Uh, Paul, you must have forgotten your glasses that day. When the guy behind you said that was Brinkley eating the tuna, it wasn't Christie, it is the news guy, David Brinkley:
And no, that doesn't count.
Skimmerless: who's doing it? pros and cons
- Thread starter rick12
- Start date
Uh, Paul, you must have forgotten your glasses that day. When the guy behind you said that was Brinkley eating the tuna, it wasn't Christie, it is the news guy, David Brinkley:
And no, that doesn't count.
Einstein and I
Einstein and I
Tom,
My bad on the Einstein reference. I was seven years old when he died. Feldman would have to be in his 90's for it to have been true.
Thank you for your review of the article. I am not knowledgeable enough to understand everything he said, but I seek to learn. It is not necessary to agree, only to respect that truth and fact come from many sources. I do not take your points of disagreement personally. But that is just me. I can choose to be offended or not. I choose to discuss in respect.
Patrick
Einstein and I
Tom,
My bad on the Einstein reference. I was seven years old when he died. Feldman would have to be in his 90's for it to have been true.
Thank you for your review of the article. I am not knowledgeable enough to understand everything he said, but I seek to learn. It is not necessary to agree, only to respect that truth and fact come from many sources. I do not take your points of disagreement personally. But that is just me. I can choose to be offended or not. I choose to discuss in respect.
Patrick
Randy,
As much as I respect academia, I will take exception to all source of knowledge coming from academia. I doubt that there are scientific papers to support Paul putting ich infested fish in his display tanks with a subsequent disappearance of symptoms. I doubt that there are scientific papers to support my observing an ich infestation with 18 months of no symptoms in the systems and no introductions of any kind to the system. I doubt that there are scientific papers that marine algaes exist in deep space, yet the Russians have sent pictures from the exterior skin of the space shuttle. In each of those situations, many would discredit the messenger because they do not like the message.
Does UV reduce the chance of ich in a reef aquarium. Of course it reduces the chance. Each free swimming parasite can spread the infestation. Appropiate UV rates will kill each parasite that passes through it.
Do I recommend UV as a cure for ich in closed recirculating systems. No I don't. However, it is a useful proactive tool to reduce free swimming infectious populations of the parasite, which in turn reduce the chance of spreading ich in a reef tank.
I value knowledge as it is presented. Of course, I study on the sources of knowledge. I am sure American scientist are skeptical of Russian pictures of marine algaes in space.
In an article you wrote about cynobacteria converting organic phosphate to inorganic phosphate with enyzeme output controlled by biofeedback, I was awe struck at the complexities of nature you refered to.
As I learn more about the world we live in, I realize how much we don't know.
Patrick
Last edited:
FWIW, I didn't mean the study had to be done by academics. Just anyone who showed it actually worked in a clear way that isn't just: "I use UV and don't have ich" or "I added a UV and ich went away". It isn't a hard study, but it does take some time and effort.
I don't doubt that a UV may kill some free floating parasites, but that doesn't mean the disease is usefully treated that way.
If I blow my nose when I have a cold, some viruses are eliminated. Is that useful to speed the total elimination?
If I take enough antibiotics to kill 5% of the bacteria when I have an infection, is that useful?
So my question really is whether one can clear an ich infestation faster with UV in use, and that isn't at all clear to me from the simple fact that some parasites may be killed when passing through it. Even if every one passing through the UV is killed, it isn't clear.
I don't doubt that a UV may kill some free floating parasites, but that doesn't mean the disease is usefully treated that way.
If I blow my nose when I have a cold, some viruses are eliminated. Is that useful to speed the total elimination?
If I take enough antibiotics to kill 5% of the bacteria when I have an infection, is that useful?
So my question really is whether one can clear an ich infestation faster with UV in use, and that isn't at all clear to me from the simple fact that some parasites may be killed when passing through it. Even if every one passing through the UV is killed, it isn't clear.
Aquarist007
New member
Randy what would it take to make it clear to you as a fellow hobbyist. Not as biochemist...or at least say it can be effective in certain situations.
Personally I have found uv sterilization more than 5 % useful in very stressful situations for eg restaurant lobbies. A lot of them will not even top up the water or feed them anything that can't be automatically dumped into the tank.
In my own tank where parameters are very consistent I have taken it off and am prepared to put up with the extra phyto on the glass ect.
You have long term experienced guys like Patrick anecdotally saying it has helped for me yet Paul disagrees but because he has adopted a very heathy feeding regime( which I have totally adopted myself)
Last edited:
Aquarist007
New member
Wrong supermodels do:thumbsup:
wildman926
Active member
When I kept ich in my tanks years ago , I used larger uvs and other claimed panaceas to attempt to cope with it; they didn't work overtime. Ultimately, I was convinced the abatement of symptoms in surviving fish was mostly related to temporary partial immunity to the strain by the fish that survived the initial infestation.
It took about 2 years of no new fish for the ich to finally make it's last appearance( one study suggests 11 months duration for a singe l strain without an opportunity for sexual reproduction; I was hoping for that). It would have been easier and kinder to leave the tank fallow for 10 to 12weeks and treat the fish .
Even after months of no symptoms I was still very reluctant to remove them or add a new fish .
Eventually, I decided to err on the side of the micro fauna and bacteria and took them off line with no negative consequences.
I keep over 50 fish and many fry and do add new specimens from time to time.I also take in rescue fish from local aquarists and occasionally from an lfs. I feed a variety of foods as I always have. There have been no signs of ich in well over 5 years
With qt and preventative treatment for new specimens folks can have, with a very high degree of probability , an ich free tank. Just don't let it in the door, and if it sneaks in somehow ,there are proven effective ways to kill it.
This thread may be of interest:
http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2185929&highlight=fish+acclimation+and+quarantine
It took about 2 years of no new fish for the ich to finally make it's last appearance( one study suggests 11 months duration for a singe l strain without an opportunity for sexual reproduction; I was hoping for that). It would have been easier and kinder to leave the tank fallow for 10 to 12weeks and treat the fish .
Even after months of no symptoms I was still very reluctant to remove them or add a new fish .
Eventually, I decided to err on the side of the micro fauna and bacteria and took them off line with no negative consequences.
I keep over 50 fish and many fry and do add new specimens from time to time.I also take in rescue fish from local aquarists and occasionally from an lfs. I feed a variety of foods as I always have. There have been no signs of ich in well over 5 years
With qt and preventative treatment for new specimens folks can have, with a very high degree of probability , an ich free tank. Just don't let it in the door, and if it sneaks in somehow ,there are proven effective ways to kill it.
This thread may be of interest:
http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2185929&highlight=fish+acclimation+and+quarantine
Last edited:
Aquarist007
New member
But Tom very respectfully that is just your experience and you justifiably so, are a very influential guy on this site. Thus your personal experience and Randy's etc over trumpets my experience with it( even though I have personal experiences with over ten tanks)and those of others that have more practical experience then you and I combined but maybe dealing with only one system like yourself.
Further ...an this is my personal inference....although not stated but implied is that unless a person with degrees after his name states it is so then people with a lot of earned respect on here won't take the presented view and as a result a lot of what very experienced reefers say is not given the merit it should in this hobby.
What is also a touch alarming is a lot of those very very experienced reefers are or have been turned off by this and just don't bother tocontribute on here....and that is a big loss IMO
This has nothing to do with personalities of social interaction and I am sure the process is occurring in other hobbies too
Randy,
Please read post #227, 228 and 230. These post outline how I treated an ich infestation brought in by an infected Blue Tank to my 12 year old reef tank, this past Christmas. As Paul points out, the fishes immune system could have cured the infestation. Also, all the other fish in this tank could have this same immunity because of healthy immune systems. What cured the ich? There is little doubt in my mind that the fishes immunity system cured the ich. However, during the first 28 days, after I noted the external symptoms on the Blue Tang, other fish showed scratching there sides and accelerated respiration rates at the gills. In my estimation, moving these fish would have created more stress and compromised immune systems. I believe in using all tools available. I treated the infectious stage of the parasite with UV, that was 9 months ago.
In light of skewed bacteria populations being a potential problem in the long term health of reef aquariums, I discontinued the use of UV two days ago. Was UV helpful in reducing the infectious free swimming stage of the ich parasite? I am convinced that it was a lot more effective than blowing ones nose which is reactive as opposed to being proactive by reducing the densities of the infectious source.
Patrick
PS. Actually,Paul said his under gravel filter cured the ich and Scotty said it was Supermodels.
Last edited:
As I learn more about the world we live in, I realize how much we don't know.
Well, I can go to Plato's cave and contemplate the chaos in the universe in an academic setting or try to bring some order to my understanding by viewing what I can see through the prism of science. I suspect the truth of it all is somewhere in the middle.
Well, I can go to Plato's cave and contemplate the chaos in the universe in an academic setting or try to bring some order to my understanding by viewing what I can see through the prism of science. I suspect the truth of it all is somewhere in the middle.
Aquarist007
New member
That's assuming you have the science skills you do
Re unhooking uv sterilizers
Notice pt 2
http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showpost.php?p=23052447&postcount=381
Paul B
Premium Member
Tom and I have very different theories about keeping a reef tank and quarantining but we are not wrong. (he may be a little more wrong than me but don't tell him that) :lol2:
We know all we want to know about ich. Or do we? I think not. Certainly in a laboratory we can count how many times ich multiplies or how long it lives in a sterile substrait or how long a fish can live with it, but in this hobby, in our tanks, it means very little. I think that ich will act completely different in a tank that was started last Tuesday and a tank that is 30 or 40 years old. The ich is the same but in an older, more established tank there "may" be forces at work that eliminate or at least weaken ich so that it is never a problem. I realize that "never" is relative and if "never" is a year or two, that stinks, but if "never" is a human lifetime, than that would be a good thing. After I die, whom ever gets my tank will most likely crash it due to ich. I am sure there is so much ich in my tank that they have to take turns watching Oprah. I am in the process even now of adding a pair of bluestriped pipefish to my reef. My quarantine is to take them out of the bag, acclimate them for 20 minutes or so and throw them in my tank. They will live for 2 or 3 years as that is how long pipefish live. I have no doubt of that as I have been doing this since Nixon was President and that is almost the last time I had a fish die from ich. (I also think Nixon may have died from ich ) But it could be because my tank is filled with tiny tube worms that eat the paracite, or it is the ozone I inject or my fish are just immune and by me adding NSW, mud and new fish they keep up that immunity. I really don't know. Tom quarantines and that is how he keeps ich off his fish. Both scenario's work. They are just different ways to run a tank. I couldn't quarantine if I wanted to as my practices of adding mud and amphipods from the sea would not allow me to do that. It just wouldn't work in my tank. :wavehand:
We know all we want to know about ich. Or do we? I think not. Certainly in a laboratory we can count how many times ich multiplies or how long it lives in a sterile substrait or how long a fish can live with it, but in this hobby, in our tanks, it means very little. I think that ich will act completely different in a tank that was started last Tuesday and a tank that is 30 or 40 years old. The ich is the same but in an older, more established tank there "may" be forces at work that eliminate or at least weaken ich so that it is never a problem. I realize that "never" is relative and if "never" is a year or two, that stinks, but if "never" is a human lifetime, than that would be a good thing. After I die, whom ever gets my tank will most likely crash it due to ich. I am sure there is so much ich in my tank that they have to take turns watching Oprah. I am in the process even now of adding a pair of bluestriped pipefish to my reef. My quarantine is to take them out of the bag, acclimate them for 20 minutes or so and throw them in my tank. They will live for 2 or 3 years as that is how long pipefish live. I have no doubt of that as I have been doing this since Nixon was President and that is almost the last time I had a fish die from ich. (I also think Nixon may have died from ich ) But it could be because my tank is filled with tiny tube worms that eat the paracite, or it is the ozone I inject or my fish are just immune and by me adding NSW, mud and new fish they keep up that immunity. I really don't know. Tom quarantines and that is how he keeps ich off his fish. Both scenario's work. They are just different ways to run a tank. I couldn't quarantine if I wanted to as my practices of adding mud and amphipods from the sea would not allow me to do that. It just wouldn't work in my tank. :wavehand:
Aquarist007
New member
Well said... And in line with the concepts that if it is working for you adopt it as practise and the second concept if it ain't broken then it don't need film.
There is a miracle mud on the market....any good?
Paul, Nixon was affected by ichinthewatergate:eek2:
Patrick,
The second time was on a large system with had seen nothing introduced into it for 18 months.....no addittions.
Due to a power failure causing a stress event, I witnessed ich on numerous fish. With this event, I can not agree with the accepted notion that dormant stage of the parasite is 12 weeks.
The tomites ( cysts) remain viable for up to 72 days in cool water; less in warmer water wtiout excysting(hatching) according to one study
This is from another post of mine recently on a thread about ich:
No, I don't recall the specific temperature range in that study(referenece is to the 11 month study) ;somewhere in the high 50F to low 60F range if I recall correctly. I haven't looked at that in a while .
I suspect it varies for different strains of cryptocaryon irritans.
Looking around:
This older study suggests an optimal range for excystment at 30 degrees F,ie 86 degrees C.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/1...146.x/abstract
This is from it:
The optimum temperature for excystment was 30°C; 50% excysted in 5 days and 100% in 7 days. At 25°C, 60% of the tomites started to excyst on the eighth day, and 70% on the ninth day. At 20°C, 10% started to excyst on the ninth day, reaching 40% on the tenth day. No excystment occurred at 37 and 7°C.
This one suggests excystment("hatching") and theront development are significantly slower at 20C(68F) vs 25C(77C):
http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.230...21104554996797
The other phases of the life cycle for crytocaryon(tomos and theronts) do not go dormant per se. The fish previously exposed develop a partial immunity to the strain and usually harbor some parasites unseen in the more vulnerable tissues mouth nostrils and gills until the strain expires which can take a year or two or more without new strains being introduced. In the meantime the parasite is still living in the tank even with lesser or unobservable symptoms showing on the fish.
A stress event can cause an outbreak in fish with partial immunity . Your observations are consistent with these expectations. Leaving the tank fallow for 12 weeks is a very safe bet for insuring all cysts hatch and theronts starve.
The second time was on a large system with had seen nothing introduced into it for 18 months.....no addittions.
Due to a power failure causing a stress event, I witnessed ich on numerous fish. With this event, I can not agree with the accepted notion that dormant stage of the parasite is 12 weeks.
The tomites ( cysts) remain viable for up to 72 days in cool water; less in warmer water wtiout excysting(hatching) according to one study
This is from another post of mine recently on a thread about ich:
No, I don't recall the specific temperature range in that study(referenece is to the 11 month study) ;somewhere in the high 50F to low 60F range if I recall correctly. I haven't looked at that in a while .
I suspect it varies for different strains of cryptocaryon irritans.
Looking around:
This older study suggests an optimal range for excystment at 30 degrees F,ie 86 degrees C.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/1...146.x/abstract
This is from it:
The optimum temperature for excystment was 30°C; 50% excysted in 5 days and 100% in 7 days. At 25°C, 60% of the tomites started to excyst on the eighth day, and 70% on the ninth day. At 20°C, 10% started to excyst on the ninth day, reaching 40% on the tenth day. No excystment occurred at 37 and 7°C.
This one suggests excystment("hatching") and theront development are significantly slower at 20C(68F) vs 25C(77C):
http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.230...21104554996797
The other phases of the life cycle for crytocaryon(tomos and theronts) do not go dormant per se. The fish previously exposed develop a partial immunity to the strain and usually harbor some parasites unseen in the more vulnerable tissues mouth nostrils and gills until the strain expires which can take a year or two or more without new strains being introduced. In the meantime the parasite is still living in the tank even with lesser or unobservable symptoms showing on the fish.
A stress event can cause an outbreak in fish with partial immunity . Your observations are consistent with these expectations. Leaving the tank fallow for 12 weeks is a very safe bet for insuring all cysts hatch and theronts starve.
Last edited:
Similar threads
