Montipora Aequituberculata

[invincible569]

Images from Splash

Latin name: Montipora aequituberculata
Discovered from / Year: Bernard, 1897
Growth: slow / medium grower
Degree of difficulty: easy - medium for advanced reefers
Lighting: low / medium (bulb)
Current: low / medium

Reference: http://data.aims.gov.au/coralpages/h...0pages/245.htm

Members please post your experiences & pictures in this thread to this species.

[nyfireman3097]

what makes it diffrent from a cap ?
Nick

[invincible569]

what makes it diffrent from a cap ?
Nick

Look close at the coralites and the what makes the body's inside. A regular cap doesnt have that texture.

[nyfireman3097]

sorry but dont see it do u have a closer pic of it sorry for being a PIA lol but i really would like to know
Nick

[invincible569]

Nick, under each new species, I have provided a reference. Under this reference, you can see the differences. Here is a pic from Coral Search with a close up:

[nyfireman3097]

ok i didnt know that thanx for the help and i see much better now
Nick

[invincible569]

ok i didnt know that thanx for the help and i see much better now
Nick

The smallest things make it a whole different species. Just like the Oregon tort vs the Cali Tort.

[nyfireman3097]

what is the diffrence all i know about is the growth pattern
Nick

[cbonito]

I have a piece of this from reef farmers that they had a few years ago. Green plating, but with these vertical "digitata" type branches too. Interesting coral.

[kolognekoral]

I had though this may be a true M. capricornis, as I first purchased it, but it has developed coenosteum ridges and a very uneven surface. I now beleive it to be M. aequituberculata.

[Aged Salt]

Yes, Jamie, I agree it's a M. cap! Bob

[kolognekoral]

Ahh, but Bob, a cap never has coenosteum ridges, which this coral certainly does. As it developes (the foto is 2 months ago) the ridges become more and more prominent and the small bumps are developing into regular peaks.

I am often a bit unsure how the species need to be defined. They are based on a skeleton, which we rarely manage to see, until death, therefore we use characteristics that are visible through/with the tissues. I have seen a few 'true' caps and this is not the same species. Now, for me, the question is, which species could it belong to. Of the foliates, it is not M. foliosa, M. delicatula, M. hodgsoni, M. cebuensis, which all have prominent coenosteum ridges to various degrees, M. friabilis, M. florida, which have a finely rough surface or M. crassituberculata, whioch has ridges over the entire surface, which means it can only be M. capricornis or M. aequituberculata. Only the latter has tuberculae and, thecal papillae which are often fused into short ridges along the colony edges.

I am always seeing foliate Montipora offered as 'caps', but only about 1 in 10 is actually that species. Most have come to accept all foliates as M. capricornis, which they aren't. Sounds like easy marketing and, let's face it, few would take the time to note the differences.

You see my argument?

[steffen]

For me looks like M.Capicornis....