Abstract
Pico- and nano-phytoplankton (respectively, 0.2–2 and 2–20 μm in cell size) play a key role in many marine ecosystems. In this size range, Bolidophyceae is a group of eukaryotes that contains species with cells surrounded by 5 or 8 silica plates (Parmales) as well as naked flagellated species (formerly Bolidomonadales). Bolidophyceae share a common ancestor with diatoms, one of the most successful groups of phytoplankton. This review summarizes the current information on taxonomy, phylogeny, ecology, and physiology obtained by recent studies using a range of approaches including metabarcoding. Despite their rather small contribution to the phytoplankton communities (on average less than 0.1%), Bolidophyceae are very widespread throughout marine systems from the tropics to the pole. This review concludes by discussing similarities and differences between Bolidophyceae and diatoms.
Introduction
Following the appearance of oxygenic photosynthesis in the ancestors of cyanobacteria, this complex process was distributed across all eukaryotic lineages via permanent primary, secondary, and tertiary endosymbioses (). Ocean photosynthesis is dominated by phytoplankton, a functional group of single cell organisms including prokaryotes and eukaryotes. In the late 70’s, early 80’s the work of Waterbury et al. (1979) and revealed the importance of very small cells, some below one micron in size, for primary productivity, which importance was formalized with the concept of the microbial loop by . However, it was only in the mid 90′s, when researchers began to investigate the eukaryotic compartment of picophytoplankton, and realized that while cyanobacteria are very little diversified, at the least at the genus level with a couple of taxa (Prochlorococcus, Synechococcus) dominating, eukaryotes turned out to be very diverse with picoplankton taxa distributed widely across several branches of eukaryotic tree of life (Vaulot et al., 2008).
Microphytoplankton such as diatoms, dinoflagellates or coccolithophorids that produce short lived blooms such as Emiliania huxleyi, have been extensively investigated, in contrast to other members of the picoplanktonic community. A large number of photosynthetic picoeukaryotes species (and clades) described to date belong to Stramenopiles (also called Heterokonts), which are characterized by flagellated cells, produced at least at some point of their life cycles, with two unequal flagella (heterokont), one being ornamented with hair-like structures called mastigonemes. Their plastids are thought to have been acquired through secondary endosymbiosis and typically contain chlorophylls a and c. Stramenopiles besides include diatoms, a very successful lineage which cells are encased in ornamented silica structures, Dictyochophyceae, also called silicoflagellates, and Pelagophyceae, well known because of the toxic algal blooms of the brown tide species Aureococcus anophagefferens and Aureoumbra lagunensis () or Pelagomonas calceolata, frequently isolated from sea water. Although often seen as less diverse, some of these groups play important ecological roles in marine ecosystems are fundamental for our understanding of the evolution of algae.
Bolidophyceae, a class created by is the Stramenopiles group phylogenetically nearest to the diatoms. They are often detected in molecular surveys, although in low abundance. We now know that they can occur as two distinct forms, either silicified pico-sized (2–5 μm) or non-silicified flagellated (1–1.7 μm) cells (; , ) and cultures from both forms have been isolated from the marine environment. This review summarizes the discovery of Bolidophyceae and current information of phylogeny, ecology, and physiology obtained by recent studies using a range of approaches. We discuss similarities and differences between Bolidophyceae and diatoms to explore the evolutionary link between these silicified algal groups.
Discovery and Taxonomy
Well before the creation of the class Bolidophyceae, their silicified forms (Figure 1) were first reported from scanning electron microscopy (SEM) images in oceanic samples from the North Pacific (). Initially, they were thought to be resting cysts of silicified loricate choanoflagellates (). However, the observation of red auto fluorescence indicating the presence of chlorophyll and the existence of a chloroplast in sectioned cells observed by transmission electron microscopy revealed that they were active phytoplankton cells (). could not establish their taxonomic position, although they suggested some morphological similarities with other algae groups such as Bacillariophyceae and Chrysophyceae.
FIGURE 1
The flagellated forms of Bolidophyceae (Figure 1d) were originally isolated from the Pacific Ocean and Mediterranean Sea, and described as two flagellated species, Bolidomonas pacifica and B. mediterranea, differing in the angle of the insertion of the two flagellum, swimming patterns as well as in 18S rRNA gene signatures (
For more than 24 years, Parmales escaped isolation. These silicified cells are small and difficult to distinguish them from other small phytoplankton in field samples under the light microscope. To overcome this problem,
Scanning electron microscopy established that this strain belonged to the species Triparma laevis and transmission electron microscope observations showed the typical ultrastructure of photosynthetic Stramenopiles, with two endoplasmic reticulate membranes surrounding the chloroplast, a girdle and two to three thylakoid lamellae as well as a mitochondrion with tubular cristae. Phylogenetic analyses based on 18S ribosomal rRNA sequences from the new strain demonstrated that T. laevis was closely related to Bolidophyceae (
Recent phylogenetic analyses using nuclear, plastidial, and mitochondrial genes from several novel strains, including a flagellate form very closely related to the silicified strains, led to a taxonomic revision (Table 1) in which the order Parmales was included within the class Bolidophyceae and Bolidomonas species were transferred to the genus Triparma (
Table 1
| class, order, family, genus, species, subspecies, forma (= synonym, basyonym) | Reference |
|---|---|
| Class Bolidophyceae Guillou et Chrétiennot-Dinet emend. Ichinomiya et Lopes dos Santos | |
| Order Parmales Booth et Marchant emend. Konno et Jordan emend. Ichinomiya et Lopes dos Santos | |
| Family Pentalaminaceae Marchant emend. Konno et Jordan | |
| Genus Pentalamina Marchant | |
| Pentalamina corona Marchant | |
| Family Triparmaceae Booth et Marchant emend. Konno et Jordan emend. Ichinomiya et Lopes dos Santos (= “Octolaminaceae” Booth et Marchant) | |
| Genus Tetraparma Booth emend. Konno et Jordan | |
| Tetraparma catinifera Konno et al. | |
| Tetraparma gracilis Konno et al. | |
| Tetraparma insecta Bravo-Sierra et Hernández-Becerril emend. Fujita et Jordan | |
| Tetraparma pelagica Booth et Marchant | |
| Tetraparma silverae Fujita et Jordan | |
| Tetraparma trullifera Fujita et Jordan | |
| Genus Triparma Booth et Marchant emend. Konno et Jordan emend. Ichinomiya et Lopes dos Santos (= Bolidomonas Guillou et Chrétiennot-Dinet) | |
| Triparma columacea Booth | |
| Triparma columacea f. convexa Konno et al. | |
| Triparma columacea f. fimbriata Konno et al. | |
| Triparma columacea f. longiseta Fujita et Jordan | |
| Triparma columacea subsp. alata Marchant | |
| Triparma eleuthera Ichinomiya et Lopes dos Santos ( = “Bolidomonas pacifica var. eleuthera”) | |
| Triparma laevis Booth | |
| Triparma laevis f. fusiformins Fujita et Jordan | |
| Triparma. laevis f. inornata Konno et al. | |
| Triparma laevis f. longispina Konno et al. | |
| Triparma laevis f. mexicana (Kosman) Bravo-Sierra et Hernández-Becerril (=Triparma laevis subsp. mexicana Kosman) | |
| Triparma laevis subsp. pinnatilobata Marchant | |
| Triparma laevis subsp. ramispina Marchant | |
| Triparma mediterranea (Guillou et Chrétiennot-Dinet) Ichinomiya et Lopes dos Santos (= Bolidomonas mediterranea Guillou et Chrétiennot-Dinet) | |
| Triparma pacifica (Guillou et Chrétiennot-Dinet) Ichinomiya et Lopes dos Santos (= Bolidomonas pacifica Guillou et Chrétiennot-Dinet) | |
| Triparma retinervis Booth | |
| Triparma retinervis f. tortispina Fujita et Jordan | |
| Triparma retinervis subsp. crenata Booth | |
| Triparma strigata Booth | |
| Triparma verrucosa Booth | |
Current taxonomy of Bolidophyceae.
Adapted from
Genetic Diversity
Clade Diversity
The analysis of full-length nuclear 18S rRNA gene sequences from public databases revealed the existence of two environmental clades (Env. clade I and II) in addition to the group corresponding to the genus Triparma (
In order to review the current state of the diversity of Bolidophyceae, we analyzed existing GenBank sequences as well as metabarcodes obtained from a range of recent studies (Table 2) focusing on the V4 region of the 18S rRNA gene (see Supplementary Material for Methodology). The phylogenetic analysis of the newly obtained V4 sequences (Figure 2) recovered the two major environmental clades previously described (Env. clade I and II,
Table 2
| Data set | Region | Samples # | Bioproject | Sequencer | Clustering | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OSD – LGC – 2014 | Ocean | 157 | PRJEB8682 | Illumina | 0.97 | |
| MALINA – Monier 2014 | Arctic Ocean | 24 | PRJNA202104 | 454 | 0.98 | |
| ACME – Comeau – 2011 | Arctic Ocean | 11 | SRA029114 | 454 | 0.98 | |
| Nansen Basin – Metfies – 2016 | Arctic Ocean | 17 | PRJEB11449 | 454 | 0.97 | |
| Southern Ocean – Wolf – 2014 | Southern Ocean | 6 | PRJNA176875 | 454 | 0.97 | Wolf et al., 2014 |
| Fieldes Bay – Luo – 2016 | Southern Ocean | 10 | PRJNA254097 | Illumina | 0.97 | |
| Fram Strait – Kilias – 2013 | Arctic Ocean | 5 | 454 | 0.97 | ||
List of metabarcoding studies using the V4 region of the 18S rRNA genes that have been used for the phylogenetic (Figure 2) and the biogeography analyses (Figures 6, 7).
See Supplementary Material for details.
FIGURE 2

ML phylogenetic tree based on the V4 region of the 18S rRNA gene based both on GenBank sequences available from the PR2 database (
Diversity Within the Genus Triparma
We explored the level of inter- and intra-clade diversity within the genus Triparma by analyzing the folding pattern of the ITS2 (see Supplementary Material for Methodology) from 14 strains previously described in
FIGURE 3

General structure model of the ITS2 molecule of the Triparma clades. The four major helices are labeled as Helix I – Helix IV and the interaction region of 5.8S and 28S rRNA as B9. Numbers refer to the alignment positions and those between brackets to the compared positions in each helix. The nucleotides that are 100% conserved in the helices spacers, hallmarks positions in helices II and III and first two base pairs of the helices are shown. The gray dots represent segments that display length and sequence variation (see Methodology in Supplementary Material).
FIGURE 4

Simplified secondary structural diagram of helices I, II, and III among the different Triparma clades. The conserved base pair among the different clades are numbered. Double-sided CBCs (compensatory base changes) and hemi-CBCs are highlighted by bold red nucleotides. Non-CBCs (N – N ↔ N × N) are represented by bold blue nucleotides. The pyrimidine-pyrimidine (Y–Y) mismatch in helix II and the YRRY (pyrimidine – purine – pyrimidine) motif on the 5′ side arm of the helix III are showed by bold nucleotides and by ∗ positions. Single nucleotide substitution between T. aff. verrucosa and T. strigata is showed by gray nucleotides (see Methodology in Supplementary Material).
The spacers between helices B9 and I, I and II, II and III, and IV and B9 were conserved in length and sequence among the clades (Figure 3), as well as the first two base pairs of helices I, II, and III. In contrast, the spacer between helices III and IV showed greater variation between Bolidophyceae clades but it was conserved at the intra-clade level (Figure 3). Helices B9 (a region of the 5.8S and 28S rRNA interaction) and III showed good intra and inter-clade conservation (Figure 3 and Supplementary Figure 1). The ITS2 sequence from T. aff. verrucosa is incomplete and the 3′side arm of helix B9 could not be determined (Supplementary Figure 1).
The identification of CBCs in Bolidophyceae ITS2 secondary structure was based on the phenetic approach which relies on a base pair sequence comparison of all CBCs between two sequences without direct reference to their evolutionary origin (
Putative CBCs, hCBCs, and non-CBCs type changes were identified in the conserved regions of the helices B9, I, II, and III within each clade and between clades (Figure 4 and Supplementary Figure 1). Helix IV (Figure 4) was not included in the inter-clade analysis given its known variable nature (
At the intra -clade level, no CBC, nor hCBCs were identified between the two forms of T. laevis, f. inornata and f. longispina (Triparma clade I), that differ by the plate morphology, suggesting that these two forms may belong to the same species, although the absence of CBCs is not an absolute indicator that two organisms belong to the same species (
Ecology
Oceanic Distribution
We explored the distribution of Bolidophyceae in the ocean using data obtained by SEM observation, environmental sequencing and metabarcoding. By compiling available records of observed silicified morphological species of Bolidophyceae in natural waters (Supplementary Table 1), we mapped the geographical and specific distribution pattern of each morphological species (Figure 5). Tetraparma pelagica, and the Triparma species, T. laevis, T. columnacea, T. retinervis, and T. strigata are widely distributed from polar to subtropical regions. In contrast, Pentalamina corona, Tetraparma gracilis, Tetraparma catinifera, and Triparma verrucosa are restricted to polar or subpolar regions. T. gracilis was observed in both, Arctic and Antarctic regions while P. corona seems endemic to the Antarctic and, T. verrucosa and T. catinifera to the subarctic region. Tetraparma insecta and the recently described species Tetraparma silverae and Tetraparma trullifera seem to be restricted so-far to subtropical regions.
FIGURE 5

Distribution of silicified Bolidophyceae species based on literature records of SEM observations (see Supplementary Table 1).
Using both available environmental GenBank sequences and 18S rRNA V9 metabarcodes acquired during the Tara Oceans expedition,
In order to obtain a more complete image of the Bolidophyceae distribution, we used the large data set of 18S rRNA V4 metabarcodes described above. This data set includes a range of studies (Table 2) including OSD (Ocean Sampling Day) that sampled an extensive set of coastal stations (
Among these metabarcodes, the Triparma clade was slightly dominating in terms of total reads followed by the three environmental clades III, I, and II, respectively, in this order (Figure 6A). Within Triparma, T. pacifica was most abundant followed by T. mediterranea. One environmental subclade (IIIA) was also particularly abundant. The relative contribution of Bolidophyceae to total metabarcodes at each station varied widely with an average of 0.23% (Figure 6B). It was highest, up to 12%, in both Arctic and Antarctic regions as well as around the European coast. In contrast Bolidophyceae were absent at several stations along the East coast of North America and in the Eastern Mediterranean Sea (Figure 6C).
FIGURE 6

(A) Distribution of read abundance among the different environmental Bolidophyceae clades and Triparma species in the metabarcoding studies based on the 18S rRNA V4 region listed in Table 2. (B) Overall statistics of the proportion of Bolidophyceae reads related to the total number of reads from studies listed in Table 2. Only surface samples were considered. (C) Oceanic distribution of Bolidophyceae. Circle size is proportional to the number of Bolidophyceae reads related to the total number of reads at a given station.
The distribution of individual Triparma species and environmental clades confirmed some of the trends observed in the Tara Oceans data (
FIGURE 7

Percentage relative to the total number of Bolidophyceae reads of the different environmental Bolidophyceae clades and Triparma species in the metabarcoding studies based on the 18S rRNA V4 region listed in Table 2. Only surface samples were considered.
Seasonal Cycle
FIGURE 8

Seasonal variation in vertical distributions of temperature and abundance of the Parmales community along the A-line in March, May, July, and October 2009. Station numbers shaded in yellow indicate the Oyashio region. Redrawn from
FIGURE 9

A proposed life history of T. laevis (see text for details).
Role in Food Webs
It is not clear how Bolidophyceae contribute to the microbial food web. Materials resembling silicified Bolidophyceae have been reported in fecal pellets of copepods (
Cell Physiology
Temperature
FIGURE 10

Growth rates of the silicified (blue symbols) and naked flagellated (red symbols) Triparma strains. Data redrawn from
Silica
The growth of diatoms is limited by dissolved silicate (
In contrast, Bolidophyceae despite possessing silica plates can grow in the absence of silica (Yamada et al., 2014). T. laevis f. inornata cells growing under sufficient silicate (100 μM) are surrounded by eight plates, rounded shield and ventral plates, as well as non-rounded dorsal and girdle plates. However, plate formation becomes incomplete and the fraction of cells lacking dorsal and girdle plates increases at low silicate concentration (10 μM). Cells finally loose almost all plates at silicate concentrations lower than 1 μM (Yamada et al., 2014). Other silicified Bolidophyceae strains, T. laevis f. longispina and T. strigata, can also grow under silicate depletion without formation of a silica cell wall (unpublished data). Cell wall is restored within a day in about 40% of the naked cells after replenishment of silicate (Yamada et al., 2014). Direct observation of regeneration of the silica cell wall in naked cells after re-supply of silicate using transmission and SEM revealed that shield plates appear first, followed by ventral, dorsal, and girdle plates, in this order. The dorsal and girdle plates are inserted into the space between the previously secreted shield and ventral plates to complete cell wall (Yamada et al., 2016). Similar uncoupling between the formation of silica structures and cell growth has also been observed in other silicified Stramenopiles such as Dictyochales (
Rounded plates of silicified Bolidophyceae have a structure similar to the valves and scales of auxospores from centric diatoms (
Mitotic Nuclear Division
In eukaryotes, cell division, mitotic process, and related apparatus are often well conserved within high phylogenetic levels (e.g., at the class or phylum levels,
Table 3
| Bolidophyceae∗1 | Diatoms | Pelagophyceae | Phaeophyceae | Xanthophyceae | Chrysophyceae/Synurophyceae | Raphidophyceae | Eustigmatophyceae | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Interphase microtubules focus | Centrioles | Microtubule center | No report | Centrioles | Centrioles | Centrioles | Centrioles | No report |
| Spindle pole | Centrioles | Polar plate | Centrioles | Centrioles | Centrioles | Rhizoplast | Golgi body | barrel/ boomerang- shaped nuclear pole body |
| Extranuclear spindle | + | + | + | - | - | - | - | - |
| Bundled spindle | + | + | + | - | - | - | - | - |
| References | Yamada et al., 2017 | Vesk and Jeffrey, 1987 | ||||||
Mitotic characters of Stramenopiles.
∗1Reported in only silicified strain Triparma laevis NIES-2565.
During the mitosis of T. laevis f. inornata, the interphase cell has more than four very short centrioles (ca. 80 nm in contrast to 150–500 nm of typical mature centrioles in other Stramenopiles, (Figure 11A). In prophase, the spindle bundle forms at in the extranuclear region (Figure 11B), the centrioles move to the spindle poles (Figure 11C) and then it moves to the cytoplasmic tunnel of the nucleus (Figure 11D). All along metaphase, the kinetochore microtubules elongate from the spindle poles to the condensed chromatin through the region of partially disintegrated nuclear envelope (Figure 11D). Finally, the chromatin is separated to both sides of the cell.
FIGURE 11

Graphical scheme of the interphase microtubule nucleation and the spindle formation in bolidophytes (A–D), diatoms (E–H), and pelagophytes (I–L). See text for details. Figures (A–D) and (E–H) are adapted from Yamada et al. (2017) and
Spindle configuration and formation of T. laevis f. inornata are very similar to the process found among diatoms and pelagophytes (Table 3). They share two conspicuous characters: extranuclear spindle formation (Figures 11B,C,F,G) and the bundling of the interpolar microtubules (Figures 11D,H). However, the organelle serving as a Microtubule Organizing Center (MTOC) and its behavior differ. T. laevis f. inornata and pelagophytes have centrioles while diatoms have the specialized MC and PP (Figures 11E–H). The centrioles of pelagophytes (reported only in one species, Pelagococcus subviridis) appear only during the spindle initiation phase (Vesk and Jeffrey, 1987) while those of T. laevis f. inornata occur after central spindle formation in the extranuclear region. Since centriole is the most common organelle serving as MTOC in Stramenopiles (Table 3), the mitotic apparatus of T. laevis f. inornata shows more ancestral features than the diatoms.
Conclusion – the Evolutionary Relationships Between Diatoms and Bolidophyceae
Diatoms are highly diverse with 30,000 to 100,000 species (
Recent multigene phylogenetic analyses suggest that bolidophytes, diatoms, pelagophytes, and dictyochophytes form a monophyletic lineage (
Recent success in the isolation of strains of both silicified and naked flagellated Bolidophyceae species allow detailed phylogenetic studies, clarifying the taxonomic position of this group as a sister group of diatoms and revealing the close relationship between silicified and naked strains. Cell wall formation and mitotic division in the silicified species T. laevis f. inornata have intermediate features between diatom and more ancient stramenopiles (Figure 11 and Tables 3, 4). Analysis of organellar genomes of this species also suggested that it displays more ancestral characteristics than diatoms (
Table 4
| Properties | Bolidophyceae | Diatoms | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Silicified species | Flagellated species | ||
| Size (μm) | 2–5 | 1–1.7 | 2–2000 |
| Level of organization | Unicellular | Unicellular | Unicellular, often form colonies |
| Silicified cell wall | Yes | No | Yes |
| Flagellate form | Yes | Yes | Yes in male gametes of centric diatom |
| Chloroplasts | Lamellae with three thylakoids, girdle lamella | Lamellae with three thylakoids, girdle lamella | |
| Major Pigments | Chl a, Chl c, fucoxanthin, diatoxanthin, diadinoxanthin, b-carotene | Chl a, Chl c, fucoxanthin, diatoxanthin, diadinoxanthin, b-carotene | |
| Mitochondria | Tubular type | Tubular type | |
| Si requirement for growth | No | No | Yes |
| Position of SDV | Chloroplast ER and plasma membrane | NA | Plasma membrane |
| Mitotic aparatus | Interphase microtubules focus:Centrioles | NA | Interphase microtubules focus:Microtubule center |
| Spindle pole:Centrioles | Spindle pole:Polar plate | ||
| Number of species | 12 | 3 | 30,000–100,000 |
| Oceanic distribution | Ubiquitous, but minor | Ubiquitous, often dominant | |
| Main habitat | Cold eutrophic water | Warm oligotrophic water | Eutrophic water |
| (Polar and subpolar region) | (Tropical or subtropical) | (Polar, coastal, and upwelling region) | |
Comparison of selected characters between Bolidophyceae and diatoms.
NA, not available.
The phylogenetically close relationship between silicified and naked Bolidophyceae strains and recent occasional observation of flagellated cells in cultures of T. laevis f. inornata (
Statements
Author contributions
DV analyzed GenBank and metabarcode sequences and draw distribution maps. MT analyzed the OSD metabarcoding data. ALdS performed ITS secondary structure. MI and AK analyzed the distribution of silicified species. AK, KY, MI, SY, DV, and ALdS wrote the manuscript and contributed to the final editing.
Funding
Financial support for this work was provided by the following projects: Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research 22657027, 23370046, 26291085, 15K14784, and 17H03724 from the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS), the Canon Foundation, ANR PhytoPol (ANR-15-CE02-0007), ECCOS MicrAntar (C16B02), TaxMArc (Research Council of Norway, 268286/E40), and CONICYT/FONDECYT regular PiSCOSouth (1171802). MT was supported by a Ph.D. fellowship from the Université Pierre et Marie Curie and the Région Bretagne.
Acknowledgments
We are thankful to Adam Monier, Katja Metfies, Estelle Kilias, and Wei Luo for communicating to us their raw metabarcoding data, and Mary-Hélène Noël for providing us with a SEM image of T. eleuthera. We would also like to thank the Ocean Sampling Day consortium for providing sequence data and the ABIMS platform in Roscoff for access to bioinformatics resources.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Supplementary material
The Supplementary Material for this article can be found online at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmars.2018.00370/full#supplementary-material and https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.5549638.
References
1
AzamF.FenchelT.FieldJ.GrayJ.Meyer-ReilL.ThingstadF. (1983). The ecological role of water-column microbes in the sea.Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser.10257–263. 10.3354/meps010257
2
BoothB. C.LewinJ.NorrisR. E. (1980). Siliceous nanoplankton I. Newly discovered cysts from the Gulf of Alaska.Mar. Biol.58205–209. 10.1007/BF00391877
3
BoothB. C.MarchantH. J. (1987). Parmales, a new order of marine chrysophytes, with descriptions of three new genera and seven new species.J. Phycol.23245–260. 10.1111/j.1529-8817.1987.tb04132.x
4
BoothB. C.MarchantH. J. (1988). Triparmaceae, a substitute name for a family in the order Parmales (Chrysophyceae).J. Phycol.24:124. 10.1111/j.1529-8817.1988.tb04467.x
5
Bravo-SierraE.Hernández-BecerrilD. U. (2003). Parmales (Chrysophyceae) from the Gulf of Tehuantepec, Mexico, including the description of a new species, Tetraparma insecta sp Nov., and a proposal to the taxonomy of the group.J. Phycol.39577–583. 10.1046/j.1529-8817.2003.02181.x
6
BrugerolleG.MignotJ. P. (2003). The rhizoplast of chrysomonads, a basal body-nucleus connector that polarises the dividing spindle.Protoplasma22213–21. 10.1007/s00709-003-0016-4
7
BrzezinskiM.OlsonR.ChisholmS. (1990). Silicon availability and cell-cycle progression in marine diatoms.Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser.6783–96. 10.3354/meps067083
8
CaisováL.MarinB.MelkonianM. (2011). A close-up view on ITS2 evolution and speciation - a case study in the Ulvophyceae (Chlorophyta, Viridiplantae).BMC Evol. Biol.11:262. 10.1186/1471-2148-11-262
9
CaisováL.MarinB.MelkonianM. (2013). A consensus secondary structure of ITS2 in the Chlorophyta identified by phylogenetic reconstruction.Protist164482–496. 10.1016/j.protis.2013.04.005
10
Cavalier-SmithT.ChaoE. E. Y. (2006). Phylogeny and megasystematics of phagotrophic heterokonts (kingdom Chromista).J. Mol. Evol.62388–420. 10.1007/s00239-004-0353-8
11
ColemanA. W. (2007). Pan-eukaryote ITS2 homologies revealed by RNA secondary structure.Nucleic Acids Res.353322–3329. 10.1093/nar/gkm233
12
ColemanA. W. (2009). Is there a molecular key to the level of “biological species” in eukaryotes? A DNA guide.Mol. Phylogenet. Evol.50197–203. 10.1016/j.ympev.2008.10.008
13
ComeauA. M.LiW. K. W.TremblayJ. -É.CarmackE. C.LovejoyC. (2011). Arctic Ocean microbial community structure before and after the 2007 record sea ice minimum.PLoS One6:e27492. 10.1371/journal.pone.0027492
14
CushingD. H. (1989). A difference in structure between in strongly stratified waters and in those that are only weakly stratified.J. Plankton. Res.111–13. 10.1093/plankt/11.1.1
15
DarleyW. M.VolcaniB. E. (1969). Role of silicon in diatom metabolism: a silicon requirement for deoxyribonucleic acid synthesis in the diatom Cylindrotheca fusiformis Reimann and Lewin.Exp. Cell Res.58334–342. 10.1016/0014-4827(69)90514-x
16
DaugbjergN.GuillouL. (2001). Phylogenetic analyses of Bolidophyceae (Heterokontophyta) using rbcL gene sequences support their sister group relationship to diatoms.Phycologia40153–161. 10.2216/i0031-8884-40-2-153.1
17
De MartinoA.AmatoA.BowlerC. (2009). Mitosis in diatoms: rediscovering an old model for cell division.Bioessays31874–884. 10.1002/bies.200900007
18
DerelleR.López-GarcíaP.TimpanoH.MoreiraD. (2016). A phylogenomic framework to study the diversity and evolution of stramenopiles (=Heterokonts).Mol. Biol. Evol.332890–2898. 10.1093/molbev/msw168
19
DrebesG. (1977). “Sexuality,” inThe Biology of Diatoms, ed.WernerD. (Oxford: Blackwell Scientific Publications), 250–283.
20
EdgarL. A.Pickett-HeapsJ. D. (1984). Valve morphogenesis in the pennate diatom Navicula cuspidata.J. Phycol.2047–61. 10.1111/j.0022-3646.1984.00047.x
21
FalkowskiP. G.BarberR. T.SmetacekV. (1998). Biogeochemical controls and feedbacks on ocean primary production.Science281200–206. 10.1126/science.281.5374.200
22
FinkelZ. V. (2016). “Silicification in the microalgae,” inThe Physiology of Microalgae, edsBorowitzkaM. A.BeardallJ.RavenJ. A. (Basel: Springer International Publishing), 289–300. 10.1007/978-3-319-24945-2_13
23
FujitaR.JordanR. W. (2017). Tropical Parmales (Bolidophyceae) assemblages from the Sulu Sea and South China Sea, including the description of five new taxa.Phycologia56499–509. 10.2216/16-128.1
24
GersondeR.HarwoodD. M. (1990). “Lower Cretaceous diatoms from ODP Leg 113 Site 693 (Weddell Sea). Part 1: vegetative cells,” inProceedings of the Ocean Drilling Program, Scientific Results, College Station, TX, 365–402.
25
GoblerC. J.SundaW. G. (2012). Ecosystem disruptive algal blooms of the brown tide species, Aureococcus anophagefferens and Aureoumbra lagunensis.Harmful Algae1436–45. 10.1016/j.hal.2011.10.013
26
GuillouL.BacharD.AudicS.BassD.BerneyC.BittnerL.et al (2013). The protist ribosomal reference database (PR2): a catalog of unicellular eukaryote Small SubUnit rRNA sequences with curated taxonomy.Nucleic Acids Res.41D597–D604. 10.1093/nar/gks1160
27
GuillouL.Chrétiennot-DinetM.-J.MedlinL. K.ClaustreH.Loiseaux-de GoërS.VaulotD. (1999a). Bolidomonas: a new genus with two species belonging to a new algal class, the Bolidophyceae (Heterokonta).J. Phycol.35368–381. 10.1046/j.1529-8817.1999.3520368.x
28
GuillouL.Moon-van der StaayS. Y.ClaustreH.PartenskyF.VaulotD. (1999b). Diversity and abundance of Bolidophyceae (Heterokonta) in two oceanic regions.Appl. Environ. Microbiol.654528–4536.
29
HarwoodD. M.GersondeR. (1990). “Lower cretaceous diatoms from ODP Leg 113 site 693 (Weddell Sea). Part 2?: resting spores, chrysophycean cysts, an endoskeletal dinoflagellate, and notes on the origin of diatoms,” inProceedings of the Ocean Drilling Program, Scientific ResultsVol.113College Station, TX, 403–425. 10.2973/odp.proc.sr.113.201.1990
30
HasleG. R.SyvertsenE. E. (1997). “Marine diatoms,” inIdentifying Marine Phytoplankton, ed.TomasC. R. (San Diego, CA: Academic Press), 5–385.
31
HeathI. B. (1980). Variant mitoses in lower eukaryotes: indicators of the evolution of mitosis?Int. Rev. Cytol.641–80. 10.1016/S0074-7696(08)60235-1
32
HenriksenP.KnipschildtF.MoestrupØ.ThomsenH. A. (1993). Autecology, life history and toxicology of the silicoflagellate Dictyocha speculum (Silicoflagellata, Dictyochophyceae).Phycologia3229–39. 10.2216/i0031-8884-32-1-29.1
33
HeywoodP. (1978). Ultrastructure of mitosis in the chloromonadophycean alga Vacuolaria virescens.J. Cell Sci.3137–51.
34
IchinomiyaM.dos SantosA. L.GourvilP.YoshikawaS.KamiyaM.OhkiK.et al (2016). Diversity and oceanic distribution of the Parmales (Bolidophyceae), a picoplanktonic group closely related to diatoms.ISME J.102419–2434. 10.1038/ismej.2016.38
35
IchinomiyaM.KuwataA. (2015). Seasonal variation in abundance and species composition of the Parmales community in the Oyashio region, western North Pacific.Aquat. Microb. Ecol.75207–223. 10.3354/ame01756
36
IchinomiyaM.KuwataA. (2017). Establishment of first ever culture revealed an unidentified algal taxa: the Parmales (in Japanese).Jpn. J. Phycol.65153–158.
37
IchinomiyaM.NakamachiM.ShimizuY.KuwataA. (2013). Growth characteristics and vertical distribution of Triparma laevis (Parmales) during summer in the Oyashio region, western North Pacific.Aquat. Microb. Ecol.68107–116. 10.3354/ame01606
38
IchinomiyaM.YoshikawaS.KamiyaM.OhkiK.TakaichiS.KuwataA. (2011). Isolation and characterization of Parmales (Heterokonta/Heterokontophyta/Stramenopiles) from the Oyashio region, Western North Pacific.J. Phycol.47144–151. 10.1111/j.1529-8817.2010.00926.x
39
IdeiM.OsadaK.SatoS.ToyodaK.NagumoT.MannD. G. (2012). Gametogenesis and auxospore development in Actinocyclus (Bacillariophyta).PLoS One7:e41890. 10.1371/journal.pone.0041890
40
IwaiT.NishidaS. (1976). The distribution of modern coccolithophores in the North Pacific.News Osaka Micropaleontol.51–11.
41
JacquetS.PartenskyF.LennonJ. F.VaulotD. (2001). Diel patterns of growth and division in marine picoplankton in culture.J. Phycol.37357–369. 10.1046/j.1529-8817.2001.037003357.x
42
JohnsonP. W.SieburthJ. M. N. (1982). In-situ morphology and occurrence of eucaryotic phototrophs of bacterial size in the picoplankton of estuarine and oceanic waters.J. Phycol.18318–327. 10.1111/j.1529-8817.1982.tb03190.x
43
KataokaT.YamaguchiH.SatoM.WatanabeT.TaniuchiY.KuwataA.et al (2017). Seasonal and geographical distribution of near-surface small photosynthetic eukaryotes in the western North Pacific determined by pyrosequencing of 18S rDNA.FEMS Microbiol. Ecol.93:fiw229. 10.1093/femsec/fiw229
44
KiliasE.WolfC.NöthigE.-M.PeekenI.MetfiesK. (2013). Protist distribution in the Western Fram Strait in summer 2010 based on 454-pyrosequencing of 18S rDNA.J. Phycol.49996–1010. 10.1111/jpy.12109
45
KnollA. H.KotrcB. (2015). “Protistan skeletons: a geologic history of evolution and constraints,” inEvolution of Lightweight Structures, ed.HammC. (Dordrecht: Springer), 1–16. 10.1007/978-94-017-9398-8
46
KomuroC.NaritaH.ImaiK.NojiriY.JordanR. W. (2005). Microplankton assemblages at Station KNOT in the subarctic western Pacific, 1999-2000.Deep Sea Res. Part 2 Top. Stud. Oceanogr.522206–2217. 10.1016/j.dsr2.2005.08.006
47
KonnoS.JordanR. W. (2007). An amended terminology for the Parmales (Chrysophyceae).Phycologia46612–616. 10.2216/07-29.1
48
KonnoS.OhiraR.HaradaN.JordanR. W. (2007). Six new taxa of subarctic Parmales (Chrysophyceae ).J. Nannoplankt. Res.29108–128.
49
KopfA.BicakM.KottmannR.SchnetzerJ.KostadinovI.LehmannK.et al (2015). The ocean sampling day consortium.Gigascience4:27. 10.1186/s13742-015-0066-5
50
KosmanC. A.ThomsenH. A.ØstergaardJ. B. (1993). Parmales (Chrysophyceae) from Mexican, Californian, Baltic, Arctic and Antarctic waters with the description of a new subspecies and several new forms.Phycologia32116–128. 10.2216/i0031-8884-32-2-116.1
51
LeadbeaterB. S. C.BarkerD. A. N. (1995). “Biomineralization and scale production in the Chrysophyta,” inChrysophyte Algae: Ecology, Phylogeny and Development, edsSandgrenC. D.SmolJ. P.KristiansenJ. (Cambridge: Cambridge University press), 141–164. 10.1017/CBO9780511752292.008
52
LeeM.LiC. W. (1992). The origin of the silica deposition vesicle of diatoms.Bot. Bull. Acad. Sin.33317–325.
53
LuoW.LiH.GaoS.YuY.LinL.ZengY. (2015). Molecular diversity of microbial eukaryotes in sea water from Fildes Peninsula, King George Island, Antarctica.Polar Biol.39605–616. 10.1007/s00300-015-1815-8
54
MaiJ. C.ColemanA. W. (1997). The internal transcribed spacer 2 exhibits a common secondary structure in green algae and flowering plants.J. Mol. Evol.44258–271. 10.1007/PL00006143
55
MannD. G. (1999). The species concept in diatoms.Phycologia38437–495. 10.2216/i0031-8884-38-6-437.1
56
MannD. G.MarchantH. J. (1989). “The origins of the diatom and its life cycle,” inThe Chromophyte Algae: Problems and Perspectives, edsGreenJ. C.LeadbeaterB. S. C.DiverW. L. (Oxford: Clarendon Press), 307–323.
57
MannD. G.VanormelingenP. (2013). An inordinate fondness? The number, distributions, and origins of diatom species.J. Eukaryot. Microbiol.60414–420. 10.1111/jeu.12047
58
MarchantH.NashG. (1986). Electron microscopy of gut contents and faeces of Euphausia superba Dana.Mem. Natl. Inst. Polar Res. Spec. Issue40167–177.
59
MarchantH. J.McEldowneyA. (1986). Nanoplanktonic siliceous cysts from Antarctica are algae.Mar. Biol.9253–57. 10.1007/BF00392745
60
MargalefR. (1978). Life-forms of phytoplankton as survival alternatives in an unstable environment.Oceanol. Acta1493–509. 10.1007/BF00202661
61
MarkeyD. R.WilceR. T. (1975). The ultrastructure of reproduction in the brown alga Pylaiella littoralis.Protoplasma85219–241. 10.1007/BF01567948
62
MarronA. O.RatcliffeS.WheelerG. L.GoldsteinR. E.KingN.NotF.et al (2016). The evolution of silicon transport in eukaryotes.Mol. Biol. Evol.333226–3248. 10.1093/molbev/msw209
63
Martin-JézéquelV.HildebrandM.BrzezinskiM. A. (2000). Silicon metabolism in diatoms: implications for growth.J. Phycol.36821–840. 10.1046/j.1529-8817.2000.00019.x
64
MassalskiA.KostikovI.OlechM.HoffmannL. (2009). Mitosis, cytokinesis and multinuclearity in a Xanthonema (Xanthophyta) isolated from Antarctica.Eur. J. Phycol.44263–275. 10.1080/09670260802636274
65
MedlinL. K. (2011). “A review of the evolution of the diatoms from the origin of the lineage to their populations,” inThe Diatom World, edsSeckbachJ.KociolekP. (Dordrecht: Springer), 94–118. 10.1007/978-94-007-1327-7_4
66
MetfiesK.von AppenW.-J.KiliasE.NicolausA.NöthigE.-M. (2016). Biogeography and photosynthetic biomass of arctic marine pico-eukaroytes during summer of the record sea ice minimum 2012.PLoS One11: e0148512. 10.1371/journal.pone.0148512
67
MonierA.ComteJ.BabinM.ForestA.MatsuokaA.LovejoyC. (2014). Oceanographic structure drives the assembly processes of microbial eukaryotic communities.ISME J.9990–1002. 10.1038/ismej.2014.197
68
MonierA.TerradoR.ThalerM.ComeauA.MedrinalE.LovejoyC. (2013). Upper Arctic Ocean water masses harbor distinct communities of heterotrophic flagellates.Biogeosciences104273–4286. 10.5194/bg-10-4273-2013
69
MüllerT.PhilippiN.DandekarT.SchultzJ.WolfM. (2007). Distinguishing species.RNA131469–1472. 10.1261/rna.617107
70
MurakamiR.HashimotoH. (2009). Unusual nuclear division in Nannochloropsis oculata (Eustigmatophyceae, Heterokonta) which may ensure faithful transmission of secondary plastids.Protist16041–49. 10.1016/j.protis.2008.09.002
71
NelsonD. M.TréguerP.BrzezinskiM. A.LeynaertA.QuéguinerB. (1995). Production and dissolution of biogenic silica in the ocean: revised global estimates, comparison with regional data and relationship to biogenic sedimentation.Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles9359–372. 10.1029/95GB01070
72
NotF.SianoR.KooistraW. H. C. F.SimonN.VaulotD.ProbertI. (2012). Diversity and ecology of eukaryotic marine phytoplankton.Adv. Bot. Res.641–53. 10.1016/B978-0-12-391499-6.00001-3
73
NotF.SimonN.BiegalaI.VaulotD. (2002). Application of fluorescent in situ hybridization coupled with tyramide signal amplification (FISH-TSA) to assess eukaryotic picoplankton composition.Aquat. Microb. Ecol.28157–166. 10.3354/ame028157
74
OkitaT. W.VolcaniB. E. (1978). Role of silicon in diatom metabolism IX. Differential synthesis of DNA polymerases and DNA-binding proteins during silicate starvation and recovery in Cylindrotheca fusiformis.Biochem. Biophys. Acta51976–86.
75
Oudot-Le SecqM. P.GreenB. R. (2011). Complex repeat structures and novel features in the mitochondrial genomes of the diatoms Phaeodactylum tricornutum and Thalassiosira pseudonana.Gene47620–26. 10.1016/j.gene.2011.02.001
76
ParsonsT. R. (1979). Some ecological, experimental and evolutionary aspets of the upwelling ecosystem.S. Afr. J. Sci.75536–540.
77
Pickett-HeapsJ. D. (1991). Cell division in diatoms.Int. Rev. Cytol.12863–108. 10.1016/S0074-7696(08)60497-0
78
Pickett-HeapsJ. D.McDonaldK. L.TippitD. H. (1975). Cell division in the pennate diatom Diatoma vulgare.Protoplasma86205–242. 10.1007/BF01275633
79
PreisigH. R. (1994). Siliceous structures and silicification in flagellated protists.Protoplasma18129–42. 10.1007/BF01666387
80
RiisbergI.OrrR. J. S.KlugeR.Shalchian-TabriziK.BowersH. A.PatilV.et al (2009). Seven gene phylogeny of Heterokonts.Protist160191–204. 10.1016/j.protis.2008.11.004
81
RytherJ. H. (1969). Photosynthesis and fish production in the sea.Science16672–76. 10.1126/science.166.3901.72
82
SandgrenC. D.HallS. A.BarlowS. B. (1996). Siliceous scale production in chrysophyte and synurophyte algae. I. Effects of silica-limited growth on cell silica content, scale morphology, and the construction of the scale layer of Synura petersenii.J. Phycol.32675–692. 10.1111/j.0022-3646.1996.00675.x
83
SarthouG.TimmermansK. R.BlainS.TréguerP. (2005). Growth physiology and fate of diatoms in the ocean: a review.J. Sea Res.5325–42. 10.1016/j.seares.2004.01.007
84
SchmitA. C.NickP. (2008). Microtubules and the evolution of mitosis.Plant Cell Monogr.11233–266. 10.1007/7089_2007_161
85
ŠevèíkováT.HorákA.KlimešV.ZbránkováV.Demir-HiltonE.SudekS.et al (2015). Updating algal evolutionary relationships through plastid genome sequencing: did alveolate plastids emerge through endosymbiosis of an ochrophyte?Sci. Rep.5:10134. 10.1038/srep10134
86
ShimizuK.Del AmoY.BrzezinskiM. A.StuckyG. D.MorseD. E. (2001). A novel fluorescent silica tracer for biological silicification studies.Chem. Biol.81051–1060. 10.1016/S1074-5521(01)00072-2
87
ShimizuY.TakahashiK.ItoS. I.KakehiS.TatebeH.YasudaI.et al (2009). Transport of subarctic large copepods from the oyashio area to the mixed water region by the coastal oyashio intrusion.Fish. Oceanogr.18312–327. 10.1111/j.1365-2419.2009.00513.x
88
SilverM. W.MitchellJ. G.RingoD. L. (1980). Siliceous nanoplankton. II. Newly discovered cysts and abundant choanoflagellates from the Weddell Sea, Antarctica.Mar. Biol.58211–217. 10.1007/BF00391878
89
SimpsonT. L.VolcaniB. E. (1981). Silicon and Siliceous Structures in Biological Systems.Hamburg: Springer Verlag Gmbh, 10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004
90
SlankisT.GibbsS. P. (1972). The fine structure of mitosis and cell division in the chrysophycean alga Ochromonas danica.J. Phycol.8243–256. 10.1111/j.1529-8817.1972.tb04035.x
91
StawiarskiB.BuitenhuisE. T.Le QuéréC. (2016). The physiological response of picophytoplankton to temperature and its model representation.Front. Mar. Sci.3:164. 10.3389/fmars.2016.00164
92
StoermerE. F.PankratzH. S.BowenC. C. (1965). Fine structure of the diatom Amphipleura pellucida. II. Cytoplasmic fine structure and frustule formation.Am. J. Bot.521067–1078. 10.1002/j.1537-2197.1965.tb07286.x
93
SuzukiK.KuwataA.YoshieN.ShibataA.KawanobeK.SaitoH. (2011). Population dynamics of phytoplankton, heterotrophic bacteria, and viruses during the spring bloom in the western subarctic Pacific.Deep Sea Res. Part 1 Oceanogr. Res. Pap.58575–589. 10.1016/j.dsr.2011.03.003
94
TajimaN.SaitohK.SatoS.MaruyamaF.IchinomiyaM.YoshikawaS.et al (2016). Sequencing and analysis of the complete organellar genomes of Parmales, a closely related group to Bacillariophyta (diatoms).Curr. Genet.62887–896. 10.1007/s00294-016-0598-y
95
TakahashiK.KuwataA.SaitoH.IdeK. (2008). Grazing impact of the copepod community in the Oyashio region of the western subarctic Pacific Ocean.Prog. Oceanogr.78222–240. 10.1016/j.pocean.2008.06.002
96
TaniguchiA.SuzukiT.ShimadaS. (1995). Growth characteristics of Parmales (Chrysophyceae) observed in bag cultures.Mar. Biol.123631–638. 10.1007/BF00349241
97
ThomasS. L.CampbellD. A. (2013). Photophysiology of Bolidomonas pacifica.J. Plankton Res.35260–269. 10.1093/plankt/fbs105
98
TippitD. H.Pickett-HeapsJ. D. (1977). Mitosis in the pennate diatom Surirella ovalis.J. Cell Biol.73705–727. 10.1083/jcb.73.3.705
99
UrbanJ. L.McKenzieC. H.DeibelD. (1993). Nanoplankton found in fecal pellets of macrozooplankton in coastal Newfoundland waters.Bot. Mar.36267–281. 10.1515/botm.1993.36.4.267
100
VaulotD.ChisholmS. W. (1987). Flow cytometric analysis of spermatogenesis in the diatom Thalassiosira weissflogii (Bacillariophyceae).J. Phycol.23132–137. 10.1111/j.1529-8817.1987.tb04435.x
101
VaulotD.EikremW.VipreyM.MoreauH. (2008). The diversity of small eukaryotic phytoplankton ( ≤ 3 μm) in marine ecosystems.FEMS Microbiol. Rev.32795–820. 10.1111/j.1574-6976.2008.00121.x
102
VaulotD.OlsonR. J.MerkelS.ChisholmS. W. (1987). Cell-cycle response to nutrient starvation in two phytoplankton species, Thalassiosira weissflogii and Hymenomonas carterae.Mar. Biol.95625–630. 10.1007/BF00393106
103
VeskM.HoffmanL. R.Pickett-HeapsJ. D. (1984). Mitosis and cell division in Hydrurus foetidus (Chrysophyceae).J. Phycol.20461–470. 10.1111/j.0022-3646.1984.00461.x
104
VeskM.JeffreyS. W. (1987). Ultrastructure and pigments of two strains of the picoplanktonic alga Pelagococcus subviridis (Chrysophyceae).J. Phycol.23322–336. 10.1111/j.1529-8817.1987.tb04141.x
105
WaterburyJ. B.WatsonS. W.GuillardR. R. L.BrandL. E. (1979). Widespread occurrence of a unicellular, marine, planktonic, cyanobacterium.Nature277293–294. 10.1038/277293a0
106
WolfC.FrickenhausS.KiliasE. S.PeekenI.MetfiesK. (2014). Protist community composition in the Pacific sector of the Southern Ocean during austral summer 2010.Polar Biol.37375–389. 10.1007/s00300-013-1438-x
107
WuW.WangL.LiaoY.XuS.HuangB. (2017). Spatial and seasonal distributions of photosynthetic picoeukaryotes along an estuary to basin transect in the northern South China Sea.J. Plankton Res.39423–435. 10.1093/plankt/fbx017
108
YamadaK.NagasatoC.MotomuraT.IchinomiyaM.KuwataA.KamiyaM.et al (2017). Mitotic spindle formation in Triparma laevis NIES-2565(Parmales, Heterokontophyta).Protoplasma254461–471. 10.1007/s00709-016-0967-x
109
YamadaK.YoshikawaS.IchinomiyaM.KuwataA.KamiyaM.OhkiK. (2014). Effects of silicon-limitation on growth and morphology of Triparma laevis NIES-2565 (Parmales, Heterokontophyta).PLoS One9:e103289. 10.1371/journal.pone.0103289
110
YamadaK.YoshikawaS.OhkiK.IchinomiyaM.KuwataA.MotomuraT.et al (2016). Ultrastructural analysis of siliceous cell wall regeneration in the stramenopile Triparma laevis (Parmales, Bolidophyceae).Phycologia55602–609. 10.2216/16-32.1
111
YangE. C.BooG. H.KimH. J.ChoS. M.BooS. M.AndersenR. A.et al (2012). Supermatrix data highlight the phylogenetic relationships of photosynthetic Stramenopiles.Protist163217–231. 10.1016/j.protis.2011.08.001
Summary
Keywords
bolidophyceae, parmales, diatoms, genetic diversity, mitosis, geographical distribution, seasonal dynamics and silicification
Citation
Kuwata A, Yamada K, Ichinomiya M, Yoshikawa S, Tragin M, Vaulot D and Lopes dos Santos A (2018) Bolidophyceae, a Sister Picoplanktonic Group of Diatoms – A Review. Front. Mar. Sci. 5:370. doi: 10.3389/fmars.2018.00370
Received
05 December 2017
Accepted
25 September 2018
Published
29 October 2018
Volume
5 - 2018
Edited by
Brivaela Moriceau, UMR6539 Laboratoire des Sciences de L’environnement Marin (LEMAR), France
Reviewed by
Jun Sun, Tianjin University of Science and Technology, China; Yantao Liang, Qingdao Institute of Bioenergy and Bioprocess Technology (CAS), China
Updates

Check for updates
Copyright
© 2018 Kuwata, Yamada, Ichinomiya, Yoshikawa, Tragin, Vaulot and Lopes dos Santos.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Akira Kuwata, akuwata@affrc.go.jp
This article was submitted to Marine Biogeochemistry, a section of the journal Frontiers in Marine Science
Disclaimer
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.