000052809 001__ 52809
000052809 005__ 20180211163947.0
000052809 0247_ $$2DOI$$a10.2216/05-63.1
000052809 0247_ $$2WOS$$aWOS:000240360600009
000052809 037__ $$aPreJuSER-52809
000052809 041__ $$aeng
000052809 082__ $$a580
000052809 084__ $$2WoS$$aPlant Sciences
000052809 084__ $$2WoS$$aMarine & Freshwater Biology
000052809 1001_ $$0P:(DE-HGF)0$$aJeon, S. L.$$b0
000052809 245__ $$aA revision of the species Desmodesmus perforatus and D. tropicus (Scenedesmaceae, Chlorophyceae, Chlorophyta)
000052809 260__ $$aLawrence, KS$$bSoc.$$c2006
000052809 300__ $$a567 - 584
000052809 3367_ $$0PUB:(DE-HGF)16$$2PUB:(DE-HGF)$$aJournal Article
000052809 3367_ $$2DataCite$$aOutput Types/Journal article
000052809 3367_ $$00$$2EndNote$$aJournal Article
000052809 3367_ $$2BibTeX$$aARTICLE
000052809 3367_ $$2ORCID$$aJOURNAL_ARTICLE
000052809 3367_ $$2DRIVER$$aarticle
000052809 440_0 $$04905$$aPhycologia$$v45$$x0031-8884$$y5
000052809 500__ $$aRecord converted from VDB: 12.11.2012
000052809 520__ $$aWe have made a synopsis of the morphology, ultrastructure, taxonomy, distribution and genetics of two widely distributed but little known species because this is important for the general understanding of species delineation in green algae. The taxa Desmodesmus perforatus and D. tropicus have in common central gaps between coenobial cells, but otherwise according to the type descriptions and type illustrations, they are morphologically well defined and easy to distinguish. However, in screening the literature, the situation becomes confusing and a clear delineation seems to be impossible. To solve the question of whether the two species are in fact different, or extremes of a single morphologically variable taxon, we isolated strains from different localities worldwide as well as strains of the related taxon D. maximus. The strains were studied under both optical and electron microscopes (EM) and the ITS-2r DNA of available strains was compared. With the results of the studied strains, and a comparison with natural populations, we could delimit the taxa D. perforatus var. perforates, D. perforatus var. iberaensis and D. tropicus and revise the literature data. Under the optical microscope, populations are clearly distinguishable, although single specimens may not be. According to ITS-2 rDNA all strains of D. perforatus (except Hegewald 1998-18) and D. tropicus differ by 10 bases and D. perforatus var. perforates and D. perforatus var. iberaensis by 2 bases. Regarding the compensatory base changes (CBC), there are zero exchanges between D. perforates and D. tropicus (except strain Hegewald 1998-18) but D. tropicus and D. perforatus var. iberaensis have one CBC. A stepwise exchange of bases was shown for CBCs. Other accepted taxa are D. perforatus f. bicaudatus (Compere) E. Hegewald, D. tropicus var. longiclathratus (Tell) S.L. Jeon & E. Hegewald and D. perforatus var. mirabilis (Massjuk) E. Hegewald. A sister group to D. perforatus and D. tropicus is D. maximus. This taxon is similar in EM cell wall structure to D. perforatus and D. tropicus, but has no holes between the cells.
000052809 536__ $$0G:(DE-Juel1)FUEK407$$2G:(DE-HGF)$$aTerrestrische Umwelt$$cP24$$x0
000052809 588__ $$aDataset connected to Web of Science
000052809 650_7 $$2WoSType$$aJ
000052809 65320 $$2Author$$acompensatory base change (CBC)
000052809 65320 $$2Author$$acultures
000052809 65320 $$2Author$$aDesmodesmus maximus
000052809 65320 $$2Author$$aD. perforatus
000052809 65320 $$2Author$$aD. perforatus var. iberaensis (Tell) E. Hegewald & SL Jeon comb. nov.
000052809 65320 $$2Author$$aD. perforatus var. mirabilis (Massjuk) E. Hegewald comb. nov.
000052809 65320 $$2Author$$aD. perforatus f. bicaudatus
000052809 65320 $$2Author$$aD. tropicus
000052809 65320 $$2Author$$aD. tropicus var. longiclathratus (Tell) SL Jeon & E. Hegewald comb. nov.
000052809 65320 $$2Author$$adistribution
000052809 65320 $$2Author$$aITS-2
000052809 65320 $$2Author$$amorphology
000052809 65320 $$2Author$$aphylogeny
000052809 65320 $$2Author$$ataxonomy
000052809 7001_ $$0P:(DE-Juel1)VDB575$$aHegewald, E.$$b1$$uFZJ
000052809 773__ $$0PERI:(DE-600)2243466-5$$a10.2216/05-63.1$$gVol. 45, p. 567 - 584$$p567 - 584$$q45<567 - 584$$tPhycologia$$v45$$x0031-8884$$y2006
000052809 8567_ $$uhttp://dx.doi.org/10.2216/05-63.1
000052809 909CO $$ooai:juser.fz-juelich.de:52809$$pVDB
000052809 9131_ $$0G:(DE-Juel1)FUEK407$$bErde und Umwelt$$kP24$$lTerrestrische Umwelt$$vTerrestrische Umwelt$$x0
000052809 9141_ $$y2006
000052809 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0010$$aJCR/ISI refereed
000052809 9201_ $$0I:(DE-Juel1)VDB49$$d31.12.2006$$gICG$$kICG-III$$lPhytosphäre$$x0
000052809 970__ $$aVDB:(DE-Juel1)83067
000052809 980__ $$aVDB
000052809 980__ $$aConvertedRecord
000052809 980__ $$ajournal
000052809 980__ $$aI:(DE-Juel1)IBG-2-20101118
000052809 980__ $$aUNRESTRICTED
000052809 981__ $$aI:(DE-Juel1)IBG-2-20101118
000052809 981__ $$aI:(DE-Juel1)ICG-3-20090406