Allelopathic interactions between the HAB dinoflagellate Ostreopsis cf. ovata and macroalgae

Genetic and toxinological characterization of North Atlantic strains of the dinoflagellate Ostreopsis and allelopathic interactions with toxic and non-toxic species from the genera Prorocentrum, Coolia and Gambierdiscus

“…In the case of benthic dinoflagellates, specifically the genus Ostreopsis, only a few reports have described weak to moderate allelopathic interactions between O. cf. ovata and other protists (Monti and Cecchin 2012;Pezzolesi et al, 2011) or macroalgae (Accoroni et al, 2015).…”

Effects of temperature, salinity and composition of the dinoflagellate assemblage on the growth of Gambierdiscus carpenteri isolated from the Great Barrier Reef

“…This highlights the interaction between identity and abundance of benthic toxic dinoflagellates as a potential key driver in the distribution and abundance of Gambierdiscus populations. Accoroni et al (2015) recently documented allelopathic interactions between Ostreopsis ovata and species of macroalgae, which implies that allelopathic interactions may also influence the suitability of macroalgal substrates for benthic toxic dinoflagellates and thus could potentially affect geographic expansion of such dinoflagellates. Further exploration into interspecies interactions, such as allelopathy between benthic dinoflagellates and their macroalgal substrates may identify causal factors in substrate pReferences…”

“…Although inhibitory effects were most frequently observed, Bomber (1990) reported stimulatory effects between species of Prorocentrum. Interestingly, although benthic dinoflagellates frequently associate with macroalgal substrates, Accoroni et al (2015) documented inhibitory effects on the growth of O. ovata in bi-algal cultures and filtrates from three macroalgae, Dictyota dichotoma, Ulva rigida and Rhodymenia pseudopalmata. The few studies that have reported allelopathic experiments with benthic dinoflagellates were conducted in culture conditions, where temperature and salinity were constant.…”

Современные Тенденции Развития Биологии Водных Экосистем

“…обзор [60]), включая QS-эффект (quorum sensing), влияние на подвижность, экспрессию генов и устойчи-вость к антибиотикам; • между бактериями и микроводорослями [10,30,62,80], включая взаимодействия, приводящие к изменению плоидности водорослей [71]; • между разными микроводорослями [77], в том числе цианобактериями и зелёными [19]; • между диатомеями и микрозоопланктоном -динофлагеллятами [7,79], динофлагеллятами и цилиатами, что изменяет динамику их роста и соотношение видов [44]. Взаимодействие продуцентов и консументов изучено наиболее подробно.…”