CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · Science & Nature

Lophelia

species of cnidarian

Specimen drawers, botanical folios and brass scientific instruments under study light
Science and natureInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionSep 10, 2026
Entity authorityQ2703346 ↗
Source-derived summary

Lophelia pertusa, the only species in the genus Lophelia, is a cold-water coral that grows in the deep waters throughout the North Atlantic ocean, as well as parts of the Caribbean Sea and Alboran Sea. Although L. pertusa reefs are home to a diverse community, the species is extremely slow growing and may be harmed by destructive fishing practices, or oil exploration and extraction.

Biology

Lophelia pertusa is a reef building, deep water coral, but it does not contain zooxanthellae, the symbiotic algae which lives inside most tropical reef building corals. Lophelia lives at a temperature range from about 4–12 °C (39–54 °F) and at depths between 80 metres (260 ft) and over 3,000 metres (9,800 ft), but most commonly at depths of 200–1,000 metres (660–3,280 ft), where there is no sunlight.

As a coral, it represents a colonial organism, which consists of many individuals. New polyps live and build upon the calcium carbonate skeletal remains of previous generations. Living coral ranges in colour from white to orange-red; each polyp has up to 16 tentacles and is a translucent pink, yellow or white. Unlike most tropical corals, the polyps are not interconnected by living tissue. Some colonies have larger polyps while others have small and delicate-looking ones. Radiocarbon dating indicates that some Lophelia reefs in the waters off North Carolina may be 40,000 years old, with individual living coral bushes as much as 1,000 years old.

Editorial summary

The public source identifies “Lophelia” as species of cnidarian. This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around Lophelia, species and cnidarian.

Editorial reviewA practical orientation to terminology and classification, particularly when read beside dated observations, specimens or technical literature. The current 236-word lead offers orientation but no explicit four-digit date, so chronology should not be assumed. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. Its value is orientation rather than verdict, with Lophelia, species and cnidarian providing the first useful test.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

A short description can identify a subject without explaining its stakes. For “Lophelia”, the useful work is to connect “species of cnidarian” to the records capable of establishing context and consequence.

Evidence profile

Stable identifiers, scientific names and standards terminology offer the best bridge between this overview and specialist evidence. The source revision retrieved here is dated Sep 10, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q2703346. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference.

Critical limits

A general summary may omit uncertainty, sample limits or methodological disagreement that is explicit in the technical record. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Check terminology, classification and the date of the cited evidence. Scientific names and technical consensus can change while older records retain historical value.

Best used for
  • Current terminology
  • Classification context
  • Finding cited technical literature
Verify next

Primary datasets, specimen catalogues, standards bodies and the most recent peer-reviewed literature.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Lophelia”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Lophelia primary sources, Lophelia archive and Lophelia research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Lophelia”?
  2. Is the terminology current, historical or disputed?
  3. Has classification or technical consensus changed since the cited source?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “Lophelia” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.