Dosing Prime On Top Of Fish

[TwoTankAmin]

Two quick notes- When adding almost anything chemical to a tank, be it dechlor, ferts, liquid or powdered meds etc, Always dilute it first in a big cup of tank water and then pour this in. I prefer to do so in some form of flow from either a filter of the return water going in.
 
The amount of salt it takes to counter nitrite is unbelievabley small. Almost nothing is a fw tank will be bothered by it especially for the short term that should be involved,
 And yes, you can use table salt even if it is iodized and contains anti-caking agents. I do it all the time. If you want to know the truth about salt and fw tanks, this is must reading:
http/www.theaquariumwiki.com/The_Salt_of_the_Earth I know the author and he is overqualified to state what he does in this article, it will also serve to kill another one of those urban aquarium myths for you.
 
Understand that aquarium salt is basically the same thing as table salt. However, this is not what is put into salt water aquariums, There they use a salt mix which includes all of the other elements found in sea water. Do not use this for treating nitrite. As for the amount one should use, I have laid this out here http/www.fishforums.net/index.php?/topic/433778-rescuing-a-fish-in-cycle-gone-wild-part-il/ Scroll down to the bottom of the article where there is a section on "CALCULATING HOW MUCH SALT TO ADD"
 
However Byron reiterated what I said about your not needing even to think about the levels you thought you had in your tank. They are not a worry even if they were real.

 

[Kaidonni]

I hesitated last night after feeding and dosed with Prime again, won't be doing that again though. Still getting the minute readings on Nutrafin nitrite test, but the fish are behaving normally. If I'm correct, this must have been going on for some time without the fish showing any obvious signs of any ammonia or nitrite poisoning, and without Prime being used. API ammonia and nitrite tests as always don't appear to be any different to tests on tap water, although sometimes there looks to be an ever-so-slight difference (given the tests aren't clear to begin with at 0ppm, if there is a subtle difference, my eyes are good).
 
I know it's just an online calculator and doesn't take everything into consideration, but the Advert for another forum removed recommends changing 80% of the water a week, with two 55% changes per week.

 

[Byron]

I know it's just an online calculator and doesn't take everything into consideration, but the Advert for another forum removed recommends changing 80% of the water a week, with two 55% changes per week.
 

 
I assume this schedule is the normal (rather than their recommendation for nitrite issues).  Provided the parameters between tap and tank water are reasonably similar, there is no harm in more rather than fewer water changes, or greater volume per change.  Most of us will advocate once a week as the minimum; the volume I usually suggest is 1/3 to 1/2 the tank (I have done 1/2 the tank weekly for years now), assuming the tank is biologically balanced.  More frequent or larger changes can help in some situations should they arise; my first "treatment" is usually a massive water change, and I have never yet seen anything but benefit from doing this, whatever the actual issue (disease, etc).
 
Fry tanks need more frequent changes, because fry are developing fast, eating more (excess food can readily pollute a tank) and are often overcrowded.  Many discus breeders change 90% of the water in the tanks every single day.
 
Byron.

 

[Kaidonni]

I'm sticking to the two 25% changes per week at the moment. Fed this evening and tested 3-4 hours after feeding, nitrites definitely seem to be affected. I am using the API test (measures total nitrites) as a control test against the difficult-to-gauge Nutrafin test (measures nitrites as nitrogen); that way, if the Nutrafin test is even anywhere near 0.05ppm, the API test should have definite colour change towards 0.165ppm (halfway between the 0ppm and 0.25ppm colour changes). As best as I can tell, the API tank test was identical to the tap test (I always carry out a tap comparison with API due to the tests being coloured and not clear - the tap test should read 0ppm), or if there was any difference, it is extremely slight (or my eyes need testing - and they actually do). Can't do the same with the ammonia because it's a 1:1 ratio, so I just do a tank and tap test there with the API kit; same as with the API nitrites, if there's any difference, it's too hard to tell what it is (again, tap test should be 0ppm - if there's any chloramine in the water supply, it still won't detect the ammonia bound to the chlorine).
 
I almost had a potential rehoming today on Aquarist Classifieds...but the person lives in London, so too far away. Hoping it won't be too long before someone steps forward.

 

[TwoTankAmin]

There are formulas for converting between the nitrogen scale and the total ion scale.
 

NH3 = NH3-N * 1.21589

NH4 = NH4-N * 1.28786

NO2 = NO2-N * 3.28443

NO3 = NO3-N * 4.42664

 
However,when I look into the Nutrafin Nitrite kit it doesn't appear to read on the nitrogen scale. Their instruction sheet, on the color chart pages says:
 

For nitrite as nitrogen (NO2 –N),
divide result by 3.3.

 
You can look here for it by going here https/ca-en.hagen.com/Aquatic/Watercare/Test-Kits/A7825 and then click on Instruction manual.
 
I am still willing to bet dollars to donuts that neither of these test can measure such levels accurately. Consider that a decent nitrite kit such as one by Hach costs $115 plus delivery and compare that to what the Nutrafin or API kits cost.
 
Next, SeaChem tells us that using Prime, which also detoxifies ammonia, will give false ammonia readings a day later. Then they tell you Prime detoxifies nitrite and nitrate, but they have no clue how or why, They surmise it works similar to how it detoxifies ammonia. But they make no mention of whether testing for nitrite or nitrate can give false readings like it does for ammonia.
 
Nutrafin makes two different ammonia kits that use two different reagents. One uses the salicylate reagents and the other uses Nessler. The latter is unreliable when used on water which has had ammonia detoxifiers added. So you cannot use it after dosing Prime. You can tell which kit you have because the salicylate test uses two reagents and the nessler uses only one.
 
I also tend to agree with Byron on water changes. For well over a decade I have been doing weeklies of 50% on most tanks with good results. Two changes of 25% remove fewer things than one at 50%, 100 x .75 = 75% left. 75% x .75 = 56.25% left. So your way actually tends to leave a 12.5% more of whatever in the water. And then lets assume that during the space between your pair of 25% changes, "bad" things are building up. This would mean your second change actually leaves more than a 12.5% difference.
 
If you are committed to doing two a week, I suggest you make the first one about 35%. 100 x .65 = 65% left. 65% x .75 = 49%. Again this doesn't allow for any buildup during the time between the two changes but it will leave you with cleaner and healthier water doing it this way.

 

[Kaidonni]

So, I could conduct a 15 litre and an 11 litre change, or a single 22 litre to get the same effect. I leave my water to stand for 24 hours, I always have done - even though I use Prime - and I can't exactly leave 22 litres sitting about (I cover the bucket I use with a wooden board to protect against dust and other things, if I can't cover the other I'd go paranoid). Possibly best to stick with the 2 changes per week, as with the 15 litre change I can quickly top the bucket up with another 4 litres, dose a small amount of Prime, then add that water to the tank.
 
I keep watching the White Cloud Mountain Minnows and have always wondered about their gills and the area around them; I'm not sure if they show any reddening or not. I've checked images online and a number do show red colouration. It's extremely difficult to tell if there is anything wrong at all. Several weeks ago I had a look with the lid off the tank and lights in the room turned on and noticed they looked quite red, but that was at a point when I was treating with Levamisole Hydrochloride for potential nematodes and had to use carbon to remove it due to the Minnows showing signs of distress. If they were affected by the medicine - which I suspect was causing hypoxia (as now and then some of them were taking sips from the top of the water, and it's a medicine which reduces oxygen content), then that wouldn't necessarily help, and I also had the lights all on so it might have been too bright and I was seeing the blood vessels inside, etc (and again, several weeks ago). Now it certainly doesn't look like that when I shine a small flashlight into the tank, or even without doing that, although it's difficult to see anyway even with the other lights on. Sometimes I've noticed at least some of the Minnows' gills going fast, but others they've been fine (doesn't really help much). I've just always wondered.
 
EDIT: Had as good a look as I can get with the lid off and lights all on. Very difficult to tell with three of them, but I've had them less time than two of the others. Of the last two, the male does appear to have quite a bit of reddening about his gill area, but he's always been very flat bellied and with clamped fins (he does eat); the female may have some additional reddening about her gills, but it's hard to tell. As for any puffy gills, I'm not sure what to look for; I could easily be looking at them from the wrong angle and seeing the normal shape of the gills.

 

[Byron]

I didn't go into the mathematics previously, but TTA has headed in that direction so I will just agree by pointing out that experiments described in articles in TFH have shown that a single larger-volume water change is much more effective than multiple smaller volume changes weekly.  The author said a 70% change once a week was the dividing line.  Now, I won't get into arguing mathematics, but unless one has a biologically-unbalanced aquarium, a 50% change once a week makes a substantial difference over two much smaller changes.
 
Second point is letting water stand out for a time.  This is unnecessary most times, as there will be no benefit but there may actually be a detriment.  "Fresh" water is just that.  Using a good water conditioner that handles the substances in the tap water (and no more, within reason) instantly makes tap water suitable for fish.  Years ago when most of us only had to worry about chlorine, we could let water sit out 24 hours and the chlorine would dissipate.  This doesn't work with chloramine which many water supplies now use.  A good conditioner will detoxify chlorine and chloramine instantly.  Detoxifying heavy metals is another facet of most of them, and while some might not need this (especially with live plants) it doesn't seem to hurt.  I've only come across one or two conditioners that do not detoxify metals, and both add other stuff like aloe vera that is far worse in my view.  As for ammonia, nitrite and nitrate...unless you have these in the source water to begin with, I wouldn't bother with conditioners that detoxify them.  The bacteria and plants will handle this just fine.  My 50%+ water changes add water directly from the tap via a Python; I adjust the hot/cold to get the temp just a tad cooler (by hand), and I squirt in the conditioner as I begin to refill.  I only have chlorine, but a fairly high amount, to deal with, and this has worked for 25+ years.
 
On the gills issue...obviously inside will be red if you can see the vast number of blood vessels that weave throughout the gill filaments.  This is difficult to put into words, but I find it fairly obvious when the gills are inflamed (more red).  And substances added to the water will factor into this, as anything and everything we dump in the water is going to end up in those gill filaments and enter the bloodstream.  The more conditioner, the more chemicals entering the fish.  And all these things are not "natural," so they should be minimal and only if absolutely necessary.  I know that most manufacturers will say that overdosing their conditioner cause no harm, but I frankly do not accept this.  A fish may manage to live through all this stuff we force in, but that doesn't mean the fish is thriving, and that should be our aim.
 
Byron.

 

[Kaidonni]

I don't have any access to a python, and the taps downstairs are not designed for anything to be attached to them, so that limits me in that regard. I could dose the tank with dechlorinator directly and then add from the tap (backwards and forwards between the kitchen and living room), but dosing untreated water directly into the tank is a large departure from what I've always done, so I'm nervous about that.
 
As for the gills issue, I tried editing my last post and the edit didn't take, so I might be repeating myself below a little...
 
With the three newer Minnows, the male is quite dark and does have some red around his gills and on his body, but it's probably completely normal colouration. He has had it for a very long time, perhaps a year in April or even longer (sometimes I notice things that were probably there before, but since I worry a lot, I might pick up on things that can easily go unnoticed in a healthy fish). His mouth is very red, but from the images I've looked at, Minnows can have red mouths. The other two are female, and look normal as far as I can tell.
 
Of the older two - whom I've had for more than 2 years now - the male does appear to have quite a bit of reddening about his gill area, but he's always been very flat bellied and with clamped fins, or at least for a very long time (he does eat, although not much, but when he presents himself to the females or the other male, his fins soon flare up). He is quite light coloured, which might not entirely help. The female may have some additional reddening about her gills, but it's hard to tell. As for any puffy gills, I'm not sure what to look for; I could easily be looking at them from the wrong angle and seeing the normal shape of the gills.
 
I did once think the markings on a Clown Loach's head were white spot, when they were completely normal markings (didn't dose with anything, I took note and waited to see if it changed). Since I can be very obsessive about looking for things, I'm not always certain whether I'm looking at something that is a sign of illness or not.

 

[Byron]

On the gills, my point was just that all the Prime being added, and any other previous medications, would undoubtedly have impacted the fish, and that is done.  All you can do now in this respect are water changes using the minimal amount of conditioner.  If this were me, I would be tempted to seek out another conditioner that does what is needed for your water and stop using Prime, at least for the present.  But just getting back to the minimum basic with clean water [meaning, devoid of medications and treatments] should work.
 
Byron.

 

[Kaidonni]

I'll stick to just using the minimum amount of Prime on the replacement water. It's 0.25ml per 10 litres, so 11 litres requires 0.275ml...I can get it close to that. There are so many dechlorinators, I already abandoned Nutrafin Aqua Plus for Prime back in 2013 (might have been 2014, actually). I'll avoid dosing the tank directly, unless I aim to add untreated replacement water directly, in which case I won't bother with treating the bucket - the dosage will be matched to the 43-45L of the tank itself - Seachem advises either to dose the replacement water only if treating before adding; or if adding it untreated to the tank, the volume of the tank. The last time I dosed was Thursday when I hesitated after feeding - didn't make the same mistake last night, won't tomorrow night or any other.
 
One advantage of waiting the 24 hours being adding treated water to the tank is that if I match the dosage to the volume, most of the reducing potential of the Prime should be spent on that bucket of water. It should then be gone within the next 24 hours from the tank, or just after.
 
I did test my .5ml dosed 11 litres today...still had reducing potential after 23 hours. Not enough going on in that 11 litres to use up the Prime (found out about the false positives last year, and in a test back then, after 24 hours there weren't any further false positives, so the Prime had been used up - probably used the more correct dosage on that bucket).

 

[Byron]

I'll stick to just using the minimum amount of Prime on the replacement water. It's 0.25ml per 10 litres, so 11 litres requires 0.275ml...I can get it close to that. There are so many dechlorinators, I already abandoned Nutrafin Aqua Plus for Prime back in 2013 (might have been 2014, actually). I'll avoid dosing the tank directly, unless I aim to add untreated replacement water directly, in which case I won't bother with treating the bucket - the dosage will be matched to the 43-45L of the tank itself - Seachem advises either to dose the replacement water only if treating before adding; or if adding it untreated to the tank, the volume of the tank. The last time I dosed was Thursday when I hesitated after feeding - didn't make the same mistake last night, won't tomorrow night or any other.
 

 
Dose for the volume of water added, regardless of whether you do the pail at a time method of the straight from the tap.  I have never dosed for the tank volume in my decades of doing water changes, and I have a lot of chlorine in my tap water but have never hurt the fish.
 
I too used to use Nutrafin Aqua+, thought it pretty good, until someone advised me that it contains valerian...and I wondered as he did, what possible use for fish is valerian that depresses the nervous system and makes one drowsy?  You really have to check what is in these products.  I'm moving to API now, having been using Kordon which I would stay with except I can no longer get it in the gallon jugs which is significantly less expensive when I have so many tanks and change half the water weekly.
 

One advantage of waiting the 24 hours being adding treated water to the tank is that if I match the dosage to the volume, most of the reducing potential of the Prime should be spent on that bucket of water. It should then be gone within the next 24 hours from the tank, or just after.
 

 
Problem is, the chemical solution is still there regardless of the effectiveness.  And you're correct, Prime does become ineffective within 36-48 hours according to Seachem.
 
Byron.

 

[TwoTankAmin]

Python makes several adapters for faucets. Normally you can unscrew the strainer part of the faucet and the Python adapter screws in. But they also make an adapter for sinks that are not cooperative. I have both. I do not use a Python to vac but I use the adapter/hoses on the road so I can fill fish containers from a sink. the top one screws in and the bottom one slips over
 

 

 

[Kaidonni]

When I was mentioning about the Minnows and their gills, I forgot to mention that I'm keeping them in a tank that is 26 degrees Celsius, so it's higher than their range (which usually caps at 22 degrees Celsius from what I've read). I'll have to do something about that once the Clown Loach is rehomed (I'm getting more responses now, so I'm hopeful).

 

[Byron]

When I was mentioning about the Minnows and their gills, I forgot to mention that I'm keeping them in a tank that is 26 degrees Celsius, so it's higher than their range (which usually caps at 22 degrees Celsius from what I've read). I'll have to do something about that once the Clown Loach is rehomed (I'm getting more responses now, so I'm hopeful).

 
Higher temperatures mean fish have to respirate much faster, so this is a factor too as you say.  Good luck finding a good home for the loach, poor fellow.

 

[Kaidonni]

I decided not to leave the water for 24 hours this evening. Tomorrow I can get someone to put it for me while I'm at work, so it'll probably be standing for 7-8 hours - this would give the dechlorinator sufficient time to do it's work and for the water to warm up, but not leave it standing for overly long.