A. F. Verrill — Bermudian and West Indian Reef Corals. 89' 



It may be an East Indian coral of the Flesiastrma-g?o\\\). In that 

 case Astrea, if retained, should be restricted to this, as the original 

 type, and thus it would be distinct from Favia. 



The name Favites was given by Link, 1807, to a genus nearly 

 equivalent to Astrea Lam. and Favia Oken, of which it could be con- 

 sidered a synonym. It included four genera. Vaughan (op. cit., 

 1901, p. 21) proposed to restore the name for a part (the favosa- 

 group) of Link's genus, and thus use it in place of Prionastroea. It 

 might have been substituted, equally as well, for Favia (in the 

 usual sense) for the latter was practically synonymous. But Vaughan 

 is justifiable in considering favosa=abdita as the proper type.* 



There is an additional reason why Astrea is rejected by some 

 writers, as by Vaughan (op. cit., 1901, pp. 60, 61). 



Bolten used the name Astrcea for a group of gastropod shells in 

 1798. His genus was not properly defined and has never come into 

 use. It included species usually referred to Turbo (L.) and A'< n<>- 

 phora. Whether it should be restored for any of these shells is very 

 doubtful. Bolten's work was a mere catalogue, not a scientific 

 work in any legitimate sense, and it is extremely rare. Still his 

 names are recognized by many inalacologists. 



The difference in the original spelling of the two names would, 

 perhaps, be a sufficient reason for retaining both, if not otherwise 

 invalid. 



It seems to me necessaiy to wait for the re-examination of the true 

 Astrea rotulosa before the status of Astrea can be settled. 



However, it would evidently lead to less confusion to reject Astrea 

 altogether, on the ground of its prior use by Bolten, than to use it 

 for Siderustraat, as some have done, for the latter does not belong to 

 the group Astroiidm, but is a fungian coral. 



Astrea is said to have been used by Gmelin, 1789 (see L. Agassiz, 

 Nomencl. Zool., and Gregory, op. cit., p. 278). The latter cites it as 

 on p. 3767, under 31. astroites. But the name is used there only as 

 a part of a polynomial name quoted from Browne (Hist. Jamaica, 

 1756, p. 392), with other descriptive quotations, and in no sense as a 

 generic term. Browne gave several species of Astrea, but he used 

 the term only as a part of his polynomial descriptive names. 



* Favites Link (pars)=Fissicella (pars) Dana= Prionastrma Edw. and H. + 

 Metastrcea E. and H. For a review of the principal species see p. 92. 



