Acropora Species

[sassyonmane]

Does anyone actually know what species pc rainbow, paletta pink tip and jason fox flame acro actually are? or have the species names been long forgotten.

 

[Biokabe]

PC Rainbow is a color morph of Acropora convexa. A quick Google search says that the other two haven't been definitively identified. Species identification of corals is honestly quite difficult, as I understand it, and requires either DNA analysis or skeletal examination under a microscope to really nail down. A. tenuis is a decent guess for both of them, but it's just that - a guess. People better-informed than I speculated that Fox Flame may have been A. appressa, but for hobbyist purposes it's difficult to justify the cost of a formal species designation.

 

[thamnasteroid]

Does anyone actually know what species pc rainbow, paletta pink tip and jason fox flame acro actually are? or have the species names been long forgotten.

Acros that have been in the hobby for a long time generally are not able to be IDed to the species level because of deformation.

PC Rainbow is a color morph of Acropora convexa. A quick Google search says that the other two haven't been definitively identified. Species identification of corals is honestly quite difficult, as I understand it, and requires either DNA analysis or skeletal examination under a microscope to really nail down. A. tenuis is a decent guess for both of them, but it's just that - a guess. People better-informed than I speculated that Fox Flame may have been A. appressa, but for hobbyist purposes it's difficult to justify the cost of a formal species designation.

A. convexa is millepora-like, and given PC rainbows have thick, rounded radials, they're probably not  convexa.
 Madrepora convexa Lectotype USNM 236 | Singapore | Credit: Smithsonian Collections

PC Rainbow Acro | Aquarium | Credit: @Pieces of the Ocean

As for Paletta Pink Tip, that one's also not A. tenuis given Paletta's (also) rounded radials in contrast to  tenuis's labellate, flared radials.
Paletta Pink Tip | Aquarium | Credit: @maroun.c

Madrepora tenuis Holotype USNM 259 | Fiji | Credit: Smithsonian Collections

As for Fox Flame, A. appressa is a a valid guess, but there are also other species to rule out, like  valida, nana, willisae, etc.
Fox Flame Acro | Aquarium | Credit: @Battlecorals

Heteropora appressa Type Specimen (?, catalog number unknown, possibly ZMB 878) | either unrecorded or Singapore (presumably, according to Veron (1984)) | Credit: CotW

Madrepora valida Holotype USNM 272 | Fiji | Credit: Smithsonian Collections

Acropora (Acropora) willisae Holotype MTQ G49313 | Great Barrier Reef | Credit: CotW

On the note about DNA analysis, DNA analysis is not the end-all-be-all, as molecular methods alone cannot identify a coral species. Corals thought to be of the same species but either from different localities or of slightly differing morphology will often produce differing DNA results with genetic analysis. This is because many of what are thought to be distinct species are actually cryptic species complexes which need detangling. Modern coral taxonomists have to use not just use DNA analysis, but also compare with type specimens and original descriptions, and collect from type localities whenever possible to produce topotypes which most closely match the studied species for molecular sampling whenever possible.

 

[sassyonmane]

Acros that have been in the hobby for a long time generally are not able to be IDed to the species level because of deformation.


A. convexa is millepora-like, and given PC rainbows have thick, rounded radials, they're probably not  convexa.
 Madrepora convexa Lectotype USNM 236 | Singapore | Credit: Smithsonian Collections

PC Rainbow Acro | Aquarium | Credit: @Pieces of the Ocean

As for Paletta Pink Tip, that one's also not A. tenuis given Paletta's (also) rounded radials in contrast to  tenuis's labellate, flared radials.
Paletta Pink Tip | Aquarium | Credit: @maroun.c

Madrepora tenuis Holotype USNM 259 | Fiji | Credit: Smithsonian Collections

As for Fox Flame, A. appressa is a a valid guess, but there are also other species to rule out, like  valida, nana, willisae, etc.
Fox Flame Acro | Aquarium | Credit: @Battlecorals

Heteropora appressa Type Specimen (?, catalog number unknown, possibly ZMB 878) | either unrecorded or Singapore (presumably, according to Veron (1984)) | Credit: CotW

Madrepora valida Holotype USNM 272 | Fiji | Credit: Smithsonian Collections

Acropora (Acropora) willisae Holotype MTQ G49313 | Great Barrier Reef | Credit: CotW

On the note about DNA analysis, DNA analysis is not the end-all-be-all, as molecular methods alone cannot identify a coral species. Corals thought to be of the same species but either from different localities or of slightly differing morphology will often produce differing DNA results with genetic analysis. This is because many of what are thought to be distinct species are actually cryptic species complexes which need detangling. Modern coral taxonomists have to use not just use DNA analysis, but also compare with type specimens and original descriptions, and collect from type localities whenever possible to produce topotypes which most closely match the studied species for molecular sampling whenever possible.

What do you mean by deformation though, do corals overtime in captivity get deformed in the physical sense? or in the sense of different tank conditions will produce different growth patterns

 

[thamnasteroid]

Acros that have been in the hobby for a long time generally are not able to be IDed to the species level because of deformation.


A. convexa is millepora-like, and given PC rainbows have thick, rounded radials, they're probably not  convexa.
 Madrepora convexa Lectotype USNM 236 | Singapore | Credit: Smithsonian Collections

PC Rainbow Acro | Aquarium | Credit: @Pieces of the Ocean

As for Paletta Pink Tip, that one's also not A. tenuis given Paletta's (also) rounded radials in contrast to  tenuis's labellate, flared radials.
Paletta Pink Tip | Aquarium | Credit: @maroun.c

Madrepora tenuis Holotype USNM 259 | Fiji | Credit: Smithsonian Collections

As for Fox Flame, A. appressa is a a valid guess, but there are also other species to rule out, like  valida, nana, willisae, etc.
Fox Flame Acro | Aquarium | Credit: @Battlecorals

Heteropora appressa Type Specimen (?, catalog number unknown, possibly ZMB 878) | either unrecorded or Singapore (presumably, according to Veron (1984)) | Credit: CotW

Madrepora valida Holotype USNM 272 | Fiji | Credit: Smithsonian Collections

Acropora (Acropora) willisae Holotype MTQ G49313 | Great Barrier Reef | Credit: CotW

On the note about DNA analysis, DNA analysis is not the end-all-be-all, as molecular methods alone cannot identify a coral species. Corals thought to be of the same species but either from different localities or of slightly differing morphology will often produce differing DNA results with genetic analysis. This is because many of what are thought to be distinct species are actually cryptic species complexes which need detangling. Modern coral taxonomists have to use not just use DNA analysis, but also compare with type specimens and original descriptions, and collect from type localities whenever possible to produce topotypes which most closely match the studied species for molecular sampling whenever possible.

What do you mean by deformation though, do corals overtime in captivity get deformed in the physical sense? or in the sense of different tank conditions will produce different growth patterns

Corals tend to become deformed overtime in aquariums for reasons beyond our knowledge or control. By deformation I mean morphologically "softening": corals tend to lose corallite definition as flesh/polyps inflate/extend more. In Acropora this is expressed by more rounded thecae and irregular branching/growth form.

 

[djf91]

Corals tend to become deformed overtime in aquariums for reasons beyond our knowledge or control. By deformation I mean morphologically "softening": corals tend to lose corallite definition as flesh/polyps inflate/extend more. In Acropora this is expressed by more rounded thecae and irregular branching/growth form.

You especially see this in systems with low intensity lighting, overly blue lighting, low flow. Any environment drastically different from their natural environment.

 

[Biokabe]

Acros that have been in the hobby for a long time generally are not able to be IDed to the species level because of deformation.


A. convexa is millepora-like, and given PC rainbows have thick, rounded radials, they're probably not  convexa.
 Madrepora convexa Lectotype USNM 236 | Singapore | Credit: Smithsonian Collections

PC Rainbow Acro | Aquarium | Credit: @Pieces of the Ocean

As for Paletta Pink Tip, that one's also not A. tenuis given Paletta's (also) rounded radials in contrast to  tenuis's labellate, flared radials.
Paletta Pink Tip | Aquarium | Credit: @maroun.c

Madrepora tenuis Holotype USNM 259 | Fiji | Credit: Smithsonian Collections

As for Fox Flame, A. appressa is a a valid guess, but there are also other species to rule out, like  valida, nana, willisae, etc.
Fox Flame Acro | Aquarium | Credit: @Battlecorals

Heteropora appressa Type Specimen (?, catalog number unknown, possibly ZMB 878) | either unrecorded or Singapore (presumably, according to Veron (1984)) | Credit: CotW

Madrepora valida Holotype USNM 272 | Fiji | Credit: Smithsonian Collections

Acropora (Acropora) willisae Holotype MTQ G49313 | Great Barrier Reef | Credit: CotW

On the note about DNA analysis, DNA analysis is not the end-all-be-all, as molecular methods alone cannot identify a coral species. Corals thought to be of the same species but either from different localities or of slightly differing morphology will often produce differing DNA results with genetic analysis. This is because many of what are thought to be distinct species are actually cryptic species complexes which need detangling. Modern coral taxonomists have to use not just use DNA analysis, but also compare with type specimens and original descriptions, and collect from type localities whenever possible to produce topotypes which most closely match the studied species for molecular sampling whenever possible.

Appreciate the in-depth explanation, just further serving to illustrate why species identification is tough, especially for hobbyist corals. I'm not surprised I was likely wrong on my assertions.