What's The Difference Between Corals & Inverts?
- Thread starter metweezer
- Start date
ophiura
Active Member
It is a fine line. In theory, all of them are inverts. He may be restricting corals to a particular type of invert which builds a calcium carbonate skeleton, but otherwise (as an invertebrate zoologist) I do not agree with his distinction even remotely. Perhaps it is another hobby distinction.
Rics and Zoas are not specifically "corals" perhaps because they do not build a "skeleton." They are in different orders, but the same subclass (Zoantharia...atleast for hard corals and anemones...soft corals are different) of the phylum Cnidaria. So it is a slippery slope.
Rics and Zoas are not specifically "corals" perhaps because they do not build a "skeleton." They are in different orders, but the same subclass (Zoantharia...atleast for hard corals and anemones...soft corals are different) of the phylum Cnidaria. So it is a slippery slope.
N
nereef
Guest
taxonomically, terms like inverts (and even the term "coral") wouldn't get used very often. an invert is any animal without a backbone. any animal outside the phylum chordata.
for aquarists, the term "invert" usually describes motile (able to move from place to place) inverts. this usually includes marine arthropods (shrimp, crabs, lobsters) and snails.
for aquarists, the term "invert" usually describes motile (able to move from place to place) inverts. this usually includes marine arthropods (shrimp, crabs, lobsters) and snails.
N
nereef
Guest
i hear ya. i bet you're a big fan of the term "starfish." that one bugs me
also: yellow coris wrasse, strawberry basslet, any freshwater "eel", fw sharks, the list goes on and on. i'm sure many of these bogus distinctions started as marketing terms. but i have to stop myself sometimes and realize that most aquarists aren't "heavy users" like us.
also: yellow coris wrasse, strawberry basslet, any freshwater "eel", fw sharks, the list goes on and on. i'm sure many of these bogus distinctions started as marketing terms. but i have to stop myself sometimes and realize that most aquarists aren't "heavy users" like us.
reefkprz
Active Member
wave the flag for binomial nomenclature
I remember how confuising it all seemed when i began in the hobby some one would call a coral a leather another would call the same thing a toadstool, another would call it sarcophyton... etcetera.... and the confusion reigns, well what is it? how am I supposed to remember all 10 names for this one thing???
I still get confused occasionally, the only difference is now i'm more expirienced at sorting through the Mythinformation than I was in the begging.
I remember how confuising it all seemed when i began in the hobby some one would call a coral a leather another would call the same thing a toadstool, another would call it sarcophyton... etcetera.... and the confusion reigns, well what is it? how am I supposed to remember all 10 names for this one thing???
I still get confused occasionally, the only difference is now i'm more expirienced at sorting through the Mythinformation than I was in the begging.
reefkprz
Active Member
Originally Posted by NEreef
http:///forum/post/2595966
i hear ya. i bet you're a big fan of the term "starfish." that one bugs me
also: yellow coris wrasse, strawberry basslet, any freshwater "eel", fw sharks, the list goes on and on. i'm sure many of these bogus distinctions started as marketing terms. but i have to stop myself sometimes and realize that most aquarists aren't "heavy users" like us.
how about mandarin goby....
http:///forum/post/2595966
i hear ya. i bet you're a big fan of the term "starfish." that one bugs me
also: yellow coris wrasse, strawberry basslet, any freshwater "eel", fw sharks, the list goes on and on. i'm sure many of these bogus distinctions started as marketing terms. but i have to stop myself sometimes and realize that most aquarists aren't "heavy users" like us.
how about mandarin goby....
N
nereef
Guest
scooter blenny, firefish goby, mantis shrimp, convict blenny/engineer goby. there's a fish that gets to my store from segrest farms named the "spotted sleeper blenny." wow, it's not sleeper/sandsifting goby, not a blenny, it's a sandperch.
binomial nomenclature is definately always the best way to describe an organism. to the light users it just seems overwhelming and complicated, but to us it's more simple. you always know what organism is being described.
binomial nomenclature is definately always the best way to describe an organism. to the light users it just seems overwhelming and complicated, but to us it's more simple. you always know what organism is being described.
ophiura
Active Member
Technically, they are not "corals" but the definition of "coral" is a bit free and loose as well. They are invertebrates, just like anemones are invertebrates, and like corals are invertebrates.
You are best, IMO, to call the Ricordea and Zoanthids which at least have a scientific basis. For the purposes of the hobby, most would probably consider them corals...but then true "soft corals" and true "hard corals" in this hobby are more distant taxonomically than zoanthids and hard corals...so they are really imposing an artificial classification on it.
You are best, IMO, to call the Ricordea and Zoanthids which at least have a scientific basis. For the purposes of the hobby, most would probably consider them corals...but then true "soft corals" and true "hard corals" in this hobby are more distant taxonomically than zoanthids and hard corals...so they are really imposing an artificial classification on it.
candycane
Active Member
I agree with the differences because of two reasons. This is pretty much the only time that I will get this techincal, LOL.
An invertebrates' dictionary or "textbook" defininition is: 'An animal lacking a backbone or notochord.......'. A notocord is 'a rod like cord of cells that forms the chief axial supporting structure of the body of the lower chordates, as amphioxus and the cyclostomes, and the embryos of the vertebrates'. Which invertebrates DO NOT have. Note hard corals have them. A mushroom is considered an Invertebrate because it lacks the ability to form a calcareous skeleton. Sometime this gets rather confusing because what about soft corals then. Well soft corals still have the ability to grow, reproduce and use calcium, in ways that invertebrates do not and never will.
I guess you could say that Corals have the ability to release calcareous deposits which in turn build a coral reef. You just don't really see a whole bunch of dead invertebrates leaving a reef behind.
As far as I know, there are only 4 classifications of creatures living in the sea. They definetely wouldn't be under Arthros' because they don't have jointed appendages or a hard exoskeleton. Couldn't be under Mollusks', because they do not have a soft unsegmented body (round is pretty segmented), a mantle, or a protective calcareous shell. They've already been tossed out of the vertebrate category because of numerous reasons, which leaves only one group.........I know i'm not taking the time to try to come up with a 5th, LMAO.
An invertebrates' dictionary or "textbook" defininition is: 'An animal lacking a backbone or notochord.......'. A notocord is 'a rod like cord of cells that forms the chief axial supporting structure of the body of the lower chordates, as amphioxus and the cyclostomes, and the embryos of the vertebrates'. Which invertebrates DO NOT have. Note hard corals have them. A mushroom is considered an Invertebrate because it lacks the ability to form a calcareous skeleton. Sometime this gets rather confusing because what about soft corals then. Well soft corals still have the ability to grow, reproduce and use calcium, in ways that invertebrates do not and never will.
I guess you could say that Corals have the ability to release calcareous deposits which in turn build a coral reef. You just don't really see a whole bunch of dead invertebrates leaving a reef behind.
As far as I know, there are only 4 classifications of creatures living in the sea. They definetely wouldn't be under Arthros' because they don't have jointed appendages or a hard exoskeleton. Couldn't be under Mollusks', because they do not have a soft unsegmented body (round is pretty segmented), a mantle, or a protective calcareous shell. They've already been tossed out of the vertebrate category because of numerous reasons, which leaves only one group.........I know i'm not taking the time to try to come up with a 5th, LMAO.
ophiura
Active Member
A skeleton of calcium carbonate does not make an animal a coral. Believe me, corals are Cnidarians. Anemones are Cnidarians. Zoanthids are Cnidarians. Jellyfish are Cnidarians. Cnidarians are invertebrates. There is no question about it whatsoever.
Echinoderms also have an internal calcium carbonate skeleton but are absolutely not vertebrates nor are they corals. Calcium carbonate as a structural support is not in any way a unique or definitive characteristic overall. There are somewhere around 30 or so Phyla of invertebrates (including Molluska, Arthropoda, Annelida, etc, etc...and one phylum of vertebrates (Chordata).
Corals are Cnidarians. Cnidarians are ALL invertebrates.
Believe me, I was stupid enough to study invertebrates for far too long in graduate school.
Cnidarians, including corals, were most definitely on my invertebrate zoology comprehensive exams.
Bad memories there.
So to the original question, the difference between a coral and an invert...All corals are invertebrates but not all invertebrates are corals.
Echinoderms also have an internal calcium carbonate skeleton but are absolutely not vertebrates nor are they corals. Calcium carbonate as a structural support is not in any way a unique or definitive characteristic overall. There are somewhere around 30 or so Phyla of invertebrates (including Molluska, Arthropoda, Annelida, etc, etc...and one phylum of vertebrates (Chordata).
Corals are Cnidarians. Cnidarians are ALL invertebrates.
Believe me, I was stupid enough to study invertebrates for far too long in graduate school.
So to the original question, the difference between a coral and an invert...All corals are invertebrates but not all invertebrates are corals.
stdreb27
Active Member
Originally Posted by ophiura
http:///forum/post/2596289
Starfish doesn't bother me nearly as much as brittlestar and serpentstar. That drives me absolutely flippin nuts.
Why?
http:///forum/post/2596289
Starfish doesn't bother me nearly as much as brittlestar and serpentstar. That drives me absolutely flippin nuts.
Why?
candycane
Active Member
I would agree that calcium carbonate does not make a coral a coral. Calcarous deposits and the secretion of calcareous however does (meaning the way it is utilized). IE; Echinoderms utilize Calcareous pieces to become what they are. They do not secrete calcareous enzymes out of their polyps to build their skeleton.
Calling it a Cnidarians does nothing more really then define the shape of an invertebrate (or coral). Cnidaria are just classided by their radially symmetrical body with a "blob like" internal cavity. Heck we didn't define the things, they were defined MILLIONS of years ago
. It's like trying to toss Choanoflagellate Protozoas' in with Anthozoas'; it doesn't really work that way.
Calling it a Cnidarians does nothing more really then define the shape of an invertebrate (or coral). Cnidaria are just classided by their radially symmetrical body with a "blob like" internal cavity. Heck we didn't define the things, they were defined MILLIONS of years ago
stdreb27
Active Member
Originally Posted by ophiura
http:///forum/post/2596349
Do you REALLY want to know?
Because I will be more than happy to explain, though it might reveal certain nuances of my personality. Such as being a geek.
yes, actually, and when are you going to speak at marsh?
http:///forum/post/2596349
Do you REALLY want to know?
Because I will be more than happy to explain, though it might reveal certain nuances of my personality. Such as being a geek.
yes, actually, and when are you going to speak at marsh?
reefkprz
Active Member
Originally Posted by ophiura
http:///forum/post/2596346
All corals are invertebrates but not all invertebrates are corals.
I almost wrote that in my post about nomenclature, but thought it would sound too cheeky, after reading it from some one else it doesnt sound cheeky at all.
http:///forum/post/2596346
All corals are invertebrates but not all invertebrates are corals.
I almost wrote that in my post about nomenclature, but thought it would sound too cheeky, after reading it from some one else it doesnt sound cheeky at all.
scopus tang
Active Member
Originally Posted by ophiura
http:///forum/post/2596349
Do you REALLY want to know?
Because I will be more than happy to explain, though it might reveal certain nuances of my personality. Such as being a geek.
^ +1 and while you're at it, about the proper terminology for Jellyfish ~ since the current trend in taxonomy is now to take "fish" out of all nonfish names.
Originally Posted by candycane
http:///forum/post/2596329
I agree with the differences because of two reasons. This is pretty much the only time that I will get this techincal, LOL.
An invertebrates' dictionary or "textbook" defininition is: 'An animal lacking a backbone or notochord.......'. A notocord is 'a rod like cord of cells that forms the chief axial supporting structure of the body of the lower chordates, as amphioxus and the cyclostomes, and the embryos of the vertebrates'. Which invertebrates DO NOT have. Note hard corals have them. A mushroom is considered an Invertebrate because it lacks the ability to form a calcareous skeleton. Sometime this gets rather confusing because what about soft corals then. Well soft corals still have the ability to grow, reproduce and use calcium, in ways that invertebrates do not and never will.
Canycane, are you saying (highlighted in red) that corals have a notochord or is this a typo?
http:///forum/post/2596349
Do you REALLY want to know?
Because I will be more than happy to explain, though it might reveal certain nuances of my personality. Such as being a geek.
^ +1 and while you're at it, about the proper terminology for Jellyfish ~ since the current trend in taxonomy is now to take "fish" out of all nonfish names.
Originally Posted by candycane
http:///forum/post/2596329
I agree with the differences because of two reasons. This is pretty much the only time that I will get this techincal, LOL.
An invertebrates' dictionary or "textbook" defininition is: 'An animal lacking a backbone or notochord.......'. A notocord is 'a rod like cord of cells that forms the chief axial supporting structure of the body of the lower chordates, as amphioxus and the cyclostomes, and the embryos of the vertebrates'. Which invertebrates DO NOT have. Note hard corals have them. A mushroom is considered an Invertebrate because it lacks the ability to form a calcareous skeleton. Sometime this gets rather confusing because what about soft corals then. Well soft corals still have the ability to grow, reproduce and use calcium, in ways that invertebrates do not and never will.
Canycane, are you saying (highlighted in red) that corals have a notochord or is this a typo?
candycane
Active Member
Originally Posted by Scopus Tang
http:///forum/post/2596490
^ +1 and while you're at it, about the proper terminology for Jellyfish ~ since the current trend in taxonomy is now to take "fish" out of all nonfish names.
Canycane, are you saying (highlighted in red) that corals have a notochord or is this a typo?
I am more or less saying that CORALS utilize certain things differently. Honestly, I forgot to add the E at the end of Note, LMAO. You could look at the list of animals in the phylum Chordata. Vertebrates, Tunicates, and Cephalochordates tend to be the main ones though.
It's definetely true that all corals are inverts. NONE of them have backbones as far as I know. I still agree with the fact that mushrooms are inverts. though.
http:///forum/post/2596490
^ +1 and while you're at it, about the proper terminology for Jellyfish ~ since the current trend in taxonomy is now to take "fish" out of all nonfish names.
Canycane, are you saying (highlighted in red) that corals have a notochord or is this a typo?
I am more or less saying that CORALS utilize certain things differently. Honestly, I forgot to add the E at the end of Note, LMAO. You could look at the list of animals in the phylum Chordata. Vertebrates, Tunicates, and Cephalochordates tend to be the main ones though.
It's definetely true that all corals are inverts. NONE of them have backbones as far as I know. I still agree with the fact that mushrooms are inverts. though.