Toward an inordinate fondness for stars,beetles and Lobophora? Species diversity of the genus Lobophora (Dictyotales,Phaeophyceae) in New Caledonia

Until the recent use of molecular markers, species diversity of Lobophora, an ecologically important brown algal genus with a worldwide distribution in temperate and tropical seas, has been critically underestimated. Using a DNA‐based taxonomic approach, we re‐examined diversity of the genus from New Caledonia in the Southwest Pacific Ocean. First, species were delineated using general mixed Yule coalescent‐based and barcoding gap approaches applied to a mitochondrial cox3 data set. Results were subsequently confirmed using chloroplast psbA and rbcL data sets. Species delimitation analyses agreed well across markers and delimitation algorithms, with the barcoding gap approach being slightly more conservative. Analyses of the cox3 data set resulted in 31–39 molecular operational taxonomic units (MOTUs), four of which are previously described species (L. asiatica, L. crassa, L. nigrescens s.l., L. pachyventera). Of the remaining MOTUs for which we obtained a representative number of sequences and results are corroborated across analyses and genes, we described 10 species de novo: L. abaculusa, L. abscondita, L. densa, L. dimorpha, L. gibbera, L. hederacea, L. monticola, L. petila, L. rosacea, and L. undulata. Our study presents an excellent case of how a traditional morphology‐based taxonomy fails to provide accurate estimates of algal diversity. Furthermore, the level of Lobophora diversity unveiled from a single locality in the Pacific Ocean raises important questions with respect to the global diversity of the genus, the distributions and range sizes of the individual species, as well as the mechanisms facilitating coexistence.     

Are Prorocentrum hoffmannianum and Prorocentrum belizeanum (DINOPHYCEAE,PROROCENTRALES), the same species? An integration of morphological and molecular data

The taxonomic assignment of Prorocentrum species is based on morphological characteristics; however, morphological variability has been found for several taxa isolated from different geographical regions. In this study, we evaluated species boundaries of Prorocentrum hoffmannianum and Prorocentrum belizeanum based on morphological and molecular data. A detailed morphological analysis was done, concentrating on the periflagellar architecture. Molecular analyses were performed on partial Small Sub‐Unit (SSU) rDNA, partial Large Sub‐Unit (LSU) rDNA, complete Internal Transcribed Spacer Regions (ITS1‐5.8S‐ITS2), and partial cytochrome b (cob) sequences. We concatenated the SSU‐ITS‐LSU fragments and constructed a phylogenetic tree using Bayesian Inference (BI) and maximum likelihood (ML) methods. Morphological analyses indicated that the main characters, such as cell size and number of depressions per valve, normally used to distinguish P. hoffmannianum from P. belizeanum, overlapped. No clear differences were found in the periflagellar area architecture. Prorocentrum hoffmannianum and P. belizeanum were a highly supported monophyletic clade separated into three subclades, which broadly corresponded to the sample collection regions. Subtle morphological overlaps found in cell shape, size, and ornamentation lead us to conclude that P. hoffmanianum and P. belizeanum might be considered conspecific. The molecular data analyses did not separate P. hoffmannianum and P. belizeanum into two morphospecies, and thus, we considered them to be the P. hoffmannianum species complex because their clades are separated by their geographic origin. These geographic and genetically distinct clades could be referred to as ribotypes: (A) Belize, (B) Florida‐Cuba, (C1) India, and (C2) Australia.