Have you guys seen one like this? - Page 2

roblack · #26 10/28/2007, 05:38 PM

In response to Underwaterparadise, I am reasonably sure it is not a litho, and I have much more faith in what Chris T at RM says than I do in most people. If you (underwater) know so much, then what is it? I wouldn't dream of conducting a skeletal analysis and harming such a beautiful coral. It could be a lepto, and while we are at it, it also looks alot like an agaricia, which is a Caribbean species. Maybe it is from another planet!? Whatever it is, I like it! But I'd bet money it is a pavona.

Underwaterparadise · #27 10/28/2007, 05:51 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by roblack
In response to Underwaterparadise, I am reasonably sure it is not a litho, and I have much more faith in what Chris T at RM says than I do in most people. If you (underwater) know so much, then what is it? I wouldn't dream of conducting a skeletal analysis and harming such a beautiful coral. It could be a lepto, and while we are at it, it also looks alot like an agaricia, which is a Caribbean species. Maybe it is from another planet!? Whatever it is, I like it! But I'd bet money it is a pavona.

My response was not personal to you so sorry if you felt that way. I am not here to argue or slander other business but I find it very funny how people are soooo positive of an ID of a certain coral but cannot name the species. Like I stated before most Pavona species are pretty different from each other so if it is indeed a pavaona, species ID shouldn't be that hard if the person is such an expert.

And I will trust Jim's (bookfish) ID over Chris since Jim has been on the reefs and collected the corals personally.

roblack · #28 10/28/2007, 06:13 PM

Thanks for your sincere communication "underwater". Just to clarify, Chris T is no longer with RM and is now in Fiji conducting surveys and collecting corals for Walt Smith, and has been doing so for some time now, even before he left RM. Just spoke with him the other day. I am convinced he is much more of an expert than you or myself. Also, when you quote someone, it is a bit personal, at least to the person you quote.

Underwaterparadise · #29 10/28/2007, 06:50 PM

Take it how ya will

Never said I was an expert. In fact I stated we need a skeleton shot to be sure. I'm out!

roblack · #30 10/29/2007, 04:37 PM

I checked it out, and that RM coral is now believed to be a Leptoseris Hawaiiensis, and it looks just like your coral.

vvolfe1 · #31 10/29/2007, 04:45 PM

Not trying to start anything but I got mine from RM too. My question is how can Leptoseris Hawaiiensis be an actual genis species? Hawaiiensis would be a discription of the local it came from not a discription of the coral. If so I thought all corals from hawii were restricted but not sure on it.

Justin74 · #32 10/29/2007, 05:02 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by vvolfe1
Not trying to start anything but I got mine from RM too. My question is how can Leptoseris Hawaiiensis be an actual genis species? Hawaiiensis would be a discription of the local it came from not a discription of the coral. If so I thought all corals from hawii were restricted but not sure on it.

Youd only be starting something possibly if you posed that question to the taxonomist who named it!

Location is often used when describing a specie, as sometimes it may be found predominantly there or is endemic of a single location making it even more worthy to carry the place from where it came. The same question can be asked of anything really, why did we decide to use the word "yellow" to describe that primary pigment which is not blue, nor red

Or Haley's Comet, named after it's founder, and so on..

When browsing through the names of species, you may notice that quite a few specie share the same name, but are only segrated and distinguished by the name of the genus they are under. Hope that helps

-Justin

roblack · #33 10/29/2007, 06:31 PM

How about acropora floridia, which is obviously not from Florida? I believe it is found in Indonesia. I would be shocked to see it while diving her in FL. Yet, its name seems to imply such.

bookfish · #34 10/30/2007, 02:17 AM

Although I do still believe that is a litho, I agree that without skeletal analysis, it's all just educated guesses. Also, I'd put a lot of weight behind any Reefer Madness ID. I often go to their site to help me ID stuff.
I think we can all agree it's a beautiful coral, obviously in excellent condition (kudos!) and worth growing out in a prime display position. -Jim

All Delight · #35 10/30/2007, 11:03 AM

It is really nice. The unique color and swirly pattern make me smile when I look at it.

I only wanted it becuase of the unique color. Everything is always red and green.

roblack · #36 11/04/2007, 01:27 AM

Just got one that looks just like it, and it is "probably" not a litho. Of course, we would have to butcher it and send it to CSI to know for sure.

Sellers told me it was Pavona Hawaiiensis, or something like that. I like lithos alot, nothing against them. Send em this way!

roblack · #37 11/04/2007, 02:04 AM

Sorry , I meant Leptoseris Hawaiiensis.

Justin74 · #38 11/04/2007, 04:24 AM

Many "sellers" out there are the ones who really get all these names cluster F'd IMO. You know, the ones a couple years ago pushing faviids as acans, and now pushing acans as Acan maxima's

As much as the shape and form on A.D's piece is debatable, the bright mouths on that piece just scream litho, sorry

-Justin

roblack · #39 11/04/2007, 01:01 PM

Bet you a dollar you are wrong.

roblack · #40 11/04/2007, 01:14 PM

I have to admit it though, you do have me wondering now. I can stand to lose a dollar.

Al G Blenny · #41 11/07/2007, 12:35 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by bookfish
Randy already correctly ID'd this coral. I've seen dozens of these corals and they don't resemble leptoseris or pavona much at all.

Randy, Jim, etc.. are right. It is most definitely Lithophyllon. If you saw these corals in person you would know that they are pretty distinct. Pics do make it hard to ID but when you see them come in to the wholesalers all the time, you get used to being able to ID something without having to point out all of the details that make it different. Lithos do puff up a bit sorta like a fungia. Pavonas and Leptos don't. You just see the tentacles. That might be one of the reasons why people call those SPS (and yes I agree that SPS and LPS are bad words because there are many shades of grey). I would have to personally put Litho in the LPS category since it is more like an Echino or Fungia than Pavona or any other SPS.

Of course there is always room to be wrong. It doesn't matter who you are. I personally think Chris from RM has some of the most accurate IDs out there but I have also disagreed with him many times and I don't think I have ever disagreed with Jim. Chris just has way too many corals to ID to be accurate every time.