Ich free tank - coral additions

[FarmerTy]

Hey all,

Curious for those that run ich-free tanks, what do you guys do for invert and coral additions? Do you wait 76 days before adding any of them as well?
I've always run ich-maintenance tanks so the thought never occurred to me what I'll do now that I'm 20 days away from being 76 days fallow and ich free in the DT.

 

[Triggreef]

I do not qt inverts. But my tank is full and haven't added much. I certainly avoid buying from places I know to harbor ich, and do what I can to avoid adding anything that can be eliminated such as frag plugs or rocks.

And all new coral gets the Bayer treatment. Not that that will do anything against ich I'm sure it won't.

 

[FarmerTy]

I do not qt inverts. But my tank is full and haven't added much. I certainly avoid buying from places I know to harbor ich, and do what I can to avoid adding anything that can be eliminated such as frag plugs or rocks.

And all new coral gets the Bayer treatment. Not that that will do anything against ich I'm sure it won't.

I feel like one of those germ-a-phobes now where I can't touch anything. Inverts could have cysts on their shells or other hard parts. Corals could be harboring cysts as well on non-flesh portions such as the rock or plug. Those can easily be eliminated but the thought is still scary.

For corals themselves, would I just remove anything that isn't flesh, QT for a month, and then introduce?

 

[FarmerTy]

I guess I just don't want to waste my 76 days of running fallow just to put a snail in and blow the whole thing up.

 

[Big B]

I'm curious about this as well. Could you do a TTM on coral? Is there anyone here with a strict fish QT practice and believed they introduced ich to their tank through coral or snail?

 

[RMS18]

It can happen, my current ich outbreak is from 1 of 2 corals. No fish added, 2 corals added a week later fish sick. Lost 1 saved the other 5. Still in qt for 39 more days. :/

 

[Big B]

It can happen, my current ich outbreak is from 1 of 2 corals. No fish added, 2 corals added a week later fish sick. Lost 1 saved the other 5. Still in qt for 39 more days. :/

Well that stinks!

 

[Blue Lip]

If you want to maintain ich free dt then qt everything!

 

[3dees]

no signs of ich in my tank since I started it 2 1/2 years ago. fish go into qt. never qt'd coral or cuc. I'm probably wrong, but I thought ich needed a host fish to survive. one thing I have going for me is no tangs or butterflies in my tank.

 

[FarmerTy]

So for those that have responded up to this point, did you do 76 fallow? Are you guaranteed ich free or are you assuming you are because you see no symptoms?

 

[Jlobes]

ich can survive on plugs, bases, CUC shell and rock. I agree that EVERYTHING needs to be QT to be totally safe, including CUC, inverts and coral.
From my understanding, a separate fishless QT for coral and inverts would work. 76 days is the extreme end of the spectrum, and you could QT everything that long. My plan is to QT coral/inverts in a standalone/fishless system for 30+ days, I know 76 is better but I think 30 is quite enough. without a fish to host, the ich will hatch and look for a host...wont find one and will die off.

 

[jetmaker]

If you get your cuc from reef cleaners you won't get ich they don't keep fish.

 

[Jlobes]

If you get your cuc from reef cleaners you won't get ich they don't keep fish.

but we have no clue of knowing how long those have been in captivity/jons system. I agree that no fish is a great start, but with rotating inventory and new livestock coming in regularly, still worth it to QT at home. Perhaps could be shortened, knowing the RC doesnt stock fish, but still worth the effort.

 

[Brian Kim]

So for those that have responded up to this point, did you do 76 fallow? Are you guaranteed ich free or are you assuming you are because you see no symptoms?

Excellent question, I've just finished fallow a month ago and all of my fishes are doing great but I honestly can't rule out the fact that ich may still be present.
I am just hoping it is since I've read somewhere that copper treatment will weaken their immune system and seeing them so healthy for a little over a month now makes me want to believe it is.

 

[FarmerTy]

ich can survive on plugs, bases, CUC shell and rock. I agree that EVERYTHING needs to be QT to be totally safe, including CUC, inverts and coral.
From my understanding, a separate fishless QT for coral and inverts would work. 76 days is the extreme end of the spectrum, and you could QT everything that long. My plan is to QT coral/inverts in a standalone/fishless system for 30+ days, I know 76 is better but I think 30 is quite enough. without a fish to host, the ich will hatch and look for a host...wont find one and will die off.

Knowing what we know about their life cycle now, 30 days will not be effective. It's not so much the actual theronts (free swimming) that are the issue, but the tomonts (encysted) stage that pushes us to 76 days.

If there is even one tomont encysted on any hard surface (dead portion of coral or rock, snail shell, etc), that will be transported into the main DT after the 30 day QT period and boom, it's in your system.

I'm just mentioning to further discussion. For those that did go through the painful process of going fallow, what are your plans to keep it that way? It seems the only true way is 76 days QT before introduction of anything that could possibly carry in a tomont. For fish and soft bodied animals with no shells or even soft coral without the rock, 30 days with TTM seems like a viable option.

 

[FarmerTy]

Bump, anybody else who's done the 76 days fallow want to chime in on how they add new additions?

 

[Humblefish]

For those who are exasperated because of having to QT corals/inverts for 76 days (and I don't blame you), please consider this:

Nothing is 100%, not anything in this life. However, going fallow or isolating corals/inverts away from fish for 76 days gets you close to 100% for disease eradication purposes. However - even 30-45 days of isolation puts the odds very much in your favor. If you stop & think about it, isolating corals/inverts away from fish is just as effective as a 30 day copper treatment for fish with ich. Of course, longer is always better but don't let the 76 day rule dissuade you from QT'ing corals/inverts altogether.

 

[Bdog4u2]

Glad I've never had to deal with ich. 15 years in the hobby I've been extremely lucky since I took down my quarantine tank 5 years ago but I will be setting up a new one soon

 

[Humblefish]

Just wanted to expand upon my earlier post with this table (below) which provides some useful info relevant to the conversation:



That table was taken from this website: http://atj.net.au/marineaquaria/marineich.html and documents the life stages of ich from various studies conducted over the years. As you can see, 35 days was the longest time it took for the tomont (encysted) stage to excyst.

So where does the 72 day rule come from? In one study (1997 Colorni and Burgess) it states, "Theront excystment is very asynchronous, occurring between 3 and 72 days.” However, it has been suggested it took up to 72 days only because the original experimentation was done in cold water. Indeed, this excerpt from the article seems to support that:

The Australian trophonts stayed on the fish longer, tomonts took longer to excyst and the theronts were larger when fish were infected at 20C compared to 25C (Diggles and Lester, 1996a).

For the reader’s reference, 20C=68F and 25C=77F.

However, later in the article (see red highlights below) it states that that the reason for the asynchronous excystment is "unclear". Wouldn't they just say the prolonged excystment (72 days) was due to cooler water temps if they were confident that was the case?

Even under identical incubation conditions tomonts vary considerably in the time required to form theronts (Nigrelli and Ruggieri, 1966; Colorni, 1992; Burgess and Matthews, 1994a; Diggles and Lester, 1996b). Thus, theront excystment is very asynchronous, occurring between 3 and 72 days and peaking at 6 ± 2 days (Colorni, 1992). This differs significantly from I. multifiliis, where the theront excystment takes only 18-24 h at 23C (Dickerson and Dawe, 1995).

The reason for asynchronous excystment is unclear. There is no relationship between the tomont size and excystment time (Nigrelli and Ruggieri, 1966; Colorni, 1992; Diggles and Lester, 1996a,b). In fact, a large and a small tomont may produce theronts at the same time, even though the smaller tomont undergoes fewer divisions. When tomites do not form until at least 2 weeks, a mass of endoplasm remains undifferentiated and fewer live theronts are produced (Colorni, 1992). Whatever the cause, asynchronous excystment prevents simultaneous exhaustion of all tomonts, facilitates theront dispersal in time and appears so advantageous to C. irritans that the phenomenon should be interpreted as a strategy for survival (Colorni, 1985).

So, the 1997 Colorni and Burgess article falls short of blaming the 72 day excystment on cold water conditions. I have wondered if they possibly encountered a new strain of ich with a prolonged life cycle, akin to Yambot's 2003 discovery of hypo resistant strains of ich. Which had been previously unknown.

Those who wish to read more about Marine Ich and Temperature can do so here: https://www.reef2reef.com/threads/marine-ich-and-temperature.232825/