No abstract

In the absence of purified standards of toxins from Pfiesteria species, appropriately conducted fish bioassays are the "gold standard" that must be used to detect toxic strains of Pfiesteria spp. from natural estuarine water or sediment samples and to culture actively toxic Pfiesteria. In this article, we describe the standardized steps of our fish bioassay as an abbreviated term for a procedure that includes two sets of trials with fish, following the Henle-Koch postulates modified for toxic rather than infectious agents. This procedure was developed in 1991, and has been refined over more than 12 years of experience in research with toxic Pfiesteria. The steps involve isolating toxic strains of Pfiesteria (or other potentially, as-yet-undetected, toxic Pfiesteria or Pfiesteria-like species) from fish-killing bioassays with natural samples; growing the clones with axenic algal prey; and retesting the isolates in a second set of fish bioassays. The specific environmental conditions used (e.g., temperature, salinity, light, other factors) must remain flexible, given the wide range of conditions from which natural estuarine samples are derived. We present a comparison of information provided for fish culture conditions, reported in international science journals in which such research is routinely published, and we provide information from more than 2,000 fish bioassays with toxic Pfiesteria, along with recommendations for suitable ranges and frequency of monitoring of environmental variables. We present data demonstrating that algal assays, unlike these standardized fish bioassays, should not be used to detect toxic strains of Pfiesteria spp. Finally, we recommend how quality control/assurance can be most rapidly advanced among laboratories engaged in studies that require research-quality isolates of toxic Pfiesteria spp.

In the absence of purified standards of toxins from Pfiesteria species, appropriately conducted fish bioassays are the "gold standard" that must be used to detect toxic strains of Pfiesteria spp. from natural estuarine water or sediment samples and to culture actively toxic Pfiesteria. In this article, we describe the standardized steps of our fish bioassay as an abbreviated term for a procedure that includes two sets of trials with fish, following the Henle-Koch postulates modified for toxic rather than infectious agents. This procedure was developed in 1991, and has been refined over more than 12 years of experience in research with toxic Pfiesteria. The steps involve isolating toxic strains of Pfiesteria (or other potentially, as-yet-undetected, toxic Pfiesteria or Pfiesteria-like species) from fish-killing bioassays with natural samples; growing the clones with axenic algal prey; and retesting the isolates in a second set of fish bioassays. The specific environmental conditions used (e.g., temperature, salinity, light, other factors) must remain flexible, given the wide range of conditions from which natural estuarine samples are derived. We present a comparison of information provided for fish culture conditions, reported in international science journals in which such research is routinely published, and we provide information from more than 2,000 fish bioassays with toxic Pfiesteria, along with recommendations for suitable ranges and frequency of monitoring of environmental variables. We present data demonstrating that algal assays, unlike these standardized fish bioassays, should not be used to detect toxic strains of Pfiesteria spp. Finally, we recommend how quality control/assurance can be most rapidly advanced among laboratories engaged in studies that require research-quality isolates of toxic Pfiesteria spp.

No abstract

Dinoflagellates can be classified both botanically and zoologically; however, they are typically put in the botanical division Pyrrhophyta. As a group they appear most related to the protistan ciliates and apicomplexans at the ultrastructure level. Within the Pyrrhophyta are both unarmored and armored forms of the dominant, motile flagellated stage. Unarmored dinoflagellates do not have thecal or wall plates arranged in specific series, whereas armored species have plates that vary in thickness but are specific in number and arrangement. In armored dinoflagellates, the plate pattern and tabulation is a diagnostic character at the family, subfamily, and even genus levels. In most cases, the molecular characterization of dinoflagellates confirms the taxonomy on the basis of external morphology; this has been demonstrated for several groups. Together, both genetic and morphological criteria are becoming increasingly important for the characterization, separation, and identification of dinoflagellates species. Pfiesteria and Pfiesteria-like species are thinly armored forms with motile dinospore stages characterized by their distinct plate formulae. Pfiesteria piscicida is the best-known member of the genus; however, there is at least one other species. Other genetically and morphologically related genera, now grouped under the common names of "Lucy," "Shepherd's crook," and cryptoperidiniopsoid, are being studied and described in separate works. All these other heterotrophic dinoflagellate groups, many of which are thought to be benign, co-occur in estuarine waters where Pfiesteria has been found.