Using hydrogen peroxide to treat velvet

[andy01748]

Since I started in this hobby I've literally had hundreds (if not thousands) of questions answered searching on the internet, including the great resources here at RC. Hence, I don't post if an answer to my question has already been provided. (Its a rhetorical question, but why do so many people ask questions that are readily answered in the stickies?)

However, one question I have not been able to answer is why isn't hydrogen peroxide recommended as a treatment for velvet (Amyloodinium ocellatum)? I assume there is a reason why it is not recommended. Searching on-line seems to indicate it is a 'promising treatment', i.e. at

http://fisheries.tamu.edu/files/201...mportant-Parasite-of-Cultured-Marine-Fish.pdf

but I haven't been able to close the loop, so to speak, and found more recent information showing it is not effective. The above paper cites Noga's book on Fish Disease: Diagnosis and Treatment, but I do not have access to this recommended reference, and wonder if more detailed discussion is provided. Since velvet is a problem that impacts the marine fishery industry I just assume research using hydrogen peroxide has continued, but I haven't been able to find it as I browse the web.

Knowing that many of our resident experts here are familiar and have access to the scientific literature, I wonder if you could share what the current status for using hydrogen peroxide for treating velvet? (Please don't take this as a request to do a literature search, as I assume someone may know the answer off the top of their head!)

 

[Newsmyrna80]

I have read several scientific studies and abstracts as to the success of utilizing hydrogen peroxide in treating not only velvet but monogeans (aka flukes) as well. The problem as I see it is there is a fine line between curing and killing the fish. Hydrogen peroxide can be very harsh, if not deadly on fish. That being said like anything else in this hobby the more it is experimented with, perfected and experiences shared it could become more mainstream.
Have you tried google scholar for scientific research?

 

[andy01748]

I have read several scientific studies and abstracts as to the success of utilizing hydrogen peroxide in treating not only velvet but monogeans (aka flukes) as well. The problem as I see it is there is a fine line between curing and killing the fish. Hydrogen peroxide can be very harsh, if not deadly on fish. That being said like anything else in this hobby the more it is experimented with, perfected and experiences shared it could become more mainstream.
Have you tried google scholar for scientific research?

I understand the fine line, but it seems that copper has the same issue, but is often used. I have tried google scholar without success. Tend to get abstracts but then need to pay to download the full paper. That is why I posted here, as I've seem to have reached a dead end trying to find the answer on my own.

 

[snorvich]

From Steven Pro's article:

"Treatment Option 12: Hydrogen Peroxide

This is one of the newest ideas for treating Amyloodinium ocellatum and, in my mind, one of the most interesting and promising as well. The first study used 20 juvenile Pacific Threadfin (Polydactylus sexfilis) suffering with an infection of Amyloodinium ocellatum. They were randomly divided into four open water tanks. One tank was the control and received no treatment. The control fish were examined and found to have a mean of 16.6 ± 16.2 trophonts per gill biopsy. The fish that were to be treated with varying levels of hydrogen peroxide were also examined and found to harbor a mean of 35.6 ± 38.7 trophonts per gill biopsy. Water flow to the three treatment tanks was stopped and they were dosed with hydrogen peroxide at concentrations of 75, 150, and 300 ppm. The fish were exposed for thirty minutes and then the water flow was returned to rid the tanks of the hydrogen peroxide. Within one hour of treatment, all the fish exposed to 300 ppm hydrogen peroxide had perished, but the fish exposed to only 75 and 150 ppm tolerated the treatment without any deaths. The surviving fish were examined immediately after treatment and found to harbor no more parasites. They were re-examined the following day. The treated fish were still infection free while the untreated fish were found to have an increase in the trophonts counted.

Another test was set up at the facility where the sick fish were obtained. Scientists used a grow out tank that contained fish infected at a rate of 16.3 ± 13.0 trophonts per gill biopsy. These fish were exposed to 75 ppm hydrogen peroxide for thirty minutes. One day after exposure, the trophonts' count dropped to 4.7 ± 0.6. After six days, the count was down to 1.0 ± 1.0. At this point, the fish were retreated with 75 ppm hydrogen peroxide for another thirty minutes. The day after the second treatment, no trophonts could be found. Because the study's participants were unsure of the effect of hydrogen peroxide against tomonts, they transferred the fish to a clean tank at this time.

Some of these same people then prepared an experiment on Mullet (Mugil cephalus) fry. They first studied hydrogen peroxide's effect on healthy fish. Three groups of ten healthy fish were exposed to 75, 50, and 25 ppm hydrogen peroxide for thirty minutes. After 24 hours, the survival rates were 20, 50, and 70% respectively. They then decided to test 25 ppm hydrogen peroxide on a large larvae-rearing tank. This tank held 3000 liters of water and approximately three fish per liter. The facility had been experiencing 200-1000 deaths per day from Amyloodinium ocellatum for one week prior to the test in this vessel, while the standard daily mortality should have been 0.002%. The fish were treated for 30 minutes with 25 ppm hydrogen peroxide. Within three days of the exposure, mortality dropped to less than 10 per day.

Now before you all go running off to the medicine cabinet, please remember that this treatment is experimental at best. It can easily be overdosed and cause mass mortalities. I would wait until further research has been performed to test the tolerance of various marine ornamentals to hydrogen peroxide exposure. Just to be clear, I am not currently recommending the use of hydrogen peroxide. If you choose to experiment and use it, you could very well be risking the lives of every inhabitant in your aquarium. I mention it only because it is promising, and as something to keep an eye out for in the future, after additional testing has been done. If you wipe out your aquarium with this treatment, don't come crying to me later."

Future research may prove out this, but current practice does not support its usage. CP is the treatment of choice from the marine biology literature.

 

[andy01748]

Thanks for this reference. I had seen this and I believe it is several years old. I guess my question is if any of the future research has been done and published, or if this article still references the most current research?

 

[snorvich]

Thanks for this reference. I had seen this and I believe it is several years old. I guess my question is if any of the future research has been done and published, or if this article still references the most current research?

This reflects current thinking.

 

[andy01748]

This reflects current thinking.

Thanks for the update. I guess it means my search skills are adequate, as I couldn't find anything more recent! However, given the impact of velvet on the Marine Fisheries industry, I had thought further sponsored (and published) research would exist to validate or dismiss this as a treatment option, where the results could be applied to our marine hobby, as done with much of the available published research. For example (and I can't find the paper now, but I believe I originally found the reference through RC) a study was done using garlic (actually I believe diallyl thiosulfinate, the primary chemical in garlic) and showed that garlic was not a viable treatment for ich.

The good news is that hydrogen peroxide (cheap, easily sourced, and simple to monitor the concentration) may still be a treatment option in the future, pending results of further research (hopefully).

 

[Newsmyrna80]

The problem is research costs money which is usually funded for and by aqua farming. When countries like China who heavily rely on aqua farming start losing millions due to a disease research gets funded. Velvet has not been an issue like cryptocaryon, flukes or even brook.
I found our local marine science center to be a good source of information on the latest research. If you have one that may be a good place to start.

 

[andy01748]

The problem is research costs money which is usually funded for and by aqua farming. When countries like China who heavily rely on aqua farming start losing millions due to a disease research gets funded. Velvet has not been an issue like cryptocaryon, flukes or even brook.
I found our local marine science center to be a good source of information on the latest research. If you have one that may be a good place to start.

Thanks for the input. I was under the mistaken impression that velvet did have a big impact on marine fisheries, but your explanation explains why there appears to be a dead end in the funded research.

 

[snorvich]

Thanks for the input. I was under the mistaken impression that velvet did have a big impact on marine fisheries, but your explanation explains why there appears to be a dead end in the funded research.

Marine fisheries are likely to use CP as that is the preferred treatment for velvet. There is little value to marine fisheries in exploring other treatments when one is known to be effective.