Copper then transfer method

[HumbleFish]

Had a brain fart, and just thought I'd get everyone's opinions on a new ich treatment idea...

We all know TT works because trophonts can't stay on a fish for longer than 13 days. So, I'm thinking if you put a fish in QT, got your copper level up to therapeutic levels and kept it there for 13 days; you could then transfer the fish to another QT (just like doing a single TT) and the fish would now be free of ich. Copper being in the water should zap any theronts and "shield" the fish from reinfection. Obviously, the copper level would need to be closely monitored to ensure therapeutic levels are maintained; but you should be doing that anyway when running the standard 30 day treatment, right?

The advantage of this method is you are cutting the time in more than half that the fish is exposed to copper poison. Also, this method should clear a fish of ich (or velvet??) in just 13 days (same as TT), but without having to transfer the fish every 3 days. Just one transfer after 13 days of consecutive treatment with copper at therapeutic levels and you are done!

FWIW; this 13 day "treatment time" also applies to CP and I guess even hyposalinity, if you want to put your faith in that.

Thoughts?

 

[snorvich]

I do not think this is good. Copper is not good for fish and should be reserved for treatment only (which is in line with my philosophy of no chemical prophylaxis except Prazipro). Why try to improve on something that is foolproof?

 

[HumbleFish]

I do not think this is good. Copper is not good for fish and should be reserved for treatment only (which is in line with my philosophy of no chemical prophylaxis except Prazipro). Why try to improve on something that is foolproof?

Is exposing the fish to copper the only reservation you have? Any faulty logic to the method, other than copper exposure? Because I see no reason why those who use CP or even hypo could not also implement this method.

We both know 90% of the people who ask for help with ich in this forum are going to use copper. So, why not cut the time in half that the fish are exposed to it? Also, this treatment idea would also eliminate velvet, would it not? That is something TT does not do.

 

[snorvich]

The problem with copper, other than my opposition to using chemicals for prophylaxis, is that you would have to take great care to maintain exactly a therapeutic dose or you may risk masking a parasite. While copper can treat velvet as well as ich, you would have to maintain the copper for 3 weeks (minimum) in the case of velvet. And, of course, you can not use an anti-ammonia compound with copper. Additionally, it is unclear that cryptocaryon irritans front end life cycle is as predictable in the presence of copper. However, as with all "new" ideas, if you like it, go for it. I will stick with the proven methods.

 

[HumbleFish]

Hmm. Perhaps Chloroquine phosphate would be a better substitute to experiment with.

 

[hedgedrew]

In the tanks ii keep copper I have a biological filter bio balls. What happens after 13 days I break tank down again to get rid of any ich cysts?? Otherwise you would still have to keep copper concentrations up long enough way past 13 days.

 

[HumbleFish]

In the tanks ii keep copper I have a biological filter bio balls. What happens after 13 days I break tank down again to get rid of any ich cysts?? Otherwise you would still have to keep copper concentrations up long enough way past 13 days.

It would be better to do chemical treatment in a temporary QT, and then transfer the fish to your permanent QT for observation.

What got me thinking about this is the flawed logic in treating with copper, CP, hypo for "30 days" and then removing the medication & observing (in the same QT). Don't get me wrong... in the vast majority of cases, 30 days is probably sufficient. But suppose you were to encounter a strain of ich similar to the one described by Colorni and Burgess in their 1997 study? I'll copy & paste below excerpts taken from this article:

The time required for theront development varies. In one study (Colorni and Burgess 1997), theronts emerged from a group of tomonts sometime between 3 and 72 days, with most released from 4 to 8 days after tomont formation.

Because of the prolonged life cycle of Cryptocaryon, affected systems should be treated for a minimum of 3–6 weeks (Noga 1996; C. Innis, pers. comm., T. Clauss, pers. comm.). As described above, in some reports, theronts were not released until 72 days after initial tomont formation, so some situations may require longer treatment time periods.

This study is where the 72 day fallow period comes from for ich. So, what sense does it make to only treat for 30 days, if it can take up to 72 days for theronts to be released? Seems to me you would either need to treat continuously for 72 days, or remove the fish from the infected QT (as outlined in my initial post) to get close to 100% certainty of eradication. Actually, you would need to treat even longer than 72 days to take into account the trophont, protomont stages; not to mention the 24 hrs the theront has to find a host or die. Who wants to leave their fish in copper, hypo or even CP for that long??

Unless my understanding of all this is somehow flawed, this renders chemical treatments & hypo for just "30 days" as unproven methods. It leaves TT standing as the only remaining proven method. What I am trying to do is figure out a way to still use chemical treatments, but more effectively, since many do not employ TT. So, from my way of thinking, removing an ich infected fish that is being treated with chemicals to a different/sterilize QT (at some point) is the only way to outrun tomonts that may have yet to release their theronts. It's the same logic used which makes TT so successful... how can we incorporate that same logic, if treating with chemicals is the only option for someone?

 

[HumbleFish]

Taken from this sticky:

Once a trophont leaves the fish, it becomes a protomont. During this phase, it loses its cilia, flattens its surfaces, and moves onto a substrate for about 2"“18 hours. After this stage, the organism stops, sticks to the surface, and encysts, whereupon it becomes a tomont. The cyst hardens in about 8"“12 hours (Colorni 1985). Before the cyst forms, the protomont may be susceptible to some treatments for a short period of time. However, once the cyst has formed and hardened around the tomont, it has greater protection against common treatments

The part in red, how certain is this? Of course, you would need to begin treatment almost immediately after putting the fish in QT to be certain you nailed all the protomonts before they could encyst. Not really feasible with copper or hypo, as the former should be raised gradually while the latter must be lowered slowly... :worried:

 

[hedgedrew]

I'm not sure I followed you. But something has too go in my hospital tank otherwise bacteria will surpress. So if you remove sick fish after 13 days I'm then placing another one in there with copper and cysts that will hatch and have to go through whole cycle.

 

[hedgedrew]

Btw I maybe the only guy in world who still uses old school copper suflate citric acid and not chelated copper at concentrations of. 15 to. 20 ppm. And I have no issues adjusting fish slowly. Just one pop of one drop per gallon. But yes you must stay on top of it every 6 to 12 hrs first few days at it dissipates and re add.

 

[Deinonych]

I'm not sure I followed you. But something has too go in my hospital tank otherwise bacteria will surpress. So if you remove sick fish after 13 days I'm then placing another one in there with copper and cysts that will hatch and have to go through whole cycle.

No, he's saying that the fish will be removed from the first tank and placed in a second tank with fresh saltwater after 13 days. The first tank would be broken down and sterilized.

Interesting concept, but I'll stick with TT.

 

[HumbleFish]

I'm not sure I followed you. But something has too go in my hospital tank otherwise bacteria will surpress. So if you remove sick fish after 13 days I'm then placing another one in there with copper and cysts that will hatch and have to go through whole cycle.

If you place a fish with ich in your HT, then you are also infecting the entire HT. Same concept as if you put an infected fish in your DT. But with a HT you are able to use chemicals/hyposalinity to cleanse the tank of ich (and prevent the fish from getting reinfected) once the life cycle of the parasite reaches the stage where it can be successfully targeted by chemical/hypo treatment. This is the free swimming or theront stage. In most cases, ich's entire life cycle completes in roughly 2 weeks time - so 30 days of chemical/hypo treatment is usually more than sufficient. However, the Colorni and Burgess study proved that not all strains of ich "play by the established rules". In their study, it took up to 72 days for all of the theronts to be released - so the tomonts that produced those theronts would have been alive & well for up to 72 days since they are unaffected by copper, CP or hypo conditions. Only the theronts are affected.

You can leave your HT fallow without impacting the nitrifying bacteria too greatly. Just add a pinch of flake every few days to maintain bacterial levels.

 

[hedgedrew]

Ya we do that sometimes. But I like to just keep copper at therapeutic levels all the time in hp so bacteria don't get suppressed and used to the copper. I don't understand how you supposed to keep fish is copper for 13 days without biological filter unless we doing daily 50 to 70 per water changes like I will do in bare tank with antibiotics.

 

[hedgedrew]

Btw I don't like to keep hp fallow with small flake food cause then when you really need it and put fish in you get ammonia spike from bacteria adjustment

 

[HumbleFish]

Ya we do that sometimes. But I like to just keep copper at therapeutic levels all the time in hp so bacteria don't get suppressed and used to the copper. I don't understand how you supposed to keep fish is copper for 13 days without biological filter unless we doing daily 50 to 70 per water changes like I will do in bare tank with antibiotics.

Basically, you would need to do water changes as needed to control ammonia. I can live with that for 13 days. I use Seachem ammonia alert badges to continuously monitor. Not to say you couldn't utilize biological filtration during that 13 day time period - a seeded sponge in a HOB, perhaps? But you would need to sterilize the sponge afterwards, thus killing all the bacteria it contained. I keep multiple Aquaclear sponges going down in my sump at all times, just in case.

 

[hedgedrew]

Ya. For sum reason I feel better doing that with antibiotic treatments or even cp. And with copper I keep bacteria in wet dry used to it. In the future in new build we will have 4 qt hospital tanks in racks 180 each. One for copper only with bio filter. One for prazzi one for cp or antibiotics and one for observation.

 

[wooden_reefer]

For most fish, the eradication of ich is in general quite successful and copper is the drug of choice, used in a QT with robust nitrification (very well cycled medium) for long duration. This has been my experience for decades and has worked quite well for me, never failed me yet.

I am interested in alternatives for two reasons. First, I am now interested in fish with which copper cannot be used. Second, copper is potentially toxic and there can be genetic variations. If an even safer drug is available, it makes sense to have an alternative. In medicine, a drug does not have to be outright dangerous in order for one to seek a safer alternative.

TT should be a consideration in some situations. Some fish acclimate very easily and will eat well within hours after being handled, and are rather immune to external bacterial infection. TT at once could be good for these.

Many fish will not eat well if handled often and during transit and holding. For such, TT at once is a mistake. What will be the health condition after TT with more poor nutrition? For these (for me most), acclimation for recovery from poor nutrition after collection and transport will be the primary objective ASAP, without delay.

The greatest problem with CP is that it is destroyed by UV, which for me is a necessity against external bacterial infection, practically speaking. External bacterial infection is more likely during the first several weeks, IME, so the risk of discontinuing UV after week 7, say, for CP treatment is a possibility. The first six to seven weeks could be with either diatom filtration or a safe dose of copper, the last six weeks switch to CP without UV.

I will even consider TT, but only after acclimation and regaining a few weeks of good diet and better nutrition. If I do TT, it will be with renewal of cycled medium, a portion at a time after each transfer, to avoid any ammonia. I shun Amquel or Prime when unnecessary because I am not certain of drug interaction (with drugs against bacterial infection, fluke, and worms) and cycled medium is cheap, easy, and more fundamentally sound than chemical means to deactivate ammonia.

 

[hedgedrew]

That's my issue with ttm. Bilogical filter and if you transfer you contaminate. I guess you could put new rock in each time from tank with no fish.

 

[wooden_reefer]

That's my issue with ttm. Bilogical filter and if you transfer you contaminate. I guess you could put new rock in each time from tank with no fish.

Ammonia needs not be the issue for TT.

Cycle medium and portion it into many; use one such portion for each transfer and not again for the duration of the treatment.

I think con against TT is the extra work in handling.

I know for sure some fish will not do well if handled often; they will not eat well. The nutrition consideration is paramount and decisive in most situations.

Fish should be in the best health after ich eradication, under the best nutrition. Fearing cooper over this real long term risk is not wise.

Some fish are good candidates for TT. Some will eat well within hours of being handled and seldom if ever get bacterial infection. There is a role for TT, but it should not be the major method in general.

 

[Deinonych]

That's my issue with ttm. Bilogical filter and if you transfer you contaminate. I guess you could put new rock in each time from tank with no fish.

I've never had a problem with ammonia in TTM. I usually add some Prime at the end of the second day just to be safe, but the fish aren't in the tank long enough (three days per transfer) for ammonia to be problematic. Now, I could see it being a concern with larger fish, though. My experience has been with small fish (under 5").