Tank Transfer vs 1 QT

[igot2gats]

What are the benefits from the TT method that you can't accomplish from using one QT?

I've been reading up on this, but can't wrap my head around the TT method...


Thoughts?

 

[jimmyj7090]

TT will eliminate marine ick. QT alone will not.

 

[mbingha]

Tt is effective in disrupting the life cycle of ich. If followed correctly it is nearly 100% effective without using meds and in a shorter time frame. Using one qt and only observe them there is the possibility that ich will make it through to the DT. If you use meds, it can both be harder on some fish and if you don't maintain proper levels it may not be effective.

 

[mbingha]

All that said, TT is only useful for treatment of ich. That's why it's recommended to have an observation period after tt is completed.

 

[supra400hptt]

I use both, transfer to speed up the process and then into a qt tank for a couple of weeks to treat with prazipro and observe that no ich got through.

 

[snorvich]

Tt is effective in disrupting the life cycle of ich. If followed correctly it is nearly 100% effective without using meds and in a shorter time frame. Using one qt and only observe them there is the possibility that ich will make it through to the DT. If you use meds, it can both be harder on some fish and if you don't maintain proper levels it may not be effective.

This will eliminate ich from consideration. However, since some LFS and online vendors use a non-therapeutic dose of copper in their system, it is essential that the TT time of 12 days be augmented by enough time so that total time in quarantine is at least 5 weeks. This will give parasites masked by a low level of copper to exhibit symptoms. Also, treating all fish for flukes is a good idea and this can be done easily with this strategy.

 

[reefgeezer]

I'm still old school. 6-8 weeks - Prazipro then copper. No hypo-salinity, tank transfer, etc.

 

[ca1ore]

I do not use TT. Not because I doubt its effectiveness for ich, but because I travel too much for work and cannot properly manage the transfers. Plus, rightly or wrongly, I figure if I'm going to be observing anyhow, might as well do it for ich too.

 

[GroktheCube]

I do TTM--> Observation. It's a pretty easy way to rule out ich entirely. While it does stress some fish out, I think it's probably less stress than most medications. The only fish I've ever lost to TTM were fish that were in extremely poor shape upon arrival, generally large terminal male wrasses. IME, larger terminal male wrasses are not great shippers. I think they're probably more sensitive to ammonia than your average fish, but I'm not certain. Given wrasses also tend to be rather sensitive to copper, I lean towards TTM. Some of them are very shy about eating during TTM due to stress, but I've never had one starve to death.

I have a pretty large stock of chloroquine diphosphate on hand (I like to keep a very well stocked fish medicine cabinet: chloroquine, cupramine, ciprofloxacin, enrofloxacin, erythromycin, trimethoprim-sulfa, amoxicillin, augmentin, nitrofurazone, praziquantel, fenbendazole, levamisole, and metronidazole), but given all the reports I've heard about chloroquine killing wrasses very quickly, I'm disinclined towards its use. I might consider it in a dire emergency (velvet). I'm generally not a fan of formalin. I know it works, but I'm always a bit paranoid about toxic and carcinogenic chemicals, even though the risk to humans from so little exposure is miniscule.

For the next round of non-wrasses I QT, I'm contemplating just doing a lengthy observation in a cycled tank with chloroquine. The biggest downside I can see to this is that there is no hobbyist-accessible test I'm aware of for chloroquine. UV light breaks it down pretty rapidly, and I believe plain ole visible light does to at least some degree.

 

[MrClam]

I have a related question. It seems that everyone in the hobby tends to agree that treatment with drugs is stressful to the fish. Why?

I assume treatment for fish would be no different than treatment for humans, in which case proper dosing usually means very little stress. At least far less stress compared to getting captured by a giant every couple days and being held in the air for a few seconds.

 

[mbingha]

Because it's very difficult to maintain therapeutic levels while at the same time not over dosing. Plus some fish react poorly to copper, and at therapeutic levels it can be both toxic, and some fish refuse to eat.

 

[GroktheCube]

I have a related question. It seems that everyone in the hobby tends to agree that treatment with drugs is stressful to the fish. Why?

I assume treatment for fish would be no different than treatment for humans, in which case proper dosing usually means very little stress. At least far less stress compared to getting captured by a giant every couple days and being held in the air for a few seconds.

Many of these drugs were developed to treat humans or domestic mammals, not fish. Others are considered too dangerous for human use.

Most of the diseases we deal with are protozoan parasites, and th e chemicals we use to treat them are toxic to both the fish and the parasite, it's just that they're generally much more toxic to the parasite. For most fish most of the time, chloroquine is pretty safe, but there are notable exceptions. Many people have reported wrasses dropping dead from it in short order.

Getting picked up by a giant is stressful, but it's also an acute vs a chronic stressor. The stress response most animals have is meant to help them survive an acute "fight or flight" type stressor. The "bad" kind of stress that impairs immune function, healing, appetite, etc is chronic stress. That's why people like putting a QT in a quiet place.

If fish are in an environment that's minimally stressful otherwise, the transfer shouldn't be stressful enough to cause harm if the fish are not physically injured.

 

[snorvich]

Many of these drugs were developed to treat humans or domestic mammals, not fish. Others are considered too dangerous for human use.

Most of the diseases we deal with are protozoan parasites, and th e chemicals we use to treat them are toxic to both the fish and the parasite, it's just that they're generally much more toxic to the parasite. For most fish most of the time, chloroquine is pretty safe, but there are notable exceptions. Many people have reported wrasses dropping dead from it in short order.

Getting picked up by a giant is stressful, but it's also an acute vs a chronic stressor. The stress response most animals have is meant to help them survive an acute "fight or flight" type stressor. The "bad" kind of stress that impairs immune function, healing, appetite, etc is chronic stress. That's why people like putting a QT in a quiet place.

If fish are in an environment that's minimally stressful otherwise, the transfer shouldn't be stressful enough to cause harm if the fish are not physically injured.

Exactly. However, also realize that drugs in humans are not necessarily a good thing either, which is why side effects are always described with fair accuracy.

 

[andex23]

TTM for Ich only here. if you have other issues you need another remedy.

 

[zeebies]

Tank transfer, Prazi and observation for every fish. Total of 10-12 weeks.

 

[HumphreyBear]

Keyboard error! Sorry

 

[wooden_reefer]

I do not do TT; I do QT

I do not do TT; I do QT

I'd agree that TT is effective against ick, but ick is not the only disease of concern.

QT is effective for the eradication of ick, plus the setup for QT facilitates other treatment, most important of which is external bacterial infection.

I always use UV for new fish against bacterial infection, for example, I do not like the fuss of phyiscal setup of UV for TT for each transfer and I don not like to touch fish unnecessarily.

Most people do TT accept their fish's exposure to some ammonia. I would not easily subject my fish to ammonia, except during transport in bags.

TT can be done without any ammonia if planned correctly. IMO, those who are expert enough to do so will recognize the undesirabiity of TT.

 

[GroktheCube]

I'd agree that TT is effective against ick, but ick is not the only disease of concern.

QT is effective for the eradication of ick, plus the setup for QT facilitates other treatment, most important of which is external bacterial infection.

I always use UV for new fish against bacterial infection, for example, I do not like the fuss of phyiscal setup of UV for TT for each transfer and I don not like to touch fish unnecessarily.

Most people do TT accept their fish's exposure to some ammonia. I would not easily subject my fish to ammonia, except during transport in bags.

TT can be done without any ammonia if planned correctly. IMO, those who are expert enough to do so will recognize the undesirabiity of TT.

IME/IMO, bacterial infections are almost always opportunistic, and I've never seen any evidence that a UV sterilizer substantially reduces the risk of opportunistic bacterial infection.

Running UV does prevent the aquarist from using many (possibly the majority) of drugs we might want to use, including dewormers, CP, most antibiotics, and some copper meds.

On the ammonia front, fish are always exposed to "some" ammonia under any circumstances. What matters is whether or not they are exposed to toxic levels of ammonia. Preventing toxic levels of ammonia while doing TTM is trivial. A little bit of prime does it, and sometimes with smaller fish or larger water volumes, that isn't even necessary.

 

[wooden_reefer]

"I've never seen any evidence that a UV sterilizer substantially reduces the risk of opportunistic bacterial infection."

I have.

This is hard to prove because it only reduces the opportunity but does not eliminate it.

I'd say when a UV is properly set up, the need to use antibiotics is reduced by 70-80%.

Plus, with a properly set up UV, the spread is much reduced among fish in the same tank.

This has been my experience in the past decades.

The UV is not used when a drug that is degraded by UV is used. The need to use these drugs for the duration of UV is reduced.

The UV certainly has it limitations but it is my first line of defense against external bacterial infection; it is a little like the sterilizing impact of the sun, also limited but significant.

I feel naked without UV for QT of fish.

 

[wooden_reefer]

"On the ammonia front, fish are always exposed to "some" ammonia under any circumstances. What matters is whether or not they are exposed to toxic levels of ammonia. Preventing toxic levels of ammonia while doing TTM is trivial. A little bit of prime does it, and sometimes with smaller fish or larger water volumes, that isn't even necessary. "

In a typical way TT is done, the ammonia level is not extremely low. It is at least moderate.

It is possible to do TT without any ammonia or Prime, but such way is not talked about much.