Marine Ich and Temperature

Humblefish

Dr. Fish
View Badges
Joined
Nov 9, 2014
Messages
22,424
Reaction score
34,851
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I recently reexamined some of the literature I have on Marine Ich, paying closer attention to what it says about temperature and its effect on the parasite’s known life cycle. As with most studies, precise conclusions can be somewhat ambiguous, but I wanted to share what I have learned and open a discussion regarding this topic.

The first article I reread was the 1997 Colorni and Burgess study, where it states: “Theront excystment is very asynchronous, occurring between 3 and 72 days.” This is the study which the infamous 72 day fallow period is based upon, and 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).

I wouldn’t think they’d label it a “phenomenon” if the simple explanation was that cooler water temps were a contributing factor for asynchronous excystment. It could be because later on they discuss “cold water intraspecific variants” which only adds to the confusion:
Cryptocaryon irritans was considered to be restricted to warmwater marine environments. However Diamant et al. (1991) found that C. irritans has a counterpart in the cooler waters of the eastern Mediterranean and Diggles and Lester (1996c) collected Cryptocaryon-infected fishes from Moreton Bay, Queensland, Australia, where the water temperature can fall to 15C. By comparing the rDNA sequences of isolates from Australia, Israel and the USA, Diggles and Adlard (1997) confirmed the existence of warm water and cold water intraspecific variants of C. irritans.

Can a cold water variant infect a reef fish typically found in warmer waters? And vice versa? :eek: With regards to temperature, the study was actually more focused on its correlation to trophont/tomont/theront size:




The next “article” I reread was a 332 page PDF, written by Peter Burgess in 1992, where he conducted a series of experiments to partially fulfill the requirements for his PhD. Some of the information contained therein is now considered outdated/obsolete, but it still lays the groundwork for most of what we know about the parasite. One such example of possible outdated info is this excerpt:
The distribution of C.irritans in the wild appears to be limited by temperature. Under aquarium conditions, C.irritans has not been shown to develop or transmit below 19C to 20C (Wilkie and Gordin, 1969; Cheung et al., 1979) or above 30C (Cheung et al., 1979). Based on this information, it is considered that C.irritans is restricted to warmwater marine environments, although recent observations by Diamant et al. (1991) suggest that C.irritans may have a counterpart existing in the cooler waters of the eastern Mediterranean. This assumption was based on reports of disease outbreaks caused by a Cryptocaryon- like ciliate which was believed to have originated from cultured fish stocks from Cyprus and northern Israel.

I know from reading more recent studies that it has been proven ich can go dormant (for up to 6 months, I believe) if temp is lowered, but then become infectious again once the temp is returned to normal. I do not know if the same applies if you were to raise aquarium temperature above 30C/86F. According to “Table 2” from this source, it would take 40C/104F for 1 hour to disinfect SW ich from your aquarium: https://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/fa164. However, I would think 104F would eradicate even nitrifying bacteria thus “uncycling” your tank. I don’t believe most fish/corals/inverts could handle > 86F (they would ALL need to be removed beforehand), but I do believe bacteria could survive that. The question is how long would you need to keep the aquarium > 86F to eradicate ich from it?

Next up is this table which outlines the development of C.irritans trophonts at different temperatures:



However, I found nothing above to be useful for our purposes since most of the animals we keep couldn’t survive in 17C/62.6F water.

Finally, the study had this to say regarding temperature and immune response to SW ich:
The kinetics of the antibody response to C.irritans is likely to be influenced by temperature, within the physiological limits of the host, as is well recognised for teleosts antibody responses in general (Rijkers et al., 1981; Rijkers, 1982; Bly and Clem, 1992). The timing may also vary according to the host species, and there is some evidence to support this (Rijkers, 1982). Sailendri and Muthukkaruppan (1975), using Tilapia mossambica, have shown that under tropical conditions (30°C) a primary antibody response can be elicited within as short a period as five days after exposure to antigen. Although the species of mullet used here has a southerly distribution, extending to the Mediterranean (Lythgoe and Lythgoe, 1971), the speed of its immune response might not be representative of tropical marine fish species normally encountered by C.irritans. The delay in antibody response, recorded here, following intraperitoneal injection could also be attributed to temperature, as mullet immunized by this route were maintained at 5-10°C lower than those exposed to C.irritans by natural infection.


Two other articles I have not read on the subject, so I will just copy & paste their abstracts below:

Studies on cryptocaryoniasis in marine fish: effect of temperature and salinity on the reproductive cycle of Cryptocaryon irritans - Journal of Fish Diseases Volume 2, Issue 2, pages 93–97, March 1979
Abstract. Trophonts of Cryptocaryon irritans Brown from infected three-spot damselfish, Dascyllus trimaculatus Ruppell, were kept at temperatures ranging from 7 to 37°C to observe encystment and development of the tomites. At 30, 25 and 20°C, the percentage of trophonts that had encysted in 16 h were 70, 77 and 64% respectively; at 37°C, 44% encysted and at 7°C only 10% had encysted.

The optimum temperature for excystment was 30°C; 50% excysted in 5 days and 100% in 7 days. At 25°C, 60% of the tomites started to excyst on the eighth day, and 70% on the ninth day. At 20°C, 10% started to excyst on the ninth day, reaching 40% on the tenth day. No excystment occurred at 37 and 7°C.

Newly encysted tomonts were placed in various dilutions of sea water (31 %0) and kept at temperatures ranging from 7 to 37°C. Low salinities, i.e. 16%0 and lower caused tomonts to rupture. At 37, 20 and 7°C, 35% of the tomonts started to rupture immediately in 50% sea water, while at 30 and 25 C, 30% of the tomonts ruptured in 25% seawater. However, none of the cysts developed normally at these dilutions. The percentage rupturing increased with decreasing salinity.

Influence of Temperature and Host Species on the Development of Cryptocaryon irritans
B. K. Diggles and R. J. G. Lester
The Journal of Parasitology
Vol. 82, No. 1 (Feb., 1996), pp. 45-51
Abstract. The course of infection of the parasitic ciliate Cryptocaryon irritans was followed on Lates calcarifer and Macquaria novemaculeata at 20 and 25 C. The parasite was originally isolated from locally caught Acanthopagrus australis. At 20 C trophonts stayed on the fish longer, tomonts took longer to excyst, and the resulting theronts were larger than at 25 C. On L. calcarifer at 20 C, trophonts grew slowly at first but eventually became significantly larger (mean tomont diameter 466 x 400 µm) than at 25 C (mean diameter 373 x 320 µm). On M. novemaculeata, trophonts never grew as large as on L. calcarifer and at 20 C they grew poorly. The number of theronts produced per tomont was directly related to the size of the tomont but was not influenced by incubation temperature. The tomont incubation period was not related to the diameter of the tomont but was significantly influenced by the host origin of the tomont. Theront size was also significantly affected by the host origin of the tomont but not the diameter of the tomont. These results show that C. irritans exhibits variability in morphometrics on different hosts and under different temperature conditions. This variability needs to be taken into account if utilizing morphometric data for separating strains of C. irritans.


Conclusions: Some of the information above is unusable for our purposes, as many of the animals we keep will not live in the experimental temperatures shown to have a negative impact on ich’s life cycle. Although, those with cold water SW tanks battling ich might find it useful. The main thing I was looking for was whether or not the recommended 72 day fallow period is greatly exaggerated due to experimentation being conducted at cooler water temps. And while I admit there is some evidence to support it is, I also believe there are other variables in play which determines how long it can take for all the theronts to be released (or rupture) from their respective tomonts. I also cannot discount the numerous anecdotal accounts of 72 day fallow failures, or chalk every single one of them up to cross contamination or some other mental error on the part of the hobbyist. In short, we probably don’t know as much about ich as we think we do. ;)

I do think, however, that it would be prudent to monitor aquarium temp while going fallow. You probably want it to be at least 77F, and it is possible that running it at 80-82F will speed up ich’s life cycle and increase your chances of having a successful fallow period. At the very least, it does no harm as most corals/inverts handle 80-82F just fine (except for possibly certain SPS.)

Whether you decide to go fallow for the entire 72 days (actually 76 if you factor in more than just the tomont stage), or roll the dice on a shorter duration is entirely up to you. For those who opt for the latter, Table 1 (below) provides some useful info taken from here: http://atj.net.au/marineaquaria/marineich.html



It shows lengths of stages of C. irritans from various studies before the 1997 Colorni and Burgess Study. In these listed studies, 35 days was the longest time it took for theront release (Burgess and Matthews, 1994a). So, 45 days fallow should be sufficient for most garden variety strains of ich so long as temp is 77F or greater during the entire fallow period.

One last thing I wanted to mention is something I said previously - about ich going dormant in lower temps and then becoming infectious again once the temp is returned to normal. That information is quoted below and was extracted from here: https://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/fa164
Temperatures for optimal growth of most strains of Cryptocaryon appear to be about 23–30°C (73.4–86°F) (Dickerson 2006; Yoshinaga 2001), although active infections at 15°C (59°F) have been documented (Diggles and Lester 1996). Encysted stages, off the host (tomonts), were also observed to survive for 2–4 weeks under experimental hypoxic conditions (24% oxygen saturation); these released free-swimming infective stages (theronts) 10–11 days after excystment (Yoshinaga 2001).

A more recent study demonstrated that two life stages of one strain of Cryptocaryon (trophonts, i.e., the feeding stage during which the parasite can be found on the fish, and tomonts) survived dormant for 4–5 months at 12°C (53.6°F), and, after the water temperature increased to 27°C (80.6°F), developed and infected fish (Dan et al. 2009).


So let’s now begin a lively discussion, debate, more info presented, etc. on Marine Ich and Temperature! :)
 

MatsReef

Active Member
View Badges
Joined
Dec 20, 2015
Messages
240
Reaction score
158
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
During my fallow period I ran the tank at 80°-81°. That's up from the normal 77°-78°. I had no idea if it would help or not but figured it couldn't hurt.
 

omykiss001

Active Member
View Badges
Joined
Oct 26, 2014
Messages
300
Reaction score
257
Location
Eugene, OR
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Great summary @Humblefish lots of good info supported by actual controlled studies. The best way to make an informed decision. I again support the authors assertion that the variation is excystment is a survival mechanism and is common in most animals that require a host or are at the mercy of their environment. Seed bank effect, flea eggs, most other parasites. The variation just ups the chance you hatch when a host is present, if all hatch at the same time and there is no host your genetic line is dead, evolution will quickly favor the strains that have larger variances. So if one cyst ruptures and there is no host, there are still other cysts that will rupture a different day and so increase probability of encountering a host. This is why us biologists have to use statistics so much more than many other branches of science as biology is noisy with variance an end product of selective force. Variance is what natural selection works on, if there is no variation within a species it takes only a small change to drive a species extinct, and also why specialist species are generally most susceptible to decline when environmental conditions change. Generalists species can handle the change as they can utilize more food sources and habitats, just not as efficiently as a specialist species. The generalist species tend to then fill the new niche and over time often evolve to be the new specialist for that ecological niche. Darwin's finches are a classic example, a generalist first colonized the islands then over time in isolation evolved into many new species that had very specific adaptations to utilize a very specific food source. In biology variance is king.
 
OP
OP
H

Humblefish

Dr. Fish
View Badges
Joined
Nov 9, 2014
Messages
22,424
Reaction score
34,851
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Thanks for the input guys. I personally believe there are strains of ich which can take longer than 72 days for all the theronts (free swimmers) to be released. However, there is no proof of this as these strains haven't been encountered yet by the scientific community. It would certainly explain the numerous 72 day fallow failures.
 

robert

Valuable Member
View Badges
Joined
Jun 14, 2011
Messages
1,028
Reaction score
491
Location
Silicon Valley - Ca
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
So if ich can encyst for up to 72 days - and it is impervious in this form to copper - why can't it survive a 30 day copper treatment - re-infest your fish - (sequestering in the gills of course and not be visable) - only to make it back along with the fish to the DT after the fallow period is over?
 

rayn

Bluefin Believer
View Badges
Joined
Mar 25, 2014
Messages
3,351
Reaction score
2,806
Location
Illinois
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Interesting. While understand in most tanks the cold water isn't usable, but I would be interested in more info along those lines.

I suppose one way would be to have a multiple QT system setup and figure out which works for which temps.

Curious as well, if 72 days is for 62 degrees and the thought I got was warmer temps shortened the time frame, what about colder temps? I assume that makes them longer gestation periods. Curious as I ran a tank at 59-60 degrees for awhile.
 
OP
OP
H

Humblefish

Dr. Fish
View Badges
Joined
Nov 9, 2014
Messages
22,424
Reaction score
34,851
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
So if ich can encyst for up to 72 days - and it is impervious in this form to copper - why can't it survive a 30 day copper treatment - re-infest your fish - (sequestering in the gills of course and not be visable) - only to make it back along with the fish to the DT after the fallow period is over?

If you were to encounter a strain of ich that took >30 days for all the theronts to be released from their tomonts, then a 30 day copper treatment would fail (and has failed some in the past). Once you dropped the copper below therapeutic, fish could be reinfected if tomonts were still present in the QT. Two workarounds for this scenario:
  1. Without dropping the copper level, transfer the fish to a non-medicated HT for additional observation. Any tomonts will be left behind in the original QT and the presence of copper should have zapped any theronts before they were able to latch onto a fish, provided Cu was kept at therapeutic levels for the entire 30 days. This same approach can be used with hypo or CP. I am currently experimenting with the latter, transferring fish with ich/velvet after only 10 days in CP in an effort to shorten exposure time to the chemical.
  2. Use tank transfer method, which outruns ich regardless of how long it takes for theronts to emerge on the back end of the life cycle: https://www.reef2reef.com/threads/tank-transfer-method.192655/
 

robert

Valuable Member
View Badges
Joined
Jun 14, 2011
Messages
1,028
Reaction score
491
Location
Silicon Valley - Ca
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
TTM is only good for ich - CP should work in all cases.

While copper can zap theronts - it requires an in water dwell time - its not instantly lethal. If fish are sleeping in PVC fittings (the perfect environment for facilitating ich finding its host) then ich may make it to the fish before copper can kill it. If copper were instantly lethal to the theront, the copper treatment could be shortened to the "infish" time of the parasite...

If you want to improve the efficacy of copper - keep the fish off the bottom of the tank and eliminate PVC fittings - this will increase the length of time theronts are exposed to the copper before they can reinfect the fish.

Copper actually works in much the same manner as filtration - it reduces the infectivity rate to the point where ich cannot maintain its population and dies out...
 

robert

Valuable Member
View Badges
Joined
Jun 14, 2011
Messages
1,028
Reaction score
491
Location
Silicon Valley - Ca
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
As it stands now - there is an inconsistancy between your recommended fallow period and your copper treatment period - if encystment can last 72 days -
 
OP
OP
H

Humblefish

Dr. Fish
View Badges
Joined
Nov 9, 2014
Messages
22,424
Reaction score
34,851
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
While copper can zap theronts - it requires an in water dwell time - its not instantly lethal.

Do you have a link to support this assertion? This one provided by @omykiss001 does not discuss theront mortality once exposed to copper: https://www.researchgate.net/public...f_the_ciliate_protozoan_Cryptocaryon_irritans

As it stands now - there is an inconsistancy between your recommended fallow period and your copper treatment period - if encystment can last 72 days -

There is no 100% reliable, not in anything in life. In a perfect world, copper treatment would last (at least) 72 days to line up with the recommended fallow period. However, 72 days of continuous copper exposure would be detrimental to the health of most fish. This is why I highly recommend TTM as the first choice for both treatment and as a prophylactic for ich. TTM doesn't expose the fish to any harmful chemicals and works in just 13 days regardless of how long tomonts remain encysted. If velvet or some other disease presents itself whilst doing TTM, you can always "audible" & begin a chemical treatment straight away since there is no danger of interacting with another chemical.

Copper, CP & hypo should be considered "back up plans" when the hobbyist cannot/will not utilize TTM for whatever reason. All 3 will successfully treat ich
in most cases if treatment is done for 30 days. However, post treatment observation time is important just in case 30 days was not sufficient. Even if you don't see visible physical symptoms of ich during that time, you should still notice behavioral symptoms (rubbing, flashing, head twitching, heavy breathing) if your fish still has ich.
 

robert

Valuable Member
View Badges
Joined
Jun 14, 2011
Messages
1,028
Reaction score
491
Location
Silicon Valley - Ca
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Sure - but if your sticking to the possibility of 72 day encystment - then you have to acknowledge that there is no probablistic advantage in having a longer fallow period than your copper treatment period - assuming that the ich isolate on your fish is the same as that which is in your tank...which of course it would be.
 
OP
OP
H

Humblefish

Dr. Fish
View Badges
Joined
Nov 9, 2014
Messages
22,424
Reaction score
34,851
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Sure - but if your sticking to the possibility of 72 day encystment - then you have to acknowledge that there is no probablistic advantage in having a longer fallow period than your copper treatment period - assuming that the ich isolate on your fish is the same as that which is in your tank...which of course it would be.

The advantage is you can restart treatment (without having to catch all the fish again) if one of your fish displays symptoms of ich during the post treatment observation period. ;)

Completely unrelated, but I've always wondered if giving the QT a thorough wipe down (using an algae pad) would "dislodge" all of the encysted tomonts and possibly force an early release of all their theronts. Or possible just crush/kill the tomonts outright. That is something you can do in a bare bottom QT; not feasible in a DT with rock/sand.
 

Justiful

Active Member
View Badges
Joined
Sep 10, 2015
Messages
381
Reaction score
136
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Temperature shock does work on most organisms in the water column even ich. Ich is a highly temperature adaptive organism. It can exist at high and low temps and adapt overtime to those temps like all protozoan organisms. However if it was shocked constantly it would, like most the protozoan family die off in mass. Gradual changes will not kill them, they will adapt and come back just as strong. Constant rapid changes will, as the same mechanism that allows them to adapt is highly susceptible to constant fluctuations in temperature.

Here is a model of how a system would be created to employ such a methodology to effectively prevent ich permanently in aquaria systems. The system would operate by mixing 50 degree celsius water with a proportional amount of 15 degree celsius water in a mix tank before supplying proper temperature water to a sump. It would require a system to regulate the hot cold system filling, release, and return to the sump. Requiring electronic check valves controlled by computer, on the cold hot mix and sump. Obviously heavy on electronics and automation. A system constructed with this methodology would be very cost prohibitive. But greatly reduce most viral fungal bacterial and parasitic organisms in the water to the point of not being a threat.

Obviously it would only be able to turn over a tanks volume a few times a day. But that would be all that would be needed anyway. During the heating/cooling cycle portion the tank would run off the regular sump.

I conducted a similar experiment in college-micro biology. Less advanced. But we looked at different temperatures, and it's effect on protozoan populations. We also looked at the effect of rapid changes on populations. Temperature shock is a known killer, but impractical for most aquarist. However it could be done by someone with enough money, which sadly is not me. This would not eradicate ich, but it would kill it in the water column. It would be an extremely strong preventive for most saltwater problems.

However. It is indiscriminate. It will kill most everything in the water column. Including good bacteria, zooplankton and plankton. They would however still exist in the system, but likely need to be dosed more frequently. As such a system like this would likely be established, and only be turned on if an outbreak was suspected. Or in tanks running ULNS. I also do not know the effects it may have on chemistry in the aquaria, while I suspect minimal it still needs to be considered.

To increase the efficiency of a system like this, Automatic dosing of calc, carbonate, mag and topoff water could be integrated into the system. Creating additional fluctuations of water parameters in the tank at the same time in the hot cold tanks. Further stressing organisms during the 15-30 minute cycles. Though you would need to be dam good at chemistry to calculate that out, and what levels would cause an effect.





Temprature shock sump..png
 
Last edited:
OP
OP
H

Humblefish

Dr. Fish
View Badges
Joined
Nov 9, 2014
Messages
22,424
Reaction score
34,851
Rating - 0%
0   0   0

omykiss001

Active Member
View Badges
Joined
Oct 26, 2014
Messages
300
Reaction score
257
Location
Eugene, OR
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Do you have a link to support this assertion? This one provided by @omykiss001 does not discuss theront mortality once exposed to copper: https://www.researchgate.net/public...f_the_ciliate_protozoan_Cryptocaryon_irritans
[/COLOR]

@Humblefish the following citation shows copper kills very quick probably less than 5 minutes, but their table starts at 5 minutes and 100% mortality at time point 1. See table 2

https://www.researchgate.net/profil..._treatment/links/004635232a8e3d8ec1000000.pdf
 
OP
OP
H

Humblefish

Dr. Fish
View Badges
Joined
Nov 9, 2014
Messages
22,424
Reaction score
34,851
Rating - 0%
0   0   0

omykiss001

Active Member
View Badges
Joined
Oct 26, 2014
Messages
300
Reaction score
257
Location
Eugene, OR
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Awesome info! Makes you wonder, though, how many fish can be infected within the first 5 minutes? o_O
Yes good question. Been looking for data that has a finer time resolution as I suspect the kill time is even shorter just don't know if 100% is achieved at 4 minutes, or 4 seconds
 

Lionfish Lair

Renee
View Badges
Joined
Jan 29, 2012
Messages
8,812
Reaction score
9,031
Location
California
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Thank you for pruning this, or separating it out. The tone is much more inviting.

I found this table of interest..... mind you it's colder than our average tank.

tab.jpg
 
Last edited:

Reefing threads: Do you wear gear from reef brands?

  • I wear reef gear everywhere.

    Votes: 27 15.2%
  • I wear reef gear primarily at fish events and my LFS.

    Votes: 11 6.2%
  • I wear reef gear primarily for water changes and tank maintenance.

    Votes: 1 0.6%
  • I wear reef gear primarily to relax where I live.

    Votes: 24 13.5%
  • I don’t wear gear from reef brands.

    Votes: 103 57.9%
  • Other.

    Votes: 12 6.7%
Back
Top