Author:
Gottschling Marc,Carbonell-Moore Maria Consuelo,Mertens Kenneth Neil,Kirsch Monika,Elbrächter Malte,Tillmann Urban
Abstract
AbstractDinophyte evolution is essentially inferred from the pattern of thecal plates, and two different labelling systems are used for the important subgroups Gonyaulacales and Peridiniales. The partiform hypotheca of cladopyxidoid dinophytes fits into the morphological concepts of neither group, although they are assigned to the Gonyaulacales. Here, we describe the thecate dinophyte Fensomea setacea, gen. & sp. nov., which has a cladopyxidoid tabulation. The cells displayed a Kofoidean plate formula APC, 3′, 4a, 7″, 7C, 6S, 6′′′, 2′′′′, and slender processes were randomly distributed over the echinate or baculate surface. In addition, we obtained rRNA sequences of F. setacea, gen. & sp. nov., but dinophytes that exhibit a partiform hypotheca did not show a close relationship to Gonyaulacales. Character evolution of thecate dinophytes may have progressed from the ancestral state of six postcingular plates, and two more or less symmetrically arranged antapical plates, towards patterns of only five postcingular plates (Peridiniales) or more asymmetrical configurations (Gonyaulacales). Based on our phylogenetic reconsiderations the contact between the posterior sulcal plate and the first postcingular plate, as well as the contact between an antapical plate and the distalmost postcingular plate, do not represent a rare, specialized gonyaulacoid plate configuration (i.e., the partiform hypotheca of cladopyxidoid dinophytes). Instead, these contacts correspond to the common and regular configuration of peridinioid (and other) dinophytes.
Funder
Alfred-Wegener-Institut, Helmholtz-Zentrum für Polar- und Meeresforschung (AWI)
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference67 articles.
1. Smetacek, V. Making sense of ocean biota: How evolution and biodiversity of land organisms differ from that of the plankton. J. Biosci. 37, 589–607 (2012).
2. Falkowski, P. G. et al. The evolution of modern eukaryotic phytoplankton. Science 305, 354–360 (2004).
3. Taylor, F. J. R. 24 Phylum Dinoflagellata in Handbook of Protoctista. The structure, cultivation, habitats and life histories of the eukaryotic microorganisms and their descendants exclusive of animals, plants and fungi. A guide to the algae, ciliates, foraminifera, sporozoa, water molds, slime molds and the other protoctists (eds Lynn Margulis, John O. Corliss, Michael Melkonian, & David J. Chapman) 419–437 (Jones and Bartlett, 1990).
4. Faust, M. A. & Gulledge, R. A. Identifying harmful marine dinoflagellates. Smith. Contr. US Natl. Herb. 42, 1–144 (2002).
5. Hackett, J. D., Anderson, D. M., Erdner, D. L. & Bhattacharya, D. Dinoflagellates: A remarkable evolutionary experiment. Am. J. Bot. 91, 1523–1534 (2004).