Starfish ID (species level please)

[Eagle_Steve]

Well I am spending way more time trying to explain your error to you than I should...you don't think it's important to avoid false information on a major forum like R2R? I just think you made a mistake and was pointing it out but you continued to deny the mistake so I tried to keep explaining.

I look at it this way.

Science sucks. I feel the same way with anemones. Way too many grouped together that shouldn't be. As a whole, we could call cows omnivores. I have cattle and know for a fact they eat "meat" in the way of bugs, baby field mice, etc. when eating grass. This is just a coincidence. But it does not make them omnivores. Nor should it.

Back to starfish. I have had a chocolate chip star for 6 years that lives in a sump, eats only alage on the sides of the sump and off the rocks. I can place a piece of shrimp in there, coral frags in there and it will never touch either. The sump is 200 gallons and has a ton of algae all over it. I think it just eats that, as that is what it wants. Yet my general star will eat corals, shrimp and algae. I know these are not linkia, but is one data point that debunks "chocolate chips are coral eaters". While only one star, it did eat corals in the tank it came from. This is why it was rehomed. No algae was present in that tank, so I assume it ate the corals for the nutrition from the algae inside the coral.

Back to science sucks. I do get a clumping, as not enough funds to go around to really get into studying these things and putting them where they need to go in classifications. With that said, I still think it sucks and by not having things in the correct classification, it can really jack things up when it comes to these critters.

 

[livinlifeinBKK]

I look at it this way.

Science sucks. I feel the same way with anemones. Way too many grouped together that shouldn't be. As a whole, we could call cows omnivores. I have cattle and know for a fact they eat "meat" in the way of bugs, baby field mice, etc. when eating grass. This is just a coincidence. But it does not make them omnivores. Nor should it.

Back to starfish. I have had a chocolate chip star for 6 years that lives in a sump, eats only alage on the sides of the sump and off the rocks. I can place a piece of shrimp in there, coral frags in there and it will never touch either. The sump is 200 gallons and has a ton of algae all over it. I think it just eats that, as that is what it wants. Yet my general star will eat corals, shrimp and algae. I know these are not linkia, but is one data point that debunks "chocolate chips are coral eaters". While only one star, it did eat corals in the tank it came from. This is why it was rehomed. No algae was present in that tank, so I assume it ate the corals for the nutrition from the algae inside the coral.

Back to science sucks. I do get a clumping, as not enough funds to go around to really get into studying these things and putting them where they need to go in classifications. With that said, I still think it sucks and by not having things in the correct classification, it can really jack things up when it comes to these critters.

I didn't see any error in that post beyond the fact that her sources also mentioned that while some might eat meiofauna, others definitely do eat meiofauna and biofilm which isn't exactly purely herbivorous. I just felt that the way it was written and defended against differring opinions sounded a little like it was coming straight from an experts mouth instead of someone who read the information. After that there were some false claims and generalizations made which were a little misleading to say the least.
We know very little about a majority of these creatures so I feel one should share any information they feel is relevant but basically claiming 100% accuracy should come with a mention at the beginning that "this is my understanding and here's my evidence to support my belief" not a definitive statement written as a pure undisputed fact, especially when dealing with organisms like these .

 

[AydenLincoln]

Science sucks. I feel the same way with anemones. Way too many grouped together that shouldn't be. As a whole, we could call cows omnivores. I have cattle and know for a fact they eat "meat" in the way of bugs, baby field mice, etc. when eating grass. This is just a coincidence. But it does not make them omnivores. Nor should it.

Back to starfish. I have had a chocolate chip star for 6 years that lives in a sump, eats only alage on the sides of the sump and off the rocks. I can place a piece of shrimp in there, coral frags in there and it will never touch either. The sump is 200 gallons and has a ton of algae all over it. I think it just eats that, as that is what it wants. Yet my general star will eat corals, shrimp and algae. I know these are not linkia, but is one data point that debunks "chocolate chips are coral eaters". While only one star, it did eat corals in the tank it came from. This is why it was rehomed. No algae was present in that tank, so I assume it ate the corals for the nutrition from the algae inside the coral.

Back to science sucks. I do get a clumping, as not enough funds to go around to really get into studying these things and putting them where they need to go in classifications. With that said, I still think it sucks and by not having things in the correct classification, it can really jack things up when it comes to these critters.

200 gallons? How big is your tank?

 

[livinlifeinBKK]

Fair enough?

 

[Eagle_Steve]

200 gallons? How big is your tank?

One is 500, one is 180, one is 29 lol. I took down the 400 or so dual tank system. The 200g sump is for the 500 and is where I also grow macros for sale locally.

 

[livinlifeinBKK]

I'm really exciyted get all 3 of my star species tomorrow!

 

[ISpeakForTheSeas]

Science sucks. I feel the same way with anemones. Way too many grouped together that shouldn't be. As a whole, we could call cows omnivores. I have cattle and know for a fact they eat "meat" in the way of bugs, baby field mice, etc. when eating grass. This is just a coincidence. But it does not make them omnivores. Nor should it.

Yeah, this is what I was trying to get at last night.

If the cows ate a substantial amount of meat (say, if +20% of their diet was meat, for example), or if they needed the meat to survive, or if they intentionally sought out the meat to eat whenever it was available (which would likely lead to them at least occasionally eating a substantial amount of it), then they would likely rightfully be considered omnivores. As they don't eat a substantial amount of meat, they don't need the meat to survive, and they don't intentionally seek out the meat, while they might still technically be able to be considered omnivores, they're definitely herbivores (hence my use of "more correct" above).

With the CC Stars, I don't think they need the meat to survive, but if they eat a substantial amount of meat (meiofauna, in their case) and/or intentionally seek out the meat, the term omnivore may be more correct to use when addressing them than the term herbivore. As they definitely benefit from the consumption of meiofauna, I am currently inclined to think they may intentionally eat the meiofauna in what they at least consider to be substantial amounts (given that there are observable health benefits from this consumption, I am inclined to believe it may be in amounts we would consider substantial as well, but I don't know for sure). For this reason, though, I'm currently more inclined to label them omnivores than herbivores, but I may be wrong.

Regardless, I agree with the first sentence I quoted from you. There's some subjectivity to sciences like biology that allow for discussions like this to take place and which can sometimes muddy the waters informationally.

 

[livinlifeinBKK]

Yeah, this is what I was trying to get at last night.

If the cows ate a substantial amount of meat (say, if +20% of their diet was meat, for example), or if they needed the meat to survive, or if they intentionally sought out the meat to eat whenever it was available (which would likely lead to them at least occasionally eating a substantial amount of it), then they would likely rightfully be considered omnivores. As they don't eat a substantial amount of meat, they don't need the meat to survive, and they don't intentionally seek out the meat, while they might still technically be able to be considered omnivores, they're definitely herbivores (hence my use of "more correct" above).

With the CC Stars, I don't think they need the meat to survive, but if they eat a substantial amount of meat (meiofauna, in their case) and/or intentionally seek out the meat, the term omnivore may be more correct to use when addressing them than the term herbivore. As they definitely benefit from the consumption of meiofauna, I am currently inclined to think they may intentionally eat the meiofauna in what they at least consider to be substantial amounts (given that there are observable health benefits from this consumption, I am inclined to believe it may be in amounts we would consider substantial as well, but I don't know for sure). For this reason, though, I'm currently more inclined to label them omnivores than herbivores, but I may be wrong.

Regardless, I agree with the first sentence I quoted from you. There's some subjectivity to sciences like biology that allow for discussions like this to take place and which can sometimes muddy the waters informationally.

I like that we can have a discussion about it as well.

 

[Eagle_Steve]

Yeah, this is what I was trying to get at last night.

If the cows ate a substantial amount of meat (say, if +20% of their diet was meat, for example), or if they needed the meat to survive, or if they intentionally sought out the meat to eat whenever it was available (which would likely lead to them at least occasionally eating a substantial amount of it), then they would likely rightfully be considered omnivores. As they don't eat a substantial amount of meat, they don't need the meat to survive, and they don't intentionally seek out the meat, while they might still technically be able to be considered omnivores, they're definitely herbivores (hence my use of "more correct" above).

With the CC Stars, I don't think they need the meat to survive, but if they eat a substantial amount of meat (meiofauna, in their case) and/or intentionally seek out the meat, the term omnivore may be more correct to use when addressing them than the term herbivore. As they definitely benefit from the consumption of meiofauna, I am currently inclined to think they may intentionally eat the meiofauna in what they at least consider to be substantial amounts (given that there are observable health benefits from this consumption, I am inclined to believe it may be in amounts we would consider substantial as well, but I don't know for sure). For this reason, though, I'm currently more inclined to label them omnivores than herbivores, but I may be wrong.

Regardless, I agree with the first sentence I quoted from you. There's some subjectivity to sciences like biology that allow for discussions like this to take place and which can sometimes muddy the waters informationally.

Well said and if you think about it, if something eats alage, I bet pods, feather duster and all other sorts of critters is consumed. This could be in an amount that would classify a critter as an omnivore, since consumption is inevitable and the reason the go after specific algae. Sadly, without much research being done, this will be like a tootsie pop and how many licks it takes to get to the center.

 

[Lost in the Sauce]

But but but..... I talked to a Marine Biologist once....

 

[livinlifeinBKK]

Well said and if you think about it, if something eats alage, I bet pods, feather duster and all other sorts of critters is consumed. This could be in an amount that would classify a critter as an omnivore, since consumption is inevitable and the reason the go after specific algae. Sadly, without much research being done, this will be like a tootsie pop and how many licks it takes to get to the center.

Well, science has never been and will never be "perfect" we can only improve and become increasingly accurate

 

[livinlifeinBKK]

But but but..... I talked to a Marine Biologist once....

Research is an art in itself...it actually can be MUCH more productive and you can learn with a lot more accuracy if you know how to go about researching... especially in scientific fields...I wouldnt make my first step contacting someone. I'd be well versed on the topic beforehand.

 

[Lost in the Sauce]

Research is an art in itself...it actually can be MUCH more productive and you can learn with a lot more accuracy if you know how to go about researching... especially in scientific fields...I wouldnt make my first step contacting someone. I'd be well versed on the topic beforehand.

Absolutely! And You're actually doing it Right!

 

[Eagle_Steve]

Well, science has never been and will never be "perfect" we can only improve and become increasingly accurate

This is correct. This is also why no one should ever claim 100% accuracy 99.9% of the time. In lab conditions, there are many variables and peer reviews may have different variables.

End of day, I think what you are doing with starfish is commendable. So many times they die due to lack of "something" and having a 10 year old linkia in a mixed reef would be awesome.

As discussed previously, just keep doing what you are doing, note everything and present what you find. From there, it can be looked at, improved upon if needed and possibly replicated.

 

[livinlifeinBKK]

This is correct. This is also why no one should ever claim 100% accuracy 99.9% of the time. In lab conditions, there are many variables and peer reviews may have different variables.

End of day, I think what you are doing with starfish is commendable. So many times they die due to lack of "something" and having a 10 year old linkia in a mixed reef would be awesome.

As discussed previously, just keep doing what you are doing, note everything and present what you find. From there, it can be looked at, improved upon if needed and possibly replicated.

I plan to record everything minutely noteworthy

 

[livinlifeinBKK]

Did I tell you guys the species I'm using?

 

[livinlifeinBKK]

SPECIES:
Fromia indica (Thai Native)
Fromia hemiopla (Thai Native)
Fromia pacifica (Indo-Pacific Native)

 

[A Young Reefer]

This was a fun read, can’t wait to see your specimens!

 

[livinlifeinBKK]

This was a fun read, can’t wait to see your specimens

Glad you enjoyed reading it over! I'll be getting the stars today...idk what time it'll be where you are so message me anytime after like 8 hours from now and I'll have em!

 

[A Young Reefer]

Did you get them?