This will be my last post in the forum. I do not like the tone. In closing, after further study, I will state the following:
Both Erik and Chuck have made their decisions based on how this colony has looked in a small picture that does not show any detail at all. Second, and perhaps more telling, at least in accordance with Borneman's book on corals, they have not asked a single question about the sclerites. Sclerite placement, etc., is at least one factor in determining genus. Third, this specimen, in appearance, is not that different than the one contained on page 138 of Borneman's book, left hand column, second picture down. Fourth, this colony fits this portion of Borneman's description to a tea: "Colonies are somewhat broccoli-like, with upright stalks.... [A]nd the sclerites may even extend outside the polyp tissue. The scerites of Dendrophthelya are particularly needlelike, quite long..." Page 136
Additionally, until my participation in this forum, there was no mention of the W & S study, regardless of whether or not Erik and and Chuck find it of merit. As for the research they speak of, to date, it does not reach the level of the W & S study in the sense that because W & S used carbon tagging they established actual digestion of the planktonic matter as opposed to merely seeing an ingestion. I do not mean, in any manner, to suggest that Eric and Chuck are not succeeding, they are. But their methodolgy is not ready for prime time, they realize this, and it isn't even clear what the underlying reasons for their success are.
Finally, and I this is a bit of a dig, the accepted spelling of these things are: Dendronephthya (not Dendronepthya) and Nephthea (not Nepthea).
I thank all for their contributions during my stay in this forum.