[Taxacom] Taxonomic treatment of cyanobacterial endosymbionts

Tony Rees tonyrees49 at gmail.com
Sat Jun 19 02:27:56 CDT 2021


Actually if I understand this paper correctly, fig. 4 of Figueroa-Martinez
et al., 2019 (link below) shows that the plastids of Glaucophytes form
their own group on molecular grounds, away from Cyanobacteria and closer to
those of the Rhodophyta, plus other organisms with red algal-derived
plastids:

https://academic.oup.com/gbe/article/11/1/174/5238078

Glaucosphaera vacuolata, once considered a glaucophyte, has been
reclassified as a red alga and it now sits in Rhodophyta in its own order
and family, along with Rhodella and Neorhodella, as presently represented
in AlgaeBase. In the latter compilation, Skujapelta and Skujapeltaceae are
also placed in the same order of red algae but I do not see any
justification for this, unless of course I have missed something. Back in
1995, Helmchen et al. (Analyses of ribosomal RNA sequences from
glaucocystophyte cyanelles provide new insights into the evolutionary
relationships of plastids. , 41(2), 203–210. doi:10.1007/bf00170674) showed
that Glaucosphaera vacuolata grouped with red algae as well, however the
cyanelles of Cyanophora, Glaucocystis, and Gloeochate ("good" glaucophytes)
did not cluster there. Although again, my understanding of the above may be
less than perfect.

Regards - Tony


On Sat, 19 Jun 2021 at 06:02, Tony Rees <tonyrees49 at gmail.com> wrote:

> OK, for now I have left both genera, and their respective families, as
> nomina dubia in Cyanophyceae (Chlorococcales) as originally proposed, with
> taxonomic notes regarding their endosymbiotic characteristic.
>
> RE Cyanocyta, despite being listed as not validly published in  LPSN, it
> looks OK to me:
> https://rupress.org/jcb/article/19/3/551/16284/ULTRASTRUCTURAL-STUDIES-ON-THE-BLUE-GREEN-ALGAL
> - and there is no comment on its non-valid status in ING (entry from 1996)
> where it is listed as "[C]" (=current). So I have left it as nomen dubium
> for now; others can comment further if they wish...
>
> Cyanocyta: https://www.irmng.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=1382326
> Skujapelta: https://www.irmng.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=1090627
>
> Regards - Tony
>
> Tony Rees, New South Wales, Australia
> https://about.me/TonyRees
> www.irmng.org
>
>
> On Fri, 18 Jun 2021 at 08:21, Tony Rees <tonyrees49 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Thanks Ken... for IRMNG I am thinking there are 3 options:
>>
>> (1) List either or both (probably now not Cyanocyta though) as accepted
>> names in Cyanophyceae, with their proposed families
>>
>> (2) List both genera and their containing families as unaccepted names in
>> Cyanophyceae, do not synonymise
>>
>> (3) Synonynise (sensu lato) both names with those of their "host" cells
>> in Glaucophyta, and move the names there.
>>
>> At present I am inclining towards option (2), but could be persuaded
>> otherwise by any suitable argument...
>>
>> Regards - Tony
>>
>>
>> On Fri, 18 Jun 2021 at 07:52, Kenneth Kinman via Taxacom <
>> taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Tony,
>>>         Cyanocyta korschikoffiana was apparently not validly published.
>>> And although Skujapelta nuda was validly published, I doubt that most
>>> botanists today would consider it an independent organism.  They seem to be
>>> very primitive chloroplasts called muroplasts, but apparently totally
>>> dependent on their hosts.
>>>                         -----------Ken Kinman
>>> Cyanocyta was not validly published according to:
>>> https://lpsn.dsmz.de/species/cyanocyta-korschikoffiana
>>> Shujapelta was validly published:
>>> https://lpsn.dsmz.de/species/skujapelta-nuda
>>>
>>>
>>> ________________________________
>>> From: Taxacom <taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu> on behalf of Tony
>>> Rees via Taxacom <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
>>> Sent: Thursday, June 17, 2021 3:38 PM
>>> To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
>>> Subject: [Taxacom] Taxonomic treatment of cyanobacterial endosymbionts
>>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> The glaucophycean "algae" Glaucocystis nostochinearum and Cyanophora
>>> paradoxa contain endosymbionts (cyanelles) resembling blue-green algae
>>> (Cyanobacteria) that have been separately named in the past (by Hall and
>>> Claus, 1963) as cyanobacteria in their own right, namely as Skujapelta
>>> nuda
>>> (fam. Skujapeltaceae, order Chroococcales) in Glaucocystis, and Cyanocyta
>>> korschikoffiana (fam. Cyanocytaceae, order Chroococcales), respectively.
>>>
>>> In Index Nominum Genericorum, Skujapelta and Cyanocyta are retained in
>>> Cyanobacteria, whereas in AlgaeBase (current version) Skujapelta is
>>> placed
>>> in Glaucosphaerales (Rodophyta - not Glaucophyceae) but still in its own
>>> family, while Cyanocyta is not mentioned.
>>>
>>> So here is a puzzle: should the names for the cyanelles, i.e.  Skujapelta
>>> and  Cyanocyta, be treated as "accepted" names, in their own families,
>>> within Cyanobacteria, or synonyms of their host names and placed in
>>> Glaucophyceae? What would you do, if interested in treating these names
>>> in
>>> a system of higher taxonomy?
>>>
>>> Comments welcome,
>>>
>>> Regards - Tony
>>> Tony Rees, New South Wales, Australia
>>> www.irmng.org<http://www.irmng.org>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Taxacom Mailing List
>>>
>>> Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>>> For list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, visit:
>>> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>>> You can reach the person managing the list at:
>>> taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>>> The Taxacom email archive back to 1992 can be searched at:
>>> http://taxacom.markmail.org
>>>
>>> Nurturing nuance while assaulting ambiguity for about 34 years,
>>> 1987-2021.
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Taxacom Mailing List
>>>
>>> Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>>> For list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, visit:
>>> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>>> You can reach the person managing the list at:
>>> taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>>> The Taxacom email archive back to 1992 can be searched at:
>>> http://taxacom.markmail.org
>>>
>>> Nurturing nuance while assaulting ambiguity for about 34 years,
>>> 1987-2021.
>>>
>>


More information about the Taxacom mailing list