Treating ICH With Cupramine In Reef Tank

Caulfield · Dec 12, 2011

Very controversial. Have read here and elsewhere where there has been success. I've been researching and communicating with some smart people on pros and cons BUT really would appreciate hearing from you closet Cupramine reefers who for one reason or another opted to treat ICH in the display tank.

And, how ave you managed evacuating the Cupramine after treatment?

Here's what I've read that's common to success:

Remove all coral and inverts (as possible)
Dose with nitrifying bacteria
DO NOT use Prime or Amquel
Live rock and substrate (aragonite) will absorb the Cupramine, so prepared to dose in substantially higher amounts of Cupramine to achieve the therapeutic levels "“ targeting in the two stage incremental method to get to the therapeutic levels.
Therapeutic Dose: some debate, but reading somewhere between .3-.5 should be therapeutic.
Test religiously: at least twice a day until dose stabilizes. I'm using the Seachem Mulitest.
Post-Treatment: to clear Cupramine, using Cuprisorb until Cupramine tests at or near zero before re-introducing inverts and coral.

Fish In 65g Tank: Tomini tang, 2 ocellaris clowns, one spotted cardinal, one royal gramma, one yellow spotted watchman goby. Two other fish are currently being treated in a small QT which has been problematic regarding managing ammonia, so have been doing 80%+ daily wc.

Again, I am really attempting to reach people who have attempted this with or without success.

Thank you.

MrTuskfish · Dec 13, 2011

This isn't what you want; but here is an actual experience. 15+ years ago, I had a QT set up and put a bunch of (at the time) unwanted LR in it. I treated a couple fish with Cupramine, then ran Cuprisorb ( I think, may have been good carbon) continually. It was impossible to maintain a constant Cu level, I got lucky. A month later, I could still test enough Cu to kill most inverts. (I lost years worth of notes in Katrina, so can't supply exact numbers).
I think I can guess what you're looking for. This same question has been asked in countless ways on our forum. IMO & IME; you're wasting valuable time looking for an answer that doesn't exist. If you find the one person that has done what you want to do, and you try it too.......well, I just hope you don't. Not trying to attack, but I disagree with your opening statement: "Very controversial". I don't think its controversial at all; its a very bad idea and almost always just looking for a way to avoid the inevitable. When using Cu, maintaining the correct dosage is vital and that's impossible in a DT. Get all the fish out, (yeah, its a PITA) and treat in a QT.
With all that said: if you insist on treating in a DT, hypo is a much better choice, but still a poor one. IMO&IME.

sandwi54 · Dec 13, 2011

MrTuskfish said:
This isn't what you want; but here is an actual experience. 15+ years ago, I had a QT set up and put a bunch of (at the time) unwanted LR in it. I treated a couple fish with Cupramine, then ran Cuprisorb ( I think, may have been good carbon) continually. It was impossible to maintain a constant Cu level, I got lucky. A month later, I could still test enough Cu to kill most inverts. (I lost years worth of notes in Katrina, so can't supply exact numbers).
I think I can guess what you're looking for. This same question has been asked in countless ways on our forum. IMO & IME; you're wasting valuable time looking for an answer that doesn't exist. If you find the one person that has done what you want to do, and you try it too.......well, I just hope you don't. Not trying to attack, but I disagree with your opening statement: "Very controversial". I don't think its controversial at all; its a very bad idea and almost always just looking for a way to avoid the inevitable. When using Cu, maintaining the correct dosage is vital and that's impossible in a DT. Get all the fish out, (yeah, its a PITA) and treat in a QT.
With all that said: if you insist on treating in a DT, hypo is a much better choice, but still a poor one. IMO&IME.

+1. First of all, despite the sporadic cases of success on the internet, I would not dose copper into a tank with live rocks. It's difficult to main the correct dosage and cope with the continuing copper leaking out of the LR afterwards. I'm sure there are success, and technically speaking, it is possible to leave cuprisorb and good carbon indefinitely to absorb the copper that leaks back out. The problem is, you just don't know when and how much copper is going to leak at a time. any trace amount of copper will kill inverts, so if a large amount leaks out and cuprisorb/carbon does not absorb in time, your corals will be #*&@!

hypo is a much better route in the DT IF you're 100% sure you're dealing with ich and not velvet. I've done it twice myself and it's way easier than copper in the DT. the presence of live rocks and sand will naturally overcome the difficulty of hypo: pH shift. add some extra sodium carbonate/bicarbonat and you won't experience pH shift at all.

however, since your fish load is so light and you're already going to pull out the corals, i don't see why you have to treat the DT. it's much easier to just move the rocks and get all of the fish into a QT, and you do not have to kill all the microfaunas in the LR/LS by treating in the DT. Treating in the DT is really a last resort ONLY if you have several large fish and do not have a big QT and do not want to risk having water quality issues.

Caulfield · Dec 13, 2011

MrTuskfish said:
This isn't what you want; but here is an actual experience. 15+ years ago, I had a QT set up and put a bunch of (at the time) unwanted LR in it. I treated a couple fish with Cupramine, then ran Cuprisorb ( I think, may have been good carbon) continually. It was impossible to maintain a constant Cu level, I got lucky. A month later, I could still test enough Cu to kill most inverts. (I lost years worth of notes in Katrina, so can't supply exact numbers).
I think I can guess what you're looking for. This same question has been asked in countless ways on our forum. IMO & IME; you're wasting valuable time looking for an answer that doesn't exist. If you find the one person that has done what you want to do, and you try it too.......well, I just hope you don't. Not trying to attack, but I disagree with your opening statement: "Very controversial". I don't think its controversial at all; its a very bad idea and almost always just looking for a way to avoid the inevitable. When using Cu, maintaining the correct dosage is vital and that's impossible in a DT. Get all the fish out, (yeah, its a PITA) and treat in a QT.
With all that said: if you insist on treating in a DT, hypo is a much better choice, but still a poor one. IMO&IME.

sandwi54 said:
+1. First of all, despite the sporadic cases of success on the internet, I would not dose copper into a tank with live rocks. It's difficult to main the correct dosage and cope with the continuing copper leaking out of the LR afterwards. I'm sure there are success, and technically speaking, it is possible to leave cuprisorb and good carbon indefinitely to absorb the copper that leaks back out. The problem is, you just don't know when and how much copper is going to leak at a time. any trace amount of copper will kill inverts, so if a large amount leaks out and cuprisorb/carbon does not absorb in time, your corals will be #*&@!

hypo is a much better route in the DT IF you're 100% sure you're dealing with ich and not velvet. I've done it twice myself and it's way easier than copper in the DT. the presence of live rocks and sand will naturally overcome the difficulty of hypo: pH shift. add some extra sodium carbonate/bicarbonat and you won't experience pH shift at all.

however, since your fish load is so light and you're already going to pull out the corals, i don't see why you have to treat the DT. it's much easier to just move the rocks and get all of the fish into a QT, and you do not have to kill all the microfaunas in the LR/LS by treating in the DT. Treating in the DT is really a last resort ONLY if you have several large fish and do not have a big QT and do not want to risk having water quality issues.

<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w

unctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <w

ontGrowAutofit/> </w:Compatibility> <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel> </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--> I really appreciate you guys weighing in and sharing your experiences and input. Please rest assured that I am in action but space and resources are slowing me down as they are an issue.

My immediate issue is logistics and water quality for the 10g QT that houses only the kole and blenny. With a small aquaclear hob with filter sponge (washed daily), I am having to do 80% water change daily. That said, I am waiting on arrival of a Seachem Ammonia multitest to verify the ammonia levels as I understand from Seachem that the ammonia read with API may be giving me false positives when Cupramine is in the water.

Earlier today, I obtained a 30g (no heater, no filter, etc) as a backstop"¦.but on the lookout for something larger"¦.but space is a major issue. But the 30g I have in hands now.

HOWEVER, really It eludes me as to how to safely maintain the water quality.

Since I read that a DT should be left fallow for 8 weeks, when treating in a QT, it seems a trade-off one way or the other. A compromised microfauna can be brought back without too much issue... and with the fish still in the same tank...less stress seems to me... but Cupramine removal as you've pointed out is problematic (even if one successfully manages a careful buildup of a therapeutic dose). So, we've clarified the issues with Cupramine in the DT and I move on to the next choice.

Treating in the DT is by far the easiest for me to manage logistically and to my thinking safely for the fish"¦ especially as you've clarified the hypo pH and buffering to not be so difficult. It also seems fairly straightforward to remove the shrimps, snails, dusters, and coral to a holding tank than trying to manage life support for the fish. After hypo, seems relatively straightforward to rebuild the microfauna / biofilter"¦ patience and copepods was all it took when originally cycling"¦not that long ago. This 65g DT is only 2.5 months old. Corals and inverts are thriving. Levels solid. Alls great....except for sick fish. Do believe it to be ICH (now at least one clown also has black ICH). We can talk about why I delayed later.

So my thinking that the tradeoff is a wash and safety preserved for the livestock"¦logistics also simplier"¦ doing hypo than QT for the fish, which you say is small numbers but I've been beaten up for too many in the DT. Cannot be both.

Back to QT. How do you see a simple management given the livestock count and an 8-week period outside the DT vs. in the DT? Even a compromised biofilter with sump/fuge must be easier to manage than a setup outside the DT. No?

Again, the coral and inverts should be the easier to maintain in a holding tank? Or donating out the shrimp, snails"¦and just holding the coral seems simple in comparison.

What am I missing? :sad2:

sandwi54 · Dec 14, 2011

Caulfield said:
 I really appreciate you guys weighing in and sharing your experiences and input. Please rest assured that I am in action but space and resources are slowing me down as they are an issue.

My immediate issue is logistics and water quality for the 10g QT that houses only the kole and blenny. With a small aquaclear hob with filter sponge (washed daily), I am having to do 80% water change daily. That said, I am waiting on arrival of a Seachem Ammonia multitest to verify the ammonia levels as I understand from Seachem that the ammonia read with API may be giving me false positives when Cupramine is in the water.

Earlier today, I obtained a 30g (no heater, no filter, etc) as a backstop"¦.but on the lookout for something larger"¦.but space is a major issue. But the 30g I have in hands now.

HOWEVER, really It eludes me as to how to safely maintain the water quality.

Since I read that a DT should be left fallow for 8 weeks, when treating in a QT, it seems a trade-off one way or the other. A compromised microfauna can be brought back without too much issue... and with the fish still in the same tank...less stress seems to me... but Cupramine removal as you've pointed out is problematic (even if one successfully manages a careful buildup of a therapeutic dose). So, we've clarified the issues with Cupramine in the DT and I move on to the next choice.

Treating in the DT is by far the easiest for me to manage logistically and to my thinking safely for the fish"¦ especially as you've clarified the hypo pH and buffering to not be so difficult. It also seems fairly straightforward to remove the shrimps, snails, dusters, and coral to a holding tank than trying to manage life support for the fish. After hypo, seems relatively straightforward to rebuild the microfauna / biofilter"¦ patience and copepods was all it took when originally cycling"¦not that long ago. This 65g DT is only 2.5 months old. Corals and inverts are thriving. Levels solid. Alls great....except for sick fish. Do believe it to be ICH (now at least one clown also has black ICH). We can talk about why I delayed later.

So my thinking that the tradeoff is a wash and safety preserved for the livestock"¦logistics also simplier"¦ doing hypo than QT for the fish, which you say is small numbers but I've been beaten up for too many in the DT. Cannot be both.

Back to QT. How do you see a simple management given the livestock count and an 8-week period outside the DT vs. in the DT? Even a compromised biofilter with sump/fuge must be easier to manage than a setup outside the DT. No?

Again, the coral and inverts should be the easier to maintain in a holding tank? Or donating out the shrimp, snails"¦and just holding the coral seems simple in comparison.

What am I missing? :sad2:

In my opinion, all your fish can be safely placed into a 30g QT for copper treatment without much water quality issue. You have four small fish and one tang (hopefully not over 4"). You're going to have some issues with ammonia/nitrite if your HOB filter is totally uncycled, but large daily water changes should take care of that. I once had 5 large fish in a 55g QT, each one probably generating more load than all your fish combined. Granted that my HOB filter was partially cycled so i didn't experience too much water quality problems. Of course, you should watch feeding in a QT.

Hypoing the DT is also ok if you feel that's easier. It sure is safer than putting fish in QT and worrying about water quality issues, plus you still get to enjoy watching the fish in the DT :lolspin:

Caulfield · Dec 14, 2011

sandwi54 said:
In my opinion, all your fish can be safely placed into a 30g QT for copper treatment without much water quality issue. You have four small fish and one tang (hopefully not over 4"). You're going to have some issues with ammonia/nitrite if your HOB filter is totally uncycled, but large daily water changes should take care of that. I once had 5 large fish in a 55g QT, each one probably generating more load than all your fish combined. Granted that my HOB filter was partially cycled so i didn't experience too much water quality problems. Of course, you should watch feeding in a QT.

Hypoing the DT is also ok if you feel that's easier. It sure is safer than putting fish in QT and worrying about water quality issues, plus you still get to enjoy watching the fish in the DT :lolspin:

I'm going to start the hypo tomorrow morning.

Please re-check the fish count as there are as also mentioned the kole tang and blenny. Overall, I think it will be easier to maintain the coral and inverts in a holding tank and hypo treat the DT. I would imagine the fish will be happier to be in their 'home' with less disruption - certainly, less stress on me.

Caulfield · Dec 14, 2011

MrTuskfish said:
This isn't what you want; but here is an actual experience. 15+ years ago... (I lost years worth of notes in Katrina, so can't supply exact numbers)...
I think I can guess what you're looking for.

With all that said: if you insist on treating in a DT, hypo is a much better choice, but still a poor one. IMO&IME.

MrTuskFish, sometimes what we need to hear is not what we want to hear. That said, what I wanted to hear was what you offered - you're experience.

Thank you for stepping up and sharing your experience. It is factual firsthand knowledge you have and that's really what I wanted to hear even if the outcome was not what I had hoped.

I know I'm going against your recommendation (regarding hypo the DT), but I've actually spoken in person two folks who have done it successfully. I was not ignoring your wisdom in making my decision on hypo.

hvacman250 · Dec 14, 2011

Dont forget a temporary QT tank doesnt have to be a TANK. As a last resort, I bought a clear Tupperware-type storage bin w/ lid at Lowes for @ $20. It was close to 36x18x16, and probably held 40 gallons or so. It was a good thing I bought it because the 55 gallon I borrowed cracked.

I set it on the floor, kept it from bowing when full with a clamp, ran a heater and HOB filter and it worked perfect.

Caulfield · Dec 14, 2011

hvacman250 said:
Dont forget a temporary QT tank doesnt have to be a TANK. As a last resort, I bought a clear Tupperware-type storage bin w/ lid at Lowes for @ $20. It was close to 36x18x16, and probably held 40 gallons or so. It was a good thing I bought it because the 55 gallon I borrowed cracked.

I set it on the floor, kept it from bowing when full with a clamp, ran a heater and HOB filter and it worked perfect.

Were you treating with copper? How was it the HOB helped with ammonia?

BTW, 36x18x16 are the dimensions for a 30g tank.

sandwi54 · Dec 14, 2011

Caulfield said:
I'm going to start the hypo tomorrow morning.

Please re-check the fish count as there are as also mentioned the kole tang and blenny. Overall, I think it will be easier to maintain the coral and inverts in a holding tank and hypo treat the DT. I would imagine the fish will be happier to be in their 'home' with less disruption - certainly, less stress on me.

Seems like you've made your decision so that's good. One caution with hypo, since you'll be doing large water changes to drop the salinity in the DT, be extra careful when you add replacement RODI water. add the replacement water slowly, preferrably over the course of 1-2 hours to prevent pH shock. You should also add sodium carbonate/bicarbonate to the replacement water and aerate it for at least 30 min before adding it to the DT.

Also make sure your refractometer is calibrated with the pinpoint calibration solution. You have a very narrow range of salinity to work with: 1.008-1.009. Draw a line on the water level and always maintain it at that level. If you don't have an ATO, make sure you top it off everyday.

I generally take 3 water changes to get down to 1.008. First, 50% change to get from 1.024 to 1.012. Second, 25% change to get from 1.012 to 1.009. Third, small (< 10%) change to get down to 1.008. Do not let the salinity go below 1.008 and do not let it go over 1.009.

Hold the salinity at 1.008-1.009 for four weeks after the LAST spot is seen on the fish. Then raise the salinity slowly, no more than 0.002 per day.

Caulfield · Dec 14, 2011

sandwi54 said:
Seems like you've made your decision so that's good. One caution with hypo, since you'll be doing large water changes to drop the salinity in the DT, be extra careful when you add replacement RODI water. add the replacement water slowly, preferrably over the course of 1-2 hours to prevent pH shock. You should also add sodium carbonate/bicarbonate to the replacement water and aerate it for at least 30 min before adding it to the DT.

Also make sure your refractometer is calibrated with the pinpoint calibration solution. You have a very narrow range of salinity to work with: 1.008-1.009. Draw a line on the water level and always maintain it at that level. If you don't have an ATO, make sure you top it off everyday.

I generally take 3 water changes to get down to 1.008. First, 50% change to get from 1.024 to 1.012. Second, 25% change to get from 1.012 to 1.009. Third, small (< 10%) change to get down to 1.008. Do not let the salinity go below 1.008 and do not let it go over 1.009.

Hold the salinity at 1.008-1.009 for four weeks after the LAST spot is seen on the fish. Then raise the salinity slowly, no more than 0.002 per day.

Use an ATO and a refract that is regularly calib.

I'm surprised that you take the salinity down as fast as you do. I had intended to go down more slowly. I was envisioning 10% changes each day...or something like that...was going to do the math with a clearer head in the A.M.

Sounds like you've done this a few times...in the DT?

snorvich · Dec 14, 2011

Caulfield;19625069 I'm surprised that you take the salinity down as fast as you do. [/QUOTE said:
You can go down faster than going up. Going up must be slow.

Caulfield · Dec 14, 2011

snorvich said:
You can go down faster than going up. Going up must be slow.

Thanks, Steve.

sandwi54 · Dec 15, 2011

Caulfield said:
Use an ATO and a refract that is regularly calib.

I'm surprised that you take the salinity down as fast as you do. I had intended to go down more slowly. I was envisioning 10% changes each day...or something like that...was going to do the math with a clearer head in the A.M.

Sounds like you've done this a few times...in the DT?

Yes, like Steve said, you can go down a lot faster than going up. In fact, even though I have not done this, I believe if you match temperature and pH, you can drop the salinity straight down to 1.009 without issues. I have never done this myself and do not recommend it though.

I have done this twice. Once in my previous 150g, and another time in my current 225g. It's a heck lot of work in large DTs. I had to use treated tap water simply because my RODI couldn't make enough water in time. It led to cyano explosion for a few weeks before the silicate in the tap water was depleted. You're pretty much starting from scratch once you do hypo in the DT. everything besides fish dies and water chemistry resets.

keep an eye on ammonia/nitrite. the lives that die will give rise to water quality issues.

Caulfield · Dec 15, 2011

sandwi54 said:
Yes, like Steve said, you can go down a lot faster than going up. In fact, even though I have not done this, I believe if you match temperature and pH, you can drop the salinity straight down to 1.009 without issues. I have never done this myself and do not recommend it though.

I have done this twice. Once in my previous 150g, and another time in my current 225g. It's a heck lot of work in large DTs. I had to use treated tap water simply because my RODI couldn't make enough water in time. It led to cyano explosion for a few weeks before the silicate in the tap water was depleted. You're pretty much starting from scratch once you do hypo in the DT. everything besides fish dies and water chemistry resets.

keep an eye on ammonia/nitrite. the lives that die will give rise to water quality issues.

Straight down seems way too fast, I agree.

Water quality seems to be a conundrum regardless if treating in the DT or QT.

I imagined this part of the management would be easier in the DT but maybe not given the die off.

I got a hold of a 30g to move the kole and blenny (yesterday) with Emperor 280, cover, light, and misc. stuff for $20. So, moving them from the 10g was a no brainer to complete their Cupramine...give them room and hoping water quality (ammonia, etc.) will be easier to manage.

Caulfield · Dec 17, 2011

sandwi54 said:
keep an eye on ammonia/nitrite. the lives that die will give rise to water quality issues.

Ammonia has become a problem. Other than massive water changes, how best to handle?

MuffsAbby · Dec 17, 2011

You can use Prime to detoxify the ammonia, assuming you're not using Cupramine (from the above threads, it seems like you're using hypo). You'll still need to carry out water changes, although Prime will make life more bearable for the fish in the interim. Prime only detoxifies ammonia; it doesn't remove ammonia. So, you should test using a kit that separately tests for free ammonia (such as Seachem) rather than total ammonia (such as API). You might also want to get a Seachem ammonia badge, which also measures free ammonia only.

Caulfield · Dec 17, 2011

MuffsAbby said:
You can use Prime to detoxify the ammonia, assuming you're not using Cupramine (from the above threads, it seems like you're using hypo). You'll still need to carry out water changes, although Prime will make life more bearable for the fish in the interim. Prime only detoxifies ammonia; it doesn't remove ammonia. So, you should test using a kit that separately tests for free ammonia (such as Seachem) rather than total ammonia (such as API). You might also want to get a Seachem ammonia badge, which also measures free ammonia only.

Yes, using hypo.

Dosed with Prime (forgot I had it) and will manage testing with the Seachem ammonia test until I get my hands on a badge (using one on the Cupramine QT tank).

Is the ammonia problem going to be temporary or is this what I should expect for the duration of the treatment? I thought water quality was going to be easier to manage in the DT with hypo. It was a primary factor in deciding on a course of treatment.

Treating ICH With Cupramine In Reef Tank

Caulfield

New member

MrTuskfish

sandwi54

New member

Caulfield

New member

sandwi54

New member

Caulfield

New member

Caulfield

New member

hvacman250

New member

Caulfield

New member

sandwi54

New member

Caulfield

New member

snorvich

Team RC member

Caulfield

New member

sandwi54

New member

Caulfield

New member

Caulfield

New member

MuffsAbby

New member

Caulfield

New member

Similar threads