DOCSLIB.ORG

CLASSIFICATION • Two Kingdom Classification of Organisms Was Proposed by Carolus Linnaeus in the Year 1758

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
CLASSIFICATION • Two Kingdom Classification of Organisms Was Proposed by Carolus Linnaeus in the Year 1758 CLASSIFICATION • Two Kingdom Classification of organisms was proposed by Carolus Linnaeus in the year 1758. • He classified all living things into two kingdoms, they are Animal kingdom and Plant kingdom. • He named for animal kingdom as Regnum Animale(Kingdom Animalia) and plant kingdom as Regnum vegetable ( Kingdom Plantae) • This two kingdom classification laid the base for modern classification. • In his classification, he has distinguished clearly animals from plants. • Carl Linnaeus - (23 May 1707 – 10 January 1778), also known after his ennoblement as Carl von Linné was a Swedish botanist, physician, and zoologist, who formalised the modern system of naming organisms called binomial nomenclature. • He is known by the epithet "father of modern taxonomy“ • Many of his writings were in Latin and his name is rendered in Latin as Carolus Linnæus. • Kingdom Plantae • The plant kingdom includes green plants, mosses, ferns, many colorless and colour unicellular organisms, molds, fungi, lichens, bacteria and multicellular seaweeds. The few distinguishing characters of plants. • Plants vary greatly in form and size. • The body is usually asymmetrical. • In higher forms of plants structures like leaves , flowers etc are present. • and plants have a definite shape and form. • Plants do not have the capability to move and they are fixed with root in the soil. • But few localized movements may occur in plants. • There is a continuous growth in their lifespan. • Plants’ nutrition is autotrophic or saprophytic. Minerals are absorbed in solution state by roots • will not absorb the particulate matter. • The plants body is having a distinct cell wall. • The plant cells have a vacuole filled with sap and plastids of different kinds. • Centrioles and lysosomes are absent in plant cell. • The reserve food in plants are in starch form. • Kingdom Animalia • Kingdom Animalia including multicellular organisms and unicellular protozoans. • These organisms have no chlorophyll and photosynthetic capability. • This is including protozoans, sponges, jellyfish, worms, crabs, insects, spiders, frogs, Snails, sharks, bony fishes, lizards, birds, and mammals. The distinguishing characters of animal as follows • The animals show a definite shape, form and symmetry. • Animals are capable of moving from one place to another place. • The growth of the animal occurs proportionately in all body parts. • They respond to stimulus. • Animal body is made up of cells but without the cell wall. • Plastids and vacuoles are absent. • Centrosomes and lysosomes are present. • In animals, food is reserved in the form of glycogen. Demerits of Two kingdom classification • This system is not suitable as due to a large diversity of among the organisms. • The main demerits are as follows • Euglena possesses characters of both plants and animals and they are not classified in a particular group. • both photosynthetic and nonphotosynthetic organisms are placed together. • Lichens are not included either in plant kingdom nor animal kingdom. • Euglena and Chlamydomonas having characters of both animals and plants. • So they can belong to any kingdom. Phylogenetic Classification by Eichler • August Wilhelm Eichler, also known under his Latinized name, Augustus Guilielmus Eichler (22 April 1839 – 2 March 1887), was a German botanist who developed a new system of classification of plants to reflect the concept of evolution. • His author abbreviation in botany is Eichler. • Based on the system of classification proposed by A.W.EICHLER(1875 - 78) , the plant kingdom is divided into two sub - kingdoms . • They are : 1. Cryptogamae . 2. Phanerogamae. • CRYPTOGAMAE (cryptogams) • The cryptogams are flowerless (non- flowering)and seedless , spore bearing plants . • This sub-kingdom is sub-divided into three divisions: (a) Thallophyta (b) Bryophyta (c) Pteridophyta • A. THALLOPHYTA (thallophytes): Thallophyta is the most primitive and the largest division of Cryptogams. • The plant body is not differentiated into root , stem and leaves and such a plant body is termed as thallus • The thalloid plant body is either unicellular or multicellular. • The division thallophyta is classified into two sub - divitions: (1) Algae and (2) Fungi • 1. ALGAE Alage are chlorophyll bearing thalloid , autotrophic and largely aquatic (fresh water and marine water) plants . • They also occur in a variety of other habitats:- moist stones ,soils wood etc. Eg. Spirogyra . • 2. FUNGI Fungi are achlorophyllous (non-green) heterotrophic thallophytes . • They live as heterotrphs • Some fungi grown in close association with roots o f vascular plants forming mycorrhizae. • Eg. Rhizopus • B . BRYOPHTA(Bryophytes): Bryophytes are chlophytes are are chlorophyllous , autotrophic, embryophic and atracheophytic cryptogams. • They are mostly found on damp and shady places. • They are called amphibians of plant kingdom. Eg. Funaria. • C.PTERIDOPHYTA(pteridophytes): Pteridophy tes are chlorophyllous, autotrophic embryophytic and tracheophytic cryptogams. • They are the non flowering plants possesing vascular tissues . • Hence they are called VASCULAR CRYPTOGAMS. Eg:pteris. 2. PHANEROGAMAE(phanerogams) Phanerogams are flower bearing ,seed producing tracheoptytes . • This sub kingdom has only one division SPERMATOPHYTA. • And 2 subdivisions: 1) Gymnospermae and 2) Angiospermae 1) GYMNOSPERMAE (gymnosperms): Gymnosperms are phanerogams or spermatophytes without ovary and fruit . The seeds are naked without a fruit wall. Eg: Cycas , Pinus 2) ANGIOSPERMAE(angiosperms):Angiosperms are the flowering plants in which the seeds are enclosed by fruits. • The angiosperms are divided into two classes : the dicotyledons and the monocotylesons . • Dicotyledons : They have two cotyledon in their seeds - Pea • Monocotyledons- with single cotyledon exampel: Maize , sorghum ,etc R.H Whittaker- 5 Kingdom classification • Organisms are divided into five major kingdoms. • R.H Whittaker proposed the five kingdom classification in 1969. • The most common system of classification in use today is the Five Kingdom Classification. • In this system all living organisms are divided into five kingdoms: • KINGDOM: MONERA • Kingdom Monera - It consists of primitive organisms. • The organisms are very small and single celled. • They consists of prokarytotes which includes species like the bacteria, archaebacteria, cyanobacteria and mycoplasma. Example: bacteria. • KINGDOM: PROTISTA • Protista are single-celled eukaryotes and are mainly aquatic. • It includes diatoms, golden algae, euglena and protozoans like amoeba, paramaecium, plasmodium etc. • They are mostly marine and photosynthetic. • Example: Paramaecium • KINGDOM: MYCOTA • Kingdom Mycota or Kingdom Fungi consists of network of thread-like structures called as mycelium. • The bodies consists of long, thread-like structures which are called hyphae. • These organisms are mostly saprophytes or parasites and also symbionts. • This kingdom of fungi also includes lichens, mycorrhiza, etc. • Example: Aspergillus • KINGDOM: METAPHYTA • Kingdom Metaphyta or Kingdom Plantae are eukaryotic, mutlicellular plants, • They contain chlororphyll pigment, which helps them prepare their own food by the process of photosynthesis. • This kingdom includes all types of plants like herbs, shrubs, trees, flowering and non flowering plants. • Example: rose plant, mango tree, etc. • KINGDOM: METAZOA • Kingdom Animalia or Kingdom Metazoa are heterotrophic, eukaryotic, multicellular organisms. • They lack cell wall. • This kingdom includes all types of animals. • Example: Dog, cattle etc. Merits of Five kingdom classification • Reveals course of evoloution • Plants and animals in this system are homogenous and judiciously separated • Prokaryotes are put in Monera- separate from higher plants- as they are morphologically and physiologically different from higher plants • Unicellular organisms are put under Protista- is appreciated as it avoids putting them either in plant kingdom or animal kingdom Demerits of Five Kingdom classification • Monera and protista includes both photosyntheic and non photosynthetic groups • Evolution of some lower groups are not fully reflected. Eg. In green algae and certain photosynthetic bacteria, the source of hydogen for photosynthesis is not water- but they are placed in two different kingdoms. • Viruses, viroids and prions have no place in 5 kingdom classification Three domain, 6 kingdom classification • Carl Richard Woese - July 15, 1928 – December 30, 2012 • American microbiologist and bio physicist. • Woese is famous for defining the Archaea (a new domain of life) in 1977 by phylogenetic taxonomy of 16S ribosomal RNA, a technique pioneered by Woese which revolutionized the discipline of microbiology. • The Three Domain System, groups organisms primarily based on differences in ribosomal RNA (rRNA) structure. • Ribosomal RNA is a molecular building block for ribosomes. • Under this system, organisms are classified into three domains and six kingdoms. • The domains are Archaea, Bacteria, and Eukarya. • The kingdoms are : • Archaebacteria(ancient bacteria) • Eubacteria (true bacteria) • Protista • Fungi • Plantae • Animalia • Archaea Domain • This domain contains single-celled organisms known as archaea. • Archaea have genes that are similar to both bacteria and eukaryotes. • Like bacteria, Archaea are prokaryotic organisms and do not have a membrane bound nucleus. • They also lack internal cell organelles and many are about the same size as and similar in shape to bacteria. • Archaea reproduce
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Korarchaeal Genome Reveals Insights Into the Evolution of the Archaea
    A korarchaeal genome reveals insights into the evolution of the Archaea James G. Elkinsa,b, Mircea Podarc, David E. Grahamd, Kira S. Makarovae, Yuri Wolfe, Lennart Randauf, Brian P. Hedlundg, Ce´ line Brochier-Armaneth, Victor Kunini, Iain Andersoni, Alla Lapidusi, Eugene Goltsmani, Kerrie Barryi, Eugene V. Koonine, Phil Hugenholtzi, Nikos Kyrpidesi, Gerhard Wannerj, Paul Richardsoni, Martin Kellerc, and Karl O. Stettera,k,l aLehrstuhl fu¨r Mikrobiologie und Archaeenzentrum, Universita¨t Regensburg, D-93053 Regensburg, Germany; cBiosciences Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN 37831; dDepartment of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of Texas, Austin, TX 78712; eNational Center for Biotechnology Information, National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20894; fDepartment of Molecular Biophysics and Biochemistry, Yale University, New Haven, CT 06520; gSchool of Life Sciences, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, NV 89154; hLaboratoire de Chimie Bacte´rienne, Unite´ Propre de Recherche 9043, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Universite´de Provence Aix-Marseille I, 13331 Marseille Cedex 3, France; iU.S. Department of Energy Joint Genome Institute, Walnut Creek, CA 94598; jInstitute of Botany, Ludwig Maximilians University of Munich, D-80638 Munich, Germany; and kInstitute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics, University of California, Los Angeles, CA 90095 Communicated by Carl R. Woese, University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign, Urbana, IL, April 2, 2008 (received for review January 7, 2008) The candidate division Korarchaeota comprises a group of uncul- and sediment samples from Obsidian Pool as an inoculum. The tivated microorganisms that, by their small subunit rRNA phylog- cultivation system supported the stable growth of a mixed commu- eny, may have diverged early from the major archaeal phyla nity of hyperthermophilic bacteria and archaea including an or- Crenarchaeota and Euryarchaeota.
    [Show full text]
  • The Two-Domain Tree of Life Is Linked to a New Root for the Archaea
    The two-domain tree of life is linked to a new root for the Archaea Kasie Raymanna, Céline Brochier-Armanetb, and Simonetta Gribaldoa,1 aInstitut Pasteur, Department of Microbiology, Unit Biologie Moléculaire du Gène chez les Extrêmophiles, 75015 Paris, France; and bUniversité de Lyon, Université Lyon 1, CNRS, UMR5558, Laboratoire de Biométrie et Biologie Evolutive, 69622 Villeurbanne, France Edited by W. Ford Doolittle, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada, and approved April 17, 2015 (received for review November 02, 2014) One of the most fundamental questions in evolutionary biology is restricted taxonomic sampling, notably for the outgroup, may also the origin of the lineage leading to eukaryotes. Recent phyloge- generate or mask potential tree reconstruction artifacts (16). All nomic analyses have indicated an emergence of eukaryotes from these considerations emphasize that we have not yet found a way within the radiation of modern Archaea and specifically from a group out of the phylogenomic impasse caused by the use of universal comprising Thaumarchaeota/“Aigarchaeota” (candidate phylum)/ trees to investigate the relationships among Archaea and eu- Crenarchaeota/Korarchaeota (TACK). Despite their major im- karyotes (12). plications, these studies were all based on the reconstruction of Here, we have applied an original two-step strategy that we universal trees and left the exact placement of eukaryotes with re- proposed a few years ago which involves separately analyzing the spect to the TACK lineage unclear. Here we have applied an original markers shared between Archaea and eukaryotes and between two-step approach that involves the separate analysis of markers Archaea and Bacteria (12). This strategy allowed us to use a larger shared between Archaea and eukaryotes and between Archaea and taxonomic sampling, more markers and thus more positions, have Bacteria.
    [Show full text]
  • Archaea and the Origin of Eukaryotes
    REVIEWS Archaea and the origin of eukaryotes Laura Eme, Anja Spang, Jonathan Lombard, Courtney W. Stairs and Thijs J. G. Ettema Abstract | Woese and Fox’s 1977 paper on the discovery of the Archaea triggered a revolution in the field of evolutionary biology by showing that life was divided into not only prokaryotes and eukaryotes. Rather, they revealed that prokaryotes comprise two distinct types of organisms, the Bacteria and the Archaea. In subsequent years, molecular phylogenetic analyses indicated that eukaryotes and the Archaea represent sister groups in the tree of life. During the genomic era, it became evident that eukaryotic cells possess a mixture of archaeal and bacterial features in addition to eukaryotic-specific features. Although it has been generally accepted for some time that mitochondria descend from endosymbiotic alphaproteobacteria, the precise evolutionary relationship between eukaryotes and archaea has continued to be a subject of debate. In this Review, we outline a brief history of the changing shape of the tree of life and examine how the recent discovery of a myriad of diverse archaeal lineages has changed our understanding of the evolutionary relationships between the three domains of life and the origin of eukaryotes. Furthermore, we revisit central questions regarding the process of eukaryogenesis and discuss what can currently be inferred about the evolutionary transition from the first to the last eukaryotic common ancestor. Sister groups Two descendants that split The pioneering work by Carl Woese and colleagues In this Review, we discuss how culture- independent from the same node; the revealed that all cellular life could be divided into three genomics has transformed our understanding of descendants are each other’s major evolutionary lines (also called domains): the archaeal diversity and how this has influenced our closest relative.
    [Show full text]
  • Life in Extreme Heat
    THERMOPHILES Thermophiles, or heat-loving microscopic organisms, are nourished by the extreme habitat at hydrothermal features in Yellowstone National Park. They also color hydrothermal features shown here at Clepsydra Geyser. Life in Extreme Heat The hydrothermal features of Yellowstone are enough to blister your skin. Some create layers that magnificent evidence of Earth’s volcanic activity. look like molten wax on the surface of steaming Amazingly, they are also habitats in which micro- alkaline pools. Still others, apparent to us through scopic organisms called thermophiles—“thermo” for the odors they create, exist only in murky, sulfuric heat, “phile” for lover—survive and thrive. caldrons that stink worse than rotten eggs. Grand Prismatic Spring at Midway Geyser Basin Today, many scientists study Yellowstone’s ther- is an outstanding example of this dual characteristic. mophiles. Some of these microbes are similar to the Visitors marvel at its size and brilliant colors. The boardwalk crosses a vast habitat for thermophiles. Nourished by energy and chemical building blocks Words to Know available in the hot springs, microbes construct Extremophile: A microorganism living in extreme vividly colored communities. Living with these conditions such as heat and acid, that cannot survive without these conditions. microscopic life forms are larger examples of life in extreme environments, such as mites, flies, spiders, Thermophile: Heat-loving extremophile. and plants. Microorganism: Single- or multi-celled organism of microscopic or submicroscopic size. Also called a microbe. For thousands of years, people have likely won- dered about these extreme habitats. The color of Microbes in Yellowstone: In addition to the thermophilic microorganisms, millions of other microbes thrive in Yellowstone’s superheated environments certainly Yellowstone’s soils, streams, rivers, lakes, vegetation, and caused geologist Walter Harvey Weed to pause, think, animals.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 4: PROKARYOTIC DIVERSITY
    Chapter 4: PROKARYOTIC DIVERSITY 1. Prokaryote Habitats, Relationships & Biomes 2. Proteobacteria 3. Gram-negative and Phototropic Non-Proteobacteria 4. Gram-Positive Bacteria 5. Deeply Branching Bacteria 6. Archaea 1. Prokaryote Habitats, Relationships & Biomes Important Metabolic Terminology Oxygen tolerance/usage: aerobic – requires or can use oxygen (O2) anaerobic – does not require or cannot tolerate O2 Energy usage: phototroph – uses light as an energy source • all photosynthetic organisms chemotroph – acquires energy from organic or inorganic molecules • organotrophs – get energy from organic molecules • lithotrophs – get energy from inorganic molecules …more Important Terminology Carbon Source: autotroph – uses CO2 as a carbon source • e.g., photoautotrophs or chemoautotrophs heterotroph – requires an organic carbon source • e.g., chemoheterotroph – gets energy & carbon from organic molecules Oligotrophs require few nutrients, the opposite of eutrophs or copiotrophs Facultative vs Obligate (or Strict): facultative – “able to, but not requiring” • e.g., facultative anaerobes can survive w/ or w/o O2 obligate – “absolutely requires” • e.g., obligate anaerobes cannot survive in O2 Symbiotic Relationships Symbiotic relationships (close, direct interactions) between different organisms in nature are of several types: • e.g., humans have beneficial bacteria in their digestive tracts that also benefit from the food we eat (mutualism) Microbiomes All the microorganisms that inhabit a particular organism or environment (e.g., human or
    [Show full text]
  • Coral-Associated Archaea
    MARINE ECOLOGY PROGRESS SERIES Vol. 273: 89–96, 2004 Published June 8 Mar Ecol Prog Ser Coral-associated Archaea Linda Wegley1, Yanan Yu1, Mya Breitbart1, Veronica Casas1, David I. Kline1, 2, 3, Forest Rohwer1, 4,* 1Department of Biology, LS316, San Diego State University, 5500 Campanile Dr, San Diego, California 92182-4614, USA 2University of California, San Diego, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, La Jolla, California 92093-0202, USA 3Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute, Apartado 2072, Balboa, Panama 4Center for Microbial Sciences, San Diego State University, 5500 Campanile Dr, San Diego, California 92182, USA ABSTRACT: The coral holobiont includes the coral, zooxanthellae, fungi, endolithic algae, and >30 species of Bacteria. Using culture-independent techniques, we now show that Archaea are also abun- dant and widespread on corals. Sequence analyses of Archaea on 3 species of Caribbean corals revealed that coral-associated Archaea are novel, diverse, and include representatives from both the Crenarchaeota and Euryarchaeota. Unlike zooxanthellae and Bacteria, the Archaea do not appear to form species-specific associations with reef-building corals. Fluorescent in situ hybridizations with peptide nucleic acid (PNA) probes showed that Archaea were present at >107 cells cm–2 on Porites astreoides, comprising nearly half of the prokaryotic community. This study and one by Kellogg (Mar Ecol Prog Ser 273:81–88) show that Archaea are abundant, diverse, and potentially important com- ponents of the coral holobiont. KEY WORDS: Coral · Archaea · 16S rDNA · Fluorescent in situ hybridization · FISH · Peptide nucleic acid probe · PNA Resale or republication not permitted without written consent of the publisher INTRODUCTION 1994, Murray et al. 1998, 1999).
    [Show full text]
  • Variations in the Two Last Steps of the Purine Biosynthetic Pathway in Prokaryotes
    GBE Different Ways of Doing the Same: Variations in the Two Last Steps of the Purine Biosynthetic Pathway in Prokaryotes Dennifier Costa Brandao~ Cruz1, Lenon Lima Santana1, Alexandre Siqueira Guedes2, Jorge Teodoro de Souza3,*, and Phellippe Arthur Santos Marbach1,* 1CCAAB, Biological Sciences, Recoˆ ncavo da Bahia Federal University, Cruz das Almas, Bahia, Brazil 2Agronomy School, Federal University of Goias, Goiania,^ Goias, Brazil 3 Department of Phytopathology, Federal University of Lavras, Minas Gerais, Brazil Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gbe/article/11/4/1235/5345563 by guest on 27 September 2021 *Corresponding authors: E-mails: [email protected]fla.br; [email protected]. Accepted: February 16, 2019 Abstract The last two steps of the purine biosynthetic pathway may be catalyzed by different enzymes in prokaryotes. The genes that encode these enzymes include homologs of purH, purP, purO and those encoding the AICARFT and IMPCH domains of PurH, here named purV and purJ, respectively. In Bacteria, these reactions are mainly catalyzed by the domains AICARFT and IMPCH of PurH. In Archaea, these reactions may be carried out by PurH and also by PurP and PurO, both considered signatures of this domain and analogous to the AICARFT and IMPCH domains of PurH, respectively. These genes were searched for in 1,403 completely sequenced prokaryotic genomes publicly available. Our analyses revealed taxonomic patterns for the distribution of these genes and anticorrelations in their occurrence. The analyses of bacterial genomes revealed the existence of genes coding for PurV, PurJ, and PurO, which may no longer be considered signatures of the domain Archaea. Although highly divergent, the PurOs of Archaea and Bacteria show a high level of conservation in the amino acids of the active sites of the protein, allowing us to infer that these enzymes are analogs.
    [Show full text]
  • Systema Naturae. the Classification of Living Organisms
    Systema Naturae. The classification of living organisms. c Alexey B. Shipunov v. 5.601 (June 26, 2007) Preface Most of researches agree that kingdom-level classification of living things needs the special rules and principles. Two approaches are possible: (a) tree- based, Hennigian approach will look for main dichotomies inside so-called “Tree of Life”; and (b) space-based, Linnaean approach will look for the key differences inside “Natural System” multidimensional “cloud”. Despite of clear advantages of tree-like approach (easy to develop rules and algorithms; trees are self-explaining), in many cases the space-based approach is still prefer- able, because it let us to summarize any kinds of taxonomically related da- ta and to compare different classifications quite easily. This approach also lead us to four-kingdom classification, but with different groups: Monera, Protista, Vegetabilia and Animalia, which represent different steps of in- creased complexity of living things, from simple prokaryotic cell to compound Nature Precedings : doi:10.1038/npre.2007.241.2 Posted 16 Aug 2007 eukaryotic cell and further to tissue/organ cell systems. The classification Only recent taxa. Viruses are not included. Abbreviations: incertae sedis (i.s.); pro parte (p.p.); sensu lato (s.l.); sedis mutabilis (sed.m.); sedis possi- bilis (sed.poss.); sensu stricto (s.str.); status mutabilis (stat.m.); quotes for “environmental” groups; asterisk for paraphyletic* taxa. 1 Regnum Monera Superphylum Archebacteria Phylum 1. Archebacteria Classis 1(1). Euryarcheota 1 2(2). Nanoarchaeota 3(3). Crenarchaeota 2 Superphylum Bacteria 3 Phylum 2. Firmicutes 4 Classis 1(4). Thermotogae sed.m. 2(5).
    [Show full text]
  • Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 62:1171–1177
    16S rRNA Phylogenetic Investigation of the Candidate Division "Korarchaeota" The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters Citation Auchtung, T. A., C. D. Takacs-Vesbach, and C. M. Cavanaugh. 2006. “16S rRNA Phylogenetic Investigation of the Candidate Division ‘Korarchaeota.’” Applied and Environmental Microbiology 72 (7) (July 1): 5077–5082. doi:10.1128/aem.00052-06. Published Version doi:10.1128/AEM.00052-06 Citable link http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:14368993 Terms of Use This article was downloaded from Harvard University’s DASH repository, and is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material, as set forth at http:// nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:dash.current.terms-of- use#LAA APPLIED AND ENVIRONMENTAL MICROBIOLOGY, July 2006, p. 5077–5082 Vol. 72, No. 7 0099-2240/06/$08.00ϩ0 doi:10.1128/AEM.00052-06 Copyright © 2006, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved. 16S rRNA Phylogenetic Investigation of the Candidate Division “Korarchaeota” Thomas A. Auchtung,1 Cristina D. Takacs-Vesbach,2 and Colleen M. Cavanaugh1* Department of Organismic and Evolutionary Biology, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138,1 and Department of Biology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico 871312 Received 9 January 2006/Accepted 15 April 2006 The environmental distribution and phylogeny of “Korarchaeota,” a proposed ancient archaeal division, was investigated by using the 16S rRNA gene framework. Korarchaeota-specific primers were designed based on previously published sequences and used to screen a variety of environments. Korarchaeota 16S rRNA genes were amplified exclusively from high temperature Yellowstone National Park hot springs and a 9°N East Pacific Downloaded from Rise deep-sea hydrothermal vent.
    [Show full text]
  • A Higher Level Classification of All Living Organisms
    RESEARCH ARTICLE A Higher Level Classification of All Living Organisms Michael A. Ruggiero1*, Dennis P. Gordon2, Thomas M. Orrell1, Nicolas Bailly3, Thierry Bourgoin4, Richard C. Brusca5, Thomas Cavalier-Smith6, Michael D. Guiry7, Paul M. Kirk8 1 Integrated Taxonomic Information System, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, District of Columbia, United States of America, 2 National Institute of Water & Atmospheric Research, Wellington, New Zealand, 3 WorldFish—FIN, Los Baños, Philippines, 4 Institut Systématique, Evolution, Biodiversité (ISYEB), UMR 7205 MNHN-CNRS-UPMC-EPHE, Sorbonne Universités, Museum National d'Histoire Naturelle, 57, rue Cuvier, CP 50, F-75005, Paris, France, 5 Department of Ecology & Evolutionary Biology, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, United States of America, 6 Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom, 7 The AlgaeBase Foundation & Irish Seaweed Research Group, Ryan Institute, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland, 8 Mycology Section, Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, London, United Kingdom * [email protected] Abstract We present a consensus classification of life to embrace the more than 1.6 million species already provided by more than 3,000 taxonomists’ expert opinions in a unified and coherent, OPEN ACCESS hierarchically ranked system known as the Catalogue of Life (CoL). The intent of this collab- orative effort is to provide a hierarchical classification serving not only the needs of the Citation: Ruggiero MA, Gordon DP, Orrell TM, Bailly CoL’s database providers but also the diverse public-domain user community, most of N, Bourgoin T, Brusca RC, et al. (2015) A Higher Level Classification of All Living Organisms. PLoS whom are familiar with the Linnaean conceptual system of ordering taxon relationships.
    [Show full text]
  • Mean and SD Archaea Bacteria Genome Size (Mb)
    Distributions for kingdom level Primer score mean and SD Genomic GC (%) mean and SD 60 3 2 50 1 Primer score 40 0 Genomic GC (%) Bacteria Bacteria Archaea Archaea kingdom kingdom 16S GC (%) mean and SD Genome size (Mb) mean and SD 65 5 60 4 55 3 16S GC (%) 2 Genome size (Mb) Genome size 50 Bacteria Bacteria Archaea Archaea kingdom kingdom 16S GC (%) Primer score 45 50 55 60 65 0 1 2 3 4 Acidobacteria Acidobacteria Actinobacteria Actinobacteria Aquificae Aquificae Bacteroidetes Bacteroidetes Caldiserica Caldiserica Chlamydiae Chlamydiae Chlorobi Primer scoremeanandSD Chlorobi 16S GC(%)meanandSD Chloroflexi Chloroflexi Chrysiogenetes Chrysiogenetes Crenarchaeota Crenarchaeota Cyanobacteria Cyanobacteria Deferribacteres Deferribacteres Deinococcus−Thermus Deinococcus−Thermus Dictyoglomi Dictyoglomi Elusimicrobia Elusimicrobia phylum phylum Euryarchaeota Euryarchaeota Fibrobacteres Fibrobacteres Firmicutes Firmicutes Fusobacteria Fusobacteria Gemmatimonadetes Gemmatimonadetes Ignavibacteria Ignavibacteria Ignavibacteriae Ignavibacteriae Korarchaeota Korarchaeota Lentisphaerae Lentisphaerae Nanoarchaeota Nanoarchaeota Nitrospirae Nitrospirae Planctomycetes Planctomycetes level phylum for Distributions Proteobacteria Proteobacteria Spirochaetes Spirochaetes Synergistetes Synergistetes Tenericutes Tenericutes Thaumarchaeota Thaumarchaeota Thermodesulfobacteria Thermodesulfobacteria Thermotogae Thermotogae unclassified unclassified Verrucomicrobia Verrucomicrobia Genome size (Mb) Genomic GC (%) 10.0 30 40 50 60 70 2.5 5.0 7.5 Acidobacteria Acidobacteria
    [Show full text]
  • And Iron-Reducing Thaumarchaeote from a Terrestrial Acidic Hot Spring
    The ISME Journal (2019) 13:2465–2474 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41396-019-0447-3 ARTICLE Isolation and characterization of a thermophilic sulfur- and iron- reducing thaumarchaeote from a terrestrial acidic hot spring 1,2 1 1 1,3 1,3 4 Shingo Kato ● Takashi Itoh ● Masahiro Yuki ● Mai Nagamori ● Masafumi Ohnishi ● Katsuyuki Uematsu ● 2 3 1 Katsuhiko Suzuki ● Tomonori Takashina ● Moriya Ohkuma Received: 10 September 2018 / Revised: 18 April 2019 / Accepted: 3 May 2019 / Published online: 6 June 2019 © International Society for Microbial Ecology 2019 Abstract A deep-branching clade of Thaumarchaeota, conventionally called Terrestrial hot spring creanarchaeotic group (THSCG), is a missing link between thaumarchaeotic ammonia oxidizers and the deeper-branching non-ammonia oxidizers, such as Crenarchaeota and Candidatus Korarchaeota. Here, we report isolation of the first cultivated representative from the THSCG, named as NAS-02. Physiological characterization demonstrated that the isolate was a thermoacidophilic, sulfur- and iron-reducing organoheterotroph, which was supported by gene contents encoded in its complete genome. There was no evidence for ammonia oxidation by the isolate. Members in THSCG are likely thermophiles, and may play roles in 1234567890();,: 1234567890();,: degrading cell debris as a scavenger and in biogeochemical cycling of sulfur and iron in the hot environments, as suggested by the physiological characteristics of the isolate and the geographical distribution of the 16S rRNA gene sequences of THSCG in terrestrial hot springs and marine hydrothermal fields. Phylogenetic analysis suggests that the THSCG lineage represented by NAS-02 has gained the ability of sulfur reduction via horizontal gene transfer. Based on the phylogeny and physiology, we propose the name Conexivisphaera calidus gen.
    [Show full text]