Is this a scolymia? Cynarnia?

[Reefer08]

What kind of coral is this?? Is it a scolymia? Maybe Indo Scolymia?? Some help please thanks..

http://i306.photobucket.com/albums/n...g?t=1210393436

[seapug]

It's a Cynarina deshayesiana. Often mislabeled/ID'd as a Scolymia.

[Reefer08]

Is it rare?

[Peter Eichler]

Originally posted by Reefer08
Is it rare?

Not really, but perhaps a little less common than many corals.

[tmz]

It's a Scolymia.often mislabled as a Cynarina. According to Vernon "Corals of the World" there is only one species of Cynarina and that is the Lacrymalis. Foster and Smith Live Aquaria list this coral often as a Cynarina Deshayesiana. I'll go with Vernon until I see a reason not to.

It is commonly called a modern or meat coral. It is not rare but pricey depending on color.

[skey44]

you pay for the color and collection locale of these... or both

[Hormigaquatica]

Originally posted by tmz
[B]It's a Scolymia.often mislabled as a Cynarina. According to Vernon "Corals of the World" there is only one species of Cynarina and that is the Lacrymalis. Foster and Smith Live Aquaria list this coral often as a Cynarina Deshayesiana. I'll go with Vernon until I see a reason not to.
/B]

This argument has come up over and over on this website actually. The coral is Not a Scolymia; the skeletal structure is quite different. If you dont want to call it Cynarina deshayesiana (since Veron's book didnt recognize that species) then you can call it Acanthophyllia deshayesiana- its old name. The only thing with that is that Acanthophyllia is often viewed as a synonym for Cynarina- which means its actually Cynarina deshayesiana.

[McCrary]

I love this site; I'm always learning something new.

[tmz]

Originally posted by Hormigaquatica
This argument has come up over and over on this website actually. The coral is Not a Scolymia; the skeletal structure is quite different. If you dont want to call it Cynarina deshayesiana (since Veron's book didnt recognize that species) then you can call it Acanthophyllia deshayesiana- its old name. The only thing with that is that Acanthophyllia is often viewed as a synonym for Cynarina- which means its actually Cynarina deshayesiana.

To be more precise, the genus named Acanthrophyllia( in 1850) has only one species,Acanthrophyllia deshayesianna. It is Acanthrophyllia deshayesianna that is synonomous with Cynarina lacrymalis not just the the first names. There is no Cynarina deshayesiana,according to Vernon. When you say Cynarina deshayesianna, all you are doing is using part of the modern taxonomic reference and part of the 1850s reference for a Cynarina lacrymalis.

Of the three major Soclymia species cubensis,vitiensis and australlis, I think Scolymia australis is an apt description of this coral.

[Hormigaquatica]

Its a reasonable argument, but its not the only argument out there. If you go by Sprung (2000) as opposed to Veron, for example, neither Acanthophyllia nor Indophyllia are valid genera, and their species are actually members of Cynarina (he also argues that C. deshayesiana merits distinction from C. lacrymalis). Which means that it wouldnt be a monotypic genus as Veron says, but instead would consist of C. lacrymalis, C. deshayesiana, C. macassarensis.

[seapug]

Bottom line is it is NOT a Scolymia. If Veron is your Bible, then recognize that Veron never called them that. He called them Cynarina lacrymalis, but anyone with eyeballs can recognize the obvious differences.

Every book and article published since 2000 that mentions these corals has referred to them as Cynarina deshayesiana. The fact that Veron hasn't gotten around to correcting his "lumping" of all these corals into one species, C. lacrymalis, does not mean the new name is not valid. If you want to learn a little more about this topic and update your taxonomy knowledge to something of this decade, read this article:

http://www.advancedaquarist.com/issu...003/invert.htm

[seapug]

Cynarina (=Acanthophyllia) deshayesiana

Although Acanthophyllia deshayesiana is supposed to be a synonym of Cynarina lacrymalis, (Veron, 2000), it differs from the former in several respects that contradict the definition of Cynarina lacrymalis. One difference is the appearance of the polyps. In Acanthophyllia deshayesiana the polyps are not translucent, but completely opaque. The thickness of the tissue is also greater than in C. lacrymalis, so that it has a texture like Lobophyllia spp. or Solymia australis. Polyp expansion, however, is the same as for Cynarina lacrymalis. Coloration matches the range and appearance for Scolymia australis, and as a result this coral is commonly mis-identified as Scolymia sp. The expansion of the tissue in Scolymia australis, however, does not achieve the dramatic proportions of Acanthophyllia deshayesiana or Cynarina lacrymalis. The polyp of Acanthophyllia deshayesiana also does not form the vesicles typical in Cynarina lacrymalis. Another difference is the size of the corallum. Although in some regions there does not appear to be a difference in the size of the corallum, in Indonesia the corallum of Acanthophyllia deshayesiana can be at least twice as large as that of Cynarina lacrymalis, to 6 inches in diameter (Sprung, 2000). Still another difference is the appearance of the primary septo-costae. In small and medium sized Acanthophyllia deshayesiana they are not thickened like dog teeth, but in the largest specimens they can be somewhat thickened (though still flatter than in typical C. lacrymalis). Also, the sharp dentations on the septo-costae are typically taller than in C. lacrymalis. Another skeletal difference exists. In Acanthophyllia deshayesiana the formation of a distinct crown of paliform lobes in the center of the polyp is nearly absent, though some of the septa may have a pallus lobe (Sprung, 2000). Although I have not had the opportunity to view large numbers of polyps and skeletons from Japan and the Red Sea, the specimens I saw when I visited these two regions appeared to have one form of skeleton (like A. deshayesiana but only achieving the size of C. lacrymalis) and two forms of polyps (like both Cynarina lacrymalis and Acanthophyllia deshayesiana). The giant corallum forms I have only seen from Indonesia. I must point out that the "Cynarina lacrymalis" skeleton on page 83 in Veron (2000) and the skeletons shown in figure 8(a-c) in Borel Best and Hoeksema (1987), that originate from Komodo, Indonesia, are typical of the deshayesiana form, not the lacrymalis form. The most complete illustration of the different forms is in Sprung (2000).

[tmz]

Well I have eyeballs and do read currently that is in this decade. You should change your avatar to Sea smug. You must enjoy trying to insult those who don't blindly agree with your statements.. You ought to work on that.Don't worry ,I'm not insulted,I've considered the source.
It's still not a Cynarina by any stretch. The fact that Sprung for whom I have great respect proposed it's inclusion doesn't make it so. So call it an Acanthophylia deshayesiana,or a Cynarina lacrymalis variant or even a Scolynmia if you wish.

By the way your last post fails to note that the text is from Sprung and not Sea smug err I mean pug.

[Anemone]

Here at Reef Central, we believe that dialogs between participants should be conducted in a friendly and helpful manner. If you disagree with a posting, please express yourself in a way that is conducive to further constructive dialog. Conversely, when you post on any given subject, you must be willing to accept constructive criticism without posting a hostile or inflammatory response. Personal attacks of any kind will not be tolerated. Please work to insure that Reef Central remains a friendly and flame free site where everyone, especially newcomers, can feel free to post questions without fear of being unfairly criticized. Thank you for your cooperation.

Or else.

Kevin

[tmz]

Just a final note, I don't know what all these books are reading.

On pg 278, of Aquarium Corals,selection ,husbandry and natural history,(c 2001) Eric Borneman offers photos of this particular coral and identifies it as a Scolymia. Guess he has no eyeballs either.

Sprung in "Corals, a quick reference guide"(1999) does identify it as a Cynarina but carefully couches his description by noting that three distnct forms are PROBABLY three separate species.

In the Reef Aquarium Vol 1 ,(1994)Sprung depictis it as an unidentified coral,PROBABLY a Cynarina sp.

As noted Vernon in Corals the World notes there is only one species of Cynarina and tha is Lacrymalis.

So please tell us the names of all of these books you have read Sea Pug which identify a taxononmic reference to this coral as a Cynarina deshayesiana.

[Anemone]

Originally posted by tmz
So please tell us the names of all of these books you have read Sea Pug which identify a taxononmic reference to this coral as a Cynarina deshayesiana.

I think several people with a good deal of knowledge have already delved into the classification history and issues with this particular coral. Certainly enough so that educated hobbyists can form their own opinion, without the need to continue the hostilities.

But, since some people can't play nice, thread closed.

Kevin