West-Indian Species of Madrepora. 27 



TiiK Species " mvstcata.^^ 



Ilencc, in the absence of corals inteinietliute between 

 ^f. pnhtutta and M. cervicornis^ and in view of the fact that 

 tlie differences in form between them are not due to growth 

 under different conditions, it appears advisable to return to 

 Lamarck's arranp:ement of the species. That decision raises 

 the question whether Linnanis's nameouj^ht not to be retained. 

 ]3ut if we follow Brook, and unite the three species, J/, pal- 

 inata, M. cervicornis, and JA. proli/era, and take the first as 

 the typical form — for Brook accepts it as forma A — then the 

 name muricata is both inappropriate and inapplicable. It is 

 inapprojuiate, since the name muricata was probably suggested 

 by Linnanis from the resemblance of the branchlets of many 

 species to the varices of Murex *. And .1/, pahnata is not 

 a nuiricated species in this sense. 



But the name is inapplicable, since, although Linnaeus 

 used it to cover all the ramose Mudreporoi that he knew, lie 

 carefully excluded the palmate variety from M. muricata. 

 He excluded it in three ways. In the first place, both in his 

 own ilia;4nosis and in his additional remarks, he describes the 

 species as a ramose form — " ]\Iadrepora ramosa composita " ; 

 " rami albi " ; '* corallium sa3])e format pulcherrime ramis suis 

 corymbum rosaceum." Linnteus makes no reference to 

 palmate or alciform varieties. He also quotes from earlier 

 authors a series of descriptive phrases in which references 

 to the ramose condition continually recur. In the second 

 place, Linnaeus carefully excluded the palmate form by 

 omitting reference to the figures of that coral in the list of 

 literature on his muricata. Thus Sloane figured an excellent 

 example of the alciform variety f ; Linnaeus accepts Sloane's 

 figures of the ce>tj/cor7j<*5 and /j?"o///(2;-a tyj)es, but not of the 

 jxilmata \. Seba § also figured all three forms, the prolifera 

 on pi. cviii. fig. G, the cervicornis on pi. cxiv. fig. 1, and a 

 typical pahnata on pi. exiii. Linnaius again accepted the two 

 first, but excluded ilie last. In the third place, the inclusion 

 of M. jtahnata in M. muricata is rendered unsatisfactory by 

 the geographical evidence. When Linna>us founded the 

 latter species in 17o4 he gave as its habitat " Pelago Asiatico." 



* Muricata, as Prof. Ik'll has remarked to iiic, means spin}-, witli sharp 

 puiutfi. 



f Sloane, ' Voyafre .... Janiaica/ vol. i. pi. xvii. fip. .*?. 



j /. e., he accepts iSlonne, ihid. vol. i. pi. .wiii. fig. 3, pi. xvii. ii'^. -4 ; 

 but not pi. xvii. tig. .'?. 



§ Sebii, ' Loc. Kenim Natur. Tlioiiuri,' vol. iii. IToB. 



