DOCSLIB.ORG

Ii Rapid Wound Repair in the Ctenophore Mnemiopsis Spp. By

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Ii Rapid Wound Repair in the Ctenophore Mnemiopsis Spp. By Rapid Wound Repair in the Ctenophore Mnemiopsis spp. by Matthew Brien Dodson A thesis submitted to the Graduate Faculty of Auburn University in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the Degree of Masters Thesis Auburn, Alabama December 13, 2010 Keywords: invertebrate, wound repair, marine ctenophore, Mnemiopsis Copyright 2010 by Matthew Brien Dodson Approved by Anthony Moss, Chair, Associate Professor of Cell Biology Frank Bartol, Professor of Reproductive Biology Mark Liles, Assistant Professor of Microbiology ii Abstract The ability to quickly and efficiently close a wound is an integral part of any organism’s ability to survive. Marine organisms are exposed to numerous environmental pressures that demand the need for a rapid repair response. The delicate marine comb jelly Mnemiopsis leidyi faces damage from predation, as well as objects found in its natural surroundings, such as coarse sea grass and sediment. This damage presents the need to quickly and efficiently repair the wound to prevent further injury or infestation by degradative microbes that enter exposed mesoglea and gastrovascular canals. Mnemiopsis has evolved a rapid, scar-free wound repair mechanism that quickly seals the mesoglea away from the external environment. Here I describe the morphological changes that occur during repair, the development of a ctenophore wound cell culture system, and provide an initial look at gene expression during the repair response. ii Table of Contents Abstract........................................................................................................................................... ii List of Tables ...................................................................................................................................v List of Figures................................................................................................................................ vi Chapter 1: Wound Repair: A Review ..............................................................................................1 Importance of wound repair.................................................................................................1 Model systems and the conservation of wound repair.........................................................1 Repair at the cellular level ...................................................................................................3 Repair at the tissue level ......................................................................................................6 Regeneration and Wound Repair.......................................................................................20 Introduction to the phylum Ctenophora.............................................................................26 Chapter 2: Basic Light Microscopy Observations.........................................................................34 Introduction........................................................................................................................34 Objectives and Hypotheses................................................................................................35 Materials and Methods.......................................................................................................39 Results................................................................................................................................41 Discussion and Conclusions ..............................................................................................52 Chapter 3: Cell Culture Observations............................................................................................56 Introduction........................................................................................................................56 Objectives and Hypotheses................................................................................................57 iii Materials and Methods.......................................................................................................58 Results................................................................................................................................59 Discussion and Conclusions ..............................................................................................69 Chapter 4: Molecular Analyses of Wound Repair.........................................................................74 Introduction........................................................................................................................74 Objectives and Hypotheses................................................................................................81 Materials and Methods.......................................................................................................82 Results................................................................................................................................85 Discussion and Conclusions ..............................................................................................88 References......................................................................................................................................94 iv List of Tables Table 1: Quantification of cell morphologies present in vitro.......................................................67 Table 2: Cell sizes in vitro .............................................................................................................68 Table 3: Primer sequences .............................................................................................................84 Table 4: Functional significance of EST targets............................................................................85 Table 5: Degenerate primers..........................................................................................................86 v List of Figures Figure 1: Clot formation in Drosophila.........................................................................................10 Figure 2: Mnemiopsis leidyi...........................................................................................................28 Figure 3: Ctenophore oral-aboral axis ...........................................................................................29 Figure 4: Larval body plan of Mnemiopsis leidyi ..........................................................................29 Figure 5: Tissue organization.........................................................................................................30 Figure 6: Brightfield of an epithelial wound..................................................................................42 Figure 7: Cavity formation.............................................................................................................43 Figure 8: Hoechst staining .............................................................................................................44 Figure 9: Cells binding to muscle fibers........................................................................................45 Figure 10: Rearranging muscle fibers............................................................................................45 Figure 11: Actin rich wound edge .................................................................................................46 Figure 12: DAPI stain of wound edge ...........................................................................................47 Figure 13: Main cell morphologies at wound edge ......................................................................48 Figure 14: Cell network underlying the wound .............................................................................48 Figure 15: Change in epithelial cell polarity..................................................................................50 Figure 16: Cell dispersal ................................................................................................................51 Figure 17: Comparison of cutaneous repair rates ..........................................................................52 Figure 18: Progression of wound repair in Mnemiopsis ................................................................53 Figure 19: Cell culture in sea water ...............................................................................................61 vi Figure 20: Cell culture progression................................................................................................61 Figure 21: Cell morphologies observed in vitro ............................................................................62 Figure 22: Cell morphologies observed in vivo .............................................................................63 Figure 23: Bipolar cells in vitro.....................................................................................................64 Figure 24: Stellate cells in vitro.....................................................................................................65 Figure 25: Multipolar cells in vitro................................................................................................66 Figure 26: Pie chart of quantified in vitro cell types .....................................................................67 Figure 27: Histogram of sphere, spindle and bipolar cell sizes .....................................................68 Figure 28: Histogram of stellate and multipolar cell sizes ............................................................69
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Zooplankton Species", Takes You Directly to the Species Cards, Which Hypercard Taxonomy Contain the Pictures and Description of Each Species in the Key
    Fisken Hav. , 198 9 ( 1) : 1- 13 + App . Creating and Using Taxonomic Keys with HyperCard Kenneth W. Estep Institute of Marine Research, Postbox 1870,5024 Bergen, Norway The preparation and use of taxonomic keys is an essential part of the work of many biologists. However, the difficulty of collecting taxonomic information that is often dispersed in many hard-to-use and difficult-to-find references discourages the common use of taxonomy in the work of many ecologists. This manuscript describes the computer program Linnaeus, which was designed to solve this problem. Linnaeus was developed at the Institute of Marine Research in Bergen using the Macintosh computer and will include much more complicated examples of HyperCard l l programming. l To use the example key, copy the files from the Linnaeus disk to your i i hard-disk drive and click on the file "Read Me First." This file has l mmplete instructions on the installation into your HyperCard Home stack. If you wish, you can print a copy of the instructions by choosing the "Print Instructions" button. b inn is After you have installed Linnaeus, you can move to the program from your HyperCard Home card by clicking on the Linnaeus Linnaeus button on your Home card. 1 This will bring you to the Index card for Linnaeus. About Linnaeus I Use the Zooplankton j i i Set User Hode i Identlffcatlon key.- i ZooplanktonKey i i ......" ......... " ... ......-.... ",.." ......... " ,......,. ",,.,".......*.~.........".........".....*..."............... "..."...."...-....".: i...... " ....................................... " ......... ".... " ......... "................................................... - .... "..." ....".. I i - - i "se the Zooplankton i -- I i Species List Reference~ i ..% ,p species list. , f ZooplanktonSpeoies i i ................." ......... "......... ".... " ........................................................................ ".... -...m .... -...m ....-.
    [Show full text]
  • Ctenophore Relationships and Their Placement As the Sister Group to All Other Animals
    ARTICLES DOI: 10.1038/s41559-017-0331-3 Ctenophore relationships and their placement as the sister group to all other animals Nathan V. Whelan 1,2*, Kevin M. Kocot3, Tatiana P. Moroz4, Krishanu Mukherjee4, Peter Williams4, Gustav Paulay5, Leonid L. Moroz 4,6* and Kenneth M. Halanych 1* Ctenophora, comprising approximately 200 described species, is an important lineage for understanding metazoan evolution and is of great ecological and economic importance. Ctenophore diversity includes species with unique colloblasts used for prey capture, smooth and striated muscles, benthic and pelagic lifestyles, and locomotion with ciliated paddles or muscular propul- sion. However, the ancestral states of traits are debated and relationships among many lineages are unresolved. Here, using 27 newly sequenced ctenophore transcriptomes, publicly available data and methods to control systematic error, we establish the placement of Ctenophora as the sister group to all other animals and refine the phylogenetic relationships within ctenophores. Molecular clock analyses suggest modern ctenophore diversity originated approximately 350 million years ago ± 88 million years, conflicting with previous hypotheses, which suggest it originated approximately 65 million years ago. We recover Euplokamis dunlapae—a species with striated muscles—as the sister lineage to other sampled ctenophores. Ancestral state reconstruction shows that the most recent common ancestor of extant ctenophores was pelagic, possessed tentacles, was bio- luminescent and did not have separate sexes. Our results imply at least two transitions from a pelagic to benthic lifestyle within Ctenophora, suggesting that such transitions were more common in animal diversification than previously thought. tenophores, or comb jellies, have successfully colonized from species across most of the known phylogenetic diversity of nearly every marine environment and can be key species in Ctenophora.
    [Show full text]
  • Midwater Data Sheet
    MIDWATER TRAWL DATA SHEET RESEARCH VESSEL__________________________________(1/20/2013Version*) CLASS__________________;DATE_____________;NAME:_________________________; DEVICE DETAILS___________ LOCATION (OVERBOARD): LAT_______________________; LONG___________________________ LOCATION (AT DEPTH): LAT_______________________; LONG______________________________ LOCATION (START UP): LAT_______________________; LONG______________________________ LOCATION (ONBOARD): LAT_______________________; LONG______________________________ BOTTOM DEPTH_________; DEPTH OF SAMPLE:____________; DURATION OF TRAWL___________; TIME: IN_________AT DEPTH________START UP__________SURFACE_________ SHIP SPEED__________; WEATHER__________________; SEA STATE_________________; AIR TEMP______________ SURFACE TEMP__________; PHYS. OCE. NOTES______________________; NOTES_____________________________ INVERTEBRATES Lensia hostile_______________________ PHYLUM RADIOLARIA Lensia havock______________________ Family Tuscaroridae “Round yellow ones”___ Family Hippopodiidae Vogtia sp.___________________________ PHYLUM CTENOPHORA Family Prayidae Subfamily Nectopyramidinae Class Nuda "Pointed siphonophores"________________ Order Beroida Nectadamas sp._______________________ Family Beroidae Nectopyramis sp.______________________ Beroe abyssicola_____________________ Family Prayidae Beroe forskalii________________________ Subfamily Prayinae Beroe cucumis _______________________ Craseoa lathetica_____________________ Class Tentaculata Desmophyes annectens_________________ Subclass
    [Show full text]
  • Articles and Plankton
    Ocean Sci., 15, 1327–1340, 2019 https://doi.org/10.5194/os-15-1327-2019 © Author(s) 2019. This work is distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. The Pelagic In situ Observation System (PELAGIOS) to reveal biodiversity, behavior, and ecology of elusive oceanic fauna Henk-Jan Hoving1, Svenja Christiansen2, Eduard Fabrizius1, Helena Hauss1, Rainer Kiko1, Peter Linke1, Philipp Neitzel1, Uwe Piatkowski1, and Arne Körtzinger1,3 1GEOMAR, Helmholtz Centre for Ocean Research Kiel, Düsternbrooker Weg 20, 24105 Kiel, Germany 2University of Oslo, Blindernveien 31, 0371 Oslo, Norway 3Christian Albrecht University Kiel, Christian-Albrechts-Platz 4, 24118 Kiel, Germany Correspondence: Henk-Jan Hoving ([email protected]) Received: 16 November 2018 – Discussion started: 10 December 2018 Revised: 11 June 2019 – Accepted: 17 June 2019 – Published: 7 October 2019 Abstract. There is a need for cost-efficient tools to explore 1 Introduction deep-ocean ecosystems to collect baseline biological obser- vations on pelagic fauna (zooplankton and nekton) and es- The open-ocean pelagic zones include the largest, yet least tablish the vertical ecological zonation in the deep sea. The explored habitats on the planet (Robison, 2004; Webb et Pelagic In situ Observation System (PELAGIOS) is a 3000 m al., 2010; Ramirez-Llodra et al., 2010). Since the first rated slowly (0.5 m s−1) towed camera system with LED il- oceanographic expeditions, oceanic communities of macro- lumination, an integrated oceanographic sensor set (CTD- zooplankton and micronekton have been sampled using nets O2) and telemetry allowing for online data acquisition and (Wiebe and Benfield, 2003). Such sampling has revealed a video inspection (low definition).
    [Show full text]
  • Homage to Linnaeus: How Many Parasites? How Many Hosts?
    Homage to Linnaeus: How many parasites? How many hosts? Andy Dobson*†, Kevin D. Lafferty‡, Armand M. Kuris§, Ryan F. Hechinger§, and Walter Jetz¶ *EEB, Guyot Hall, Princeton University, Washington Road, Princeton, NJ 08544; ‡Western Ecological Research Center, U.S. Geological Survey, Marine Science Institute, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA 93106; §Department of Ecology, Evolution, and Marine Biology, and Marine Science Institute, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA 93106; and ¶Division of Biological Sciences, University of California at San Diego, 9500 Gilman Drive, La Jolla, CA 92093 Estimates of the total number of species that inhabit the Earth have pragmatic reasons: vertebrates are a small component of host increased significantly since Linnaeus’s initial catalog of 20,000 diversity, vertebrates are parasitized by a subset of the helminths, species. The best recent estimates suggest that there are Ϸ6 and helminths are not the most fully described parasite taxa. million species. More emphasis has been placed on counts of free-living species than on parasitic species. We rectify this by How Many Species Are There on Earth? quantifying the numbers and proportion of parasitic species. We Beginning in 1988, Robert May (2, 3, 9) cogently argued that our estimate that there are between 75,000 and 300,000 helminth inability to estimate the diversity of species on Earth provided a species parasitizing the vertebrates. We have no credible way of sad and somewhat self-centered testimony to human inquisitive- estimating how many parasitic protozoa, fungi, bacteria, and ness. After collating data on the numbers of species in each viruses exist. We estimate that between 3% and 5% of parasitic major taxon, May (2) concluded that our knowledge of verte- helminths are threatened with extinction in the next 50 to 100 brates far exceeded that of invertebrates and protists.
    [Show full text]
  • The Ecological Significance of a Ctenophore, Mnemiopsis Leidyi (A
    W&M ScholarWorks Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects Theses, Dissertations, & Master Projects 1968 The Ecological Significance of a Ctenophore, Mnemiopsis leidyi (A. Aggasiz), in a Fish Nursery Ground Victor G. Burrell College of William and Mary - Virginia Institute of Marine Science Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wm.edu/etd Part of the Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Commons, Fresh Water Studies Commons, Marine Biology Commons, and the Oceanography Commons Recommended Citation Burrell, Victor G., "The Ecological Significance of a Ctenophore, Mnemiopsis leidyi (A. Aggasiz), in a Fish Nursery Ground" (1968). Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects. Paper 1539617413. https://dx.doi.org/doi:10.25773/v5-kgbx-s889 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses, Dissertations, & Master Projects at W&M ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects by an authorized administrator of W&M ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE ECOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE OF A CTENOPHORE, MNEMIOPSIS LEIDYI (A. AGASSIZ)-,.. IN A FISH NURSERY GROUND A Thesis Presented to The Faculty of the School of Marine Science The College of William and Mary in Virginia In Partial Fulfillment Of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts By Victor G. Burrell, Jr. 1968 APPROVAL SHEET This thesis is submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts Author ^ Approved, July 1968 j/OLCCfrd. £ . Qa-c i Willard A. Van Engel, £h.M. Si«. ____________ Dexter S. Haven, M.S. Edwin B. Joseph/, Ph ^ . Frank 0. Perkins, Ph.D Marvin L.
    [Show full text]
  • CTENOPHORA Comb Jellies
    THREE Phylum CTENOPHORA comb jellies HERMES MIANZAN, ELLIOT W. Dawson, CLAUDIA E. MILLS tenophores have been described as the most beautiful, delicate, seem- ingly innocent yet most voracious, sinister and destructive of plankton Corganisms. They are exclusively marine, are found in all oceans at all depths, have many different shapes, and range in size from a few millimetres diameter to two metres long. They are mostly planktonic, but one order is bottom- dwelling with a creeping mode of existence. The planktonic forms are stunningly beautiful, diaphanous creatures, flashing iridescence as their comb-like cilia plates catch the light. Their bodies are soft, fragile, gelatinous. The phylum is small and well defined, with about 150 species worldwide (Mills 2008). Like the Cnidaria, they are radiate animals and at one time the two phyla were linked together as the Coelenterata. Ctenophoran symmetry is biradial and the general body plan somewhat more complicated than that of Cnidaria (Harbison & Madin 1982; Mills & Miller 1984; Harbison 1985). The two phyla are now thought to be only very distantly related. Recent evidence from ribosomal RNA sequencing shows that the Ctenophora lie close to the Porifera as the second-most-basic group of the Metazoa (Bridge et al. 1995; Collins 1998; Podar et al. 2001). Similarity in body form between pelagic ctenophores and medusae is a phenomenon of convergence. Ctenophores (literally, comb bearers) are named for their eight symmetrical tracks (comb rows) of fused ciliary plates (ctenes) on the body surface (Hernán- dez-Nicaise & Franc 1993). These constitute the locomotory apparatus that Leucothea sp. characterises the group.
    [Show full text]
  • Benthic Invertebrate Species Richness & Diversity At
    BBEENNTTHHIICC INVVEERTTEEBBRRAATTEE SPPEECCIIEESSRRIICCHHNNEESSSS && DDIIVVEERRSSIITTYYAATT DIIFFFFEERRENNTTHHAABBIITTAATTSS IINN TTHHEEGGRREEAATEERR CCHHAARRLLOOTTTTEE HAARRBBOORRSSYYSSTTEEMM Charlotte Harbor National Estuary Program 1926 Victoria Avenue Fort Myers, Florida 33901 March 2007 Mote Marine Laboratory Technical Report No. 1169 The Charlotte Harbor National Estuary Program is a partnership of citizens, elected officials, resource managers and commercial and recreational resource users working to improve the water quality and ecological integrity of the greater Charlotte Harbor watershed. A cooperative decision-making process is used within the program to address diverse resource management concerns in the 4,400 square mile study area. Many of these partners also financially support the Program, which, in turn, affords the Program opportunities to fund projects such as this. The entities that have financially supported the program include the following: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Southwest Florida Water Management District South Florida Water Management District Florida Department of Environmental Protection Florida Coastal Zone Management Program Peace River/Manasota Regional Water Supply Authority Polk, Sarasota, Manatee, Lee, Charlotte, DeSoto and Hardee Counties Cities of Sanibel, Cape Coral, Fort Myers, Punta Gorda, North Port, Venice and Fort Myers Beach and the Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This document was prepared with support from the Charlotte Harbor National Estuary Program with supplemental support from Mote Marine Laboratory. The project was conducted through the Benthic Ecology Program of Mote's Center for Coastal Ecology. Mote staff project participants included: Principal Investigator James K. Culter; Field Biologists and Invertebrate Taxonomists, Jay R. Leverone, Debi Ingrao, Anamari Boyes, Bernadette Hohmann and Lucas Jennings; Data Management, Jay Sprinkel and Janet Gannon; Sediment Analysis, Jon Perry and Ari Nissanka.
    [Show full text]
  • Surface Associated Amoebae on the Ctenophore, Mnemiopsis Sp
    Nova Southeastern University NSUWorks HCNSO Student Theses and Dissertations HCNSO Student Work 1-1-2007 Surface Associated Amoebae on the Ctenophore, Mnemiopsis sp. Connie S. Versteeg Nova Southeastern University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://nsuworks.nova.edu/occ_stuetd Part of the Marine Biology Commons, and the Oceanography and Atmospheric Sciences and Meteorology Commons Share Feedback About This Item NSUWorks Citation Connie S. Versteeg. 2007. Surface Associated Amoebae on the Ctenophore, Mnemiopsis sp.. Master's thesis. Nova Southeastern University. Retrieved from NSUWorks, Oceanographic Center. (103) https://nsuworks.nova.edu/occ_stuetd/103. This Thesis is brought to you by the HCNSO Student Work at NSUWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in HCNSO Student Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of NSUWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. NOVA SOUTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY OCEANOGRAPHIC CENTER Surface Associated Amoebae on the Ctenophore, Mnemiopsis sp. By Connie S. Versteeg Submitted to the Faculty of Nova Southeastern University Oceanographic Center in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science with a Specialty in: Marine Biology NOVA SOUTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY 2007 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would first like to express my appreciation to Dr. Andrew Rogerson for everything he has taught me over the past few years. He gave me the guidance and encouragement I needed to complete this educational journey. He was a great teacher, mentor, and advisor, and he will always be an inspiration to me. I would also like to thank Dr. Curtis Burney for jumping in with short notice to help out when needed.
    [Show full text]
  • Diversity of Ctenophores in the Sundarban Mangroves, Northern Indian Ocean
    Rec. zool. Surv. India: Vol. 120(2)/133-140, 2020 ISSN (Online) : 2581-8686 DOI: 10.26515/rzsi/v120/i2/2020/144245 ISSN (Print) : 0375-1511 Diversity of Ctenophores in the Sundarban Mangroves, Northern Indian Ocean Jasmine Purushothaman*, Alfisa Siddique, Aishee Bhowal and Kailash Chandra Zoological Survey of India, Protozoology Section, M Block, New Alipore, Kolkata – 700053; Email: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Abstract Four species of ctenophore viz., Pleurobrachia globosa Moser, 1903; Pleurobrachia pileus (O. F. Müller, 1776); Beroe ovata Bruguière, 1789 and Beroe gracilis Künne, 1939 were collected from the mangrove estuarine waters of Sundarban during winter monsoon survey conducted in January 2018. Of these species, Beroe gracilis Künne, 1939 is a new record from Bay of Bengal, Northern Indian Ocean. Pleurobrachia pileus was found to cause a swarm in Sundarban waters. The present study provides the description and distribution of four ctenophore species recorded in the study area. Keywords: Bay of Bengal, Ctenophora, Beroe gracilis, Beroe ovata, Pleurobrachia pileus, Pleurobrachia globosa Introduction from Indian waters (Venkatraman & Raghunathan, 2015; Venkatraman & Wafar, 2005), with P. globosa being the Gelatinous zooplankters are a diverse group of organisms only species reported from Sundarban coastal waters. that are often active, swarming predators in the marine This paper presents the detailed description of all the pelagic ecosystem (Harbison et al., 1978; Oliveira et al., ctenophore species recorded from Sundarbans with the 2014; Purcell, 2005). Jellyfishes and ctenophores are the hydrographical observations and also provides the first two major groups of gelatinous zooplankton (Madin record of Beroe gracilis from the northern coastal waters & Harbison, 2001).
    [Show full text]
  • (1940) : - Proposed New Systematic
    Downloaded from https:// www.studiestoday.com ANIMAL DIVERSITY-I IN TRODUCTION : –Taxomony (Gr.) - study of nomenclature, classification and their principles. This word was given by ''Candolle'' (Taxis – arrangements. Nomos - Law) HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF TAXONOMY : –Aristotle : - ''father of zoology ''. (Book : Historia Animalium) Father of ancient animal – Classification. He classified animals into two groups on the basis of their natural similarities and differences into – (i) Anaima :- Those animals which don't have Red blood or in which RBC are absent e.g. Sponges, Cnidaria, Mollusca, Arthropoda. Echinodermata like Invertebrates. (ii) Enaima :- These animals have red blood. This group includes all vertebrated and it has been further divided into two sub groups. (a) Vivipara :- It incldues animals which give birth to young-ones e.g. Man, Whale and other mammals. (b) Ovipara : - It includes animals which lay eggs. e.g. Amphibians, Pisces, Aves, Reptiles etc. –Pliny :- He classified animal into groups : - (a) Flying (b) Non-flying –John-Ray :- He gave & defined the term '' species'' as the smallest unit of classfication. He gave ''concept of species ''. According to him, the organisms which develop from the similar type of parents, belong to the same-species. –Mayr : - According to him similar species are those which are capacble of interbreeding in natureal condtions. Modern definition of species is conied by ''Mayr''. –Binomial system of Nomenclature was devised by Gesparrd-Bauhin. But the detailed information about Binomial system was given by Linnaeus. In 1758 in the 10th edition of his book ''Systema Naturae'' he gave the classification of known 4236 animals and presented the Binomial system of nomenclature of animal.
    [Show full text]
  • Revisiting the Phylogeny of Phylum Ctenophora: a Molecular Perspective [Version 1; Referees: 1 Approved with Reservations, 3 Not Approved] Luis A
    F1000Research 2016, 5:2881 Last updated: 03 APR 2017 RESEARCH NOTE Revisiting the phylogeny of phylum Ctenophora: a molecular perspective [version 1; referees: 1 approved with reservations, 3 not approved] Luis A. Arteaga-Figueroa1, Valentina Sánchez-Bermúdez1, Nicolás D. Franco-Sierra 1-3 1Semillero de Biologıa Computacional, Departamento de Ciencias Biologicas, Escuela de Ciencias, Universidad EAFIT, Medellin, Colombia 2Grupo CIBIOP (Ciencias Biologicas y Bioprocesos), Departamento de Ciencias Biologicas, Escuela de Ciencias, Universidad EAFIT, Medellin, Colombia 3Grupo BEC (Biodiversidad, Evolucion y Conservacion), Departamento de Ciencias Biologicas, Escuela de Ciencias, Universidad EAFIT, Medellın, Colombia v1 First published: 20 Dec 2016, 5:2881 (doi: 10.12688/f1000research.10426.1) Open Peer Review Latest published: 20 Dec 2016, 5:2881 (doi: 10.12688/f1000research.10426.1) Referee Status: Abstract The phylogenetic relationships of deep metazoans, specifically in the phylum Ctenophora, are not totally understood. Previous studies have been developed Invited Referees on this subject, mostly based on morphology and single gene analyses (rRNA 1 2 3 4 sequences). Several loci (protein coding and ribosomal RNA) from taxa belonging to this phylum are currently available on public databases (e.g. version 1 GenBank). Here we revisit Ctenophora molecular phylogeny using public published report report report report sequences and probabilistic methods (Bayesian inference and maximum 20 Dec 2016 likelihood). To get more reliable results multi-locus analyses were performed using 5.8S, 28S, ITS1, ITS2 and 18S, and IPNS and GFP-like proteins. Best Martin Dohrmann, topologies, consistent with both methods for each data set, are shown and 1 analysed. Comparing the results of the pylogenetic reconstruction with previous Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München research, most clades showed the same relationships as the ones found with Germany morphology and single gene analyses, consistent with hypotheses made in Steven H.D.
    [Show full text]