220 A. E. Verrill — Corals of the Genus Acrojiora. 



A. vallda (D.) Brook, p. 168. 

 Fiji (D., B ); Tongatabu, Torres St., Mergui Arch., and Singa- 

 pore (B.). 



*A. variabilis (Klz.) Brook, p. 16l-=.coalescens Ort., t. Br. 



Red Sea (KL, V.); Ceylon, Macclesfield Bank, Samoa, Tongatabu, 

 and G. Barrier Reef (B.). 



*A. virgata (D.) Brook, p. 40. 



Fiji (D., B.); Tahiti (B.); New Hanover, Amboina, and Tonga- 

 tabu (B.). 



*A. Wardii Ver., sp. nov. See notes, below. 



Indo-Pacific (V.). 



The localities of numerous specimens of species included in the 

 above list, that I have studied, were doubtful or unknown, many of 

 the specimens having been bought from dealers. In such cases I 

 have omitted the doubtful localities, adding only those that seemed 

 to be authentic. 



Probably many of the localities given by others, and quoted here, 

 are not altogether reliable, for the same reasons. 



Another source of error lies in the various modes of cleaning and 

 bleaching the specimens. Chemicals are sometimes used that injure 

 the delicate parts. Long exposure to the weather, as in bleaching 

 them, always destroys or changes the delicate septa, margins of the 

 calicles, and especially the fine spinules of the surface. 



Acropora acervata (Dana) Ver. See p. 212. 



Madrepora acervata Dana, Zooph., p. 460, pi. xxxiv, fig. 4. 1846. Brook, 



Cat. Maclreporarian Corals British Mus., i, p. 147, 1893. 

 t Madrepora amblyclados Brook, op. cit., p. 140. 



Plate XXXVI. Figure 17. Plate XXXVI B. Figure 8. 



Brook assumed, without due evidence, that my (1864) determina- 

 tion of Dana's species was incorrect and that I had a distinct species 

 in view. However, I had Dana's types in my hands for comparison, 

 and still have some branches that he specially described, for the 

 details. 



Brook merely quotes Dana's description and records no additional 

 specimens. This indicates that he had not identified the species, 

 although it is a common one at Singapore. Doubtless he has it 

 under some other name or names in his catalogue. 



Brook was, however, probably correct in stating that Dana's 

 species is not the same as M. plantaginea Lam., as described by him 



