A. E. Verrill — Berniudian and West Indian Reef Corals. 67 



As a matter of fact, one of the meandrUes-g^Yo\\\) Avas included 

 by Oken in this genus by mere accident, it being erroneously referred 

 to as a variety of a true Mceandra {M. labi/rinthiformis (L.) = 

 Diploria), while the four other species are of the Dlploria and 

 Cmloria groups. Moreover, he founded, in the same work, a new 

 genus [Pectinia) for the meandrites-gvo\\\). This of itself would 

 show that he did not intend to include nieandrltes in Mmandra. The 

 fact that a copied figure of mea)idrltes was given, as an example, 

 has no special significance in this case, for the publisher of such 

 general works, rather than the author, is in many cases responsible 

 for the selection of the illustrations, which, as is well known, are 

 often misleading. 



It would be far more consistent and correct to take either the first 

 species {M. areola^^areolata), or else the second species mentioned, 

 for the type of Mmandra. Meandrites had already been eliminated 

 by Lamarck, as Vaughan himself admits, when he named it as the 

 type of Meandrhia, in 1801. But Ehrenberg (1S84), in adopting 

 the genus Mmandra, used it in nearly the sense now proposed, 

 though he eliminated Oken's first species, referring it erroneously 

 to his new genus Manicina, which, as understood by him, included 

 Plerogyra and also ColpophylUa E. and H. (See note, p. 85.) 

 Platygyra was used by Ehrenberg as a subgenus of Mmandra. It 

 included Cmloria, Diploria, and Leptoria E. and H., or the whole 

 of his Mmandra except Dendrogyra. Therefore it is a synonym of 

 Mmandra proper. 



These eliminations of two of Oken's species clearly leave, as the 

 real available tj'pe, 31. labyrinthiformis {\jmne)=- Dlploria cerehri- 

 formis E. and H., which is var. a. of Oken's second species. There- 

 fore, should others still prefer to consider the latter the type of a 

 special genus, on account of its usually double ridges, it should be 

 called Mmandra labyrinthiformis (L.) Oken, but for those who do not 

 thus restrict the Linnoean name it should be Mmandra implicata 

 (Ellis and Sol.), or else M. cerebriformis. The forms Stokesi (E. 

 and H.) and geographica Whitf., are mere growth-variations in the 

 forms of the ridges and grooves. 



The characters that have been used b}^ authors to separate 

 Mmandrina E. and H., Diploria, Cmloria, and Manicina are due 

 only to slightly different modes of growth. These several forms do 

 not show any structural differences, such as should characterize 

 genera. Young examples of Diploria can scai-cely be distinguished 

 from Manicina, of similar age, even by the forms of the grooves 



