Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30450723›Full record

ArticleBiological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society2019

Evolutionary significance of the microbial assemblages of large benthic Foraminifera.

Martina Prazeres, Willem Renema

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
6.2field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 100 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Martina PrazeresMarine Biodiversity Group, Naturalis Biodiversity Center, 2300 RA, Leiden, 9517, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-9443-4998
Willem RenemaMarine Biodiversity Group, Naturalis Biodiversity Center, 2300 RA, Leiden, 9517, the Netherlands.
Naturalis Biodiversity Center · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Large benthic Foraminifera (LBF) are major carbonate producers on coral reefs, and are hosts to a diverse symbiotic microbial community. During warm episodes in the geological past, these reef-building organisms expanded their geographical ranges as subtropical and tropical belts moved into higher latitudes. During these range-expansion periods, LBF were the most prolific carbonate producers on reefs, dominating shallow carbonate platforms over reef-building corals. Even though the fossil and modern distributions of groups of species that harbour different types of symbionts are known, the nature, mechanisms, and factors that influence their occurrence remain elusive. Furthermore, the presence of a diverse and persistent bacterial community has only recently gained attention. We examined recent advances in molecular identification of prokaryotic (i.e. bacteria) and eukaryotic (i.e. microalgae) associates, and palaeoecology, and place the partnership with bacteria and algae in the context of climate change. In critically reviewing the available fossil and modern data on symbiosis, we reveal a crucial role of microalgae in the response of LBF to ocean warming, and their capacity to colonise a variety of habitats, across both latitudes and broad depth ranges. Symbiont identity is a key factor enabling LBF to expand their geographic ranges when the sea-surface temperature increases. Our analyses showed that over the past 66 million years (My), diatom-bearing species were dominant in reef environments. The modern record shows that these species display a stable, persistent eukaryotic assemblage across their geographic distribution range, and are less dependent on symbiotic photosynthesis for survival. By contrast, dinoflagellate and chlorophytic species, which show a provincial distribution, tend to have a more flexible eukaryotic community throughout their range. This group is more dependent on their symbionts, and flexibility in their symbiosis is likely to be the driving force behind their evolutionary history, as they form a monophyletic group originating from a rhodophyte-bearing ancestor. The study of bacterial assemblages, while still in its infancy, is a promising field of study. Bacterial communities are likely to be shaped by the local environment, although a core bacterial microbiome is found in species with global distributions. Cryptic speciation is also an important factor that must be taken into consideration. As global warming intensifies, genetic divergence in hosts in addition to the range of flexibility/specificity within host-symbiont associations will be important elements in the continued evolutionary success of LBF species in a wide range of environments. Based on fossil and modern data, we conclude that the microbiome, which includes both algal and bacterial partners, is a key factor influencing the evolution of LBF. As a result, the microbiome assists LBF in colonising a wide range of habitats, and allowed them to become the most important calcifiers on shallow platforms worldwide during periods of ocean warming in the geologic past. Since LBF are crucial ecosystem engineers and prolific carbonate producers, the microbiome is a critical component that will play a central role in the responses of LBF to a changing ocean, and ultimately in shaping the future of coral reefs.

Indexed as

Biological EvolutionAnimalsBacteriaEcosystemForaminiferaMicroalgaeSymbiosisCenozoicclimate changecoral reefsmicrobiomeocean warmingsymbiosis

Identifiers

PMID30450723
PMCPMC7379505
OpenAlexW2900559148

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.