It is not good, and is illegal in conservation areas where coral reefs are protected by law.
soft corals live deeper water than hard corals because soft corals do not create a hard outer skeleton as the hard corals do.
What would you consider to be a good fact? For that matter, what would define a 'bad' fact? Facts are facts, they have no innate goodness or badness. FACTS ABOUT CORALS: They're invertibrates, some have calcium carbonate skeletons, they're colorful, and people collect them.
It is not good, and is illegal in conservation areas where coral reefs are protected by law.
Corals are plants.
Corals are not decomposers. They are consumers.
Hermatypic corals contain zooxanthellae (a symbiotic algae), whereas ahermatypic corals do not. It is like saying that hermatypic corals are photosynthetic, where ahermatypic corals are non photosynthetic.
No, corals are not edible.
Yes, corals are composed of an exoskeleton
dynamite fishing and muro ami can destroy corals so if there are less corals, less corals will be produced.
No corals doesn't eat zooxanthellae they only eat zooplankton. Zooxanthallae helps corals to live and keeps corals colourful.They live on the coral polyps.
Many corals, specifically hermatypic corals, contain symbiotic algae that provide the coral with sugar from photosynthesis. Algae also feed zooplankton, which corals feed on. Basically, algae provide corals with food, indirectly.
John West Wells has written: 'Eocene corals from Eua, Tonga' -- subject(s): Fossil Corals, Fossil Fishes, Fossil Otoliths, Paleontology 'Some fossil corals from the West Indies' -- subject(s): Fossil Corals, Paleontology 'Fossil corals from Eniwetok Atoll' -- subject(s): Fossil Corals, Paleontology 'Recent corals of the Marshall Islands' -- subject(s): Corals