
Ninong, thats why I purposely added that line.
I know all about Burgess's study of ich and I am not sure if I agree with him or disagree since I have not done scientific studies myself. In any case it has no bearing on my above statement. Most people add something at least once a year.
I personally add animals all the time, some from stores and a lot from the sea. For some reason, sometimes, ich can live in a tank full of fish without causing harm. I have proof of that but I don't know why. I wish I did.
I am fairly certain that no one else knows why either.
I have been following Burgess work for many years, since he was a fresh water "Expert"
Take care.
Paul

don't you think alot of that can depend on diet/vitamins etc and lack of stress for the fish?

 

[Paul B]

don't you think alot of that can depend on diet/vitamins etc and lack of stress for the fish?

Yes Capt. I do. I also think there is something besides these three things. It may be that fish in breeding condition have some sort of immunity from the paracite. Fish in a store are very susepticle to ich probably from all of the things you mention. I am sure stress plays a large part. Confined fish start out with a disadvantage no matter how well we feed them or how many vitamins we provide. They know they are confined and they don't like it. Thats why you never see adult fish in 12" of water as we usually keep them. I have seen royal gramma's in 120 feet of water, they are there because they want to be deep. If you released our fish back to the sea the first thing they will do is head for deep water, they just feel safer there. Tangs or so called, "Ich magnets" will immediately look for their kind because they are schooling fish and are almost never seen alone.
Our fish are stressed no matter what we do but if they exhibit breeding behavior they may have gotten over their fear and therefore their stress. If your fish are not exhibiting breeding behavior they are not as healthy as you think they are. Fish do two things all the time, eat and breed. Even a lone clownfish will clean off a nesting place and chase other fish away, gobies will do the same thing. Tangs will not do this for a few reasons, they don't build nests and they will be too stressed in a tank without a school thats why they are "Ich magnets" It is our fault not theirs.
I don't know if stress is the only factor or what role it plays, I also do not know if as some authors suggest, a fish can build up an immunity to ich. It seems to me that would be like having an immunity to bullets as these paracites inhabit the outside of the fish. As far as I know we humans can't build up an immunity to mosquetoes or bee stings, we may have an immunity to the venem but paracites do not kill the host with venem or even sucking the blood, they kill by blocking the gills with their bodies.
Fish stress is not an easy thing to study. Human stress is not too easy and we can talk.

 

[greenbean36191]

Developing immunity to ich is nothing at all like developing immunity to bullets or mosquitoes. Despite their proximity to the surface of the skin, these are internal parasites. It's more like developing an immunity to traveler's diarrhea. There are many other cases of animals developing immunity to internal macroparasites, including other fish parasites, so the idea that immunity can be acquired doesn't seem far fetched at all IMO.

I think Burgess and Matthews demonstrated pretty well that fish can develop immunity to ich. 30-80% of previously exposed fish showing no parasites vs. 0% of naive fish is pretty significant. They also showed extremely significant differences in the parasite loads. It's hard to ask for an experiment that gives more cut and dry results than that.

 

[Aquarist007]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=11130087#post11130087 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Paul B
Yes Capt. I do. I also think there is something besides these three things. It may be that fish in breeding condition have some sort of immunity from the paracite. Fish in a store are very susepticle to ich probably from all of the things you mention. I am sure stress plays a large part. Confined fish start out with a disadvantage no matter how well we feed them or how many vitamins we provide. They know they are confined and they don't like it. Thats why you never see adult fish in 12" of water as we usually keep them. I have seen royal gramma's in 120 feet of water, they are there because they want to be deep. If you released our fish back to the sea the first thing they will do is head for deep water, they just feel safer there. Tangs or so called, "Ich magnets" will immediately look for their kind because they are schooling fish and are almost never seen alone.
Our fish are stressed no matter what we do but if they exhibit breeding behavior they may have gotten over their fear and therefore their stress. If your fish are not exhibiting breeding behavior they are not as healthy as you think they are. Fish do two things all the time, eat and breed. Even a lone clownfish will clean off a nesting place and chase other fish away, gobies will do the same thing. Tangs will not do this for a few reasons, they don't build nests and they will be too stressed in a tank without a school thats why they are "Ich magnets" It is our fault not theirs.
I don't know if stress is the only factor or what role it plays, I also do not know if as some authors suggest, a fish can build up an immunity to ich. It seems to me that would be like having an immunity to bullets as these paracites inhabit the outside of the fish. As far as I know we humans can't build up an immunity to mosquetoes or bee stings, we may have an immunity to the venem but paracites do not kill the host with venem or even sucking the blood, they kill by blocking the gills with their bodies.
Fish stress is not an easy thing to study. Human stress is not too easy and we can talk.

thanks for the detailed answers Paul--as always it is welcomed and appreciated.
I understand what you are saying about the fish being understressed because we are not totally matching real reef conditions for them.
However how much do you feel the conception of adaptation factors into this. I know earlier in this thread Greenbean has suggested that marine fish can adapt to fluctuations in temperature etc.

Greenbean---I am not quoting your here--its just my take on what you wrote

I think it was mentioned around the idea that we can actually teach fish to be less adapatable to fluctuations by maintaining systems that have very little fluctuations---which is acutally not the norm for real reefs.

That said can we not expect that our fish could adapt to differences in water depth from the real reef.
I keep my numbers on the high side with fish--and have three tangs---would the larger number of fish also help the tangs with the stress of not having schools?

I am wondering if your example of the gramma has other factors rather then depth---at 120 feet --are the temp and oxygen levels not going to play a big part?

These are not challenges--rather meaningful questions---I appreciate being able to discuss things with such experienced and knowledgeable people like you and greenbean(not to mention the many others):smokin:

 

[Aquarist007]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=11131529#post11131529 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by greenbean36191
Developing immunity to ich is nothing at all like developing immunity to bullets or mosquitoes. Despite their proximity to the surface of the skin, these are internal parasites. It's more like developing an immunity to traveler's diarrhea. There are many other cases of animals developing immunity to internal macroparasites, including other fish parasites, so the idea that immunity can be acquired doesn't seem far fetched at all IMO.

I think Burgess and Matthews demonstrated pretty well that fish can develop immunity to ich. 30-80% of previously exposed fish showing no parasites vs. 0% of naive fish is pretty significant. They also showed extremely significant differences in the parasite loads. It's hard to ask for an experiment that gives more cut and dry results than that.

Accepting this could have a large impact on the use of qt tanks----why qt for ich if you build up the immunites of your fish in the main tank.
I am not considering other practical uses for qt tanks here like getting more difficult fish to eat, treating with chemicals etc etc)

 

[greenbean36191]

Accepting this could have a large impact on the use of qt tanks----why qt for ich if you build up the immunites of your fish in the main tank. I am not considering other practical uses for qt tanks here like getting more difficult fish to eat, treating with chemicals etc etc)

Because the immunity is not total for many fish, meaning they can still harbor the parasite and the odds of all fish in a tank developing total immunity is low. Any future changes can still allow population growth of the parasite, causing renewed outbreak, even in fish with resistance. The immunological memory also isn't permanent, so even fish that develop immunity at one point can become infected again if they go long enough without exposure. You could in theory eradicate it from the tank through immunity or at least keep it at very low levels only to have it come back on with the addition of a new fish.

 

[Aquarist007]

such is life

 

[Paul B]

Greenbean old buddy, I disagree that Ich is an internal paracite.
Malaria travels in the blood and "traveler's disease" which is a paracite which inhabits the intestional tract of humans are internal paracites but ich lives on, not in a fish. I guess you could say it is embedded in the mucus of the animal but It does not live inside the blood or organs of fish. If it did, it would not be able to reproduce. This is of course only my opinion based on my experience.
I am still not convinced one way or the other about immunity even though it seems my fish are immune unless they are severly stressed.
The paracites do not (as far as I know) inject or otherwise add any toxins to a fish system that would cause the fish immune system to respond with any antibodies which would cause immunity. As I said, I am not 100% positive of this and I don't think Burgess is either. I know about the immunity studies but I feel there is something else that causes some fish to be more suseptable.
Capt. I think fish are only slightly, if at all, able to get "used" to shallow water depths, different temperatures or not schooling. Fish have evolved in a very stable envirnment over thousands of years. They had no reason to adapt to different conditions. They respond by dying.
Fish have very definate ideas about which conditions suit them thats one reason why the fish are not equally mixed on reefs all over the world. The oceans have been there for millions of years but certain fish are only in one place or even one island even though there are many island chains close by where they could migrate to. I imagine copper band butterflies could not swim across the open sea to the Caribbean but there are many places in the South Pacific where they could get to where they are not found. I believe it is because of the very exact conditions the fish evolved in.
If fish could evolve to live in different temperatures you would think that by now the fish in the tropics would have moved north to New York. Only because of Global warming do we have tropical fish up north but it is because our water is getting warmer, not because the fish evolved.
I think a fish like a tang which lives in schools of a few hundred individuals for protection and desends on corals to eat algae in 30' of water will never get over it. They will obviousely live in a tank but if you see tangs in the open sea, they look much better than any captive fish no matter what you feed them.
We also don't talk about fish exercise. I don't know if it has any bearing on their health but a tang in the sea swims constantly and fights a current, at night they stay hidden in the coral. I followed moorish Idols many times and they constantly take 100 yard treks around the reef. Our fish are over weight, under stimulated, poorly fed and under exercised.
I even forgot what this thread was about, I apologize to the original poster.
I get carried away sometimes.
Have a great day.
Paul :smokin:

 

[Aquarist007]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=11136433#post11136433 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Paul B
Greenbean old buddy, I disagree that Ich is an internal paracite.
Malaria travels in the blood and "traveler's disease" which is a paracite which inhabits the intestional tract of humans are internal paracites but ich lives on, not in a fish. I guess you could say it is embedded in the mucus of the animal but It does not live inside the blood or organs of fish. If it did, it would not be able to reproduce. This is of course only my opinion based on my experience.
I am still not convinced one way or the other about immunity even though it seems my fish are immune unless they are severly stressed.
The paracites do not (as far as I know) inject or otherwise add any toxins to a fish system that would cause the fish immune system to respond with any antibodies which would cause immunity. As I said, I am not 100% positive of this and I don't think Burgess is either. I know about the immunity studies but I feel there is something else that causes some fish to be more suseptable.
Capt. I think fish are only slightly, if at all, able to get "used" to shallow water depths, different temperatures or not schooling. Fish have evolved in a very stable envirnment over thousands of years. They had no reason to adapt to different conditions. They respond by dying.
Fish have very definate ideas about which conditions suit them thats one reason why the fish are not equally mixed on reefs all over the world. The oceans have been there for millions of years but certain fish are only in one place or even one island even though there are many island chains close by where they could migrate to. I imagine copper band butterflies could not swim across the open sea to the Caribbean but there are many places in the South Pacific where they could get to where they are not found. I believe it is because of the very exact conditions the fish evolved in.
If fish could evolve to live in different temperatures you would think that by now the fish in the tropics would have moved north to New York. Only because of Global warming do we have tropical fish up north but it is because our water is getting warmer, not because the fish evolved.
I think a fish like a tang which lives in schools of a few hundred individuals for protection and desends on corals to eat algae in 30' of water will never get over it. They will obviousely live in a tank but if you see tangs in the open sea, they look much better than any captive fish no matter what you feed them.
We also don't talk about fish exercise. I don't know if it has any bearing on their health but a tang in the sea swims constantly and fights a current, at night they stay hidden in the coral. I followed moorish Idols many times and they constantly take 100 yard treks around the reef. Our fish are over weight, under stimulated, poorly fed and under exercised.
I even forgot what this thread was about, I apologize to the original poster.
I get carried away sometimes.
Have a great day.
Paul :smokin:

Your covered Paul--the thread is on misconceptions in the reef hobby--and you've hit on a great one.

After reading this post it gives one kind of a downer. I bought a lab retreiver --I knew at the time that my responsibility was to provide it daily exercise. It gets an hour a day--in the bush---I feel I am meeting that animals needs.

However with what you have said above it sounds like no matter how well intentioned we are --we should not keep reef fish --because we can never meet the criteriae for them on the real reefs. I look at my three tangs now and I feel sorry I ever purchased them.
Help me put a positive spin back on reefing.:eek2:

 

[Paul B]

Capt, don't think like that at all. I said they will never be completely over their fears but I have kept fish alive for 18 years. He may not have adapted but he certainly was not cut short from it. Fish will obviousely live in a tank as a parrakeit will live many years in a cage. If we do our jobs correctly fish will live longer in our tanks then they do in the sea.
I doubt they have feelings or could be considered "happy"
They just know food and sex, kind of like us.
They also don't "miss" the reefs.
I just want to state that they "may" be more suseptacle to some diseases in a tank.
My fish seem very healthy and are in breeeding condition. Their scales are like velvet and their eyes shiny. They rarely hide and their shape is convex. My fish also almost never get ich. (I don't quarantine, but you should) I don't know if it is an immune thing or for some reason fish in great health have different slime which protects them (which could be considered an immune response)
It took my tank about ten years before ich was not a problem. I lost many tanks of fish to ich and before my tank was a reef I had to continousely keep copper in the water.
I can easily make ich appear on my fish by stressing them almost to the point of death. All of my fish exhibit ich if they are near death from some other cause like jumping out or as happened recently when my water company used zinc to treat the water. My corals died and most of the fish got ich as did the animals in a large LFS a few blocks away. The ich disappeared on it's own when I improved the water conditions.
Food is a big factor in this and one of the big problems in this hobby. I believe some people still feed flakes to salt water fish every day. They need fresh, preferably live food.
If you feed live blackworms to fish like damsels every day for two weeks they will be spawning all over the place. I used to breed them and it was very easy to get them in the mood. I still feed live blackworms almost every day along with other things and my fish that can spawn in a tank are spawning or are trying to find a mate to spawn with.
Yes frozen Angel formula, mysis, shrimp are also good foods but live blackworms are the best by far to keep fish in breeding condition. I understand they are not available everywhere which is a shame as they are very common in almost any store in NY for about a buck for a weeks supply.
I also hatch brine shrimp every day. My fish don't get ich, maybe thats why.
:lol:

 

[greenbean36191]

From Colorni and Burgess (1997):
"The trophonts of a Red Sea isolate fed on body Fluids, tissue
debris and whole cells of gilthead seabream Sparus aurata."

"Cryptocaryon irritans trophonts live completely embedded within the host's epithelium..." There are also micrographs showing the embedded trophonts completely encased within the epithelium.

"After contact is made with the host integument, the theront forces its way into the epithelium, disrupting the epithelial cells and settling adjacent to the germinative layer.... The tissue damage caused by theront penetration heals rapidly and there is no sign of penetration damage in fish with 1 day old trophonts."

"In branchial tissue, the parasites settle on the basement membrane [the non-cellular layer directly below a cell layer] of the gill filament and rapidly (within 20±30 min) become enclosed by a thin layer of epithelial cells.... When infecting the eyes, C. irritans settles on the corneal basement membrane."

Parasites don't have to inject toxins in their hosts to illicit an immune response. Almost any foreign material will get a response (hence the development of surgical plastics), especially those with proteins that the body recognizes as non-self. Ich and other large parasites like worms have proteins that the body can recognize and develop specific antibodies against just as they would viruses or bacteria. In practice though, larger parasites tend to take longer to develop immunity to and the immunological memory doesn't last as long as with microparasites.

 

[Aquarist007]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=11136809#post11136809 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Paul B
Capt, don't think like that at all. I said they will never be completely over their fears but I have kept fish alive for 18 years. He may not have adapted but he certainly was not cut short from it. Fish will obviousely live in a tank as a parrakeit will live many years in a cage. If we do our jobs correctly fish will live longer in our tanks then they do in the sea.
I doubt they have feelings or could be considered "happy"
They just know food and sex, kind of like us.
They also don't "miss" the reefs.
I just want to state that they "may" be more suseptacle to some diseases in a tank.
My fish seem very healthy and are in breeeding condition. Their scales are like velvet and their eyes shiny. They rarely hide and their shape is convex. My fish also almost never get ich. (I don't quarantine, but you should) I don't know if it is an immune thing or for some reason fish in great health have different slime which protects them (which could be considered an immune response)
It took my tank about ten years before ich was not a problem. I lost many tanks of fish to ich and before my tank was a reef I had to continousely keep copper in the water.
I can easily make ich appear on my fish by stressing them almost to the point of death. All of my fish exhibit ich if they are near death from some other cause like jumping out or as happened recently when my water company used zinc to treat the water. My corals died and most of the fish got ich as did the animals in a large LFS a few blocks away. The ich disappeared on it's own when I improved the water conditions.
Food is a big factor in this and one of the big problems in this hobby. I believe some people still feed flakes to salt water fish every day. They need fresh, preferably live food.
If you feed live blackworms to fish like damsels every day for two weeks they will be spawning all over the place. I used to breed them and it was very easy to get them in the mood. I still feed live blackworms almost every day along with other things and my fish that can spawn in a tank are spawning or are trying to find a mate to spawn with.
Yes frozen Angel formula, mysis, shrimp are also good foods but live blackworms are the best by far to keep fish in breeding condition. I understand they are not available everywhere which is a shame as they are very common in almost any store in NY for about a buck for a weeks supply.
I also hatch brine shrimp every day. My fish don't get ich, maybe thats why.
:lol:

Paul I realize Nemo and Ariel are not real(although the concept of a red headed mermaid is fantasiable) :lol:

(you and I might be the only ones old enough to remember) Every since the Mondo Condos of the 60's I have realized there is much cruelty to animals in this world. Personally I have always tried to avoid cruelty to animals and have taught this to my students also.
What you are saying makes alot of sense but at the same time we should also realize that we can cause fish alot of stress by lack of knowledge or experience------for example keeping a large tank in a 29gal nano cube--many times you see that posted and when you read between the lines the poster actually was advised incorrectly or did not know better.

For this reason I find your posting and those of the other really experinced very valuable and you never need to apologize for going on in detail etc :smokin: