UV sterilizers in a different light

[Aquarist007]

I maintain around 30 tanks a week in my business. There have been a number of cases where ich and other parasites have started to take their toll on the fish. I have tried to treat it in tank with various medications unusuccessfully.
(I am aware that the fish need to be qt'ed and treated with copper and or hyposalination but in these cases it has been impossible to catch the fish)

In the last six months Coralife came out with a new uv sterilizer that has a larger body and a 36 watt uv light.

I have found in each case that running this unit for a number of month seems to irradicate the problems of ich and oodenium(marine velvet).
I believe that the uv sterilizer removes the ich when it leaves its host for the second stage and or when the second stage erupts into the third stage and the parasites are waterborne. So over a few months the ich is irradicated and the fish have had time to become healthy enough to not be in peril from it.

Of course I welcome any discussion on this as I might not be on track of something or spot on which can save alot of disaster from my other clients.

 

[TheAquatard]

I'm sure there people will tell you otherwise but if you got the results you were looking for then who can argue?

My tanks been plagued with weekly bacteria blooms, I've tried everything to stop them. About a month ago I picked up a 3 watt UV and its stayed crystal clear ever since. I don't get the bad rep for them

 

[MrTuskfish]

Ich cysts live primarily in the substrate. most rea;ease the next generation of free-swimmers at night. Most fish sleep on the substrate; on top of the emerging ich theronts. I'm sure some UV will kill some ich and some brands better than others. But with ich, '"some" just isn't good enough. Just one parasite can multiply and devastate a tank. Unless a UV unit could suck up every free swimming parasite; I just see no way that it is any more than a band-aid. Ich can live in very small numbers for months, then erupt into a real infestation. I wish there was a UV cure; but getting every ich parasite into the UV seems to defy all logic. (IMO)

As the above post says, UV is great for algae spores.

 

[Aquarist007]

Ich cysts live primarily in the substrate. most rea;ease the next generation of free-swimmers at night. Most fish sleep on the substrate; on top of the emerging ich theronts. I'm sure some UV will kill some ich and some brands better than others. But with ich, '"some" just isn't good enough. Just one parasite can multiply and devastate a tank. Unless a UV unit could suck up every free swimming parasite; I just see no way that it is any more than a band-aid. Ich can live in very small numbers for months, then erupt into a real infestation. I wish there was a UV cure; but getting every ich parasite into the UV seems to defy all logic.

As the above post says, UV is great for algae spores.

thank you both for your inputs--appreciated.

I wonder then if the uv is just buying time for the fish to become healthy providing one is feeding them with a healthy diet.

I am also a firm believer that exists always exists at some level in the tank--you never completely irradicate it. In a previous discussion here years ago my viewpoint was substantiated by a couple of marine biologists on here. I can remember one stating that ich can live in the gills at a very reduced level where it is not lethal to the fish under normal or unstressed situations.

This view is in direct conflict with the findings I am getting in 8 or so of my tanks where I have installed uv sterilizers after outbreaks of ich. It is also the reason with starting this post and appreciating the input from others

 

[MrTuskfish]

I hope you find the elusive cure for fish in stocked tanks; its there somewhere.

I know ich can remain unseen for long periods; but, sooner or later, the ich will win. I know there are plenty of folks who share you opinion that ich is present in all tanks. I'm not in this group. Plenty of hobbyists on our forum have ich-free tanks. I think most long-term hobbyists are in this group and know (of) many of them. You don't hear about them because they don't have the ich problems to discuss. My own experience is hardly proof; but I keep 1000 + gals of DT tanks and haven't seen any sign of ich since I started prophylacticly treating all new fish with copper in a QT. That's about 16 years ago. If ich were present, I'd know it by now. Just for the record, I'd be just as comfortable using tank-transfer in the QT. The key to an ich-free tank continues to be keeping it out from day one. Although nothing ever seems to be 100% sure when it comes to ich; you can get pretty close.

 

[MattyO]

The ick proof method is to find something that eats ick in each of it's phases... That would be the best remedy. I do agree that you are prob buying time and allowing ur fish to get healthy and manage the ick not caught in your uv... But then again in this hobby there are so many different ways to do the samething.

 

[MrTuskfish]

The ick proof method is to find something that eats ick in each of it's phases... That would be the best remedy. I do agree that you are prob buying time and allowing ur fish to get healthy and manage the ick not caught in your uv... But then again in this hobby there are so many different ways to do the samething.

We're sort of in an "if only" discussion, it seems. But I'll go along. Any cure that involved something "eating ich in all its phases" would be great. But it still would have to eat 100% of the parasites. I don't think any predator is capable of eating all of its prey and 100% kill is the only way to eliminate ich, IMO.
Also IMO & IME; there are not ''many different ways" to eliminate ich. There are 3 (maybe just 2). Tank transfer, copper, and possibly hypo. You could also count leaving a tank fishless for 9+ weeks. A couple of the quinine drugs seem to be potential cures too; but I just don't have the experience with them.

 

[DHyslop]

thank you both for your inputs--appreciated.

I wonder then if the uv is just buying time for the fish to become healthy providing one is feeding them with a healthy diet.

I am also a firm believer that exists always exists at some level in the tank--you never completely irradicate it. In a previous discussion here years ago my viewpoint was substantiated by a couple of marine biologists on here. I can remember one stating that ich can live in the gills at a very reduced level where it is not lethal to the fish under normal or unstressed situations.

This view is in direct conflict with the findings I am getting in 8 or so of my tanks where I have installed uv sterilizers after outbreaks of ich. It is also the reason with starting this post and appreciating the input from others

I've generally found that after a tank gets a nasty case of ich each subsequent cycle will be a little less severe as the remaining fish get stronger and perhaps have developed some measure of biological resistance. This has been my observation with or without UV which is consistent with scientific data that show UV has very little, if any, effect. You seem to be observing about the same thing in these eight tanks in which you added UV: my (largely rhetorical) question for you is if you have another eight tanks that got ich in which you did not add UV, to see whether these improvements are the result of the UV or if they would happen anyway.

For the record I don't use UV on new installations, and based on scientific consensus and my own experiences with several dozen tanks in a business environment, I generally remove or disable UVs on tanks that have had them previously installed. The UVs I have experience with are generally Emperor units around 1/2 watt to 3/4 watt per gallon (80W on 120-180 gallons, two 80W on a 300g, etc).

People using them to fight algae are generally using them as band-aids. Nutrients cause algae and as a professional I feel a responsibility to solve any algae issues at the source by traditional means: increasing export with filter socks, GFO, organic carbon dosing, more effective skimming, improved circulation/aquascape design, etc.

 

[Aquarist007]

I am aware of the three preferred and generally accepted methods of treating ich. I am also aware of the negatives surrounding UV.
I am still wondering with the improvements in UV sterilizers and how to use them more effectively----corlife has supplied research relating the flow to the organism desired to be irradicated-----that the general body of reefers might want to revisit their usefulness
After all we know they can kill phytoplakton or algae.they make a difference on the freshwater tanks I still look after

 

[DHyslop]

I do use them on freshwater. Different ecosystem, different type of client, different cost/benefit.

UVs are used extensively in industrial, waste processing and aquaculture environments: it's a mature technology with a great deal of objective scientific and engineering literature describing effectiveness and techniques. In these situations I'm quite skeptical when a company like Coralife that sells toys--err, "consumer-grade" products comes forward with breakthrough and only their own internal "research" to back it up. All of the consumer aquarium companies (most subsidiaries of the same two corporations) say the same things about every new powerfilter or canister filter they release.

Obviously your mileage my vary, and if you like the equipment then you should use it. In your post you offered a bit of a contrary hypothesis, though, and I felt a desire to throw my weight behind it

 

[Jbrodys]

I believe uv sterlizers work for ich

 

[ingtar_shinowa]

My experiences with Ich and UV was very positive. Over the course of 3 weeks I was watching Ich take out my black tang. It was progressively worse, after a week of UV it was gone. I haven't seen hide nor tentacle since. Hardly scientific but I'm a firm believer.

 

[kubbard]

Just bought a Turbo-Twist 12x for my 240 hope it prevents. Plus the box is pretty cool!!!

 

[alton]

The only problem I have with UV is it kills beneficial as well as harmful.

 

[kubbard]

Does the clean up crew eat ich while in the Cyst stage (while in the sand, rock work, walls ect.)?

 

[nuclearheli]

I wished for a long time somebody would stick their toe in the water when it comes to ich and UV. Kudos to the poster. I believe in UV and it's long term effect on ich. I had ich in my tank, last September and it was pretty bad. As recommended by others the standard chemo therapy techniques were not possible for me. I purchased a UV sterilizer that is typically used for smaller pool's, 48 watts. I also have on on my pool just a lot larger. I run the UV system 24x7 and have not seen a single sign of ich or any other parasite related issues with my tank since last October.

I have extensive rock structures and most of my fish sleep in the caves and rocks, not on the substrate.

I believe that the possibility exists that during the water column phase of the ich cycle, the UV is 100% effective at killing the parasite for the ones that actually make it to the UV sterilizer. That is the key, if the parasite goes through the UV system before finding a host fish. I don't believe that all the ich parasites in the water column find their way to the UV system before infecting a fish, I am not that naive. But if you apply simple statistics to the situation it does seem possible that you are killing off the ich over long periods of time where eventually the population is small enough, less likely to find a host, and more likely to be killed by the UV, and eventually the population will approach and possibly reach zero.

That may be naive also but the fact remains I have what appears to be an ich free tank since last October, not a single sign of the parasite and not a single disease I can identify on any of my fish. I have a purple tang that was a magnet for ich in the past, has not had a single problem.

Since anything beneficial to my tank does not reside in the water column I can only believe that UV is eliminating only bad things from my tank. The only proof of UV being beneficial I need is to see my tank every day. For sure it's not hurting anything.

 

[ingtar_shinowa]

Well said nuclearheli!!!! I agree 100%

 

[Entropy]

I would think the same arguement that is made the UV can't kill all the bad stuff, could be made that it can't kill all the good stuff so I don't see any issues running one unless you are putting faith in it to cure something unrealistically. I know mine kicks butt on my pond (again a different animal).

You could also eliminate the host. The quickest route to peace on earth is to get rid of the humans. The quickest route to an ich free tank is to get rid of the fish.

 

[MrTuskfish]

But if you apply simple statistics to the situation it does seem possible that you are killing off the ich over long periods of time where eventually the population is small enough, less likely to find a host, and more likely to be killed by the UV, and eventually the population will approach and possibly reach zero.

Maybe. But the ich is constantly reproducing. This discussion has been going on for many years. If UV COULD eliminate ich, a mfg certainly would have a good scientific study proving the value of their UV unit. Every publication I've ever seen says the opposite. Many factors can reduce ich populations, making it appear its gone. Then, it reappears. Usually at the worst possible time. Until there is more than just anecdotal evidence, I'll stick with the science: a fallow tank is the only way to eliminate ich permanently.

 

[Aquarist007]

Why has the manufacturer in this case improved on their product and offered it at a higher price if they don't feel hobbyists will buy it. They must be going on some encouraging results.