QT vs Toss Em In

[areze]

how many people are putting a 10$ clownfish into a 30g aquarium...
do you all really expect everyone to have a QT tank setup for this? equipment and cycled ready to go?

I dont... Im thinking of putting a 30g tank in my fish room for QT, but I have to expect a QT raises the chances of that fish dieing. no matter what you do, the display tank is going to be the better enviroment... hell, even if the QT tank is plumbed out of the sump loop. the key is that it gets all the beneficial equipment we have for our displays that we will not have on a QT tank.

I bring home a 6" fish for a 240g tank, and drop him into a 30g tank with barely a heater and a power head; thats supposed to help him? no, I dont think so. its only really protecting your display, not your new investment...

as for how to really rationalize all of that. I dont know. your damed if you do, damned if you dont. the monetary tradeoff does favor a QT tank, risk the 1 to benefit the many... but Im almost sure it increases your chances of the new fish getting sick.

 

[abulgin]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12850630#post12850630 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by areze
how many people are putting a 10$ clownfish into a 30g aquarium...
do you all really expect everyone to have a QT tank setup for this? equipment and cycled ready to go?

I dont... Im thinking of putting a 30g tank in my fish room for QT, but I have to expect a QT raises the chances of that fish dieing. no matter what you do, the display tank is going to be the better enviroment... hell, even if the QT tank is plumbed out of the sump loop. the key is that it gets all the beneficial equipment we have for our displays that we will not have on a QT tank.

I bring home a 6" fish for a 240g tank, and drop him into a 30g tank with barely a heater and a power head; thats supposed to help him? no, I dont think so. its only really protecting your display, not your new investment...

as for how to really rationalize all of that. I dont know. your damed if you do, damned if you dont. the monetary tradeoff does favor a QT tank, risk the 1 to benefit the many... but Im almost sure it increases your chances of the new fish getting sick.

Please don't take offense, but I think you need to read up on the quarantine concept and its purposes. Plumbing the QT into the display defeats the purpose of the QT--water is mixed with the display water. A display is not necessarily a better environment for a stressed, weak fish, where the fish will have to deal with tankmates, compete for food, etc. I would suggest that you read the section of Bob Fenner's Conscientious Marine Aquarist dealing with quarantine.

I'm not sure I follow your comments about throwing a $10 clown in a 30g QT. If that clown as Clownfish Disease and wipes out your entire tank in a matter of hours, I'll bet you wish you would have QT that fish.

http://www.wetwebmedia.com/quaranti.htm

http://www.wetwebmedia.com/QuarMarFishes.htm

http://www.wetwebmedia.com/ca/volume_3/cav3i4/quarantine/Quarantine.htm

 

[Slakker]

But it doesn't risk one, that's the problem.

The display will be more stable, yes, but absolutely not the better environment in most cases. For one, the new addition has to compete with established fish for food immediately after the stress of being shipped/sold from the LFS. In a QT, that fish has time to calm down and become more comfortable with its new surroundings, your feeding/lighting schedule, etc. Yes, there will be some stress later on when transferring to the DT, but by that point the fish is already quite a lot stronger and will be more capable of competing than it was before it went into QT.

Furthermore, putting a fish directly into the DT is far more risky for that fishes health than a QT will ever be. Even if other fish don't get infected, if the new fish needs treatment it's going to be incredibly stressful to chase it around through all of your rock trying to catch it in order to transfer it over to a hospital tank, when the entire situation could have easily been avoided by simply quarantining it in the first place.

Plumbing it in to the main system defeats all benefits to the established inhabitants...free-swimming trophonts will likely end up in the display and on your fish. They're viable for a matter of hours, but that's plenty of time to make it from the QT up through the return.

Some fish may just be destined not to survive, but if fish you quarantine are always dying something is probably off with your QT system and/or husbandry practices.

 

[rkelman]

I QT everything. I usually keep a sponge filter in my sump so all I have to do is fill the QT and start up the sponge filter. It just doesn't make sense to risk all my other fish for one. If I got ich in my display I'd have to remove all the rock / corals just to get the fish out. No thanks. Its much easier to have them in QT for a month. And yes a month is generally long enough. The chances of a fish going through a 4 week QT then developing ich after going to my display is negligible.

 

[areze]

Please don't take offense, but I think you need to read up on the quarantine concept and its purposes. Plumbing the QT into the display defeats the purpose of the QT--water is mixed with the display water. A display is not necessarily a better environment for a stressed, weak fish, where the fish will have to deal with tankmates, compete for food, etc.

point was that a QT tank plumbed to your display would afford the water quality of your display, and no need to keep a seperate tank cycled. plus when it comes time to transfer, no chance that the most obscure levels in the water would be drasticly different. less stress on the fish, less chance they get sick at that point.

of course that isnt a QT... it puts your entire tank at risk. it does solve SOME of the purpose though(keeping them from being attacked/fighting for food).

now a question... if you did this, and placed a huge UV filter on the return from the QT, would this solve all problems? Im not sure how effective UV is on spores...

 

[Slakker]

If everything is properly QTed, there IS no chance of them being afflicted with parasites upon introduction into the display.

C. irritans et al are not magical little creatures, they don't just appear out of nowhere. They're organisms with well researched and well documented life cycles. Without uninhibited introduction into the system, they will not be present in our systems.

 

[rkelman]

" if you did this, and placed a huge UV filter on the return from the QT, would this solve all problems?"

Maybe Maybe not... I'm not sure of the effects of UV on ich, brook, other parasites / viruses I'd want some kind of lab test... before I would do it.

 

[areze]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12851334#post12851334 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Slakker
If everything is properly QTed, there IS no chance of them being afflicted with parasites upon introduction into the display.

C. irritans et al are not magical little creatures, they don't just appear out of nowhere. They're organisms with well researched and well documented life cycles. Without uninhibited introduction into the system, they will not be present in our systems.

whats the lifecycle on an ich spore?

 

[abulgin]

http://www.wetwebmedia.com/AqBizSubWebIndex/bizuvs.htm

Also, from Anthony Calfo:

"I don't understand how I can still get ich -- that's what I bought this UV sterilizer for. . .can you provide an opinion?
[UV sterilizers do a terrible job of preventing Ich. You money would have been much better spent (and less of it) on a hospital tank that all new fish go through first. These quarantine tanks (QT) prevent Ich from entering your display through faithful screening and treatment. ***The problem with a UV sterilizer for controlling pathogens is that they have a narrow range that they will work in. The UV lamp must be less than 6 months old, the water MUST be prefiltered of all particulate matter (sediment free), the tank water MUST be crystal clear (heavy frequent use of carbon else discolorants reduce efficacy of UV light), the UV chamber must be frequently cleaned of sediment and organic slime buildup inside or light is blocked (just look at how much slime builds on power filter tuber in one month), the water flow must be rather slow as per mfg rating for kill time and the bulb must be sufficiently intense to handle the rate of turnover for the tank. And even after all of those things have been satisfied, it can only denature the parasites that are run through it... some may travel through the water and attach to fish without ever traveling through the UV! For disease control Ozone is easier, much more effective but easier to abuse. My vote is always for a QT tank for all new and sick fish]"

 

[abulgin]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12851409#post12851409 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by areze
whats the lifecycle on an ich spore?

From: http://www.wetwebmedia.com/ichart2mar.htm

"The ugly little causative parasite of Marine Ich is the ciliated protozoan, Cryptocaryon irritans (even the name sounds bad!). The parasite has a rather simple life cycle, and has several different phases during its life cycle when it is especially vulnerable. The parasite, in its free swimming phase, locates a suitable host (i.e.; your fishes!), and burrows into the host’s skin, gills, and fins, where it feeds on the fluids contained within the host’s body. For protection, the parasites form a thin cyst over themselves. The cysts, which look a lot like grains of salt, are usually the aquarist’s first signal that the fish has contracted the disease. The encysted parasites, called trophonts, remain attached to their fish host for approximately 7 days until the protozoan reaches maturity. Next, the protozoan leaves the host and enters the water column as single cell, known as a tomont. The tomont (or cyst) can swim for up to 18 hours before it attaches to a suitable substrate, such as sand, rock, or the aquarium itself. Then, the cells within the cysts divide, and form up to 200 "daughter" parasites, or tomites. This process, which takes anywhere from 4 to 28 days, results in a new generation of free swimming protozoans called theronts. The theronts must then locate and inhabit a suitable host to complete their life cycle within several hours, or they will die. It is during this free swimming phase that the Cryptocaryon parasite is most vulnerable, and this is the part of the life cycle when Marine Ich can be eradicated with a relatively high degree of success."

 

[Slakker]

 

[areze]

so the QT needs to be 1.5-2months?

 

[Slakker]

Ideally, yes, but in most cases 4 weeks is sufficient.

 

[cloak]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12851438#post12851438 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Slakker

Good information. IMO though, it doesn't work like that. If it was as easy as a chart, there wouldn't be multiple threads like this. Ich is a number between the numbers. A common cold. Everybody gets it, but there is no cure.

 

[Slakker]

I feel that this is all I really need to post in response to that:

References

Bunkley-Williams L. and Williams E.H. 1994. Disease caused by Trichodina spheroidesi and Cryptocaryon irritans (Ciliophora) in wild coral reef fishes. Journal of Aquatic Animal Health 6:360-361.

Burgess P.J. and Matthews R.A. 1994. A standardized method for the in vivo maintenance of Cryptocaryon irritans (Ciliophora) using the grey mullet Chelon labrosus as an experimental host. J Parasitol 80:288-292.

Burgess P.J. and Matthews R.A. 1994. Cryotocaryon irritans (Ciliophora): photoperiod and transmission in marine fish. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 74:535-542.

Burgess P.J. and Matthews R.A. 1995. Cryptocaryon irritans (Ciliophora): acquired protective immunity in the thick-lipped mullet, Chelon labrosus. Fish & Shellfish Immunology 5(6):459-468.

Cheung P.J., Nigrelli R.F. and Ruggieri G.D. 1979. Studies on cryptocaryoniasis in marine fish: effect of temperature and salinity on reproductive cycle of Cryptocaryon irritans Brown, 1951. J. Fish Dis. 2:93-97.

Colorni A. 1985. Aspects of the biology of Cryptocaryon irritans, and hyposalinity as a control measure in cultured gilt-head sea bream Sparus aurata. Dis. Aquat. Org. 1:19-22.

Colorni A. 1987. Biology of Cryptocaryon irritans and strategies for its control. Aquaculture 67(1-2):236-237.

Delbeek J.C. and Sprung J. 1994. The Reef Aquarium Volume 1. Ricordea Publishing, Coconut Grove, Florida. 544pp.

Dickerson H.W. and Clark T.G. 1996. Immune response of fishes to ciliates. Annual Review of Fish Diseases 6:107-120.

Dickerson H.W. and Dawe D.L. 1995. Icthyophythirius multifiliis and Cryptocaryon irritans (Phylum Ciliophora) In: P T K Woo (ed.) Fish Diseases and Disorders. Volume 1: Protozoan and Metazoan Infections. CAB International, Wallingford, Oxon. pp 181-227.

Diggles B.K. and Lester R.J. 1996. Influence of temperature and host species on the development of Cryptocaryon irritans. J Parasitol 82:45-51.

Diggles B.K. and Lester R.J. 1996. Variation in the development of two isolates of Cryptocaryon irritans. J Parasitol 82:384-388.

Grutter A.S. 2000. Ontogenetic variation in the diet of the cleaner fish Labroides dimidiatus and its ecological consequences. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 197:241-246.

Ruppert E.E. and Barnes R.D. 1994. Invertebrate Zoology. Saunders College Publishing, Orlando, FL. 1056pp.

Yoshinaga T. and Dickerson H.W. 1994. Laboratory propagation of Cryptocaryon irritans Brown, 1951 on saltwater-adapted black mollies Poecilia latipinna. J. Aquat. Anim. Health 6:197-201.

Wilkie D.W. and Gordin H. 1969. Outbreak of cryptocaryoniasis in marine aquaria at Scripps Institution of Oceanography. California Fish and Game 55:227-236.

Wright A. and Colorni A. 2002. Taxonomic re-assignment of Cryptocaryon irritans , a marine fish parasite.. European Journal of Protistology 37(4):375-378.

 

[cloak]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12852188#post12852188 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Slakker
I feel that this is all I really need to post in response to that:

I've used tap water for almost nine years. No problem. Not going to chalk it up to luck now. To me, RO/DI might be outdated.

 

[Slakker]

I'm very glad that your tap water is of such high quality. It must save you a bundle.

However, I don't see how that in any way discredits the findings of 17 academic/scientific sources relating to the life cycle of "Ich."

 

[tkeracer619]

Ick is childs play. Get a case of brooknella (sp) and you will QT from then on out.

Flatworms, Zoa Eating Spiders, Redbugs, diseases, preditory snails, hitchhiking crabs, parasites, bacterial infections, getting a fish to eat.....etc. All reasons in no particular order that you SHOULD QT.

Take a look at fish tuberculosis and the ability of it to transfer to humans. Scary.

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12852159#post12852159 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by cloak
Good information. IMO though, it doesn't work like that. If it was as easy as a chart, there wouldn't be multiple threads like this. Ich is a number between the numbers. A common cold. Everybody gets it, but there is no cure.

You are incorrect. Copper and Hypo-salinity are both methods of eradicating ick. It isn't a virus like the common cold. It is a parasite.

 

[Aquarist007]

I qt all fish if even just for observation

IMO what is important here is why you quaranitne rather then voting yes you do or no you don't. Alot of good reasons have been brought forth here and by alot of RC regulars which I believe or more in tune with doing the correct things

Here is another excellent thread worth linking to this one

http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=1420521

 

[Aquarist007]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12852232#post12852232 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Slakker
I'm very glad that your tap water is of such high quality. It must save you a bundle.

However, I don't see how that in any way discredits the findings of 17 academic/scientific sources relating to the life cycle of "Ich."

me too--maybe the post was meant for another thread?