QT: copper/prazi everytime? Or is visual observation enough?

[pinocchio]

Recently I have been QTing all my fish and medicating them with copper and prazi regardless of if they look sick or not.

I am wondering when observation alone is enough? Sometimes I wonder if I am medicating them for no reason at all and if that’s bad for them.

Any advice on when/if it’s ever ok to monitor and the add?

 

[Dburr1014]

Recently I have been QTing all my fish and medicating them with copper and prazi regardless of if they look sick or not.

I am wondering when observation alone is enough? Sometimes I wonder if I am medicating them for no reason at all and if that’s bad for them.

Any advice on when/if it’s ever ok to monitor and the add?

You will get many answers.

Me personally, I do visuals if I get them from my normal source. I have 1 lfs I go to, ask all my questions, watch them feed the tank and how long them have had them. I normally buy if they have had them 1+ months.

If they had them shorter time or go to a different lfs and I buy, I will do prazi and/or copper.

Very situational for me personally. All my lfs know me by name and I know them.

 

[pinocchio]

I am sure there are tons of opinions. What makes you decide whether or not to do copper?

 

[Dom]

Recently I have been QTing all my fish and medicating them with copper and prazi regardless of if they look sick or not.

I am wondering when observation alone is enough? Sometimes I wonder if I am medicating them for no reason at all and if that’s bad for them.

Any advice on when/if it’s ever ok to monitor and the add?

Observational QT is all I ever do. If signs of disease present, then I treat. Is it too late to successfully treat the fish once signs of disease show? Maybe.

 

[pinocchio]

For things like Ich/Brook/velvet, how long does that take to show up? If I QT a fish for 30 days with no symptoms, does that mean there’s no chance of them having it?

Currently the fish looks visually fine, eating normal, and acting fine. Would a visual observation for 30 days been enough? Overkill? Not enough?

 

[Dburr1014]

For things like Ich/Brook/velvet, how long does that take to show up? If I QT a fish for 30 days with no symptoms, does that mean there’s no chance of them having it?

Currently the fish looks visually fine, eating normal, and acting fine. Would a visual observation for 30 days been enough? Overkill? Not enough?

That's about what I do. 4 weeks of observation and most likely fine if nothing shows up.... IMO.

 

[TheGrimReeferTx]

I have seen many answers to this in my short time in the community. I always observe my fish at the minimum. But I am a believer in doing a medicated QT. I typically follow the 80/20 method that BRS has. I have had success with this method and am currently running it now.

I think treating Prazi is good as I forget the percentage but a high percentage of fish have flukes. That and it's simple enough and pretty safe.

As others have posted here, observation is a great start. Observation for a month should give you a good idea if the fish has any issues present. I just don't trust my eyes enough and would rather take an additional step to not expose my tank to possible issues.

Following along to see other's opinions!

 

[ISpeakForTheSeas]

For things like Ich/Brook/velvet, how long does that take to show up? If I QT a fish for 30 days with no symptoms, does that mean there’s no chance of them having it?

Currently the fish looks visually fine, eating normal, and acting fine. Would a visual observation for 30 days been enough? Overkill? Not enough?

I'm not sure with brook, velvet, flukes, etc. but ich can hide indefinitely on fish until something stresses them - this is why some people buy apparently healthy fish or have apparently healthy fish for years, and then (seemingly from nowhere) ich pops up (see the second and third quotes below).

That said, there are basically three camps that I’ve seen with QT:

-Full, medicated QT (the timeframe for this can vary, but Jay Hemdal’s 2023 protocols suggests 64 days); this is likely the most stressful option, but the thought for this is basically that disease can’t wipe out your tank if it isn’t in your tank. Some people believe this weakens a fish’s immune system and may lead to them dying relatively young.

-Observational QT (I generally see this from reefers in places where it’s harder to get fish meds); this option is probably still stressful for the fish, but it seems to be more about avoiding particularly deadly diseases (such as velvet) or knowing in advance what you’re allowing into the tank. This method carries a lot of the same risks as no-QT (see below), but it can give a heads-up about issues new fish may have/introduce.

-No QT; this avoids the stress of being moved between tanks, but I feel like Paul B’s comment above is a pretty accurate description here. The thought here is that a healthy fish with a healthy immune system won’t die except from old age. Basically, this method can work if you’re able to provide good water, good food, and a good environment for the fish. Most newcomers to the hobby are probably not capable of that when they start, and when the fish isn’t healthy/is too stressed (such as because of inadequate water, food, or environment), them any diseases they’re carrying flare up and can take them out (hence why the disease forum here is full of no-QT tanks getting wiped out by diseases). This method does carry the risks that 1) a deadly disease like velvet may come in and wipe some or all of the fish in the tank out unexpectedly and 2) if a stressful event (such as a bacterial bloom, for example) happens unexpectedly, you may face a disease outbreak in the tank at the same time. Jay Hemdal has some posts about other potential weaknesses of this method here on R2R too, but these are the most important in my mind for most people to be aware of.

So, for most people a properly done, full, medicated QT is probably the safer route to go with when just starting out - honestly, this is why I’m personally a fan of pre-QT vendors, as they have a pretty good track record of delivering disease-free fish (meaning that sub-optimal care like the average newcomer is likely to unintentionally give the fish is less likely to kill it), and it’s hassle-free for the buyer.

Again, all of these methods when done properly can work, and they all have some pros and cons, but those are my two cents on the matter.

the answer is that they do have ich at the fish store, but - with either ich management techniques used in the hobby, copper medication/hyposalinity in fish store tanks (from what I've heard, in most cases it's probably this one; non-therapeutic levels of copper/hypo), or a combination of the two - the ich is suppressed (not eliminated) at the store.

So, when you bring the fish home and it gets stressed by travel and the new environment (and doesn't have copper or hyposalinity suppressing the ich), it's immune system weakens from the stress, and the ich pops up seemingly from nowhere.

If you never quarantined, then ich has probably been in your tank for years.

From what I've seen with ich management on here, ich will basically remain managed and under control (seemingly nonexistent in the tank) as long the fish are in excellent health (and as long as the outbreak doesn't get too bad for the tank - not necessarily for the individual fish, but for the tank as a whole). As soon as a fish gets stressed/weakened, however, there will be an outbreak like you just had with your tang.

To say it another way, your tang isn't really cured, it's just healthy enough to hold the parasites at bay at the moment. Your other fish likely have ich too and are just asymptomatic at the moment like your tang. So, if something stresses/weakens them, you'll have another outbreak that seemingly appears from nowhere. To prevent another outbreak, you have to keep the fish in great health - low stress, good food (LRS and macroalgae are great; some of Hikari's stuff is really good too - like their Mega Marine line - but some of their other marine-oriented food options aren't as good from what I recall), good water quality, etc. are key.

This is why I typically suggest for people who are considering not quarantining to look at some of Paul B's ich management stuff, as he talks about good care being necessary for good fish health too. (This is also why I typically suggest that newcomers to the hobby buy pre-quarantined fish if they don't want to do a full, medicated QT - fish that don't have diseases/parasites should be a lot harder to accidentally kill, as they won't have a potentially lethal disease outbreak every time the aquarist makes a mistake while learning the ropes).

Personally, I would not mix potentially disease-carrying fish (whether they look healthy or not) with fish that have been through a medicated QT, as that not only invalidates all of the effort you put in with the QT, but it also risks exposing fish with potentially weakened immune systems to potentially fatal diseases.

Personally, I'd really suggest picking one of the three methods above and sticking with it and/or just buying pre-QT'd fish.

 

[JayM]

For things like Ich/Brook/velvet, how long does that take to show up? If I QT a fish for 30 days with no symptoms, does that mean there’s no chance of them having it?

Currently the fish looks visually fine, eating normal, and acting fine. Would a visual observation for 30 days been enough? Overkill? Not enough?

Unless you’re really opposed to prophylactically medicating, you may as well do just that if you’re going to keep them out of the DT for 30 days.

It would suck to observe and see something on day 29 and have to start the 30 day clock again with meds.