1,012
views
6
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    9
    shares
      scite_
       
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Excessive proliferation of new dinoflagellate generic names: the case of Torquentidium (Ceratoperidiniaceae, Dinophyceae)

      Preprint
      In review
      research-article
        1 ,
      ScienceOpen Preprints
      ScienceOpen
      Cochlodinium, Dinoflagellata, dinoflagellate, Dinophyceae, Gymnodinium, Gyrodinium, Pseliodinium, Torquentidium, molecular phylogenetics, taxonomy
      Bookmark

            Author Summary

            Summary

            New genera of unarmoured dinoflagellates represented by a single or very few species have largely increased in the last two decades. An example is the new genus name Torquentidium H.H. Shin, Z. Li, K.W. Lee & Matsuoka 2019 (Shin et al., Eur. J. Phycol. 54: 249-262) recently proposed for species that were transferred into Pseliodinium in 2018. The SSU- and LSU rRNA gene sequences of the type species of Pseliodinium and Torquentidium only differed by 0.3% and 2%, respectively, and they clustered together as a monophyletic group with high support. Based on these tree topologies and/or the sequence divergences, each dinoflagellate species would be classified in its own genus. The morphological character proposed to distinguish Pseliodinium and Torquentidium is that the cingulum encircled the cell 1 and 1.5 times, respectively. This kind of arbitrary numeric morphometric character, proposed one century ago, is currently considered invalid for the generic split of unarmoured dinoflagellates. For example, Polykrikos geminatum (with ~1.5 cingular turns) clusters between species of Polykrikos (1 turn). Within the Ceratoperidiniaceae, the arrangement of the amphiesmal vesicles in apical structure complex was used for distinction at the genus level (i.e., Kirithra), while this character is identical for Pseliodinium and Torquentidium. For the first time, an unarmoured dinoflagellate genus contains species with smooth cell covering (T. convolutum, T. helix) and species with longitudinal striae (T. pirum). However, the original description as Gymnodinium pirum in 1895 erroneously illustrated two distinct species, and since then nobody has ever reported surface markings in T. pirum. The morphological and molecular criteria used for the split of Torquentidium from Pseliodinium are unsupported, contributing to the excessive proliferation of monotypic genera. Torquentidium pirum and T. convolutum are synonyms, and Torquentidium is a superfluous generic name and junior synonym of Pseliodinium.

            Abstract

            New genera of unarmoured dinoflagellates represented by a single or very few species have largely increased in the last two decades. An example is the new genus name Torquentidium H.H. Shin, Z. Li, K.W. Lee & Matsuoka 2019 (Shin et al. , Eur. J. Phycol . 54: 249-262) recently proposed for species that were transferred into Pseliodinium in 2018. The SSU- and LSU rRNA gene sequences of the type species of Pseliodinium and Torquentidium only differed by 0.3% and 2%, respectively, and they clustered together as a monophyletic group with high support. Based on these tree topologies and/or the sequence divergences, each dinoflagellate species would be classified in its own genus. The morphological character proposed to distinguish Pseliodinium and Torquentidium is that the cingulum encircled the cell 1 and 1.5 times, respectively. This kind of arbitrary numeric morphometric character, proposed one century ago, is currently considered invalid for the generic split of unarmoured dinoflagellates. For example, Polykrikos geminatum (with ~1.5 cingular turns) clusters between species of Polykrikos (1 turn). Within the Ceratoperidiniaceae, the arrangement of the amphiesmal vesicles in apical structure complex was used for distinction at the genus level (i.e., Kirithra ), while this character is identical for Pseliodinium and Torquentidium . For the first time, an unarmoured dinoflagellate genus contains species with smooth cell covering ( T. convolutum , T. helix ) and species with longitudinal striae ( T. pirum ). However, the original description as Gymnodinium pirum in 1895 erroneously illustrated two distinct species, and since then nobody has ever reported surface markings in T. pirum . The morphological and molecular criteria used for the split of Torquentidium from Pseliodinium are unsupported, contributing to the excessive proliferation of monotypic genera. Torquentidium pirum and T. convolutum are synonyms, and Torquentidium is a superfluous generic name and junior synonym of Pseliodinium .

            Content

            Author and article information

            Journal
            ScienceOpen Preprints
            ScienceOpen
            10 November 2019
            Affiliations
            [1 ] Carmen Campos Panisse 3, E-11500 Puerto de Santa María, Spain
            Author information
            https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5886-3488
            Article
            10.14293/S2199-1006.1.SOR-.PPWN5AK.v1
            ad4bb0d2-3ea8-4b3f-8bb9-ed8f746f7971

            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 .

            History

            General life sciences
            Cochlodinium,Dinoflagellata,dinoflagellate,Dinophyceae,Gymnodinium,Gyrodinium,Pseliodinium,Torquentidium,molecular phylogenetics,taxonomy

            Comments

            Comment on this article