Have ICH looky here!!!!!

[ryan scott]

I had to pull everything out of my tank to catch all of the fish, but i think it will be well worth the effort!

All fish have been out now for 4 weeks and i will not put them back in until another 2 weeks.
I have had ich for a long time now and am looking forward to it been gone for good.
i have tryed all of these others methods and they dont work long term, such as i have cleaner wrase which do not eat white spot, i have had cleaner shrimps that cost over $100 aus and they made a great snack for some of my fish.

I will qt everything in the future

 

[WaterKeeper]

:thumbsup: Ryan.

 

[Aquarist007]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14087537#post14087537 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by ryan scott
I had to pull everything out of my tank to catch all of the fish, but i think it will be well worth the effort!

All fish have been out now for 4 weeks and i will not put them back in until another 2 weeks.
I have had ich for a long time now and am looking forward to it been gone for good.
i have tryed all of these others methods and they dont work long term, such as i have cleaner wrase which do not eat white spot, i have had cleaner shrimps that cost over $100 aus and they made a great snack for some of my fish.

I will qt everything in the future

good show Ryan

have you been treating your fish while they are out of the tank?

 

[Stuart60611]

I was just wondering whether anyone has had any experience with Quninine medicines (used to treat malaria in humans) as an ich treatment. Bob Fenner seems to be a big fan of Quinine drugs as a means to treat ich, particularly on fish which are sensative to copper, such as tangs, angels and puffers. Quinine is supposed to be safe for your biological filter. It will kill all photosynthetic algae, corals, and most inverts (have read that hermits seem to be able to tolerate it). It is supposed to be much more gentile than copper and now the prefered treatment by public aquariums. Also, since it is supposed to not effect the biological filter, it could I think theoritically be used in a FOWLR display without any live rock (just base rock) or live sand safely so as to rid the display also of ich. I do not know if it is safe to use with ammonia removers, like prime. I have read that it is not absorbed substantially in the rock and substrate and is easily removed through skimming and carbon. I have also read that the medicine breaks down rapidly with strong light so you need to keep you lights low during treatment. Unlike copper and hypo, the way it works is it kills the parasite when the parasite attaches to the fish b/c the fish absorbs the medicine and the parasite dies immediately upon feeding off of the fish and eating the medicine absorbed in the fish. As such, it seems to me that the treatment could be very useful on saving a very sick fish b/c the medicine should provide very quick relief to sick fish in that I would think it would cause the ich on the fish to die quickly. The treatment protocal suggested by Fenner is a single treatment of 10mg/L for 10 days. It is reportedly not harmful to the fish. I would think that a single treatment in the display would not be effective b/c new cists would hatch after the 10 days and re-attach to fish who no longer would have the quinine in their bodies. Perhaps, though, several treatments would do the job if you kept your fish medicated with quinine long enough for all cists in the system to hatch (21 days or so). Fenner has indicated that it is an option for display tank in some circumstances. Any thoughts?

 

[WaterKeeper]

Hi Stuart,

I tried it a some years ago, around 1998 I think, on a badly infected tank without much success. It did have some adverse effect on the LR but did not cure the infection on the fish in an FO tank. I believe the dose was far less than 10 ppm and somewhere around 0.5 or 1. Higher doses may work but I've never tried it that high. Since it can't be used in the display I tend to stick with older methods until someone comes up with a reef safe medication. I'd be interested to know if it is safe and effective for fish, however.

 

[Stuart60611]

Waterkeeper:

Thanks for the response. However, Fenner seems to suggest that it can be use in the display in situations where you do not have live rock or live sand, corals, substantial algae, or inverts. Not sure if this is accurate, but I read several postings of his in which he recommended that someone treat their display with quinine.

 

[WaterKeeper]

:lol:

That is a REAL FO system that Bob envisions.

 

[Stuart60611]

I agree. But if the system consisting of only base rock and a dead sandbed, I do not think there would be much of a difference. I guess the dead base rock and dead sand could develop a small amount of fauna over time, but unless the system was at some point seeded with live rock or live sand I would imagine not much fauna would develop. I think the concern with the quinine in the display would be the resulting die off of fauna and corresponding ammonia spike. However, in a FOWLR, most aquarists could care less about the fauna and would be only concerned about the ammonia spike that could result from the fauna dying after dosing quinine. As such, it would be great to know if an ammonia remover could be used in conjunction with quinine which would be useful to control any ammonia spike from any fauna die off.

 

[MotherFish]

I applaud and support any new attempts at combatting marine Ich and have tested out several products that promised to be a "magic bullet" to no avail... including quinine-based meds after reading about some new copper-resistant strains showing up a couple of years ago.
Unfortunately, non that I have tried were successful in the long run.

Some meds were good at ridding the fish of visible signs of infection quickly, but never removed the parasites entirely from the system.

So far the only two oldschool methods that have worked successfully for me, including copper-resist strains, have been hyposalinity at 1.009 for 6+ weeks, and the tank transfer method (TTM).
TTM involves moving the infected fish to a clean tank every 3 days for 12 days (4 moves).
This allows the trophonts to finish feeding and exit the fish after 3 to 7 days (Colorni, 1985. Colorni & Diamant, 1993) without allowing them to encyst on the substrate and hatch into new free-swimming parasites.

For the home aquarist, hypo is preferable as you only need room for one QT and the display must remain fallow for 6-8 weeks anyway.
For processing fish quickly thru holding tanks into general population for resale or breeding, TTM is the fastest way.

 

[Stuart60611]

Motherfish:

Interesting to hear that the quinine did not work for you. How did you treat and which med did you dose? I have read quite a few recently made posts from Fenner and several other moderators on wetwebmedia recommending the use of Chrloroquin diphosphate (virtually impossible to get without prescription but the most effective), Chloroquin phosphate (difficult but obtainable from several on line sources and nearly as effective as the diphospate), and quinine sulfate (pretty effective but not as effective as the other two but easily obtainable from National Fish Pharmaceuticals). They claim it is very effective for ich with a high sucess rate. It just strikes me that these are some of the more knowledgeable people in the hobby who are making these claims so I would like to think that there is something behind the effectiveness of the treatment.

 

[ryan scott]

yep treated with cooper for 14 days

 

[WaterKeeper]

Stuart,

I don't think anyone was questioning Bob Fenner's claims. When I tried it the dose was far lower than what he is using. It was also claimed it was reef safe back then but wasn't at even low dosage. I think Motherfish didn't have much luck with it but didn't say the dosage level used. No treatment works 100% of the time, and that includes copper and hypo, so it would be unfair to say quinine is not a useful treatment. If its use were more widespread I would have included it in this sticky but results so far are limited and more successful cures need to be reported. That holds true for TTM. It is just not in widespread use, as of yet, but does sound promising. Both treatments may prove effective in the near future.

 

[MotherFish]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14102620#post14102620 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Stuart60611
It just strikes me that these are some of the more knowledgeable people in the hobby who are making these claims so I would like to think that there is something behind the effectiveness of the treatment.

Hi Stuart,

Please don't get me wrong. I have the highest regard for Bob Fenner and am very grateful for his work and the WWM resources.
I am just stating what has worked for me personally and don't doubt for a moment that others have had success in areas or with methods where I've failed.

I tried an OTC quinine sulfate med, followed the recommended dosage and time in QT. The treatment looked to work great in the beginning, but after a couple of months the telltales of Ich were starting to show again.
That was my limited experience with quinine for Ich.
If I continue to hear positive results from others in the future then I would be willing to give it another shot, but for now I'll just stick with what's worked best for me.

 

[jenglish]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14106270#post14106270 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by WaterKeeper
Stuart,

I don't think anyone was questioning Bob Fenner's claims. When I tried it the dose was far lower than what he is using. It was also claimed it was reef safe back then but wasn't at even low dosage. I think Motherfish didn't have much luck with it but didn't say the dosage level used. No treatment works 100% of the time, and that includes copper and hypo, so it would be unfair to say quinine is not a useful treatment. If its use were more widespread I would have included it in this sticky but results so far are limited and more successful cures need to be reported. That holds true for TTM. It is just not in widespread use, as of yet, but does sound promising. Both treatments may prove effective in the near future.

I was under the impression that the TTM was fairly established method as far as efficacy just not used much in the hobby due to the space requirements. Is it not that well established?

 

[WaterKeeper]

Being old Jeremy; unless Mose invented it I don't jump on the band wagon.

 

[jenglish]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14110886#post14110886 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by WaterKeeper
Being old Jeremy; unless Mose invented it I don't jump on the band wagon.

Back before the dead sea was even sick? :lol: No I really thought they were using TTM back in the 70s it was just more of a PITA than most people were willing to deal with. I could be wrong since I wasn't around for the 70s

 

[WaterKeeper]

I was but I guess I missed it. Not much about it on the web back then.

 

[Aquarist007]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14110886#post14110886 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by WaterKeeper
Being old Jeremy; unless Mose invented it I don't jump on the band wagon.

Mose?
Do you mean this guy(Mose Schrute)

or this guy (Moses)

:lol: :rollface: :lol:

Doesn't matter --they are both a little "ichy"

 

[michellejy]

Sorry if this was mentioned before. I'm being too lazy to go back and read 5 pages of this thread.

I had a foxface in quarantine who spent a couple of days hiding motionless inside a piece of PVC. When he finally opted to reveal himself, I was horrified to see him literally covered with ich spots. I'd never even seen ich before, and my new fish was like the ich poster child! I'd read that due to their thick slime coats, rabbitfish are a bit less likely than other fish to get ich, but lucky me, I hit the rabbitfish ich lottery!

Or so I thought....

I kept observing him, and he wasn't glancing off of rocks or displaying any of the other behaviors associated with ich. It turns out that his thick slime coat was good for attracting something. He was actually covered with tons of tiny microbubbles that had easily remained attached since he wasn't swimming very much.

So before you go crazy with treatments, make sure you are treating for an actual problem. :lol:

 

[Aquarist007]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14149989#post14149989 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by michellejy
Sorry if this was mentioned before. I'm being too lazy to go back and read 5 pages of this thread.

I had a foxface in quarantine who spent a couple of days hiding motionless inside a piece of PVC. When he finally opted to reveal himself, I was horrified to see him literally covered with ich spots. I'd never even seen ich before, and my new fish was like the ich poster child! I'd read that due to their thick slime coats, rabbitfish are a bit less likely than other fish to get ich, but lucky me, I hit the rabbitfish ich lottery!

Or so I thought....

I kept observing him, and he wasn't glancing off of rocks or displaying any of the other behaviors associated with ich. It turns out that his thick slime coat was good for attracting something. He was actually covered with tons of tiny microbubbles that had easily remained attached since he wasn't swimming very much.

So before you go crazy with treatments, make sure you are treating for an actual problem. :lol:

good points Michelle---and you are correct in quarantining all fish but observing them for a time before you actually treat.
There are some reefers that swear by treating with hyposalination regardless if they observe ich or not.
Others prefer to qt for 4-6 weeks and observe rather then stress out a new fish needlessly. However if the disease is observed in this time frame then qt time 4-6 weeks starts at the onset of the treatment.