Christensen, Fam. Monadoïdes, Solitaria, Induta, Phycearum
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Two new families and some new names and combinations in the Algae Tyge Christensen Universitetets Institut for Sporeplanter, Kobenhavn, Denmark of Danish In a recent survey of algal taxonomy published for the use university author and students, the (1962, 1966) has introduced some new taxa names. A few for. The of them express new systematic opinions, and will be separately accounted have been made for formal and established here majority reasons only, are in accordance with the code of nomenclature. Dunaliellaceae T. Christensen, fam. nov. Cellula monadoïdes, solitaria, nulla membrana vel lorica induta, notas Chloro- phycearum praecipue flagella nuda exhibens. Dunaliella Genus typificum: E. C. Teodoresco 1905, p. 230, Platymonadaceae T. Christensen, fam. nov. membrana Cellula monadoides, solitaria, induta, notas Prasinophycearum praecipue flagella squamis et appendicibus filiformibus crassioribus vestita exhibens. Genus G. typificum: Platymonas S. West 1916, p. 3. In the Chlorophyta the author has followed Chadefaud (1950) in excluding the allies ofPrasinocladus from and them the the Chlorophyceae placing in a separate class, Prasino- Such of former the phyceae. separation entails a splitting two Chlorophycean families, Polyblepharidaceae comprising naked monads, and the Chlamydomonadaceae comprising similar forms with cell wall. which is the of the former provided a Polyblepharides, type has been studied but the Prasinocladus family, not yet adequately probably represents assumed that the should be type as by Chadefaud, so family name Polyblepharidaceae applied to naked forms placed in thePrasinophyceae. Chlamydomonas, on the other hand, shows a typical Chlorophycean construction. The family name Chlamydomonadaceae, forms therefore, must be applied to walled remaining in the Chlorophyceae. For previous the and for members of Polyblepharidaceae now left behind in the Chlorophyceae, previous members of the Chlamydomonadaceae now placed in the Prasinophyceae, new family names have been introduced in the Danish text. In the first edition (Christensen, 1962) they were calledDunaliellaceae and Tetraselmidaceae, respectively. Since then some doubt whether has arisen (cf. Manton & Parke, 1965) as to Tetraselmis Stein (1878) and Platymonas West (1916) are taxonomically identical, as is assumed by Butcher (1959), the following Korschikoff (1938). If there is no such identity Platymonas still belongs in second Prasinophyceae, while Tetraselmis possibly does not. Therefore, the family name, the not yet formally established, has been changed to Platymonadaceae in second edition (Christensen, 1966). — Lemmermann Dictyochales T. Christensen, nom. iiov. Siphonotestales 1901, p. 92. Familia typifica: Dictyochaceae Lemmermann 1901, p. 92. According to the codes of nomenclature adopted by the Stockholm and the Paris 92 BLUMEA VOL. XV, No. I, 1967 Congresses, the name of an order should invariably be taken from that of its type family. that did In the Algae names not comply with this rule were gradually replaced by others formed in with the agreement code, and this process had nearly been carried through without notification the of forward when, in Synopsis Proposals, a proposal was brought in and hastily carried Montreal giving authors an absolutely free hand in this respect. The author favour of the present is in simplicity and uniformity prescribed by the and unwanted previous codes has used his freedom only to keep to a rule no longer In the order obligatory. survey referred to, the name Dictyochales has been introduced as a substitute of that given by Lemmermann because the latter is not derived from the name of a subordinate taxon. Planonephraceae T. Christensen, nom. nou. familiae Cryptophycearum. — Senniaceae Genus Skuja 1948, p. 366, nom. illeg. typificum: — Pascher Planonephros T. Christensen, nom. nov. Nephroselmis sensu & Lemmermann 1913, p. in (vix Nephroselmis Stein 1878, pi. 19). — Sennia sensu Skuja 1948, p. 366 & (non Sennia Pascher in Pascher Lemmermann 1913, p. 184). Species typifica: Pascher Planonephros dispar T. Christensen, nom. nov. — Nephroselmis olivacea sensu & — Lemmermann 1913, p. 111 (vix Nephroselmis olivacea Stein 1878, pi. 19). Sennia & Lemmer- commutata sensu Skuja 1948, p. 366 (non Sennia commutata Pascher in Pascher mann 1913, p. 184). from Bean-shaped flagellates with yellow-green plastids and two flagella issuing the of them concave side are known both in theCryptophyceae and in the Chlorophyta. One under his is described by Stein (1878) the nameNephroselmis olivacea. Stein refers organism to theCryptomonadina, but from his illustration it seems to show more resemblance to the forms and Stein's be based the colour Chlorophytic opinion may mainly on peculiar of the describes rather chromatophore. Senn (1911) a similar looking organism, sup- posing it to be identical with that studied by Stein, but referring it to the Volvocaceae. Pascher & Lemmermann (19x3) describe and picture two forms, one under the Crypto- phyceae, the other as an organism of uncertain affinity. The name given by Stein is applied to both without cross reference. In the case of the form of uncertain affinity, however, Sennia is cited a new name, commutata, introduced, with Stein's name only as a synonym; well the Senn is mentioned as one of the previous finders, and this as as new name makes it fairly clear that what is meantis not ‘Nephroselmis olivacea Stein', but ‘Nephroselmis olivacea sensu Senn (non Stein)'. No matter whether Senn's or Pascher's organism should be regarded the type of Sennia, this name applies to the non-Cryptophycean genus. the Stein is Skuja (1948) resumes Senn's opinion that organism studied by non-Crypto- and and phycean, therefore uses the generic nameNephroselmis the family name Nephro- he selmidaceae for forms now placed close to thePolyblepharidaceae. In this usage is followed by most subsequent authors. Application ofthename Nephroselmis tosuch forms, however, leaves the form without Cryptophycean a name. Skuja suggests a simple interchange such circum- of names, applying the name Sennia to the Cryptophycean genus. But of and therefore be maintained. scription the genus Sennia excludes the type, cannot The will be question where to place Nephroselmis Stein hardly answered in a fully con- found Stein's vincing manner without a form being that agrees better with description than of those later studied. the referred the author any In new taxonomic survey to, his estimate. has placed it in the Chlorophyta, following general usage as well as own For the Cryptophycean form and for the family established by Skuja to accommodate have been have been it, the above names introduced. They chosen to cover largely in T. CHRISTENSEN: New families, names, and combinations the Algae 93 the same meaning as the word Nephroselmis, the stem selmid, flagellum, being replaced by the stem plan(o), moving around. Vertebrata lanosa (L.) T. Christensen, comb. nov.\ basionyma: Fucus lanosus Linnaeus 1767, p. 718. of the Introduction of this new combination is a necessary consequence accepting with the and taxonomic concept ofKylin (1956) regard to generaPolysiphonia Vertebrata, cf. Tandy (1931). — in Nemaliales orth. mut. Nemalionales Schmitz Engler 1892, p. 17. the of referred to the The name Nemalion was originally specific epithet a plant genus Fucus (Bertoloni, 1818). Probably, as stated by Frank in Leunis & Senft (1877), it was latinised from Greek nema leion, slippery thread (noun first as in the Linnean epithets form Virgaurea and Adiantum-nigrum; a more regular being Lionema, in conformity with the name Liochlaena). Harvey (1846) gives a different interpretation, deriving it and then from Greek nerna, thread, leion, crop (a more regular form being Nematoleïon). No matter which of these derivations is correct, the stem of the generic name ends in -lion. -li(o), not in Oddly enough, authors have used the group designations Nemalieae andNemalionales side by side. The former is correct in omitting the -on-. The latter has to be shortened by the same two letters so as to conform with the designation based the Phaeothamniales on generic namePhaeothamnion. LITERATURE BERTOLONI, A. 1818. Letttera (sic) al Signor Lamouroux. Opuscoli Scientifici (Bologna) 2: 286—292, Tav. 10—11. R. W. Min. Food, Fish. BUTCHER, 1959. Introduction and Chlorophyceae. of Agr., Fish, and Invest., Part London. Ser. 4. An Introductory Account of the Smaller Algae of British Coastal Waters. I. M. Les cellules des dans l'embranchement des C. R. CHADEFAUD, 1950. nageuses Algues Chlorophycees. Acad. Sc. [Paris] 231 (19): 988—990. Bind CHRISTENSEN, T. 1962. Alger. In T. W. Bocher, M. Lange, and T. Sorensen, Botanik, 2, Nr. 2. Kobenhavn. 1966. The same, 2nd edition. ENGLER, A. 1892. Syllabus der Vorlesungen iiber specielle und medicinisch-pharmaceutische Botanik. Grosse Ausgabe. Berlin. HARVEY, W. H. 1846. Phycologia Britannica. Vol. 1. London. O. A. Kiev. KORSCHIKOFF, 1938. Viznainik prisnovodnich vodorostej URSR 4., Volvocineae. KYLIN, H. 1956. Die Gattungen der Rhodophyceen. Lund. E. Kenntniss der XII. Notizen iiber LEMMERMANN, 1901. Beitrage zur Planktonalgen. einige Schwebalgen. Ges. XIII. Das Phytoplankton des Ryck und des Greifswalder Boddens. Ber. Deutsch. Bot. 19(2): 85—95, Tafel 4. Hannover. LEUNIS, J., & F. SENFT. 1877. Synopsis der drei Naturreiche. 2. Theil. Botanik. 2. Auflage. LINNAEUS, C. (C. A LINNE) . 1767. Systema Naturae. T. 2. Editio 12. Holmias. Observations the of of with MANTON, I., & M. PARKE. 1965. on fine structure two species Platymonas