UV and ich

[korkus]

I have read the UV ich thread here that gives the low down on what you need to kill ich in its free floating stage.
http://www.atlantareefclub.org/forums/showthread.php?t=36805">http://www.atlantareefclub.org/forums/showthread.php?t=36805</a>

My question is if people who do the 336,000 UV intensity on their tank believe it will prevent breakouts? I have been back and forth on buying the full nuclear UV set up for my tank. Its a lot of money, but if it will actually stop fish from needing hypo-salinity treatments I will pull the trigger.

 

[rdnelson]

Many believe in it. My feeling is that it is like wearing a helmet when riding a bike. May help will small accidents but if you get hit by a Mack Truck it isn't going to do a lot.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[nickg]

From what i read on this forum, Rich may need his helmet to walk...

 

[rdnelson]

nickg;870529 wrote: From what i read on this forum, Rich may need his helmet to walk...

Only after the ARC Christmas Party. But if I am not mistaken I was not alone.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[k3nnyp]

rdnelson99;870531 wrote: Only after the ARC Christmas Party. But if I am not mistaken I was not alone.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Can't speak about his, or my, ability to walk but he was able to drive me home.

 

[rdnelson]

k3nnyP;870534 wrote: Can't speak about his, or my, ability to walk but he was able to drive me home.

Someone had too!!!!! Hehehehe. We need another outing line that. When's the BBQ?????


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[k3nnyp]

rdnelson99;870535 wrote: Someone had too!!!!! Hehehehe. We need another outing line that. When's the BBQ?????


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Would love for it to happen but between work, my two kids, planning a move in two weeks and getting our current home ready for renters I'm lucky to get my water changes done. Oh, did I mention prepping the 120 and stand for the upgrade?

Hopefully when the dust settles we can have some more conversations.

 

[ichthyoid]

I own several UV's, but do not currently run any of them.

I have used them successfully to prevent outbreaks, for years. They do not do a good job of eliminating an infestation once established, imo. That requires medicine, of which I prefer quinine sulfate.

What I have found is that prevention and good husbandry go a long way in avoiding outbreaks of ectoparasites.

The exception may be that tangs in particular, seemed to have a much higher susceptibility than other species. If you keep these, I recommend that you run a UV.

An alternative is to prophylacticly treat every fish. If done, no water from another tank should EVER touch your system.

All corals inverts, etc. should all go through a 6 week minimum quarantine before introduction into your system.

That's all a LOT of work, I know. However it's the only way to know for sure you won't have ectoparasites.

In the end, using a UV is like buying insurance and is very convenient.

My $0.02

 

[porpoiseaquatics]

As a tang lover and a person that understands that they are the general carrier, I employ a UV filter....a 40W unit on my 93 cube at a very slow rate and during the 2 years it was in operation, I never had an ick breakout. Upon taking down the tank and placing the very same fish in a tank that did not have a UV....they all came down with Ick and before I could get a UV on that tank and treat, they perished. So with that experience and understanding, I will have the UV up and running on my 180 without fail. You will read where some say they work while others say they don't. I would have to wonder if the ones that claim they do not work has done the research and understand proper flow rates through a UV. That's just my opinion.

 

[jdavid]

porpoiseaquatics;871120 wrote: Upon taking down the tank and placing the very same fish in a tank that did not have a UV....they all came down with Ick and before I could get a UV on that tank and treat, they perished.

you have to take the stress from the move into account, too.

Don't they help with algae as well? That's why I want one.

 

[acroholic]

I have an Emperor 150 watt Smart HO UV, biggest one you can buy from that series stock on my 465 gallon. I have the following tangs: Unicorn, Desjardinii, Kole, Blond Naso, Powder Blue, and a Gem. I run a flow rate of about 500-600 GPH through the UV, and I have never had a single case of ich in this tank (knock on wood). Got another 25 or so varied fish in addition to these tangs. My water is definitely getting the exposure time needed to kill protozoa.

 

[skriz]

Get the uv. It works. It works well.

 

[jef4y]

After killing enough fish to = the cost of a good UV (don't even consider buying anything other than Emperor), I pulled the plug and bought and Emperor. Have not had a single ich issue since.

 

[ichthyoid]

I really don't get the allegiance to the Emperor brand. Any well designed model with sufficient output, using a quartz envelope lamp should work.

The Emperor's do have models that use HO bulbs, which may be of benefit by providing 'overkill' levels of UV ( more 'cushion', if you will).

Ectoparasites certainly don't care about what brand you use.

What does matter, is that you have-

1) sufficient flow through the unit to ensure adequate treatment ...

AND

2) sufficient irradiance (measured in watts per square centimeter - w/cm^2) to ensure a high kill rate.

The UV light works by breaking bonds in the organisms DNA (specifically the thiamine dimers, as I recall)

There is a LOT of 'anecdotal' evidence for 336,000 w/cm^2 being 'REQUIRED' for UV to work.

This number is based on just 1 specific organism- Cryptocaryon, AND that was only for the adult stage. The free swimming stage (which is what we actually can treat) is MUCH more susceptible to UV.

I find this 'convenient' oversight by UV manufacturers to be particularly disturbing. It borders on 'scare tactics'.

I conducted a pretty exhaustive search on this topic, and found that the above level was also based on studies for treating drinking water, which passes through a UV unit ONLY 1 TIME (also referred to as 'point source treatment')

The drinking water number is also based on a log 5 kill rate (99.995+%)

Aquaria certainly don't require that much efficiency to keep fish healthy.

In our systems, we typically use UV's in a 'recirculating' method, where the organisms are exposed (typically) multiple times.

I also performed regression analysis, with proof's, which confirmed lower levels can be highly effective.

This was all confirmed by research results documented in the literature. Specifically, research conducted by the University of Florida Extension Service on behalf of the Florida Aquaculture industry. Please feel free to look it up.

Treatment at levels 1/4 of the above still achieve a 90+% kill rate, for adult cryptocaryon.

Virtually all other ectoparasite's tested showed much lower levels of UV required for high kill rates (99+%)

All of the above is documented in the sticky thread on UV.

Bottom line:
If you use UV, buy a good quality, well designed unit from a reputable manufacturer.

A larger/higher dosage unit does provide the added benefit of having extra capacity. So, stretching out the bulb changes, or upsizing your system isn't such a big concern.

My $29.00!

 

[ichthyoid]

Acroholic;871166 wrote: I have an Emperor 150 watt Smart HO UV, biggest one you can buy from that series stock on my 465 gallon. I have the following tangs: Unicorn, Desjardinii, Kole, Blond Naso, Powder Blue, and a Gem. I run a flow rate of about 500-600 GPH through the UV, and I have never had a single case of ich in this tank (knock on wood). Got another 25 or so varied fish in addition to these tangs. My water is definitely getting the exposure time needed to kill protozoa.

I think it's interesting to note that my original Aquanetics UV, which I still have and was used to treat my old 55 gallon tank, had a similar gallon/watt ratio as Dave's system.

465gal/150W= 3.1 gal/W
55gal/15W= 3.67 gal/W

I used it for several years without a parasite outbreak.

 

[skriz]

ichthyoid;871354 wrote: I really don't get the allegiance to the Emperor brand. Any well designed model with sufficient output, using a quartz envelope lamp should work...

The second sentence above answers the first. Emperor IS a well designed model with sufficient output, using a quartz sleeve. They also clearly give you the output and specs on their lamps, which other manufacturers do not, even upon request. You'd be hard pressed to find a UV in our industry that meets your requirements stated above.

Also, don't forget that the lamps degrade over time. Emperor's units are rated for effective output after 12 months of use. Common practice is to state the output when new/unused.

 

[ichthyoid]

Fair enough, I retract the first sentence.

All else stands.

It was not my intent to appear to disparage Emperor. My exasperation showed, that is all.

To the contrary, I provided similar supportive statements for their purchase.

To suggest that 'it's Emperor or nothing else', is what I perceive to be the issue.

Raj, I would hope that you know I try to be as objective as possible.

My analysis summary was provided for the benefit of the OP, and others, to show that there are many effective options, without having to buy 'the Lamborghini of UV's'.

However,
Your 2nd paragraph is based on ratings which are at best 'suspect', yet taken as gospel.

Using a 336,000 W/cm^2 UV is kind of like driving a 2 penny nail with a 20 lb. sledge hammer, based on current evidence.

When they show me objective data to the contrary, I will reevaluate my position.

Now, I will again say that Emperor arguably builds an excellent device.

Warmest regards,

-Bill

 

[rdnelson]

ichthyoid;871377 wrote: Fair enough, I retract the first sentence.

All else stands.

It was not my intent to appear to disparage Emperor. My exasperation showed, that is all.

To the contrary, I provided similar supportive statements for their purchase.

To suggest that 'it's Emperor or nothing else', is what I perceive to be the issue.

Raj, I would hope that you know I try to be as objective as possible.

My analysis summary was provided for the benefit of the OP, and others, to show that there are many effective options, without having to buy 'the Lamborghini of UV's'.

Warmest regards,

-Bill

But what if your fav store only sells Lamborghini???? Hehehehehe


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[acroholic]

I bought mine based on the recommendation of others whose opinion I respect, and I also liked the fact that many public aquaria and research institutions use Emperor.

That being said, I'm sure there are other brands that work well also. But Emperor is not the most expensive. Aqua-UV seems to be at about the same price point. A big part of my choice to buy Emperor as well was there are not too many manufacturers that make one large enough for my system. I really was limited to Aqua-UV or Emperor, so they had a 50% chance of being what I bought anyways, reputation or not.

There is a broader range of UV choices for a 55 gallon reef system vs a 500 gallon reef system.

 

[ichthyoid]

Then I hope you have a great mechanic AND own a gas station!



Without question-
Buying an Emperor is a 'can't miss' purchase.

If that gives you peace of mind, there is something to be said for that.