Am I Reading This Oodinium Research Correctly??

[DanielJameS]

I’m always doing more reading when dealing with this **** parasite, and was reading through this Bob Fenner article (which I’ve probably read a couple times before already) and stopped in my tracks here....

<i> “ Copper (either citrated, chelated or not) at standard dosages of 0.15-0.20 have been shown to neither prevent division nor kill dinospores. However, trophonts are affected at treatment concentrations.” </i>

Am I reading this correctly? Is this not suggesting that copper has been shown to not do what we believe it does but the exact opposite...kill trophonts? Everything I’ve read suggests copper kills dinospores but this suggests the contrary. I also find the bit about bleach concentrations not killing encysted parasites fascinating.

This article makes it sound like copper can’t eradicate the parasite but only “manage” it.

Is this correct or is it only specific to certain strains? It’s not really clear.

Freaking zombie like parasite...what a nightmare.

http://www.wetwebmedia.com/amylloodiniumart.htm

 

[ihavecrabs]

Edit: I meant Theront stage... I'm unsure about this article and would need to see the studies it is based on.

I read the copper section as the only stage of the Ich lifecycle affected is the trophont stage. Not allowing the trophonts to find a host ends the life cycle of the parasite as long as copper remains at therapeutic concentrations. Allowing copper to go below the appropriate range allows the lifecycle to continue.

Hence testing throughout treatment is crucial.

Interesting about bleach. I think that is why allowing all equipment to completely dry for w4 hours is so important in TTM. [emoji4]


@Humblefish

 

[Brew12]

I’m always doing more reading when dealing with this **** parasite, and was reading through this Bob Fenner article (which I’ve probably read a couple times before already) and stopped in my tracks here....

<i> “ Copper (either citrated, chelated or not) at standard dosages of 0.15-0.20 have been shown to neither prevent division nor kill dinospores. However, trophonts are affected at treatment concentrations.” </i>

Am I reading this correctly? Is this not suggesting that copper has been shown to not do what we believe it does but the exact opposite...kill trophonts? Everything I’ve read suggests copper kills dinospores but this suggests the contrary. I also find the bit about bleach concentrations not killing encysted parasites fascinating.

This article makes it sound like copper can’t eradicate the parasite but only “manage” it.

Is this correct or is it only specific to certain strains? It’s not really clear.

Freaking zombie like parasite...what a nightmare.

http://www.wetwebmedia.com/amylloodiniumart.htm

There is some debate on this but this is a minority opinion. It may or may not kill dinospores but it seems well proven that it will kill them as they transition to becoming full fledged dinospores.

Bleach is great for a lot of things, but this is why it is recommended to bleach and then dry completely.

 

[DanielJameS]

There is some debate on this but this is a minority opinion. It may or may not kill dinospores but it seems well proven that it will kill them as they transition to becoming full fledged dinospores.

Very Interesting.

Saying that therapeutic levels effect trophonts seems to suggest it would kill parasites ON the fish in their feeding stage, which is the opposite of most of what I’ve read which is where the confusion stems from.

 

[Humblefish]

There is some debate on this but this is a minority opinion. It may or may not kill dinospores but it seems well proven that it will kill them as they transition to becoming full fledged dinospores.

^^ This. Velvet dinospores are just as vulnerable to copper (and other chemicals) as Cryptocaryon theronts. The free swimming and protomont stage do not have a cyst to protect them like the tomont stage does. The trophont is embedded within the skin, so it is relatively protected from any potential treatments.

I used to believe that CP was possibly more effective at eradicating velvet than copper. I theorized that Chloroquine’s algaecide properties might target more stages of a dinoflagellate than just the free swimming stage. However, I’ve seen enough fish with velvet where the trophonts remained for up to 4 days (the maximum) to know that Chloroquine has no impact on this life stage.

 

[DanielJameS]

^^ This. Velvet dinospores are just as vulnerable to copper (and other chemicals) as Cryptocaryon theronts. The free swimming and protomont stage do not have a cyst to protect them like the tomont stage does. The trophont is embedded within the skin, so it is relatively protected from any potential treatments.

I used to believe that CP was possibly more effective at eradicating velvet than copper. I theorized that Chloroquine’s algaecide properties might target more stages of a dinoflagellate than just the free swimming stage. However, I’ve seen enough fish with velvet where the trophonts remained for up to 4 days (the maximum) to know that Chloroquine has no impact on this life stage.

Excellent insight thanks for clearing that up [emoji1360][emoji1360]

 

[Humblefish]

Excellent insight thanks for clearing that up [emoji1360][emoji1360]

Just one more thing to add: Chloroquine is probably safer than using copper for treating ich/velvet, because one can go from zero to full therapeutic with minimal side effects (for most fish) when treating with CP. This is absolutely not the case with copper. However, when placing an infected specimen in a QT and treating with copper, you still have a 48 hr window (for velvet) and a 72 hr window (for ich) to gradually raise the copper to minimal therapeutic. I highly recommend adding very small quantities every few hours.