ArticleJournal of phycology2025
A hitchhiker's guide to modern, practical cyanobacterial taxonomy.
Article in Journal of phycology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Limnofasciculus delicatus (Coleofasciculaceae, Coleofasciculales), a Novel Mat-Forming Cyanobacterium From Shenandoah River, Virginia, USA.Environmental microbiology reports · 2026Article
- How do I publish the name of a new species of algae? A basic guide.Journal of phycology · 2026Article
- Population and herbarium genomics provide a comprehensive framework for a revision of Microcoleus (Cyanobacteria).Journal of phycology · 2026Article
- Revealing novelty from the southwestern Atlantic, Yemanjia gen. nov. and Olokunococcus gen. nov. from the coral cyanobiome of the Abrolhos Bank.Journal of phycology · 2026Article
- Taxonomic description of cyanobacteria from extreme habitats through genome-based classification.Frontiers in microbiology · 2026Article
- A hitchhiker's guide to modern, practical cyanobacterial taxonomy.Journal of phycology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
There has been an explosion of new Cyanobacterial taxa described within the last two decades. Cyanobacteria exhibit incredible ecological versatility and morphological variability, and thousands of species have already been described using "traditional" approaches (e.g., morphological features). However, DNA sequencing and other molecular tools have provided extensive evidence that the diversity of cyanobacteria is not necessarily congruent with morphology, as many morphological genera (e.g., Phormidium, Leptolyngbya, and Nostoc) are polyphyletic, and species within the genera are often morphologically indistinguishable, thus cryptic. Further confounding systematic assessments, newly erected taxa are often based on a single strain with one or two 16S rRNA gene sequences, may have incomplete formal descriptions, and lack indication of the employed species concepts. Here we have proposed a set of guidelines for cyanobacterial taxonomists. We have focused on the whole process of erecting new taxa: sampling, sequencing (including genomes), phylogenetic inference, phenotype characterization, species concepts, formal descriptions, and codes of nomenclature. Our hope is that these guidelines will help with the laborious but ever-rewarding task of identifying and describing the taxa within the world of cyanobacteria.
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.