MATTHAI— RECENT COLONIAL ASTR^ID^ 5 



been created; the species of Leptastrcea Ed. and H., which Gardiner brought under 

 Orhicella, have again been transferred to the former genus, while all the remaining species 

 have been assigned to Favia, Oken. In the same manner HeliastrcBa forskcelana Ed. 

 and H., and Orhicella mammillosa Klunz. have been found to be identical with 

 Echinopora gemmacea Lam. Echinojoora hirsutissima Ed. and H. and Favia favus 

 (Forsk.) may be mentioned as examples of species combining a wide range of skeletal 

 variation with identity in polyp-structure. 



In order to settle the synonymy of the species it became imperative to examine the 

 type specimens, as it was impossible from descriptions, often without adequate figures, to 

 get any clear idea of their characters. In the summer of 1913 I visited the following 

 museums : Museum d'histoire naturelle, Paris ; Museum ftir Nattirkunde, Berlin ; Natur- 

 historische Hofmuseum, Vienna ; Universitets Zoologiske Museum, Copenhagen ; British 

 Museum, London, and Hunterian Museum, University of Glasgow. I therein examined 

 the existing types of Lamarck, Milne Edwards and Haime, Ehrenberg, Klunzinger, 

 Forskal, Quelch, and Ellis and Solander ; unfortunately many of Forskal's and of Ellis 

 and Solander's types have been lost. In the Berlin Museum I also examined Prof. Studer's 

 " Gazelle " types and some of Dr Ortmann's examples from Ceylon and Dar-es-Salaam. 

 Altogether my work led me to examine 590 specimens in these museums. For great 

 assistance rendered in connection with this part of my work I wish to thank the following 

 gentlemen : Dr Charles Gravier, Dr Lamy, Profs. Dr Brauer and Dr Weltner, Hofrat 

 Dr Steindachner, Prof. Dr Jungerson, Dr Harmer, Prof Graham Kerr and Dr Agar. 

 Particularly I desire to thank Dr Gravier, Dr Weltner and Dr Mortensen for sending me 

 photographs of some of the type specimens in their museums to be reproduced in this 

 paper. I am indebted to the managers of the F. M. Balfour Fund, Cambridge, for financial 

 aid in connection with these visits. 



I also had the great pleasure and advantage of discussing species in Madreporaria 

 with Dr Emil v. Marenzeller, whose beautiful work on corals is so well known. It would 

 be an impertinence were I to speak of his great power of discrimination, particularly in his 

 study of Favia savignyi Ed. and H. and F. okeni Ed. and H., species with which I have 

 had to deal. The collections he studied were extensive and he visited practically all the 

 European museums which possess types. I differ from him in considering that the 

 Madreporaria must be studied in their entirety, not on the skeleton alone. 



In settling the nomenclature of a known species, either the earliest recorded name 

 may be taken, as was Milne Edwards and Haime's aim in their great work on corals, or, 

 as Dr Marenzeller held, selection may be made of the particular name which is accompanied 

 by the best description and figures. In the latter case due credit would be paid to the 

 author who had undertaken the most complete study of the species, but in a group like 

 the Madreporaria, in which the synonymy has been so enormously complicated with 

 specific descriptions of varying merit, opinions would of course differ as to which was the 

 best account ; hence a determination of this kind would be largely left to the fancy of the 

 particular worker. I have adopted the method of employing the earliest names wherever 

 possible, even though the descriptions be of the scantiest nature. This in Madreporarian 

 corals can, in my opinion, be done in the case of a species only if its first recorded type 



