Ich always present, truth or not

[hwynboy]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=13471726#post13471726 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by justinpsmith
Ok...once again, I never claimed that there should not have been ich because I QT'd for 4 weeks. Your just repeating exactly what I said.

So have you QT'd all inverts, corals, LR, ect and treated every fish for ich before they went into your display tank? Not just kept an eye on the fish but actually put them through hypo (which I do not believe kills all strains of ich) or copper. Unless you have done this, you can have ich in your tank. Im just curious about your process because this is way too much work for me when I feel I can give them a perfectly safe home without it

I think you are missing the point though. No one is encouraging not to QT. I am just saying that unless you treat all new fish and not just observe them, them like many of us do, it can get in. I still Qt fish but I am not willing to put them through copper or hypo if they appear healthy during the QT period.

The fact is that the ich need a host to survive, they imbed themselves into the fish's skin. The fish then provide the the obligate parasite a place to live. If the parasite is not on the host, it will go to the substrate to reproduce. I am no scientist and while I'm sure it's a possibility for the tomont to exist on a piece of rock or coral, it's not likely. As the parasite is trying to live by seeking out a host. I have kept reef tanks and fish for years, and have not had issues with ICH once I started QTing all my fish.

My process is 8 weeks in a QT aquarium with 1.008 hyposalinity from day one till week 8. To me it's worth the inconvenience versus the other alternative of infecting my whole display and killing all my fish. I have friends who never QT anything and they have good results. But I have been through 3 bouts of ICH and lost many fish. So to me, I won't risk it.

 

[ReefEnabler]

"I am no scientist and while I'm sure it's a possibility for the tomont to exist on a piece of rock or coral, it's not likely. "

Are you suggesting that the only "substrate" that tomonts live in would be sand? any not the rocky/possibly fuzzy surface of any snail?

and if thats what you are suggesting, how do you know tomonts prefer sand compared to rock surface?

 

[hwynboy]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=13471958#post13471958 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by RyanBrucks
"I am no scientist and while I'm sure it's a possibility for the tomont to exist on a piece of rock or coral, it's not likely. "

Are you suggesting that the only "substrate" that tomonts live in would be sand? any not the rocky/possibly fuzzy surface of any snail?

and if thats what you are suggesting, how do you know tomonts prefer sand compared to rock surface?

I'm not refering to the fact that they cannot live on rock or coral, but I was referring to them not living on that surface for an extended period of time. In that phase of their life IIRC they usually survive for a couple/few days before seeking out a host. So in rare circumstances, it could happen, but it would be unlikely.

 

[black_majik]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=13471958#post13471958 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by RyanBrucks
"I am no scientist and while I'm sure it's a possibility for the tomont to exist on a piece of rock or coral, it's not likely. "

Are you suggesting that the only "substrate" that tomonts live in would be sand? any not the rocky/possibly fuzzy surface of any snail?

and if thats what you are suggesting, how do you know tomonts prefer sand compared to rock surface?

most reef flats lack sand and are set upon rock shelves without sand and the ich species is still present in the ocean again tides could bring tomonts towards the shores.....

its a far shot though having a cyst infected piece of rock, I still am a firm believer in that ich isn't a parasite that can stay under radar at times. It is a simple organism, Feed, reproduce, Search For Host, Repeat. And if conditions are right ( lack of parasite removal and/or medication) the species would outbreak like any other simple organism. So to say that it could be tolerated is acceptable, but the fact remains that it will reproduce and reproduce if it is feeding and not being preyed on, thus creating a noticeable outbreak. I think you have a better chance of coral seeds being attached to a fish than Ich co-existing in a closed system such as a tank. Same goes for Aiptasia of course you can deal with it when there is very little but you give it a few weeks and the lack of predation results in a continuous growth in population which in this example is a tank full to the brim with Aiptasia. You have to understand the reef ( or any ecosystem) as a cycle no matter what. Something growths, something eats it and everything is in balance. Something growths, nothing eats it, it grows more until a complete outbreak begins and the cycle is broken ( Caulerpa is a great example too) and your ecosystem is damaged.


Sorry I babbled a bit but the point is in a closed system if ich is in it, it will grow to be a noticeable outbreak unless interrupted by predation or unfit living conditions ( medications, hypo, copper, etc.)

 

[JustinReef]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=13472553#post13472553 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by black_majik
most reef flats lack sand and are set upon rock shelves without sand and the ich species is still present in the ocean again tides could bring tomonts towards the shores.....

its a far shot though having a cyst infected piece of rock, I still am a firm believer in that ich isn't a parasite that can stay under radar at times. It is a simple organism, Feed, reproduce, Search For Host, Repeat. And if conditions are right ( lack of parasite removal and/or medication) the species would outbreak like any other simple organism. So to say that it could be tolerated is acceptable, but the fact remains that it will reproduce and reproduce if it is feeding and not being preyed on, thus creating a noticeable outbreak. I think you have a better chance of coral seeds being attached to a fish than Ich co-existing in a closed system such as a tank. Same goes for Aiptasia of course you can deal with it when there is very little but you give it a few weeks and the lack of predation results in a continuous growth in population which in this example is a tank full to the brim with Aiptasia. You have to understand the reef ( or any ecosystem) as a cycle no matter what. Something growths, something eats it and everything is in balance. Something growths, nothing eats it, it grows more until a complete outbreak begins and the cycle is broken ( Caulerpa is a great example too) and your ecosystem is damaged.


Sorry I babbled a bit but the point is in a closed system if ich is in it, it will grow to be a noticeable outbreak unless interrupted by predation or unfit living conditions ( medications, hypo, copper, etc.)

Time and time again on RC there is proof that is DOES stay under the radar!

You are right that ich is very opportunistic but your forgetting one thing...a fishes immune system will also fight off ich.

My tank (and many, many people I know personally and through the internet) are proof that ich can be managed by healthy fish without losses. I have yet to loose a fish to ich except in QT. I do contribute a lot of this success to the fact that I quarantine all new fish and treat them is necessary. But the only fish with ich that I have lost is during hypo. Could be from water quality issues, could be osmotic shock, could be the ich itself, I don't know but I have yet to loose a fish in my display to ich. Only to jumping actually and being eaten

If your right and ich will always grow to be noticeable, Im wondering why I don't see it in my tank right now even though I know its still there? I do see about half a dozen spots once a month or so on two fish (both puffers) for about 2-3 days. Is this what you mean by noticeable? If so, I agree with what your saying but I do not see this as a problem. I care very much for my fish and if I see them in obvious distress or suffering, I will always treat them. In the past few months though the only distress I have seen from them is in QT.

 

[JustinReef]

I should add that I am talking about minor outbreaks. I would not leave my fish to fend for themselves if the ich were more than a half dozen spots that disappear after a day or two and do not reappear for at least a month if not longer. If my fish were ever covered in ich and appeared to be "loosing the battle" they would be treated right away.

 

[greenbean36191]

You are right that ich is very opportunistic but your forgetting one thing...a fishes immune system will also fight off ich.

Exactly. We know from experiments that fish can develop resistance to ich and that when that happens they don't develop total immunity, but still harbor small numbers of the parasites, but that doesn't progress into a visible outbreak.

 

[JustinReef]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=13473574#post13473574 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by greenbean36191
Exactly. We know from experiments that fish can develop resistance to ich and that when that happens they don't develop total immunity, but still harbor small numbers of the parasites, but that doesn't progress into a visible outbreak.

Do you have any idea how long the resistance generally lasts?

What I am thinking is that maybe the reason I see ich show up every few months is that the resistance has "worn" down (for lack of a better word) and the ich gains some strength. Its never a bad outbreak but an outbreak none the less. Im thinking that the my fish fight the outbreak off quite fast and maybe the resistance is restored. Cycle continues every few months but one thing I have noticed is that the fish get less spots each time and seem to fight them off quicker. So perhaps the resistance is getting stronger each time they are forced to fight the parasite off?

The other interesting thing is that I have 14 fish in my tank. Only two ever show signs of ich. The two puffers which are ich prone. I have not seen ich on any other fish for the past 3-4 months or maybe even longer. My rabbitfish, coral beauty, and cardinal fish never that I have seen. My Niger Trigger got it once but very minimal and never again. Thats not to say none of them have ich but you would never know it from looking if they do.

It will be interesting to see how things progress.

 

[JustinReef]

I should also add that since using some of the Immunity vitamins from Tropic Marin, my fish have looked very healthy. Im not sure if this has anything to do with them dealing with the ich but i do know they're colors are amazing since using these vitamins

 

[black_majik]

I can't understand the fish immune system idea. The fuzzy picture is the fact that parasites are breaking through I'm sure if some can they all can, again parasites are organisms that basically are immune to immune systems. Now Ich is a single celled organism so I'm sure there are be deterred, but even in a good immune system it doesn't make since that some parasites are on the fish, but not all can get on.



Plus look at fish types. You made a good point in that only two get Ich. You didn't get the second part of the equation, location of sleep. Among the 12 others you listed they all go into the rock work to sleep. Now I'm not sure about puffers, but I have seen a few sleeping on the sand. It takes that image of sand grains and you think of ich. Your Niger could have slept on the sand once and picked of grains. So in a very possible situation you are just deceived.

 

[mrbncal]

A healthy fishes slim coat is an effective barrier against ich most of the time....but not always a failsafe. Think of it like a good firewall, theres always someone trying to hack in but not many of them do.

 

[JustinReef]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=13474060#post13474060 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by black_majik
I can't understand the fish immune system idea. The fuzzy picture is the fact that parasites are breaking through I'm sure if some can they all can, again parasites are organisms that basically are immune to immune systems. Now Ich is a single celled organism so I'm sure there are be deterred, but even in a good immune system it doesn't make since that some parasites are on the fish, but not all can get on.



Plus look at fish types. You made a good point in that only two get Ich. You didn't get the second part of the equation, location of sleep. Among the 12 others you listed they all go into the rock work to sleep. Now I'm not sure about puffers, but I have seen a few sleeping on the sand. It takes that image of sand grains and you think of ich. Your Niger could have slept on the sand once and picked of grains. So in a very possible situation you are just deceived.

Whether or not you understand the fishes immune system, this is something that has been studied and is a fact. If their immune system could not fight off ich, most fish would die quite fast. You really would not have much time to treat and save your fish once they got infected.

I have not been deceived by sand for the past 8 months or so. I have done this long enough to know what ich looks like. I really wish it was sand though and not ich.

I will get you some better info on how a fishes immune system fights ich. Give me a few minutes

 

[JustinReef]

After 5 minutes on Google Scholar I found a few examples. There are much better, involved ones available but this gives you an idea...Second study is much better in this case.


Recent studies have shown that fish are able to mount protective immune responses against various parasites. One of the best characterized parasiteâ€"œhost system in this context is the ciliate Ichthyophthirius multifiliis (Ich) parasitizing a range of freshwater fishes. Both specific and non-specific host defence mechanisms are responsible for the protection of fish against challenge infections with this ciliate. The specific humoral components comprise at least specific antibodies. The non-specific humoral elements included are the alternative complement pathway and probably lectins. Cellular factors involved in the specific response are B-cells and putative T-cells. The non-specific effector cells recognized are various leukocytes. In addition, goblet-cells and mast cells (EGC-cells) may have a function. The NCC-cell (suggested analogue to NK-cells in mammals) seems to play a role in the non-specific response. This well documented protective response in freshwater fishes against Ich has urged the development of anti-parasitic vaccines. Indeed, such products based on formalin killed parasites have been developed and found to offer the vaccinated host a satisfactory protection. However, the collection of parasites for vaccine production is extremely laborious. It involves keeping infected fish due to the fact that in vitro propagation of the parasite is still insufficiently developed. Gaining knowledge of amino acid sequences and its encoding DNA-sequences for the protective antigens (i-antigens) in the parasite was a major breakthrough. That achievement made it possible to produce a recombinant protein in E. coli and preliminary results indicated a certain protection of fish vaccinated with this product. Recent work has shown that the free-living and easily cultivated ciliate Tetrahymena can be transformed and express the i-antigen. This path seems to be promising for future development of vaccines against Ich. A novel approach in fish is the development of DNA-vaccines. Successful DNA-vaccination trials have been conducted in fish against viral infections and the technology also makes it possible to develop a DNA-vaccine against Ich. Other approaches to immuno-protection against Ich have been the use of heterologous vaccines. Thus, both bath and injection vaccination using live or killed (un-transformed) Tetrahymena has been reported to offer treated fish a certain level of protection. Such protection could be explained by non-specific reactions and the efficacy and duration of this vaccination type should be further evaluated.

-Department of Veterinary Microbiology, Section of Fish Diseases, Royal Veterinary and Agricultural University, 4 Stigbøjlen, DK-1870 Frederiksberg C, Denmark


Ciliates are highly evolved protists comprising a phylum of diverse species, many of which are opportunistic or obligate parasites. Ciliates parasitic to fish consist of salt and freshwater forms with endo- or ectoparasitic modes of infection. Some of the more commonly encountered genera include Chilodonella, Brooklynella, Ophryoglenina, Ichthyophthirius, Cryptocaryon, Uronema, Tetrahymena, Epistylus, and Trichodina. Species range from obligate parasites and commensals to opportunistic, facultative forms. Some parasitic ciliates are highly pathogenic and fishes in closed environments such as aquaria and farm ponds are particularly susceptible to high mortalities. Nevertheless, fish have evolved an immune system capable of mounting an effective protective response against parasite challenge. Much of the experimental research on immunity against ciliates has been carried out with Ichthyophthirius multifiliis, on obligate parasite that invades surface epithelia of virtually all freshwater fish species. Interest in the immune response against I. multifiliis stems from the fact that convalescent fish become resistant to subsequent challenge (suggesting the possibility of immunoprophylaxis), and the need to curtail severe losses caused by this parasite in intensively farmed fishes. Furthermore, I. multifiliis has proven to be a useful experimental model because it is amenable to study under laboratory conditions. In this review cellular and humoral factors involved in both innate and acquired immunity against ciliates are covered and include natural killer cells, phagocytic cells, and antibody responses. Current ideas on the mechanisms of antibody-mediated cutaneous immunity against I. multifiliis are discussed and approaches toward the development of vaccines against this and other ciliate parasites are presented.

-Department of Medical Microbiology, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602, USA b Department of Microbiology and Immunology, College of Veterinary Medicine, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA

 

[JustinReef]

Found this very interesting as well. Hopefully in the future we will be buying fish to add to the tank to treat ich.

United States Patent 5643571

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

A novel method of controlling pathogenic organisms in the aquatic environment and in fish and other aquatic lifeforms living in that environment, through placing in the same environment hardy fish immunized against those pathogenic organisms; these immunized fish continuously and increasingly release into the water antibodies against the pathogenic organisms concerned as long as the pathogenic organisms are still present in the water, thereby controlling the pathogenic organisms in the water and protecting the aquatic lifeforms concerned living in the same water against infection by the pathogenic organisms. In accordance with the present invention, fish may be immunized against one or more pathogenic organisms.

In the preferred embodiment for controlling pathogenic organisms in the aquatic environment, a closed culture system consisting of two (FIG. 1) or multi-tanks (FIG. 2) was used. All the tanks of this system are connected with PVC pipes with a pump and a filter so that water is continuously recirculating between the tanks. Hardy fish such as freshwater catfish or shubankin which were immunized against the pathogenic organisms such as Ichthyophthirius (causing white-spot disease), Oodinium (causing velvet disease), Ichthyobodo, Trichodina and Chilodonella (causing slimy skin) or Aeromonas (causing fin- and gill-rot disease) were kept in one tank while the remaining tanks were used to keep naive fish or fish infected by the pathogenic organisms concerned.

The method has demonstrated its effectiveness not only in maintaining naive fish free from infection but also in facilitating the rapid recovery of the infected fish. The protection was due to the antibodies in the aquatic environment released by the immunized hardy fish.

Although evidence for the effectiveness of the invention is provided only for the white-spot disease (due to the parasitic protozoan, Ichthyophthirius), velvet disease (due to Oodinium) slimy skin disease (caused by Ichthyobodo, Trichodina and Chilodonella), and the fin- and gill-rot disease (due to the bacteria, Aeromonas) in freshwater ornamental fish, the inventive concept is applicable to any disease (whether due to parasites, bacteria, viruses, or fungi) in any species of freshwater or marine life (whether finfish or shellfish, e.g. crustaceans, mollusks and echinoderms) at any developmental stage (whether eggs, larvae, fry, juveniles or adults).



Full patent if anyone is interested.

http://www.freepatentsonline.com/5643571.html

 

[percula99]

I am the guy whose heniochus broke out in ich which inspired my buddy to start this thread. I would like to go back to the sleep stage of the parasite. It incubates and attacks fish in their den when they go to sleep. That does sound diabolical. However my heniochus never slept. I know many of you won't beleive that, but I could go down at 3AM and I could still see my two heniochus swimming around the open area of the tank. Apparently sharks don't sleep either. They keep moving but conserve energy at night by moving less. This is their way of resting. They do a partial shutdown to conserve energy. My heniochus did the same thing. Yet, they were the first to develop ich in my tank even though they had no sleeping space to get infected in. This kind of contradicts this theory, but it still sounds very plausible. Any ideas here?

 

[Paul B]

It incubates and attacks fish in their den when they go to sleep. That does sound diabolical. However my heniochus never slept.

Yes that is very science fiction. Does ich paracites hear the fish snoreing so they can zoom in on them? I think not.
Paracites are free swimming for at least some of their infectious life and in the process of the fish breathing, they can and will become lodged in their gills.

 

[JustinReef]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=13474711#post13474711 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by percula99
I am the guy whose heniochus broke out in ich which inspired my buddy to start this thread. I would like to go back to the sleep stage of the parasite. It incubates and attacks fish in their den when they go to sleep. That does sound diabolical. However my heniochus never slept. I know many of you won't beleive that, but I could go down at 3AM and I could still see my two heniochus swimming around the open area of the tank. Apparently sharks don't sleep either. They keep moving but conserve energy at night by moving less. This is their way of resting. They do a partial shutdown to conserve energy. My heniochus did the same thing. Yet, they were the first to develop ich in my tank even though they had no sleeping space to get infected in. This kind of contradicts this theory, but it still sounds very plausible. Any ideas here?

Ich does not wait for the fish to fall asleep until it attacks. It is not the boogie man waiting under fishes beds.

A fish not physically laying down to sleep in nothing new. Both my rabbitfish and Burrfish never stop swimming. Like you, I can go check out the tank at any time and she will be swimming in one of the corners. The Burrfish (puffer) then swims ALL day long. We have yet to see it ever lay down.

Regardless, ich infects during its FREE SWIMMING stage and so it doesn't matter if your fish is swimming or laying, ich can find them. I forget how long it can survive in his stage but its not long.

There is little to debate about the life cycle or infection patterns of ich since its been so well studied and documented for so many years. What my argument was is that a fishes immune system can fight off ich and effectively knock it down in numbers that they can co-exist with. The counter argument was that 1. fishes immune system cannot fight ich because ich is a parasite, 2. that if one ich parasite can infect a fish, that all of them can and 3. that fish are infected while they sleep and that my puffers sleep in the sand.

I have given proof that fishes immune system does fight off ich (as long as its not a massive infection), its known that ich does not just attack during sleep and I know for a fact that neither of my puffers sleep in the sand Which is irrelevant anyways.

"parasites are organisms that basically are immune to immune systems."

Can you imagine if this were true...we would all be in trouble!!!

 

[greenbean36191]

Do you have any idea how long the resistance generally lasts?

At least 6 months, but no one has studied it beyond that. However, if the fish is immune compromised, the resistance is still less effective.

I can't understand the fish immune system idea.

Regardless of whether you (or anyone) understands exactly how it works, there is a clearly documented immune response. You can read some about it here:
Burgess, P.J. and Matthews, R.A. (1995) Cryptocaryon irritans (Ciliophora): acquired protective immunity in the thick-lipped mullet, Chelon labrosus. Fish and Shellfish Immunology 5, 459-468.

parasites are organisms that basically are immune to immune systems.

No.

As far as ich infecting sleeping fish, there is a grain of truth to that. The theronts do emerge at night, and in nature fish that sleep or go torpid, especially close to the reef, are more likely to be infected. However, in a closed system like a reef tank, it's not likely to make much difference since the parasite actively searches out hosts and it has about 18 hrs to find one.

 

[tbar]

All things being equal is not a Bare bottom tank less likely to have ich issues? Isn't part of the cycle for it to be in the substrate? I'm thinking of getting a Blue Hippo aka Ich magnet, I'm BB and hope that will help.

 

[Paul B]

I don't think ich paracites ever read that they should not infect fish in a bare bottom tank.