hydrogen peroxide dip-velvet

[boxfishpooalot]

A lot of my fish contracted velvet due to an alkalinity drop of 1.6meq/l. Im sad to see some of my fish die after 2 years of having some of them...

As far as I know there are no effective treatments to kill this parasite.

I found one about the use of hydrogen peroxide. 30 minutes exposure at 75ppm hydrogen peroxide was enough to kill the parasite.

How much hydrogen peroxide at 3% volume(The stuff to clean wounds) would I need in a 5 gallon pail of saltwater to get a concentration of 75ppm?

Here is the article that I discovered it

http://www.reefkeeping.com/issues/2004-07/sp/feature/index.php

Thanks

[marsh]

I get ~ 47 ml (or a smidgeon over 3 tablespoons in 5 Gal)....close to the universal answer of 42 from Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy

H2O2 - SG = 1
3% by vol - 30 ml/L...30 gm/L
5 gal = 5 * 3.785 (L/Gal)= 18.925 L

((x ml)(30 gm/L)/18.925 L ) = .075 gm/L
solve for x = ((.075 gm/L*18.925 L)/30 gm/L) = .0473 L

[boxfishpooalot]

Thanks.

Im trying this on a dog faced puffer as we speak. But im trying 5ml hydrogen peroxide at 3% in 16cups of saltwater in a bucket for 30 minutes.Whats that work out to?

This fish is on its last breath. Hopefully it helps.

[marsh]

Without grinding through....16 cups = 1 gal
If 5 gal requires ~ 50 cc for a 75 ppm solution
1 gal would require ~ 10 cc
You intend to put 5 cc into 1 gal giving ~35 ppm H2O2

[boxfishpooalot]

Ufortunately the fish did not make it over night. :(

I did the dip for only 20 minutes. Breathing was still rapid afterwards. Imo it just makes them worse, I would not do it again.

It seems a better treatment would be one that directly kills the parasite and not the fish too. Copper is out, H2O2 is out, Only thing I can think of is formalin. Perhaps thats the way to go?

[Boomer]

The parasites infect the gills, lowering their ability to pick up O2, to include "feeding" off the fish. Most of the H2O2 in water rapidly converts to O2. You may have raised the O2 levels up to high burning the kills making it even worse or even any free H2O2 would be worse. I migh add that in a advanced state, where there is allot of damage, no treatment will work, it is to late.

Alk has nothing to do with "velvet". But something that tank lowered their immune response. Have you added any new fish recently. "Velvet" in a tank for 2 years and showig no signs is unheard off. Alkalinity and carbonate-substrates can impact the absorption and release of free copper in the water, is about it.

Hypo or the use of SeaCehm Labs Cupramine are still the best treatments. I do find the H23O treatment maybe a usefu nice metod. It would be best for such a method to montior the O2 so you know what 75ppm hydrogen peroxide is or use a H2O2 test kit.

More on H2O2

Objective: Test the efficacy of hydrogen peroxide to control common ectoparasite infestation of culture fishes.
Work continued to test hydrogen peroxide, which the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has classified as a low regulatory priority compound for aquaculture, as a chemical control agent for treatment of common ectoparasite infestation of cultured freshwater and marine fish. During year five of the project, juvenile moi (Polydactylus sexfilis) with Amyloodinium sp. infection of the gills were treated with hydrogen peroxide to determine the fish’s tolerance to hydrogen peroxide (e.g. concentration and duration) and to test the compound’s efficacy as a chemical control of Amyloodinium.

Juvenile moi were found to tolerate exposure to hydrogen peroxide at 150 ppm for 30 to 60 minutes. Twenty-six fish were used in the study; 13 were hydrogen-peroxide treated and 13 were untreated control fish. Gill wet-mounts of treated juvenile moi showed significantly reduced numbers of Amyloodinium sp. This indicates that hydrogen peroxide may be an effective chemical for the treatment of ectoparasite disease caused by Amyloodinium species.

Hydrogen peroxide was also tested as a treatment to control two Chinese catfish ectoparasites, Gyrodactylus sp. and Trichodina sp. Juvenile Chinese catfish were found to tolerate 30 minute treatment with 250 ppm hydrogen peroxide. Twenty-four hours after treatment, no Gyrodactylus sp. or Trichodina sp. were observed in wet-mounts of skin scrapings from the treated catfish, but an average of 18.4 Gyrodactylus sp. and 12.4 Trichodina sp. per fish appeared in wet mounts of skin scrapings of untreated control fish. This indicates that hydrogen peroxide may be useful as a chemical treatment for the control of ectoparasite infections in Chinese catfish.

However, some producers experienced mortalities in Chinese catfish following treatment with hydrogen peroxide. Rach et al. (1997) reported a reduced tolerance of fish to hydrogen peroxide exposure when fish were held in higher water temperature. During year five, a study was conducted to test whether hydrogen peroxide toxic to Chinese catfish when administered in “warm” rather than “cool” water. Forty juvenile catfish weighing between 5 and 48 grams each were divided into two groups, which were subdivided into four batches of five fish each. Each batch of five fish was released into a bucket filled with 12.5 liters of water. Four buckets were placed into a tank in which the level of water was adjusted so that buckets were immersed to about 75 percent of the depth of the bucket. In each group, two buckets of fish were unexposed controls and two buckets of fish were administered hydrogen peroxide. In the high temperature group, the four buckets of fish were acclimated overnight in heated 29°C water. The second group of four buckets of fish were held in a tank with water at the ambient temperature of 23°C. Two buckets in the each group were administered hydrogen peroxide at a rate of 150 ppm for 30 minutes, after which they were transferred to buckets with clean water at their treatment temperatures. The control groups were handled in a similar fashion. Following treatment, all bucket groups of fish were held and observed for 24 hours. None of the Chinese catfish died during the study, which did not demonstrate increased toxicity of hydrogen peroxide to Chinese catfish at higher temperatures.

Objective: Develop a protocol for monitoring of subclinical Amyloodinium sp. Infection of cultured moi and the use of the procedure on a commercial farm.
Experience has shown that once the moi have started dying from OD, the losses will be high even if the fish are treated with hydrogen peroxide and/or transferred to a clean raceway. An analysis of these problems led to the conclusion that the outcome for hydrogen peroxide treatment or management procedures practices for the control of OD would be more favorable if intervention was initiated prior to the onset of clinical disease (morbidity and mortality) of the fish. In year five of the project, a protocol was devised, tested, modified and found to be suitable for the monitoring of subclinical infection by Amyloodinium sp. of moi.

The gill biopsy/microscopic trophont count method was applied weekly by project members or farm staff to check moi for Amyloodinium sp. infection. The moi tanks were sampled 85 times over a period of 22 weeks. In a few cases for specific problem tanks, the trophont counts were made every few days. Fifty-five (65%) of the tanks sampled had one or more fish positive for trophonts. For 30 of the tank samples (35%) the gill biopsy samples from the five fish were negative for trophonts. Even with a five fish sample size, Amyloodinium sp. infection was detected well in advance of the occurrence of clinical disease. When trophont counts were observed to rise, steps were taken to mitigate an outbreak of OD.

A study was undertaken to evaluate if a larger sample size of fish per tank would increase the sensitivity of detection of trophonts. The frequency of trophont positive biopsy specimens for samples of 10 fish were compared with samples from five fish. The frequency of trophont positive biopsy specimens was not statistically different (P=0.65) for the 10 or five fish groups. These findings indicated that a sample size of five fish per tank provided adequate sensitivity for the gill biopsy procedure.

The gill biopsy procedure was found to be effective as a means to monitor subclinical Amyloodinium sp. infection in cultured moi. The observations indicated that moi were asymptomatic and feeding well in tank populations when the average trophont count/field remained at 5 or less. There was danger of an impending outbreak of OD when the average trophont count/field score rose to 20 or higher. Average trophont count/field scores of >75 were associated with clinical signs of OD in the moi.

Objective: Assess the effect of low light conditions as an approach for the control of Amyloodinium sp. disease of moi cultured in Hawaii.
Weekly monitoring of the Amyloodinium sp. trophont count coupled with hydrogen peroxide treatment and transfer to a clean tank was found to help advert losses from OD. However, complications arose when there were no empty tanks available for the fish to be transferred to and the procedures were found to be time consuming and labor intensive. A simpler approach was needed for the prevention of OD. This led to studies to evaluate the maintenance of low light as a means to inhibit the life cycle of Amyloodinium sp. in moi culture tanks. The rationale for using darkness to combat OD was based on the belief that a significant reduction in light would slow down or stop the proliferation of macro algal on the bottom of the moi tanks and that this would reduce the favorable substrate for Amyloodinium sp. Investigators also speculated that the low light conditions would be unfavorable to the dinoflagellate (swimming) stage of this parasite.

The first experiment was conducted in small circular tanks at Anuenue Fisheries Research Center (AFRC). Eight moi were transported to AFRC from the commercial moi farm on Oahu. These fish were collected from a raceway where the fish were exhibiting clinical signs of Amyloodinium infection (flashing, not eating, discolored and mottled appearance). The eight fish were separated into two groups of four fish each and randomly assigned to two, 270 liter tanks with continuous aeration and flow through of salt water. One of the tanks was covered to almost complete darkness with the use of a cover and shade cloth. The other tank was left uncovered.

On the day of arrival at AFRC, each of the eight fish were examined separately, gill biopsies made, trophonts counted and the results recorded. Three days later all of the fish were re-examined and trophont count determined. The gill exam was repeated one month after the fish had been stocked into the tanks. During the holding period the fish were fed daily a commercial pelleted fish feed.

After one month, the covered tank was uncovered to expose the tank sides and bottom to sunlight. Likewise, the uncovered tank was covered to greatly reduce exposure to sunlight. Twenty-seven days later the fish were re-examined by gill biopsy and the trophont count determined.

A companion study was also carried out at the commercial moi farm. Moi from a tank population with high trophont count were moved into a covered tank. Gill biopsy/trophont counts were made from fish in the darkened tank on days 14 and 25 following transfer.

In the AFRC trial the bottom of the covered tank remained clean while the sides and bottom of the uncovered tank had a thick algal growth. In the covered tank, by one month the trophont count had declined below a level detectable by the gill biopsy/microscopic examination procedure. When the light conditions were switched, trophonts were detected at a low level in the now uncovered tank, but had declined below detectable in the then covered tank. Similar observations were found for the moi transferred to the covered tank at the commercial moi farm. The trophont count declined to a very low level within the 25 days of the observation period.

The results of these trials strongly suggest that maintenance of moi under limited light conditions may be an effective means for the prevention of OD.

[cthetoy]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=9852657#post9852657 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Boomer


Hypo or the use of SeaCehm Labs Cupramine are still the best treatments. I do find the H23O treatment maybe a usefu nice metod. It would be best for such a method to montior the O2 so you know what 75ppm hydrogen peroxide is or use a H2O2 test kit.
[/B]

I thought Hypo works with Ich and not with Velvet. I do agree that Cupramine works great for both Ich and Velvet

[boxfishpooalot]

The parasites infect the gills, lowering their ability to pick up O2, to include "feeding" off the fish. I thought about this too. Whats pricking my mind about it is if the fish develops a slime coat around the gills, would H2O2 have any effect or chance at getting passed the slimed up gills?


Most of the H2O2 in water rapidly converts to O2.
True.I was thinking H2O2 would be useless in organic laden water. As in oxidiezing organics, rather than parasites. I dont know.

Alk has nothing to do with "velvet". But something that tank lowered their immune response. Have you added any new fish recently. Yes, I added a porcupine puffer about 3 months ago. This fish still lives.

Hypo or the use of SeaCehm Labs Cupramine are still the best treatments. Yep I want to get some cupramine for the remaining fish, take out all inverts, live rock ect. And dose the main tank with the skimmer and heater running. Problem is my girlfriend thinks the fish are fine. Although they are still eating I think the parasite will get a hold of the rest of them. She has a belief that copper kills puffers due to the fact that they are scale-less fish, so they are more sensitive to copper. How to convince her its safe in low dosages?

What I have learned from all this?

-dont use the syringe to stir the alkalinity kit while tirating. Then go and put the used tirant back into the titrant bottle.

-There are diseases that can wipe out your tank. If not treated asap, death is emminent.

-Alkalinity for prolonged periods can cause a suppressed immune system in fish.

-Alkalinity can become quite low with use of sulphur denitrator and contaminated alkalinity test kit. Lowering nitrate at the cost of alkalinity is not a good alternative.

-Sea urchins dropping abnormal amounts of spines offer a good biological alkalinity test kit. Mine was loosing spines. Black long spined.


Well the death toll is-
-vlamingi tang
-dog faced puffer
-2 percula clowns
-tomato clownfish
-yellow tailed damsel
-royal gramma
-yellow spotted boxfish


Remaining surviors
-porcupine puffer
-regal tang
-yellow tang
-naso tang
-cleaner wrasse
-4 chromis

If you differentiate the two sets of fish, I notice that shallow water species tend to tolerate more of an alkalinity decline than deep water ones. I would say yellow tangs take the cake, man they are tough. My theory is that the fish that died evoloved mostly in deep water where alk does not drift so much as shallow water. just a thought. So the shallow water fish remain healthy.

O yea and im almost 100% sure its Velvet. The dog faced puffer had rough skin, gold dusting over his body. Rapid breathing and secondary infections too causing rubbing. Also I dont think ich could wipe out that many fish. :)

[Billybeau1]

Wow, sorry to hear about this Box.

I'm with Boomer on this one. I don't think decreased alkalinity did this to your tank. I mean heck, how can you kill a damsel. :confused: Did the damsel have flecks on it before it died ? Were all the fish breathing heavily before they died ?

Some type of water poisoning me thinks. :confused:

[boxfishpooalot]

Im not sure the damsel died from velvet. But when the damsel when missing for a week things whent downhill. Ammonia was zero all the time. Either it died from disease, or the porcupine ate it....

The only possible suspect was an alkalinity of 1.6meq/l for a week. I think thats enough to lower the disease resistance of most fish.

One example was when I screwed up from long ago in a 30 gallon. I had a faulty ph probe. I was a newb back then. I add so much alkalinity that all the fish got sick and died. The last fish remaining? A yellow tang. Man they are tough as bricks.

Thanks for the sympathy Billy :)

[Billybeau1]

Your welcome Box. If you are not running carbon already, I suggest you do so. A good quality carbon. Just in case you got something in the water. Cant hurt :)

[cthetoy]

[i
Hypo or the use of SeaCehm Labs Cupramine are still the best treatments. Yep I want to get some cupramine for the remaining fish, take out all inverts, live rock ect. And dose the main tank with the skimmer and heater running. Problem is my girlfriend thinks the fish are fine. Although they are still eating I think the parasite will get a hold of the rest of them. She has a belief that copper kills puffers due to the fact that they are scale-less fish, so they are more sensitive to copper. How to convince her its safe in low dosages?
[/B]

Cupramine is pretty safe. My Regal Angel and Moorish idol survived the 2 week Cupramine treatment. Just make sure you have no live rocks or sand because Cupramine will just precipitate into it causing less copper being dosed into the water column.

[Boomer]

I'll say it again Box, Alk has nothing to do with it. More than likely something went bad with that denitrator, like releasing H2S

[b]Sea urchins dropping abnormal amounts of spines offer a good biological alkalinity test kit.[/b ]

That also tells you nothing. Urchins, especially Hat-Pin Urchins, can loose spines at any Alk.

Matter of fact, I still question "velvet", as the tangs are still alive. Your disease sounds more like 'Clownfish Disease", Brooklynella, if a disease at all.

Where the fish use to live in the ocean also has nothing to do with it, especially after 2 years, they have readapted.

I would bet you have or had a toxicity problem. Velvet just does not go 2 yrs and then just pop-up, it is not ick, where I would buy it.



cthetoy

You're right , "pretty" safe at 2 wks ;) Some past that may crash and die like Copperbanded Butterfly fish. Copper actually does not kill the parasites. The theory is the copper causes the gill lamella to over mucate and the parasites can not get ahold to live, as the thickness is to great. Second, the copper accumulates in the mucus, the fishes first line of defense, where there is thus more to kill the parasites as opposed to the water column.

Oodinium is not like "ick". Copper is still the best treatment, in a BD Q-T, unless you can get ahold of some of the antimalarial meds and then you better know what you are doing as the dosage is critical.


And yes hypo is not the best treatment but few have tried it . They just make comments on it like Steve Pro. Something else about Oodium. Even bleach @ 2 ppm does not kill them even after days.

[boxfishpooalot]

Well if it is not the alkalinity the only other possible causes I can think of is sulphur poisening. But is that even possible?

The sulphur reactor 2 weeks ago had yellow water inside the reactor. It was the same color as the beads themselves. Some of that got into the water, well all of it. But that has happened before with no ill effects.

My sea urchin has never dropped 20 spines in one week ever. Only when I discovered the alkalinity was this low I then realized thats why the urchin is dropping spines. How can you say alkalinity being 1.6meq/l would not effect calcium carbonate materials? :)

And I was aware that brook shows as a serious slime coat. This parasite looks like gold dust all over the fish body.

I dont understand how you think that an alkalinity 1.6meq/l would not worsen the effects of disease. Im not saying it caused it, but perhaps worsen its effect. :)

The naso tang, which is on its last breath now too, will be dead by tomorrow. :(

[Boomer]

I'm sorry for your loss I have been there :sad1:


can you say alkalinity being 1.6meq/l would not effect calcium carbonate materials

Why would it? Spines just don't't fall off like that, in 1 wk 20 of them. Spines fall of urchins even at normal Alk. It is usually a toxin or poor diet, especially Hat-Pins as I said. I raised them for years. Most urchins, especially like yours, do not get hardly any if any at all of their calcium from the water. They get it from eating, like when they craze on the rocks which are CaCO3


What does a Alk of 1.6 have to do with lower the immune response of fish ? Many FOT tank people never check the Alk and I gave seen them down to 1 meq / l without what you have.

You found 1 water parameter that you can measure and are blaming it all all on that. That is rarely the case. How does ALk effect any of this ? How often I have heard in 40 years : "My fish are dying and there is nothing wrong with the tank. All water parameters are prefect and I seen no disease."

If you have "velvet" where did it come from?

And I was aware that brook shows as a serious slime coat

Theory can both cause excessive mucous production in fish and both can also produce little, same for ick. These are not a + ID of it either. An velvet does not always look "golden brown". Not only that but velvet is not very common and is often mis-ID for other disease like ick, Brook or even Uronemia.

I don't think you have any disease at all and is what I said in the last post. Am I 100 % sure, no, you can never be 100% without seeing it. Have I ever seen "velvet" pop-up after a year or two with no velvet, nope. Not unless something new was added a month or so ago. Fish can not handle velvet anything like Ick. And then there is the question why the urchin. It is not affected by velvet or Alk.

[King Nine]

Hey guys I have a peroxide question. I'm very new to this hobby and have had several fist die of ich. I'm down to one Carpenter Wrasse, One Spotted Mandarin and 2 convict blennies. I never saw ich on my clown or wrasse until my blue hippo tang died. Those two started showing white spots that would disapear within a day. I guess my question is does peroxide kill ich as well as velvet? Also, how would you dose a reef tank? I don't want to hurt my corals.

[lecher]

Put all fish in a seperate tank and treat with cupramine and let the main tank run fishless for 6-8 weeks. Don't mess with the peroxide.

[Boomer]

I agree with lecher. It is very difficult to treat a disease in a "show" tank.

[boxfishpooalot]

Ok guys, naso tang is resting on its side :( The body is discoloured and appears to be sandpaper-like. Breathing is very rapid.

Regal tang has cloudy eyes and appears to have velvet too. Porcupine puffer and yellow tang appear fine, normal respiration rates.

What is the best treatment for the remaining fish in the tank? I want to save at least some fish. Ill have to move the live rock and inverts to the sump and treat the main tank with nothing but sand in it.

[lecher]

boxfishpooalot, I hate to say it but if it is in fact velvet all fish will prob. die. It kills in a matter of a couple of days. If it were me and I suspected velvet, I would remove all fish, give them a formalin/freshwater dip on route to a hospital tank and then treat with cupramine for 2 weeks. And let the main tank run fallow for at least 2-3 months.

[boxfishpooalot]

I think im going to blame ammonia on this one. The first missing fish was not found. The yellow tail damsel. I think it was rotting in the tank somwhere. And that must have caused a huge ammonia spike.

I also found a chromis dead for one day tucked in a rock, that looked decayed already. Only from 1 day!

What do you guys think? But I did not measure any ammonia.

So the fish that survived without treatment are- regal tang, yellow tang, porcupine puffer, cleaner wrasse and 2 chromis.

RIP to the other guys. :(

I think next time I notice a fish missing im going to search very hard......move rock ect.

[Boomer]

I may have been a ammonia spike Box, especially if it went unchecked for a couple of days. Any nitrite readings and has the nitrate increased ?

[lecher]

Sorry to hear about your loses Box. No fun at all. Hopefully the troubles are behind you now.