4.2 Article

Reappraisal of nine species of Martensia (Delesseriaceae, Rhodophyta) reported from Korea based on morphology and molecular analyses

Journal

BOTANICA MARINA
Volume 58, Issue 3, Pages 151-166

Publisher

WALTER DE GRUYTER GMBH
DOI: 10.1515/bot-2014-0075

Keywords

Delesseriaceae; Martensia; molecular analyses; Rhodophyta; taxonomy

Funding

  1. National Institute of Biological Resources (NIBR) - Ministry of Environment (MOE) of the Republic of Korea (NIBR) [2014-0655]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Previous taxonomic studies reported that nine species of Martensia (i.e., Martensia albida, Martensia australis, Martensia bibarii, Martensia elegans, Martensia flammifolia, Martensia fragilis, Martensia jejuensis, Martensia projecta, and Martensia palmata) occur on the Korean coast. Our recent Martensia collections from various localities in Korea contain many specimens with a huge range of morphological variation and are difficult to classify into the named species. In this study, we analyzed DNA sequences of rbcL and COI genes to access their phylogenetic relationships and to verify taxonomic status based on morphological observations. The molecular analyses revealed that only two species of Martensia occur in Korea (M. albida and M. jejuensis). Martensia albida is characterized by having entire margins of blades with a single band of networks, whereas M. jejuensis is distinguished from the other species by possessing projections along the margins of the networks and blades. Both molecular analyses and morphological observations revealed that M. flammifolia is a member of the genus Nitophyllum. Some features (e.g., thallus habit, branching patterns, blade morphology, positions of reproductive structures) are not reliable for species identification. Our results indicate that the rbcL and the COI gene have sufficient resolution for delimitation at both species and generic levels in the subfamily Nitophylloideae.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available