21
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0
shares
    • Review: found
    Is Open Access

    Review of 'Recent proposals on nomenclature of dinoflagellates (Dinophyceae)'

    Bookmark
    5
    Recent proposals on nomenclature of dinoflagellates (Dinophyceae)Crossref
    Critical revision to the current nomenclature of some dinoflagellates from past centuries
    Average rating:
        Rated 5 of 5.
    Level of importance:
        Rated 5 of 5.
    Level of validity:
        Rated 5 of 5.
    Level of completeness:
        Rated 5 of 5.
    Level of comprehensibility:
        Rated 5 of 5.
    Competing interests:
    None

    Reviewed article

    • Record: found
    • Abstract: found
    • Article: found
    Is Open Access

    Recent proposals on nomenclature of dinoflagellates (Dinophyceae)

     Fernando Gomez (corresponding) (2021)
    The recent proposals to conserve or reject dinoflagellate names are commented. The Nomenclatural Committee for Algae (NCA) recommended to conserve Scrippsiella against Heteraulacus and Goniodoma (proposal #2382). The synonymy of Peridinium acuminatum and Glenodinium trochoideum is highly questionable, and one Steins illustration of Goniodoma acuminatum as type will solve the doubts. An alternative genus and family name for the gonyaulacoid taxa formerly classified in Goniodoma is not provided, and Scrippsiella is a junior synonym of Duboscquodinium . The NCA confirmed Amphidoma acuminata as type species against A. nucula (2577). Stein established Amphidoma nucula as the representative species of the genus, and the poor-defined A. acuminata is associated with higher nomenclatural instability because it is probably a Centrodinium species. The NCA recommended Heterocapsa steinii as type of Heterocapsa (2607). That species name is a junior synonym of Properidinium heterocapsum and Peridinium monas. That taxon and allied species should be placed in Cachonina because Stein proposed Heterocapsa for three species of the Kryptoperidiniaceae. The proposal to conserve Alexandrium against Blepharocysta (2686) is based on that Peridinium splendor-maris is a senior synonym of Alexandrium balechii , currently classified in Gessnerium . Peridinium splendor-maris is a collective name that includes undefined organisms, and no description or illustration corresponded to Alexandrium or Gessnerium . The NCA reported that Alexandrium catenella and A. fundyensis are synonyms, without comments on A. pacificum (2302). The consequence is that one of the five species of that group has not name. Naming taxa should follow the principle of priority and the article 7.3 of the International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants, and rejection or conservation of names should be exceptional. Based on a supposed nomenclatural stability, the NCA is creating arbitrariness and instability in naming dinoflagellate taxa based on questionable taxonomical interpretations.
      Bookmark

      Review information

      10.14293/S2199-1006.1.SOR-LIFE.APBI9QN.v1.RFZABW

      This work has been published open access under Creative Commons Attribution License CC BY 4.0, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Conditions, terms of use and publishing policy can be found at www.scienceopen.com.

      Keywords:

      Review text

      Recent proposals on nomenclature of dinoflagellates

      This is a review article of the nomenclature of dinoflagellates of great depth that demonstrates a high level of understanding, analysis that allows making proposals on the changes in the name of species from the initial and original description or image to the changes that have been made accompanied by the use of more advanced tools such as microscopy and molecular techniques. This is an article that exposes the status quo of the nomenclature of some species or species complexes that for various reasons, not always related to the characteristics of the species, their classification is not clear and they are in continuous debate.
      The narrative is very much enjoyed but I would also like to see a figure or table on the state of the art of the species treated with the timeline from the first description to the current one, marking the most relevant changes over time.
      It is undoubtedly an article to analyze and discuss the changes in the nomenclature of dinoflagellates of ecological and toxicological importance.

       

      Comments

      Comment on this review