Is it just me?

[BlueStag]

Has any one noticed many of the online coral businesses miss naming corals to help move and sell the corals?

Like calling Acropora Austera's a Miyagi Tort. (Miyage Tort is very differant than an Austera in growth and corralite structure)

Or calling a Acropora Formosa a Blue Slimer. (Blue Slimer is actually an Acropora Yongeii)

Or calling a more common chalice an Alien Eye.

Or calling a Acropora Gomezi a Blue Tort.

There is a trend going on, with the business always miss labeling the coral, towards the coral that fetches a higher price. Shouldn't the business be accountable for this type of practice.

 

[RCS]

What's in a name?

Good luck, business have been doing this for decades without any repercussions, so it's not likely it will change any time soon, if ever. Besides that, how do you "prove" what is and isn't correct with common names?

For instance, tell me the difference between a yellow A. austera and a "Miyagi Tort" and then prove to me the "differences" in corallite growth aren't due to water flow, tank parameters or some other man-influenced variable.

I have a green cap that I got from a friend and it has completely different colors and growth form in my tank, does that mean we have different corals?

Bottom line is something is only worth what someone else is willing to pay for it, if you pay for something based on the name, that's just silly.

 

[MiddletonMark]

If folks weren't buying, the naming wouldn't last [it wouldn't work].

I also points out how incorrect many species-ID's are as well. Funny how it's the same 4 species of Montipora being sold every time, when there's a lot more than that possible

 

[Sk8r]

I sure wouldn't buy from them twice.

 

[drake66]

if its pretty i'll buy it, regardless of the name.

 

[Znut Reefer]

Same here, whats a name.

 

[zapata41]

it is a trend but it is working for them, most smart buyers look at the coral rather than the name when deciding. if we only lokoed at names then we wouldnt need pictures to sell the corals. those that do buy strictly off names will probably buy lots of corals at an inflated price and kill lots of corals due to lack of experience. then again i could be totaly wrong and should start buying by the name rather than what i feel it is.

Tim

 

[slojmn]

I'm with drake66 and znut, I like the coral that is pleasing to my eye. Having said that there are many very beautiful corals with fancy nicknames. Despite the true lineage, which can be tricky to prove or check into, there are certain corals I am drawn to and it is all about the look.

 

[mm949]

something does need to be done about it....when you spend top dollar for a coral identification you should get what your buying...mailorder is a scam...most have poor business ethics...for many of us who are looking for that specific genus it is important and even if they guarantee you are getting the coral in the picture...BUYER BEWARE...

 

[RCS]

something does need to be done about it....when you spend top dollar for a coral identification you should get what your buying...mailorder is a scam

The question is: how do you prove what is and what isn't a "true" named coral?

Let's be frank: without skeletel evidence, assigning a true species to any coral is difficult to impossible, even the experts will tell you as much. So, unless you're planning on buying an expensive named coral and then killing it to find out what it is, there's still no way to prove that the original named coral is different, unless you have a sample to compare it with.

I said it in my first post and I'll re-iterate it here: two of the exact same coral can have different growth pattern, color, or any number of characteristics depending on what tank they're in, what lighting they're under, what flow they're receiving, etc.

If you're buying based on name alone, then there's not much to be done for it. If you like the coral, buy it, regardless of name. If not, then don't. Simple as that.

As far as "lineage", I'll never understand this one. Just beause someone took a coral from the wild and got it to turn a certan color in their tank does not by any means indicate they have a monopoly on the piece. If anyone thinks that there's only ONE coral out there of that exact same species and color form, then I've got some nice land just west of CA to sell you, cheap.

 

[RCS]

for many of us who are looking for that specific genus

Not to put too fine a point on it, but I would hope you're able to tell genus for the most part. Genus is simply the family or corals (ie: Acropora is the genus, whereas tenuis would indicate a specific species).

The point to take home is that the vast majority of people and online retailers are honest, and attach a species name to a coral based on certain attributes they can visually distinguish from the coral in question. They're not always going to be accurate, and that's just something people will have to live with.

I think others said it but it bears repeating: buy the coral because you like it. If it's too much money, then regardless of whether it's named or not, don't buy it.

 

[BlueStag]

"Bottom line is something is only worth what someone else is willing to pay for it, if you pay for something based on the name, that's just silly."

This is pretty true and I agree with it, and I'm sure everyone here on RC does too. But we are talking about deception, not accidental misidentifications. Kind of along the lines of False Advertising. I didn't know we were talking about the buyers motivations. Breaking down the buyers motivations into moral groups, doesn't really address the false id'ing of corals from so called industry "Experts"

I'm sure that someone that has an Acropora Gomezi already, and wants a Acropora Tortusa, and see's a slightly blurry picture of a "Blue" Sps coral on a web page. See's that it's labeled Blue Tort and decides to order it. I think that person should feel that he will recieve a Blue Tort. Not some "theory" about man made currents vs. real ocean currents and how they affect growth patterns. The buyer should be able to trust the seller, even more so, if they are a legit company.

No one that has been growing corals for a while is buying that. Sure take a green cap. Put it into four tanks with varying flow patterns. Still you have four green monti caps. Nothing new there. Some may cup, some may be flatter. You still can tell someone it's a monti cap. There is no deception there.

 

[SPStoner]

I think that 99% off all coral ID's are guesses, at best. And I won't limit it to just mailorder. I've seen the same thing at many LFS, as well. I had the good fortune to meet Dr. Veron (author of COTW and COAAIP) at the Boston MACNA and even he says it is nearly impossible to ID many of these without a skeletal examination.

A couple of the examples you give are a stretch, but some I don't feel are stretching too much.

If you have ever held an Acropora Formosa, you'd know that they slime like crazy. So a blue slimer is a pretty accurate name for a blue formosa.


Alien Eye seems to be applied to anything with green eyes now. I have a colony of the original Tubs Alien Eye grown from a frag. I have had it for close to 2 years, I think, and it has changed colors at least 4 times to the point where you may not even recognize it. And yet, is it not still "the" alien eye?


An interesting topic, that's for sure.


Tony

 

[twon8]

I agree that knowingly calling something by the wrong species name is not right, but like spstoner i think you have taken it too far. but just because of your post i will be referring to any blueacro that produces lots of slime a blue slimer, and if I want to call something a miyagi because it reminds me of a bonsai tree or the karate kid movies i will.

Unless you are sending skeletal parts away for examination you will only have a guess what you really have anyway. If someone wants to spend their money on LE corals, what do you care?

 

[BlueStag]

All SPS slime. Many are blue. We can't call them all Blue Slimers.:lol:

It's commonly known that back a couple of generations in this hobby, a certain coral stood out from all the rest. It was bright green and seemed to slime more than any other SPS when it was stressed. Out of that slime came a nick name "Green Slimer." It was a very in demand coral, that has since become a common coral. Acropora Yongeii. To this coral, the name Slimer was given. The blue variety was harder to find, rarer in captivity, didn't slime nearly as much. It's tempermental, and hard to keep it's color. Before many of the now sought after "rare" corals, the Blue Slimer, was one of them.

"Unless you are sending skeletal parts away for examination you will only have a guess what you really have anyway. If someone wants to spend their money on LE corals, what do you care?"

I don't care that people want to buy them. I care that they get what they are looking for. Sorry if I offended you. Sounds like alot of people here think it's Ok business practice, so I'll just let it be.

 

[MiddletonMark]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7048475#post7048475 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by BlueStag
[B. Sure take a green cap. Put it into four tanks with varying flow patterns. Still you have four green monti caps. Nothing new there. Some may cup, some may be flatter. You still can tell someone it's a monti cap. There is no deception there. [/B]

Actually, that's `coral lumping' too. There are quite a few species of Montipora that `plate' ... and like calling everything vaguely similar a tort - caps are the same way.
Check out this, see if you can ID the caps:
http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2002-04/eb/index.php

Montipora, IME, is easily as mis-ID'ed as Acropora.

 

[RCS]

But we are talking about deception, not accidental misidentifications.

I'll agree that if something is intentionally misidentified then that would be wrong. But if you're buying a high-dollar, named coral based on this:

and see's a slightly blurry picture of a "Blue" Sps coral on a web page. See's that it's labeled Blue Tort and decides to order it

...then I'd question a lot more than morals. Buying a coral based on a blurry picture...who does that? I might buy something if the color looks good and it's a reasonable price, but to pay big bucks? That's not silly, that's stupid.

All SPS slime. Many are blue. We can't call them all Blue Slimers.

So, if it's blue, and it slimes, it's not a blue slimer? Sounds pretty simply and logically like it would be.

This is one of the problems with "common names". If an A. formasa is blue and slimes, and a A. yongei is blue and it slimes, which one is a blue slimer, and which isn't? And if you can explain to us more particulary WHY, then that may help. Once you start labeling corals with common names, it's all a marketing gimmick, period. Besides that, as I think we've established, many corals are similar and ID down to an exact species is next to impossible.

Let's go back to my green cap example. It works because it's a true example:

The original colony is a yellow-green color with blue-purple growing edges that simply plates.

The friend's colony is highlighter green with bright purple growing edges that forms multiple plates.

Another friend's piece off the same coral is muddy green-brown with white growing edges that encusts.

Mine is deep jade green with white growing edges that grows small nodules on it which are purple.

If the original owner calls it Bob's Green Acres Montipora, then the rest of us can't call it that because our color and growth form is different? What about someone else that has the exact same coral but can't trace its "lineage" to the original owner?

 

[RCS]

Actually, that's `coral lumping' too. There are quite a few species of Montipora that `plate' ... and like calling everything vaguely similar a tort - caps are the same way.

I have a couple different montis that I received as small plates and have since taken on an encrusting form. Must have changed species on me mid-growth. :lol:

 

[MiddletonMark]

Fred - IMO that's a very different thing. Common-naming relies on the fact that propagation as we do it yields two pieces of the same individual's genetics. A year later, you can take those two pieces - and they will grow back into one individual colony.

Another of the same species + coloration - will not likely grow back together with the original.

I find such names to be useful, as in our local area - we can refer to these names and see if we've traded the same coral with the same guy. I know for sure I wouldn't need another blue tort - but Ereefic's blue-tort-like unique coral ... while fairly similar to the standard blue tort - is a different coral, that will vary differently.

Given most of us can't/don't go through a formal, complete ID practice ... we're left talking in generalities. IMO, non-scientific naming allows us to refer to specific individual corals, which with today's trading and wide sharing, is useful so as to not trade for corals you already have - and to differentiate some that are similar to each other.
I have a piece of `Green Slimer' and a `Bali Green Slimer' that are two different species of Acropora - yet if all lumped as `green slimer' without further differentiation, would give very confused people as different corals are being referred to. IMO, it's important to keep `names' with the corals, as well as to not have folks naming similar corals by the name of an already known variety. And - I wouldn't have two if they were named the same ... but by having a difference, even subtle, it allowed me to know they were two different corals even though as 1" frag, it didn't look that different. Grown out, there's zero doubt.

Yes, naming can turn into marketing. `Rare' is not a common name, IMO But either we call them just about nothing [purple acro #1], or we call them by incorrect scientific names [Acropora tortuosa, when actually A. gomezi], or we call them by reefer-names [green slimer, cali blue tort]. IMO - the third is the best option, though none of the options are ideal.

Growth form, one tank's coloration - IMO this is not what is referred to. Just as we could get clones of the same dog and raise one lovely, and one mean dog from the same genetics. But - that doesn't mean another dog of the same variety shares the close genetic bond of the clones + an equivalent close bond.

IMO, that's what's going on with `named varieties'. In such cases, we are naming a specific genetic individual strain. Will it look the same in all tanks? Nope, nothing is guaranteed - but IMO there's the potential of the same exact coloration. With another genetic individual, it might be similar, but exactness IMO is worth paying attention to.

Just my take, go ahead and think differently if you like

 

[RCS]

Growth form, one tank's coloration - IMO this is not what is referred to. Just as we could get clones of the same dog and raise one lovely, and one mean dog from the same genetics. But - that doesn't mean another dog of the same variety shares the close genetic bond of the clones + an equivalent close bond.

True, but you can breed these dog's together, correct?

I don't agree or disagree with any of this really, it's all a matter of perspective. I don't like the "naming" of corals, as it gives them a sense of "uniqueness", when that's normally far from the case. I buy what I like, and recommend others to do the same, regardless of "name".

I will admit though, there's way too many people trying to mix a Shih-tzu and a Bulldog and sell it as a purebred (if you take my meaning).