2015
DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.224.1.5
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Scytolyngbya timoleontis, gen. et sp. nov. (Leptolyngbyaceae, Cyanobacteria): a novel false branching Cyanobacteria from China

Abstract: A novel genus within Leptolyngbyaceae related to Leptolyngbya morphotypes, Scytolyngbya, gen. nov., is described based on a polyphasic approach in the present study. From a freshwater sample with filaments of oscillatorean cyanobacteria from a well in Hubei Province, China, Scytolyngbya (type species: Scytolyngbya timoleontis, sp. nov.) was found to possess richly and repeatedly false branches and thick sheaths, which distinguishs this genus from Leptolyngbya sensu stricto. Phylogenetic analysis based on 16S r… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
15
0
1

Year Published

2017
2017
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 24 publications
(16 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
15
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The Synechococcales contains a great number of molecularly and morphologically divergent taxa. Seventy-four genera were recognized in the order in the newest taxonomic system (Komárek et al 2014), with (counting Lagosinema) 18 additional genera being published since that treatment (Dvořák et al 2015;Song et al 2015;Vaz et al 2015;Li & Li 2016;Miscoe et al 2016;Sciuto & Moro 2016;Dvořak et al 2017;Jahodářová et al 2017aJahodářová et al , 2017bSciuto et al 2017;Mai et al 2018). Furthermore, there are numerous unnamed or incorrectly named sequenced species that appear in our Science for the Developing World (OWSD) and the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (Sida) postgraduate training fellowship to Sandra C. Akagha (Grant No.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The Synechococcales contains a great number of molecularly and morphologically divergent taxa. Seventy-four genera were recognized in the order in the newest taxonomic system (Komárek et al 2014), with (counting Lagosinema) 18 additional genera being published since that treatment (Dvořák et al 2015;Song et al 2015;Vaz et al 2015;Li & Li 2016;Miscoe et al 2016;Sciuto & Moro 2016;Dvořak et al 2017;Jahodářová et al 2017aJahodářová et al , 2017bSciuto et al 2017;Mai et al 2018). Furthermore, there are numerous unnamed or incorrectly named sequenced species that appear in our Science for the Developing World (OWSD) and the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (Sida) postgraduate training fellowship to Sandra C. Akagha (Grant No.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Unfortunately, this circumscription is so broad that numerous genetically distinct strains and species were assigned to Leptolyngbya based on morphology, even though recent phylogenetic studies have demonstrated that the genus is polyphyletic and in need of taxonomic revision , Osorio-Santos et al 2014. This revisionary work has commenced, and over a dozen novel genera have been split out of Leptolyngbya thus far (Abed et al 2002, Turicchia et al 2009, Perkerson et al 2011, Taton et al 2011, Zammit et al 2012, Dadheech et al 2012, Vaz et al 2015, Song et al 2015a, 2015b, Miscoe et al, 2016, Sciuto et Moro 2016, Sciuto et al 2017, Strunecký et al 2017.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Phylogenetic evaluations of the genus emerging from 16S rRNA gene sequence phylogeny revealed that there are two groups: Leptolyngbya sensu stricto, a monophyletic and well-supported clade and Leptolyngbya sensu lato, comprising several morphologically and phylogenetically related lineages (Taton et al 2006). Subsequently, phylogenetic studies on Leptolyngbya sensu lato led to the separation and definition of several new genera: Nodosilinea, Haloleptolyngbya, Oculatella, Scytolyngbya, Pantanalinema, Alkalinema, and Stenomitos (Perkerson et al 2011, Dadheech et al 2012, Zammit et al 2012, Song et al 2015, Vaz et al 2015, Miscoe et al 2016.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%