Caracterización Del Ensamblaje De Dinoflagelados En Un Sector Oceánico Del Caribe Colombiano En La Época De Lluvias Mayor (2015) Y Seca Mayor (2016)

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Caracterización Del Ensamblaje De Dinoflagelados En Un Sector Oceánico Del Caribe Colombiano En La Época De Lluvias Mayor (2015) Y Seca Mayor (2016) CARACTERIZACIÓN DEL ENSAMBLAJE DE DINOFLAGELADOS EN UN SECTOR OCEÁNICO DEL CARIBE COLOMBIANO EN LA ÉPOCA DE LLUVIAS MAYOR (2015) Y SECA MAYOR (2016) Enmarcado en el proyecto: Caracterización de sedimentos y comunidades bióticas marinas del área de interés dentro del bloque SINOFF 7 en época seca y lluviosa, Caribe colombiano, para establecer una línea base del estudio de impacto ambiental Programa de Coordinación de Servicios Científicos (C.S.C) MAYRA YISETH AVILA-SILVA Trabajo de grado para optar al título de biólogo M.Sc. MARÍA DEL PILAR MARTÍNEZ BARRAGÁN Directora Universidad del Magdalena Facultad de ciencias básicas Programa de Biología Santa Marta, D.T.C.H. 2018 CARACTERIZACIÓN DEL ENSAMBLAJE DE DINOFLAGELADOS EN UN SECTOR OCEÁNICO DEL CARIBE COLOMBIANO EN LA ÉPOCA DE LLUVIAS MAYOR (2015) Y SECA MAYOR (2016) MAYRA YISETH AVILA-SILVA Autor M.Sc. MARÍA DEL PILAR MARTÍNEZ BARRAGÁN Directora Universidad del Magdalena Facultad de ciencias básicas Programa de Biología Santa Marta, D.T.C.H. 2018 ____________________ CALIFICACIÓN ___________________ EVALUADOR 1 __________________ EVALUADOR 2 ___________________ DIRECTOR DE PROGRAMA DEDICATORIA A Dios por que siempre ha estado a mi lado dándome fortaleza para cumplir mis metas. A mis padres Robinson Avila Salamanca y Aminta Silva Lara por estar siempre a mi lado y apoyarme durante la elaboración de este trabajo. A mi amiga Nika Avila por brindarme momentos de alegría cuando lo necesitaba. A mis herman@s y sobrinos a quienes quiero mucho. AGRADECIMIENTOS A INVEMAR por brindarme la oportunidad de la realización de este trabajo en sus intalaciones y con sus equipos. Principalmente agradezco a la oficina de Coordinacion de Servicion Cientifícos (CSC) y el programa de Biodiversidad y Ecosistemas Marinos (BEM) A SHELL por permitirme trabajar con las muestras recolectadas en la caracterización del Bloque SIN OFF 7, llevado a cabo por INVEMAR. A la Universidad del Magdalena por formarme como profesional. A mi tutora María del Pilar Martinez Barragán por el apoyo que me ha brindado antes y durante la realización de este trabajo. Pili te admiro y te respeto mucho, algún dia quiero tener la determinacíon que tienes para tomar las decisiones A Julián Betancourt jefe de la Coordinación de Servicios Cientifícos (CSC). A Mauricio Beltrán por enseñarme el maravilloso mundo del Fitoplancton. A Arianda Cardenas por ser amiga, compañera y una exelente persona. A Sandra Vera, Jenny Barrerra, Nathalia Delgadillo, Karen Ayala, Israel Caicedo, Maryela Bolaños y Nicolas Daza por compartirme su conocimiento y colaborarme durante la elaboración de este trabajo. TABLA DE CONTENIDO i. RESUMEN................................................................................................................ 10 ii. ABSTRACT .............................................................................................................. 11 1. INTRODUCCIÓN ...................................................................................................... 12 2. HIPÓTESIS .............................................................................................................. 17 3. OBJETIVOS ............................................................................................................. 18 3.1 Objetivo general .............................................................................................. 18 3.2 Objetivos específicos ...................................................................................... 18 4. METODOLOGÍA ....................................................................................................... 19 4.1 Área de estudio ................................................................................................ 19 4.2 Fase de campo ................................................................................................. 20 4.3 Fase de laboratorio.......................................................................................... 22 4.4 Fase de análisis ............................................................................................... 23 4.4.1 Tratamiento de datos .................................................................................. 23 4.4.2 Análisis de datos ........................................................................................ 26 5. RESULTADOS ......................................................................................................... 27 5.1 Composición .................................................................................................... 27 5.2 Densidad .......................................................................................................... 29 5.3 Índices de diversidad ...................................................................................... 31 5.4 Variación espacial ........................................................................................... 35 6. DISCUSIÓN .............................................................................................................. 38 7. CONCLUSIÓN .......................................................................................................... 41 8. BIBLIOGRAFÍA ......................................................................................................... 42 9. ANEXOS .................................................................................................................. 50 10. Charla Mayra-Avila.pptx LISTA DE FIGURAS Figura 1, Ubicación geográfica del bloque SINOFF 7 y de las estaciones de muestreo (E01 - E09). Elaborado por el laboratorio de servicios de información (LABSIS) en INVEMAR. 21 Figura 2. a.) y b.) Montaje de la muestra de fitoplancton en placas Utermöhl. C.) Cuantificación de las muestras de fitoplancton en un microscopio invertido. ...................... 23 Figura 3, Composición porcentual de los dinoflagelados por orden de muestreo en el bloque SINOFF 7. ....................................................................................................................................... 28 Figura 4, Especies con mayor frecuencia de aparición en el bloque SINOFF 7. a.) Amphidinium sp. 3; b.) Karlodinium Sp. 1; c.) Gymnodiniales 16; d.) Oxytoxum caudatum; e.) Oxytoxum scolopax; f.) Scrippsiella sp. 2. ............................................................................ 28 Figura 5, Diagrama de cajas para el Número de morfo-especies de acuerdo a las épocas, jornadas e intensidades lumínicas de muestreo en el bloque SINOFF 7. ............................ 29 Figura 6, Figura 5. Morfoespecies más representativas de acuerdo a su abundancia en el bloque SINOFF 7. a.) cf. Karlodinium sp. 3; b.) Scrippsiella sp. 3; c.) Karlodinium sp. 2; d.) Gymnodiniales 10; e.) Oxytoxum cf. ovum; f.) Dinophyceae 10. ............................................ 30 Figura 7, Diagrama de cajas para la densidad celular de acuerdo a las épocas, jornadas e intensidades lumínicas de muestreo en el bloque SINOFF 7 ................................................. 31 Figura 8, Diagramas de cajas para la diversidad de Shannon-Wiener de acuerdo a las épocas, jornadas e intensidades lumínicas de muestreo en el bloque SINOFF 7. ............. 32 Figura 9, Diagramas de cajas para la riqueza de Margalef de acuerdo a las épocas, jornadas e intensidades lumínicas de muestreo en el bloque SINOFF 7.............................................. 33 Figura 10, Diagramas de cajas para la uniformidad de Pielou de acuerdo a las épocas, jornadas e intensidades lumínicas de muestreo en el bloque SINOFF 7. ............................ 34 Figura 11, Diagramas de cajas para la Dominancia de Simpson de acuerdo a las épocas, jornadas e intensidades lumínicas de muestreo en el bloque SINOFF 7. ............................ 35 Figura 12, Dendrograma obtenido con el análisis de clasificación mediante el índice de similaridad de Bray-Curtis (20%) para el grupo de dinoflagelados en el bloqueSINOFF 7. .......................................................................................................................................................... 36 Figura 13, Ordenación mediante el Análisis de escalamiento multidimensional para la densidad de acuerdo a las diferentes épocas y jornadas de muestreo en el bloque SINOFF 7. ....................................................................................................................................................... 37 Figura 14, Ordenación mediante el Análisis de escalamiento multidimensional para la densidad de acuerdo a las diferentes épocas y jornadas para las intensidades lumínicas de 75%, 50% y 1% de muestreo en el bloque bloque SINOFF 7. ............................................... 37 LISTA DE TABLAS Tabla 1. Coordenadas y profundidad máxima de los puntos de muestreo en el bloque SINOFF 7, Colombia. ...................................................................................................... 21 Tabla 2. Profundidad de las intensidades lumínicas en metros por estación y jornada de muestreo en el bloque SINOFF 7. ................................................................................... 22 LISTA DE ANEXOS Anexo 1. Prueba de normalidad Shapiro-Wilk y análisis de homogeneidad de varianza de Levene. Ho = tienen distribución normal y homogénea con un α = > 0,05. ...................... 50 Anexo 2. Gráfica de transformación de la matriz biológica a raíz cuarta basado en la Ley de Taylor (1961). .................................................................................................................. 51
Recommended publications
  • Checklist of Mediterranean Free-Living Dinoflagellates
    Botanica Marina Vol. 46, 2003, pp. 215–242 © 2003 by Walter de Gruyter · Berlin · New York Checklist of Mediterranean Free-living Dinoflagellates F. Gómez Department of Aquatic Biosciences, The University of Tokyo, 1-1-1 Yayoi, Bunkyo, Tokyo 113-8657, Japan, [email protected] An annotated checklist of the free-living dinoflagellates (Dinophyceae) of the Mediterranean Sea, based on literature records, is given. The distribution of 673 species in 9 Mediterranean sub-basins is reported. The number of taxa among the sub-basins was as follows: Ligurian (496 species), Balear-Provençal (360), Adri- atic (322), Tyrrhenian (284), Ionian (283), Levantine (268), Aegean (182), Alborán (179) and Algerian Seas (151). Introduction cionellum Defrandre, Pentapharsodinium Indelicato et Loeblich III and Preperidinium Mangin have been The oligotrophic conditions in the Mediterranean added to the Peridiniaceae. Sea could favour the richness of dinoflagellates, Synonyms have been tracked down and relocated typical organisms of oligotrophic waters. Intensive in order to avoid duplicate entries. Synonyms, which studies have been made by Jörgensen (1920, have not been quoted in the world literature during 1923), Schiller (1931–37) (Adriatic Sea), Pavillard the last decades, are not reported. Because of space (1905–1937) (Gulf of Lions and Monaco), Halim limitation, not all the references reporting each (1960) (Villefranche and Alexandria), Rampi species for each area have been included. Only when (1939–1969) (Ligurian Sea) and Margalef (1945– a taxon is reported in less than 3 of the 9 Mediter- 1995) (Spanish coasts). However a catalogue of the ranean sub-basins considered, is the source of the dinoflagellate species recorded is not available.
    [Show full text]
  • VII EUROPEAN CONGRESS of PROTISTOLOGY in Partnership with the INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY of PROTISTOLOGISTS (VII ECOP - ISOP Joint Meeting)
    See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/283484592 FINAL PROGRAMME AND ABSTRACTS BOOK - VII EUROPEAN CONGRESS OF PROTISTOLOGY in partnership with THE INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY OF PROTISTOLOGISTS (VII ECOP - ISOP Joint Meeting) Conference Paper · September 2015 CITATIONS READS 0 620 1 author: Aurelio Serrano Institute of Plant Biochemistry and Photosynthesis, Joint Center CSIC-Univ. of Seville, Spain 157 PUBLICATIONS 1,824 CITATIONS SEE PROFILE Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects: Use Tetrahymena as a model stress study View project Characterization of true-branching cyanobacteria from geothermal sites and hot springs of Costa Rica View project All content following this page was uploaded by Aurelio Serrano on 04 November 2015. The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. VII ECOP - ISOP Joint Meeting / 1 Content VII ECOP - ISOP Joint Meeting ORGANIZING COMMITTEES / 3 WELCOME ADDRESS / 4 CONGRESS USEFUL / 5 INFORMATION SOCIAL PROGRAMME / 12 CITY OF SEVILLE / 14 PROGRAMME OVERVIEW / 18 CONGRESS PROGRAMME / 19 Opening Ceremony / 19 Plenary Lectures / 19 Symposia and Workshops / 20 Special Sessions - Oral Presentations / 35 by PhD Students and Young Postdocts General Oral Sessions / 37 Poster Sessions / 42 ABSTRACTS / 57 Plenary Lectures / 57 Oral Presentations / 66 Posters / 231 AUTHOR INDEX / 423 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS-CREDITS / 429 President of the Organizing Committee Secretary of the Organizing Committee Dr. Aurelio Serrano
    [Show full text]
  • DINOFLAGELLATA, ALVEOLATA) Gómez, F
    CICIMAR Oceánides 27(1): 65-140 (2012) A CHECKLIST AND CLASSIFICATION OF LIVING DINOFLAGELLATES (DINOFLAGELLATA, ALVEOLATA) Gómez, F. Instituto Cavanilles de Biodiversidad y Biología Evolutiva, Universidad de Valencia, PO Box 22085, 46071 Valencia, España. email: [email protected] ABSTRACT. A checklist and classification of the extant dinoflagellates are given. Dinokaryotic dinoflagellates (including Noctilucales) comprised 2,294 species belonging to 238 genera. Dinoflagellatessensu lato (Ellobiopsea, Oxyrrhea, Syndinea and Dinokaryota) comprised 2,377 species belonging to 259 genera. The nomenclature of several taxa has been corrected according to the International Code of Botanical Nomenclature. When gene sequences were available, the species were classified following the Small and Large SubUnit rDNA (SSU and LSU rDNA) phylogenies. No taxonomical innovations are proposed herein. However, the checklist revealed that taxa distantly related to the type species of their genera would need to be placed in a new or another known genus. At present, the most extended molecular markers are unable to elucidate the interrelations between the classical orders, and the available sequences of other markers are still insufficient. The classification of the dinoflagellates remains unresolved, especially at the order level. Keywords: alveolates, biodiversity inventory, Dinophyceae, Dinophyta, parasitic phytoplankton, systematics. Inventario y classificacion de especies de dinoflagelados actuales (Dinoflagellata, Alveolata) RESUMEN. Se presentan un inventario y una clasificación de las especies de dinoflagelados actuales. Los dinoflagelados dinocariontes (incluyendo los Noctilucales) están formados por 2,294 especies pertenecientes a 238 géneros. Los dinoflagelados en un sentido amplio (Ellobiopsea, Oxyrrhea, Syndinea y Dinokaryota) comprenden un total de 2,377 especies distribuidas en 259 géneros. La nomenclatura de algunos taxones se ha corregido siguiendo las reglas del Código Internacional de Nomenclatura Botánica.
    [Show full text]
  • Recent Proposals on Nomenclature of Dinoflagellates
    Article title: Recent proposals on nomenclature of dinoflagellates (Dinophyceae) Authors: Fernando Gomez[1] Affiliations: Carmen Campos Panisse 3, E-11500 Puerto de Santa Maria, Spain[1] Orcid ids: 0000-0002-5886-3488[1] Contact e-mail: [email protected] License information: This work has been published open access under Creative Commons Attribution License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Conditions, terms of use and publishing policy can be found at https://www.scienceopen.com/. Preprint statement: This article is a preprint and has not been peer-reviewed, under consideration and submitted to ScienceOpen Preprints for open peer review. DOI: 10.14293/S2199-1006.1.SOR-.PPBI9QN.v1 Preprint first posted online: 10 March 2021 Keywords: Alexandrium, dinoflagellates, Dinophyta, Heterocapsa, Kryptoperidinium, nomenclature, Scrippsiella, systematics, taxonomy 1 2 3 4 5 Recent proposals on nomenclature of dinoflagellates (Dinophyceae) 6 7 Fernando Gómez 8 Carmen Campos Panisse 3, E-11500 Puerto de Santa María, Spain. 9 Email: [email protected] 10 http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5886-3488 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 1 28 Abstract 29 The recent proposals to conserve or reject dinoflagellate names are commented. The 30 Nomenclatural Committee for Algae (NCA) recommended to conserve Scrippsiella 31 against Heteraulacus and Goniodoma (proposal #2382). The synonymy of Peridinium 32 acuminatum and Glenodinium trochoideum is highly questionable, and one Stein’s 33 illustration of Goniodoma acuminatum as type will solve the doubts.
    [Show full text]
  • Revisions to the Classification, Nomenclature, and Diversity of Eukaryotes
    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.
    [Show full text]
  • Redefinition of the Dinoflagellate Genus Alexandrium Based on Centrodinium: Reinstatement of Gessnerium and Protogonyaulax, and Episemicolon Gen
    Redefinition of the dinoflagellate genus Alexandrium based on Centrodinium: reinstatement of Gessnerium and Protogonyaulax, and Episemicolon gen. nov. (Gonyaulacales, Dinophyceae) Supporting Information Appendix S1. Taxonomy, synonymy, plate arrangement and classification of Centrodinium 1. Account of the laterally flattened species of Murrayella (Fig. S1) Murray & Whitting (1899) described a slight laterally flattened biconical species under the name Ceratium biconicum G. Murray & Whitting from samples collected in the tropical North Atlantic. Cleve (1900) described ‘Steiniella? puntacta’ from the mid North Atlantic waters, and commented on the affinity with Ceratium biconicum. The type species of Steiniella F. Schütt, currently known as Gonyaulax fragilis (F. Schütt) Kofoid (=G. hyalina Ostenfeld & Johs. Schmidt), is a globular species with smooth cell surface, while Ceratium biconicum or Steiniella puntacta are laterally flattened species with a theca ornamented with poroids. Kofoid (1907) proposed the genus Murrayella for four species: Two non- compressed species, M. globosa (type species) and M. rotundata; a biconical species, M. spinosa that resembles Amphidoma; and one laterally flattened species, M. punctata, for Cleve’s Steiniella punctata. Kofoid and Michener (1911) reclassified M. spinosa in the genus Amphidoma. The species M. punctata differed from the other congeneric species in the laterally compressed cell body, porulate theca, and the tabulation, with four apical and two antapical plates (Kofoid 1907). 1 Kofoid and Michener (1911) described Centrodinium porulosa without illustration as an elongated cell with a premedian cingulum and porulate theca. This suggests affinities with Ceratium biconicum or Murrayella intermedia. It is uncertain why Kofoid and Michener (1911) described this taxon as Centrodinium, while it resembles Murrayella.
    [Show full text]
  • Protozoologica Special Issue: Marine Heterotrophic Protists Guest Editors: John R
    Acta Protozool. (2014) 53: 63–75 http://www.eko.uj.edu.pl/ap ActA doi:10.4467/16890027AP.13.0021.1118 Protozoologica Special issue: Marine Heterotrophic Protists Guest editors: John R. Dolan and David J. S. Montagnes Review paper Problematic Biases in the Availability of Molecular Markers in Protists: The Example of the Dinoflagellates Fernando GÓMEZ Laboratory of Plankton Systems, Oceanographic Institute, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil Abstract. Dinoflagellates (Alveolata, Dinophyceae) are protists with a truly remarkable diversity in lifestyles (free-living, parasites and mutualistic symbionts), habitats (marine, freshwater, plankton, benthos), and trophic modes (heterotrophic, plastid-containing). Here dino- flagellates are used to evaluate biases in the availability of molecular markers in relation to the variety of functional and ecological charac- teristics of protists. A large number of dinoflagellate sequences are available in GenBank, at least one for 56% of the 264 described genera. The most common marker is the small ribosomal subunit ribosomal DNA (49%). At the species level, SSU rDNA or the large subunit rDNA are available for 15% of the 2,386 described species. Availability of sequences of the internal transcribed spacers (ITS) and cytochrome oxidase I (COI) show a strong bias towards cultivable species. Relative to trophic mode, while about half of the known dinoflagellates are heterotrophic, only 12% of them have been sequenced compared to 29% of the plastid-containing species. For the COI marker availability is 10 times greater for plastid-containing compared to heterotrophic species. Freshwater species are underrepresented (13%) relative to the marine forms (22%). A high proportion of benthic species have been sequenced (46%) reflecting interest inSymbiodinium and harmful epi- phytic taxa.
    [Show full text]
  • Revisions to the Classification, Nomenclature, and Diversity Of
    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.
    [Show full text]
  • Article Title: Recent Proposals on Nomenclature of Dinoflagellates (Dinophyceae) Authors: Fernando Gomez[1] Affiliations: Carmen
    Article title: Recent proposals on nomenclature of dinoflagellates (Dinophyceae) Authors: Fernando Gomez[1] Affiliations: Carmen Campos Panisse 3, E-11500 Puerto de Santa Maria, Spain[1] Orcid ids: 0000-0002-5886-3488[1] Contact e-mail: [email protected] License information: This work has been published open access under Creative Commons Attribution License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Conditions, terms of use and publishing policy can be found at https://www.scienceopen.com/. Preprint statement: This article is a preprint and has not been peer-reviewed, under consideration and submitted to ScienceOpen Preprints for open peer review. DOI: 10.14293/S2199-1006.1.SOR-.PPBI9QN.v2 Preprint first posted online: 23 March 2021 Keywords: Alexandrium, dinoflagellates, Dinophyta, Heterocapsa, Kryptoperidinium, nomenclature, Scrippsiella, systematics, taxonomy 1 2 3 4 5 Recent proposals on nomenclature of dinoflagellates (Dinophyceae) 6 7 Fernando Gómez 8 Carmen Campos Panisse 3, E-11500 Puerto de Santa María, Spain. 9 Email: [email protected] 10 http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5886-3488 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 1 28 Abstract 29 The recent proposals to conserve or reject dinoflagellate names are commented. The 30 Nomenclatural Committee for Algae (NCA) recommended to conserve Scrippsiella 31 against Heteraulacus and Goniodoma (proposal #2382). The synonymy of Peridinium 32 acuminatum and Glenodinium trochoideum is highly questionable, and one Stein’s 33 illustration of Goniodoma acuminatum as type will solve the doubts.
    [Show full text]
  • Solenn MORDRET
    Open Research Online The Open University’s repository of research publications and other research outputs Integrated Study Of Dinoflagellate Diversity In The Gulf of Naples Thesis How to cite: Mordret, Solenn (2018). Integrated Study Of Dinoflagellate Diversity In The Gulf of Naples. PhD thesis The Open University. For guidance on citations see FAQs. c 2017 The Author https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ Version: Version of Record Link(s) to article on publisher’s website: http://dx.doi.org/doi:10.21954/ou.ro.0000d900 Copyright and Moral Rights for the articles on this site are retained by the individual authors and/or other copyright owners. For more information on Open Research Online’s data policy on reuse of materials please consult the policies page. oro.open.ac.uk The Open University, London Stazione Zoologica Anton Dohrn, Naples (ARC center) Integrated study of dinoflagellate diversity in the Gulf of Naples Solenn MORDRET Thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor in Philosophy (PhD) in Life and Biomolecular Sciences December 2017 SOLENN MORDRET Integrated study of dinoflagellate diversity in the Gulf of Naples Abstract Dinoflagellates are a diverse lineage of protists known as an essential component of marine planktonic communities. To study their seasonal diversity at the LTER‐MC station in the Gulf of Naples, I used high throughput sequencing (HTS) metabarcoding of the V4 region in the 18S rDNA. To taxonomically identify the metabarcode sequences, I established a database, called DinoREF, of taxonomically verified and nomenclaturally updated 18S reference barcodes with associated metadata. The reference sequences were organised into Superclades based on phylogenetics and higher taxonomic treatment.
    [Show full text]
  • Jeu12691 Am.Pdf
    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) 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, o p q r,s t Ivan Čepička , Ludmila Chistyakova , Javier del Campo , Micah Dunthorn , Bente Edvardsen , Yana u v w x y z Eglit , Laure Guillou , VladimírAuthor Manuscript Hampl , Aaron A. Heiss , Mona Hoppenrath , Timothy Y. James , 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, This is the author manuscript accepted for publication and has undergone full peer review but has not been through the copyediting, typesetting, pagination and proofreading process, which may lead to differences between this version and the Version of Record.
    [Show full text]