Ich Advice Question

[CStrickland]

Hi all!

I'm curious about a certain piece of ich advice I see now and then. People often say that ich can be present and unnoticeable for long periods. Like years. But other people give advice that suggests that if you don't lose fish or see symptoms within 72 days, your tank is ich free.

Can these seemingly different positions be reconciled in a way that I'm missing, or is it a difference of opinion about how the disease works? It seems like a fish that has looked healthy for 72 days either has ich-potential or it doesn't?

 

[gone fishin]

Hi all!

I'm curious about a certain piece of ich advice I see now and then. People often say that ich can be present and unnoticeable for long periods. Like years. But other people give advice that suggests that if you don't lose fish or see symptoms within 72 days, your tank is ich free.

Can these seemingly different positions be reconciled in a way that I'm missing, or is it a difference of opinion about how the disease works? It seems like a fish that has looked healthy for 72 days either has ich-potential or it doesn't?

Just my 2 cents on the subject.

If the fish have been treated no symptoms present themselves in 72 days then I am of the opinion that one is 99% ich free.

If on the other hand at some point there was ich in the DT and never treated but only managed then I do think it is entirely possible for ich to be present and potentially unnoticed for long periods of time. Under this case I believe if some sort of major tank stressor and the ich life cycle are timed correctly then a serious outbreak would be noticed.

 

[Dogshowgrl]

I agree with gone fishin.

Ick in a DT that has not been treated can live in gills without being a problem or noticed until the livestock gets stressed years later, then cause a huge break out. 72 day starves it out but then EVERY FISH must be out for the FULL 72 days AND TREATED, before going back into the tank, to have that meathod work.

I have had a fish go through a 72 quarantine with hyposalinity, copper, formalin, and coliquinphosphate after the following week (days 73-80) bringing salinity back up break out with the worst case of ick I have seen. I even isolated them in a a/c storage unit to not have any cross-contamination, with all new equipment, and I used full agriculture quarantine procedures. Before they ever left that system, and no, I did not add any livestock I was invested in this project, they broke out with ick. Yes, I had it Identified at a local university. I had a point to make to prove I could have an ick free system. Lies, all lies.

But we can have a happy healthy system living along with all the species ick that are out there as long as we treat ick when it becomes symptomatic and keep the stressors down to prevent out breaks.

 

[CStrickland]

Ok, so it sounds like you guys are talking about a 72 day post-treatment observation to be extra sure the treatment worked. As opposed to replacing treatment with observation. That makes sense given all the variables in human error and ich strains etc. that make no treatment 100%. Like, the observation length is kinda arbitrary. If 4 weeks is good maybe 5 is better. One life cycle seems a reasonable number to pick.

If anybody who does just a 72 day observation without treatment reads this, I'd like to hear about that. Maybe for really delicate fish or something?

 

[Rybren]

The 72 day period relates to leaving a tank fallow with no fish. Ich needs a fish host to complete the life cycle; after 72 days (some say 76) of being fallow, you can be assured that it is free of ich.

Of course, if you haven't followed the TTM or some other proven method of ridding the fish of ich, when you return them to the tank, you run the risk of reintroducing ich to the display.

 

[snorvich]

Just my 2 cents on the subject.

If the fish have been treated no symptoms present themselves in 72 days then I am of the opinion that one is 99% ich free.

If on the other hand at some point there was ich in the DT and never treated but only managed then I do think it is entirely possible for ich to be present and potentially unnoticed for long periods of time. Under this case I believe if some sort of major tank stressor and the ich life cycle are timed correctly then a serious outbreak would be noticed.

This.

 

[snorvich]

The 72 day period relates to leaving a tank fallow with no fish. Ich needs a fish host to complete the life cycle; after 72 days (some say 76) of being fallow, you can be assured that it is free of ich.

Of course, if you haven't followed the TTM or some other proven method of ridding the fish of ich, when you return them to the tank, you run the risk of reintroducing ich to the display.

What he said.

 

[Reef Frog]

No expert by any means - I bring up the following just for the sake of discussion and I don't know if it is indeed a fact.

I've read statements in several places and by several different knowledgeable individuals saying that if no new fish are added to a tank (thus no new Ich organisms) any Idh population already present will burn itself out in 11 or 12 generations.

On the surface this sounds possibly plausible to me since it is a fact in other natural realms that genetically isolated populations of animals can die out from inbreeding. Maybe someone with access to advanced indexes of scientific papers can refute or confirm this idea's veracity.

 

[nereefpat]

It's my understanding that ich doesn't sexually reproduce (inbreeding or otherwise). It makes daughter cells by fission.

 

[Reef Frog]

Did a little reading and believe the above ^(Pat) is correct. Didn't see any indication C.I. reproduces sexually although it seems some protozoans can. Is it possible that isolated populations could crash for other reasons than inbreeding over a long length of time?

During my surfing, I encountered information that aquaculture facilities and marine fish keepers use some anti-malarial compounds like Quinine Sulfate, Crypto - Pro & Chloroquine phosphate with success. There is some information of varying quality on these meds in this forum and on other internet sources. But not much and it doesn't seem to be popular anymore despite their apparent safety when compared with copper use. I wonder why.

 

[cougareyes]

In 30 years and many tanks, I have had ich twice. Both times were in tanks where there had been no introductions in months. Last year my 210 fowlr when the last fish had been added 4 months prior, the other was a reef where it had been likely 6 or 7 months. I had not treated the tanks or the fish and did no TTM, so fish can be carriers for length of time where their immune system becomes compromised and stress triggers it. There were events that happened in both tanks that could have done this, but no new fish.

 

[sleepydoc]

I have read in a couple of places that isolated strains of ich will eventually die out, meaning any ich in a tank with no new introductions would eventually die out. The time frame I read for this is 1-2 years, but that's a very difficult thing to research.

As others have said, a fallow period with no hosts (fish) is necessary to clear a tank with reasonable certainty.

The practical issue is if you have fish that may be carrying ich, are you willing and able to remove all of them to a QT to treat them while the DT remains fallow? For many, this is not practical. Then your best option is to keep them as healthy as possible so they can fight the infection with their immune systems and keep your fingers crossed. If you have such a tank, you should treat it as 'contaminated' and take precautions not to infect any other tanks you have.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[cougareyes]

One tank I treated the display with cupramine and have since added new fish and none have been infected. The other tank was well established reef and I decided to just ride it out. it was a small tank with only 4 fish, the blue assessor lived. After 3 months with just the blue assessor, I added more fish. They never became infected.

 

[scarolina01]

I am also currently battling an Ich outbreak in my tank, and just lost my PBT. Someone local suggested that I increase the water temp to 86-88 and keeping it there for a few days/week will kill it.

I saw a little about this process on wikipedia, but I don't trust that site for anything. Has anyone else tried this with positive results?

 

[CStrickland]

I am also currently battling an Ich outbreak in my tank, and just lost my PBT. Someone local suggested that I increase the water temp to 86-88 and keeping it there for a few days/week will kill it.

I saw a little about this process on wikipedia, but I don't trust that site for anything. Has anyone else tried this with positive results?

Hi scarolina, this might help you figure out what to do: http://reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1985626

 

[sleepydoc]

Any temperature high enough to kill the parasite will also kill your fish. Increasing the temp also decreases the amount of oxygen in the water, and may give you problems.

 

[Reef Frog]

I have read in a couple of places that isolated strains of ich will eventually die out, meaning any ich in a tank with no new introductions would eventually die out. The time frame I read for this is 1-2 years, but that's a very difficult thing to research

Sleepy doc

So you have to wonder how a population of ASEXUAL REPRODUCING CI (Ich) would die out in an environment with plenty of hosts (food). Population burn out is easy to understand in organisms that reproduce sexually. How would a colony of clones expire over time (with no new introductions)? Such a phenomena would suggest some sexual reproduction, wouldn't it?

I've often wondered if sudden ich CI outbreaks have been observed in tanks where NO new fish or anything else has been introduced...for many years.

 

[Reef Frog]

W

I have read in a couple of places that isolated strains of ich will eventually die out, meaning any ich in a tank with no new introductions would eventually die out. The time frame I read for this is 1-2 years, but that's a very difficult thing to research

Sleepy doc

So you have to wonder how a population of ASEXUAL REPRODUCING CI (Ich) would die out in an environment with plenty of hosts (food) available at all times? Population burn out by inbreeding is easy to understand in organisms that reproduce sexually. How would a colony of clones expire over time (with no new introductions)? Such a phenomena would suggest some sexual reproduction, wouldn't it?

I've often wondered if sudden ich CI outbreaks have been observed in tanks where NO new fish or anything else has been introduced for many years.

And that brings up the question of the concept of IMMUNITY to ich. The immune response to bacteria & viruses is well understood. How does "immunity" work against protozoan organisms?