4.1 Article

Culturing Heterotrophic Protists from the Baltic Sea: Mostly the Usual Suspects but a Few Novelties as Well

Journal

JOURNAL OF EUKARYOTIC MICROBIOLOGY
Volume 64, Issue 2, Pages 153-163

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/jeu.12347

Keywords

Bodonids; chrysophytes; culturing bias; flagellates; novel taxa; Paraphysomonas; traditional cultivation; unamended seawater incubation

Categories

Funding

  1. Russian Science Foundation [14-14-00515]
  2. IOW
  3. German Science Foundation (DFG) [JU 367/11-1]
  4. Russian Science Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study of cultured strains has a long tradition in protistological research and has greatly contributed to establishing the morphology, taxonomy, and ecology of many protist species. However, cultivation-independent techniques, based on 18S rRNA gene sequences, have demonstrated that natural protistan assemblages mainly consist of hitherto uncultured protist lineages. This mismatch impedes the linkage of environmental diversity data with the biological features of cultured strains. Thus, novel taxa need to be obtained in culture to close this knowledge gap. In this study, traditional cultivation techniques were applied to samples from coastal surface waters and from deep oxygen-depleted waters of the Baltic Sea. Based on 18S rRNA gene sequencing, 126 monoclonal cultures of heterotrophic protists were identified. The majority of the isolated strains were affiliated with already cultured and described taxa, mainly chrysophytes and bodonids. This was likely due to culturing bias but also to the eutrophic nature of the Baltic Sea. Nonetheless, similar to 12% of the isolates in our culture collection showed highly divergent 18S rRNA gene sequences compared to those of known organisms and thus may represent novel taxa, either at the species level or at the genus level. Moreover, we also obtained evidence that some of the isolated taxa are ecologically relevant, under certain conditions, in the Baltic Sea.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available