Fifteenth NAWQA Workshop on Harmonization of Algal Taxonomy April 28-May 1, 2005 Report No. 06-07 Phycology Section/Diatom Analysis Laboratory Patrick Center for Environmental Research The Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia 1900 Benjamin Franklin Parkway Philadelphia, PA 19027-1195 Edited by Eduardo A. Morales August 2006 This page is intentionally left blank. Table of Contents Page Introduction..................................................................................................................................... 1 Criteria for Adopting New Names.................................................................................................. 2 Procedure for Evaluating Names .................................................................................................... 4 Workshop Outcomes....................................................................................................................... 5 Adopted Genera Names .............................................................................................................. 6 Genus Names that were not Adopted or that were Deleted from List........................................ 8 Additional Workshop Outcomes................................................................................................... 11 Summary of the Discussion on Gyrosigma Taxonomy at the Fifteenth NAWQA Workshop on Harmonization of Algal Taxonomy.............................................................................................. 13 Conclusions............................................................................................................................... 17 Current Status of the Monoraphid GeneraKarayevia and Kolbesia .......................................... 23 Summary................................................................................................................................... 23 Problem Background ................................................................................................................ 23 Current status of Kolbesia......................................................................................................... 25 Current status of Karayevia ...................................................................................................... 26 Recommendations..................................................................................................................... 28 List of names within or related to Karayevia recommended for use in NAWQA ................... 28 Taxonomy and Nomenclature of Two Species within the Genus Nitzschia Hassall.................... 31 Summary................................................................................................................................... 31 Review of valid taxa ................................................................................................................. 32 Review of invalid taxa .............................................................................................................. 34 Review of new species found in NAWQA material................................................................. 35 Conclusions and recommendations........................................................................................... 36 General References ....................................................................................................................... 56 Appendix 1.....................................................................................................................................69 Appendix 2...................................................................................................................................182 Appendix 3...................................................................................................................................272 i This page is intentionally left blank. ii Introduction The Fifteenth NAWQA Diatom Taxonomy Workshop was held at the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia on April 28-May 1, 2005. Specialists participating in the workshop were Kalina Manoylov from Michigan State University, MI; Nadezhda Slavchova and Rosalina Topalova from Portland State University, OR; Diane M. Winter from University of Nebraska, NB; Dr. Rex L. Lowe from Bowling Green State University, OH; Dr. Mark B. Edlund from the Science Museum of Minnesota, MN; Paul B. Hamilton from the Canadian Museum of Nature, Ottawa; and Dr. Sarah Spaulding from University of Colorado, Boulder, CO. Dr. Marina G. Potapova, Dr. Eduardo A. Morales, Dr. Donald F. Charles, Karin C. Ponader, Sarah Hamsher, Erin Hagan, Frank W. Acker, Mark Schadler and Kathleen Sprouffske from the Patrick Center for Environmental Research’s Phycology Section at the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia also participated in the workshop and/or collaborated in its organization. The First, Second, and Third NAWQA taxonomy workshops had the overall objectives of harmonizing taxa names used in the ANSP and University of Louisville/University of Michigan laboratories, identifying reference images for each taxon, and agreeing on up-to-date nomenclature to use when analyzing NAWQA 1994 and 1997-Start samples (See Clason and Charles, 1999; 2000; Morales and Potapova, 2000). The Fourth Workshop dealt with the taxonomy of some problematic Navicula and Gomphonema species (Morales, 2001a), the Fifth Workshop with additional problematic species in the genus Navicula (Morales, 2001b), and the Sixth Workshop with many problematic taxa in the genus Gomphonema (Morales, 2002a). The Seventh Workshop concentrated on problematic species of the genus Nitzschia (Morales and Hamilton, 2002). The Eighth Workshop focused on the production of an updated taxonomic list, 1 the 2001-Start Taxa List (Morales, 2003a). The Ninth Workshop dealt with the taxonomic review of lists and some groups of soft algae, including a review of taxa lists and consideration of cyanobacteria and red-algae groups (in prep.). The Tenth Workshop focused on the taxonomy of Achnanthes-like taxa that are difficult to identify under the light microscope (Morales and Charles, 2005). The Eleventh Workshop dealt with the taxonomy of the blue-green algae (in prep.). The Twelfth Workshop dealt with fragilarioid problematic taxa (in prep.). The Thirteenth Workshop dealt with the taxonomy of taxa related to Synedra ulna (Nitzsch) Ehrenberg (in prep.). The Fourteenth Workshop concentrated on the taxonomy of various soft algal groups and continued with the review of the soft algae taxa list (in prep). The Fifteenth Workshop, subject of this report, focused on the revision of the 2001-Start diatom taxa list to produce the 2004-Start list to be used in the analysis of samples collected in 2004 and subsequent years. This revision was based on discussions of recent transfers of taxa and the review of recent concepts of taxa at the family, genus and species levels. Criteria for Adopting New Names Taxonomic lists used for the analysis of NAWQA samples are regularly updated at three- year intervals. In order to achieve this, a workshop is organized and an extensive literature review is performed in search of new changes and advances in algal taxonomy (see “Procedure for Evaluating Names,” p. 4). Taxonomic names used for 2004-Start samples should reflect recent taxonomic trends, but any changes to the existing list should be made conservatively. Similar to the Third Workshop, the majority of new taxonomic names proposed in the literature pertain to the genus level. The majority of the newly erected genera are the result of discovery (mainly by SEM analysis) of a wide morphological variability within previously 2 established genera. These new genera tend to reflect more restricted groupings in which the morphological variability is limited, thus resulting in a more concise classification system. Some changes at the species and variety levels were also considered. Current literature reflects a tendency to work with morphologically restricted groups at the species level, restricting the use of the “variety” and “form” ranks. Therefore, many of these subspecific taxa became species of their own. Three main criteria were used in deciding whether to adopt a new name for the 2004- Start list. First, the validity of the proposed transfer was considered. Workshop participants determined whether creation of a new genus and/or species had a solid justification. Frequently, references with protologues were consulted and type material was observed, when available, from the ANSP Diatom Collection. To be accepted as a valid transfer, the new taxon had to be sufficiently supported by light microscopy (LM) and scanning electron microscopy (SEM), and/or ecological evidence. Second, the taxon had to be generally accepted by other diatom researchers. Participants relied on the frequency with which the new taxon was used in recent ecological and/or taxonomic literature, on the publication of arguments against or in favor of a given taxon, and on their own personal experience (i.e., does one consider that the taxon is sufficiently distinct?). During the Third Workshop, taxa changes may have been rejected because of their lack of distinguishable characters at the LM level. Due to the increasing use of SEM technology in published literature and by NAWQA analysts, this lack of LM characters was a minor criterion. Third, in cases in which a new genus had been accepted during the Third Workshop, additional transfers of species were done. In a few cases, workshop participants