exactly, the live rock is what the bugs are in. as far as sand is concerned you can't see the "microscopic" bugs in it that the gobys, or other "sand stars, ect." eat. doesent matter much anyways as a captive DSB has a very very small amount of life in terms of both density and verity when compared to a natural sand bed. but it is the microscopic stuff that the sand sifting fish/invertabrae are going after when they are eating. Of course they are going to eat mysis as thats a treat. :mrgreen: mine used to gorge them selves on mysis and then in a couple hours they were right back to sifting sand.

Steve

I couldn't agree with you more... and that is why I went barebottom. I don't want to start a debate as to which is better because it is obviously a personal choice; however, I do want to clarify my reasons for doing what I do. I personally like the look of sand better - everyone does. However, I realized that the sand in my 20gal tank does not really function like a "mini ocean floor".
When people say that BB is cleaner they don't mean Cleaner: Astetically less cluttered.
They mean Cleaner: Less place for phosphates, nitrates, and crapates to build up.
I think you raised a really good point too. If someone goes BB they need to select inhaditants that do not depend on the sandbed for food, or shelter etc. I've had awsome success with rbta (lives in rock crevice), scotts damsel (lives in water column) and brittle star (didn't sift sand even when I had aragonite).

- Chad

My goby avoided one side of my tank nearly entirely. Hence, I expect there was more sandbed diversity in that area.