% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded. This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.
@ARTICLE{Jeon:52809,
author = {Jeon, S. L. and Hegewald, E.},
title = {{A} revision of the species {D}esmodesmus perforatus and
{D}. tropicus ({S}cenedesmaceae, {C}hlorophyceae,
{C}hlorophyta)},
journal = {Phycologia},
volume = {45},
issn = {0031-8884},
address = {Lawrence, KS},
publisher = {Soc.},
reportid = {PreJuSER-52809},
pages = {567 - 584},
year = {2006},
note = {Record converted from VDB: 12.11.2012},
abstract = {We 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.},
keywords = {J (WoSType)},
cin = {ICG-III},
ddc = {580},
cid = {I:(DE-Juel1)VDB49},
pnm = {Terrestrische Umwelt},
pid = {G:(DE-Juel1)FUEK407},
shelfmark = {Plant Sciences / Marine $\&$ Freshwater Biology},
typ = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
UT = {WOS:000240360600009},
doi = {10.2216/05-63.1},
url = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/52809},
}