Biotic and Abiotic Factors Affecting the Population Dynamics of Ceratium
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Akashiwo Sanguinea
Ocean ORIGINAL ARTICLE and Coastal http://doi.org/10.1590/2675-2824069.20-004hmdja Research ISSN 2675-2824 Phytoplankton community in a tropical estuarine gradient after an exceptional harmful bloom of Akashiwo sanguinea (Dinophyceae) in the Todos os Santos Bay Helen Michelle de Jesus Affe1,2,* , Lorena Pedreira Conceição3,4 , Diogo Souza Bezerra Rocha5 , Luis Antônio de Oliveira Proença6 , José Marcos de Castro Nunes3,4 1 Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro - Faculdade de Oceanografia (Bloco E - 900, Pavilhão João Lyra Filho, 4º andar, sala 4018, R. São Francisco Xavier, 524 - Maracanã - 20550-000 - Rio de Janeiro - RJ - Brazil) 2 Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas Espaciais/INPE - Rede Clima - Sub-rede Oceanos (Av. dos Astronautas, 1758. Jd. da Granja -12227-010 - São José dos Campos - SP - Brazil) 3 Universidade Estadual de Feira de Santana - Departamento de Ciências Biológicas - Programa de Pós-graduação em Botânica (Av. Transnordestina s/n - Novo Horizonte - 44036-900 - Feira de Santana - BA - Brazil) 4 Universidade Federal da Bahia - Instituto de Biologia - Laboratório de Algas Marinhas (Rua Barão de Jeremoabo, 668 - Campus de Ondina 40170-115 - Salvador - BA - Brazil) 5 Instituto Internacional para Sustentabilidade - (Estr. Dona Castorina, 124 - Jardim Botânico - 22460-320 - Rio de Janeiro - RJ - Brazil) 6 Instituto Federal de Santa Catarina (Av. Ver. Abrahão João Francisco, 3899 - Ressacada, Itajaí - 88307-303 - SC - Brazil) * Corresponding author: [email protected] ABSTRAct The objective of this study was to evaluate variations in the composition and abundance of the phytoplankton community after an exceptional harmful bloom of Akashiwo sanguinea that occurred in Todos os Santos Bay (BTS) in early March, 2007. -
28-Protistsf20r.Ppt [Compatibility Mode]
9/3/20 Ch 28: The Protists (a.k.a. Protoctists) (meet these in more detail in your book and lab) 1 Protists invent: eukaryotic cells size complexity Remember: 1°(primary) endosymbiosis? -> mitochondrion -> chloroplast genome unicellular -> multicellular 2 1 9/3/20 For chloroplasts 2° (secondary) happened (more complicated) {3°(tertiary) happened too} 3 4 Eukaryotic “supergroups” (SG; between K and P) 4 2 9/3/20 Protists invent sex: meiosis and fertilization -> 3 Life Cycles/Histories (Fig 13.6) Spores and some protists (Humans do this one) 5 “Algae” Group PS Pigments Euglenoids chl a & b (& carotenoids) Dinoflagellates chl a & c (usually) (& carotenoids) Diatoms chl a & c (& carotenoids) Xanthophytes chl a & c (& carotenoids) Chrysophytes chl a & c (& carotenoids) Coccolithophorids chl a & c (& carotenoids) Browns chl a & c (& carotenoids) Reds chl a, phycobilins (& carotenoids) Greens chl a & b (& carotenoids) (more groups exist) 6 3 9/3/20 Name word roots (indicate nutrition) “algae” (-phyt-) protozoa (no consistent word ending) “fungal-like” (-myc-) Ecological terms plankton phytoplankton zooplankton 7 SG: Excavata/Excavates “excavated” feeding groove some have reduced mitochondria (e.g.: mitosomes, hydrogenosomes) 8 4 9/3/20 SG: Excavata O: Diplomonads: †Giardia Cl: Parabasalids: Trichonympha (bk only) †Trichomonas P: Euglenophyta/zoa C: Kinetoplastids = trypanosomes/hemoflagellates: †Trypanosoma C: Euglenids: Euglena 9 SG: “SAR” clade: Clade Alveolates cell membrane 10 5 9/3/20 SG: “SAR” clade: Clade Alveolates P: Dinoflagellata/Pyrrophyta: -
The Planktonic Protist Interactome: Where Do We Stand After a Century of Research?
bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/587352; this version posted May 2, 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. Bjorbækmo et al., 23.03.2019 – preprint copy - BioRxiv The planktonic protist interactome: where do we stand after a century of research? Marit F. Markussen Bjorbækmo1*, Andreas Evenstad1* and Line Lieblein Røsæg1*, Anders K. Krabberød1**, and Ramiro Logares2,1** 1 University of Oslo, Department of Biosciences, Section for Genetics and Evolutionary Biology (Evogene), Blindernv. 31, N- 0316 Oslo, Norway 2 Institut de Ciències del Mar (CSIC), Passeig Marítim de la Barceloneta, 37-49, ES-08003, Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain * The three authors contributed equally ** Corresponding authors: Ramiro Logares: Institute of Marine Sciences (ICM-CSIC), Passeig Marítim de la Barceloneta 37-49, 08003, Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain. Phone: 34-93-2309500; Fax: 34-93-2309555. [email protected] Anders K. Krabberød: University of Oslo, Department of Biosciences, Section for Genetics and Evolutionary Biology (Evogene), Blindernv. 31, N-0316 Oslo, Norway. Phone +47 22845986, Fax: +47 22854726. [email protected] Abstract Microbial interactions are crucial for Earth ecosystem function, yet our knowledge about them is limited and has so far mainly existed as scattered records. Here, we have surveyed the literature involving planktonic protist interactions and gathered the information in a manually curated Protist Interaction DAtabase (PIDA). In total, we have registered ~2,500 ecological interactions from ~500 publications, spanning the last 150 years. -
There Is Not a Latin Root Word Clear Your Desk Protist Quiz Grade Quiz
There is not a Latin Root Word Clear your desk Protist Quiz Grade Quiz Malaria Fever Wars Classification Kingdom Protista contains THREE main groups of organisms: 1. Protozoa: “animal-like protists” 2. Algae: “plant-like protists” 3. Slime & Water Molds: “fungus-like protists” Basics of Protozoa Unicellular Eukaryotic unlike bacteria 65, 000 different species Heterotrophic Free-living (move in aquatic environments) or Parasitic Habitats include oceans, rivers, ponds, soil, and other organisms. Protozoa Reproduction ALL protozoa can use asexual reproduction through binary fission or multiple fission FEW protozoa reproduce sexually through conjugation. Adaptation Special Protozoa Adaptations Eyespot: detects changes in the quantity/ quality of light, and physical/chemical changes in their environment Cyst: hardened external covering that protects protozoa in extreme environments. Basics of Algae: “Plant-like” protists. MOST unicellular; SOME multicellular. Make food by photosynthesis (“autotrophic prostists”). Were classified as plants, BUT… – Lack tissue differentiation- NO roots, stems, leaves, etc. – Reproduce differently Most algal cells have pyrenoids (organelles that make and store starch) Can use asexual or sexual reproduction. Algae Structure: Thallus: body portion; usually haploid Body Structure: 1) unicellular: single-celled; aquatic (Ex.phytoplankton, Chlamydomonas) 2) colonial: groups of coordinated cells; “division of labor” (Ex. Volvox) 3) filamentous: rod-shaped thallus; some anchor to ocean bottom (Ex. Spyrogyra) 4) multicellular: large, complex, leaflike thallus (Ex. Macrocystis- giant kelp) Basics of Fungus-like Protists: Slime Molds: Water Molds: Once classified as fungi Fungus-like; composed of Found in damp soil, branching filaments rotting logs, and other Commonly freshwater; decaying matter. some in soil; some Some white, most yellow parasites. -
Wrc Research Report No. 131 Effects of Feedlot Runoff
WRC RESEARCH REPORT NO. 131 EFFECTS OF FEEDLOT RUNOFF ON FREE-LIVING AQUATIC CILIATED PROTOZOA BY Kenneth S. Todd, Jr. College of Veterinary Medicine Department of Veterinary Pathology and Hygiene University of Illinois Urbana, Illinois 61801 FINAL REPORT PROJECT NO. A-074-ILL This project was partially supported by the U. S. ~epartmentof the Interior in accordance with the Water Resources Research Act of 1964, P .L. 88-379, Agreement No. 14-31-0001-7030. UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS WATER RESOURCES CENTER 2535 Hydrosystems Laboratory Urbana, Illinois 61801 AUGUST 1977 ABSTRACT Water samples and free-living and sessite ciliated protozoa were col- lected at various distances above and below a stream that received runoff from a feedlot. No correlation was found between the species of protozoa recovered, water chemistry, location in the stream, or time of collection. Kenneth S. Todd, Jr'. EFFECTS OF FEEDLOT RUNOFF ON FREE-LIVING AQUATIC CILIATED PROTOZOA Final Report Project A-074-ILL, Office of Water Resources Research, Department of the Interior, August 1977, Washington, D.C., 13 p. KEYWORDS--*ciliated protozoa/feed lots runoff/*water pollution/water chemistry/Illinois/surface water INTRODUCTION The current trend for feeding livestock in the United States is toward large confinement types of operation. Most of these large commercial feedlots have some means of manure disposal and programs to prevent runoff from feed- lots from reaching streams. However, there are still large numbers of smaller feedlots, many of which do not have adequate facilities for disposal of manure or preventing runoff from reaching waterways. The production of wastes by domestic animals was often not considered in the past, but management of wastes is currently one of the largest problems facing the livestock industry. -
Parasitic and Fungal Identification in Bamboo Lobster Panulirus Versicolour and Ornate Lobster P
Parasitic and Fungal Identification in Bamboo Lobster Panulirus versicolour and Ornate Lobster P. ornatus Cultures Indriyani Nur1)* and Yusnaini2) 1) Department of Aquaculture, Faculty of Fisheries and Marine Science, University of Halu Oleo, Kendari 93232, Indonesia Corresponding author: [email protected] (Indriyani Nur) Abstract—Lobster cultures have failed because of mortalities transmissible [5] including Vibrio, Aeromonas, Pseudomonas, associated with parasitic and fungal infections. Monitoring of spawned Cytophaga and Pseudoalteromonas [6,7]. Futher examination eggs and larva of bamboo lobsters, Panulirus versicolour, and ornate of these lobsters revealed four parasite species: Porospora lobsters, P. ornatus, in a hatchery was conducted in order to gigantea (Apicomplexa: Sporozoea), Polymorphus botulus characterize fungal and parasitic diseases of eggs and larva. One (Acanthocephala: Palaeacanthocephala), Hysterothylacium sp. species of protozoan parasite (Vorticella sp.) was identified from eggs while two species of fungi (Lagenidium sp. and Haliphthoros sp.) were (Nematoda: Secernentea), and Stichocotyle nephropis found on the lobster larvae. Furthermore, adult lobsters cultured in (Platyhelminthes: Trematoda) [8]. Therefore, the aim of this floating net cages had burning-like diseases on their pleopod, uropod, study was to examine and to characterize the infestation of and telson. Histopathological samples were collected for parasite parasites and fungus of potentially cultured lobsters (larval identification and tissue changes. There were two parasites found to stages and adult stages of the spiny lobsters), and also to look infect spiny lobsters on their external body and gill, they are Octolasmis sp. and Oodinium sp..Histopathology showed tissue at the histopathological changes of their tissues. This is changes, necrosis on the kidneys/liver/pancreas, necrosis in the gills regarded as a major cause of low production in aquaculture and around the uropods and telson. -
Observations on the Ecology of Protozoa Associated
OBSERVATIONS ON THE ECOLOGY OF PROTOZOA ASSOCIATED WITH SPHAGNUM DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Peter Chacharonis, B. A., M. A The Ohio State University 1954 Approved by Advise TABLE OK CONTENTS INTRODUCTION...................................................... 1 HISTORICAL REVIEW................................................. 2 NATURE OK THE ENVIRONMENT......................................... iO Location and History of the Bog.............................. 10 Description of the Hog....................................... 11 Ecological Characteristics of the Bog....................... 12 Structure and Growth of Sphagnum............................. IB MATERIALS AND METHODS............................................. 21 General...................................................... ill Collections.................................................. 21 pH Determinations............................................ 23 Temperature Determinations................................... 24 Methods of Examination....................................... 25 Staining Methods............................................. 2b Quantitative Determinations.................................. iO OBSERVATIONS.................................................. 32 General..................... 32 Distribution and Relative Frequency of Protozoa............. 32 The Position of the Organisms on and in the Sphagnum plant... 4J Seasonal Observations....................................... -
Flagellates, Ciliates) and Bacteria in Lake Kinneret, Israel
AQUATIC MICROBIAL ECOLOGY Published February 13 Aquat Microb Ecol Seasonal abundance and vertical distribution of Protozoa (flagellates, ciliates) and bacteria in Lake Kinneret, Israel Ora Hadas*, Tom Berman Israel Oceanographic & Limnological Research, The Yigal Allon Kinneret Limnological Laboratory, PO Box 345, Tiberias 14102, Israel ABSTRACT: The seasonal and vertical abundances of ciliates and flagellates are described over a 2 yr period in Lake Kinneret, Israel, a warm rneso-eutroph~cmonomictic lake. Ciliate numbers ranged from 3 to 47 cells ml-l. At the thermocline and oxycline region, the h~ghestcillate numbers were observed in autumn, with Coleps hirtus as the dominant speclea. Maximum heterotrophic nanoflagellate abun- dance (1300 cells ml") was found in the epilimnion In winter-spnng, minimum numbers (66 cells ml-') occurred in autumn. Bacteria ranged from 10ho 3 10' cells ml-l with h~ghestnumbers at the decline of the Peridinium yatunense bloom and the lowest during ivlnter. Protozoa, especially ciliates, appeared to be important food sources for metazooplankton. Top-down control is an important factor determin- ing the structure of the microbial loop in Lake Kinneret. KEY WORDS: HNAN Ciliates . Bacteria . Lake Kinneret INTRODUCTION for zooplankton in both marine and aquatic environ- ments (Beaver & Crisman 1989, Pace et al. 1990, The abundance and distribution of microorganisms Stoecker & Capuzzo 1990). in aquatic ecosystems result from a complex of envi- The abundance of each component within the ronmental factors and trophic interactions among a microbial loop, i.e. bacteria, picophytoplankton, fla- multitude of biotic components. In lakes, as in the gellates and ciliates, is controlled by some combina- marine habitat, important fluxes of carbon nutrients tion of bottom-up (nutrient supply) and top-down and energy are mediated by the microbial food web (grazing) regulation. -
Pusillus Poseidon's Guide to Protozoa
Pusillus Poseidon’s guide to PROTOZOA GENERAL NOTES ABOUT PROTOZOANS Protozoa are also called protists. The word “protist” is the more general term and includes all types of single-celled eukaryotes, whereas “protozoa” is more often used to describe the protists that are animal-like (as opposed to plant-like or fungi-like). Protists are measured using units called microns. There are 1000 microns in one millimeter. A millimeter is the smallest unit on a metric ruler and can be estimated with your fingers: The traditional way of classifying protists is by the way they look (morphology), by the way they move (mo- tility), and how and what they eat. This gives us terms such as ciliates, flagellates, ameboids, and all those colors of algae. Recently, the classification system has been overhauled and has become immensely complicated. (Infor- mation about DNA is now the primary consideration for classification, rather than how a creature looks or acts.) If you research these creatures on Wikipedia, you will see this new system being used. Bear in mind, however, that the categories are constantly shifting as we learn more and more about protist DNA. Here is a visual overview that might help you understand the wide range of similarities and differences. Some organisms fit into more than one category and some don’t fit well into any category. Always remember that classification is an artificial construct made by humans. The organisms don’t know anything about it and they don’t care what we think! CILIATES Eats anything smaller than Blepharisma looks slightly pink because it Blepharisma itself, even smaller Bleph- makes a red pigment that senses light (simi- arismas. -
Mixotrophy Among Dinoflagellates1
J Eukaryn Microbiol.. 46(4). 1999 pp. 397-401 0 1999 by the Society of Protozoologists Mixotrophy among Dinoflagellates’ DIANE K. STOECKER University of Maryland Center for Environmentul Science, Horn Point Laboratory, P.O. Box 775, Cambridge, Marylund 21613, USA ABSTRACT. Mixotrophy, used herein for the combination of phototrophy and phagotrophy, is widespread among dinoflagellates. It occurs among most, perhaps all, of the extant orders, including the Prorocentrales, Dinophysiales, Gymnodiniales, Noctilucales, Gon- yaulacales, Peridiniales, Blastodiniales, Phytodiniales, and Dinamoebales. Many cases of mixotrophy among dinoflagellates are probably undocumented. Primarily photosynthetic dinoflagellates with their “own” plastids can often supplement their nutrition by preying on other cells. Some primarily phagotrophic species are photosynthetic due to the presence of kleptochloroplasts or algal endosymbionts. Some parasitic dinoflagellates have plastids and are probably mixotrophic. For most mixotrophic dinoflagellates, the relative importance of photosynthesis, uptake of dissolved inorganic nutrients, and feeding are unknown. However, it is apparent that mixotrophy has different functions in different physiological types of dinoflagellates. Data on the simultaneous regulation of photosynthesis, assimilation of dissolved inorganic and organic nutrients, and phagotophy by environmental parameters (irradiance, availablity of dissolved nutrients, availability of prey) and by life history events are needed in order to understand the diverse -
Catalogue of Protozoan Parasites Recorded in Australia Peter J. O
1 CATALOGUE OF PROTOZOAN PARASITES RECORDED IN AUSTRALIA PETER J. O’DONOGHUE & ROBERT D. ADLARD O’Donoghue, P.J. & Adlard, R.D. 2000 02 29: Catalogue of protozoan parasites recorded in Australia. Memoirs of the Queensland Museum 45(1):1-164. Brisbane. ISSN 0079-8835. Published reports of protozoan species from Australian animals have been compiled into a host- parasite checklist, a parasite-host checklist and a cross-referenced bibliography. Protozoa listed include parasites, commensals and symbionts but free-living species have been excluded. Over 590 protozoan species are listed including amoebae, flagellates, ciliates and ‘sporozoa’ (the latter comprising apicomplexans, microsporans, myxozoans, haplosporidians and paramyxeans). Organisms are recorded in association with some 520 hosts including mammals, marsupials, birds, reptiles, amphibians, fish and invertebrates. Information has been abstracted from over 1,270 scientific publications predating 1999 and all records include taxonomic authorities, synonyms, common names, sites of infection within hosts and geographic locations. Protozoa, parasite checklist, host checklist, bibliography, Australia. Peter J. O’Donoghue, Department of Microbiology and Parasitology, The University of Queensland, St Lucia 4072, Australia; Robert D. Adlard, Protozoa Section, Queensland Museum, PO Box 3300, South Brisbane 4101, Australia; 31 January 2000. CONTENTS the literature for reports relevant to contemporary studies. Such problems could be avoided if all previous HOST-PARASITE CHECKLIST 5 records were consolidated into a single database. Most Mammals 5 researchers currently avail themselves of various Reptiles 21 electronic database and abstracting services but none Amphibians 26 include literature published earlier than 1985 and not all Birds 34 journal titles are covered in their databases. Fish 44 Invertebrates 54 Several catalogues of parasites in Australian PARASITE-HOST CHECKLIST 63 hosts have previously been published. -
The Windblown: Possible Explanations for Dinophyte DNA
bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.08.07.242388; this version posted August 10, 2020. 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. The windblown: possible explanations for dinophyte DNA in forest soils Marc Gottschlinga, Lucas Czechb,c, Frédéric Mahéd,e, Sina Adlf, Micah Dunthorng,h,* a Department Biologie, Systematische Botanik und Mykologie, GeoBio-Center, Ludwig- Maximilians-Universität München, D-80638 Munich, Germany b Computational Molecular Evolution Group, Heidelberg Institute for Theoretical Studies, D- 69118 Heidelberg, Germany c Department of Plant Biology, Carnegie Institution for Science, Stanford, CA 94305, USA d CIRAD, UMR BGPI, F-34398, Montpellier, France e BGPI, Université de Montpellier, CIRAD, IRD, Montpellier SupAgro, Montpellier, France f Department of Soil Sciences, College of Agriculture and Bioresources, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, S7N 5A8, SK, Canada g Eukaryotic Microbiology, Faculty of Biology, Universität Duisburg-Essen, D-45141 Essen, Germany h Centre for Water and Environmental Research (ZWU), Universität Duisburg-Essen, D- 45141 Essen, Germany Running title: Dinophytes in soils Correspondence M. Dunthorn, Eukaryotic Microbiology, Faculty of Biology, Universität Duisburg-Essen, Universitätsstrasse 5, D-45141 Essen, Germany Telephone number: +49-(0)-201-183-2453; email: [email protected] bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.08.07.242388; this version posted August 10, 2020. 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.