Holocarpic oomycete parasites of red algae are not Olpidiopsis, but neither are they all Pontisma or Sirolpidium (Oomycota)

Algae Pub Date : 2024-03-15 DOI:10.4490/algae.2024.39.3.8
G. Zuccarello, C. Gachon, Yacine Badis, P. Murúa, A. Garvetto, Gwang Hoon Kim
{"title":"Holocarpic oomycete parasites of red algae are not Olpidiopsis, but neither are they all Pontisma or Sirolpidium (Oomycota)","authors":"G. Zuccarello, C. Gachon, Yacine Badis, P. Murúa, A. Garvetto, Gwang Hoon Kim","doi":"10.4490/algae.2024.39.3.8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Oomycetes are ubiquitous heterotrophs of considerable economic and ecological importance. Lately their diversity in marine environments has been shown to be greatly underappreciated and many lineages of intracellular holocarpic parasites, infecting micro- and macro-algae, remain to be fully described taxonomically. Among them, pathogens of marine red algae have been studied extensively as they infect important seaweed crops. Throughout the 20th century, most intracellular, holocarpic biotrophic oomycetes that infect red algae have been assigned to the genus Olpidiopsis Cornu. However, 18S rRNA sequencing of Olpidiopsis saprolegniae, the species considered the generitype for Olpidiopsis, suggests that this genus is not closely related to the marine pathogens and that the latter requires a nomenclatural update. Here, we compile and reanalyze all recently published 18S rRNA sequence data for marine holocarpic oomycetes, with a particular focus on holocarpic pathogens of red algae. Their taxonomy has been revised twice over the past four years, with suggestions to transfer them first into the genus Pontisma and then Sirolpidium, and into a monogeneric order, Pontismatales. We show however, that previously published topologies and the proposed taxa Pontisma, Sirolpidium, and Pontismatales are unsupported. We highlight that name changes that are unfounded and premature create confusion in interested parties, especially concerning pathogens of marine red algae that infect important seaweed crops. We thus propose that the names of these holocarpic biotrophic parasites of red algae are retained temporarily, until a supported topology is produced with more genetic markers to enable the circumscription of species and higher-level taxa.","PeriodicalId":504557,"journal":{"name":"Algae","volume":" 34","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Algae","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4490/algae.2024.39.3.8","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Oomycetes are ubiquitous heterotrophs of considerable economic and ecological importance. Lately their diversity in marine environments has been shown to be greatly underappreciated and many lineages of intracellular holocarpic parasites, infecting micro- and macro-algae, remain to be fully described taxonomically. Among them, pathogens of marine red algae have been studied extensively as they infect important seaweed crops. Throughout the 20th century, most intracellular, holocarpic biotrophic oomycetes that infect red algae have been assigned to the genus Olpidiopsis Cornu. However, 18S rRNA sequencing of Olpidiopsis saprolegniae, the species considered the generitype for Olpidiopsis, suggests that this genus is not closely related to the marine pathogens and that the latter requires a nomenclatural update. Here, we compile and reanalyze all recently published 18S rRNA sequence data for marine holocarpic oomycetes, with a particular focus on holocarpic pathogens of red algae. Their taxonomy has been revised twice over the past four years, with suggestions to transfer them first into the genus Pontisma and then Sirolpidium, and into a monogeneric order, Pontismatales. We show however, that previously published topologies and the proposed taxa Pontisma, Sirolpidium, and Pontismatales are unsupported. We highlight that name changes that are unfounded and premature create confusion in interested parties, especially concerning pathogens of marine red algae that infect important seaweed crops. We thus propose that the names of these holocarpic biotrophic parasites of red algae are retained temporarily, until a supported topology is produced with more genetic markers to enable the circumscription of species and higher-level taxa.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
寄生在红藻中的全缘卵菌并非 Olpidiopsis,但也不全是 Pontisma 或 Sirolpidium(卵菌纲)。
卵菌是一种无处不在的异养生物,具有相当重要的经济和生态意义。近来,它们在海洋环境中的多样性被严重低估,许多感染微藻和大型藻类的胞内全缘寄生虫仍有待在分类学上进行全面描述。其中,海洋红藻的病原体因感染重要的海藻作物而受到广泛研究。在整个 20 世纪,大多数感染红藻的胞内、全壳生物营养型卵菌都被归入 Olpidiopsis Cornu 属。然而,Opidiopsis saprolegniae(被认为是 Olpidiopsis 属的物种)的 18S rRNA 测序表明,该属与海洋病原体的关系并不密切,后者需要进行命名更新。在此,我们汇编并重新分析了最近发表的所有海洋全缘卵菌的 18S rRNA 序列数据,尤其关注红藻的全缘病原体。在过去的四年中,对它们的分类进行了两次修订,建议先将它们归入 Pontisma 属,然后再归入 Sirolpidium 属,最后再归入单属的 Pontismatales 目。然而,我们的研究表明,之前公布的拓扑结构以及提议的分类群 Pontisma、Sirolpidium 和 Pontismatales 都是不成立的。我们强调,毫无根据且不成熟的名称更改会给相关方造成混淆,尤其是在感染重要海藻作物的海洋红藻病原体方面。因此,我们建议暂时保留这些红藻全缘生物营养寄生虫的名称,直到有了更多的遗传标记来支持拓扑结构,从而能够划分物种和更高级的类群。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
ERRATUM: Error in the New Combination Estimation of bioluminescence intensity of the dinoflagellates Noctiluca scintillans, Polykrikos kofoidii, and Alexandrium mediterraneum populations in Korean waters using cell abundance and water temperature Holocarpic oomycete parasites of red algae are not Olpidiopsis, but neither are they all Pontisma or Sirolpidium (Oomycota) Effects of biostimulants, AMPEP and Kelpak on the growth and asexual reproduction of Pyropia yezoensis (Bangiales, Rhodophyta) at different temperatures Optimal filter materials for protist quantification via droplet digital PCR
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1