New ich treatment idea
- Thread starter nothingfishy
- Start date
nothingfishy
New member
Not feeding, I did a 15 gallon water change, Friday night, next day ammonia was up. On the last day, I used prime to try to neutralize the ammonia, but even that you are not supposed to use with copper. So what give, cant use a blocker, and unless you I was doing 70 gallon water changes daily, ammonia crept up.
Lost a 7 inch Austrailian Tusk, 8 inch Naso, 6 inch Cuban Hog Fish, 6 inch Maculiceps, 4 inch Achilles.
All in all, this "qt" or "ht: matched step for step last time I tried to qt. To me its simple, no bio filter, means no fish. I would have to set up a separate tank, with all the goods, for months, in order for me to feel safe about them. Even then, using copper, its iffy.
Maybe if I was doing one or two fish, clown fish sized, but these fish were too large for any half fast set up, and I made them suffer thinking I could make it work.
Im angry with myself, my gut set no to hospital tank, well 3 days later, I should have listened.
Knowing what I know now, I wished I used cp. Anything I could have tried in my tank, rock, sand and all, just so I could have zero ammonia.
Lost a 7 inch Austrailian Tusk, 8 inch Naso, 6 inch Cuban Hog Fish, 6 inch Maculiceps, 4 inch Achilles.
All in all, this "qt" or "ht: matched step for step last time I tried to qt. To me its simple, no bio filter, means no fish. I would have to set up a separate tank, with all the goods, for months, in order for me to feel safe about them. Even then, using copper, its iffy.
Maybe if I was doing one or two fish, clown fish sized, but these fish were too large for any half fast set up, and I made them suffer thinking I could make it work.
Im angry with myself, my gut set no to hospital tank, well 3 days later, I should have listened.
Knowing what I know now, I wished I used cp. Anything I could have tried in my tank, rock, sand and all, just so I could have zero ammonia.
GroktheCube
New member
The only big thing CP has against it are the many anecdotal reports of it killing wrasses and pipefish. For the next fish I treat/QT (which will not include wrasses), I'm contemplating just tossing them in a cycled QT and running CP for 6 weeks. My recent experience with what I believe to be velvet in QT has made me very paranoid. If I weren't so paranoid in the first place and started with FW dips into cupramine as soon as I saw unexplained respiratory distress, I'm pretty confident I would have lost a lot of fish, and even then, I think I'm a bit lucky to have had an FWD beat it back enough to give me time to get cypramine up over .3.
MrTuskfish
Team RC
I think there have been anecdotal reports linking just about any fish death with CP. The list of fish that are supposed to be not "copper safe" must include every fish we keep. IMO, if a med is in the water and a fish croaks, its gotta be the med; which, of course, isn't the case. I use copper prophylacticly and probably always will. But, for someone with no copper experience, I think CP may be best. If doable, TT is always my first choice for ich.
GroktheCube
New member
Yup, TTM takes a fraction of the time for a guaranteed cure (if executed correctly). It also lets one "autopilot" through the rest of the QT to a greater degree. Don't have to worry about checking copper levels daily, and trying to squint just right to figure out which damn color it matches up to on the salifert chart.
I only have limited experience with SW fish and copper, but even "copper sensitive" FW fish tend to do OK if you're very careful, and raise the dose slowly enough. I still prefer to minimize drug use if I can.
There are some great teaching points here. It is Important to remember that tank transfer has no effect on velvet. An incorrect diagnosis of ich will lead to a rapid, high mortality if TT is employed. The mass wipe outs that are commonly reported are in my opinion Velvet and not ich. If there is uncertainty, CP and copper will treat both. CP in my experience works faster and saves more fish infected with velvet.
Also, prime or Amquel added to copper is more lethal than ich and velvet. It will kill all of your fish where some will survive from the disease. Never combine the two.
Ammonia and bleach is a lethal combo too. For humans that is.
Also, prime or Amquel added to copper is more lethal than ich and velvet. It will kill all of your fish where some will survive from the disease. Never combine the two.
Ammonia and bleach is a lethal combo too. For humans that is.
nothingfishy
New member
Understood, put myself in a bad position, tried to be the hero, not utilize copper in display tank any longer, and tried to do the unthinkable...use a 100 gallon tub for too many fish.
I understand the life cycle, and realize the methods people employ. My question is, is ich always, always, always, reproducing and out and about. Perhaps an example will help illustrate my point..
You have a brand new, tank. Completely sterile, and cycle it 3 months, using ammonia. You acquire your first fish, an Achilles tang (in reality, this would not be a first fish, but using it to shine my point). You place it quarantine, nice 40 gallon, well cycled tank. You go 6 weeks in copper, and after no signs, place in display.
Here is where I get confused, even though this fish was a carrier, (assuming so) did it fall off in quarantine, or try to, and thus, you broke the cycle with copper and didn't allow it to exist?
Or can you do the same scenario, the ich laid dormant, non active in the fish, waited out the 6 weeks of copper in quarantine, now to only go in display tank, and show itself 6 months later?
Assuming this is the first and only fish in the your display, is it guaranteed to spawn in qt, or could it wait months upon months, to begin its dance in the display tank, 7 months from now?
If not, and if it always has to fall of fish in order to sustain its existence, if that's the case, wouldn't TTM, not using drugs, and only lasting 12 days (14 maybe?) be the home run way to go? You would not have to worry about a bio filter, changing water every 3 days, thus no ammonia. And if ich is always trying to fall off, wouldn't this stop it in 12 days?
I guess I am not understanding if ich have to succom to quarantine upon arrival? Can it wait until a later unannounced time, and then do its thing?
I understand the life cycle, and realize the methods people employ. My question is, is ich always, always, always, reproducing and out and about. Perhaps an example will help illustrate my point..
You have a brand new, tank. Completely sterile, and cycle it 3 months, using ammonia. You acquire your first fish, an Achilles tang (in reality, this would not be a first fish, but using it to shine my point). You place it quarantine, nice 40 gallon, well cycled tank. You go 6 weeks in copper, and after no signs, place in display.
Here is where I get confused, even though this fish was a carrier, (assuming so) did it fall off in quarantine, or try to, and thus, you broke the cycle with copper and didn't allow it to exist?
Or can you do the same scenario, the ich laid dormant, non active in the fish, waited out the 6 weeks of copper in quarantine, now to only go in display tank, and show itself 6 months later?
Assuming this is the first and only fish in the your display, is it guaranteed to spawn in qt, or could it wait months upon months, to begin its dance in the display tank, 7 months from now?
If not, and if it always has to fall of fish in order to sustain its existence, if that's the case, wouldn't TTM, not using drugs, and only lasting 12 days (14 maybe?) be the home run way to go? You would not have to worry about a bio filter, changing water every 3 days, thus no ammonia. And if ich is always trying to fall off, wouldn't this stop it in 12 days?
I guess I am not understanding if ich have to succom to quarantine upon arrival? Can it wait until a later unannounced time, and then do its thing?
nothingfishy
New member
What made me think of this, is all the news and buzz on ebola. It take 21 days of obvervation, because that is how long it can take to show itself. After that, they assume you do not have it. It cant go 6 weeks, and then suddenly pop up, assuming there was no exposure after that quarantine.
If you place in qt, and treat for the allotted time needed for the cycle, was that its only change to rear its ugly head, or can it lay hidden, unopposed to treatment, and wait a long, long time to show itself?
If you place in qt, and treat for the allotted time needed for the cycle, was that its only change to rear its ugly head, or can it lay hidden, unopposed to treatment, and wait a long, long time to show itself?
Spar
New member
The life cycle for ich is fairly predictable within a 3-7 day period for each of 4 of the 5 stages. The unpredictable stage is the cyst (or tomite) stage, which can take as little as 3 days but up to 72 days... so quite some time. the parasite, during this stage, splits into 100-1000 daughter parasites.
this means that you could for instance have just a couple parasites jump off a fish right when you add to the tank, and then 72 days later hundreds of new parasites come out of nowhere. you would have a false sense of security for the prior couple/few months having not seen any new indicators. it is probably unlikely that the 72 day scenario happens, especially since most take 4-8 days, but is possible.
this is the only stage that could "lay hidden" and wait for a long time to show itself. all other stages require quick process.
this means that you could for instance have just a couple parasites jump off a fish right when you add to the tank, and then 72 days later hundreds of new parasites come out of nowhere. you would have a false sense of security for the prior couple/few months having not seen any new indicators. it is probably unlikely that the 72 day scenario happens, especially since most take 4-8 days, but is possible.
this is the only stage that could "lay hidden" and wait for a long time to show itself. all other stages require quick process.
Deinonych
New member
Yes. TTM exploits the predictable phase of the parasite's life cycle - the trophont (feeding) stage. By removing the fish before the parasite encysts and multiplies, you prevent the parasite from completing its life cycle. It is for this reason that I and many others on this forum prefer TTM to other treatments. Copper and CP, while effective, only target the free-swimming theront stage, which is highly variable. One particular study showed that the parasite remained encysted for 72 days before releasing theronts. Obviously, if you only treated with copper for 4 weeks, you wouldn't get all the parasites if that happened.
Also, crypto does not need to be visible (white spots) to be present. It is possible that a fish's immune system kept the parasite in check and did not display any visible symptoms during quarantine. It is for this reason that I don't rely on simple observation. It's best to assume all fish have crypto and put them through the 12 day TTM treatment.
[edit] Spar beat me to the punch
Sorry, this is not a reliable treatment for anything.
Post a marine biology literature reference; I will happily read!
I will wait with anticipation for this link!
Similar threads
