DOCSLIB.ORG

Revisions to the Classification, Nomenclature, and Diversity Of

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

PROF. SINA ADL (Orcid ID : 0000-0001-6324-6065) PROF. DAVID BASS (Orcid ID : 0000-0002-9883-7823) DR. CÉDRIC BERNEY (Orcid ID : 0000-0001-8689-9907) DR. PACO CÁRDENAS (Orcid ID : 0000-0003-4045-6718) DR. IVAN CEPICKA (Orcid ID : 0000-0002-4322-0754) DR. MICAH DUNTHORN (Orcid ID : 0000-0003-1376-4109) PROF. BENTE EDVARDSEN (Orcid ID : 0000-0002-6806-4807) DR. DENIS H. LYNN (Orcid ID : 0000-0002-1554-7792) DR. EDWARD A.D MITCHELL (Orcid ID : 0000-0003-0358-506X) PROF. JONG SOO PARK (Orcid ID : 0000-0001-6253-5199) DR. GUIFRÉ TORRUELLA (Orcid ID : 0000-0002-6534-4758) Article DR. VASILY V. ZLATOGURSKY (Orcid ID : 0000-0002-2688-3900) Article type : Original Article Corresponding author mail id: [email protected] Adl et al.---Classification of Eukaryotes Revisions to the Classification, Nomenclature, and Diversity of Eukaryotes Sina M. Adla, David Bassb,c, Christopher E. Laned, Julius Lukeše,f, Conrad L. Schochg, Alexey Smirnovh, Sabine Agathai, Cedric Berneyj, Matthew W. Brownk,l, Fabien Burkim, Paco Cárdenasn, Ivan Čepičkao, Ludmila Chistyakovap, Javier del Campoq, Micah Dunthornr,s, Bente Edvardsent, Yana Eglitu, Laure Guillouv, Vladimír Hamplw, Aaron A. Heissx, Mona Hoppenrathy, Timothy Y. Jamesz, Sergey Karpovh, Eunsoo Kimx, Martin Koliskoe, Alexander Kudryavtsevh,aa, Daniel J. G. Lahrab, Enrique Laraac,ad, Line Le Gallae, Denis H. Lynnaf,ag, David G. Mannah, Ramon Massana i Moleraq, Edward A. D. Mitchellac,ai , Christine Morrowaj, Jong Soo Parkak, Jan W. Pawlowskial, Martha J. Powellam, Daniel J. Richteran, Sonja Rueckertao, Lora Shadwickap, Satoshi Shimanoaq, Frederick W. Spiegelap, Guifré Torruella i Cortesar, Noha Youssefas, Vasily Zlatogurskyh,at, Qianqian Zhangau,av. This article has been accepted for publication and undergone full peer review but has not Accepted been through the copyediting, typesetting, pagination and proofreading process, which may lead to differences between this version and the Version of Record. Please cite this article as doi: 10.1111/jeu.12691 This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. a Department of Soil Sciences, College of Agriculture and Bioresources, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK Canada, and b Dept of Life Sciences, The Natural History Museum, Cromwell Road, London SW7 5BD, and c Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science (CEFAS), Barrack Road, The Nothe, Weymouth, Dorset DT4 8UB, and d Department of Biological Sciences, University of Rhode Island, Kingston, Rhode Island, 02881 USA, and eInstitute of Parasitology, Biology Centre, Czech Academy of Sciences, 37005 České Budějovice, Czechia, and fFaculty of Science, University of South Bohemia, 37005 České Budějovice, Czechia, and gNational Institute for Biotechnology Information, National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA, and hDepartment of Invertebrate Zoology, Faculty of Biology, Saint Petersburg State University, 199034 Saint Petersburg, Russia, and iDepartment of Biosciences, University of Salzburg, Hellbrunnerstrasse 34, A-5020 Salzburg, Austria, and jCNRS, UMR 7144 (AD2M), Groupe Evolution des Protistes et Ecosystèmes Pélagiques, Station Biologique de Roscoff, Place Georges Teissier, Roscoff 29680, France, and kDepartment of Biological Sciences, Mississippi State University, MS USA, and lInstitute for Genomics, Biocomputing & Biotechnology, Mississippi State University, MS USA, and mDepartment of Organismal Biology, Program in Systematic Biology, Science for Life Laboratory, Article Uppsala University, Uppsala 75236, Sweden, and nPharmacognosy, Department of Medicinal Chemistry, Uppsala University, BMC Box 574, SE-75123 Uppsala, Sweden, and oDepartment of Zoology, Faculty of Science, Charles University, Vinicna 7, 128 44 Prague, Czechia, and pCore Facility Centre for Culture Collection of Microorganisms, Saint Petersburg State University, 198504 Saint Petersburg, Russia, and q Institut de Ciències del Mar, CSIC, Passeig Marítim de la Barceloneta, 37-49 08003 Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain, and rDepartment of Ecology, University of Kaiserslautern, Erwin-Schroedinger Street, D-67663 Kaiserslautern, Germany, and sDepartment of Eukaryotic Microbiology, University of Duisburg-Essen, Universitätsstrasse 5, D- 45141 Essen, Germany, and tDepartment of Biosciences, University of Oslo, P.O. Box 1066 Blindern, 0316 Oslo, Norway, and uDepartment of Biology, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada, and vSorbonne Université, Université Pierre et Marie Curie - Paris 6, CNRS, UMR 7144 (AD2M), Station Biologique de Roscoff, Place Georges Teissier, CS90074, 29688 Roscoff, France, and wDepartment of Parasitology, Faculty of Science, Charles University, BIOCEV, Průmyslová 595, 252 42 Vestec, Czechia, and xDepartment of Invertebrate Zoology, American Museum of Natural History, New York, NY 10024 USA, and ySenckenberg am Meer, DZMB – German Centre for Marine Biodiversity Research, D-26382 Wilhelmshaven, Germany, and z Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 USA, and aaLaboratory of Parasitic Worms and Protistology, Zoological Institute RAS, 199034 Saint Petersburg, Russia, and abDepartment of Zoology, Institute of Biosciences, University of Sao Paulo, Matao Travessa 14 Cidade Universitaria, Sao Paulo, 05508-090 SP, Brazil, and acLaboratory of Soil Biodiversity, University of Neuchâtel, Rue Emile-Argand 11, Neuchâtel, Accepted Switzerland, and This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. adReal Jardín Botánico, CSIC, Plaza de Murillo 2, 28014 Madrid, Spain, and aeInstitut de Systématique, Évolution, Biodiversité, Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle, Sorbonne Universités, 57 rue Cuvier, CP 39 75005, Paris, France, and afDepartment of Integrative Biology, University of Guelph, Summerlee Science Complex, Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1 Canada, and agDepartment of Zoology, University of British Columbia, 4200-6270 University Blvd., Vancouver, British Columbia V6T 1Z4 Canada, and ahRoyal Botanic Garden, Edinburgh, EH3 5LR, United Kingdom and Institute for Agrifood Research and Technology, C/ Poble Nou km 5.5, Sant Carles de La Ràpita, E-43540 Spain , and aiJardin Botanique de Neuchâtel, Chemin du Perthuis-du-Sault 58, CH-2000 Neuchâtel, Switzerland, and ajDepartment of Natural Sciences, National Museums Northern Ireland, 153 Bangor Road, Holywood BT18 OEU, Northern Ireland, UK, and akDepartment of Oceanography and Kyungpook Institute of Oceanography, School of Earth System Sciences, Kyungpook National University, Daegu, Republic of Korea, and alDepartment of Genetics and Evolution, University of Geneva 1211, Geneva 4, Switzerland, and amDepartment of Biological Sciences, The University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, AL 35487 USA, and anInstitut de Biologia Evolutiva (CSIC-Univeritat Pompeu Fabra), Passeig Marítim de la Barceloneta 37-49, 08003 Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain, and aoSchool of Applied Sciences, Edinburgh Napier University, Edinburgh, EH11 4BN, United Kingdom, and ap Article Department of Biological Sciences, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, Arkansas, USA, and aqScience Research Centre, Hosei University, 2-17-1 Fujimi, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo, 102-8160, Japan, and arLaboratoire Evolution et Systématique, Université Paris-XI, 91405 Orsay, France, and asDepartment of Microbiology and Molecular Genetics, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK 74074 USA, and atDepartment of Organismal Biology, Systematic Biology Program, Uppsala university, Uppsala, Sweden, and au Yantai Institute of Coastal Zone Research, Chinese Academy of Science, Yantai 264003, China, and avInstitute of Evolution & Marine Biodiversity, Ocean University of China, Qingdao 266003, China. Abstract: This revision of the classification of eukaryotes follows that of Adl et al., 2012 [J. Euk. Microbiol. 59(5)] and retains an emphasis on protists. Changes since have improved the resolution of many nodes in phylogenetic analyses. For some clades even families are being clearly resolved. As we had predicted, environmental sampling in the intervening years has massively increased the genetic information at hand. Consequently, we have discovered novel clades, exciting new genera, and uncovered a massive species level diversity beyond the morphological species descriptions. Several clades known from environmental samples only have found their home. Sampling soils, deeper marine waters, and the deep sea will continue to fill us with surprises. The main changes in this revision are the confirmation that eukaryotes form at least two domains, the loss of monophyly in the Exavata, robust support for the Haptista and Cryptista. We provide suggested primer sets for DNA sequences from environmental samples that are effective for each clade. We have provided a guide to trophic functional guilds in an appendix, to facilitate the interpretation of environmental samples. Accepted This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. THIS revision of the classification of eukaryotes updates that of the International Society of Protistologists (Adl et al., 2012). Since then, there has been a massive increase in DNA sequence information of phylogenetic relevance from environmental samples. We now have a much better sense of the undescribed biodiversity in our environment (Pawlowski et al., 2012; de Vargas et al., 2015). While significant, it still remains a partial estimation as several continents and soils in general are poorly sampled, and the deeper ocean is hard to reach. This new data clarified phylogenetic relationships and the new information is incorporated
Recommended publications

  • Molecular Data and the Evolutionary History of Dinoflagellates by Juan Fernando Saldarriaga Echavarria Diplom, Ruprecht-Karls-Un

    Molecular data and the evolutionary history of dinoflagellates by Juan Fernando Saldarriaga Echavarria Diplom, Ruprecht-Karls-Universitat Heidelberg, 1993 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES Department of Botany We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA November 2003 © Juan Fernando Saldarriaga Echavarria, 2003 ABSTRACT New sequences of ribosomal and protein genes were combined with available morphological and paleontological data to produce a phylogenetic framework for dinoflagellates. The evolutionary history of some of the major morphological features of the group was then investigated in the light of that framework. Phylogenetic trees of dinoflagellates based on the small subunit ribosomal RNA gene (SSU) are generally poorly resolved but include many well- supported clades, and while combined analyses of SSU and LSU (large subunit ribosomal RNA) improve the support for several nodes, they are still generally unsatisfactory. Protein-gene based trees lack the degree of species representation necessary for meaningful in-group phylogenetic analyses, but do provide important insights to the phylogenetic position of dinoflagellates as a whole and on the identity of their close relatives. Molecular data agree with paleontology in suggesting an early evolutionary radiation of the group, but whereas paleontological data include only taxa with fossilizable cysts, the new data examined here establish that this radiation event included all dinokaryotic lineages, including athecate forms. Plastids were lost and replaced many times in dinoflagellates, a situation entirely unique for this group. Histones could well have been lost earlier in the lineage than previously assumed.
  • Molecular Phylogenetic Position of Hexacontium Pachydermum Jørgensen (Radiolaria)

    Molecular Phylogenetic Position of Hexacontium Pachydermum Jørgensen (Radiolaria)

    Marine Micropaleontology 73 (2009) 129–134 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Marine Micropaleontology journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/marmicro Molecular phylogenetic position of Hexacontium pachydermum Jørgensen (Radiolaria) Tomoko Yuasa a,⁎, Jane K. Dolven b, Kjell R. Bjørklund b, Shigeki Mayama c, Osamu Takahashi a a Department of Astronomy and Earth Sciences, Tokyo Gakugei University, Koganei, Tokyo 184-8501, Japan b Natural History Museum, University of Oslo, P.O. Box 1172, Blindern, 0318 Oslo, Norway c Department of Biology, Tokyo Gakugei University, Koganei, Tokyo 184-8501, Japan article info abstract Article history: The taxonomic affiliation of Hexacontium pachydermum Jørgensen, specifically whether it belongs to the Received 9 April 2009 order Spumellarida or the order Entactinarida, is a subject of ongoing debate. In this study, we sequenced the Received in revised form 3 August 2009 18S rRNA gene of H. pachydermum and of three spherical spumellarians of Cladococcus viminalis Haeckel, Accepted 7 August 2009 Arachnosphaera myriacantha Haeckel, and Astrosphaera hexagonalis Haeckel. Our molecular phylogenetic analysis revealed that the spumellarian species of C. viminalis, A. myriacantha, and A. hexagonalis form a Keywords: monophyletic group. Moreover, this clade occupies a sister position to the clade comprising the spongodiscid Radiolaria fi Entactinarida spumellarians, coccodiscid spumellarians, and H. pachydermum. This nding is contrary to the results of Spumellarida morphological studies based on internal spicular morphology, placing H. pachydermum in the order Nassellarida Entactinarida, which had been considered to have a common ancestor shared with the nassellarians. 18S rRNA gene © 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. Molecular phylogeny. 1. Introduction the order Entactinarida has an inner spicular system homologenous with that of the order Nassellarida.
  • Ultrastructure and Molecular Phylogenetic Position of a New Marine Sand-Dwelling Dinoflagellate from British Columbia, Canada: Pseudadenoides Polypyrenoides Sp

    Ultrastructure and Molecular Phylogenetic Position of a New Marine Sand-Dwelling Dinoflagellate from British Columbia, Canada: Pseudadenoides Polypyrenoides Sp

    European Journal of Phycology ISSN: 0967-0262 (Print) 1469-4433 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tejp20 Ultrastructure and molecular phylogenetic position of a new marine sand-dwelling dinoflagellate from British Columbia, Canada: Pseudadenoides polypyrenoides sp. nov. (Dinophyceae) Mona Hoppenrath, Naoji Yubuki, Rowena Stern & Brian S. Leander To cite this article: Mona Hoppenrath, Naoji Yubuki, Rowena Stern & Brian S. Leander (2017) Ultrastructure and molecular phylogenetic position of a new marine sand-dwelling dinoflagellate from British Columbia, Canada: Pseudadenoides polypyrenoides sp. nov. (Dinophyceae), European Journal of Phycology, 52:2, 208-224, DOI: 10.1080/09670262.2016.1274788 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09670262.2016.1274788 View supplementary material Published online: 03 Mar 2017. Submit your article to this journal Article views: 25 View related articles View Crossmark data Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=tejp20 Download by: [The University of British Columbia] Date: 13 April 2017, At: 11:37 EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PHYCOLOGY, 2017 VOL. 52, NO. 2, 208–224 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09670262.2016.1274788 Ultrastructure and molecular phylogenetic position of a new marine sand-dwelling dinoflagellate from British Columbia, Canada: Pseudadenoides polypyrenoides sp. nov. (Dinophyceae) Mona Hoppenratha,b, Naoji Yubukia,c, Rowena Sterna,d and Brian S. Leandera aDepartments of Botany and Zoology,
  • Protocols for Monitoring Harmful Algal Blooms for Sustainable Aquaculture and Coastal Fisheries in Chile (Supplement Data)

    Protocols for Monitoring Harmful Algal Blooms for Sustainable Aquaculture and Coastal Fisheries in Chile (Supplement Data)

    Protocols for monitoring Harmful Algal Blooms for sustainable aquaculture and coastal fisheries in Chile (Supplement data) Provided by Kyoko Yarimizu, et al. Table S1. Phytoplankton Naming Dictionary: This dictionary was constructed from the species observed in Chilean coast water in the past combined with the IOC list. Each name was verified with the list provided by IFOP and online dictionaries, AlgaeBase (https://www.algaebase.org/) and WoRMS (http://www.marinespecies.org/). The list is subjected to be updated. Phylum Class Order Family Genus Species Ochrophyta Bacillariophyceae Achnanthales Achnanthaceae Achnanthes Achnanthes longipes Bacillariophyta Coscinodiscophyceae Coscinodiscales Heliopeltaceae Actinoptychus Actinoptychus spp. Dinoflagellata Dinophyceae Gymnodiniales Gymnodiniaceae Akashiwo Akashiwo sanguinea Dinoflagellata Dinophyceae Gymnodiniales Gymnodiniaceae Amphidinium Amphidinium spp. Ochrophyta Bacillariophyceae Naviculales Amphipleuraceae Amphiprora Amphiprora spp. Bacillariophyta Bacillariophyceae Thalassiophysales Catenulaceae Amphora Amphora spp. Cyanobacteria Cyanophyceae Nostocales Aphanizomenonaceae Anabaenopsis Anabaenopsis milleri Cyanobacteria Cyanophyceae Oscillatoriales Coleofasciculaceae Anagnostidinema Anagnostidinema amphibium Anagnostidinema Cyanobacteria Cyanophyceae Oscillatoriales Coleofasciculaceae Anagnostidinema lemmermannii Cyanobacteria Cyanophyceae Oscillatoriales Microcoleaceae Annamia Annamia toxica Cyanobacteria Cyanophyceae Nostocales Aphanizomenonaceae Aphanizomenon Aphanizomenon flos-aquae
  • A Parasite of Marine Rotifers: a New Lineage of Dinokaryotic Dinoflagellates (Dinophyceae)

    A Parasite of Marine Rotifers: a New Lineage of Dinokaryotic Dinoflagellates (Dinophyceae)

    Hindawi Publishing Corporation Journal of Marine Biology Volume 2015, Article ID 614609, 5 pages http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/614609 Research Article A Parasite of Marine Rotifers: A New Lineage of Dinokaryotic Dinoflagellates (Dinophyceae) Fernando Gómez1 and Alf Skovgaard2 1 Laboratory of Plankton Systems, Oceanographic Institute, University of Sao˜ Paulo, Prac¸a do Oceanografico´ 191, Cidade Universitaria,´ 05508-900 Butanta,˜ SP, Brazil 2Department of Veterinary Disease Biology, University of Copenhagen, Stigbøjlen 7, 1870 Frederiksberg C, Denmark Correspondence should be addressed to Fernando Gomez;´ [email protected] Received 11 July 2015; Accepted 27 August 2015 Academic Editor: Gerardo R. Vasta Copyright © 2015 F. Gomez´ and A. Skovgaard. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Dinoflagellate infections have been reported for different protistan and animal hosts. We report, for the first time, the association between a dinoflagellate parasite and a rotifer host, tentatively Synchaeta sp. (Rotifera), collected from the port of Valencia, NW Mediterranean Sea. The rotifer contained a sporangium with 100–200 thecate dinospores that develop synchronically through palintomic sporogenesis. This undescribed dinoflagellate forms a new and divergent fast-evolved lineage that branches amongthe dinokaryotic dinoflagellates. 1. Introduction form independent lineages with no evident relation to other dinoflagellates [12]. In this study, we describe a new lineage of The alveolates (or Alveolata) are a major lineage of protists an undescribed parasitic dinoflagellate that largely diverged divided into three main phyla: ciliates, apicomplexans, and from other known dinoflagellates.
  • Biology and Systematics of Heterokont and Haptophyte Algae1

    Biology and Systematics of Heterokont and Haptophyte Algae1

    American Journal of Botany 91(10): 1508±1522. 2004. BIOLOGY AND SYSTEMATICS OF HETEROKONT AND HAPTOPHYTE ALGAE1 ROBERT A. ANDERSEN Bigelow Laboratory for Ocean Sciences, P.O. Box 475, West Boothbay Harbor, Maine 04575 USA In this paper, I review what is currently known of phylogenetic relationships of heterokont and haptophyte algae. Heterokont algae are a monophyletic group that is classi®ed into 17 classes and represents a diverse group of marine, freshwater, and terrestrial algae. Classes are distinguished by morphology, chloroplast pigments, ultrastructural features, and gene sequence data. Electron microscopy and molecular biology have contributed signi®cantly to our understanding of their evolutionary relationships, but even today class relationships are poorly understood. Haptophyte algae are a second monophyletic group that consists of two classes of predominately marine phytoplankton. The closest relatives of the haptophytes are currently unknown, but recent evidence indicates they may be part of a large assemblage (chromalveolates) that includes heterokont algae and other stramenopiles, alveolates, and cryptophytes. Heter- okont and haptophyte algae are important primary producers in aquatic habitats, and they are probably the primary carbon source for petroleum products (crude oil, natural gas). Key words: chromalveolate; chromist; chromophyte; ¯agella; phylogeny; stramenopile; tree of life. Heterokont algae are a monophyletic group that includes all (Phaeophyceae) by Linnaeus (1753), and shortly thereafter, photosynthetic organisms with tripartite tubular hairs on the microscopic chrysophytes (currently 5 Oikomonas, Anthophy- mature ¯agellum (discussed later; also see Wetherbee et al., sa) were described by MuÈller (1773, 1786). The history of 1988, for de®nitions of mature and immature ¯agella), as well heterokont algae was recently discussed in detail (Andersen, as some nonphotosynthetic relatives and some that have sec- 2004), and four distinct periods were identi®ed.
  • PROTISTAS MARINOS Viviana A

    PROTISTAS MARINOS Viviana A

    PROTISTAS MARINOS Viviana A. Alder INTRODUCCIÓN plantas y animales. Según este esquema básico, a las plantas les correspondían las características de En 1673, el editor de Philosophical Transac- ser organismos sésiles con pigmentos fotosinté- tions of the Royal Society of London recibió una ticos para la síntesis de las sustancias esenciales carta del anatomista Regnier de Graaf informan- para su metabolismo a partir de sustancias inor- do que un comerciante holandés, Antonie van gánicas (nutrición autótrofa), y de poseer células Leeuwenhoek, había “diseñado microscopios rodeadas por paredes de celulosa. En oposición muy superiores a aquéllos que hemos visto has- a las plantas, les correspondía a los animales los ta ahora”. Van Leeuwenhoek vendía lana, algo- atributos de tener motilidad activa y de carecer dón y otros materiales textiles, y se había visto tanto de pigmentos fotosintéticos (debiendo por en la necesidad de mejorar las lentes de aumento lo tanto procurarse su alimento a partir de sustan- que comúnmente usaba para contar el número cias orgánicas sintetizadas por otros organismos) de hebras y evaluar la calidad de fibras y tejidos. como de paredes celulósicas en sus células. Así fue que construyó su primer microscopio de Es a partir de los estudios de Georg Gol- lente única: simple, pequeño, pero con un poder dfuss (1782-1848) que estos diminutos organis- de magnificación de hasta 300 aumentos (¡diez mos, invisibles a ojo desnudo, comienzan a ser veces más que sus precursores!). Este magnífico clasificados como plantas primarias
  • Author's Manuscript (764.7Kb)

    Author's Manuscript (764.7Kb)

    1 BROADLY SAMPLED TREE OF EUKARYOTIC LIFE Broadly Sampled Multigene Analyses Yield a Well-resolved Eukaryotic Tree of Life Laura Wegener Parfrey1†, Jessica Grant2†, Yonas I. Tekle2,6, Erica Lasek-Nesselquist3,4, Hilary G. Morrison3, Mitchell L. Sogin3, David J. Patterson5, Laura A. Katz1,2,* 1Program in Organismic and Evolutionary Biology, University of Massachusetts, 611 North Pleasant Street, Amherst, Massachusetts 01003, USA 2Department of Biological Sciences, Smith College, 44 College Lane, Northampton, Massachusetts 01063, USA 3Bay Paul Center for Comparative Molecular Biology and Evolution, Marine Biological Laboratory, 7 MBL Street, Woods Hole, Massachusetts 02543, USA 4Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Brown University, 80 Waterman Street, Providence, Rhode Island 02912, USA 5Biodiversity Informatics Group, Marine Biological Laboratory, 7 MBL Street, Woods Hole, Massachusetts 02543, USA 6Current address: Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut 06520, USA †These authors contributed equally *Corresponding author: L.A.K - [email protected] Phone: 413-585-3825, Fax: 413-585-3786 Keywords: Microbial eukaryotes, supergroups, taxon sampling, Rhizaria, systematic error, Excavata 2 An accurate reconstruction of the eukaryotic tree of life is essential to identify the innovations underlying the diversity of microbial and macroscopic (e.g. plants and animals) eukaryotes. Previous work has divided eukaryotic diversity into a small number of high-level ‘supergroups’, many of which receive strong support in phylogenomic analyses. However, the abundance of data in phylogenomic analyses can lead to highly supported but incorrect relationships due to systematic phylogenetic error. Further, the paucity of major eukaryotic lineages (19 or fewer) included in these genomic studies may exaggerate systematic error and reduces power to evaluate hypotheses.
  • Supplementary Materials - Methods

    Supplementary Materials - Methods

    Supplementary Materials - Methods Bacterial Phylogeny Using the predicted phylogenetic positions from the Microbial Gene Atlas (MiGA), all complete genomes for the classes betaproteobacteria, alphaproteobacteria, and Bacteroides available on NCBI were collected. The GToTree pipeline was run on each of these datasets, including the Nephromyces endosymbiont, using the relevant ​ ​ HMM set of single copy gene targets (57–62). This included 138 gene targets and 722 genomes in alphaproteobacteria, 203 gene targets and 471 genomes in betaproteobacteria, and 90 gene targets and 388 genomes in Bacteroidetes. In betaproteobacteria, 5 genomes were removed for having either too few hits to the single copy gene targets, or multiple hits. The final trees were created with FastTree v2 (63), and formatted in FigTree (S Figure 2,3). Amplicon Methods Detailed Fifty Molgula manhattensis tunicates were collected from a single floating dock ​ ​ located in Greenwich Bay, RI (41.653N, -71.452W), and 29 Molgula occidentalis were ​ ​ collected from Alligator Harbor, FL (29.899N, -84.381W) by Gulf Specimens Marine Laboratories, Inc. (https://gulfspecimen.org/). All 79 samples were collected in August ​ ​ of 2016 and prepared for a single Illumina MiSeq flow cell (hereafter referred to as Run One). An additional 25 Molgula occidentalis were collected by Gulf Specimens Marine ​ ​ Laboratories, Inc. in March of 2018 from the same location and prepared for a second MiSeq flow cell (hereafter referred to as Run Two). Tunicates were dissected to remove renal sacs and Nephromyces cells contained within were collected by a micropipette and ​ ​ placed in 1.5 ml eppendorf tubes. Dissecting tools were sterilized in a 10% bleach solution for 15 min and then rinsed between tunicates.
  • Dinoflagellate Nuclear SSU Rrna Phylogeny Suggests Multiple Plastid Losses and Replacements

    Dinoflagellate Nuclear SSU Rrna Phylogeny Suggests Multiple Plastid Losses and Replacements

    J Mol Evol (2001) 53:204–213 DOI: 10.1007/s002390010210 © Springer-Verlag New York Inc. 2001 Dinoflagellate Nuclear SSU rRNA Phylogeny Suggests Multiple Plastid Losses and Replacements Juan F. Saldarriaga,1 F.J.R. Taylor,1,2 Patrick J. Keeling,1 Thomas Cavalier-Smith3 1 Department of Botany, University of British Columbia, 6270 University Boulevard, Vancouver, British Columbia, V6T 1Z4, Canada 2 Department of Earth and Ocean Sciences, University of British Columbia, 6270 University Boulevard, Vancouver, British Columbia, V6T 1Z4, Canada 3 Department of Zoology, Oxford University, South Parks Road, Oxford, OX1 3PS, UK Received: 25 September 2000 / Accepted: 24 April 2001 Abstract. Dinoflagellates are a trophically diverse Introduction group of protists with photosynthetic and non- photosynthetic members that appears to incorporate and There is now no serious doubt that mitochondria and lose endosymbionts relatively easily. To trace the gain plastids are descendants of free-living prokaryotic cells and loss of plastids in dinoflagellates, we have sequenced (Gray and Spencer 1996). The primary endosymbioses the nuclear small subunit rRNA gene of 28 photosyn- that incorporated these cells into eukaryotic organisms thetic and four non-photosynthetic species, and produced are, however, exceedingly rare events: mitochondria phylogenetic trees with a total of 81 dinoflagellate se- were probably incorporated only once in the history of quences. Patterns of plastid gain, loss, and replacement life (Roger 1999), and the same is probably true for were plotted onto this phylogeny. With the exception of plastids (Delwiche 1999; Cavalier-Smith 2000). Vertical the apparently early-diverging Syndiniales and Noctilu- descendants of plastids obtained through primary endo- cales, all non-photosynthetic dinoflagellates are very symbiosis are now found in many photosynthetic organ- likely to have had photosynthetic ancestors with peridi- isms (glaucophytes, red and green algae, and land nin-containing plastids.
  • Chamber Arrangement Versus Wall Structure in the High-Rank Phylogenetic Classification of Foraminifera

    Chamber Arrangement Versus Wall Structure in the High-Rank Phylogenetic Classification of Foraminifera

    Editors' choice Chamber arrangement versus wall structure in the high-rank phylogenetic classification of Foraminifera ZOFIA DUBICKA Dubicka, Z. 2019. Chamber arrangement versus wall structure in the high-rank phylogenetic classification of Fora- minifera. Acta Palaeontologica Polonica 64 (1): 1–18. Foraminiferal wall micro/ultra-structures of Recent and well-preserved Jurassic (Bathonian) foraminifers of distinct for- aminiferal high-rank taxonomic groups, Globothalamea (Rotaliida, Robertinida, and Textulariida), Miliolida, Spirillinata and Lagenata, are presented. Both calcite-cemented agglutinated and entirely calcareous foraminiferal walls have been investigated. Original test ultra-structures of Jurassic foraminifers are given for the first time. “Monocrystalline” wall-type which characterizes the class Spirillinata is documented in high resolution imaging. Globothalamea, Lagenata, porcel- aneous representatives of Tubothalamea and Spirillinata display four different major types of wall-structure which may be related to distinct calcification processes. It confirms that these distinct molecular groups evolved separately, probably from single-chambered monothalamids, and independently developed unique wall types. Studied Jurassic simple bilocular taxa, characterized by undivided spiralling or irregular tubes, are composed of miliolid-type needle-shaped crystallites. In turn, spirillinid “monocrystalline” test structure has only been recorded within more complex, multilocular taxa pos- sessing secondary subdivided chambers: Jurassic
  • (PAD) and Post-Translational Protein Deimination—Novel Insights Into Alveolata Metabolism, Epigenetic Regulation and Host–Pathogen Interactions

    (PAD) and Post-Translational Protein Deimination—Novel Insights Into Alveolata Metabolism, Epigenetic Regulation and Host–Pathogen Interactions

    biology Article Peptidylarginine Deiminase (PAD) and Post-Translational Protein Deimination—Novel Insights into Alveolata Metabolism, Epigenetic Regulation and Host–Pathogen Interactions Árni Kristmundsson 1,*, Ásthildur Erlingsdóttir 1 and Sigrun Lange 2,* 1 Institute for Experimental Pathology at Keldur, University of Iceland, Keldnavegur 3, 112 Reykjavik, Iceland; [email protected] 2 Tissue Architecture and Regeneration Research Group, School of Life Sciences, University of Westminster, London W1W 6UW, UK * Correspondence: [email protected] (Á.K.); [email protected] (S.L.) Simple Summary: Alveolates are a major group of free living and parasitic organisms; some of which are serious pathogens of animals and humans. Apicomplexans and chromerids are two phyla belonging to the alveolates. Apicomplexans are obligate intracellular parasites; that cannot complete their life cycle without exploiting a suitable host. Chromerids are mostly photoautotrophs as they can obtain energy from sunlight; and are considered ancestors of the apicomplexans. The pathogenicity and life cycle strategies differ significantly between parasitic alveolates; with some causing major losses in host populations while others seem harmless to the host. As the life cycles of Citation: Kristmundsson, Á.; Erlingsdóttir, Á.; Lange, S. some are still poorly understood, a better understanding of the factors which can affect the parasitic Peptidylarginine Deiminase (PAD) alveolates’ life cycles and survival is of great importance and may aid in new biomarker discovery. and Post-Translational Protein This study assessed new mechanisms relating to changes in protein structure and function (so-called Deimination—Novel Insights into “deimination” or “citrullination”) in two key parasites—an apicomplexan and a chromerid—to Alveolata Metabolism, Epigenetic assess the pathways affected by this protein modification.