Justification: These Indian records seem to be either invalid or unconfirmable: Fernando, 2011: 97 – 98, pl. 61, fig. 1 – 1 c (SE coast); Fernando et al. 2017: 199, pl. 91, fig. 1 – 1 c (SE coast). Literature analysis: The descriptions of the Indian material by Fernando (2011) and Fernando et al. (2017) are identical. The illustrated colony is branched in an irregular lateral manner with relatively thick branches, whereas the colonies figured by Ridley (1888) and Williams & Vennam (2001) are pinnate and have very thin branches (Ridley: 1 – 1.5 mm thick). The sclerites figures given by Fernando (2011) and Fernando et al. (2017) are very small and unsharp so it is not possible to see a lot of detail, but nearly all seem to be short, stout spindles of the same size, some curved, with a well-defined waist between 2 distinct girdles of large, warts, and possibly another girdle and some terminal warts at each end. Scaphoids seem to be absent or are very indistinct. Williams & Vennam (2001) describe the sclerites as including elongate spindles with many girdles of warts and scaphoids that are mostly long, narrow, and well developed. They also say this species is one of two that have the highest proportion of scaphoids in the genus, which tallies with Ridley’s account where he only describes scaphoids and describes them as being slender and pointed. It would seem that that the colony described by Fernando’s does not fit this species; however, as the original samples came from Mergui it would not be surprising if it was eventually discovered off the Andaman and Nicobar Islands.
Sumber: The taxonomy of Indian gorgonians: an assessment of the descriptive records of gorgonians (Anthozoa: Octocorallia: Alcyonacea) recorded as occurring in the territorial waters of India, along with neighbouring regions and the Andaman and Nicobar Islands, and the highlighting of perceived unethical practice