Cynarina

Brüggemann, 1877, p. 305

Type Species

Cynarina savignyi Brüggemann, 1877, p. 305; Original Designation Brüggemann, 1877: 305

Type Specimen: Syntype; NHMUK 1858.2.12.3, 1869.2.25.39; Verified; Dry Preserved

Type Locality: Red Sea, Gulf of Suez (Recent)

The NHM has a specimen labelled "Cynarina savignyi" with the catalogue number 1934.5.14.492 (see Crossland, 1952); however this specimen does not appear to be one of Brüggemann's types. Wells' (1964) indicates that there are 8 Brüggemann type specimens, including 69.2.25.39, 58.2.12.3, and an unnumbered specimen. This species was later synonymized with Caryophyllia lacrymalis Milne Edwards and Haime, 1849, p.239, pl.8, fig. 1,1a. The type specimen of lacrymalis is also reported as lost (Wells, 1964).

Classification

• Family: Lobophylliidae Dai and Horng, 2009, p. 59

Synonyms

• Acanthophyllia Wells, 1937, p. 242
• Protolobophyllia Yabe and Sugiyama, 1935, p. 382
• Rhodocyathus Bourne, 1905, p. 191

Diagnosis

Solitary. Budding intracalicular. Corallites monomorphic; discrete. Calice width large (> 15 mm), with high relief (> 6 mm). Septa in ≥ four cycles (≥ 48 septa). Free septa irregular. Septa spaced < six septa per 5 mm. Costosepta unequal in relative thickness. Columellae trabecular and spongy (> three threads), < 1/4 of calice width. Septal (multiaxial) lobes weakly or moderately developed. Epitheca reduced. Endotheca usually low-moderate (tabular), but may be abundant. Tooth base at midcalice elliptical-parallel. Tooth tip orientation parallel. Teeth tall (> 0.6 mm); widely spaced (> 1 mm), with > six teeth per septum. Tooth shape unequal between first and third order septa. Tooth size unequal between wall and septum. Granules scattered on septal face; weak (rounded). Interarea palisade. Walls formed by dominant paratheca and partial septotheca. Thickening deposits in concentric rings with extensive stereome. Costa centre clusters strong; > 0.6 mm between clusters; medial lines strong. Septum centre clusters weak; > 0.5 mm between clusters; medial lines weak.

Description

'Agreeing in all respects with Scolymia, except that the coral is free when adult, turbinate, and covered with a thick epitheca. From Antillia it differs in having the costae roughly spinose; the free edges of the larger septa lacero-dentate, the septal teeth increasing in size from within outwards, the calicular fossa very shallow; the calice circular in the adult, compressed in the young (the reverse being the case in Antillia). From Homophyllia it is likewise distinguished by the structure of its costae, septa, and fossa; besides, Homophyllia is always fixed by its base, and shows a very thin, appressed epitheca, whereas the latter is thick and only loosely adherent in Cynarina.' (Brüggemann, 1877: 305)

Comparisons

Two synapomorphies have been recovered for the moderately supported Cynarina clade (bootstrap support of 62): weakly or moderately developed septal (multiaxial) lobes (likelihood of 1 based on the Mk1 model), and strong costa medial lines (likelihood 1). The sister relationship between Cynarina and Lobophyllia recovered here is unsurprising given their previous affiliation, and the inclusive clade is indeed supported by the synapomorphy of unequal tooth size between the wall and septum (likelihood 0.90). They can however be distinguished easily based on Cynarina's synapomorphies, as well as its solitary form and low-moderate (tabular, instead of vesicular) endotheca. Within Lobophylliidae, in which species are predominantly colonial, Cynarina is the only genus that is exclusively solitary. Lobophyllia vitiensis (Brüggemann, 1877: 304), Homophyllia australis (Milne Edwards and Haime, 1849a, vol. 11: 239) and Micromussa pacifica Benzoni and Arrigoni in Arrigoni et al., 2016a, are typically monostomatous but can sometimes form polystomatous coralla (Arrigoni et al., 2014b; e.g. NHMUK 1840.11.30.79, syntype of Caryophyllia australis). The congeneric of the monostomatous Sclerophyllia margariticola Klunzinger, 1879: 4—S. maxima (Sheppard and Salm, 1988: 276)—is colonial.

Remarks

Cynarina was established by Brüggemann (1877: 305) for a new species Cynarina savignyi Brüggemann, 1877: 305, which was collected from the Gulf of Suez and deposited at the British Museum (now NHMUK). Brüggemann (1877: 306) stated on the description of C. savignyi that, 'of this species, the Museum contains a considerable series of specimens; yet I have taken the description from a single example, because this is the only one which is fully adult and at the same time beautifully regular in its septal apparatus.' Indeed, we found eight specimens at NHMUK that were examined by Brüggemann (1877), and the largest of which fits his description and should be considered the holotype of the species. However, Brüggemann (1877: 305) was less specific in his description for the genus, and clearly used all of the specimens available to him at that time. Therefore we regard all eight specimens (NHMUK 1858.2.12.3, 1869.2.25.39, and one unlabelled lot) as syntypical material for the genus. Cynarina savignyi was named after J. C. Savigny, who discovered and figured the species as Caryophyllia carduus in Audouin (1826: 233, pl. 4: figs 2.1, 2.2, 2.3). The latter species name was already used in Madrepora carduus Ellis and Solander, 1786: 153, pl. 35 (= Madrepora lacera Pallas, 1766: 298), an Atlantic species, whereas Cynarina savignyi is a junior synonym of Caryophyllia lacrymalis Milne Edwards and Haime, 1849a, vol. 11: 238, which remained the only valid species in Cynarina until Budd et al. (2012) transferred Indophyllia macassarensis Best and Hoeksema, 1987: 394, into the genus. Our morphological analysis support this placement as Cynarina lacrymalis and C. macassarensis form a clade, but molecular sampling is needed to verify this result. Cynarina has been affiliated with Lobophyllia and Symphyllia in the past. Matthai (1928) considered the solitary forms represented by Scolymia Haime, 1852: 279, Homophyllia Brüggemann, 1877: 310, Sclerophyllia Klunzinger, 1879: 4, and Cynarina to be early monocentric stages of the colonial Lobophyllia, and placed them in tentative synonymy under the latter. Wells (1937) followed this line of reasoning when he synonymised Scolymia under Mussa Oken, 1815: 73, Homophyllia under Lobophyllia de Blainville, 1830: 321, and Sclerophyllia + Cynarina under Symphyllia Milne Edwards and Haime, 1848a, vol. 27: 491. Vaughan and Wells (1943) and Wells (1956) preserved this scheme but placed Cynarina under Lobophyllia instead. Subsequently, Wells (1964) resurrected all of the solitary taxa above except for Sclerophyllia. The latter, together with Rhodocyathus Bourne, 1905: 191, and Protolobophyllia Yabe and Sugiyama, 1935: 381, were considered as synonyms of Cynarina (Wells, 1964; Veron and Pichon, 1980). However, the most recent phylogenetic analysis by Arrigoni et al. (2015), supported by our results here, indicated that Sclerophyllia is a distinct genus and has since been resurrected (see below). Acanthophyllia Wells, 1937: 242, was described as a fully solitary coral that, in comparison with Cynarina, possesses even larger lobate teeth, much bigger over the wall than near the columella. Although this separation was maintained by Wells (1964), Veron and Pichon (1980) studied the holotype of its type species A. deshayesiana and detected only minor differences in internal lobe development between Acanthophyllia and Cynarina, tentatively listing Acanthophyllia as a junior synonym. Here, we also find septal tooth size and septal lobe development to be comparable between the two taxa, thus supporting the generic synonymy presented by Veron and Pichon (1980). Some exceptional specimens identified as C. lacrymalis by Wells (1964, pls 20, 21) that were collected from Gubbins Reef in Australia and Banc Gail in New Caledonia have more rounded tooth tips and well-developed septal lobes. These peculiar corals have superficial affinities to Caryophylliidae and are in need of more detailed examinations. Cynarina is widely distributed on the reefs of Indo-Pacific, present from the Red Sea and East Africa to as far east as the Marshall Islands in the Northern Hemisphere and Samoa in the Southern Hemisphere (Veron, 2000).

Distribution

• East Asia; Pliocene
• Melanesia; Pliocene
• Southeast Asia; Pliocene
• East Asia; Pleistocene - Holocene
• Subsaharan Africa; Pleistocene
• East Asia; Pleistocene
• Indian Ocean; Recent
• Western Pacific; Recent
• Central Pacific; Recent
• East Asia; Holocene

This page has been in preparation since 18-Jul-2010 21:17

This version was contributed by Danwei Huang on 29-Jan-2016 13:45.

Page authors are: Ann Budd Danwei Huang. Please contact the editor if you would like to contribute to the diagnosis of this taxon.

The editor is: Ann Budd