GONIOPORA. 



33 



the chance that the soft parts would greatly help is remote ; undoubtedly they will have to 

 be studied before we can finally group the corals into species, and this is a further reason 

 for not making that attempt without the Icnowledge it is hoped they will yield. But at 

 first their study will merely add to the number of minute variations shading off into one 

 another which make the grouping into species so difficult. The soft parts could only reveal 

 to us the limits of species if they were themselves specifically very stable. We have no 

 reason to believe that tliis is the case. 



Under these circumstances — that is, in the absence of all the necessary data for genetic 

 groups — it became necessary to find some ■prmciplc of arrangement which would embody the 

 results of our researches; unless we can do so we are condemned to give a mere haphazard uncon- 

 nected list of descriptions. The method chosen is that which expresses the only certain data 

 which we possess. The specimens are arranged according to their localities. This, fortunately, is 

 not only extremely simple, but all the facts can be given in such a way as to be constantly acces- 

 sible, and new facts can be added without having to malce any rearrangement. It is import- 

 ant to note that Dr. Giinther, in coping with the similar difficulties in his Catalogue of the 

 Salmonidffi, found himself compelled to bring the geographical data into special prominence. 



A most important advantage, further, is in the simple character of the designation which 

 this arrangement suggests. At first sight, the simple geographical name may be less euphonious 

 than the customary fanciful name. But it avoids all the disadvantages of such names and 

 hence will, in the long run, be far more useful. The most serious practical disadvantage of the 

 ordinary fanciful name, whether intended to designate a specific group or a mere type of 

 structure, is its tendency to become a snare. It is a snare not only to the bad, but to the 

 careful worker. It is applied quite recklessly by the former, ami in desperation by the latter, 

 who instinctively hesitates to give a new name ami yet has not sufficient data to allow of a 

 decision as to which so-called " species " his specimen belongs. As far as my experience goes, 

 the records of the different coral genera are in hopeless confusion ; the same name has been 

 given to scores of entirely different variations.* Hence, if the object of our published treatises 

 is to build up an accurate knowledge of the genera we describe, we must first of all have a 

 method of designation which wiU minimise this confusion and allow e\'ery apparently distinct 

 form to be recorded in a way whicli makes identification easy. This is the case with the 

 geographical designation. With this method, the museum official may, in the future, leave the 



* A union of great numbers of varying forms may sometimes be dehberate -on the part of a 

 conscientious worker, simply because it appears impossible to disentangle the bewldering number of 

 apparently minute intergrading variations. Compare the way my friend Mr. Wayland Vaughaii has 

 dealt with the West Indian Pontes (U.S. Fish Commission Bulletin, 1900, vol. ii.). This will be 

 discussed in the next volume, but in the meantime I would point out that, while forms may be 

 grouped thus I'oughly for a general survey of a coral fauna, such grouping is not justifiable when 

 making a special study of a genus. In this latter case, if the manifold variations permit themselves 

 to be grouped genetically, well and good, but if not, one has only to describe them and affix some sign 

 or symbol to them for future reference. 



V 



