2014
DOI: 10.1080/0269249x.2014.922125
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

An investigation into the morphology and genetics ofCyclotella comensisand closely related taxa

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
14
0
1

Year Published

2015
2015
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 17 publications
(16 citation statements)
references
References 33 publications
1
14
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…, Kistenich et al. ). Specifically in Pinnularia , it was used for phylogenetic inferences of the entire genus, including Caloneis (Bruder et al.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 98%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…, Kistenich et al. ). Specifically in Pinnularia , it was used for phylogenetic inferences of the entire genus, including Caloneis (Bruder et al.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…, Kistenich et al. ). For molecular species delimitation, (i) a “barcode gap” should be present (i.e., the intraspecific variation must be distinctly lower than the interspecific variation) and (ii) the markers should be variable enough to distinguish between closely related species.…”
mentioning
confidence: 98%
“…For culturing conditions see kistenicH et al (2014). Molecular results of our previous studies (kistenicH et al 2014(kistenicH et al , DulebA et al 2015 were used for comparison; information about details of culturing, molecular methods and phylogenetic analyses are available therein.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Recent revisions and/or descriptions of new centric diatom genera like Stephanocostis (Genkal & Kuzmina, 1985), Discostella (Houk & Klee, 2004), Spicaticribra (Johansen et al, 2008), Lindavia (Nakov et al, 2015) and Pantocsekiella (Á cs et al, 2016) have increased our knowledge about the diversity of freshwater centric diatoms (Karthick & Kociolek, 2011), but also stressed a further need for detailed phylogenetic analyses of this group of taxa (Kociolek & Khursevich, 2013). In particular, difficulties like barely discernible differences in the morphological structures under light and scanning electron microscopy (Kling & Håkansson, 1988;Abonyi et al, 2012;Kistenich et al, 2014), interspecific similarity (Sabater & Klee, 1990), and largely unknown species ecology (Sládeček, 1986) greatly account for erroneous or inaccurate species identifications (Håkansson & Kling, 1994) and related misplacements into FGs. Therefore, both taxonomical accuracy and precise functional characterization (Izaguirre et al, 2012;Ž utinić et al, 2014) are fundamental for adequate ecological assessments (Cavalcante et al, 2013) and monitoring studies (Holzenthal et al, 2010;Martín & Reyes Fernández, 2012).…”
Section: Assemblage Analysesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Furthermore, physiological properties and ecotype placement (Gligora Udovič et al, 2015) of Lake Vransko is congruent with the placement of its dominant, typifying species into codon A. Pantocsekiella costei was originally described by Druart & Straub (1988) as Cyclotella costei during an ecological and palaeoecological study of a small alkaline, eutrophic lake Paladru (France). Pantocsekiella costei (Cyclotella costei) is closely related and probably conspecific with C. comensis and C. pseudocomensis (Kistenich et al, 2014;Duleba et al, 2015). Håkansson & Carter (1990) described Cyclotella cyclopuncta from Plitvice Lakes, but later taxonomic analyses of Houk et al (2010) showed that both species share the same morphological features, and thus, C. cyclopuncta was considered a synonym of P. costei.…”
Section: Assemblage Analysesmentioning
confidence: 99%