Considering a UV Sterilizer... - Page 3
Planted Tank Forums
Your Tanks Image Hosting *Tank Tracker * Plant Profiles Fish Profiles Planted Tank Guide Photo Gallery Articles

Go Back   The Planted Tank Forum > Specific Aspects of a Planted Tank > Equipment


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-20-2013, 07:54 PM   #31
wkndracer
Planted Tank Guru
 
wkndracer's Avatar
 
PTrader: (68/100%)
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Citrus County,Florida
Posts: 6,180
Default

Considering a UV Sterilizer...


Based on how this thread developed for me interest ended on 6/15/13.
This will be my final post to it.

Shawn, if you have no objections I think we should move the discussion over to your old thread and I'll cross post what matters there. (your call, let me know here or in PM)

In post#24 I mentioned taking more fish to the lab. I just received the path report and I'm posting it in it's entirety.

Brief background;
These fish arrived here mid year last year as specialty dime size angelfish. Showed little or no outward sign of defect and were roughly 1yr old. Myco was confirmed within the eight fish I received last December after only two losses to wasting and a third failing when tested. The full report was completed in the first quarter of 2013. I still had maintained four fish in a 90g closed loop tank hoping to confirm vertical transmission.
Identifying three as male and one female I had the two secondary males surveyed.

Path. Report;
Report Status: Preliminary 0 Final 1

Fish A = Blue smoke; fish B = “glitter”

Fish A had 2 ulcerations approximately 5 mm in diameter on either side of the body and erythema and swelling of the base of the right pectoral fin. A scraping of one of the ulcers revealed a poorly organized granuloma and numerous white blood cells. Gill and fin biopsies were unremarkable.
Gross findings at necropsy revealed the lower intestine distended with fluid, though no parasites were observed microscopically. Numerous trichomonads were observed in an anterior feces-filled section of intestine. Numerous granulomas were observed in anterior kidney, spleen, and posterior kidney. The liver contained lipid droplets. No gonadal tissue was identified. Spleen and anterior kidney were cultured on tryptic soya agar (TSA) with 5% sheep blood, but no growth occurred.
Histopathology results: Skin-A moderate to severe inflammatory reaction including macrophages and lymphocytes was observed in the dermis, sometimes extending into the muscles, in the region of the ulcers.
Pectoral fin-inflammatory reaction including lymphocytes and macrophages.
Gill-mild to moderate telangiectasia, occasional hyperplasia and fusion; several lamellae enveloped in extensive inflammatory response including macrophages; extensive inflammatory reaction in branchial arch, including many macrophages and one granuloma.
Intestine-extensive eosinophilic granular cells (EGCs) in submucosa, infrequent foci of lymphocytes.
Liver- mild hepatic lipidosis.
Posterior kidney-extensive severe granulomatous disease acid-fast positive beaded rods observed; numerous hyaline droplets in ~50% tubular epithelium.
Anterior kidney- extensive severe granulomatous disease, approximately 75% of tissue is granulomas; acid-fast positive beaded rods observed.
Spleen- extensive severe granulomatous disease, approximately 90% of tissue is granulomas; occasional acid-fast positive beaded rods observed.
Brain-no significant findings.
Heart-very large coalescing granulomatous structure in ventricle; occasional beaded acid-fast positive rods observed.

Except for through and through ulcerations of the left side of the mouth, Fish B appeared normal. No pathogens were observed on biopsies of skin mucus, gill, and fin. At necropsy the liver of this fish was located in the right coelom, which is highly unusual for this species. Numerous granulomas were observed in spleen, anterior kidney, and light granulomas were present in posterior kidney. Testes was identified, and granulomas were observed within. The intestine appeared normal, but numerous trichomonads were observed. Spleen and anterior kidney were cultured on TSA with 5% sheep blood, and a gram-negative, cytochrome oxidase-positive bacillus (common aquatic environmental bacteria such as Aeromonas, Vibrio, and Pseudomonas and usually opportunistic) grew from both organs.
Histopathology results: Gill-moderate telangiectasia .
Branchial arch- large focus of inflammatory cells, lymphocytes and macrophages.
Mouth lesion- mild multifocal necrosis, moderate to severe inflammation.
Testes-one granuloma containing necrotic cellular debris and acid-fast positive bacteria.
Liver-one small basophilic focus and associated EGCs; one small granuloma that contains a few acid-fast positive bacteria; one focus of large adipocytes.
Heart- large focus of granulomas in ventricle with small groups of EGCs and three acid-fast positive rods; most of atrium is granulomatous inflammation and numerous EGCs.
Posterior kidney-approximately 40% of tissue is severe extensive granulomatous disease; numerous acid-fast positive bacteria observed; approximately 20% of tubular epithelium effaced by hyaline droplets.
Spleen- approximately 60% of tissue is severe extensive granulomatous disease; numerous acid-fast positive bacteria observed.
Anterior kidney- approximately 50% of tissue is severe extensive granulomatous disease; numerous acid-fast positive bacteria observed.
Brain-no significant findings.
Intestine-multifocal mild necrosis, occasional small clusters of EGCs; numerous bacteria of various shapes and sizes in the lumen along with plant material.

Acid-fast staining confirmed extensive, severe mycobacteriosis in both fish. We recommend humane euthanasia of remaining angels from this group. Currently, it is unclear if any of the other fish in the system are infected with Mycobacterium. Careful consideration should be given to the disinfection of the system/tank holding these fish.

Strongly consider what you are doing if you ignore myco after it's confirmed

Regards to all who have posted in this thread.
OP, plz clean the tank.
__________________
The Fraternity of Dirt
If at first you don't succeed,,, keep kicking it
RubberSideDownOnTheLanding,
2-75g planted, 5-55g planted, 5-20g planted, 110g w/30g sump, 8-10g, Refugium, doghouse/newbie
2012 update adding table top pleco pans & a 90g (Nutz)
wkndracer is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 06-20-2013, 08:37 PM   #32
CrypticLifeStyle
Wannabe Guru
 
PTrader: (8/100%)
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Boston
Posts: 1,283
Default

Well i liked the discussion thus far. Informative
__________________
I'm not into the image, but into the hobby...
CrypticLifeStyle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-21-2013, 04:47 AM   #33
FlyingShawn
Algae Grower
 
PTrader: (4/100%)
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Harrisburg, PA
Posts: 143
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wkndracer View Post
Shawn, if you have no objections I think we should move the discussion over to your old thread and I'll cross post what matters there. (your call, let me know here or in PM)
Feel free to cross-post anything you feel would be informative or add to the discussion. The more that thread can be a resource for anyone dealing with this the better!
FlyingShawn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2013, 02:40 AM   #34
zdnet
Planted Tank Enthusiast
 
PTrader: (0/0%)
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Canada
Posts: 532
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyingShawn View Post
--Wkndracer seems to have been approaching it from an understanding that UV was being alleged to have the potential to "cure" the fish ("cure" being the elimination of Myco from the infected fish and tank so that it is no longer a threat).
And who _alleged_ that UV has the potential to cure? Not Diana Walstad's article. Not any postings in this thread. Not anyone here. So why kept arguing that UV is not a cure?


As to myco infection, keep in mind that:

* Myco infection is widespread.

* The bacteria can live in a host for years without any outward sign.

* There is no way of verifying that a fish is indeed free of myco infection without first killing the fish.

* Fish from disinfected eggs have been known to acquire myco infection even when raised under optimal conditions.


Therefore, regardless of how well people have sanitized a tank, the moment new fish are added, the risk of myco infection is back. When the fish are then shared as ones without myco infection, it spreads a false sense of security. That exposes unsuspecting hobbyists who have open wounds on their hands and also a weakened immune systems or chronic medical conditions (such as diabetes or cancer).

Do NOT be fooled into the false sense of security that a sanitized tank with fish from some trusted source is free of myco infection. I treat all fish as carriers. Whenever my hands have open cuts or scrapes, I wear gloves before dipping the hands into a tank. Better be safe than sorry.

UV is a pragmatic way of dealing with the infection risk. It serves as a constant reminder of the risk involved.
zdnet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2013, 09:54 PM   #35
wkndracer
Planted Tank Guru
 
wkndracer's Avatar
 
PTrader: (68/100%)
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Citrus County,Florida
Posts: 6,180
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zdnet View Post
And who _alleged_ that UV has the potential to cure? Not Diana Walstad's article. Not any postings in this thread. Not anyone here. So why kept arguing that UV is not a cure?
Quote:
Originally Posted by zdnet View Post
Diana Walstad mentioned in her article (Mycobacteriosis−--the Stealth Disease) that adding a UV to an existing tank with MB outbreak stopped the fish death and those fish with symptoms actually recovered.

I wonder whether a tear-down is really necessary.
Quote:
Originally Posted by zdnet View Post
As stated in Diana's article, UV did allow her infected fish to recover. It also stopped the spread of the disease. This is a very important consideration for people like the OP who is contemplating having a UV sterilizer.
Indeed,,, why?
Reading the posts as they were presented in this thread you appeared to be inferring it. That's what was addressed at the time of the exchanges in specific reply.

I fail to understand why this argument of semantics must be revisited. Recently suspended I'm assuming based on the argumentative and insulting posting behaviors presented in this same thread (and deleted) why is it the first visited when forum posting privileges are restored? Nothing new here.
__________________
The Fraternity of Dirt
If at first you don't succeed,,, keep kicking it
RubberSideDownOnTheLanding,
2-75g planted, 5-55g planted, 5-20g planted, 110g w/30g sump, 8-10g, Refugium, doghouse/newbie
2012 update adding table top pleco pans & a 90g (Nutz)
wkndracer is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
sterilizer

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:11 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Planted Tank LLC 2012