ArticlePloS one2022
Using RDNA sequences to define dinoflagellate species.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Genomic copy number variability at the genus, species and population levels impacts in situ ecological analyses of dinoflagellates and harmful algal blooms.ISME communications · 2023Article
- Gambierone and Sodium Channel Specific Bioactivity Are Associated with the Extracellular Metabolite Pool of the Marine DinoflagellateMarine drugs · 2023Article
- Oleaginous Heterotrophic Dinoflagellates-Crypthecodiniaceae.Marine drugs · 2023Article
- Outbreak of Parasitic DinoflagellatePathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Dinoflagellate species are traditionally defined using morphological characters, but molecular evidence accumulated over the past several decades indicates many morphologically-based descriptions are inaccurate. This recognition led to an increasing reliance on DNA sequence data, particularly rDNA gene segments, in defining species. The validity of this approach assumes the divergence in rDNA or other selected genes parallels speciation events. Another concern is whether single gene rDNA phylogenies by themselves are adequate for delineating species or if multigene phylogenies are required instead. Currently, few studies have directly assessed the relative utility of multigene versus rDNA-based phylogenies for distinguishing species. To address this, the current study examined D1-D3 and ITS/5.8S rDNA gene regions, a multi-gene phylogeny, and morphological characters in Gambierdiscus and other related dinoflagellate genera to determine if they produce congruent phylogenies and identify the same species. Data for the analyses were obtained from previous sequencing efforts and publicly available dinoflagellate transcriptomic libraries as well from the additional nine well-characterized Gambierdiscus species transcriptomic libraries generated in this study. The D1-D3 and ITS/5.8S phylogenies successfully identified the described Gambierdiscus and Alexandrium species. Additionally, the data showed that the D1-D3 and multigene phylogenies were equally capable of identifying the same species. The multigene phylogenies, however, showed different relationships among species and are likely to prove more accurate at determining phylogenetic relationships above the species level. These data indicated that D1-D3 and ITS/5.8S rDNA region phylogenies are generally successful for identifying species of Gambierdiscus, and likely those of other dinoflagellates. To assess how broadly general this finding is likely to be, rDNA molecular phylogenies from over 473 manuscripts representing 232 genera and 863 described species of dinoflagellates were reviewed. Results showed the D1-D3 rDNA and ITS phylogenies in combination are capable of identifying 97% of dinoflagellate species including all the species belonging to the genera Alexandrium, Ostreopsis and Gambierdiscus, although it should be noted that multi-gene phylogenies are preferred for inferring relationships among these species. A protocol is presented for determining when D1-D3, confirmed by ITS/5.8S rDNA sequence data, would take precedence over morphological features when describing new dinoflagellate species. This protocol addresses situations such as: a) when a new species is both morphologically and molecularly distinct from other known species; b) when a new species and closely related species are morphologically indistinguishable, but genetically distinct; and c) how to handle potentially cryptic species and cases where morphotypes are clearly distinct but have the same rDNA sequence. The protocol also addresses other molecular, morphological, and genetic approaches required to resolve species boundaries in the small minority of species where the D1-D3/ITS region phylogenies fail.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.