Dinoflagellates

Carty, Susan

doi:10.1016/b978-012741550-5/50021-0

Cited by 20 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 109 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Some species are multitrophic and able to switch between autotrophy, herbivory, and parasitism. Many species are surrounded by an armored theca of cellulose plates (Carty, ). The dormant propagule produced by dinoflagellates is a cyst resulting from sexual reproduction (Dale, ).…”

Section: Other Freshwater Organisms With Dormancy Stagesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Paleolimnology and resurrection ecology: The future of reconstructing the past

Burge

Edlund

Frisch

2017

Evolutionary Applications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Paleolimnologists have utilized lake sediment records to understand historical lake and landscape development, timing and magnitude of environmental change at lake, watershed, regional and global scales, and as historical datasets to target watershed and lake management. Resurrection ecologists have long recognized lake sediments as sources of viable propagules (“seed or egg banks”) with which to explore questions of community ecology, ecological response, and evolutionary ecology. Most researchers consider Daphnia as the primary model organism in these efforts, but many other aquatic biota, from viruses to macrophytes, similarly produce viable propagules that are incorporated in the sediment record but have been underutilized in resurrection ecology. The common goals shared by these two disciplines have led to mutualistic and synergistic collaborations—a development that must be encouraged to expand. We give an overview of the achievements of paleolimnology and the reconstruction of environmental history of lakes, review the untapped diversity of aquatic organisms that produce dormant propagules, compare Daphnia as a model of resurrection ecology with other organisms amenable to resurrection studies, especially diatoms, and consider new research directions that represent the nexus of these two fields.

show abstract

Section: Other Freshwater Organisms With Dormancy Stagesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Many species are surrounded by an armored theca of cellulose plates (Carty, 2003). The dormant propagule produced by dinoflagellates is a cyst resulting from sexual reproduction (Dale, 1983).…”

Section: Other Freshwater Organisms With Dormancy Stagesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Paleolimnology and resurrection ecology: The future of reconstructing the past

Burge

Edlund

Frisch

2017

Evolutionary Applications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Freshwater dinoflagellates that are naked (athecate) and possess an indistinct sulcus and an incomplete cingulum that does not fully encircle the cell have varied descriptions and a confused taxonomy, alternatively being classified as Bernardinium or Esoptrodinium in identification keys and the scientific literature (Popovský and Pfiester 1990, Javornický 1997, Carty 2003, Calado et al. 2006).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…According to Javornický (1997), the taxon with the right‐handed cingulum is Bernardinium . This is problematic because the name Bernardinium (Chodat 1924) has taxonomic priority for these dinoflagellates and is also used to describe them irrespective of cingulum orientation in most primary literature and taxonomic keys (Thompson 1951, Javornický 1962, Starmach 1974, Popovský and Pfiester 1990, Carty 2003, Moestrup et al. 2009).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

CYTOLOGICAL AND PHYLOGENETIC DIVERSITY IN FRESHWATER ESOPTRODINIUM/BERNARDINIUM SPECIES (DINOPHYCEAE)¹

Fawcett¹,

Parrow²

2012

Journal of Phycology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The genera Esoptrodinium Javornický and Bernardinium Chodat comprise freshwater, athecate dinoflagellates with an incomplete cingulum but differing reports regarding cingulum orientation and the presence of chloroplasts and an eyespot. To examine this reported diversity, six isolates were collected from different freshwater ponds and brought into clonal culture. The isolates were examined using LM to determine major cytological differences, and rDNA sequences were compared to determine relatedness and overall phylogenetic position within the dinoflagellates. All isolates were athecate with a left-oriented cingulum that did not fully encircle the cell, corresponding to the current taxonomic concept of Esoptrodinium. However, consistent cytological differences were observed among clonal isolates. Most isolates exhibited unambiguous pale green chloroplasts and a distinct bright-red eyespot located at the base of the longitudinal flagellum. However, one isolate had cryptic chloroplasts that were difficult to observe using LM, and another had an eyespot that was so reduced as to be almost undetectable. Another isolate lacked visible chloroplasts but did possess the characteristic eyespot. Nuclear rDNA phylogenies strongly supported a monophyletic Esoptrodinium clade containing all isolates from this study together with a previous sequence from Portugal, within the Tovelliaceae. Esoptrodinium subclades were largely correlated with cytological differences, and the data suggested that independent chloroplast and eyespot reduction and/or loss may have occurred within this taxon. Overall, the isolates encompassed the majority of cytological diversity reported in previous observations of Bernardinium/Esoptrodinium in field samples. Systematic issues with the current taxonomic distinction between Bernardinium and Esoptrodinium are discussed.

show abstract

“…The resulting sediment was pipetted onto the Superfrost slides and examined for the presence of morphologically similar congeners using the methods described above. The following taxonomic publications were used to aid protist identification: Andersen and Preisig (2002), Carty (2003), Dodge and Lee (2000), Foissner et al (1995), Foissner, Berger, and Kohmann (1992), Foissner, Berger, and Schaumburg (1999), Kugrens and Clay (2003), Kugrens, Lee, and Hill (2000), Lynn and Small (2000), Patterson (1992, 2000), Popovsky and Pfiester (1990), Siver (2003), Skuja (1956), Stramach (1985), Sun et al (2006), Taft and Taft (1971).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Application of Combined Morphological–Molecular Approaches to the Identification of Planktonic Protists from Environmental Samples

Duff

Ball

Lavrentyev

2008

J Eukaryotic Microbiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The value of molecular databases for unicellular eukaryotic identification and phylogenetic reconstruction is predicated on the availability of sequences and accuracy of taxonomic identifications that accompany those sequences. Biased representation of sequences is due in part to the differing ability to isolate and culture various groups of protists. Techniques that allow for parallel single-cell morphological and molecular identifications have been reported for a few groups of unicellular protists. We have sought to explore how those techniques can be adapted to work across a greater phylogenetic diversity of taxa. Twelve morphologically diverse and abundant members of limnetic microplankton, including ciliates, dinoflagellates, cryptophytes, stramenopiles, and synurophytes, were targeted for analysis. These cells were captured directly from environmental samples, identified, and prepared for sequence analyses using variations of single-cell extraction techniques depending on their size, mobility, and the absence or presence of the cell wall. The application of these techniques yielded a strong congruence between the morphological and molecular identifications of the targeted taxa. Challenges to the single-cell approach in some groups are discussed. The general ability to obtain DNA sequences and morphological descriptions from individual cells should open new avenues to studying either rare or difficult to culture taxa, even directly at the point of collection (e.g. remote locations or shipboard).

show abstract

Dinoflagellates

Cited by 20 publications

References 109 publications

Paleolimnology and resurrection ecology: The future of reconstructing the past

Paleolimnology and resurrection ecology: The future of reconstructing the past

CYTOLOGICAL AND PHYLOGENETIC DIVERSITY IN FRESHWATER ESOPTRODINIUM/BERNARDINIUM SPECIES (DINOPHYCEAE)¹

Application of Combined Morphological–Molecular Approaches to the Identification of Planktonic Protists from Environmental Samples

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Dinoflagellates

Cited by 20 publications

References 109 publications

Paleolimnology and resurrection ecology: The future of reconstructing the past

Paleolimnology and resurrection ecology: The future of reconstructing the past

CYTOLOGICAL AND PHYLOGENETIC DIVERSITY IN FRESHWATER ESOPTRODINIUM/BERNARDINIUM SPECIES (DINOPHYCEAE)1

Application of Combined Morphological–Molecular Approaches to the Identification of Planktonic Protists from Environmental Samples

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

CYTOLOGICAL AND PHYLOGENETIC DIVERSITY IN FRESHWATER ESOPTRODINIUM/BERNARDINIUM SPECIES (DINOPHYCEAE)¹