DOCSLIB.ORG

The Effects of Multiple Abiotic Stressors on the Susceptibility of the Seagrass Thalassia Testudinum to Labyrinthula Sp., the Ca

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Effects of Multiple Abiotic Stressors on the Susceptibility of the Seagrass Thalassia Testudinum to Labyrinthula Sp., the Ca UNF Digital Commons UNF Graduate Theses and Dissertations Student Scholarship 2013 The ffecE ts of Multiple Abiotic Stressors on the Susceptibility of the Seagrass Thalassia Testudinum to Labyrinthula sp., the Causative Agent of Wasting Disease Nichole Danielle Bishop University of North Florida Suggested Citation Bishop, Nichole Danielle, "The Effects of Multiple Abiotic Stressors on the Susceptibility of the Seagrass Thalassia Testudinum to Labyrinthula sp., the Causative Agent of Wasting Disease" (2013). UNF Graduate Theses and Dissertations. 471. https://digitalcommons.unf.edu/etd/471 This Master's Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Scholarship at UNF Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in UNF Graduate Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of UNF Digital Commons. For more information, please contact Digital Projects. © 2013 All Rights Reserved THE EFFECTS OF MULTIPLE ABIOTIC STRESSORS ON THE SUSCEPTIBILITY OF THE SEAGRASS THALASSIA TESTUDINUM TO LABYRINTHULA SP., THE CAUSATIVE AGENT OF WASTING DISEASE By Nichole Bishop A thesis submitted to the Department of Biology in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master‟s of Science in Biology UNIVERSITY OF NORTH FLORIDA COLLEGE OF ARTS AND SCIENCES December, 2013 1 Certificate of Approval The thesis of Nichole Bishop is approved: (Date) Dr. Cliff Ross Dr. Eric Johnson Dr. Dan Moon Accepted for the Biology Department: Dr. Dan Moon Chair Accepted for the College of Arts and Sciences: Dr. Barbara Hetrick Accepted for the University: Dr. Len Roberson Dean of The Graduate School ii Dedication In memory of my grandmother, Iola Bishop (1912-2002), who always believed “education was something that could never be taken away” iii Table of Contents 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Evolution, Taxonomy, Distribution and Adaptations ............................................................ 1 1.2 Ecological and Economical Importance of Seagrass Beds .................................................... 3 1.3 Seagrass Decline .................................................................................................................... 6 1.4 Wasting Disease ..................................................................................................................... 9 1.5 Labyrinthula spp. ................................................................................................................. 15 1.6 Environmental Stressors ...................................................................................................... 18 1.7 Objectives and Hypotheses .................................................................................................. 25 2 Effects of multiple abiotic stressors on the health and susceptibility of Thalassia testudinum to wasting disease when exposed to Labyrinthula spp. ..................................................................... 27 2.1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 27 2.2 Materials and Methods ......................................................................................................... 31 2.3 Results .................................................................................................................................. 44 2.4 Discussion ............................................................................................................................ 76 2.5 Conclusion ........................................................................................................................... 81 Reference Materials ....................................................................................................................... 83 iv List of Tables Table 1. Experimental conditions to test host-pathogen interactions between T. testudinum v List of Figures Figure 1. History of wasting disease outbreaks among temperate and tropical seagrasses 2. Necrotic lesion on T. testudinum caused by infection from Labyrinthula spp. 3. In situ localization of spindle-shaped Labyrinthula cells inside epidermal cells of the seagrass T. testudinum 4. Experimental microcosm with root chamber containing seawater treated with sodium sulfide 5. Thalassia testudinum blades infected with Labyrinthula sp. under ambient salinity groups had significantly larger lesions on average than groups incubated under high salinity conditions. There was no significant difference in lesion size due to temperature. 6. Post-infection EQY values between the high salinity + high temperature groups exposed to Labyrinthula sp. and the control group (no Labyrinthula sp.) exposed to the same stressors were not significantly different 7. Pre-infection EQY values for the groups formed by ambient and high salinity and ambient and high temperature were significantly different from their corresponding post-infection EQY values. However, there were no significant differences in main effects among post-infection EQY values. vi 8. Lesion size for salinity and temperature under a recovery simulation. There were no differences in lesion size due to either main effect. 9. Post-infection EQY values between the control group (no Labyrinthula sp.) and the group exposed to the same stressors under a recovery simulation were not significantly different 10. Comparison of pre- and post-infection EQY for salinity and temperature under a recovery simulation. All main effects had significantly lower EQY values after infection with Labyrinthula sp. All main effects also had mean post-infection EQY values below 0.700. However, here were no statistically significant differences in post-infection EQY values for the groups formed by either salinity or temperature. 11. Comparison of mean lesion size between the sustained stress condition and the recovery simulation. Lesions were significantly smaller in the experiment where stressors were maintained throughout 12. Comparison of lesion size due to the effects of sulfide and oxygen. Seagrasses exposed to 6mM of sulfide had significantly larger lesions than groups not exposed to sulfide. There were no statistically significant differences in lesion size due to hypoxia. 13. Comparison of post-infection EQY values between the control group (no Labyrinthula sp.) and the group exposed to similar stressors. There were no significant differences between the groups. vii 14. Pre- vs post-infection EQY values for the effects of oxygen and sulfide. There were no significant differences between pre- and post-infection EQY values among sulfide treatments. However, hypoxic groups possessed significantly (p = .011) lower post-infection EQY values when compared to pre-infection EQY values. There were no differences in post-infection EQY values among the groups formed by sulfide or oxygen treatments. 15. Comparison of lesion size for temperature groups when seagrasses were exposed to a combination of salinity, temperature, sulfide and oxygen. Stressors were sustained throughout the experiment. Ambient temperature groups had significantly larger lesions than high temperature groups. 16. An interaction between salinity and sulfide indicated that at ambient salinity, high sulfide results in larger lesions 17. Post-infection EQY values for the control (no Labyrinthula sp.) and the group exposed to similar stressors. There was no significant difference between the groups 18. Comparison of pre- and post-infection EQY values for the effects of salinity, temperature, sulfide and oxygen under sustained stress conditions. There were significant differences between pre- and post-infection EQY values for ambient salinity, ambient temperature, 0 mM sulfide and hypoxia. The only significant difference between post-infection EQY values was found among temperature groups, with elevated temperatures resulting in lower post-infection EQY values. viii 19. Comparison of salinity, temperature and sulfide due to the interaction of all main effects under a recovery simulation. Seagrasses in ambient salinity groups had significantly larger lesions regardless of temperature or sulfide. 20. Comparison of salinity, temperature and oxygen due to the interaction of all main effects under a recovery simulation. Seagrasses in ambient salinity groups had significantly larger lesions regardless of temperature or sulfide. 21. Comparison of salinity, sulfide and oxygen due to the interaction of all main effects under a recovery simulation. Seagrasses in ambient salinity groups had significantly larger lesions regardless of temperature or sulfide. 22. Comparison of temperature, sulfide and oxygen due to the interaction of all main effects under a recovery simulation. There was no significance for any of these effects. 23. Post-infection EQY values for the control and stress group under a recovery simulation. There were no statistically significant differences between the control (no Labyrinthula sp.) and the group with similar stressors. 24. Comparison of the pre- and post-infection EQY values for the effects of salinity, temperature, sulfide and oxygen under a recovery simulation. There were significant differences between pre- and post-infection EQY values for all main effects at all levels. However, the only significant difference among post- infection EQY values between the salinity groups with ambient salinity resulting in lower post-infection EQY values.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Physiology and Biochemistry of the Tropical Seagrass Thalassia Testudinum in Response to Hypersalinity Stress and Labyrinthula Sp
    UNF Digital Commons UNF Graduate Theses and Dissertations Student Scholarship 2011 Physiology and Biochemistry of the Tropical Seagrass Thalassia testudinum in Response to Hypersalinity Stress and Labyrinthula sp. Infection Stacey Marie Trevathan-Tackett University of North Florida Suggested Citation Trevathan-Tackett, Stacey Marie, "Physiology and Biochemistry of the Tropical Seagrass Thalassia testudinum in Response to Hypersalinity Stress and Labyrinthula sp. Infection" (2011). UNF Graduate Theses and Dissertations. 391. https://digitalcommons.unf.edu/etd/391 This Master's Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Scholarship at UNF Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in UNF Graduate Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of UNF Digital Commons. For more information, please contact Digital Projects. © 2011 All Rights Reserved Physiology and Biochemistry of the Tropical Seagrass Thalassia testudinum in Response to Hypersalinity Stress and Labyrinthula sp. Infection by Stacey Marie Trevathan-Tackett A thesis submitted to the Department of Biology in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Biology University of North Florida College of Arts and Sciences December, 2011 Unpublished Work © 2011 Stacey Marie Trevathan-Tackett Signature Deleted Signature Deleted Signature Deleted Signature Deleted Signature Deleted Signature Deleted Acknowledgements I first would like to acknowledge NOAA and the Nancy Foster Scholarship for funding both school and living expenses for the majority of my Master‟s career allowing me to focus all of my time and efforts toward research. Also, I would like to thank the Dodson Grant, the Coastal Biology program and the Graduate School at UNF for their continued financial support and resources during graduate school.
    [Show full text]
  • Genetic Diversity of Labyrinthula Spp. in Seagrass Zostera Marina Beds in the North Atlantic Ocean and the Baltic Sea
    Genetic diversity of Labyrinthula spp. in seagrass Zostera marina beds in the North Atlantic Ocean and the Baltic Sea Submitted by Matsapume Detcharoen In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in Biology Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München Faculty of Biology August 2015 Abstract Die sogenannte Seegras – „Wasting Disease“ führte in den 1930er Jahren zu einem Massenrückgang des Seegrases Zostera marina im nördlichen Atlantik. Labyrinthula zosterae ist der potentielle Erreger der Krankheit, der zu dem Verlust von Seegrasbetten führen kann. Dieser Organismus infiziert die Blätter des Seegrases. Frühere Studien, die die Vielfalt der Labyrinthula spp untersuchten, basierten auf der Kultivierung von Labyrinthula. Diese Studie ist die erste Studie, die Blattproben zur molekularen Identifizierung von Labyrinthula verwendet und erforscht die Vielfalt der Gattung Labyrinthula. Proben von sechs Standorten wurden untersucht, dabei wurde ein 290 bp lange Teilsequenz der 18S rDNA kloniert und Sanger sequenziert. Das Abgleichen der erhaltenen Sequenzen mit NCBI GenBank mittels des blast Algorithmus ergab, dass die meisten Sequenzen von 77 bis 100% mit L. zosterae übereinstimmen, während inige Sequenzen der Standorte Wackerballig und Sandspollen eine 84-94 prozentige Übereinstimmung mit Labyrinthula spp zeigten. Keine der mutmaßlichen Labyrinthula spp. Sequenzen wurden mit bekannten Sequenzen aus der Datenbank zusammengefasst. Es wurden sieben OTUs generiert. Der Test von verschiedenen DNA-Extraktionmethoden ergab für ein Pflanzen- und ein Gewebe-Extraktionskit ähnliche Ergebnisse. Nichtsdestotrotz hat das Pflanzen-Kit mehr Vorteile wegen geringerer Kosten und dem geringeren Zeitaufwand. Zusammenfassend zeigt diese Studie, dass bisher unbekannte Labyrinthula spp. in den Seegraspopulationen vorkommen, und dass das in dieser Studie verwendete Verfahren für weitere Anwendungen geeignet ist.
    [Show full text]
  • Rare Plants of Louisiana
    Rare Plants of Louisiana Agalinis filicaulis - purple false-foxglove Figwort Family (Scrophulariaceae) Rarity Rank: S2/G3G4 Range: AL, FL, LA, MS Recognition: Photo by John Hays • Short annual, 10 to 50 cm tall, with stems finely wiry, spindly • Stems simple to few-branched • Leaves opposite, scale-like, about 1mm long, barely perceptible to the unaided eye • Flowers few in number, mostly born singly or in pairs from the highest node of a branchlet • Pedicels filiform, 5 to 10 mm long, subtending bracts minute • Calyx 2 mm long, lobes short-deltoid, with broad shallow sinuses between lobes • Corolla lavender-pink, without lines or spots within, 10 to 13 mm long, exterior glabrous • Capsule globe-like, nearly half exerted from calyx Flowering Time: September to November Light Requirement: Full sun to partial shade Wetland Indicator Status: FAC – similar likelihood of occurring in both wetlands and non-wetlands Habitat: Wet longleaf pine flatwoods savannahs and hillside seepage bogs. Threats: • Conversion of habitat to pine plantations (bedding, dense tree spacing, etc.) • Residential and commercial development • Fire exclusion, allowing invasion of habitat by woody species • Hydrologic alteration directly (e.g. ditching) and indirectly (fire suppression allowing higher tree density and more large-diameter trees) Beneficial Management Practices: • Thinning (during very dry periods), targeting off-site species such as loblolly and slash pines for removal • Prescribed burning, establishing a regime consisting of mostly growing season (May-June) burns Rare Plants of Louisiana LA River Basins: Pearl, Pontchartrain, Mermentau, Calcasieu, Sabine Side view of flower. Photo by John Hays References: Godfrey, R. K. and J. W. Wooten.
    [Show full text]
  • SEAGRASS MEADOWS of TAMPA BAY - a REVIEW Roy R
    PROCEEDINGS TAMPA BAY AREA SClENTlFIC INFORMATION SYMPOaUM May 1982 Editors: Sara-Ann F, Treat Joseph L. Simon Roy R. Lewis 111 Robert L, Whitrnan, Jr. Sea Grant Project No. IR/82-2 Grant No, NASUAA-D-00038 Report Number 65 Florida Sea Grant College July 1985 Copyright O 1985 by Bellwether Press ISBN 0-8087-35787 Reproduced directiy from the author's manuscript. AII rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form whatsoever, by pho tograplr or rnimeognph or by any other means, by broadcast or transmission, by translation into any kind of language, nor by recording electronicalIy or otherwise, without permissio~lin writing from the publisher, except by a reviewer, who may quote brief passages in critical articles and reviews. Printed in the United States of America. SEAGRASS MEADOWS OF TAMPA BAY - A REVIEW Roy R. Lewis III Mangrove Systems, Inc. Post Office Box 15759 Tampa, Fi 33684 M. 3, Durako M. D. MoffIer Florida Department of Natural Resources Marine Research Laboratory 100 8th Avenue S.E. St. Petersburg, FL 33701 R, C. Phillips Department of Biology Seattle Pacific University Seattle, WA 981 19 ABSTRACT Seagtass meadows presently cover approximately 5,750 ha of the bottom of Tampa Bay, in 81% reduction from the historical coverage of approximately 30,970 ha, Five of the seven species of seagrass occurring in Florida are found in the estuary, typically in less than 2 rn of water. These are: Thalassia testudinum Banks ex Konig (turtle grassh S rin odium filiforme Kutzing (manatee grassh Halodule wrightii Ascherson+ shoal - grass);~uppia maritirna L, (widgeon= and Halophila engelmannii Ascherson, The dominant species are turtle grass and shoal grass.
    [Show full text]
  • Seagrass Taxonomytaxonomy
    SeagrassSeagrass TaxonomyTaxonomy By Dr. Roy L. Lehman Texas A&M University - Corpus Christi TheThe InternationalInternational CodeCode ofof BotanicalBotanical NomenclatureNomenclature Rules for the use of scientific names are maintained and updated periodically at meetings of botanists called International Botanical Congress. Updated rules are published after congress in each new edition of The International Code of Botanical Nomenclature. Now can be found online as a web site. © Dr. Roy L. Lehman BackgroundBackground InformationInformation AuthorAuthor NamesNames Scientific names are often written with their author or authors, the individuals who are responsible for having given the plants their names • Lotus corniculatus L. • Lotus heermanii (Dur. & Hilg.) Greene z Both cases the generic name is Lotus, a genus in the pea family. z First specific epithet is an adjective that in Latin means “bearing a horn-like projection”. z The second was named in honor of A L. Heermann, a 19th century plant collector. z The name means Heermann’s lotus © Dr. Roy L. Lehman AuthorAuthor NamesNames The name or names of the authors follow the binomials z SurnamesSurnames areare oftenoften abbreviatedabbreviated •• asas L.L. forfor LinnaeusLinnaeus © Dr. Roy L. Lehman SecondSecond ExampleExample The second example is a little more complicated. Originally named by two naturalists: z E. M. Durand and z T. C. Hilgard z as Hosackia heermannii. Several years later, E. L. Greene concluded that the genus Hosackia should be merged with Lotus and transferred the specific epithet, heermannii from Hosackia to Lotus. © Dr. Roy L. Lehman SecondSecond ExampleExample Durand and Higard (the parenthetical authors) get credit for having published the epithet, heermannii.
    [Show full text]
  • The Global Distribution and Status of Seagrass Ecosystems
    The global distribution and status of seagrass ecosystems ^^ ^^^H Discussion paper prepared for tlie UNEP-WCWIC Global Seagrass Workshop St Pete's Beach, Florida, 9 November, 2001 Prepared by: Mark D. Spalding, Michelle L. Taylor, Sergio Martins, Edmund P. Green, and Mary Edwards WA.. WORLD CONSERVATION MONITORING CENTRE Digitized by tine Internet Archive in 2010 witii funding from UNEP-WCIVIC, Cambridge Iittp://www.archive.org/details/globaldistributi01spal The global distribution and status of seagrass ecosystems Discussion paper prepared for tlie UNEP-WCIVIC Global Seagrass Workshop St Pete's Beach, Florida, 9 November, 2001 Prepared by: Mark D. Spalding, Michelle L. Taylor, Sergio Martins, Edmund P. Green, and Mary Edwards With assistance from: Mark Taylor and Corinna Ravilious Table of Contents Introduction to the workshop 2 The global distribution and status of seagrass ecosystems 3 Introduction 3 Definitions 3 The diversity of seagrasses 3 Species distribution 4 Associated Species 6 Productivity and biomass 7 The distribution and area of seagrass habitat 8 The value of seagrasses 13 Threats to seagrasses 13 Management Interventions 14 Bibliography; 16 29 Annex 1 : Seagrass Species Lists by Country Annex 2 - Species distribution maps 34 Annex 3 - Seagrass distribution maps 68 74 Annex 4 -Full list of MPAs by country ; /4^ ] UNEP WCMC Introduction to the workshop The Global Seagrass Workshop of 9 November 2001 has been set up with the expressed aim to develop a global synthesis on the distribution and status of seagrasses world-wide. Approximately 20 seagrass experts from 14 counu-ies, representing all of the major seagrass regions of the world have been invited to share their knowledge and expertise.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Phylogenetic Regionalization of Marine Plants Reveals Close Evolutionary Affinities Among Disjunct Temperate Assemblages Barna
    Phylogenetic regionalization of marine plants reveals close evolutionary affinities among disjunct temperate assemblages Barnabas H. Darua,b,*, Ben G. Holtc, Jean-Philippe Lessardd,e, Kowiyou Yessoufouf and T. Jonathan Daviesg,h aDepartment of Organismic and Evolutionary Biology and Harvard University Herbaria, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA bDepartment of Plant Science, University of Pretoria, Private Bag X20, Hatfield 0028, Pretoria, South Africa cDepartment of Life Sciences, Imperial College London, Silwood Park Campus, Ascot SL5 7PY, United Kingdom dQuebec Centre for Biodiversity Science, Department of Biology, McGill University, Montreal, QC H3A 0G4, Canada eDepartment of Biology, Concordia University, Montreal, QC, H4B 1R6, Canada; fDepartment of Environmental Sciences, University of South Africa, Florida campus, Florida 1710, South Africa gDepartment of Biology, McGill University, Montreal, QC H3A 0G4, Canada hAfrican Centre for DNA Barcoding, University of Johannesburg, PO Box 524, Auckland Park, Johannesburg 2006, South Africa *Corresponding author Email: [email protected] (B.H. Daru) Running head: Phylogenetic regionalization of seagrasses 1 Abstract While our knowledge of species distributions and diversity in the terrestrial biosphere has increased sharply over the last decades, we lack equivalent knowledge of the marine world. Here, we use the phylogenetic tree of seagrasses along with their global distributions and a metric of phylogenetic beta diversity to generate a phylogenetically-based delimitation of marine phytoregions (phyloregions). We then evaluate their evolutionary affinities and explore environmental correlates of phylogenetic turnover between them. We identified 11 phyloregions based on the clustering of phylogenetic beta diversity values. Most phyloregions can be classified as either temperate or tropical, and even geographically disjunct temperate regions can harbor closely related species assemblages.
    [Show full text]
  • Associated Heterotrophic Protists, Stereomyxa Ramosa, Nitzschia Alba and Labyrinthula Sp
    AQUATIC MICROBIAL ECOLOGY Vol. 21: 49-57,2000 Published February 21 Aquat Microb Ecol Utilisation of seaweed carbon by three surface- associated heterotrophic protists, Stereomyxa ramosa, Nitzschia alba and Labyrinthula sp. Evelyn ~rmstrong'~~~*,Andrew ~ogerson~,John W. ~eftley~ 'University Marine Biological Station Millport, Isle of Curnbrae KA28 OEG, Scotland, UK 'Oceanographic Center, Nova Southeastern University, 8000 N. Ocean Drive, Dania Beach, Florida 33004, USA 'Scottish Association for Marine Science, Dunstaffnage Marine Laboratory. PO Box 3, Oban. Argyll PA34 4AD. Scotland, UK ABSTRACT: In view of the abundance of protists associated with seaweeds and the diversity of nutri- tional strategies displayed by protists in general, the ability of 3 closely associated protists to utilise sea- weed carbon was investigated. Stereomyxa ramosa, Nitzschja alba and Labyrinthula sp. were cultured with seaweed polysaccharides as well as seaweed itself. N. alba and Labyrinthula sp. were found to utilise seaweed polysaccharides in axenic culture. All 3 protists were capable of penetrating intact but 'damaged' (autoclaved) seaweed particularly when bacteria were present. The possibility that these and other heterotrophic protists are directly removing macroalgal carbon in the field is discussed. KEY WORDS: Protist . Heterotroph - Seaweed. Carbon . Utilisation INTRODUCTION (Lucas et al. 1981, Rieper-Kirchner 1989).This conver- sion of dissolved carbon into particulate forms (as bac- Heterotrophic protists are abundant on seaweed sur- terial biomass) is thought to be a major link to higher faces (Rogerson 1991, Armstrong et al. 2000) because trophic levels (Newell et al. 1980). To compete effec- seaweeds are rich in bacterial prey (Laycock 1974, tively with bacteria, heterotrophic protists would need Shiba & Taga 1980).
    [Show full text]
  • Controlled Sampling of Ribosomally Active Protistan Diversity in Sediment-Surface Layers Identifies Putative Players in the Marine Carbon Sink
    The ISME Journal (2020) 14:984–998 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41396-019-0581-y ARTICLE Controlled sampling of ribosomally active protistan diversity in sediment-surface layers identifies putative players in the marine carbon sink 1,2 1 1 3 3 Raquel Rodríguez-Martínez ● Guy Leonard ● David S. Milner ● Sebastian Sudek ● Mike Conway ● 1 1 4,5 6 7 Karen Moore ● Theresa Hudson ● Frédéric Mahé ● Patrick J. Keeling ● Alyson E. Santoro ● 3,8 1,9 Alexandra Z. Worden ● Thomas A. Richards Received: 6 October 2019 / Revised: 4 December 2019 / Accepted: 17 December 2019 / Published online: 9 January 2020 © The Author(s) 2020. This article is published with open access Abstract Marine sediments are one of the largest carbon reservoir on Earth, yet the microbial communities, especially the eukaryotes, that drive these ecosystems are poorly characterised. Here, we report implementation of a sampling system that enables injection of reagents into sediments at depth, allowing for preservation of RNA in situ. Using the RNA templates recovered, we investigate the ‘ribosomally active’ eukaryotic diversity present in sediments close to the water/sediment interface. We 1234567890();,: 1234567890();,: demonstrate that in situ preservation leads to recovery of a significantly altered community profile. Using SSU rRNA amplicon sequencing, we investigated the community structure in these environments, demonstrating a wide diversity and high relative abundance of stramenopiles and alveolates, specifically: Bacillariophyta (diatoms), labyrinthulomycetes and ciliates. The identification of abundant diatom rRNA molecules is consistent with microscopy-based studies, but demonstrates that these algae can also be exported to the sediment as active cells as opposed to dead forms.
    [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]
  • Seagrasses of Florida: a Review
    Page 1 of 1 Seagrasses of Florida: A Review Virginia Rigdon The University of Florida Soil and Water Science Departments Introduction Seagrass communities are noted to be some of the most productive ecosystems on earth, as they provide countless ecological functions, including carbon uptake, habitat for endangered species, food sources for many commercially and recreationally important fish and shellfish, aiding nutrient cyling, and their ability to anchor the sediment bottom. These communites are in jeopardy and a wordwide decline can be attributed mainly to deterioration in water quality, due to anthropogenic activities. Seagrasses are a diverse group of submerged angiosperms, which grow in estuaries and shallow ocean shelves and form dense vegetative communities. These vascular plants are not true grasses; however, their “grass-like” qualities and their ability to adapt to a saline environment give them their name. While seagrasses can be found across the globe, they have relatively low taxonomic diversity. There are approximately 60 species of seagrasses, compared to roughly 250,000 terrestrial angiosperms (Orth, 2006). These plants can be traced back to three distinct seagrass families (Hydrocharitaceae, Cymodoceaceace complex, and Zosteraceae), which all evolved 70 million to 100 million years ago from a individual line of monocotyledonous flowering plants (Orth, 2006). The importance of these ecosystems, both ecologically and economically is well understood. The focus of this paper will be to discuss the species of seagrass in Florida, the components which affect their health and growth, and the major factors which threaten these precious and unique ecosystems, as well as programs which are in place to protect and preserve this essential resource.
    [Show full text]
  • Short Communication on the Classification of The
    SHORT COMMUNICATION ON THE CLASSIFICATION OF THE GENERA Labyrinthula, Schizochytrium AND Thraustochytrium (Labyrinthulids AND Thraustochytrids) Øjvind Moestrup Biological Institute, University of Copenhagen Universitetsparken 4 , DK- 2100 Copenhagen, Denmark E-mail: [email protected] Citation as: Moestrup Øjvind, 2019. On the classification of the genera Labyrinthula, Schizochytrium and Thraustochytrium (Labyrinthulids and Thraustochytrids). Tap chi Sinh hoc, 41(2): xx–xx. https://doi.org/10.15625/0866-7160/v41n2.xxxxx Species of the genera Labyrinthula, Schizochytrium, Thraustochytrium and related organisms have recently attracted attention in biotechnology, and here is a short note on how to classify these rather special organisms. The labyrinthulids and thraustochytrids belong to the heterokonts, a large group of very diverse organisms, from microscopic unicells to metre-long brown algae. The heterokonts comprise species that were formerly classified as algae, fungi and/or protozoa. Many heterokonts are autotrophic and contain chloroplasts, and such organisms are often classified as algae (golden algae, brown algae). Labyrinthulids and thraustochytrids, however, are heterotrophic and lack chloroplasts. They were until recently known as Labyrinthulomycetes or Labyrinthulea , indeed the new classification of Adl et al. (2019) uses the first of these names. It is an unfortunate name as it gives the misleading impression that they are fungi. Honigberg et al. (1964) and others considered them protozoa. Are heterokonts algae, protozoa or fungi? And, more specifically, what are labyrinthulids and thraustochytrids? The heterokonts are thought to be a very old group (probably precambrian), and this may account for their huge morphological diversity. In the WORMS list (World Register of Marine Species) heterokonts are classified as the Infrakingdom Heterokonta .
    [Show full text]