seahorsedreams
New member
Oh I gave up.... he lives with Ich.
Fallow period for cryptocaryon irritans (ich)
- Thread starter snorvich
- Start date
- Status
Urchinhead
New member
Don't give up Renee! Just treat him/her like a patient and do what's best. 
seahorsedreams
New member
It's been over a year. He hasn't had a bout since we moved last summer. He got over it himself. I just dosed vitamin C and started some Beta Glucan each time to support him. I figure when he stops being stressed, his immunity returns to normal and he beats the numbers down so I can't see it. He's had and beat it himself 3 times. I'm not gonna mess with that. Now when he moves out of this tank and into a tank with others, he'll be treated.
He's lucky I don't treat him as dinner..... he's eatin' and leftovers size. Actually, I shouldn't complain.... he deals with his own issues.
He's lucky I don't treat him as dinner..... he's eatin' and leftovers size. Actually, I shouldn't complain.... he deals with his own issues.
jcw
Active member
yellowbellied
New member
Seems like tangs are very easily infected. Mine are. The others seem to be not as affected or at all?
Steve, I really like what you wrote about ich on here. However I think there is an error in the method. Why do we treat for copper for 4 weeks, but fallow the DT for 9 or 10?
Say when yo put you fish in the HT timer starts, but say you also introduce cysts that arent going to hatch for say 40 days. Not even as far strecthed as 72 days. Just 40 days
Well the copper has been removed after 30 days, now those cysts hatch, fish are reinfected. And as we all know, they may have subclinical symptoms. So we re introduce them to the DT, then down the road, BAM more ich. Do you see where Im going with this? Im really wondering if we need a 9 or 10 week copper treatment. That makes more sense to me. The copper period needs to be equal length as the fallow period. If it isnt, the practice is flawed and doesnt make sense.
Your input?
Say when yo put you fish in the HT timer starts, but say you also introduce cysts that arent going to hatch for say 40 days. Not even as far strecthed as 72 days. Just 40 days
Well the copper has been removed after 30 days, now those cysts hatch, fish are reinfected. And as we all know, they may have subclinical symptoms. So we re introduce them to the DT, then down the road, BAM more ich. Do you see where Im going with this? Im really wondering if we need a 9 or 10 week copper treatment. That makes more sense to me. The copper period needs to be equal length as the fallow period. If it isnt, the practice is flawed and doesnt make sense.
Your input?
seahorsedreams
New member
Different species of fish have a better resistance than others. One study involved several species, all under the same conditions. Some consistently avoided infection all together, some would get non-lethal bouts of it and then there were those that died no matter what the treatment, once it was infected.
THAT it itself doesn't help the mass confusion in the hobby. I can't expect to have the same results as Joe Blow down the street and Jane Doe across the road, when I have lions, one has tangs and the other has a tank full of anthias. All these fish can possibly respond differently to the infection itself.
There are way too many variables with this infection which leads to SO many different outcomes from SO many different hobbyists. Then the forums and articles out there, which are mostly just opinions, are taken as fact.
Even the books some use as bibles, are JUST opinions. Good opinions, based on experiences, but still all the same, just opinions and interpretations that can indeed be wrong. Status in the hobby does not guarantee facts, yet we believe them as such.
There are tons of academic peer reviewed journals out there. THOSE are the things we need to be reading.
hvacman250
New member
I think you are correct, however...
I believe 4 weeks of copper is supposed to be followed by 4 weeks of observation in case your scenario happens. But you are correct by my reasoning; fish should stay in copper as long as the tank is fallow.
I am about to employ a copper/tank transfer hybrid on my fish. Once I get my copper level to 0.35, I am going to do a 3x tank transfer (12 days) followed by 16 additional days of copper to equal 4 weeks. This should give me the best chance to eradicate the disease.
Cptn Spaulding
New member
I'm not sure how copper only kills one stage on the ich life cycle, seeing as though it destroys all types of invertebrates and what not. I have treated many a fish with copper solutions and formalin solutions. My favorite has to be Cupramine, as it is copper based which I enjoy more than formalin, and is safer than most copper treatments on the fish. The formalin based solution I used was Ich-X. It was a daily dose and I hate dealing with any form of formaldehyde, but it always cleared up in a QT within 1.5-2 weeks max, with the fish not contracting the disease after being reintroduced, although there was a UV sterilizer on the display system, which I suppose helped. Cupramine worked just as fast, if not faster. Again, same system being reintroduced, no ich. Now this is all just personal experience, probably moreso than most hobbyists (in charge of a LFS QT tank for 2 years) and I am no expert in marine cryptocarion. IMO if you treat a fish (now of course this depends on the fish) in a small QT tank for 9 weeks, the fish probably wouldn't last that duration, especially if it is a tang, or some other touchy fish.
I recently had an ich outbreak in my tank; killed all but one fish in 6 days since the start of the disease (the sixline living was never bothered by it). The tank was fallow for 4-5 weeks, and I just added a pair of young true percs about 4 days ago. I will try to post on here in the future to let you all know how they are doing after 4-5 weeks of being fallow in a mixed reef tank (aka no treatments, hyper/hyposalinity, or temperature change, no sterilizer, just a thorough sand siphoning once). So far, so good, and am planning on reintroducing my old sixline back into the tank on Monday, which I think at this point might be immune to ich, or darn close to it.
I have heard the life cycle of this horrible organism was 2 weeks to 72 days, depending on the strain. I also heard when they fall off of the fish, they go into the sand bed, so eggs are found in the sand bed and on rocks. I suppose this makes sense, seeing as though a fish can have a few spots on its body one day, and the next (which at night normally the fish tend to stay in one area, especially a sick fish) there will be tons of them on it, and only on that fish...most of the time. I suppose if you want to play it safe, wait a little longer, and give it the whole 8-9 week period. I, on the other hand, became a victim of restlessness, and waited half that amount of time. It is very hard to give a general guideline to an organism like ich, because there are different strains and some live longer/are more resilient to treatments than others. Anyone else have a fallow reef after an ich infestation? How long did you wait until adding new fish? Any new ich on the new fish after introduced?
I recently had an ich outbreak in my tank; killed all but one fish in 6 days since the start of the disease (the sixline living was never bothered by it). The tank was fallow for 4-5 weeks, and I just added a pair of young true percs about 4 days ago. I will try to post on here in the future to let you all know how they are doing after 4-5 weeks of being fallow in a mixed reef tank (aka no treatments, hyper/hyposalinity, or temperature change, no sterilizer, just a thorough sand siphoning once). So far, so good, and am planning on reintroducing my old sixline back into the tank on Monday, which I think at this point might be immune to ich, or darn close to it.
I have heard the life cycle of this horrible organism was 2 weeks to 72 days, depending on the strain. I also heard when they fall off of the fish, they go into the sand bed, so eggs are found in the sand bed and on rocks. I suppose this makes sense, seeing as though a fish can have a few spots on its body one day, and the next (which at night normally the fish tend to stay in one area, especially a sick fish) there will be tons of them on it, and only on that fish...most of the time. I suppose if you want to play it safe, wait a little longer, and give it the whole 8-9 week period. I, on the other hand, became a victim of restlessness, and waited half that amount of time. It is very hard to give a general guideline to an organism like ich, because there are different strains and some live longer/are more resilient to treatments than others. Anyone else have a fallow reef after an ich infestation? How long did you wait until adding new fish? Any new ich on the new fish after introduced?
seahorsedreams
New member
Cptn Spaulding
New member
I don't have a formal reference, just a few fellow hobbyists that mentioned the same thing I mentioned. The only thing I can personally correlate that statement with is my experiences. Sometimes ich will stay on the fish longer than usual (a few spots that just won't go away, or taking much longer just to see an improvement), with the same treatment and same tank, nonetheless. I'm not sure if it has to do anything with the type of fish itself, exact water parameters each time there was a fish in QT, or a "super strain" that one just can't seem to get rid of. If anyone has any facts on how ich works on different families of fish (i.e. surgeonfish, anemonefish, blennies, gobies, rabbitfish, etc) and the effectiveness of the treatment on the fish itself I would love to see if my experiences correlate with the actual scientific facts themselves (or other experiences with it to correlate with).
Day 8 of new percs in the previously fallow (for 5 weeks) reef system; no ich, no signs of stress. My beast of a sixline will be coming home tonight. I do not plan on getting any other fish in the near future, at least until another month or two has passed without any problems. I lost the most awesome fu manchu lionfish I have ever seen due to ich (attacked frozen krill, which I hear is quite rare for them) and I will now not be taking any more chances when it comes to introduction of fish/dealing with any amount of stress that happens to be occurring.
New sidenote: dealt with ich in a 400g system (two separate tanks and a sump) with a tang. I treated the tang in a 75 with Cupramine, and it healed up completely in 5 days. No other fish got ich in the 3 weeks he was not in the system. I even added a small sailfin to the other tank in the system, no ich on him. Added a powder blue (not the same fish) from the same system with Cupramine (aka, so no ich on the fish at all once introduced) to the same tank with the previously sick tang that used to be in it. 3 days later: whammo, ich. He is being treated in the tank he used to be in with Cupramine. Now, none of the other fish have ich in the reef system, nor will they ever I feel (especially at this point seeing as though this is the second time a fish got ich in the system with no ill effects on the other fish, and the first tang was in there for about a month/month and a half, battling a few spots until a few turned into a lot within a week). However, I am wondering when it would be safe to introduce the powder blue back into it. Perhaps wait the 9 week period and if no other fish get ich then it should be okay? Do we think that this will be an ongoing battle in the system no matter what since there will always be fish in it? I know being fallow is the best option, and I am not about to leave these systems fallow if it is unnecessary in the longrun. I suppose my real question is: can ich survive in potentially lethal numbers in a non-treated system indefinitely if there is fish in it but there are NEVER any signs of it?
If not, would the period of no introduction of fish be longer than the 9 week fallow period?
If so, will any new fish in the future have a huge chance of getting ich no matter what, even with meticulous and OCD acclimation processes?
Maybe I just got extremely lucky with the addition of the sailfin in the other tank linked up to the system? Or perhaps since it was the other tank in the system it didn't have the same potential destruction as the tank that previously had a sick fish in it? (the latter doesn't make much sense to me, but I am not ruling anything out)
Sorry for the long post.. This is a fantastic thread and I feel the more we all explain our experiences and compare them with the scientific facts posted by snorvich earlier in the thread the better our collective understanding of this horrible organism should be.
Day 8 of new percs in the previously fallow (for 5 weeks) reef system; no ich, no signs of stress. My beast of a sixline will be coming home tonight. I do not plan on getting any other fish in the near future, at least until another month or two has passed without any problems. I lost the most awesome fu manchu lionfish I have ever seen due to ich (attacked frozen krill, which I hear is quite rare for them) and I will now not be taking any more chances when it comes to introduction of fish/dealing with any amount of stress that happens to be occurring.
New sidenote: dealt with ich in a 400g system (two separate tanks and a sump) with a tang. I treated the tang in a 75 with Cupramine, and it healed up completely in 5 days. No other fish got ich in the 3 weeks he was not in the system. I even added a small sailfin to the other tank in the system, no ich on him. Added a powder blue (not the same fish) from the same system with Cupramine (aka, so no ich on the fish at all once introduced) to the same tank with the previously sick tang that used to be in it. 3 days later: whammo, ich. He is being treated in the tank he used to be in with Cupramine. Now, none of the other fish have ich in the reef system, nor will they ever I feel (especially at this point seeing as though this is the second time a fish got ich in the system with no ill effects on the other fish, and the first tang was in there for about a month/month and a half, battling a few spots until a few turned into a lot within a week). However, I am wondering when it would be safe to introduce the powder blue back into it. Perhaps wait the 9 week period and if no other fish get ich then it should be okay? Do we think that this will be an ongoing battle in the system no matter what since there will always be fish in it? I know being fallow is the best option, and I am not about to leave these systems fallow if it is unnecessary in the longrun. I suppose my real question is: can ich survive in potentially lethal numbers in a non-treated system indefinitely if there is fish in it but there are NEVER any signs of it?
If not, would the period of no introduction of fish be longer than the 9 week fallow period?
If so, will any new fish in the future have a huge chance of getting ich no matter what, even with meticulous and OCD acclimation processes?
Maybe I just got extremely lucky with the addition of the sailfin in the other tank linked up to the system? Or perhaps since it was the other tank in the system it didn't have the same potential destruction as the tank that previously had a sick fish in it? (the latter doesn't make much sense to me, but I am not ruling anything out)
Sorry for the long post.. This is a fantastic thread and I feel the more we all explain our experiences and compare them with the scientific facts posted by snorvich earlier in the thread the better our collective understanding of this horrible organism should be.
seahorsedreams
New member
AGREED! There are many things in this hobby that have only anecdotal evidence to support it, simply because we don't have the means of doing and writing scientific peer reviewed journal articles. I'm not talking books that contain opinions, like the ones that are made for hobbyists. They are valid and have their place, but they are not a substitute for scientific data.
There are no mysteries of what makes Ich tick, hence there is no need to rely on anecdotal evidence. Aquaculture researchers have the parasite figured out. The problem is how to impliment it in their type of systems with as many fish as they handle that is also destined for food. That's three things we don't have to deal with. We know how to "fix it", we're just looking for an easier way to do it.
You want to get rid of ich, take your fish out and do an appropriate Copper treatment or hypo. Leave your tank fallow for an appropriate amount of time. How long? Whatever odds you feel comfortable with. If that black cloud likes to follow you around, aim for past the longest documented time between a parasite leaving the fish and erupting. 72 days is the longest I've read. Now, if you're one of those lucky people (I don't like you, BTW
and you like to gamble.... maybe the average 11-15 days at 70-75 degrees is comfortable for you.I just don't know what the speculation is about when we have the evidence. We need to learn what research really is... it's not these forums... it's not a Fenner/Calfo book... it's not your mentor. Go to academic library.
I have no idea what my tone comes across as, if you met me, you would know none of these words are harsh.
Cptn Spaulding
New member
No offense taken, and I'm sorry if I came off as giving unscientific data. I never claimed anything I said was 100% correct without a shadow of a doubt, I was just throwing an experience out there that I deemed worthy of sharing in this conversation, and asking questions that I personally have not seen on this site ever. I know this site is not the end all be all of marine facts, but the more frequent this readily obtained information is out there the better understanding people will have.
I also read that 72 days is the longest time as well. It is darn near impossible for a system to be completely ich free if there is fish in there and you aren't dosing something constantly, which is why I asked if anyone had any ideas on reintroduction of treated fish to the system in which it got sick in, without it being fallow. Of course, it's still in there. But if there are never any signs on the other fish for, oh let's just say, 8 or 9 weeks, and one were to reintroduce a fish in that system, would the likelihood of the fish getting ich be the same as if it was reintroduced 3 weeks later after a nice, long, successful treatment? I'm more or less thinking out loud, I know it isn't ideal to do this, but any thoughts on the effectiveness of it?
I don't remember where I read it but I did read that higher or lower temperatures don't do a thing for marine ich, only freshwater ich, but hyposalinity helps if there is no other treatment being used, for the ph is tougher to manage in a lower salinity environment with treatments such as copper/formalin etc. I also read that if no new ich is introduced to the system (aka when adding new fish qt for extended periods of time so they are FULLY cured) the existing ich in the system will exhaust itself in 10 or 11 months, although the truth behind that science puzzles me. The only thing I can think of is ich inbreeding through many generations, but I'm no genetics major so I cannot back that assumption up with anything relevant. That pseudo-answers my question about reintroducing fish, however anyone else that would like to tackle that question in greater detail is more than welcome to.
I also read that 72 days is the longest time as well. It is darn near impossible for a system to be completely ich free if there is fish in there and you aren't dosing something constantly, which is why I asked if anyone had any ideas on reintroduction of treated fish to the system in which it got sick in, without it being fallow. Of course, it's still in there. But if there are never any signs on the other fish for, oh let's just say, 8 or 9 weeks, and one were to reintroduce a fish in that system, would the likelihood of the fish getting ich be the same as if it was reintroduced 3 weeks later after a nice, long, successful treatment? I'm more or less thinking out loud, I know it isn't ideal to do this, but any thoughts on the effectiveness of it?
I don't remember where I read it but I did read that higher or lower temperatures don't do a thing for marine ich, only freshwater ich, but hyposalinity helps if there is no other treatment being used, for the ph is tougher to manage in a lower salinity environment with treatments such as copper/formalin etc. I also read that if no new ich is introduced to the system (aka when adding new fish qt for extended periods of time so they are FULLY cured) the existing ich in the system will exhaust itself in 10 or 11 months, although the truth behind that science puzzles me. The only thing I can think of is ich inbreeding through many generations, but I'm no genetics major so I cannot back that assumption up with anything relevant. That pseudo-answers my question about reintroducing fish, however anyone else that would like to tackle that question in greater detail is more than welcome to.
Cptn Spaulding
New member
Double post...... why is RC so slow lately?!
I am not going to get into "half truths" and "observations". If you put fish into a display that is being kept fallow:
1. If those fish are not ich free, you will reinfect the display tank which obviates the display tank fallow period
2. If you add any fish, ich free or not, you break the fallow period. If it is too short, you restart the cycle of cryptocaryon irritans
Raising temperature will decrease the fallow period because it accelerates the life cycle of cryptocaryon irritans. If you raise the temperature with fish in a system with ich, remember that this also reduces dissolved oxygen and ich very often resides in the gills. Alternatively, lowering temperature will increase the fallow period (which has been observed to be 72+ days under those circumstances).
As for observations for "discussion purposes", feel free but I am unlikely to respond to them because those observations are "uncontrolled" and may or may not be useful. What any aquarist does is their chose clearly.
1. If those fish are not ich free, you will reinfect the display tank which obviates the display tank fallow period
2. If you add any fish, ich free or not, you break the fallow period. If it is too short, you restart the cycle of cryptocaryon irritans
Raising temperature will decrease the fallow period because it accelerates the life cycle of cryptocaryon irritans. If you raise the temperature with fish in a system with ich, remember that this also reduces dissolved oxygen and ich very often resides in the gills. Alternatively, lowering temperature will increase the fallow period (which has been observed to be 72+ days under those circumstances).
As for observations for "discussion purposes", feel free but I am unlikely to respond to them because those observations are "uncontrolled" and may or may not be useful. What any aquarist does is their chose clearly.
seahorsedreams
New member
It's not just you. I've been double posting all over the place because of it.
seahorsedreams
New member
I'm not sure where the idea that marine ich doesn't respond to temperature the way FW ich does came from. I've read it on the internet as well. It may not be the same numbers, but they react the same. Wilkie and Gordon state reproduction stops below 66F, but since that time they found some at something like 39 degrees (don't quote me on the 39 number) and they were talking about different strains. I don't remember the high number, but 86F is optimum, so it's much higher than our fish can tolerate, especially a fish with a gill load of parasites. The one thing I've noticed is that some studies give slightly different numbers, but ya gotta let that minut point go, in the grande scheme of things.
Where I think the FW/SW thing comes in, is that temperature IS a treatment for FW Ich. It's not a plausible one in our marine environments. Somehow that got translated into "Marine ich is not affected by temperature".
Where I think the FW/SW thing comes in, is that temperature IS a treatment for FW Ich. It's not a plausible one in our marine environments. Somehow that got translated into "Marine ich is not affected by temperature".
Last edited:
Cptn Spaulding
New member
Interesting. Good to know because every solid reference I have heard from (not mentioning names...because I looked all this up years ago and forgot) said it does not help with saltwater ich. I suppose the lack of fruitful efforts of change of temperature in marine tanks led people to believe that.
- Status
