DOCSLIB.ORG

Aquatic Microbial Ecology 53:295–305 (2008)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Aquatic Microbial Ecology 53:295–305 (2008) The following appendix accompanies the article Genetic diversity of picoeukaryotes in a semi-enclosed harbour in the subtropical western Pacific Ocean Man Kit Cheung, Ka Hou Chu, Chi Pang Li, Hoi Shan Kwan, Chong Kim Wong* Department of Biology, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, New Territories, Hong Kong SAR, China *Corresponding author. Email: [email protected] Aquatic Microbial Ecology 53:295–305 (2008) Table A1. List of all the operational taxonomic units (OTUs) recovered in the current study. For each OTU, its GenBank closest relative with accession number, the sequence percent similarity, BLAST score, Query/Subject ratio and frequency from each clone library are provided. The remaining columns indicate the OTU frequency from each clone library OTUs OTU frequency Library Clone Closest relative GenBank % similarity BLAST Query/ MB01 MB04 MB07 MB10 TH01 TH04 TH07 TH10 Accession # score Subject Alveolates group II MB01 3 Uncultured marine alveolate group II clone DH147-EKD16 AF290071 94.9 1210 751/791 25 1 7 11 Amoebophrya sp. AF239260 97.6 1279 730/748 1 6 16 Uncultured marine picoplankton AP-picoclone15 DQ386751 94.8 1232 754/795 5 2 4 15 19 Uncultured alveolate clone RA010613.44 AY295708 96.1 861 522/543 1 42 Amoebophrya sp. ex Scrippsiella sp. AF472555 91.9 1096 733/798 2 1 52 Uncultured marine eukaryote clone UEPACAFp5 AY129057 96.6 1319 770/797 8 3 TH01 1 Uncultured marine eukaryote clone UEPACCp3 AY129036 98.9 1317 745/753 4 4 1 8 8 Uncultured marine eukaryote clone UEPACBp4 AY129045 98.8 1330 738/747 3 35 Uncultured eukaryote clone ENI40076.00788 AY937888 94.1 678 430/457 2 2 37 Amoebophrya sp. ex Gymnodinium instriatum AF472554 94.2 1003 629/668 16 42 Uncultured marine picoplankton clone He000803_31 AJ965140 96.3 660 388/403 1 1 MB04 24 Uncultured marine eukaryote clone ENVP10203.00015 DQ917938 99.4 965 528/531 2 25 Amoebophrya sp. ex Scrippsiella sp. AF472555 97.8 1199 680/695 3 TH04 14 Amoebophrya sp. ex Karlodinium micrum AF472553 95 1194 727/765 5 18 Uncultured marine eukaryote clone NOR26.14r DQ119913 99.7 1280 697/699 2 26 Uncultured marine eukaryote clone NOR50.19 DQ119916 90.5 839 589/651 2 MB07 9 Uncultured marine eukaryote clone UEPAC41p3 AY129042 99.6 1400 765/768 1 17 4 21 15 Uncultured eukaryote clone SCM37C36 AY664989 93.2 1031 662/711 1 21 Eukaryote clone OLI11009 AJ402348 98.2 1323 765/779 4 29 Uncultured marine picoplankton AP-picoclone20 DQ386756 98.8 1345 747/756 2 42 Uncultured marine eukaryote clone UEPACEp3 AY129038 98.9 1434 796/805 3 1 Table A1 (continued) OTUs OTU frequency Library Clone Closest relative GenBank % similarity BLAST Query/ MB01 MB04 MB07 MB10 TH01 TH04 TH07 TH10 Accession # score Subject TH07 2 Uncultured marine eukaryote clone NW414.31 DQ119928 92.6 1051 689/744 2 5 Uncultured alveolate clone RA010613.20 DQ186535 93.3 1079 691/741 5 10 6 Uncultured eukaryote clone SCM37C21 AY664990 93.8 1101 695/741 2 9 Uncultured marine eukaryote clone ENVP36162.00243 DQ918787 94.9 459 279/294 3 12 Uncultured eukaryote clone SCM37C21 AY664990 90.8 987 689/759 5 5 18 Uncultured marine picoplankton clone He000327_39 AJ965089 99.4 647 355/357 1 26 Uncultured marine eukaryote clone BL001221.40 AY426886 90.6 983 681/752 2 3 27 Uncultured marine eukaryote clone UEPACAPp3 AY129041 99.6 1301 710/713 3 32 Uncultured alveolate clone RA010613.126 DQ186534 95.7 1182 709/741 1 42 Amoebophrya sp. ex Karlodinium micrum AF472553 97.4 1227 702/721 1 1 1 43 Amoebophrya sp. ex Karlodinium micrum AF472553 96.5 1123 656/680 1 MB10 27 Uncultured alveolate clone RA010412.70 DQ186533 98.2 1127 646/658 1 30 Amoebophrya sp. ex Ceratium tripos AY208892 99.3 1293 712/717 2 46 Amoebophrya sp. ex Ceratium tripos AY208892 100 1260 682/682 1 3 1 51 Uncultured marine picoplankton AP-picoclone8 DQ386744 92.4 1090 720/779 1 TH10 1 Eukaryote clone OLI11012 AJ402330 95.7 1240 749/783 4 4 Uncultured eukaryote clone BB01_83 AY885027 93.7 798 508/542 8 7 Uncultured marine alveolate group II clone DH147-EKD16 AF290071 95.7 1201 718/750 3 12 Amoebophrya sp. ‘Dinophysis’ AF239260 96.5 1219 714/740 2 19 Amoebophrya sp. AY775284 93 1149 742/798 2 22 Amoebophrya sp. ex Karlodinium micrum AF472553 92.2 1110 734/796 1 25 Uncultured alveolate clone RA000907.2 AY295491 95.6 682 409/428 1 27 Uncultured eukaryote clone Q2A03 EF173006 95.8 1194 715/746 2 46 Uncultured marine picoplankton AP-picoclone8 DQ386744 98.4 1179 660/671 1 49 Uncultured marine alveolate group II clone DH147-EKD6 AF290068 91.5 1070 720/787 1 Alveolates group I MB04 17 Uncultured marine eukaryote clone ENVP21819.00079 DQ918313 98.6 1105 616/625 2 MB07 2 Uncultured marine eukaryote clone BL001221.41 AY426887 98.9 1332 739/747 1 11 10 5 5 2 40 Uncultured eukaryote isolate CAR_E214 AY256282 98.1 1301 736/750 1 TH07 0 Uncultured eukaryote isolate A3_E031 AY046773 89.4 806 579/648 1 4 Uncultured marine alveolate isolate 65 DQ916410 88.1 881 667/757 23 TH10 8 Uncultured eukaryote clone SCM37C30 AY665056 97 1345 781/805 1 45 Uncultured eukaryote clone TAGIRI-10 AB191418 99.4 1297 711/715 1 1 57 Uncultured eukaryote clone SCM38C41 AY664995 99.1 1367 755/762 1 Alveolata; Ciliophora MB01 7 Strombidium sp. AY143564 99.3 1208 665/670 2 3 12 Uncultured marine eukaryote clone CD8.16 DQ647517 97.8 1347 763/780 2 1 1 3 1 3 13 Uncultured marine eukaryote clone CD8.16 DQ647517 99.6 1273 696/699 1 1 18 Strombidium sp. AY143564 98.9 1421 789/798 1 21 Uncultured marine eukaryote clone MD65.05 DQ119933 97.6 1347 771/790 5 1 1 26 Uncultured marine eukaryote clone NW414.24 DQ120009 99.1 1421 785/792 1 2 1 35 Uncultured eukaryote clone ENI40076.00328 AY937624 95.5 1068 640/670 1 36 Uncultured eukaryote clone ENI42482.00244 AY938119 99.8 948 515/516 1 1 37 Uncultured eukaryote clone ENI40076.00328 AY937624 99.1 1201 661/667 1 3 1 Table A1 (continued) OTUs OTU frequency Library Clone Closest relative GenBank % similarity BLAST Query/ MB01 MB04 MB07 MB10 TH01 TH04 TH07 TH10 Accession # score Subject Alveolata; Ciliophora TH01 13 Ciliate sp. NCMS0601 AM412525 94.8 1138 698/736 4 MB04 2 Uncultured eukaryote clone ENI40076.00749 AY937854 99.6 953 520/522 3 7 Uncultured eukaryote clone ENI40076.00328 AY937624 99.1 1201 661/667 1 TH04 2 Uncultured marine eukaryote clone NW414.24 DQ120009 97.1 1210 700/721 1 16 Uncultured marine eukaryote clone MD65.18 DQ119937 97.6 1256 718/736 1 21 Uncultured marine eukaryote clone UEPACAIp5 AY129053 98.9 1290 715/723 7 4 37 Uncultured marine eukaryote clone MD65.18 DQ119937 97.9 1321 748/764 1 39 Uncultured eukaryote clone ENI47296.00059 AY938245 97.2 1098 632/650 8 4 42 Uncultured marine eukaryote clone UEPACAIp5 AY129053 98.4 880 494/502 2 1 2 MB07 25 Uncultured eukaryote clone D3P05C08 EF100279 93.8 1062 675/720 2 30 Strombidium sp. AY143564 95.3 1166 707/742 1 38 Cryptocaryon irritans AF351579 93.6 1129 714/763 1 MB10 16 Strobilidium caudatum AY143573 94.9 1110 682/719 1 31 Tintinnopsis dadayi AY143562 95.5 1240 748/783 2 33 Strobilidium caudatum AY143573 94.4 1092 678/718 1 36 Strombidinopsis sp. AM412524 95.8 688 408/426 2 40 Parastrombidinopsis shimi AJ786648 93.8 989 623/664 1 TH10 18 Uncultured eukaryote clone SCM15C2 AY665093 94.5 1229 761/805 1 20 Uncultured eukaryote clone SCM28C124 AY665085 99.5 1423 780/784 2 24 Uncultured eukaryote clone ENI42482.00186 AY938072 98.6 913 508/515 1 33 Strobilidium caudatum AY143573 93 1075 692/743 7 2 2 34 Strombidium sp. AY143564 99.5 1356 743/747 1 6 1 1 4 1 3 37 Strombidium sp. AY143565 93.4 1146 736/788 1 53 Uncultured marine colpodean ciliate clone DH147-EKD23 AF290076 88.9 941 706/794 1 1 1 58 Eutintinnus pectinis AF399170 93.9 1105 694/739 2 1 Alveolata; Dinophyceae MB01 6 Uncultured eukaryote clone SCM37C24 AY664894 98.7 1395 777/787 8 4 27 Uncultured marine eukaryote clone BL001221.15 AY426867 99.1 1421 785/792 1 2 33 Uncultured eukaryote clone SCM15C23 AY664993 99 1413 783/791 2 1 40 Uncultured eukaryote clone SCM37C27 AY664962 99.4 1432 786/791 1 1 2 TH01 22 Uncultured marine eukaryote clone BL001221.42 AY426888 99.1 1238 682/688 1 MB04 15 Uncultured eukaryote clone SCM28C60 AY664961 95.8 1255 749/782 3 34 Pyrodinium bahamense var. compressum DQ500120 96.1 1199 709/738 1 39 Uncultured eukaryote clone SCM27C15 AY664924 98.5 1297 724/735 1 1 TH07 15 Uncultured marine eukaryote clone CD8.10 DQ647514 100 1295 701/701 2 1 MB10 3 Ceratium longipes DQ388462 99.6 1291 705/708 2 3 1 2 10 Ceratium longipes DQ388462 99.3 981 539/543 1 23 Noctiluca scintillans DQ388461 97.1 1158 667/687 1 29 Pentapharsodinium sp. AF274270 96.7 1240 722/747 3 52 Noctiluca scintillans DQ388461 99.6 1459 797/800 1 5 TH10 6 Uncultured eukaryote clone SCM37C27 AY664962 99.8 1016 552/553 1 10 Uncultured marine picoplankton AP-picoclone12 DQ386748 98.5 1301 729/740 1 Table A1 (continued) OTUs OTU frequency Library Clone Closest relative GenBank % similarity BLAST Query/ MB01 MB04 MB07 MB10 TH01 TH04 TH07 TH10 Accession # score Subject Chlorophyta; Prasinophyceae MB01 5 Micromonas pusilla AY425316 99.5 1430 783/787 4 22 Micromonas pusilla AB183589 99.7 1454 792/794 3 1 2 30 Uncultured prasinophyte clone NW414.32 DQ055165 99.7 1437 782/784 2 1 3 31 Micromonas pusilla AB183589 97.5 1351 775/795 1 38 Micromonas pusilla AB183589 98 1040 589/601 1 TH01 40 Ostreococcus sp.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Viral Haemorrhagic Septicaemia Virus (VHSV): on the Search for Determinants Important for Virulence in Rainbow Trout Oncorhynchus Mykiss
    Downloaded from orbit.dtu.dk on: Nov 08, 2017 Viral haemorrhagic septicaemia virus (VHSV): on the search for determinants important for virulence in rainbow trout oncorhynchus mykiss Olesen, Niels Jørgen; Skall, H. F.; Kurita, J.; Mori, K.; Ito, T. Published in: 17th International Conference on Diseases of Fish And Shellfish Publication date: 2015 Document Version Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record Link back to DTU Orbit Citation (APA): Olesen, N. J., Skall, H. F., Kurita, J., Mori, K., & Ito, T. (2015). Viral haemorrhagic septicaemia virus (VHSV): on the search for determinants important for virulence in rainbow trout oncorhynchus mykiss. In 17th International Conference on Diseases of Fish And Shellfish: Abstract book (pp. 147-147). [O-139] Las Palmas: European Association of Fish Pathologists. General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. • Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. DISCLAIMER: The organizer takes no responsibility for any of the content stated in the abstracts.
    [Show full text]
  • New Zealand's Genetic Diversity
    1.13 NEW ZEALAND’S GENETIC DIVERSITY NEW ZEALAND’S GENETIC DIVERSITY Dennis P. Gordon National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research, Private Bag 14901, Kilbirnie, Wellington 6022, New Zealand ABSTRACT: The known genetic diversity represented by the New Zealand biota is reviewed and summarised, largely based on a recently published New Zealand inventory of biodiversity. All kingdoms and eukaryote phyla are covered, updated to refl ect the latest phylogenetic view of Eukaryota. The total known biota comprises a nominal 57 406 species (c. 48 640 described). Subtraction of the 4889 naturalised-alien species gives a biota of 52 517 native species. A minimum (the status of a number of the unnamed species is uncertain) of 27 380 (52%) of these species are endemic (cf. 26% for Fungi, 38% for all marine species, 46% for marine Animalia, 68% for all Animalia, 78% for vascular plants and 91% for terrestrial Animalia). In passing, examples are given both of the roles of the major taxa in providing ecosystem services and of the use of genetic resources in the New Zealand economy. Key words: Animalia, Chromista, freshwater, Fungi, genetic diversity, marine, New Zealand, Prokaryota, Protozoa, terrestrial. INTRODUCTION Article 10b of the CBD calls for signatories to ‘Adopt The original brief for this chapter was to review New Zealand’s measures relating to the use of biological resources [i.e. genetic genetic resources. The OECD defi nition of genetic resources resources] to avoid or minimize adverse impacts on biological is ‘genetic material of plants, animals or micro-organisms of diversity [e.g. genetic diversity]’ (my parentheses).
    [Show full text]
  • The Planktonic Protist Interactome: Where Do We Stand After a Century of Research?
    bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/587352; this version posted May 2, 2019. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under aCC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license. Bjorbækmo et al., 23.03.2019 – preprint copy - BioRxiv The planktonic protist interactome: where do we stand after a century of research? Marit F. Markussen Bjorbækmo1*, Andreas Evenstad1* and Line Lieblein Røsæg1*, Anders K. Krabberød1**, and Ramiro Logares2,1** 1 University of Oslo, Department of Biosciences, Section for Genetics and Evolutionary Biology (Evogene), Blindernv. 31, N- 0316 Oslo, Norway 2 Institut de Ciències del Mar (CSIC), Passeig Marítim de la Barceloneta, 37-49, ES-08003, Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain * The three authors contributed equally ** Corresponding authors: Ramiro Logares: Institute of Marine Sciences (ICM-CSIC), Passeig Marítim de la Barceloneta 37-49, 08003, Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain. Phone: 34-93-2309500; Fax: 34-93-2309555. [email protected] Anders K. Krabberød: University of Oslo, Department of Biosciences, Section for Genetics and Evolutionary Biology (Evogene), Blindernv. 31, N-0316 Oslo, Norway. Phone +47 22845986, Fax: +47 22854726. [email protected] Abstract Microbial interactions are crucial for Earth ecosystem function, yet our knowledge about them is limited and has so far mainly existed as scattered records. Here, we have surveyed the literature involving planktonic protist interactions and gathered the information in a manually curated Protist Interaction DAtabase (PIDA). In total, we have registered ~2,500 ecological interactions from ~500 publications, spanning the last 150 years.
    [Show full text]
  • Check List 15 (5): 951–963
    15 5 ANNOTATED LIST OF SPECIES Check List 15 (5): 951–963 https://doi.org/10.15560/15.5.951 Dinoflagellates in tropical estuarine waters from the Maraú River, Camamu Bay, northeastern Brazil Caio Ceza da Silva Nunes1, Sylvia Maria Moreira Susini-Ribeiro1, 2, Kaoli Pereira Cavalcante3 1 Mestrado em Sistemas Aquáticos Tropicais, Universidade Estadual de Santa Cruz, Rodovia Jorge Amado, km 16, Salobrinho, 45662090 Ilhéus, BA, Brazil. 2 Universidade Estadual de Santa Cruz, Rodovia Jorge Amado, km 16, Salobrinho, 45662090 Ilhéus, BA, Brazil. 3 Universidade Estadual Vale do Acaraú, Avenida da Universidade, 850, Campus da Betânia, Betânia, 62040370, Sobral, CE, Brazil. Corresponding author: Caio Ceza da Silva Nunes, [email protected] Abstract Dinoflagellates display great diversity in tropical regions and play an important role in the complex microbial food webs of marine and brackish environments. The goal of this study is to identify planktonic dinoflagellates and their distribution in the estuary of the Maraú River, Camamu Bay, state of Bahia, in a region with increasing use of shellfish farming. Samples were carried out monthly from August 2006 to July 2007 at four stations along the estuary. Plankton was sampled with a 20 μm mesh net. We identified 20 dinoflagellate species. The greatest species richness was ob- served in the genera Protoperidinium (five spp.), Tripos (four spp.), and Prorocentrum (three spp.). Based on literature, six species were classified as potentially harmful: Akashiwo sanguinea, Dinophysis caudata, Gonyaulax spinifera, Prorocentrum micans, Scrippsiella cf. acuminata, and Tripos furca. Protoperidinium venustum was recorded for the first time in coastal waters of Bahia. Keywords Brackish water, Dinophyta, distribution, potentially harmful species, taxonomy.
    [Show full text]
  • 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
    [Show full text]
  • Ciliate Diversity, Community Structure, and Novel Taxa in Lakes of the Mcmurdo Dry Valleys, Antarctica
    Reference: Biol. Bull. 227: 175–190. (October 2014) © 2014 Marine Biological Laboratory Ciliate Diversity, Community Structure, and Novel Taxa in Lakes of the McMurdo Dry Valleys, Antarctica YUAN XU1,*†, TRISTA VICK-MAJORS2, RACHAEL MORGAN-KISS3, JOHN C. PRISCU2, AND LINDA AMARAL-ZETTLER4,5,*࿣ 1Laboratory of Protozoology, Institute of Evolution & Marine Biodiversity, Ocean University of China, Qingdao 266003, China; 2Montana State University, Department of Land Resources and Environmental Sciences, 334 Leon Johnson Hall, Bozeman, Montana 59717; 3Department of Microbiology, Miami University, Oxford, Ohio 45056; 4The Josephine Bay Paul Center for Comparative Molecular Biology and Evolution, Marine Biological Laboratory, Woods Hole, Massachusetts 02543; and 5Department of Earth, Environmental and Planetary Sciences, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island 02912 Abstract. We report an in-depth survey of next-genera- trends in dissolved oxygen concentration and salinity may tion DNA sequencing of ciliate diversity and community play a critical role in structuring ciliate communities. A structure in two permanently ice-covered McMurdo Dry PCR-based strategy capitalizing on divergent eukaryotic V9 Valley lakes during the austral summer and autumn (No- hypervariable region ribosomal RNA gene targets unveiled vember 2007 and March 2008). We tested hypotheses on the two new genera in these lakes. A novel taxon belonging to relationship between species richness and environmental an unknown class most closely related to Cryptocaryon conditions
    [Show full text]
  • The Revised Classification of Eukaryotes
    See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/231610049 The Revised Classification of Eukaryotes Article in Journal of Eukaryotic Microbiology · September 2012 DOI: 10.1111/j.1550-7408.2012.00644.x · Source: PubMed CITATIONS READS 961 2,825 25 authors, including: Sina M Adl Alastair Simpson University of Saskatchewan Dalhousie University 118 PUBLICATIONS 8,522 CITATIONS 264 PUBLICATIONS 10,739 CITATIONS SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE Christopher E Lane David Bass University of Rhode Island Natural History Museum, London 82 PUBLICATIONS 6,233 CITATIONS 464 PUBLICATIONS 7,765 CITATIONS SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects: Biodiversity and ecology of soil taste amoeba View project Predator control of diversity View project All content following this page was uploaded by Smirnov Alexey on 25 October 2017. The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. The Journal of Published by the International Society of Eukaryotic Microbiology Protistologists J. Eukaryot. Microbiol., 59(5), 2012 pp. 429–493 © 2012 The Author(s) Journal of Eukaryotic Microbiology © 2012 International Society of Protistologists DOI: 10.1111/j.1550-7408.2012.00644.x The Revised Classification of Eukaryotes SINA M. ADL,a,b ALASTAIR G. B. SIMPSON,b CHRISTOPHER E. LANE,c JULIUS LUKESˇ,d DAVID BASS,e SAMUEL S. BOWSER,f MATTHEW W. BROWN,g FABIEN BURKI,h MICAH DUNTHORN,i VLADIMIR HAMPL,j AARON HEISS,b MONA HOPPENRATH,k ENRIQUE LARA,l LINE LE GALL,m DENIS H. LYNN,n,1 HILARY MCMANUS,o EDWARD A. D.
    [Show full text]
  • Shellfish Diseases and Their Management in Commercial Recirculating Systems
    Shellfish Diseases and Their Management in Commercial Recirculating Systems Ralph Elston AquaTechnics & Pacific Shellfish Institute PO Box 687 Carlsborg, WA 98324 Introduction Intensive culture of early life stages of bivalve shellfish culture has been practiced since at least the late 1950’s on an experimental basis. Production scale culture emerged in the 1970’s and today, hathcheries and nurseries produce large numbers of a variety of species of oysters, clams and scallops. The early life stage systems may be entirely or partially recirculating or static. Management of infectious diseases in these systems has been a challenge since their inception and effective health management is a requisite to successful culture. The diseases which affect early life stage shellfish in intensive production systems and the principles and practice of health management are the subject of this presentation. Shellfish Diseases and Management Diseases of bivalve shellfish affecting those reared or harvested from extensive culture primarily consist of parasitic infections and generally comprise the reportable or certifiable diseases. Due to the extensive nature of such culture, intervention options or disease control are limited. In contrast, infectious diseases known from early life stages in intensive culture systems tend to be opportunistic in nature and offer substantial opportunity for management due to the control that can be exerted at key points in the systems. In marine shellfish hatcheries, infectious organisms can enter the system from three sources: brood stock, seawater source and algal food source. Once an organism is established in the system, it may persist without further introduction. Bacterial infections are the most common opportunistic infection in shellfish hatcheries.
    [Show full text]
  • Volume 19 Winter 2002 the Coral Hind, Lapu Lapu, Or Miniata
    FREE ISSN 1045-3520 Volume 19 Winter 2002 Introducing a Zonal Based Natural Photo by Robert Fenner Filtration System for Reef Aquariums by Steve Tyree Quite a few natural based filtration systems have been devised by reef aquarists and scientists in the past twenty years. Some systems utilized algae to remove organic and inorganic pollutants from the reef aquarium; others utilized sediment beds. The natural filtration system that I have been researching and designing is drastically different from both of these types. No external algae are used. I believe that all the algae a functional reef requires are already growing in the reef, even if they are not apparent. They include micro-algae, turf algae, coralline algae, single-cell algae within photosynthetic corals, and cyanobacteria with photosynthetic capabilities. Most of the systems that I have set up to research this concept have not included sediment beds. All organic matter and pollutants are recycled and processed within the system by macro-organisms. Sediment beds have not been utilized to process excess Miniata Grouper, Cephalopholis miniata organic debris, but that does not prevent other aquarists from adding them. The main concept behind my system is the use of living sponges, sea squirts, and filter feeders for filtration. Sponges consume bacteria, can reach about twenty inches in length in the wild, and dissolved and colloidal organic material, micro-plankton, The Coral Hind, Lapu about half that in captivity. It is undoubtedly the most and fine particulate matter. Sea squirts consume large Lapu, or Miniata prized member of the genus for the aquarium trade.
    [Show full text]
  • The Windblown: Possible Explanations for Dinophyte DNA
    bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.08.07.242388; this version posted August 10, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under aCC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license. The windblown: possible explanations for dinophyte DNA in forest soils Marc Gottschlinga, Lucas Czechb,c, Frédéric Mahéd,e, Sina Adlf, Micah Dunthorng,h,* a Department Biologie, Systematische Botanik und Mykologie, GeoBio-Center, Ludwig- Maximilians-Universität München, D-80638 Munich, Germany b Computational Molecular Evolution Group, Heidelberg Institute for Theoretical Studies, D- 69118 Heidelberg, Germany c Department of Plant Biology, Carnegie Institution for Science, Stanford, CA 94305, USA d CIRAD, UMR BGPI, F-34398, Montpellier, France e BGPI, Université de Montpellier, CIRAD, IRD, Montpellier SupAgro, Montpellier, France f Department of Soil Sciences, College of Agriculture and Bioresources, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, S7N 5A8, SK, Canada g Eukaryotic Microbiology, Faculty of Biology, Universität Duisburg-Essen, D-45141 Essen, Germany h Centre for Water and Environmental Research (ZWU), Universität Duisburg-Essen, D- 45141 Essen, Germany Running title: Dinophytes in soils Correspondence M. Dunthorn, Eukaryotic Microbiology, Faculty of Biology, Universität Duisburg-Essen, Universitätsstrasse 5, D-45141 Essen, Germany Telephone number: +49-(0)-201-183-2453; email: [email protected] bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.08.07.242388; this version posted August 10, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.
    [Show full text]
  • Induced in Vitro Mutagenesis of Aquatic Plant Cryptocoryne Willisii Engler Ex Baum Using Gamma Irradiation to Develop New Varieties
    Malaysian Fisheries Journal 10: 93 - 104 (December 2011) Induced in vitro Mutagenesis of Aquatic Plant Cryptocoryne willisii Engler ex Baum Using Gamma Irradiation to Develop New Varieties NORHANIZAN SAHIDIN1/,3/, NURAINI ABD WAHID3/, ROFINA YASMIN OTHMAN2/.3/ & NORZULAANI KHALID2/,3/ 1/Freshwater Fisheries Research Division, FRI Glami Lemi, Department of Fisheries, Jelebu, 71650 Negeri Sembilan, Malaysia 2/Centre for Research in Biotechnology for Agriculture (CEBAR), University of Malaya, 50603 Kuala Lumpur 3/Institute of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Science, University of Malaya, 50603 Kuala Lumpur Abstract: Two new varieties of Cryptocoryne willisii were developed through mutagenesis in this work, where shoot-tip explants of C. willisii were subjected to a range of 60Co gamma ray irradiations: (0, 100, 200, 300, 400, 500, 600, 700 and 800 Gray). The LD50 for the tissue culture plants of C. willisii was at 25 Gy, which was considered as an appropriate dosage to induced mutations in this plant. About two thousand shoot-tip explants were irradiated at 25 Gy and variants from the M1, M2, M3 and M4 generations were screened for morphological differences. The shoots were th subcultured repeatedly until the 4 generation (M4) to ensure stability of mutants. Although initially many regenerants with different morphological traits were produced, only two mutants remained stable. The mutants obtained were dwarf plants (D1) and plants of taller stature with pigmented leaves (G1) in comparison to control cultures. This was verified from the significant F value from the ANOVA test, where P<0.05. The Inter-Retrotransposon Amplified Polymorphism (IRAP) markers were used to distinguish the D1 and G1 genomes from normal C.
    [Show full text]
  • Common Diseases of Cultured Striped Bass, Morone Saxatilis, and Its Hybrid (M
    PUBLICATION 600-080 Common Diseases of Cultured Striped Bass, Morone saxatilis, and Its Hybrid (M. saxitilis x M. chrysops) Stephen A. Smith, Professor, Biomedical Sciences and Pathobiology, Virginia-Maryland Regional College of Veterinary Medicine, Virginia Tech David Pasnik, Research Scientist, Agricultural Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture Fish Health and Disease Parasites Striped bass (Morone saxitilis) and hybrid striped bass Parasitic infestations are a common problem in striped (M. saxitilis x M. chrysops) are widely cultured for bass culture and may have harmful health consequences both food and sportfishing markets. Because these fish when fish are heavily parasitized (Smith and Noga 1992). are commonly raised in high densities under intensive aquaculture situations (e.g., cages, ponds, tanks), they Ichthyophthiriosis or “Ich” is caused by the ciliated are often exposed to suboptimal conditions. Healthy protozoan parasite Ichthyophthirius multifiliis in fresh- striped bass can generally resist many of the viral, water or Cryptocaryon irritans in saltwater. These bacterial, fungal, and parasitic pathogens, but the fish parasites cause raised, white lesions visible on the become increasingly susceptible to disease agents when skin and gill (commonly called “white spot disease”) immunocompromised as a result of stress. and can cause high mortalities in a population of fish. The parasite burrows into skin and gill tissue (figure A number of noninfectious problems are commonly 1), resulting in osmotic stress and allowing secondary encountered in striped bass and hybrid striped bass bacterial and fungal infections to become established culture facilities. Factors such as poor water quality, at the site of penetration. The life cycle of the parasite improper nutrition, and gas supersaturation can directly can be completed in a short time, so light infestations cause morbidity (clinical disease) and mortality.
    [Show full text]