Is this "true blue xenia"?

[Fragguy]

Justin,

What Atlantis sells is Cespitularia which is non pulsing (like you said).
It is easy to tell the two apart, Cespitularia braches and this Xenia does not. This is a picture of my Cespitularia: http://www.thecoralnursery.com/newsite/ ... ia_md2.JPG

Adam,

I tried to find siphonozoids but didn't have any luck. They are reported to show up in more mature individuals and possibly seasonal so the lack of them is not conclusive. In either case neither Xenia or Heteroxenia are branching so that is not a determening factor between the two.

I am leaning towards a morph of X. umbellata which I find it most closely resembles in physical appearance (minus the color difference).

Rafael

 

[Adam1]

Rafael,

I tried to find siphonozoids but didn't have any luck. They are reported to show up in more mature individuals and possibly seasonal so the lack of them is not conclusive.

Agreed. Also, subjectively, the few confirmed Heteroxenia specimens that I have seen had relatively sparse polyps compared to most xenia.

In either case neither Xenia or Heteroxenia are branching so that is not a determening factor between the two.

Hmm... maybe an issue of semantics. I guess that you could say that xenia that appears to be branching (as it often does) is all destined to completely divide, so is not truly branching. I also have colonies of Cespitularia and agree that the branching it exhibits is quite distinctive from the "multi-stalked" appearance of xenia that might be described as "branching". I am not sure what strict criteria (if any) constitutes a "branch".

A Heteroxenia (I confirmed siphonozoids myself) owner I chatted with said that his colonies never divided that way. They budded daughters from the base. Sadly, they wiped out their colonies before I could buy one

Adam

 

[Fragguy]

Hmm... maybe an issue of semantics. I guess that you could say that xenia that appears to be branching (as it often does) is all destined to completely divide, so is not truly branching. I also have colonies of Cespitularia and agree that the branching it exhibits is quite distinctive from the "multi-stalked" appearance of xenia that might be described as "branching". I am not sure what strict criteria (if any) constitutes a "branch".

I call that spliting/division not branching. There is a clear difference between the branching found in Cespitularia and that of X. umbellata or elongata. The branching in Xenias sooner or later pretty much all ends in a split down to the base, and then there are two.

Rafael

 

[Fragguy]

As if this isn't confusing enough. Here is different blue/green, I belive Anthelia/Sansibia since there is no stalk to be found that I was fortunate enough to acquire. I think this is closer in species to what Tommy has.

The first picture is under cloudy 100% natural light. The second (bluer) picture is under one 250w 10k no actinic suplementation bulb.

 

[Adam1]

Rafael and all,

I call that spliting/division not branching. There is a clear difference between the branching found in Cespitularia and that of X. umbellata or elongata. The branching in Xenias sooner or later pretty much all ends in a split down to the base, and then there are two.

OK. I can't really argue.... I pretty much already conceded that point. :wink:

That said... field observers don't have the benefit of the kind of long term, daily observation of individual corals like we do, and Fabricius and Alderslade use the descriptor "sometimes branching" for xenia. The fact that Heteroxenia is described as "non branching" tells me that wild colonies are never observed in a state of fission (whether or not you agree that it is proper to refer to this as branching).

So, seeing colonies in this state of fission (or branching if you please) may be at least be one piece of strong evidence against and ID of Heteroxenia.

Please also realize that I am not arguing to be obnoxious. I am interested in soft coral ID and how people understand it, so I enjoy these discussions immensely.

Adam

 

[Adam1]

Hi all,

Another interesting point... Dr. Cathy McFadden has accepted our invitation to speak at MACNA next year. Her DNA research on soft coral taxonomy is throwing most of what we think we know about the topic into total disarray. Her talk alone will be worth the trip IMO!

Adam

 

[Fragguy]

That said... field observers don't have the benefit of the kind of long term, daily observation of individual corals like we do, and Fabricius and Alderslade use the descriptor "sometimes branching" for xenia. The fact that Heteroxenia is described as "non branching" tells me that wild colonies are never observed in a state of fission (whether or not you agree that it is proper to refer to this as branching).

I agree. Hobbyists have spent many more hours as a collective group than scientist could ever do in the field and we could definitely contribute to the puzzle.

It is also very possible that the rate of Xenia splitting is so much more frequent that it is easily encountered in the wild, while heteroxenia by their nature might split much less frequent and therefore that state may possibly be missed.

I don't see any arguing here, these discussions stimulate new ideas and thoughts that might not occur otherwise.

Already signed up for MACNA so I will watch for her presentation.

Thanks.

 

[Anonymous]

Hi all,

Another interesting point... Dr. Cathy McFadden has accepted our invitation to speak at MACNA next year. Her DNA research on soft coral taxonomy is throwing most of what we think we know about the topic into total disarray. Her talk alone will be worth the trip IMO!

Adam

I was all ready going (as a vendor), but that's just more of a reason