4.2 Article

Circumscription of species in the genus Sirodotia (Batrachospermales, Rhodophyta) based on molecular and morphological data

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PHYCOLOGY
卷 47, 期 1, 页码 42-50

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/09670262.2011.645885

关键词

Batrachospermales; cox2-3 spacer; freshwater; macroalgae; phylogeography; Rhodophyta; rbcL; Sirodotia; streams

资金

  1. Ohio University
  2. National Science Foundation (USA) [DEB0235676, DEB0936855]
  3. Polish Ministry of Science and Higher Education [N N304 285937]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Species level taxonomy and phylogeographical distribution patterns in the freshwater rhodophyte Sirodotia are resolved through phylogenetic inferences based on rbcL and cox2-3 sequence data. Previous studies focused on the taxonomy of specific Sirodotia species or the distributions across a limited geographical region. Our molecular phylogenies included samples attributable to five recognized Sirodotia species and include collections from Australia, Brazil, Costa Rica, Canada, Finland, Mexico, New Zealand, South Africa and the United States. Both rbcL and cox2-3 phylogenies inferred S. suecica, S. tenuissima and S. goebelii as a monophyletic group with little sequence divergence. This result supports the synonymy of S. tenuissima and S. goebelii with S. suecica (the species name with priority). Within this clade, samples collected from Australia and New Zealand formed a monophyletic group with no other discernible phylogeographical patterns within S. suecica. This result seems to be somewhat unusual in the Batrachospermales, as other species have shown greater genetic variation among geographically distant locations. As in previous studies, S. huillensis and S. delicatula were inferred as a separate species based on the rbcL phylogeny, supporting the current taxonomy. A specimen of S. aff. huillensis from South Africa, may represent a new species but further research is necessary before it can be designated as such.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据