Solenocaulon sterroclonium

Opinion: It is not possible to determine if this species occurs in the region. Justification: These Indian records seem to be either invalid or unconfirmable: Thomson & Simpson 1909: 157 – 159, 160 – 161 (table) (Andamans); Fernando 2011: 16, pl. 1, fig. 1 – 1 f (Tuticorin); Fernando et al. 2017: 12, pl. 1, fig. 1 – 1 c (Tuticorin).

Literature analysis: This species was first described from Indonesia. The report by Thomson & Simpson (1909) is not illustrated so it is impossible to know what species these authors had. The descriptions of Indian material by Fernando (2011) and Fernando et al. (2017) are identical and very brief, and it is impossible to relate the small figures of dense mixtures of sclerites to any species. These authors refer the reader to the description given by Grasshoff (2000) for a specimen from the Red Sea. Rao & Devi (2003: 94) just list the species. We wonder if the illustrations for Solenocaulon sterroclonium (plate 1) and for S. tortuosum (plate 2) of Fernando (2011) and Fernando et al. (2017) are perhaps reversed. The colony captioned as Solenocaulon sterroclonium has no substantial, narrow branches, which is quite unlike the illustrations given by Germanos and Grasshoff, but is much more like S. tortuosum as figured by Gray (1862: 36). On the other hand, the colony figured by the Indian authors for S. tortuosum does have substantial, narrow branches and resembles Grasshoff’s figures for S. sterroclonium.