DOCSLIB.ORG

Coccidia;Eucoccidiorida Eukaryota;Alveolata;Apicomplexa

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Coccidia;Eucoccidiorida Eukaryota;Alveolata;Apicomplexa Eukaryota;;soil;Other;Other Eukaryota;Alveolata;Apicomplexa;Coccidia;Eucoccidiorida Eukaryota;Alveolata;Apicomplexa;Gregarinia;Eugregarinida Eukaryota;Alveolata;Ciliophora;Intramacronucleata;Colpodea Eukaryota;Alveolata;Ciliophora;Intramacronucleata;Spirotrichea Eukaryota;Alveolata;environmental;Other;Other Eukaryota;Amoebozoa;Flabellinea;Flamella; Eukaryota;Amoebozoa;Mycetozoa;Hyperamoeba; Eukaryota;Amoebozoa;Tubulinea;Euamoebida;Echinamoebidae Eukaryota;Amoebozoa;Tubulinea;Euamoebida;Tubulinida Eukaryota;Amoebozoa;Tubulinea;environmental;Other Eukaryota;Dimorpha;;Dimorpha;Other Eukaryota;Fungi;Blastocladiomycota;Blastocladiomycetes;Blastocladiales Eukaryota;Fungi;Chytridiomycota;Chytridiomycetes;Lobulomycetales Eukaryota;Fungi;Chytridiomycota;Chytridiomycetes;Spizellomycetales Eukaryota;Fungi;Chytridiomycota;environmental;Other Eukaryota;Fungi;Dikarya;Ascomycota; Eukaryota;Fungi;Dikarya;Ascomycota;Ascomycota Eukaryota;Fungi;Dikarya;Ascomycota;Saccharomyceta Eukaryota;Fungi;Dikarya;Ascomycota;mitosporic Eukaryota;Fungi;Dikarya;Basidiomycota; Eukaryota;Fungi;Dikarya;Basidiomycota;Agaricomycotina Eukaryota;Fungi;Dikarya;Basidiomycota;Pucciniomycotina Eukaryota;Fungi;Dikarya;Basidiomycota;environmental Eukaryota;Fungi;Fungi;Other;Other Eukaryota;Fungi;Glomeromycota;Glomeromycetes;Glomerales Eukaryota;Fungi;environmental;Other;Other Eukaryota;Heterolobosea;Schizopyrenida;Vahlkampfiidae;Tetramitus Eukaryota;Ichthyosporea;Ichthyophonida;Anurofeca; Eukaryota;Metazoa;Arthropoda;Chelicerata;Arachnida Eukaryota;Metazoa;Arthropoda;Myriapoda;Chilopoda Eukaryota;Metazoa;Nematoda;Chromadorea;Diplogasterida Eukaryota;Metazoa;Nematoda;Chromadorea;Rhabditida Eukaryota;Metazoa;Nematoda;Chromadorea;Tylenchida Eukaryota;Metazoa;Nematoda;Enoplea;Dorylaimida Eukaryota;Metazoa;Nematoda;Enoplea;Enoplida Eukaryota;Metazoa;Nematoda;environmental;Other Eukaryota;Metazoa;environmental;Other;Other Eukaryota;Proleptomonas;;Proleptomonas;Other Eukaryota;Rhizaria;Cercozoa;;Cercozoa Eukaryota;Rhizaria;Cercozoa;;soil Eukaryota;Rhizaria;Cercozoa;Cercomonadida;Cercomonadidae Eukaryota;Rhizaria;Cercozoa;Cercomonadida;Heteromitidae Eukaryota;Rhizaria;Cercozoa;Cercomonadida;environmental Eukaryota;Rhizaria;Cercozoa;Cercomonadida;unclassified Eukaryota;Rhizaria;Cercozoa;Plasmodiophorida;Plasmodiophoridae Eukaryota;Rhizaria;Cercozoa;Plasmodiophorida;environmental Eukaryota;Rhizaria;Cercozoa;Silicofilosea;Euglyphida Eukaryota;Rhizaria;Cercozoa;Silicofilosea;Thaumatomonadida Eukaryota;Rhizaria;Cercozoa;Vampyrellidae;Arachnula Eukaryota;Rhizaria;Cercozoa;environmental;Other Eukaryota;Rhizaria;environmental;Other;Other Eukaryota;Viridiplantae;Chlorophyta;Chlorophyceae; Eukaryota;Viridiplantae;Chlorophyta;Chlorophyceae;Chlamydomonadales Eukaryota;Viridiplantae;Chlorophyta;Chlorophyceae;Chlorococcales Eukaryota;Viridiplantae;Chlorophyta;Chlorophyceae;Chlorosarcinales Eukaryota;Viridiplantae;Chlorophyta;Chlorophyceae;Pseudomuriella Eukaryota;Viridiplantae;Chlorophyta;Chlorophyceae;Pseudotetracystis Eukaryota;Viridiplantae;Chlorophyta;Chlorophyceae;Sphaeropleales Eukaryota;Viridiplantae;Chlorophyta;Trebouxiophyceae;Chlorellales Eukaryota;Viridiplantae;Chlorophyta;Trebouxiophyceae;Interfilum Eukaryota;Viridiplantae;Chlorophyta;Trebouxiophyceae;unclassified Eukaryota;Viridiplantae;Chlorophyta;Ulvophyceae;Acrosiphoniales Eukaryota;Viridiplantae;Chlorophyta;Ulvophyceae;Ulotrichales Eukaryota;Viridiplantae;Chlorophyta;environmental;Other Eukaryota;Viridiplantae;Streptophyta;Embryophyta;Anthocerotophyta Eukaryota;Viridiplantae;Streptophyta;Embryophyta;Bryophyta Eukaryota;Viridiplantae;Streptophyta;Embryophyta;Tracheophyta Eukaryota;Viridiplantae;Streptophyta;Zygnemophyceae;Zygnematales Eukaryota;environmental;Other;Other;Other Eukaryota;stramenopiles;;Leukarachnion;Other Eukaryota;stramenopiles;Bacillariophyta;Bacillariophyceae;Bacillariophycidae Eukaryota;stramenopiles;Hyphochytriomycetes;Hyphochytriaceae;Hyphochytrium Eukaryota;stramenopiles;Oomycetes;Leptomitales;Apodachlya Eukaryota;stramenopiles;Oomycetes;Peronosporales;Phytophthora Eukaryota;stramenopiles;Oomycetes;Pythiales;Pythiaceae Eukaryota;stramenopiles;Oomycetes;Saprolegniales;Saprolegniaceae Unclassified;Coxiella;Other;Other;Other.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Broadly Sampled Multigene Analyses Yield a Well-Resolved Eukaryotic Tree of Life
    Smith ScholarWorks Biological Sciences: Faculty Publications Biological Sciences 10-1-2010 Broadly Sampled Multigene Analyses Yield a Well-Resolved Eukaryotic Tree of Life Laura Wegener Parfrey University of Massachusetts Amherst Jessica Grant Smith College Yonas I. Tekle Smith College Erica Lasek-Nesselquist Marine Biological Laboratory Hilary G. Morrison Marine Biological Laboratory See next page for additional authors Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.smith.edu/bio_facpubs Part of the Biology Commons Recommended Citation Parfrey, Laura Wegener; Grant, Jessica; Tekle, Yonas I.; Lasek-Nesselquist, Erica; Morrison, Hilary G.; Sogin, Mitchell L.; Patterson, David J.; and Katz, Laura A., "Broadly Sampled Multigene Analyses Yield a Well-Resolved Eukaryotic Tree of Life" (2010). Biological Sciences: Faculty Publications, Smith College, Northampton, MA. https://scholarworks.smith.edu/bio_facpubs/126 This Article has been accepted for inclusion in Biological Sciences: Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of Smith ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected] Authors Laura Wegener Parfrey, Jessica Grant, Yonas I. Tekle, Erica Lasek-Nesselquist, Hilary G. Morrison, Mitchell L. Sogin, David J. Patterson, and Laura A. Katz This article is available at Smith ScholarWorks: https://scholarworks.smith.edu/bio_facpubs/126 Syst. Biol. 59(5):518–533, 2010 c The Author(s) 2010. Published by Oxford University Press, on behalf of the Society of Systematic Biologists. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: [email protected] DOI:10.1093/sysbio/syq037 Advance Access publication on July 23, 2010 Broadly Sampled Multigene Analyses Yield a Well-Resolved Eukaryotic Tree of Life LAURA WEGENER PARFREY1,JESSICA GRANT2,YONAS I. TEKLE2,6,ERICA LASEK-NESSELQUIST3,4, 3 3 5 1,2, HILARY G.
    [Show full text]
  • Old Woman Creek National Estuarine Research Reserve Management Plan 2011-2016
    Old Woman Creek National Estuarine Research Reserve Management Plan 2011-2016 April 1981 Revised, May 1982 2nd revision, April 1983 3rd revision, December 1999 4th revision, May 2011 Prepared for U.S. Department of Commerce Ohio Department of Natural Resources National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Division of Wildlife Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management 2045 Morse Road, Bldg. G Estuarine Reserves Division Columbus, Ohio 1305 East West Highway 43229-6693 Silver Spring, MD 20910 This management plan has been developed in accordance with NOAA regulations, including all provisions for public involvement. It is consistent with the congressional intent of Section 315 of the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended, and the provisions of the Ohio Coastal Management Program. OWC NERR Management Plan, 2011 - 2016 Acknowledgements This management plan was prepared by the staff and Advisory Council of the Old Woman Creek National Estuarine Research Reserve (OWC NERR), in collaboration with the Ohio Department of Natural Resources-Division of Wildlife. Participants in the planning process included: Manager, Frank Lopez; Research Coordinator, Dr. David Klarer; Coastal Training Program Coordinator, Heather Elmer; Education Coordinator, Ann Keefe; Education Specialist Phoebe Van Zoest; and Office Assistant, Gloria Pasterak. Other Reserve staff including Dick Boyer and Marje Bernhardt contributed their expertise to numerous planning meetings. The Reserve is grateful for the input and recommendations provided by members of the Old Woman Creek NERR Advisory Council. The Reserve is appreciative of the review, guidance, and council of Division of Wildlife Executive Administrator Dave Scott and the mapping expertise of Keith Lott and the late Steve Barry.
    [Show full text]
  • A Revised Classification of Naked Lobose Amoebae (Amoebozoa
    Protist, Vol. 162, 545–570, October 2011 http://www.elsevier.de/protis Published online date 28 July 2011 PROTIST NEWS A Revised Classification of Naked Lobose Amoebae (Amoebozoa: Lobosa) Introduction together constitute the amoebozoan subphy- lum Lobosa, which never have cilia or flagella, Molecular evidence and an associated reevaluation whereas Variosea (as here revised) together with of morphology have recently considerably revised Mycetozoa and Archamoebea are now grouped our views on relationships among the higher-level as the subphylum Conosa, whose constituent groups of amoebae. First of all, establishing the lineages either have cilia or flagella or have lost phylum Amoebozoa grouped all lobose amoe- them secondarily (Cavalier-Smith 1998, 2009). boid protists, whether naked or testate, aerobic Figure 1 is a schematic tree showing amoebozoan or anaerobic, with the Mycetozoa and Archamoe- relationships deduced from both morphology and bea (Cavalier-Smith 1998), and separated them DNA sequences. from both the heterolobosean amoebae (Page and The first attempt to construct a congruent molec- Blanton 1985), now belonging in the phylum Per- ular and morphological system of Amoebozoa by colozoa - Cavalier-Smith and Nikolaev (2008), and Cavalier-Smith et al. (2004) was limited by the the filose amoebae that belong in other phyla lack of molecular data for many amoeboid taxa, (notably Cercozoa: Bass et al. 2009a; Howe et al. which were therefore classified solely on morpho- 2011). logical evidence. Smirnov et al. (2005) suggested The phylum Amoebozoa consists of naked and another system for naked lobose amoebae only; testate lobose amoebae (e.g. Amoeba, Vannella, this left taxa with no molecular data incertae sedis, Hartmannella, Acanthamoeba, Arcella, Difflugia), which limited its utility.
    [Show full text]
  • Phylogenetische Analyse Der 18S Rrna Identifiziert Den
    ZOBODAT - www.zobodat.at Zoologisch-Botanische Datenbank/Zoological-Botanical Database Digitale Literatur/Digital Literature Zeitschrift/Journal: Denisia Jahr/Year: 2004 Band/Volume: 0013 Autor(en)/Author(s): Wylezich Claudia, Radek Renate, Schlegel Martin Artikel/Article: Phylogenetische Analyse der 18S rRNA identifiziert den parasitschen Protisten Nephridiophaga blattellae (Nephridiophagidae) als Vertreter der Zygomycota (Fungi) 435-442 © Biologiezentrum Linz/Austria; download unter www.biologiezentrum.at Denisia 13 | 17.09.2004 | 435-442 Phylogenetische Analyse der 18S rRNA identifiziert den parasitischen Protisten Nephridiophaga blattet I ae (Nephridiophagidae) als Vertreter der Zygomycota (Fungi)1 C. WYLEZICH, R. RADEK £t M. SCHLEGEL Abstract: Phylogenetic analysis of 18S rRNA identifies the parasitic protist Nephridiophaga blattellae (Nephrid- iophagidae) as a member of fungi. — The taxonomic affiliation of the spore-forming, unicellular nephridiophagids that thrive in the Malpighian tubules of insects is still completely unresolved. Their morphological and ultrastruc- tural characters do not closely resemble any known taxon of spore-forming protists. Some authors classed them with the Haplosporidia but proof is poor; e.g. the typical haplosporosomes are missing in nephridiophagids. In the present examination, the 18S rRNA of Nephridiophaga blatiellae (from the German cockroach Blauella germanica) was ampli- fied and sequenced in order to reconstruct the phylogenetic relationships of that group. Results exclude a close rela- tion to haplosporidia. Data rather support their classification within the fungi. Morphological findings such as the presence of chitin also argue in favour of this hypothesis. According to our analysis the exact position of nephridio- phagids seems to be near to the Zygomycota, as it is also reported for microsporidia. Key words: Nephridiophagidae, phylogeny, Zygomycota, Microsporidia, 18S rRNA.
    [Show full text]
  • The Revised Classification of Eukaryotes
    See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/231610049 The Revised Classification of Eukaryotes Article in Journal of Eukaryotic Microbiology · September 2012 DOI: 10.1111/j.1550-7408.2012.00644.x · Source: PubMed CITATIONS READS 961 2,825 25 authors, including: Sina M Adl Alastair Simpson University of Saskatchewan Dalhousie University 118 PUBLICATIONS 8,522 CITATIONS 264 PUBLICATIONS 10,739 CITATIONS SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE Christopher E Lane David Bass University of Rhode Island Natural History Museum, London 82 PUBLICATIONS 6,233 CITATIONS 464 PUBLICATIONS 7,765 CITATIONS SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects: Biodiversity and ecology of soil taste amoeba View project Predator control of diversity View project All content following this page was uploaded by Smirnov Alexey on 25 October 2017. The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. The Journal of Published by the International Society of Eukaryotic Microbiology Protistologists J. Eukaryot. Microbiol., 59(5), 2012 pp. 429–493 © 2012 The Author(s) Journal of Eukaryotic Microbiology © 2012 International Society of Protistologists DOI: 10.1111/j.1550-7408.2012.00644.x The Revised Classification of Eukaryotes SINA M. ADL,a,b ALASTAIR G. B. SIMPSON,b CHRISTOPHER E. LANE,c JULIUS LUKESˇ,d DAVID BASS,e SAMUEL S. BOWSER,f MATTHEW W. BROWN,g FABIEN BURKI,h MICAH DUNTHORN,i VLADIMIR HAMPL,j AARON HEISS,b MONA HOPPENRATH,k ENRIQUE LARA,l LINE LE GALL,m DENIS H. LYNN,n,1 HILARY MCMANUS,o EDWARD A. D.
    [Show full text]
  • Phylogenomics Supports the Monophyly of the Cercozoa T ⁎ Nicholas A.T
    Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 130 (2019) 416–423 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ympev Phylogenomics supports the monophyly of the Cercozoa T ⁎ Nicholas A.T. Irwina, , Denis V. Tikhonenkova,b, Elisabeth Hehenbergera,1, Alexander P. Mylnikovb, Fabien Burkia,2, Patrick J. Keelinga a Department of Botany, University of British Columbia, Vancouver V6T 1Z4, British Columbia, Canada b Institute for Biology of Inland Waters, Russian Academy of Sciences, Borok 152742, Russia ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT Keywords: The phylum Cercozoa consists of a diverse assemblage of amoeboid and flagellated protists that forms a major Cercozoa component of the supergroup, Rhizaria. However, despite its size and ubiquity, the phylogeny of the Cercozoa Rhizaria remains unclear as morphological variability between cercozoan species and ambiguity in molecular analyses, Phylogeny including phylogenomic approaches, have produced ambiguous results and raised doubts about the monophyly Phylogenomics of the group. Here we sought to resolve these ambiguities using a 161-gene phylogenetic dataset with data from Single-cell transcriptomics newly available genomes and deeply sequenced transcriptomes, including three new transcriptomes from Aurigamonas solis, Abollifer prolabens, and a novel species, Lapot gusevi n. gen. n. sp. Our phylogenomic analysis strongly supported a monophyletic Cercozoa, and approximately-unbiased tests rejected the paraphyletic topologies observed in previous studies. The transcriptome of L. gusevi represents the first transcriptomic data from the large and recently characterized Aquavolonidae-Treumulida-'Novel Clade 12′ group, and phyloge- nomics supported its position as sister to the cercozoan subphylum, Endomyxa. These results provide insights into the phylogeny of the Cercozoa and the Rhizaria as a whole.
    [Show full text]
  • Author's Manuscript (764.7Kb)
    1 BROADLY SAMPLED TREE OF EUKARYOTIC LIFE Broadly Sampled Multigene Analyses Yield a Well-resolved Eukaryotic Tree of Life Laura Wegener Parfrey1†, Jessica Grant2†, Yonas I. Tekle2,6, Erica Lasek-Nesselquist3,4, Hilary G. Morrison3, Mitchell L. Sogin3, David J. Patterson5, Laura A. Katz1,2,* 1Program in Organismic and Evolutionary Biology, University of Massachusetts, 611 North Pleasant Street, Amherst, Massachusetts 01003, USA 2Department of Biological Sciences, Smith College, 44 College Lane, Northampton, Massachusetts 01063, USA 3Bay Paul Center for Comparative Molecular Biology and Evolution, Marine Biological Laboratory, 7 MBL Street, Woods Hole, Massachusetts 02543, USA 4Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Brown University, 80 Waterman Street, Providence, Rhode Island 02912, USA 5Biodiversity Informatics Group, Marine Biological Laboratory, 7 MBL Street, Woods Hole, Massachusetts 02543, USA 6Current address: Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut 06520, USA †These authors contributed equally *Corresponding author: L.A.K - [email protected] Phone: 413-585-3825, Fax: 413-585-3786 Keywords: Microbial eukaryotes, supergroups, taxon sampling, Rhizaria, systematic error, Excavata 2 An accurate reconstruction of the eukaryotic tree of life is essential to identify the innovations underlying the diversity of microbial and macroscopic (e.g. plants and animals) eukaryotes. Previous work has divided eukaryotic diversity into a small number of high-level ‘supergroups’, many of which receive strong support in phylogenomic analyses. However, the abundance of data in phylogenomic analyses can lead to highly supported but incorrect relationships due to systematic phylogenetic error. Further, the paucity of major eukaryotic lineages (19 or fewer) included in these genomic studies may exaggerate systematic error and reduces power to evaluate hypotheses.
    [Show full text]
  • Molecular Phylogeny of Euglyphid Testate Amoebae (Cercozoa: Euglyphida)
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE ARTICLE IN PRESS provided by Infoscience - École polytechnique fédérale de Lausanne Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution xxx (2010) xxx–xxx Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ympev Molecular phylogeny of euglyphid testate amoebae (Cercozoa: Euglyphida) suggests transitions between marine supralittoral and freshwater/terrestrial environments are infrequent Thierry J. Heger a,b,c,d,e,*, Edward A.D. Mitchell a,b,c, Milcho Todorov f, Vassil Golemansky f, Enrique Lara c, Brian S. Leander e, Jan Pawlowski d a Ecosystem Boundaries Research Unit, Swiss Federal Institute for Forest, Snow and Landscape Research (WSL), CH-1015 Lausanne, Switzerland b Environmental Engineering Institute, École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), Station 2, CH-1015 Lausanne, Switzerland c Institute of Biology, University of Neuchâtel, CH-2009 Neuchâtel, Switzerland d Department of Zoology and Animal Biology, University of Geneva, Sciences III, CH-1211 Geneva 4, Switzerland e Departments of Zoology and Botany, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada V6T 1Z4 f Institute of Zoology, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, 1000 Sofia, Bulgaria article info abstract Article history: Marine and freshwater ecosystems are fundamentally different regarding many biotic and abiotic factors. Received 24 June 2009 The physiological adaptations required for an organism to pass the salinity barrier are considerable. Many Revised 22 November 2009 eukaryotic lineages are restricted to either freshwater or marine environments. Molecular phylogenetic Accepted 25 November 2009 analyses generally demonstrate that freshwater species and marine species segregate into different Available online xxxx sub-clades, indicating that transitions between these two environments occur only rarely in the course of evolution.
    [Show full text]
  • Long Metabarcoding of the Eukaryotic Rdna Operon to Phylogenetically and Taxonomically Resolve Environmental Diversity
    bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/627828; this version posted May 5, 2019. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under aCC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license. Long metabarcoding of the eukaryotic rDNA operon to phylogenetically and taxonomically resolve environmental diversity Mahwash Jamy1, Rachel Foster2, Pierre Barbera3, Lucas Czech3, Alexey Kozlov3, Alexandros Stamatakis3,4, David Bass2,5*, Fabien Burki1,* 1Science for Life Laboratory, Program in Systematic Biology, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden 2Department of Life Sciences, Natural History Museum, London, UK 3Computational Molecular Evolution Group, Heidelberg Institute for Theoretical Studies, Heidelberg, Germany 4Institute of Theoretical Informatics, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Karlsruhe, Germany 5Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science (Cefas), Weymouth, Dorset, UK Corresponding authors: [email protected] [email protected] 1 bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/627828; this version posted May 5, 2019. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under aCC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license. Abstract High-throughput environmental DNA metabarcoding has revolutionized the analysis of microbial diversity, but this approach is generally restricted to amplicon sizes below 500 base pairs. These short regions contain limited phylogenetic signal, which makes it impractical to use environmental DNA in full phylogenetic inferences. However, new long-read sequencing technologies such as the Pacific Biosciences platform may provide sufficiently large sequence lengths to overcome the poor phylogenetic resolution of short amplicons.
    [Show full text]
  • Download File
    Acta Protozool. (2012) 51: 305–318 http://www.eko.uj.edu.pl/ap ACTA doi:10.4467/16890027AP.12.024.0784 PROTOZOOLOGICA Morphological Description of Telaepolella tubasferens n. g. n. sp., Isolate ATCC© 50593™, a Filose Amoeba in the Gracilipodida, Amoebozoa Daniel J. G. LAHR1,2*, Gabriela M. KUBIK1*, Anastasia L. GANT1, Jessica GRANT1, O. Roger ANDERSON3 and Laura A. KATZ1,2 1Department of Biological Sciences, Smith College, Northampton, MA, USA; 2Program in Organismic and Evolutionary Biology, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA, USA; 3Biology, Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University, Palisades, New York; * D. J. G. Lahr and G. M. Kubik contributed equally to this work Abstract. We describe the amoeboid isolate ATCC© 50593™ as a new taxon, Telaepolella tubasferens n. g. n. sp. This multinucleated amoeba has filose pseudopods and is superficially similar to members of the vampyrellids (Rhizaria) such as Arachnula impatiens Cien- kowski, 1876, which was the original identification upon deposition. However, previous multigene analyses place this taxon within the Gracilipodida Lahr and Katz 2011 in the Amoebozoa. Here, we document the morphology of this organism at multiple life history stages and provide data underlying the description as a new taxon. We demonstrate that T. tubasferens is distinct from Arachnula and other rhizari- ans (Theratromyxa, Leptophrys) in a suite of morphological characters such as general body shape, relative size of pseudopods, distinction of ecto- and endoplasmic regions, and visibility of nuclei in non-stained cells (an important diagnostic character). Although Amoebozoa taxa generally have lobose pseudopods, genera in Gracilipodida such as Flamella and Filamoeba as well as several organisms previously classified as protosteloid amoebae (e.g.
    [Show full text]
  • The Classification of Lower Organisms
    The Classification of Lower Organisms Ernst Hkinrich Haickei, in 1874 From Rolschc (1906). By permission of Macrae Smith Company. C f3 The Classification of LOWER ORGANISMS By HERBERT FAULKNER COPELAND \ PACIFIC ^.,^,kfi^..^ BOOKS PALO ALTO, CALIFORNIA Copyright 1956 by Herbert F. Copeland Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 56-7944 Published by PACIFIC BOOKS Palo Alto, California Printed and bound in the United States of America CONTENTS Chapter Page I. Introduction 1 II. An Essay on Nomenclature 6 III. Kingdom Mychota 12 Phylum Archezoa 17 Class 1. Schizophyta 18 Order 1. Schizosporea 18 Order 2. Actinomycetalea 24 Order 3. Caulobacterialea 25 Class 2. Myxoschizomycetes 27 Order 1. Myxobactralea 27 Order 2. Spirochaetalea 28 Class 3. Archiplastidea 29 Order 1. Rhodobacteria 31 Order 2. Sphaerotilalea 33 Order 3. Coccogonea 33 Order 4. Gloiophycea 33 IV. Kingdom Protoctista 37 V. Phylum Rhodophyta 40 Class 1. Bangialea 41 Order Bangiacea 41 Class 2. Heterocarpea 44 Order 1. Cryptospermea 47 Order 2. Sphaerococcoidea 47 Order 3. Gelidialea 49 Order 4. Furccllariea 50 Order 5. Coeloblastea 51 Order 6. Floridea 51 VI. Phylum Phaeophyta 53 Class 1. Heterokonta 55 Order 1. Ochromonadalea 57 Order 2. Silicoflagellata 61 Order 3. Vaucheriacea 63 Order 4. Choanoflagellata 67 Order 5. Hyphochytrialea 69 Class 2. Bacillariacea 69 Order 1. Disciformia 73 Order 2. Diatomea 74 Class 3. Oomycetes 76 Order 1. Saprolegnina 77 Order 2. Peronosporina 80 Order 3. Lagenidialea 81 Class 4. Melanophycea 82 Order 1 . Phaeozoosporea 86 Order 2. Sphacelarialea 86 Order 3. Dictyotea 86 Order 4. Sporochnoidea 87 V ly Chapter Page Orders. Cutlerialea 88 Order 6.
    [Show full text]
  • Foraminifera and Cercozoa Share a Common Origin According to RNA Polymerase II Phylogenies
    International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology (2003), 53, 1735–1739 DOI 10.1099/ijs.0.02597-0 ISEP XIV Foraminifera and Cercozoa share a common origin according to RNA polymerase II phylogenies David Longet,1 John M. Archibald,2 Patrick J. Keeling2 and Jan Pawlowski1 Correspondence 1Dept of zoology and animal biology, University of Geneva, Sciences III, 30 Quai Ernest Jan Pawlowski Ansermet, CH 1211 Gene`ve 4, Switzerland [email protected] 2Canadian Institute for Advanced Research, Department of Botany, University of British Columbia, #3529-6270 University Blvd, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada V6T 1Z4 Phylogenetic analysis of small and large subunits of rDNA genes suggested that Foraminifera originated early in the evolution of eukaryotes, preceding the origin of other rhizopodial protists. This view was recently challenged by the analysis of actin and ubiquitin protein sequences, which revealed a close relationship between Foraminifera and Cercozoa, an assemblage of various filose amoebae and amoeboflagellates that branch in the so-called crown of the SSU rDNA tree of eukaryotes. To further test this hypothesis, we sequenced a fragment of the largest subunit of the RNA polymerase II (RPB1) from five foraminiferans, two cercozoans and the testate filosean Gromia oviformis. Analysis of our data confirms a close relationship between Foraminifera and Cercozoa and points to Gromia as the closest relative of Foraminifera. INTRODUCTION produces an artificial grouping of Foraminifera with early protist lineages. The long-branch attraction phenomenon Foraminifera are common marine protists characterized by was suggested to be responsible for the position of granular and highly anastomosed pseudopodia (granulo- Foraminifera and some other putatively ancient groups of reticulopodia) and, typically, an organic, agglutinated or protists in rDNA trees (Philippe & Adoutte, 1998).
    [Show full text]