Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T12:19:18.261Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Platymonas Impellucida Sp.Nov. From Puerto Rico

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 May 2009

J. Mclachlan  and
M. Parke
J. Mclachlan*
Affiliation:
The Plymouth Laboratory
M. Parke
Affiliation:
The Plymouth Laboratory
*
*Permanent address: National Research Council, Atlantic Regional Laboratory, Halifax, Canada.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The morphology and microanatomy of Platymonas impellucida sp.nov. have been investigated using light and electron microscopes and unusual stages of cell division studied. The anatomical features closely resemble those recently described for Platymonas convolutae (cf. Parke & Manton, 1967). As in that species the pyrenoid is penetrated from many directions by cytoplasmic canaliculi lined with the double plastid membrane but unlike that species a starch shell is not developed around the pyrenoid. In whole cells of P. impellucida therefore, it is extremely difficult, in most cases impossible, to detect the presence of the pyrenoid. This new information on the absence of a starch shell in a member of the Prasinophyceae is of importance since pyrenoid structure appears to be of major importance for taxonomic purposes. Apparent fusion stages have been shown to be a variation in vegetative division not previously encountered in the genus Platymonas.

Introduction

Recent studies on members of the Prasinophyceae have assisted greatly in characterizing this class of green-pigmented algae although the limits are not as yet entirely defined. Fine-structure investigations have, in addition, elucidated certain features of generic significance. The genus Platymonas is now well described and can be unequivocally distinguished from Prasinocladus, a closely related genus. Previously these two genera were separated on the presence or absence of non-motile dendroid colonies, but such colonies are now known in both genera (Parke & Manton, 1967).

The remaining significant diagnostic generic characteristic is the structure of the pyrenoid. In Platymonas the branched canaliculi invading the pyrenoid either from a direction facing the nucleus (Gibbs, 1962; Manton & Parke, 1965) or from many directions (Parke & Manton, 1967) contain cytoplasm rather than protrusions of the nucleus as in Prasinocladus (Parke & Manton, 1965).

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom , Volume 47 , Issue 3 , October 1967 , pp. 723 - 733
Copyright
Copyright © Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 1967

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Butcher, R. W., 1959. An introductory account of the smaller algae of British coastal waters. I. Introduction and Chlorophyceae. Fish, Invest., Lond., Series 4, 74 pp.Google Scholar
Craigie, J. S., Mclachlan, J., Ackman, R. G. & Tocher, C. S., 1967. Photo-synthesis in algae. III. Soluble carbohydrates and dimethyl-β-propiothetin in marine unicellular Chlorophyceae and Prasinophyceae. Can. J. Bot. Vol. 45 (in the Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ettl, H. & Ettl, O., 1961. Platymonas bichlora nov.spec. Arch. Protistenk., Vol. 105, pp. 280–4.Google Scholar
Gibbs, S. P., 1962. The ultrastructure of the pyrenoids of green algae. J. Ultrastruct. Res., Vol. 7, pp. 262–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gorbunova, N. N., 1961. Polovio protsess u Asteromonas gracilis Artari (the sexual process in Asteromonas gracilis Artari). Bot. Zh., Kyyiv., Vol. 46, pp. 993–8.Google Scholar
Kylin, H., 1935. Über Rhodomonas, Platymonas und Prasinocladus. K. fysiogr. Sällsk. Lund Förk., Vol. 5, pp. 1–13.Google Scholar
Manton, I. & Parke, M., 1965. Observations on the fine structure of two species of Platymonas with special reference to flagellar scales and the mode of origin of the theca. J. mar. biol. Ass. U.K., Vol. 45, pp. 743–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mclachlan, J. & Craigie, J. S., 1967. Photosynthesis in algae containing chlorophyll b. Br. phycol. Bull., Vol. 3, p. 408 (abstr.).Google Scholar
Nygaard, G., 1949. Hydrobiological studies on some Danish ponds and lakes. II. The quotient hypothesis and some new or better known phytoplankton organisms. K. danske Vidensk. Selsk. Skr., Vol. 7, pp. 1–293.Google Scholar
Parke, M. & Manton, I., 1965. Preliminary observations on the fine structure of Prasinocladus marinus. J. mar. biol. Ass. U.K., Vol. 45, pp. 525–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parke, M. & Manton, I., 1967. The specific identity of the algal symbiont in Convoluta roscoffensis. J. mar. biol. Ass. U.K., Vol. 47, pp. 445–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pascher, A., 1911. Scherffelia eine neue Chlamydomonadine aus Böhmen. Lotos, Vol. 59, pp. 341–2.Google Scholar
Stein, F. R. V., 1878. Der Organismus der Infusionsthiere. Abt. III, Häfte, I, Flagellaten. 154 pp. Leipzig.Google Scholar
West, G. S., 1916. Algological notes—XVIII-XXIII. J. Bot., Lond., Vol. 54, pp. 1–10.Google Scholar
Zimmermann, W., 1925. Helgoländer Meeresalgen. I–VI. Wiss. Meeresunters., Abt. Helgoland, Bd. 16, H. 1, pp. 1–25.Google Scholar