Identification on Chalice - not the vendor name

[Reefing_addiction]

I would love to know which genera these chalice are. I would also like to know how to identify different chalice types or better yet the best place to find descriptions of each.

I also recently purchased this chalice- I have yet to receive it - but an ID would also be helpful. Hopefully these vendor photos will do.
@encrustingacro

 

[Tommy's Reef]

Your first 2 look to be mycedium, the 1 on the right fo sho

 

[Tommy's Reef]

And the other looks to be an echinophyllia. Buy im no expert

 

[Tommy's Reef]

You can find a bunch of different articles to help you identify from reef builders and books from libraries and so on.

 

[thamnasteroid]

1st is Mycedium robokaki, 2nd is Echinophyllia cf aspera

 

[Reefing_addiction]

1st is Mycedium robokaki, 2nd is Echinophyllia cf aspera

You are awesome


Where can I find this information or rather learn how to do this myself :)

 

[thamnasteroid]

You are awesome


Where can I find this information or rather learn how to do this myself :)

I would recommend reading the literature (original species descriptions, reclassification studies, etc).

 

[Knucker]

Honestly for me the scientific names keep changing. I just stick with the names in the hobby.

I still call a Micro Lord, an Acan Lord.

 

[Reefing_addiction]

I would recommend reading the literature (original species descriptions, reclassification studies, etc).

Is there a site or a book/journal that is better?

 

[Reefing_addiction]

Honestly for me the scientific names keep changing. I just stick with the names in the hobby.

I still call a Micro Lord, an Acan Lord.

I get that…..

What I really want to dive into are goniopora since I have amassed a small collection (around 50 I think) and there can be disagreements between sub sprecies

 

[Knucker]

I get that…..

What I really want to dive into are goniopora since I have amassed a small collection (around 50 I think) and there can be disagreements between sub sprecies

More power to you. I'm happy with just Acan Duncan GSP and so on.

 

[thamnasteroid]

Is there a site or a book/journal that is better?

No, not really. Most are either outdated or have incorrect information. Coral species are defined by their type material (usually either a skeletal specimen or an illustation), and many times in history, the concept of those species have been altered in a way that does not match the type material. In addition, many taxa are not able to be identified to the species level, either because of ambiguous type data (illustrations/original descriptions) or because the species are poorly defined.

Most would point to the CotW website, but Veron is massively unreliable when it comes to species concepts. The site is rife with misidentifications; in addition, Veron had a tendency to redefine or expand on species in a way that did not match their type material and original descriptions.

A better source is Joe Rowlett's Indo-Pacific Corals (available as a PDF for free on WoRMS), but that book is a few years outdated. What's good about this guide is that it also goes into the history of the taxa it covers. The book mostly only covers genera, and only glosses over species-level identification, though.

The best sources are the papers from the taxonomists themselves, as that is what defines the species concepts.

 

[Reefing_addiction]

No, not really. Most are either outdated or have incorrect information. Coral species are defined by their type material (usually either a skeletal specimen or an illustation), and many times in history, the concept of those species have been altered in a way that does not match the type material. In addition, many taxa are not able to be identified to the species level, either because of ambiguous type data (illustrations/original descriptions) or because the species are poorly defined.

Most would point to the CotW website, but Veron is massively unreliable when it comes to species concepts. The site is rife with misidentifications; in addition, Veron had a tendency to redefine or expand on species in a way that did not match their type material and original descriptions.

A better source is Joe Rowlett's Indo-Pacific Corals (available as a PDF for free on WoRMS), but that book is a few years outdated. What's good about this guide is that it also goes into the history of the taxa it covers. The book mostly only covers genera, and only glosses over species-level identification, though.

The best sources are the papers from the taxonomists themselves, as that is what defines the species concepts.

Thank you for that information I will grab that PDF and start hunting papers.

I found this site when searching for some I info on things. But that was while on break at work so I didn’t get far.

https://www.reeflex.net/

Truly do appreciate you taking the time to respond.

 

[thamnasteroid]

Thank you for that information I will grab that PDF and start hunting papers.

I found this site when searching for some I info on things. But that was while on break at work so I didn’t get far.

https://www.reeflex.net/

Truly do appreciate you taking the time to respond.

Reeflex has a lot of misidentifications, so I wouldn't recommend it.

 

[Reefing_addiction]

Reeflex has a lot of misidentifications, so I wouldn't recommend it.

Now i know who to go to to ask if a site is good or not!

Thanks!