Questions about display tank disease eradication theories

[bpipher]

@Mazzy21 Most of the points have been made, and I'm glad you found and posted the UFL link!  I was about to recommend it.  It compiles quite a few sources worth reading as it does provide credit for most of what has been said.
 

The remaining misconceptions you seem to have are also refuted in that same article you previously posted:

 

" Fish that survive a Cryptocaryon infection develop im-munity, which can prevent significant disease for up to 6 months (Burgess 1992; Burgess and Matthews 1995). However, these survivors may act as carriers and provide a reservoir for future outbreaks (Colorni and Burgess 1997) "

 

You boost the fishes immune system, or otherwise let them naturally fight the parasite, doesn't mean the parasite is gone.  Symptoms are just diminished.

You add a new fish to your tank, it will get infected. 

If your current fish have any stress or are in any immuno-compromising situations, they will get "reinfected" in that they will be showing symptoms again. 

If you give anything out of your tank to another hobbyist, you can infect their tank with the parasite.

On 2/9/2020 at 7:45 AM, mcarroll said:

Eradication is a theory -- nothing more or less in spite of how it gets promoted.

A theory doesn't mean it's not true...

 

"A scientific theory is an explanation of an aspect of the natural world that can be repeatedly tested and verified in accordance with the scientific method, using accepted protocols of observation, measurement, and evaluation of results"

 

Just because we call something a theory is because it can't directly be proven.  Many things fall into this category.  I'd argue most things can't be directly proven.  That doesn't mean we can't amount sufficient evidence for one theory and against every other theory.

 

This thread is somewhat painful to read but I'm glad to see @Humblefish is toughing it out and trying to be helpful, as he always is.  I hope the communities appreciate the work he does in compiling resources and trying to dispel the common fallacies.

 

[mcarroll]

Speaking at least for myself, seeing that article was very interesting.  I'm bummed that seeing it or hearing some commentary on it caused pain for anyone.

 

IMO it sheds a lot of light on some things the OP was asking about.

 

Also, there was A LOT of info that I haven't seen folks mention before...including some regarding common problems folks run into when QT'ing.

 

On 2/10/2020 at 7:51 PM, Humblefish said:

Purely anecdotal, but I can't tell you how many velvet outbreaks (in particular) can be traced back to snails or corals being recently added. It has happened too many times without another logical reason (i.e. no fish were added in months/years), and the timing of the outbreak lines up perfectly with free swimmer excystation.

As for carriers of parasites - whether the carrier is a snail, coral, fish or whatever - the parasite they are carrying has requirements. 

 

Cysts do not automatically last all the way to hatching.

 

Swarmers do not automatically find a target.

 

They also require a naive target (no acquired immunity) with a compromised immune system (insufficient immune response) to effect its goal.

 

So a parasite needs ALL of these things or it's no-deal and they just die (or get eaten) before finding a host:

1. A vector into the tank
2. A clear path for the swarmer to the target fish
3. An immune-compromised fish

We can get em anywhere on that list!  😈 

 

Vector-elimination OR more obstructions/competition OR a healthy fish. 

 

If a cyst or swarmer finds its vector eliminated, or any obstruction or the mucus layer of a healthy fish, it's done - game over.   That second one (obstructions) has LOTS of options for us, but all should receive consideration.

 

POINT #ONE

You're telling me that even scrubbed snail shells with living snails in them are regularly bringing velvet dino's into your tank AND it's regularly causing outbreaks for you.

 

Those snails have to be coming from a system where there are active outbreaks happening in a fish population that they live with.  That should be a very unusual way to keep snails.

 

* Have you had someone else try the same source for snails?  This would help to confirm if the problem is coming with the snails. 

 

* Alternately have you been able to try a different snail source?  Unlikely that multiple sources would have the same unusual problem.  If the problem repeats at an independent source, then the vector might be something besides the snails.

 

Can you capture these cysts in a shell via microscope?  If it's common, it would be interesting to see what they look like in this situation. 

 

I wonder if the cysts are actually in the snail's poop, so maybe you'd be more likely to see them in the tank's sediment?

 

POINT #TWO

The fact that parasites are finding a clear path to your fish with regularity makes me wonder about the filtration on the tank, among other things. (see below)

 

POINT #THREE

If an outbreak also results in a tank wipe-out vs one or a few sick fish then I'd have to wonder about the state of the tank they were in....crowding issues, filtration again, etc.

 

About Filtration

I know you knock filtration and reef-safe treatments pretty hard in threads and file them under "ich management" for folks who "don't mind ich". 

 

But these things do work.   Filtration can remove 100% of the parasite load on a tank.

 

I don't know the context of the tank where these problems are happening, but it sounds like it could use at least some micron filtration. 

 

Something like an old-school Vortex, a Marineland Polishing Filter or a NuClear micron canister filter (or a Magnum 350 if you're old and take care of your gear), etc.

 

Depending on circumstances, the performance of the mechanical filter can be enhanced by adding (e.g) UV or peroxide dosing along with it, depending on the tank.  (In a reef tank, you'd substitute one of the reef-safe tank anti-parasite treatments for the peroxide if you wanted something to add.)

 

"Obstructions" is also where something like a reef (or FOWLR) tank full of mature live rock would be a benefit vs having a more typical fish tank or quarantine tank full of flat, hard, mostly-inert surfaces that are either clean or support a minimal bacterial film -- live rock creates A LOT more biological obstructions for the swarmers in a parasite outbreak:  https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q="ambient+fauna"+"parasite"

 

On 2/10/2020 at 7:51 PM, Humblefish said:

Both are breeding grounds for parasites, but a fish QT can be dosed with copper or chloroquine to kill the free swimmers before they latch onto a fish.

That may be true about both being potential breeding grounds.  

 

But chemotherapy is one way to deal with free swimmers/swarmers, it's not the only way.   

 

Chemo is definitely not reef safe (nor foolproof).

 

The other ways mentioned ARE reef safe though.

 

UV is reef safe. 

 

Micron filtration is reef safe.

 

(If you're technically capable of installing it, ozone is another good enhancement option too....prolly less-good for most folks though.)

 

Either micron filtration OR UV filtration (and especially BOTH) can reduce parasite load by 100%.

For example, putting a Marineland Polishing Filter together with an AquaUV Advance Hang On UV filter would be a pretty fierce combination for most tanks from 40 gal-70 gal or less I'd say. 

 

For smaller tanks that combo could be overkill so I'd consider something like a Green Killing Machine at .5-3 watts per gallon instead.  At least applied in that dosage range, when installed inside the tank where the bloom is happening, these seem to be very effective.

 

Check these articles out...they are unambiguous about the 100% part in dealing with more or less similar parasites:

Control of Ichthyophthirius multifiliis using a combination of water filtration and sodium percarbonate: Dose-response studies

Quote

Micro-filtration studies demonstrated that it was possible to filter out 100% of the tomonts using a mesh size of 80 µm. Therefore mechanical methods are recommended in order to eliminate tomonts whereby the subsequent production of tomocysts and theronts will be prevented.

Advanced treatment for municipal wastewater reuse in agriculture. UV disinfection: parasite removal and by-product formation

Quote

The "multiple barrier concept" involving clarification and filtration [removal of most solids and most nutrients] prior to UV disinfection was confirmed to be the most effective approach for complete parasite removal in wastewater treatment

Those guys could even do it in a single-pass, doing basically the same things we can do.  Much easier in a recirculating system where the filters usually have 2-5 passes per hour!

 

[Humblefish]

@mcarroll If tools/filtration existed which so effectively eliminated the pathogens, then we wouldn't even be having this discussion. Everyone would have one, it would be "required" aquarium equipment. And companies which made these tools would be pushing them as "must haves" so they could make more $$$.

 

Public aquariums wouldn't struggle with parasites, and the aqua farming industry wouldn't spend money on studies into H2O2 (for example) if every disease problem could be solved via filtration. Public aquariums and certain wholesalers who sell to public aquariums wouldn't have QT facilities where they use copper + formalin.

 

I'm not saying filtration (and other methods) are not valuable tools for controlling parasite populations. All I'm saying is they are a very imperfect solution to a problem, and definitely not the end-all to this problem.

[mcarroll]

On 2/15/2020 at 9:14 PM, Humblefish said:

If tools/filtration existed which so effectively eliminated the pathogens, then we wouldn't even be having this discussion.

I'm not sure what you mean.....folks use tools incorrectly all the time.  GFO, macro algae, even lighting.  Doesn't mean they don't exist or don't work.

 

To err is human after all, right?

 

On 2/15/2020 at 9:14 PM, Humblefish said:

Everyone would have one, it would be "required" aquarium equipment.

Not really.  "There's no one way to reef" as folks are fond of saying.  Sometimes I wish our hobby (or humanity) worked that way though.

 

On 2/15/2020 at 9:14 PM, Humblefish said:

And companies which made these tools would be pushing them as "must haves" so they could make more $$$.

What more do you expect folks like AquaUV to do to push their products??  They've been on the market since forever and they advertise directly to this cause and provide VERY specific instructions.

 

On 2/15/2020 at 9:14 PM, Humblefish said:

Public aquariums wouldn't struggle with parasites, and the aqua farming industry wouldn't spend money on studies into H2O2 (for example) if every disease problem could be solved via filtration

I'm not sure that's true....folks always want something to be "better" even if it's already great.

 

And you're also making up a false requirement that something be perfect in order to be useful or good.  Untrue.

 

Last, the extent to which public aquariums suffer and why isn't entirely clear outside of a few surveys.  None that I've see provide enough detail to arrive at any real conclusions about "the industry".

 

My prediction would be that folks inside the industry are human and operating within limits just like us.....so they might not be any "ideal" cases out there. 

 

There are no perfect tools or perfect situations for them...

 

On 2/15/2020 at 9:14 PM, Humblefish said:

I'm not saying filtration (and other methods) are not valuable tools for controlling parasite populations.

😉  I'm not trying to put too fine a point on it, but in the eradication thread in particular I'm pretty sure you say just that, only in different words. 

 

You might even be quoted implying that filtration (and other methods) are good for keeping parasites around so they can be "managed" to make a contrast with your chosen blend of methods.

 

On 2/15/2020 at 9:14 PM, Humblefish said:

All I'm saying is they are a very imperfect solution to a problem, and definitely not the end-all to this problem.

Good point...let's list all the perfect tools first:

• Uh....

Now lets list the "very imperfect" ones:

• QT
• Medications
• Filtration
• Et al.

 

This is why nobody (not even you) uses only one of them.   That would be expecting miracles.   

 

I think the article I linked called it the "multi-barrier approach" where complimentary tools are used together.  (Same thing you do, only you do it without filtration.)

 

Let me know when you find a perfect situation or a perfect tool!  😃

 

IMO a QT running UV and micron filtration seems to make all the sense in the world.

 

In the event that there IS an infected fish vectoring parasites into the tank, numbers of swarmers would be reduced by filtration, potentially to zero.  No side-effects for any of the fish whether they are infected or not.

 

Why isn't that better than subjecting all the fish to a medication with side-effects without knowing that the fish is even infected?

 

If a fish demonstrates an infection you can still ID the parasite and treat it with meds as-needed...ideally in a separate hospital/treatment tank. 

 

So at least IMO, making use of advanced filtration doesn't really inhibit your plan....it just makes a better version of the plan that does more to prevent outbreaks without impacting healthy fish.