What can it attached too? No hard surfaces. In theory it could be in the water the anemone takes up, but ich in its free swimming stage cannot live long. I’d still qt a nem to be safe but no where near the 11 week fallow tank period of hard shelled inverts or corals.
Yeah I pretty much agree that it's a lower-risk prospect of getting ich from a RBTA than a fish that has been quarantined for less than 11 weeks, but that is far from foolproof. The OP is clearly new to QT, so we need to be careful with our language.
I said the only
foolproof method is to QT fishless for ~11 weeks. Is it overkill? Maybe. But I said
foolproof. You made a definitive statement that RBTAs do not need 11 weeks of QT in response to my statement - which is not true unless there is new scientific evidence I am unaware of. I am open to the possibility there is new evidence.
"Ich in its free swimming stage cannot live long."
This is true only after the tomites have hatched. If we are talking about a trophont dropping off a fish (into the water) and moving to protomont, then tomont, then tomite, we are talking 72 days based on the most recent scientific evidence that I am aware of.
You asked what can it (the ich) attach to?
Well, when we put the anemone in QT some of the water the anemone was in goes with it. We don't know what stage of the lifecycle the ich was in, so if there were protomonts in the water they have now gone into your QT and are adhering to any surface in the tank, where they can be dormant for up to 72 days (unless the scientific literature has been updated). Once they hatch, they have another ~ 2 days to find a host before they die. That is where the ~11 weeks number for foolproof certainty came from.
Again, I agree with you that getting ich from an RBTA is lower-risk than from a fish, but only because the RBTA cannot host the ich. Unfortunately you can't really accurately quantify the odds of success with your suggestion. The method I suggested is foolproof.
Finally, if the RBTA came from a system you were 100% certain had no fish in it for the last 11 weeks, you don't need to QT it at all - for ich at least.
There are a ton of more in-depth readings you can do on this, but this chart from Marine Depot is very helpful and accessible to beginners to this (like the OP):
https://blog.marinedepot.com/educat...cycle-diagram-cryptocaryon-irritans-treatment
So just to be clear, I agree that getting ich from an RBTA is a lower-risk (but non-quantifiable) probability than from a fish. The chances might be really low, but we just don't know.
My assertion is that my method is foolproof - again, based on the most recent research that I have seen.
I'm not trying to win a debate with you, I am just trying to give the OP the most accurate information so they can make an informed decision based on their own reward/risk analysis. There is way too much bad information and baseless assertions being made around this forum - usually to newbies that are most vulnerable to it. Again, the last sentence is not directed at you - it's more a of general observation. Look around some other recent threads
If people are successful in the hobby, they stay in the hobby. They stay engaged in conservation, reef preservation, etc. And it broadens the body of knowledge in the hobby hopefully! Something we all benefit from...
Have a good day!
