Not direct feeding, feeding a tank. When you have sufficient food source in the system through both fish and feeding. Both food and fish produce waste, and it all ends up as detritus. Many people who fail with these creatures simply do not have a large enough food source, so in that aspect you are completely correct. However the fact they feed on 'microfuana' as you put it and that im depleting is not accurate and if you think about it makes no sense considering this animal has been alive for 4 years. It does not take 4 years to starve to death. You are right that they fail in many aquariums, but do they fail in all? No?.
Nice clarification, but not the way your initial post reads in regards to "feeding." So just for clarification, you maintained this same star in your tank with weekly siphonings for that entire four year period?
In regards to the microfauna, that statement is completely accurate. If you allow the debris from your weekly siphonings to settle and looked through it closely with a microscope or even a very good magnifying glass, you are going to find all kinds of microfauna within that water; from micro brittlestars to bacteria. Those organisms live within the sandbed in the water and on the sandgrains and when you remove that water and sandgrains by siphoning you do in fact reduce or deplete the microfauna by default. I'm correct in that they fail in the
majority of aquariums, do they fail in all no. As I stated, they are always going to be exceptions to the rule, but encouraging those who do not understand how to properly maintain these animals to keep them is a huge error in my opinion. And simply saying proper feeding isn't going to cut it.
Im referring to 'properly' setup DSB's. No amount of oxygen depleted sand or microfauna will cope with the fact DSB's do not process phosphates. Also there are three layers to a deep sand bed. Aerobic, anaerobic, and anoxic. And i am referring to siphoning the Aerobic layer of the DSB.
Clarification, clarification, clarification. No were in your initial posts did you account for any of these clarifications. When posting general broadsweeping statements or threads like "siphoning your sandbed" proper clarification is needed if your intent is to educate. Someone who doesn't know any better and simply read your post and then went out and started completely vaccuming their entire DSB every week is destined for failure no?
The simple fact is, no sandbed processes phosphates, and you can't claim to be processing your sandbed clean enough on a weekly basis to remove all phosphate and yet leave enough nutrients behind to support the microfauna required to support that sand-sifting star. The two points are counter intuitive. If in fact enough phosphates (i.e. nutrients) are being left behind to support the microfauna, then there are enough phosphates being left behind to bind up in the sand and liverock.
Again, 3 zones here. Aerobic zone is the area we are siphoning. And yes a DSB is recommended to be entirely siphoned half or less at a time about 1-2 times a year. The effect is null on disturbing the life. A deep sand bed remains perfectly functional with this 'proper maintenance'.
Again, good clarification, but need for others to understand your point. However, to say that the effect is null is completely inaccurate. The fact is that siphoning of that portion of the sandbed depletes the microfauna severely and it has to reseed from the unsiphoned half of the sandbed. This is in fact why only once or twice a year siphonings are recommended no?
In regards to the three zones, can you please clarify your position on this. Anoxic by definition means without oxygen, the same as anaerobic, so I'm curious to see on what basis you are trying to seperate the oxygen depleted layer into two seperate layers.
Leaving a DSB sit is no maintenance. And siphoning the aerobic zone weekly is hardly what id recommend but the point is it still needs to be done.
True enough, however a DSB can be properly maintained without siphoning. It can be done with the regular reintroduction of the proper microfauna which burrows and tunnels its way through the DSB maintaining the functionality of the DSB by doing so. That is not maintainance free. You are quite correct in your assertion that a DSB needs to be maintained. However you are incorrect in that the only way to do so properly is by siphoning. There is always more than one way to do things properly in this hobby.
If you understand where phosphate comes from then you will understand why phosphate is not a problem with a properly maintained sand bed.
Not even the ocean is phosphate free, however we are talking about TOO MUCH phosphate, neither of which sand or live rock will produce massive amounts of. The problems is the rotting organic matter that is left to rot.
Actually some recent research would tend to disagree with you. Some studies I've seen indicate that phosphate binds into the sand and LR even with a properly maintained aquarium and sandbed. I fully understand why phosphate is not a problem with a properly maintained fully funtioning system. I believe that part of our differences here is in term of how you and I are defining maintained. You appear to be trying to assert that there is only one proper way to maintain a sandbed and I am simply disagreeing with you.
A deep sand bed is not self sufficient and it was never designed to be. It still has to be maintained like any other sand bed. The misconception is that its a sit and forget method.
To my knowledge no one who truly understands them would argue that they are self-sufficient and that they require no maintainence. Our aquariums are by definition a closed ecosystem and maintance is required on each and every type of sandbed and/or system we employ. Anyone who tries the sit and forget method with any type of SW system is doomed to eventual failure regardless of the type of sandbed or lack thereof that they employ.
Introducing an algae scrubber to fix a left alone DSB is hardly a fix. It too requires maintenance, space, money and power. The fix for a DSB involves a well maintained DSB.....there is not a need for a fix if you dont create the problem.
I never proposed any such thing. I proposed the addition of a source of algae as a solution to the removal of phosphates. Which without the actual removal of that algae from time to time is also not effective, as algae binds but does not remove phosphates. I'm not proposing a left along DSB at all, I'm simply stating that a DSB can properly be maintained without siphoning.
Could not agree more, however, BB, SSB, and DSB can and will all work with similar results with the correct maintenance.
Absolutely agree that maintenance of any system is required and that any and all of them can and will work with similar results with the correct maintenance. I was simply pointing out that one must understand the "correct" maintenance for their particular system. It is not a one-size-fits-all methodology.