Taxonomic revision of<i>Chattonella antiqua, C. marina</i>and<i>C. ovata</i>(Raphidophyceae) based on their morphological characteristics and genetic diversity

Demura, Mikihide; Nöel, Mary-Hélène; Kasai, Fumie; Watanabe, Makoto M.; Kawachi, Masanobu

doi:10.2216/08-98.1

Cited by 49 publications

(56 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The nucleotide differences between C. subsalsa and the Adriatic genotype were noticeably higher than the differences within the C. marina complex (Figs 1-5 and see Demura et al, 2009). Whereas the rather slowly evolving SSU showed only three base substitutions (out of 1773 aligned nucleotides) between previously described C. subsalsa and the new Adriatic strains, the highly variable D1/D2 region of the LSU (671 bp) yielded 25 substitutions (Figs 1, 2).…”

Section: Phylogenymentioning

confidence: 72%

“…The genetic similarity among the members of the C. marina clade is remarkable, given that species previously considered to be separate from it, C. antiqua and C. ovata, are apparently distinguishable morphologically (Bowers et al, 2006). Nevertheless, Demura et al (2009), who sequenced the ITS, rbcL and COI genes and examined the morphology of several strains assigned to the three species by LM observations, concluded that the relationships among them are so close that they should all be considered as varieties of C. marina. Our results are consistent with these previous studies of this species complex and consequently we believe that the conclusions of Demura et al (2009) should be accepted.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Nevertheless, Demura et al (2009), who sequenced the ITS, rbcL and COI genes and examined the morphology of several strains assigned to the three species by LM observations, concluded that the relationships among them are so close that they should all be considered as varieties of C. marina. Our results are consistent with these previous studies of this species complex and consequently we believe that the conclusions of Demura et al (2009) should be accepted.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Molecular studies on raphidophytes initially focused on classification of the entire class within a phylogenetic system (Cavalier-Smith & Chao, 1996). In several recent investigations gene sequences have been analysed from different species to trace phylogenetic relationships within the class (Hirashita et al, 2000;Bowers et al, 2006;Hosoi-Tanabe et al, 2006;Yamaguchi et al, 2008Yamaguchi et al, , 2010Demura et al, 2009;Band-Schmidt et al, 2012) and provide molecular tools for species identification (e.g. Tyrrell et al, 2002).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The classification of three species within the genus Chattonella is particularly problematic. Chattonella marina, C. antiqua and C. ovata were first described based upon morphological characters visible by light microscopy, but they were subsequently shown to exhibit high sequence similarities for different genetic markers (Hirashita et al, 2000;Bowers et al, 2006;HosoiTanabe et al, 2006;Demura et al, 2009). Based on the most recent molecular and morphological findings, it has been suggested that differences among these three taxa warrant them to be accorded at most varietal status (Demura et al, 2009), the valid name for the species being C. marina (Subrahmanyan) Y. Hara & Chihara , which comprises C. var.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Phylogeny and morphology of a Chattonella (Raphidophyceae) species from the Mediterranean Sea: what is C. subsalsa?

Klöpper

John

Zingone

et al. 2013

European Journal of Phycology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We analysed the molecular and morphological features of strains of Chattonella subsalsa isolated from the western Adriatic coast (Mediterranean Sea), with the aim of confirming their classification and elucidating their phylogenetic positions within the Raphidophyceae. We sequenced parts of the ribosomal operon, including the small subunit (SSU), the internal transcribed spacer region (ITS) and the large subunit (LSU) of the rDNA. Additionally, we analysed sequences of the chloroplast-encoded subunit psaA of Photosystem I (PSI) and rbcL, encoding the large subunit of the Rubisco gene. For three phylogenetic markers (LSU, ITS, rbcL), the sequences of the strains from the Adriatic Sea were identical and for two markers (SSU, psaA) only minor differences occurred. All strains were sister to, but well separated from, sequences from isolates in culture collections and from GenBank, thus far classified as belonging to C. subsalsa. Light and electron microscopy provided evidence for morphological differences between a strain of C. subsalsa (CCMP217) from the Gulf of Mexico and the isolates from the Adriatic Sea. Differences concerned the shape and arrangement of chloroplasts and the presence of mucocysts and other surface microstructures, which were only observed in isolates from the Adriatic Sea. This is the first evidence for two different taxa classified as C. subsalsa, which are clearly separated on the basis of several genetic markers and also show morphological differences. As compared with strains assigned to C. subsalsa from the NCMA (formerly CCMP) culture collection, the Adriatic strains more closely match the original species description. This would imply that strain CCMP217 and other genetically similar strains should be described under a new species name. Nevertheless, given the high morphological plasticity of Chattonella species, the definition of the true C. subsalsa must be decided based on detailed morphological and molecular analysis of more strains from other geographical areas.

show abstract

Section: Phylogenymentioning

confidence: 72%