tang has the ick

[Ninong]

Question.....Is the Tang "cured"?....Or is it just no longer showing symptoms?.....

If there are no visible trophonts on his tang for a period of several months -- which is what I believe he's talking about -- then it is cured. Period. Whether or not the garlic had anything to do with it or whether it developed acquired immunity coincidentally with the garlic treatment is irrelevant.

In my case, there were a total of six fish in my tank and five of them became infected with ich within a few days after the first one. After a period of about nine or ten weeks (3 weeks, plus a week when I quit too soon, plus another five weeks or so) there were no visible trophonts on any of my fish and none appeared after that up unti the time I sold my system, which was two years later.

I've read many people post (On other forums) that they had fish that "Got Ich" after some sort of stress event, and I always suspect that the fish had it all along, it's just that the aquarist didn't know it because they didn't see "white spots".

It always makes me wonder when I read someone say that they cured a fish by changing the temerature (Or some other method besides copper or hyposalinity). Is the fish going to have another outbreak in six months or a year after some stress causing event?

And is that outbreak is attributed to the stress rather than to the fact the fish was never really cured in the first place?

That's pure mythinformation perpetuated by some stubborn hobbyists that ich is always present in the aquarium and that all it takes is stress for a fish to "come down with it."

C. irritans is an obligate parasite that must have a host (fish) to complete its life cycle. If the trophonts are inside the gills, you won't see them. However, it is extremely unlikely that all of the trophonts on all of your fish would be hidden from view for a period of several months. This myth -- that ich is always present -- is put forth by those who argue that there is nothing you can do to treat ich because it's supposedly caused by stress and since it's always present in all aquariums you should simply try to avoid stress. There have been too many scientific studies that totally refute this myth.

It is certainly possible that a stressed out fish may have lowered immunity and therefore it may be more susceptible to ich than an unstressed fish. It is also possible that garlic (freshly minced garlic fed three times a days for several weeks) may have some beneficial effect on the fish's immune system. There are many studies that have shown beneficial effects of garlic in humans.

In any case, the ich has to be in the tank in the first place and the tomonts (cysts) can't remain viable longer than a few weeks at the most (28 days is what is usually cited as the maximum) without hatching. Then the theronts have to attach to a fish within a matter of hours or they will die.

IMO, hyposalinity is the best way to treat marine ich. All of the fish from the infected tank should be removed to a quarantine tank and the display aquarium should be allowed to remain fallow (without any fish) for three months. I don't like copper at all unless it's the only method to treat something. Copper has harmful effects on the fish's immune system and its reproductive system.

I don't recommend garlic as the best method for treating ich at all. All I wanted to do was publish my observations and offer some discussion of possible explanations. I hate to suggest that people should even try garlic if they encounter an ich outbreak. If they do, they had better know what they are doing and be prepared to go to Plan B (hyposalinity) immediately if it appears that the garlic is not having the desired effect. It did work for me and it has worked for five or six others on this board who read my thread. Of course, all of that is anecdotal and none of us really know how or why it worked. Garlic has been reported to have worked by a lot of reefkeepers on Reef Central and other boards. I doubt that it would work in a fully stocked fish-only aquarium and I'm almost certain it would not work in a commercial facility.

My garlic thread was put up more along the lines of, "gee, look what happened for me, I'm amazed and I wonder how it worked." I can't get into a 'debate' about the benefits of using garlic, if any, because I'm not sure how it worked. Everything I wrote was pure speculation based on the studies that have been done on the beneficial effects of garlic in treating human medical problems and the known facts about allicin and how it is formed.

As far as recommendations go, I wish everyone would read the threads that Lee has posted in this forum and follow his excellent advice. And they should certainly not follow the advice in Delbeek's and Sprung's first book (1994) where they claimed that a specific gravity of 1.017 would be effective in controlling ich. That's ridiculous! There have been numerous studies that have proven that this parasite can survive specific gravity much lower than 1.017. For example, Colorni (1985) reported that it could survive at salinities as low as 15 ppt (1.011 SG). The latest recommendation is to lower the specific gravity to 1.009 if you're using hyposalinity to treat ich.

Why Delbeek recommended running a reef tank at 1.017 SG is beyond me. He still insists that it will do no long-term harm to the corals and other invertebrates in spite of numerous studies to the contrary. Marine invertebrates are not designed to thrive at 1.017 SG.

[sober_pollock]

If there are no visible trophonts on his tang for a period of several months -- which is what I believe he's talking about -- then it is cured. Period.....

O.K. .....I believe you.....I didn't know that it was as definitive as this.

I guess that I assumed that if the large public aquariums did things like look at gill and scale scrapings under a microscope to screen new fish, that they couldn't determine it through observation and examination during or after a couple of months of quarantine.

I agree, ich is not caused by stress or anything other than a parisite, (I never thought it was) but we've all read the stories, and we know that there are plenty of people who do believe these things.


pollock

[Ninong]

I guess that I assumed that if the large public aquariums did things like look at gill and scale scrapings under a microscope to screen new fish, that they couldn't determine it through observation and examination during or after a couple of months of quarantine.

And based on that assumption, your recommendation for a minimum quarantine period for all fish before we place them in our aquariums would be what?

[leebca]

This is what we disagree on, Ninong. Not seeing any evidence of C. irritans with the unaided eye doesn't mean the fishes are cured. It just means they are not displaying.

Until the fish is examined (scrapings, gill clip, fin clip, etc.) it is not technically free of this parasite. This is the only proof of being free of this parasite.

[sober_pollock]

If there are no visible trophonts on his tang for a period of several months -- which is what I believe he's talking about -- then it is cured. Period.....

And based on that assumption, your recommendation for a minimum quarantine period for all fish before we place them in our aquariums would be what?

12 weeks

This is what we disagree on, Ninong. Not seeing any evidence of C. irritans with the unaided eye doesn't mean the fishes are cured. It just means they are not displaying.

Until the fish is examined (scrapings, gill clip, fin clip, etc.) it is not technically free of this parasite. This is the only proof of being free of this parasite.

O.K. .....Now I think I see where my confusion comes from.....

I am NOT an aquarist of high enough caliber to make a call as to which of these views is correct.....

With great respect for you both.....I will stay out of this one!!!!!


patrick (A.K.A. pollock)

[Ninong]

Until the fish is examined (scrapings, gill clip, fin clip, etc.) it is not technically free of this parasite. This is the only proof of being free of this parasite.

Are you saying that a six-week quarantine -- which is what you recommend -- is a waste of time as far as detecting C. irritans is concerned?

I doubt that most hobbyists are equipped to perform microscopic examinations of scrapings, gill clips, fin clips, etc. on every fish they purchase.

While I agree with you that such an examination may be the only way to be absolutely 100% sure that a particular fish is not carrying ich, I believe that if none of your fish show any trophonts for a period of several months or several years, then it's reasonable to assume that there is a very good possibility that there is no ich in your aquarium.

It's true that a longer quarantine period, say three months, would be even better than a six-week quarantine but I think we're talking about two different things. It may be possible to miss one of two trophonts that are hidden on the fish when you first purchase it and a microscopic examination would be a lot better than visual examination but after the fish is placed in a QT and it is examined visually every day for several weeks, I think it is reasonable to assume that there is better than a 99% probability that it is not carrying ich if you don't see any trophonts during that period.

I think it is highly unlikely that any of my six fish still had ich after not observing a single trophont for a period of two years, and I doubt that metalhead's fish still carried ich after several months of not seeing a single trophont. That's the way this question came up. Someone questioned whether metalhead's fish was really ich-free. I wasn't saying that visual examination was as good as microscopic examination. All I said was that I didn't see any trophonts on any of my fish for two years after treating them with fresh garlic and metalhead said he didn't see any trophonts on his fish several months after using the same method. I believe he treated his fish several months ago.

[leebca]

You are turning the quarantine process against this simple verification of determining what is or is not a cure. The curing and quarantine are not the same.

You know I wrote that hobbyists don't use microscopes. What we do use is time. And the hidden factor -- stress.

A proper quarantine not only includes time, but it includes a stressed fish in a small space. The stressors on the new acquisition is much different than stressors on an acclimated fish. The Marine Ich will show itself under the quarantine circumstances, or at least the fish will be breathing faster than normal and may or may not be flashing. The quarantine doesn't miss it. This assumes my procedure is followed (tank size, setup, etc.).

If no new Marine Ich has entered the system for more than 10.5 months, then the Marine Ich is gone. But if there hasn't been this span, and quarantine isn't performed to prevent it from entering the system, the likelihood of Marine Ich being present is there.

Remember that after about 10.5 months, Marine Ich will die out on its own.