﻿Genus MONTIPORA, Quoy and Gaimaed. 



(Manopora, Dana.) 



I. HISTORICAL. 



This genus was founded by Quoy and Gaimard for a coral from the island of Tonga. The 

 definition of the genus was given as follows : — " Animals actiniform, short, with twelve 

 tentacles, contained in cavities which are circular, immersed, regular, with but few septa 

 (paucicannelees), scattered over a corallum which is either encrusting or glomerate, porous, 

 highly echinulate, and provided with mounds or ridges." There is a figure of the specimen, 

 which the authors, having first sketched " avec assez de soin," lost ; their description of the 

 type, which was named Montipora verrucosa, is largely based upon this figure.* 



The work containing the above (published in 1833) had evidently been seen by de Blain- 

 ville in MSS., for, in 1830, in the ' Dictionnaire des Sciences Naturelles,' Ix. p. 353, he described 

 the new genus of Quoy and Gaimard, quoting their MS., and practically repeating their defini- 

 tion. He placed the genus between Gemmi2xra {Turhi7icma) and Machxjjora, and among a 

 number of other genera, including Porites, under the general heading " Les Madrepores." De 

 BlainvLUe identified their species M. verrucosa with Lamarck's Porites verrucosa, and transferred 

 another of Lamarck's Porites (tubercidosa) to the new genus, which thus contained two species 

 both of which had apparently been previously described by Lamarck. De Blainville at the 

 same time noted the great difference between the calicles in Montipora and Porites. In 1836, 

 the same author published his ' Manuel d'Actinologie ' ; by this time he had identified four 

 more of Lamarck's species, viz. Porites spumosa, P. rosacea, Agaricia lima, A. papillosa, 

 as belonging to the new genus. He divided these into two divisions, "tuberiform" and 

 " explanariform." In the atlas to this work, he gave a figure (pi. Lsi. fig. 1) of M. verrucosa 

 Q. and G., which, however, does not at all agree with Quoy and Gaimard's original figure. As 

 de BlainviUe had the opportunity of examining Lamarck's collection, this figure might be 

 supposed to represent the Porites verrucosa of that author. This, however, is not the case. 

 De Blainville's figure represents neither Quoy and Gaimard's nor Lamarck's verrucosa, and 

 has therefore been a standing enigma to all who have worked over this ground. It represents 

 a true MontijMra, however, and has been here identified with the M. ohtusata of Quelch. 



In 1834, in his classical ' Beitrage zur Kenntniss der CoraUenthiere des rothen Meeres,' 



* 'Voyage de I'Astrolabe,' Zool, iv. (1833) p. 247; see also Atlas, Zoophytes, — pL xx. 

 fig. 11. 



B 2 



