Is Micromussa still amakukensis?

[grisha]

Ok I was out of loop since 2012 but now trying to put my pieces together.
I found acanlords got reclassified in to micromussa lordwensis. How did it happen?
And most importantly, is micromussa amak, still a different coral or it’s all the same now.
please help me to get in the same page with this
Regards

 

[AcroNem]

I haven't seen anything about revising the species, or that it has been placed under a different Genus. I believe it is still the same. You can find a good amount of the revisions in this paper

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...Vaw3qIoBF2yNRQ3IszJDG3s7S&cshid=1583207776889

[/URL]

 

[AcroNem]

Guess that link doesn't work. It is titled "recent changes in Scleractinian nomenclature" M. Pichon

 

[grisha]

Thank you for reply.
do you follow what is general hobbyists understanding?
Do I get it right acans=Micromussa lordwensis, micros=micromussa amakukensis

 

[AcroNem]

Yes, A. lordhowensis is now M. lordhowensis and
M. amakukensis is still accepted, as far as I know.

And I'm not sure I understand your other question, I do not generally follow what is understood by hobbyists, the "hobby science" that is spread around is full of misinformation.

 

[grisha]

ACRO, thank you for helping.
To be completely clear:
there are species M. Lordwensis
And different species M. Amakukensis

 

[AcroNem]

Same Genus, different species.

 

[grisha]

Got it
Like H. s. sapiens and H. s. neanderthalensis
Learning something here

 

[AcroNem]

There are definitely a lot of the Genera and species changes still missing from this page, but overall it can help a bit

http://www.coralsoftheworld.org/species_factsheets/

 

[grisha]

This is the best pages by far... all laid out nicely and very clear now

WoRMS - World Register of Marine Species - Micromussa Veron, 2000

www.marinespecies.org

 

[AcroNem]

Yes, it's very helpful when learning, but make sure whichever Genus or species you're looking at has not been revised. Some off the top of my head are

-Scolymia australis is now Homophyllia australis (Scolymia vitiensis is still Scolymia)

-Acanthastrea bowerbanki is now Homophyllia bowerbanki

-Euphylliids except for torch corals (Euphyllia glabrescens, and E. paraglabrescens) are now in the revived Genus Fimbriaphyllia

-Symphyllia wilsoni is now Australophyllia wilsoni

-Trachyphyllia geoffroyi and Wellsophyllia radiata are separate species (again)

Acanthophyllia deshayesiana still exists as a species, not sure why they didn't revise it into the genus Cynarina. And the genus Blastomussa has been marked as "uncertain placement" which is a sort of limbo where it half exists until minds are made up.

I'm missing some I just can't remember them all, I wish I was that good. Anyway, happy reefing! Shoot me a PM if you need anything

 

[grisha]

dang, do they need help there or something? Where do those grant money go?
I bet you those marine biologist still working out differences between cyan and dinos in those labs

 

[AcroNem]

A lot of these changes came from soft tissue analysis. Most stony corals had basically been categorized off of Morphological differences or that they "looked like this or that genus/species" but new tests shook everything up.

 

[grisha]

Few years back what blew my mind is :
chat is coral really? Animal or plant? when i realized there is a photosynthetic proto algae working inside sps polyp creating calcified tissue...
But by my, im not in the planting hobby, Im in livestock keeping hobby!!!

 

[AcroNem]

Yes. Coral polyps are animals, so many of them are large colonies of animals. Many of them harbor Zooxanthellae and rely on them for a majority of their energy, yet for as many of those species there are azooxanthellate species. Non photosynthetic. I've spent a lot of time studying and working with non photosynthetic corals and filter feeding invertebrates, figuring out their diets and feeding methods etc. They're fascinating