Echinogorgia macrospiculata Thomson & Simpson, 1909

Echinogorgia macrospiculata Thomson & Simpson, 1909: 219–220, pl. 5, fig. 7, pl. 4, fig. 8; pl. 8, fig. 1 (Andamans)

? Echinogorgia macrospiculata Samimi-Namin & van Ofwegen 2009: 20 .

Opinion: This taxon occurs in the region but its true identity is unknown.

Justification:

These Indian records are either unconfirmable or seem to be invalid: Thomas et al. 1995: 139, fig. 2e, 1–4 (NE coast of India); Fernando 2011: 59–60, pl. 36, fig. 1– 1g (Pamban); Fernando et al. 2017: 125, pl. 57, fig. 1– 1g (Pamban).

Literature analysis: Although Kükenthal (1919 & 1924) treated this species as an Echinogorgia the original description is not adequate enough to be certain of this diagnosis. Samimi-Namin & van Of wegen (2009) commented that the material needed to be redescribed before any specimens were assigned to this species. Consequently, any subsequent records of its occurrence have to have been based on assumptions and are unreliable.

Thomas et al. (1995) described the species as having broad plates, some unilaterally spined, but their simple outline drawings and colony description places their material in Paraplexaura . The accounts of Indian material by Fernando (2011) and Fernando et al. (2017) are identical, but the shape of the figured colony combined with the images of massive sclerites with long, sharp thorns, indicate their material also belongs in the genus Paraplexaura, with obvious similarities to their Echinogorgia longispinosa (= Paraplexaura longispinosa).