Why do we use the term "Chalice?"

[returnofsid]

Maybe it's just a pet peeve of mine, but why do we use the term "Chalice?"

There are many Genus and Species of corals, that we commonly refer to, as "Chalice," yet they're vastly unrelated to one another.

Echinophyllia
Echinopora
Physophyllia
Leptoseris
Leptastria
Oxypora
Echinomorpha
Mycedium
Pectina

I'm sure there are more, but that's a list, off the top of my head, of corals that are generically referred to, as "Chalices." WHY??!!

 

[Troylee]

Well the only one I have seen grow into a shape of a chalice cup was my hollywood stunner.... Not really sure Michael...:tongue:

 

[returnofsid]

Speaking of the shape...the only corals that I would say grow into a "chalice" shape, would be Montipora species, such as capricornis and maybe Turbinaria...lol. Neither of these are referred to as "chalice."

 

[Russellaqua]

My guess is that it's in reference to a gross generalization based on morphology. Basically, any relatively flat-growing (though in the case of Pectinia sp. this certainly isn't the case) zooxanthellate (I am unaware of any coral referred to as a "chalice" that does not derive some of its' energy from a symbiotic relationship) scleractinian (stony coral) is referred to as a "chalice." Similar problems exist with Actinodiscus sp. and Rhodactis sp. ("mushrooms") and the "leathers" (Sarcophyton sp., Nephthea sp., Sinularia sp., etc.) The terms are so entrenched in the hobby that they will probably always be there, but they certainly are much more imprecise. The difference in genera and species may account for why some "chalices" seem to be more tempermental than others in our tanks, browning out, or not growing well. By labeling everything chalice it implies that success with one will lead to success with others, which is not necessarily the case. A better understanding of the genera and species we keep might elucidate differences in their care, which could be passed on to other reef-keepers, helping them attain success.

 

[Troylee]

Yeah I agree the scroll coral looks like a chalice to me... Dunno..:tongue:

 

[reefkoi]

didnt tyree come up with chalice years and years ago? like before anyone knew what they were.....I dunno thats what comes to mind anyway for me

 

[returnofsid]

Yes, from my reading, Tyree came up with the name, circa 1995, with the Tyree Blue Chalice, an Echinopora lamellosa. I think it probably caught on, as a marketing ploy, attempting to make certain corals appear very rare, think "Holy Grail," which is thought to have been a chalice...lol

 

[droblack]

They look more like plates or saucers to me. My Toxic Pie did grow in the shape of a bowl.

 

[brahm]

Because we are lazy, and nobody takes the time to ID different unless it's VERY obvious.

 

[CalmSeasQuest]

Just a guess - Perhaps because it's easier than Echinophyllia,Echinopora,Physophyllia,Leptoseris,Leptastria,Oxypora,Echinomorpha,Mycedium,Pectina...

:tongue:

 

[clowns101]

I agree with Russle, but then again, I may be worng.

 

[returnofsid]

Or is it because, 10 years ago, you could buy a huge colony of Echinophyllia, for under $50.00. Once the "Chalice craze" hit, that same Echinophyllia became $100.00 per eye! It suddenly became the "Holy Grail" of corals.

 

[FateX8]

if i had to guess, id agree with the echinopora lamellosa being labelled as a "chalice" in that it does form a cupping structure and maybe "chalice" sounded better then cup or bowl
as for all the other genuses being lumped together in the "chalice" namesake, id guess that the other genuses look similar enough to echinopora and people just kept on calling them that and it just stuck
in terms of the pricing...well i dont think the name "chalice" is what drove them up seeing that they have been around for a while and the prices only have been going up recently (past few years)

 

[SDguy]

Several of mine (various species) have grown into the same shape as a traditional cup coral... but the name cup coral was already taken, so why not chalice :bigsmile: