Reefnation.Jon
In Memoriam
Tank transfer is quite possibly the best/safest/easiest way for rid a fish of ich. A great way for new livestock who may have or are confirmed to have ich to be "cured" before they enter a DT.
Possible new tank transfer method for MARINE ICH ???
- Thread starter Reefnation.Jon
- Start date
MrTuskfish
Team RC
+! Safe, efficient, and idiot-proof. I think this method is ideal for folks who haven't treated ich before or aren't comfortable using copper yet. . When you get through this; find out how to be able to instantly cycle a QT ( by keeping media in the DT) and learn how to properly use copper. Remember; TT will only work on ich, not other protozoan parasites, like velvet & brooklynella.
Last edited:
wooden_reefer
New member
I completely disagree.
I accept that TT can be a method, but TT should not be the general method of choice if one plans ahead, except for some small percentage of fish.
I do not recommend handling fish needlessly.
I do not recommend any exposure to ammonia (this can be overcome in TT)
I do not like the fuss in setting up UV at every transfer. I believe UV is practically necessary.
TT is not safer than copper. handling fish always increases the chance of bacterial infection, the real wildcard.
Little work is always better than handling and WC. Compliance and thoroughness always increase with ease of application.
Ich is basically a dead horse issue except for some fish.
Reefnation.Jon
In Memoriam
Looks like we have a bit of split differences here. I know most people who use tank transfer love it and continue to use it. in terms of ammonia, as mention minimal risk if done right or by using a detoxifier. Handling, I use my hands, no net. Never have used UV. And no matter what anyone says copper is poisonous. We just keep the level of poison just below the lethal dose for fish when treating them.
There are other ways though as wooden reefer has mentioned. Those other ways have been proven to work.
Its is most recommended to do what the administrator of the process is most comfortable with and has most experience with thus minimizing incorrect procedure.
There are other ways though as wooden reefer has mentioned. Those other ways have been proven to work.
Its is most recommended to do what the administrator of the process is most comfortable with and has most experience with thus minimizing incorrect procedure.
sleepydoc
Team RC
Where did UV enter the discussion? Did you mean necessary or unnecessary?
There will probably always be. Wooden_reefer is a strong advocate of copper (in case you hadn't guessed! :lmao
It obviously works for him/her. Others feel equally strongly about TT or hypo. You need to 'pick your poison'. Like you said, choose the method that you are comfortable with and works for you.Even your lion fish?
Yes - relative toxicity is generally a fundamental tenet of almost every disease treatment. You could argue that it isn't with TT, but as has been discussed, there are other 'toxicities' to worry about.
Reefnation.Jon
In Memoriam
Thanks for bringing this to everyone's attention. There are definitely species that should not be handled by hand. Please research before touching anything coming out of the ocean.
wooden_reefer
New member
I always plan to use UV to vastly reduce waterborne pathogenic bacteria.
UV is NOT effective against ich.
I believe UV IS necessary as a part of QT, to reduce the chance and seriousness of bacterial infection.
Bacterial infection per se is very bad, but when an antibiotic drug that harms nitrification bacteria has to be used to treat it, it very much undermines the ease and certainty of eradication of ich.
IME, the UV is very useful, to the point of necessity practically speaking.
UV is NOT effective against ich.
I believe UV IS necessary as a part of QT, to reduce the chance and seriousness of bacterial infection.
Bacterial infection per se is very bad, but when an antibiotic drug that harms nitrification bacteria has to be used to treat it, it very much undermines the ease and certainty of eradication of ich.
IME, the UV is very useful, to the point of necessity practically speaking.
wooden_reefer
New member
Yes, the net is the greatest cause of bacterial infection.
If you use the best transfer method (using a clear plastic bag moving very slowly to herd the fish into it), it has higher chance of kicking up ich and including it in transfer.
Many drugs are poisons when used in too high a dose.
The question of harm of copper can only be answered emperically. IME, copper when used carefully is very safe and has no long term impact.
Ammonia is far more dangerous than copper.
In sum, the chance of death by bacteria infection does certainly swing the balance in consideration toward the use of copper, or hypo is applicable. Bacterial infection is a very serious threat, IME. It is the greatest real wildcard in disease control for fish.
Ich is a dead horse issue, a defeated foe.
If you use the best transfer method (using a clear plastic bag moving very slowly to herd the fish into it), it has higher chance of kicking up ich and including it in transfer.
Many drugs are poisons when used in too high a dose.
The question of harm of copper can only be answered emperically. IME, copper when used carefully is very safe and has no long term impact.
Ammonia is far more dangerous than copper.
In sum, the chance of death by bacteria infection does certainly swing the balance in consideration toward the use of copper, or hypo is applicable. Bacterial infection is a very serious threat, IME. It is the greatest real wildcard in disease control for fish.
Ich is a dead horse issue, a defeated foe.
Last edited:
Reefnation.Jon
In Memoriam
I personally have never had an issure with bacterial infections while performning or even after performing TT method. Thats not to say it cant happen or hasnt to others.
wooden_reefer
New member
Likely choice of fish type has something to do.
Indeed, using fresh salt water every transfer in TT has some features of the UV in reducing waterborne pathogen concentration as least for the first 12-24 hours, but not quite as sure and consistent and lasting as UV, IMO.
wooden_reefer
New member
It is highly desirable for fish to NEVER be exposed to even low level of ammonia. To do so generally you need to cycle, or you trust Prime or Amquel. Prime and Amquel are not all that bad if everything goes well. But often things don't and drugs may be needed, and these product may get in the way.
If you go thru cycling anyway, TT is much less attractive.
If you go thru cycling anyway, TT is much less attractive.
Triton_Z
Member
Jon,
Just follow the procedures outlined by Snorvich as it's very easy to follow and effective (can be problematic for large fish and then you have to decide on other methods).
http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/blog.php?b=508
This has helped a number of members.
jamesbaur13
Apsiring Alhcohlolic
Think about what you are saying for a moment and the product that you are endorsing.
Fish are exposed to ammonia in nature. Any scavenging fish will inevitably be exposed to high amounts of it. It's a byproduct of decomposition.
Now think about copper. This element is typically trapped deep within the earth.
Of the 2 elements, which do you think a fish is more likely to encounter in nature?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copper_toxicity
Fish have no natural countermeasures to copper, nor do the parasitic source of their afflictions. This is what makes the treatment effective, but it's also what makes the treatment detrimental.
Copper, to fish, is not a natural byproduct. It's an element that they are not capable of processing and in a QT, you are forcing them to process it.
Those who are saying, "all meds have some sort of side effect"... you only further my point.
If there is a more natural way to do it, do it.
This stands true for both your fish and for yourselves.
Yep, some guy coming into my home and trapping me in a small glass bowl every 3 days would definitely be upsetting and stressful.
The fact is this is life for a captive fish. He is going to see some weird thing coming into the water and squirting shrimp onto a sun coral every 2 days. He's going to see a big pair of clamps with a piece of fish clamped in it, feeding to an anemone every 3 days. He's going to see a blue colored hand moving rocks from one place to another from time to time.
If he can't get used to the bowl, he will not get used to captivity. It's sad, but not all make it.
Don't blame the bowl.
Last edited:
jamesbaur13
Apsiring Alhcohlolic
Less interaction with people via copper treatment is not the solution. It's more a problem than anything.
I fiddle with my tank almost daily. Fish need to be accustomed to this. The QT period is the best time to get your fish used to this.
I am completely against the use of copper and in favor of tank transfer. Logically, it makes more sense.
I fiddle with my tank almost daily. Fish need to be accustomed to this. The QT period is the best time to get your fish used to this.
I am completely against the use of copper and in favor of tank transfer. Logically, it makes more sense.
Last edited:
I don't think I will every quite understand why people are more interested in decreasing the stress of the treatment for the disease rather the the disease itself. First, it is much more stressful for fish to be bouncing around from tank to tank than to treat the fish with copper. Second, I don't think there is any proof that ich is in anyway guaranteed to magically jump off the fish within 7 days. While hyposalinity or copper are known to successfully eradicate cryptocaryon, there no such reliability with tank transfer. If you are squeamish about treating sick fish correctly, then you probably shouldn't own fish, or you should have someone else do it.
wooden_reefer
New member
Ammonia level in the open reef is very low.
You may not agree that ammonia is very dangerous, often more dangerous than copper in the context of treatment, but I am certain. This is what over 35 years of experience tells me.
Natural and unnatural is not necessarily decisive. Natural has to be better is a fallacy. Completely unnatural can be harmless; significant deviation from natural can be deadly. Emperical evidence rules.
Cooper is also natural in seawater, at about 0.5 to 1 % the level to treat ich. about 100 times natural kills ich, 300 times natural kills fish
Last edited:
wooden_reefer
New member
In human physiology class I learnt that the active ingredient in bleach is a naturally generated substance.
Bleach can be very toxic to you.
Many unnatural things are much less toxic than bleach.
To use natural us unnatural to gauge degree of toxicity is not science.
Empirical evidence rule!!
Bleach can be very toxic to you.
Many unnatural things are much less toxic than bleach.
To use natural us unnatural to gauge degree of toxicity is not science.
Empirical evidence rule!!
Reefnation.Jon
In Memoriam
Folks, nobody is saying ammonia is good. We all agree it is something to avoid. You also should not encounter ammonia in tt as you are completely turning over the water every three days at the most.
The purpose of this post was to get peoples thoughts on a 2 or even 1 day transfer period. With much research and even some experiences it is possible to reduce the over all tt process to 8 days instead of 12 with equal success of eraticating marine ich.
The purpose of this post was to get peoples thoughts on a 2 or even 1 day transfer period. With much research and even some experiences it is possible to reduce the over all tt process to 8 days instead of 12 with equal success of eraticating marine ich.
wooden_reefer
New member
As long the fish live they excrete ammonia.
Ammonia is generated by excretion of livestock, decay of poops, decay of uneaten food, and die-offs if any.
The issue is not only that X concentration of ammonia is more harmful than Y concentration of copper.
The issue is also, practically speaking, that ammonia can go up more and faster than one expects, but copper can only go down.
I would agree that with massive WC ammonia can be managed to some extent, but I read very strange posts about people replacing 25% of water daily, not bothering with decay of poops and uneaten food particles, as means to manage ammonia.
To manage ammonia without nitrification, one has to do massive WC with removal of particles of poops and uneaten food. It is more and more difficult as bioload increases. The bioload increases eight time with each doubling of fish length for the same proportions.
TT is not wise with even just one very large fish.
