Post on 13-Feb-2017
Botanica Marina 54 (2011): 269–292 � 2011 by Walter de Gruyter • Berlin • Boston. DOI 10.1515/BOT.2011.036
2010/101
Article in press - uncorrected proof
Taxonomic notes on Caribbean Neosiphonia and Polysiphonia
(Ceramiales, Florideophyceae): five species from Florida, USA
and Mexico
Nadya R. Mamoozadeh and D. Wilson Freshwater*
Center for Marine Science, UNCW, 5600 Marvin MossLane, Wilmington, NC 28409, USA,e-mail: freshwaterw@uncw.edu
* Corresponding author
Abstract
Molecular-assisted identification using plastid-encoded rbcLand mitochondrion-encoded COI loci identified five speciesof Polysiphonia sensu lato from 16 Florida and CaribbeanMexico samples. Morphological character states were exam-ined and used to identify these species as Neosiphonia baja-cali comb. nov., N. echinata comb. nov., N. sphaerocarpa,N. tepida, and Polysiphonia anomala. Descriptions are pro-vided and the phylogenetic relationships of the five specieswere determined through maximum likelihood analyses ofrbcL and nuclear-encoded SSU sequence data. Neosiphoniabajacali and N. echinata had a combination of characterstates described for Neosiphonia: rhizoids cut-off from peri-central cells, lateral branch or trichoblast initials on everysegment in a spiral pattern, tetrasporangia in spiral series,and spermatangial stichidia developing as bifurcations oftrichoblasts, and these new combinations are proposed.Examination of N. echinata, P. fracta and North Carolinaspecimens identified as P. breviarticulata revealed no signif-icant morphological differences. Polysiphonia fracta is pro-posed as a synonym of N. echinata and the presence of P.breviarticulata within the western Atlantic is questioned.This is the first report of N. bajacali from the Caribbean andthe first report of N. echinata from Caribbean Mexico.
Keywords: Caribbean Mexico; Florida; molecular-assistedidentification; Neosiphonia; Polysiphonia.
Introduction
Polysiphonia Greville (Rhodomelaceae) is a large (ca. 200species) red algal genus whose species have a nearly globaldistribution. Species of Polysiphonia sensu lato (s.l.) have adelicate habit composed of filamentous main axes andbranches that are segmented and polysiphonous. A widerange of morphological variability occurs among the manyspecies of Polysiphonia s.l. This variation has led to muchdebate on the classification of species within the genus. Torevise the classification of Polysiphonia s.l., Kim et al.(2000) suggested the use of ‘‘independent comparative
evidence’’ to determine which morphological characters arerelevant to species identification. The recent coupling ofmorphological characters with DNA sequence data is helpingestablish an accurate classification of Polysiphonia based onnatural relationships.
Molecular-assisted identification (MAI) through use of theplastid-encoded ribulose-1,5-bisphosphate carboxylase/oxy-genase large subunit gene (rbcL) has proven useful for dis-criminating species of Polysiphonia s.l. Previous studies ofrbcL sequence data in Polysiphonia s.l. detected compara-tively low intraspecific and high interspecific sequencedivergences, with values ranging from 0 to 1.3% (with aninstance of 2.13%) and 2.6–14.12%, respectively (McIvor etal. 2001, Kim et al. 2004, Kim and Yang 2005). A relativelydistinct break between intra- and interspecific sequence var-iation makes rbcL a useful tool for aiding species identi-fications.
The 59 end of the mitochondrion-encoded cytochrome coxidase subunit I gene (COI) is another region of DNA thatis employed for MAI. Previous studies of red algae haveshown COI to be successful in distinguishing closely relatedand cryptic species as well as geographic groups within aspecies (Saunders 2005, Robba et al. 2006, Yang et al. 2008,Clarkston and Saunders 2010, Le Gall and Saunders 2010).The utility of COI barcoding within Polysiphonia s.l. has yetto be established.
Phylogenetic relationships among Polysiphonia s.l. speciescan also be determined using molecular data. The nuclear-encoded 18S rDNA (SSU) gene has limited intraspecificsequence variation and provides better resolution of taxo-nomic relationships above the species level. Analyses of SSUsequence data showed that Polysiphonia s.l. is polyphyleticwith respect to other genera (Choi et al. 2001). The rbcLlocus has a faster rate of evolution than SSU allowing greaterresolution of species-level relationships. The use of rbcL todetermine species relationships has been common in recentstudies of Polysiphonia s.l. (McIvor et al. 2001, Kim et al.2004, 2005, Stuercke and Freshwater 2008, 2010). Phylo-genetic relationships within Polysiphonia s.l. can be thor-oughly evaluated when analyses of SSU and rbcL arecompared with one another (Stuercke 2006).
Stuercke and Freshwater (2008) examined many of themorphological characters used to distinguish Polysiphonias.l. species in an integrated molecular-morphological study.Little to no intraspecific variation was found in the characterstates for pericentral cell number, rhizoid-pericentral cellconnection, lateral branch-trichoblast relationship, sperma-tangial axis development, tetrasporangial arrangement, tri-choblasts/scar cell occurrence and pattern, holdfast type, and
Brought to you by | College of William and MaryAuthenticated | 128.239.99.140
Download Date | 1/13/14 7:32 PM
270 N.R. Mamoozadeh and D.W. Freshwater: Five Neosiphonia/Polysiphonia species from the Caribbean
Article in press - uncorrected proof
cicatrigenous branch formation. The genus NeosiphoniaM.-S. Kim et I.K. Lee was segregated from Polysiphoniabased on a combination of character states including the fol-lowing from those listed above: rhizoids that are cut-off frompericentral cells, spirally arranged trichoblasts or scar cellson every segment, three-celled carpogonial branches, sper-matangial axes developing as a bifurcation of trichoblasts,and spirally arranged tetrasporangia (Kim and Lee 1999).Polysiphonia s.l. now includes species that are predomi-nantly placed in Neosiphonia or Polysiphonia, although lessspeciose genera are also included.
Study of the Caribbean marine algal flora has resulted inreports of at least 28 distinct species of Polysiphonia s.l.(e.g., Wynne 1998). Early reports of Polysiphonia s.l. byHarvey (1853) and Børgesen (1918), described several spe-cies from Florida, USA and the West Indies, respectively.More recent reports are the result of floristic assessmentsmade throughout the Caribbean (e.g., Taylor 1929, 1941,1942, 1945, 1960, 1969, Almodovar and Ballantine 1983,Ballantine and Aponte 1997, Littler and Littler 2000, Mateo-Cid et al. 2006). Caribbean studies specific to Polysiphonias.l. include reports of species from Belize (Kapraun and Nor-ris 1982), Colombia and Venezuela (Kapraun et al. 1983).
The purpose of this study was to complete integratedmolecular and morphological analyses of Polysiphonia s.l.samples collected from Caribbean Mexico and Florida.Examination of morphology and MAI using rbcL and COIsequence data were used to identify four Neosiphonia andone Polysiphonia species within samples while phylogeneticanalyses of rbcL and SSU sequence data were used to deter-mine the relationships of these species.
Materials and methods
Collections and vouchers
Samples of Neosiphonia and Polysiphonia were collectedfrom intertidal and subtidal substrata in Caribbean Mexicoand Florida by snorkeling (Appendix 1). Samples were driedin silica gel desiccant (Chase and Hills 1991) and depositedin the silica collection at the Center for Marine Science, Uni-versity of North Carolina-Wilmington. Examinations of mor-phological characters and taxonomic guides were used toidentify species (Børgesen 1918, Setchell and Gardner 1930,Hollenberg 1942, 1958, 1961, 1968a,b, Taylor 1945, 1960,Dawson 1964, Abbott and Hollenberg 1976, Hollenberg andNorris 1977, Kapraun 1977, 1980, Womersley 1979, 2003,Kapraun and Norris 1982, Kapraun et al. 1983, Adams 1991,Schneider and Searles 1991, Abbott 1999, Littler and Littler2000, Dawes and Mathieson 2008, D. Kapraun unpublishedmanuscript). Specimens were stained with aniline blue solu-tion (Millar and Wynne 1992) and permanent slide vouchersmade following Tsuda and Abbott (1985) for deposit in theUniversity of North Carolina Wilmington (WNC) herbarium.Additional specimens from the United States National Her-barium (US) were also studied. All herbarium abbreviations
follow the Index Herbariorum (http://sciweb.nybg.org/sci-ence2/IndexHerbariorum.asp).
Morphological data
Specimens and slides were observed using an Olympus SZHdissecting microscope (Olympus America Inc., CenterValley, PA, USA) and a Nikon Labophot-2 compound micro-scope (Nikon Inc., Melville, NY, USA). Images were cap-tured using a Zeiss Axio Imager.Z1 compound microscopefitted with an AxioCam MRc 5 camera system (Carl ZeissMicroimaging Inc., Thornwood, NY, USA) or an OlympusBX41 compound microscope fitted with a Roper ScientificPhotometrics� CoolSnapTM camera (Photometrics, Tucson,AZ, USA). Species descriptions were written based on obser-vations of specimens collected in this study and at the US,and with information from the literature included for char-acter states that were not directly observed.
DNA extraction and sequencing
DNA was extracted from specimens according to Hughey etal. (2001) with an additional cleaning step using the One-Step� PCR Inhibitor Removal Kit (Zymo Research, Orange,CA, USA). SSU, rbcL, and COI were amplified followingthe basic PCR recipe outlined in Freshwater et al. (2005) butusing GOTaq DNA polymerase and buffer (Promega, Mad-ison, WI, USA). The thermocycling protocol followed Fresh-water et al. (2000) but with 35 cycles of denaturing,annealing at 40, 45, or 508C, and an elongation period of90 s. Amplification products were cleaned with a StratageneStrataPrep� PCR Purification Kit (Stratagene, La Jolla, CA,USA) and used as templates in BigDye� Terminator v3.1sequencing reactions (Applied Biosystems, Foster City, CA,USA). Sequences were edited and assembled using Sequen-cher� (version 4.9, GeneCodes Corporation, Ann Arbor, MI,USA). Primers utilized in amplification and sequencing reac-tions are listed in Table 1.
rbcL and COI sequences were generated for as many sam-ples as possible. These loci are appropriate for the exami-nation of inter- and intraspecific relationships and were usedas barcodes to objectively assign samples to species (e.g.,Millar and Freshwater 2005, Clarkston and Saunders 2010).An SSU sequence was generated for one sample per species.Both rbcL and SSU sequence data were used to identifygroupings of species (clades) within Polysiphonia s.l.
Molecular data analyses
Sequences of Neosiphonia and Polysiphonia generated inthis study were combined with rbcL and SSU sequencesavailable from GenBank and with some from unpublishedstudies (J. Kelly and D.W. Freshwater unpublished) and ini-tially aligned using MacClade (v.4, Maddison and Maddison2000). SSU sequence data were also aligned using theClustalW multiple sequence alignment feature of the pro-gram Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis (MEGA)(www.megasoftware.net; Tamura et al. 2007, Kumar et al.
Brought to you by | College of William and MaryAuthenticated | 128.239.99.140
Download Date | 1/13/14 7:32 PM
N.R. Mamoozadeh and D.W. Freshwater: Five Neosiphonia/Polysiphonia species from the Caribbean 271
Article in press - uncorrected proof
Table 1 Primer sequences utilized in amplification and sequencing reactions of rbcL, SSU and COI.
Locus/primer name Primer sequence References
rbcLFrbcLstart 59-ATGTCTAACTCTGTAGAAG-39 Freshwater and Rueness (1994)F87 59-GGATCCTAAYTACGTAAYTAAAG-39 This studyF577 59-GTATATGAAGGTCTAAAAGG-39 Freshwater and Rueness (1994)F753 59-GGAAGATATGTATGAAAGAGC-39 Freshwater and Rueness (1994)R893 59-GAATAAGTTGARTTWCCIGCAC-39 Stuercke and Freshwater (2008)R1415 59-CTACRAAGTCAGCTGTATCTG-39 This studyRrbcSstart 59-GTTCCTTGTGTTAATCTCAC-39 Freshwater and Rueness (1994)
SSUA.2 59-AGACTAAGCCATGCAAGTGC-39 D.W. Freshwater (unpublished)A.3 59-ACA(AT)CGAAACTGCGAATGG-39 D.W. Freshwater (unpublished)CerD 59-GCAAGTCTGGTGCCAGCAG-39 Hommersand et al. (2005)CerE 59-CTATTATTCCATGCTAATGTATTC-39 Hommersand et al. (2005)CerG 59-AGCCTGCGGCTTAATTTGAC-39 Hommersand et al. (2005)CerH 59-TAACCAGACAGATCACTCCAC-39 Hommersand et al. (2005)CerJ 59-TCTCCTTCCTCTAAGTGATAA-39 Hommersand et al. (2005)GO1 59-CACCTGGTTGATCCTGCCAG-39 Saunders and Kraft (1994)GO4 59-CAGAGGTGAAATTCTTGGAT-39 Saunders and Kraft (1994)GO7 59-ATCCTTCTGCAGGTTCACCTAC-39 Saunders and Kraft (1994)GO8 59-GAACGGCCATGCACCACCACC Saunders and Kraft (1994)
COICerR1 59-CCAAAAAATCAAAATARRTG-39 Saunders (unpublished)GazF1 59-TCAACAAATCATAAAGATATTGG-39 Saunders (2005)GHalF 59-TCAACAAATCATAAAGATATYGG-39 Saunders (2008)Mam1R 59-CCICCWCCIGCWGGATCAA-39 This studyMam2R 59-GTATTAAAATTWCKATCWGTTA-39 This study
2008) followed by manual adjustment. Characteristics of theDNA sequence data sets were determined using MacCladeand PAUP (v.4, Swofford 2002). MEGA was used to performUnweighted Pair Group Method with Arithmetic mean(UPGMA) and Neighbor Joining (NJ) cluster analyses onCOI and rbcL sequence data for MAI. Simple mean dis-tances (p-distances) were used in all MAI analyses. ML anal-yses were performed on reduced (identical sequencesremoved) rbcL and SSU sequence data separately using theprogram Genetic Algorithm for Rapid Likelihood Inference(GARLI) (www.bio.utexas.edu/faculty/antisense/garli/Garli.html; Zwickl 2006). The ML analyses included 10 separatesearches from random starting trees that used default par-ameters, including 10,000 generations without improvingtopology and allowing model estimation during the run(models available from the second author). GARLI was alsoused to perform a total of 1003 ML bootstrap (BS) replicateson the rbcL dataset and 1000 ML BS replicates on the SSUdataset.
Results and discussion
Molecular assisted identification
The rbcL MAI alignment consisted of 113 taxa and included1081 sites in the analysis, of which 402 (37.19%) were var-iable. Five species from 16 Florida and Caribbean Mexicosamples were resolved in UPGMA and NJ cluster analyses
of rbcL sequence data (Figure 1, only UPGMA cluster dia-gram shown). Species distinctions were based on values ofinter- and intraspecific rbcL sequence divergence from pre-vious studies of Polysiphonia s.l. (McIvor et al. 2001, Kimet al. 2004, Kim and Yang 2005). The COI MAI alignmentconsisted of 74 taxa and included 605 sites in the analysis,of which 248 (40.99%) were variable. Four species from 10Florida and Caribbean Mexico samples were resolved inUPGMA and NJ cluster analyses of COI sequence data; thislocus did not amplify in some samples (Figure 2, onlyUPGMA cluster diagram shown). Species distinctions werebased on the 4.80% COI sequence divergence between sam-ples identified as Polysiphonia subtilissima 1 (NC-24) andP. subtilissima 2 (PHYKOS-3271). These samples differedby 2.22% in the rbcL data, which slightly exceeds the rangeof intraspecific rbcL sequence divergence observed in pre-vious studies of Polysiphonia s.l. (McIvor et al. 2001). Asequence divergence of 2.22% in the P. subtilissima rbcLdata corresponds to 4.80% sequence divergence in the COIdata; the latter value was therefore used as the maximumintraspecific barcoding gap value (Meier et al. 2008) in theCOI data. Values of intraspecific sequence divergence arediscussed in the remarks on each species.
Molecular systematics
Phylogenetic relationships of Florida and Caribbean Mexicospecies within Polysiphonia s.l. were determined throughML analyses of SSU and reduced rbcL sequence data
Brought to you by | College of William and MaryAuthenticated | 128.239.99.140
Download Date | 1/13/14 7:32 PM
272 N.R. Mamoozadeh and D.W. Freshwater: Five Neosiphonia/Polysiphonia species from the Caribbean
Article in press - uncorrected proof
Figure 1 Unweighted pair group method with arithmetic mean rbcL cluster analysis for 113 Polysiphonia s.l. samples.The 2.13% and 1.3% sequence divergence levels are indicated by vertical dashed lines. Florida and Caribbean Mexico species are shownin boldface type. P., Polysiphonia; N., Neosiphonia.
(Figures 3 and 4). The specific relationships among thesespecies are discussed later in the remarks on each species.The reduced rbcL alignment consisted of 52 taxa and includ-ed 1334 sites in the analysis, 528 (39.58%) of which werevariable. The rbcL topology contains several strongly sup-ported clades as well as groups of clades and species withunresolved relationships. Near the base of the topology aretwo well-supported clades (rbcL bootstrap values wrBxs100)
that contain species typically regarded as Polysiphonia sensustricto (s.s.). These species all have four pericentral cells,rhizoids in open connection with the pericentral cells, tetra-sporangia in straight series, and spermatangial stichidia thatdevelopmentally replace trichoblasts. Species in these cladesinclude the generitype, Polysiphonia stricta (Dillwyn) Gre-ville. Another well-supported clade (rB100) contains a groupof species referred to as the ‘‘multipericentral cell group’’
Brought to you by | College of William and MaryAuthenticated | 128.239.99.140
Download Date | 1/13/14 7:32 PM
N.R. Mamoozadeh and D.W. Freshwater: Five Neosiphonia/Polysiphonia species from the Caribbean 273
Article in press - uncorrected proof
Figure 2 Unweighted pair group method with arithmetic mean COI cluster analysis for 74 Polysiphonia s.l. samples.The 4.80% sequence divergence level is indicated by the vertical dashed line. Florida and Caribbean Mexico species are shown in boldfacetype. P., Polysiphonia; N., Neosiphonia.
by Choi et al. (2001). These species all have 7q pericentralcells and rhizoids cut-off from pericentral cells. The majorityof species in the rbcL ML topology are placed within a largeunsupported (rB-50) group of species and variously sup-ported clades that contain both Neosiphonia and Polysipho-nia species. Although species of Neosiphonia are scatteredthroughout the topology, a strongly supported clade (rB100)of predominantly Neosiphonia species is apparent within thislarge grouping.
The SSU alignment consisted of 44 taxa and included1602 sites in the analysis, 158 (9.86%) of which were vari-able. The major clades and species resolved in the rbcLtopology were also resolved in the SSU topology. Two cladescontaining Polysiphonia s.s. species are strongly supported(SSU bootstrap values wsBxs99 and 100) and received mod-erate support (sB78) for resolution as a monophyletic group.Another well-supported (sB91) clade contains ‘‘multiperi-central cell’’ species of multiple genera including Polysipho-
Brought to you by | College of William and MaryAuthenticated | 128.239.99.140
Download Date | 1/13/14 7:32 PM
274 N.R. Mamoozadeh and D.W. Freshwater: Five Neosiphonia/Polysiphonia species from the Caribbean
Article in press - uncorrected proof
Figure 3 Maximum likelihood rbcL tree (lnLs–14603.23387) for 50 Polysiphonia s.l. and two outgroup species. Bootstrap proportionvalues for branches are shown for each node when )50. Florida and Caribbean Mexico species are shown in boldface type.Vertical bars show: A) Polysiphonia sensu stricto clades; B) the ‘‘multipericentral cell’’ clade; C) predominately Neosiphonia clade. Car.,Caribbean; Pac., Pacific; NC, North Carolina; FL, Florida; OR, Oregon; P., Polysiphonia; N., Neosiphonia.
nia, Boergeseniella Kylin, Enelittosiphonia Segi, andVertebrata S.F. Gray. The majority of species are containedwithin a large, strongly supported (sB91) grouping of speciesand clades that include both Neosiphonia and Polysiphoniaspecies. A clade of predominantly Neosiphonia species iscontained within this large grouping and received moderatesupport (sB87).
Taxonomic observations and remarks
Genus Neosiphonia
Neosiphonia bajacali (Hollenberg) N.R. Mamoozadeh
et D.W. Freshwater, comb. nov.
(Figures 5–8)
Basionym Polysiphonia bajacali Hollenberg (1961, p. 347).
Brought to you by | College of William and MaryAuthenticated | 128.239.99.140
Download Date | 1/13/14 7:32 PM
N.R. Mamoozadeh and D.W. Freshwater: Five Neosiphonia/Polysiphonia species from the Caribbean 275
Article in press - uncorrected proof
Figure 4 Maximum likelihood SSU tree (lnLs–4146.45008) for 43 Polysiphonia s.l. and one outgroup species.Bootstrap proportion values for branches are shown for each node when )50. Florida and Caribbean Mexico species are shown in boldfacetype. Vertical bars show: A) Polysiphonia sensu stricto clades; B) the ‘‘multipericentral cell’’ clade; C) predominately Neosiphonia clade.Car., Caribbean; Pac., Pacific; CA, California; NC, North Carolina; FL, Florida; OR, Oregon; RI, Rhode Island; P., Polysiphonia; N.,Neosiphonia.
Description Plants to 3 (–6) cm tall, chiefly erect fromlimited basal prostrate axes attached to the substratum byrhizoids that are cut-off from pericentral cells (Figure 5);highly branched; branching subdichotomous to alternate(Figure 6); erect axes (150–) 200–300 mm in diameter, pros-trate axes (175–) 225–325 mm in diameter; branchlets bas-ally attenuated; mid axis segments of erect axes mostly 1=
as long as wide; light cortication present in some matureprostrate axes; main axes with four pericentral cells (Figure7); branches replacing trichoblasts in development; tricho-blasts with several dichotomies, to 750 mm in length; scarcells one per segment in 1/4 spiral series; adventitious lateralsrare; tetrasporangia greatly distending segments, developingin short spiral series (Figure 8); spermatangial stichidia
Brought to you by | College of William and MaryAuthenticated | 128.239.99.140
Download Date | 1/13/14 7:32 PM
276 N.R. Mamoozadeh and D.W. Freshwater: Five Neosiphonia/Polysiphonia species from the Caribbean
Article in press - uncorrected proof
Figures 5–8 Neosiphonia bajacali comb. nov.(5) Prostrate axis with rhizoids that are cut-off from the pericentral cells, MEX04-09, scales0.10 mm, WNC2010-s061. (6) Habit of erectaxes, MEX04-09, scales0.20 mm, WNC2010-s061. (7) Portion of erect axis flattened to show four pericentral cells per segment, centralaxial cell (arrowhead), and scar cells (arrows), MEX04-09, scales0.10 mm, WNC2010-s061. (8) Reproductive branch displaying shortspiral series of tetrasporangia (arrows), MEX04-11A, scales0.10 mm, WNC2010-s056.
developing as a furcation of trichoblasts, without sterile tipcells; cystocarps urceolate to globose.
Type locality Isla Guadalupe, Baja California.
Other sources Abbott and Hollenberg 1976, Hollenberg1961.
Specimens studied Mexico: US-42350, Isotype,extreme south tip of Isla Guadalupe, 18 Dec 1949, E.Y. Daw-son; WNC2010-s055 to s57 (MEX04-11A), Blue Bay Marina,North of Cancun, Yucatan, D.W. Freshwater, 29 Feb 2004;WNC2009-s58 to s061 (MEX04-09), Blue Bay Marina, Northof Cancun, Yucatan, D.W. Freshwater, 29 Feb 2004.
Molecular vouchers GenBank accession numbersHM573572 (rbcL); HM560659 (SSU); HM573526 (COI).
Remarks Hollenberg (1961) originally described Neosi-phonia bajacali (as Polysiphonia bajacali) as ecorticate butin a later description indicated that light basal cortication
may be present (Abbott and Hollenberg 1976). Samples inthis study infrequently displayed cortication in limited por-tions of some mature prostrate axes. The original and sub-sequent descriptions of N. bajacali do not indicate whetherrhizoids are in open connection or are cut-off from pericen-tral cells (Hollenberg 1961, Abbott and Hollenberg 1976,Stewart 1991). Samples in this study had rhizoids cut-offfrom pericentral cells (Figure 5).
Neosiphonia bajacali displays a combination of characterstates unique to Neosiphonia. These include rhizoids cut-offfrom pericentral cells, lateral branch or trichoblast initialsone per segment in a spiral pattern, tetrasporangia developingin spiral series, and spermatangial stichidia developing asfurcations of trichoblasts.
Two samples of Neosiphonia bajacali were collected fromCancun, Mexico (Figures 1, 2). Neosiphonia bajacali isresolved within a strongly supported (rB100; sB87) clade ofpredominantly Neosiphonia species in ML analyses of rbcLand SSU sequence data (Figures 3, 4). Neosiphonia bajacaliis most closely related to N. tongatensis in the SSU phylog-eny, but this relationship received only moderate support
Brought to you by | College of William and MaryAuthenticated | 128.239.99.140
Download Date | 1/13/14 7:32 PM
N.R. Mamoozadeh and D.W. Freshwater: Five Neosiphonia/Polysiphonia species from the Caribbean 277
Article in press - uncorrected proof
Figures 9–14 Neosiphonia echinata comb. nov.(9) Portion of erect axis flattened to show four pericentral cells per segment, FL09-40, scales100 mm, WNC2009-s112. (10) Apical partof main axis showing a lateral branch developing in the axil of a trichoblast (arrow), FL05-07, scales50 mm, WNC2010-s085. (11) Habitshowing adventitious laterals (arrows) arising every segment to every few segments, FL09-42, scales0.20 mm, WNC2009-s119. (12)Reproductive branch displaying long spiral series of tetrasporangia (arrows), FL09-42, scales100 mm, WNC2009-s118. (13) Branch apexwith spermatangial stichidium developing as a furcation of the trichoblast (arrow), MEX04-8, scales50 mm, WNC2010-s054. (14) Mainaxis bearing a short-stalked cystocarp, MEX04-10, scales50 mm, WNC2010-s062.
(sB78) and is not present in the rbcL phylogeny. Neosiphoniabajacali and N. tongatensis share many character states butcan be distinguished by a smaller diameter of erect and pros-trate axes (to 150 mm and 250 mm, respectively), no corti-cation, and segments 1–2= as long as wide in N. tongatensis.
Neosiphonia echinata (Harvey) N. Mamoozadeh et
D.W. Freshwater, comb. nov.
(Figures 9–14)
Basionym Polysiphonia echinata Harvey (1853, p. 38).
Synonym Polysiphonia fracta Harvey (1853, p. 38).
Misapplied name Polysiphonia breviarticulata sensuStuercke and Freshwater.
Description Plants to 3 cm tall, entirely erect from singlebasal holdfast of rhizoids cut-off from pericentral cells; main
axes sparsely branched in a subdichotomous pattern; erectmain axes (275–) 375–500 mm in diameter, basal axes(375–) 500–625 (–750) mm in diameter; mid axis segmentsof erect axes mostly 0.5–1= as long as wide; light to mod-erate cortication present in some mature prostrate axes andat the bases of older adventitious laterals; main axes withfour pericentral cells (Figure 9); branches forming in theaxils of trichoblasts (Figure 10); trichoblasts with severaldichotomies, to 500–800 mm in length; scar cells one persegment in 1/4 spiral series; adventitious laterals abundant,every segment to every few segments on main axes givingplants a coarse appearance (Figure 11), linear in shape, var-iable in length from 0.5 to 1.5 mm long; tetrasporangia littledistending segments, developing in short spiral series (Figure12); spermatangial stichidia developing as furcations of tri-choblasts, without sterile tip cells (Figure 13); cystocarpsglobose to subglobose, on short stalk (Figure 14).
Type locality Key West, Monroe County, Florida, USA.
Brought to you by | College of William and MaryAuthenticated | 128.239.99.140
Download Date | 1/13/14 7:32 PM
278 N.R. Mamoozadeh and D.W. Freshwater: Five Neosiphonia/Polysiphonia species from the Caribbean
Article in press - uncorrected proof
Other sources Harvey 1853, Taylor 1960, Dawes andMathieson 2008.
Specimens studied Neosiphonia echinata (Harvey) N.Mamoozadeh et D.W. Freshwater, Florida: US-66789 (slidenumber US-3323, 3324), Isotype, Key West, Monroe County,W.H. Harvey, Feb 1850; US-22409, West Summerland Key,Monroe County, J. Brunson, 21 Mar 1976; US-22404, Alli-gator Point, Franklin County, H.J.H., 16 Apr 1950; US-22403, Alligator Point, Franklin County, H.J.H., 21 Mar1950; WNC2009-s112 to s115 (FL09-40), Lake Surprise,Key Largo, Monroe County, N. Mamoozadeh, 09 Mar 2009;WNC2009-s117 to s119 (FL09-42), Lake Surprise, Key Lar-go, Monroe County, N. Mamoozadeh, 09 Mar 2009;WNC2009-s123 to s127 (FL09-44), Lake Surprise, Key Lar-go, Monroe County, N. Mamoozadeh, 09 Mar 2009;WNC2009-s137 to 140 (FL09-75), KML Mangrove, LongKey, Monroe County, N. Mamoozadeh, 10 Mar 2009;WNC2009-s141 to s144 (FL09-76), KML Mangrove, LongKey, Monroe County, N. Mamoozadeh, 10 Mar 2009;WNC2010-s085 (FL05-7), West Summerland Key, MonroeCounty, B. Stuercke, 28 Feb 2005; Mexico: WNC2010-s051to s054 (MEX04-8), Blue Bay Marina, Cancun, D.W. Fresh-water, 29 Feb 2004; WNC2010-s062 to s064 (MEX04-10),Blue Bay Marina, Cancun, D.W. Freshwater, 29 Feb 2004;North Carolina: WNC2005-s039 (NC-1), Snead’s Ferry, NewRiver Inlet, Onslow County, D.W. Freshwater and F. Mont-gomery, 11 Jul 2005; WNC2005-s053, s054 (NC-3), CORMPSite OB-1, Onslow Bay, D.W. Freshwater and K. Johns, 19Jul 2004; WNC2005-s001, s059 (NC-5), CORMP Site OB-27, Onslow Bay, J. Souza and J. Dorton, 02 Jan 2005;WNC2005-s067 (NC-7), CORMP Site OB-27, Onslow Bay,J. Souza and J. Dorton, 12 Jan 2005; WNC2005-s026, s104(NC-14), Bank’s Channel (Site NH-M), New Hanover Coun-ty, D.W. Freshwater, 11 May 2005; WNC2005-s031 (NC-18),Bogue Sound, Corkey’s house, Carteret County, D.W. Fresh-water, 26 Mar 2005; WNC2005-s008 (NC-20), Bogue Sound,Corkey’s House, Carteret County, D.W. Freshwater, 26 Dec2003; WNC2005-s124, s127 (NC-25), CORMP Site OB-27,J. Souza, 12 May 2005; Polysiphonia fracta Harvey, Florida:US-66791 (slides US-3320 to 3322), Isotype, Key West,Monroe County, W.H. Harvey, Feb 1850; Texas: US-2329,near Aransas Pass, Corpus Christi, E.Y. Dawson, 12 Dec1957; Bahamas: US-14293, Eleuthra, M.E. Hay, 10 May1981; US-14294, Eleuthra, M.E. Hay, 08 May 1981; Poly-siphonia hapalacantha Harvey, Florida: US-66793 (slidesUS-3325, 3326), Isotype, Key West, Monroe County, W.H.Harvey, Feb 1850; Puerto Rico: US-202615, Boqueron, CaboRojo, M. Dıaz-Piferrer, 26 Feb 1964; US-40250, Boqueron,Cabo Rojo, M. Dıaz-Piferrer, 26 Feb 1964; US-78248,Boqueron, Cabo Rojo, M. Dıaz-Piferrer, 26 Feb 1964.
Molecular vouchers GenBank accession numbersHM573561, HM573559, HM573558, HM573560,HM573557 (rbcL); HM560658 (SSU); HM573503,HM573506, HM573504, HM573505 (COI).
Remarks Harvey (1853) originally described Neosipho-nia echinata (as Polysiphonia echinata), P. fracta Harvey,
and P. hapalacantha Harvey from Key West, Florida, USA.A report and description of P. breviarticulata (C. Agardh)Zanardini were also included among these original speciesdescriptions (Harvey 1853). These species all have erect thal-li with four pericentral cells, segment length-width ratiosgenerally F1, and numerous adventitious laterals that oftengive the plants a coarse appearance. The character state com-bination of rhizoids cut-off from pericentral cells, sperma-tangia developing as a furcation of trichoblasts, tetra-sporangia in spiral series, and trichoblasts or scar cells in aspiral pattern on every segment observed in the specimensof N. echinata studied is characteristic of the genus Neosi-phonia. This same combination of character states may bepresent in P. breviarticulata and P. hapalacantha, but thesecharacters were not all observed in the specimens availablefor study and recent descriptions do not include this infor-mation (Taylor 1960, Athanasiadis 1987, Dawes and Mathie-son 2008), making it impossible to determine whether newcombinations are warranted for these species as well.
Harvey’s original description of Polysiphonia hapalacanthaincluded no remarks on its similarity to Neosiphonia echinata,P. fracta, or P. breviarticulata. P. hapalacantha has traditionallybeen distinguished from these species by its adventitious lat-erals to 2–4 mm in length. The type material of P. hapalacan-tha at US is in poor condition, and an assessment of the speciesfrom this material was not possible. Material at US identifiedas P. hapalacantha from Puerto Rico displayed a habit consis-tent with the original species description and seemed to exem-plify true P. hapalacantha. These specimens showed longeradventitious laterals that gave the specimens a more lax andless coarse habit than N. echinata and P. fracta, allowing thesespecies to be distinguished.
Harvey (1853) indicated that, while Neosiphonia echinataclosely resembled Polysiphonia fracta, a more robust habitand adventitious laterals that were shorter, more abundant,and ‘‘more equally inserted on all sides of the branches’’could distinguish N. echinata. Examination of type materialfor N. echinata and P. fracta suggests that these two namesrepresent one morphological species as no satisfactory dif-ference was observed. It seems possible that Harvey’s mate-rial of P. fracta is simply a diminutive form of N. echinata,and this possibility was also suggested by D. Kapraun (unpub-lished manuscript). Although both names were introduced inthe same publication, N. echinata appears to be more widelyutilized in species reports and is therefore conserved.
Harvey’s reports of Polysiphonia breviarticulata in KeyWest, Florida, USA and Vera Cruz, Mexico seem to be thefirst reports of this species in the western Atlantic (Harvey1853). Agardh (1824) originally described P. breviarticulatafrom the Adriatic Sea as Hutchinsia breviarticulata C.Agardh. Prior to Harvey (1853), P. breviarticulata wasknown only from the Adriatic and the Mediterranean. In hisdescription of P. breviarticulata, Harvey noted that the Flor-ida material appeared more robust and with more lateralbranches than Mediterranean material of P. breviarticulata(Harvey 1853). Kutzing (1863) described and illustrated aspecimen identified as P. breviarticulata, from Vera Cruz,Mexico that may be the same Liebman specimen that Harvey
Brought to you by | College of William and MaryAuthenticated | 128.239.99.140
Download Date | 1/13/14 7:32 PM
N.R. Mamoozadeh and D.W. Freshwater: Five Neosiphonia/Polysiphonia species from the Caribbean 279
Article in press - uncorrected proof
Figures 15–20 Neosiphonia sphaerocarpa.(15) Prostrate axis with rhizoids (arrows) that are cut-off from the pericentral cells, FL05-06, scales0.10 mm, WNC2010-s083. (16) Habitof erect axes, FL05-5B, scales0.20 mm, WNC2010-s073. (17) Portion of erect axis flattened to show four pericentral cells per segment,central axial cells (arrowheads), and scar cells in spiral pattern (arrows), FL05-5B, scales0.10 mm, WNC2010-s071. (18) Apical portionof erect axis bearing many trichoblasts (arrows), FL05-5B, scales50 mm, WNC2010-s071. (19) Reproductive branch displaying long spiralseries of tetrasporangia (arrows), FL05-5B, scales0.10 mm, WNC2010-s073. (20) Main axis bearing cystocarp (flattened during preparation)on short stalk, FL05-5B, scales0.10 mm, WNC2010-s072.
studied. It differs in branching pattern and segment size fromthe Adriatic P. breviarticulata that Kutzing also describedand illustrated (Kutzing 1863).
The next report of Polysiphonia breviarticulata in thewestern Atlantic (Kapraun and Searles 1990) identified thisas the species in intense macro-algal bloom along the coastof North Carolina. Kapraun and Searles’ (1990) descriptionof North Carolina P. breviarticulata appears identical todescriptions and material of Mexico and Florida Neosiphoniaechinata, except for the presence of basal attenuation in thelateral branches of P. breviarticulata specimens. Examinationof North Carolina specimens identified as P. breviarticulataby Stuercke and Freshwater (2008) revealed basal attenua-tion to be a variable character state that is present in somebranchlets, particularly ones that are tetrasporangial, but notothers. The basal attenuation observed in tetrasporangialbranchlets could be the result of mid axis segments that aredistended due to the presence of tetrasporangia and in turngive basal segments a slightly constricted appearance. Noother morphological difference was observed between NorthCarolina material of P. breviarticulata examined by Stuercke
and Freshwater (2008) and Florida and Mexico material ofN. echinata. North Carolina material in WNC labeled as‘‘P. echinata, 01 Dec 1982, Masonboro Bay’’ most likelyrepresents specimens published under the name P. breviar-ticulata in Kapraun and Searles (1990), who indicated thattheir initial material of P. breviarticulata was collected ‘‘inthe sound behind Masonboro Island in December 1982’’.This material, apart from basal attenuation in some bran-chlets (particularly ones that are tetrasporangial) also appearsindistinguishable from Florida and Mexico specimens. Basedon type localities and morphology, it seems likely that NorthCarolina material previously identified as P. breviarticulataby Stuercke and Freshwater (2008) and perhaps Kapraun andSearles (1990) actually represents N. echinata.
This conclusion is supported by cluster analyses of rbcLand COI sequence data. Four samples of Neosiphonia echi-nata were collected from the Florida Keys and two fromCaribbean Mexico (Figures 1, 2). Samples identified as Poly-siphonia breviarticulata by Stuercke and Freshwater (2008)differed from Florida and Mexico samples of N. echinata by0.093–0.19% and 0.50–1.09% in the rbcL and COI sequence
Brought to you by | College of William and MaryAuthenticated | 128.239.99.140
Download Date | 1/13/14 7:32 PM
280 N.R. Mamoozadeh and D.W. Freshwater: Five Neosiphonia/Polysiphonia species from the Caribbean
Article in press - uncorrected proof
Figures 21–26 Neosiphonia tepida.(21) Prostrate axis with rhizoid cut-off from the pericentral cell, FL05-02, scales20 mm, WNC2010-s077. (22) Apical portion of erect axesbearing trichoblasts (arrows), FL05-02, scales0.10 mm, WNC2010-s077. (23) Habit of erect axes, FL05-02, scales0.20 mm, WNC2010-s077. (24) Cross-sections of young and mature branch axes showing central axial cell and seven pericentral cells, FL05-02, scales20 mm,WNC2010-s079. (25) Cross-section of mature branch axis showing central axial cell and eight pericentral cells, FL05-02, scales20 mm,WNC2010-s079. (26) Apical part of main axis showing a lateral branch developing in the axil of a trichoblast, FL05-02, scales20 mm,WNC2010-s077.
data, respectively. These values are well within the range ofintraspecific sequence divergence observed in previous stud-ies for these two loci (e.g., McIvor et al. 2001, Yang et al.2008). ML analysis of rbcL sequence data resolves N. echi-nata within a large unsupported clade (rB-50) of speciesand variously supported clades of Polysiphonia s.l. (Figure3). This placement is also supported in the SSU ML phylog-eny (Figure 4). The rbcL ML phylogeny places N. echinataas sister to P. havanensis sensu Børgesen and P. binneyi Har-vey, with this relationship receiving weak support (rB72).These species are all similar in having four pericentral cells,but the latter two have rhizoids in open connection withpericentral cells.
Neosiphonia sphaerocarpa (Børgesen) M.S. Kim et
Lee (1999, p. 280) (Figures 15–20)
Basionym Polysiphonia sphaerocarpa Børgesen (1918,p. 321).
Description Plants to 2.5 cm tall, erect from basal rhi-zoids cut-off from pericentral cells (Figure 15), with somebranches becoming decumbent and attached to substratumby rhizoids; moderately to highly branched in a subdicho-tomous pattern (Figure 16); erect axes 75–150 mm in diam-eter, prostrate axes 225–325 mm in diameter; mid axissegments of erect axes mostly (1–) 1.5–2= as long as wide;cortication lacking; main axes with four pericentral cells(Figure 17); branches replacing trichoblasts in development;trichoblasts long, to 875 mm in length, with several dichot-omies, dense at apices (Figure 18); scar cells one per seg-ment in 1/4 spiral series (Figure 17); adventitious lateralsabsent; tetrasporangia greatly distending segments, in longspiral series near branch tips (Figure 19), 70–90 mm in diam-eter; spermatangial stichidia developing as furcations of tri-choblasts, 40–60=150–180 (–290) mm, with or without onesterile tip cell; cystocarps globose, short stalked (Figure 20),250–375 mm in diameter.
Type locality St. Thomas, Virgin Islands.
Brought to you by | College of William and MaryAuthenticated | 128.239.99.140
Download Date | 1/13/14 7:32 PM
N.R. Mamoozadeh and D.W. Freshwater: Five Neosiphonia/Polysiphonia species from the Caribbean 281
Article in press - uncorrected proof
Other sources Dawes and Mathieson 2008; as Polysi-phonia sphaerocarpa, Abbott 1999, Børgesen 1918, Hollen-berg 1968a, Kapraun 1977, Kapraun and Norris 1982,Kapraun et al. 1983, Schneider and Searles 1991, Taylor1960.
Specimens studied Florida: WNC2010-s71 to s73(FL05-5B), Keys Marine Laboratory, Long Key, MonroeCounty, B. Stuercke, 27 Feb 2005; WNC2009-s83, s84(FL05-6), Keys Marine Laboratory, Long Key, MonroeCounty, B. Stuercke, 27 Feb 2005.
Molecular vouchers GenBank accession numbersHM573569 (rbcL); HM573527 (COI).
Remarks Neosiphonia sphaerocarpa is part of a greatercomplex of Polysiphonia s.l. species that share severalmorphological character states, potentially leading to spe-cies misidentifications. These species include N. tongaten-sis (Harvey in Kutzing) M.S. Kim et I.K. Lee, N. bajacali,N. beaudettei (Hollenberg) M.-S. Kim et I.A. Abbott, P.acuminata N.L. Gardner, P. japonica var. savatieri (Hariot)Yoon, P. masonii Setchell et N.L. Gardner, and P. mollisJ.D. Hooker et Harvey. All are described as having fourpericentral cells, rhizoids cut-off from pericentral cells,scar cells one per segment in 1/4 spiral series, tetrasporan-gia developing in spiral series, and spermatangial stichidiadeveloping as a furcation of trichoblasts (Setchell andGardner 1930, Hollenberg 1961, Abbott and Hollenberg1976, Hollenberg and Norris 1977, Yoon 1986). Thesecharacter states, among others, are used to define membersof the genus Neosiphonia. N. sphaerocarpa is distin-guished from the aforementioned species by a combinationof the following characters: lack of a central percurrentaxis, smaller habit (typically F1.5 cm), smaller dimen-sions for erect and prostrate axes, lack of cortication, ulti-mate and fertile branches that are not basally attenuated,segments mostly longer than wide (but not typically morethan twice as long as wide), and a subdichotomous branch-ing pattern.
Two samples of Neosiphonia sphaerocarpa were collectedfrom Long Key, Monroe County, Florida, USA (Figures 1,2). Only one rbcL sequence was generated from these sam-ples, but the COI sequences for both samples were identical.SSU sequence data could not be generated for this species.Neosiphonia sphaerocarpa is placed within a strongly sup-ported clade (rB100) of predominantly Neosiphonia speciesin the rbcL ML phylogeny (Figure 3). This topology showsN. sphaerocarpa as most closely related to Polysiphonia for-fex Harvey, with this relationship receiving strong support(rB98). These species are similar in having rhizoids cut-off from pericentral cells, scar cells every segment in spiralseries, branches replacing trichoblasts, and tetrasporangiain spiral series, but P. forfex has (5–) 6 (–7) pericentralcells, segments shorter than wide, basal cortication, andspermatangial stichidia that developmentally replace tricho-blasts.
Neosiphonia tepida (Hollenberg) S.M. Guimaraes
et M.T. Fujii in Guimaraes et al. (2004, p. 171)
Figures 21–26
Basionym Polysiphonia tepida Hollenberg (1958, p. 65).
Synonyms Polysiphonia taylorii Hollenberg ex Williams(1949, p. 694); Polysiphonia flabellulata sensu Menez (1964,p. 219) wnon P. flabellulata Harvey (1860, p. 330)x.
Description Plants to 1.5 cm tall, erect branches arisingfrom a prostrate branching system attached to substratum byrhizoids cut-off from pericentral cells (Figure 21); highlybranched in an alternate to subdichotomous pattern (Figures22, 23); erect axes 50–75 mm in diameter, prostrate axes125–175 mm in diameter; mid axis segments of erect axesmostly 1.5= as long as wide; cortication lacking; main axeswith 7–8 pericentral cells (Figures 24, 25), occasionally 5–6in immature axes; branches forming in the axils of tricho-blasts (Figure 26); trichoblasts to 620 mm in length, typicallywith 2–3 dichotomies; scar cells obvious, mostly every threeto four segments and in no particular pattern; adventitiouslaterals absent; tetrasporangia scattered or in short to longstraight or slightly spiral series, 50–95 mm in diameter; sper-matangial stichidia developing as a furcation of trichoblasts,60–80=250 mm, without sterile tip cells; cystocarps sub-globose to urceolate, 160 mm in diameter, stalked, with wideostioles.
Type locality Beaufort, Carteret County, North Carolina,USA.
Other sources Dawes and Mathieson 2008; as Polysi-phonia tepida, Abbott 1999, Hollenberg 1958, Hollenberg1968b, Kapraun 1977, Kapraun 1980, Schneider and Searles1991, Taylor 1960; as Polysiphonia flabellulata, Menez 1964.
Specimens studied Florida: WNC2010-s77 to s79(FL05-02), Sebastian Inlet, Indian River County, B. Stuercke,26 Feb 2005.
Molecular voucher GenBank accession numberHM573552 (rbcL).
Remarks Hollenberg (1958) originally described Neosi-phonoia tepida (as Polysiphonia tepida) as having tetraspor-angia in slightly spiral series but in a later publicationdescribed tetrasporangia as developing in straight series(Hollenberg 1968b). This later description agrees withdescriptions of P. tepida provided by Abbott (1999), Menez(1964, as Polysiphonia flabellulata Harvey), and Schneiderand Searles (1991). Tetrasporangia were not observed in thisstudy but are listed above as developing in straight or slightlyspiral series according to Hollenberg’s descriptions.
Only one sample of Neosiphonia tepida was collectedfrom Sebastian Inlet, Indian River County, Florida, USA.COI and SSU sequence data could not be generated for thissample. Cluster analyses of the N. tepida rbcL sequenceshow it to be similar to that for Polysiphonia isogona Harvey
Brought to you by | College of William and MaryAuthenticated | 128.239.99.140
Download Date | 1/13/14 7:32 PM
282 N.R. Mamoozadeh and D.W. Freshwater: Five Neosiphonia/Polysiphonia species from the Caribbean
Article in press - uncorrected proof
Figures 27–32 Polysiphonia anomala.(27) Prostrate axis with a rhizoid cut-off from the pericentral cell, FL09-41B, scales20 mm, WNC2010-s048. (28) Habit of erect axes,FL09-78, scales0.20 mm, WNC2009-s149. (29) Portion of erect axis flattened to show four pericentral cells per segment, FL09-41B,scales25 mm, WNC2010-s048. (30) Apex of lateral branch bearing trichoblasts (arrows), FL09-41B, scales0.10 mm, WNC2010-s049.(31) Main axis showing development of adventitious laterals, FL09-77, scales0.20 mm, WNC2009-s145. (32) Reproductive branch dis-playing long spiral series of tetrasporangia (arrows), FL09-77, scales50 mm, WNC2009-s145.
(Figure 1), with sequences differing by only 1.85%. This iscomparable to the maximum intraspecific rbcL sequencedivergence of F2.13% (predominantly F1.3%) that hasbeen observed in previous studies of Polysiphonia (McIvoret al. 2001). Neosiphonia tepida is resolved in a stronglysupported clade (rB100) of multipericentral cell species inML analysis of rbcL sequence data (Figure 3). Neosiphoniatepida is sister to P. isogona in this tree, with the relationshipreceiving strong support (rB100).
Neosiphonia tepida and Polysiphonia isogona share char-acter states of rhizoids cut-off from pericentral cells, scarcells that are variable in pattern and frequency, spermatangialstichidia developing as a furcation of trichoblasts, and sub-globose cystocarps. If N. tepida has tetrasporangia in spiralseries, then this character state would also be shared. P. iso-gona can be distinguished from N. tepida by having erectaxes to 250 (–300) mm in diameter, segments 2–4 (–6)= aslong as wide in mid portions of erect axes, spermatangial
branches with 1–3(–5) sterile tip cells, and branches thatdevelop to the side of trichoblasts (Adams 1991, Womersley1979, 2003).
Neosiphonia tepida and Polysiphonia isogona may alsodiffer in pericentral cell number. Hollenberg originallydescribed N. tepida as ‘‘mostly with 7–8 pericentral cells’’(Hollenberg 1958). Whether the term ‘‘mostly’’ indicatesthat fewer or more pericentral cells were observed is uncer-tain. Harvey did not indicate the number of pericentral cellsin his original description of P. isogona (Harvey in Hooker1855), but this species is described as having 9–10 (–12)pericentral cells by Adams (1991) and (8–) 9–10 pericentralcells by Womersley (1979). Womersley also remarked thatthis species may rarely have seven pericentral cells, as sev-eral samples collected from southern Australia appearedidentical to P. isogona except for this difference in pericentralcell number and were therefore considered ‘‘unusual vari-ants’’ of the species (Womersley 1979). He further com-
Brought to you by | College of William and MaryAuthenticated | 128.239.99.140
Download Date | 1/13/14 7:32 PM
N.R. Mamoozadeh and D.W. Freshwater: Five Neosiphonia/Polysiphonia species from the Caribbean 283
Article in press - uncorrected proof
mented that comparison of P. isogona and N. tepida (as P.tepida) is required. Specimens examined in this study strictlyhad no more than eight pericentral cells. Thorough compar-ison of type material and molecular and morphological anal-yses of topotype material are needed to clarify the status ofboth species.
Genus Polysiphonia
Polysiphonia anomala Hollenberg (1968, p. 59)
(Figures 27–32)
Description Plants small, to 5 mm tall, forming densetangled mats, erect determinate branches arising from anindeterminate prostrate branching system attached to the sub-stratum by rhizoids cut-off from pericentral cells (Figure 27);erect axes simple or with limited subdichotomous to irregularbranching (Figure 28); erect axes 40–50 (–80) mm in diam-eter, prostrate axes 80–100 mm in diameter; mid axis seg-ments of erect axes mostly 2.5–3= as long as wide;cortication lacking; main axes with four pericentral cells(Figure 29); relationship of branches to trichoblasts unknown;trichoblasts with several dichotomies, long and delicate, to900 mm in length (Figure 30); scar cells obvious, variablein pattern and frequency; adventitious laterals frequent tooccasionally present, linear in shape (Figure 31); tetraspor-angia slightly distending segments, in long spiral series (Fig-ure 32), 45 mm in diameter; spermatangial stichidiadevelopment unknown; cystocarps ovoid to slightly urceo-late, short stalked, 120–140 mm in diameter.
Type locality Bikini Atoll, Marshall Islands.
Other sources Abbott 1999, Dawes and Mathieson2008, Hollenberg 1968a.
Specimens studied Marshall Islands: US-48521 (slidenumber US-1100), Holotype, Amen Island, Bikini Atoll, G.J.Hollenberg, 07 July 1948; Florida: WNC2009-s145 to s147(FL09-77), mangrove near Keys Marine Laboratory, LongKey, Monroe County, N. Mamoozadeh, 10 March 2009;WNC2009-s148 to s151 (FL09-78), mangrove near KeysMarine Laboratory, Long Key, Monroe County, N. Mamoo-zadeh, 10 March 2009; WNC2010-s048, s-49 (FL09-41B),Lake Surprise, Key Largo, Monroe County, N. Mamoozadeh,09 March 2009; US-66362 (slide numbers US-2352 to 2354),Panama City, Bay County, M.L. Jones, 17 Jan 1958; US-2355 to 2357, Along highway near NW side of lagoon, LakeSurprise, Key Largo, Monroe County, E.Y. Dawson, 28 May1949.
Molecular vouchers GenBank accession numbersHM573549, HM573550 (rbcL); HM560654 (SSU);HM573502 (COI).
Remarks Hollenberg originally described Polysiphoniaanomala with scar cells occurring one per segment in 1/4
spiral series on both prostrate and erect axes (Hollenberg1968a). Hollenberg also noted that a very similar specimencollected by E.Y. Dawson from Lake Surprise, Key Largo,
Florida (US-2355 to 2357) closely resembled P. anomala andwas therefore identified as such by Hollenberg in the originaldescription of the species. Hollenberg observed slight differ-ences between Dawson’s Florida samples and the Pacificholotype of the species, however, including scar cells that donot occur regularly one per segment on prostrate branchesand tetrasporangia that occur in much longer series in theFlorida specimen. This same scar cell pattern was observedin all other Florida samples examined in this study. Tetra-sporangia were also observed occurring in long spiral seriesin WNC2009-s145 to s147. Scar cell pattern alone is not areliable species identifier as this character is often variablewithin species (Stuercke and Freshwater 2008); it is unclearwhether length of tetrasporangial series can be independentlyused to distinguish species.
Three samples of Polysiphonia anomala were collectedfrom Lake Surprise and Long Key, Monroe County, Florida,USA in this study (Figures 1, 2). Two of the three rbcLsequences generated for these samples are identical and thethird differs by only 0.37%, which is well within the rangeof intraspecific rbcL sequence variation observed in previousstudies of Polysiphonia s.l. (e.g., McIvor et al. 2001). Onlyone COI sequence was generated from these specimens. MLanalyses of rbcL and SSU sequence data resolve P. anomalaas an independent lineage with variable levels of support(rB-50 and 56; sB91 and 69) for its topological position(Figures 3, 4).
Conclusion
Four species of Neosiphonia and one species of Polysiphoniawere identified in 16 samples from Florida and CaribbeanMexico. This is the first report of Neosiphonia bajacali inthe Caribbean and of N. echinata from Caribbean Mexico.Samples of the other three species do not represent newreports from their collection sites, but help confirm theirknown distributions. Further study of Caribbean Neosiphoniaand Polysiphonia is necessary to determine the true genericstatus of the species reported for this widespread area. It alsoseems likely that more than 29 of the nearly 200 Neosipho-nia/Polysiphonia species are present in this diverse region.
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to thank J.C. Bailey for reviewing an early versionof the manuscript, two anonymous reviewers and the editor for help-ful comments and edits, those listed in the Appendix who providedsamples, and J. Kelly and B. Stuercke for the use of unpublishedsequence data. We are grateful to D.H. Freshwater for facilitatingMexico collections, J. Norris for assisting with US specimens,and S. Schmitt for fieldwork help. This research was funded byNSF-BS&I grant �0742437 and the CMS DNA Algal Trust.
Brought to you by | College of William and MaryAuthenticated | 128.239.99.140
Download Date | 1/13/14 7:32 PM
284 N.R. Mamoozadeh and D.W. Freshwater: Five Neosiphonia/Polysiphonia species from the Caribbean
Article in press - uncorrected proof
App
endi
x1
Col
lect
ion
info
rmat
ion,
sam
ple
num
ber/
sour
ce,
and
Gen
Ban
kac
cess
ion
num
bers
for
Rho
dom
elac
eae
exam
ined
inth
isst
udy;
iden
tical
acce
ssio
nnu
mbe
rsin
dica
tesp
ecim
ens
with
iden
tical
sequ
ence
s.
Spec
ies
Sam
ple
Col
lect
ion
loca
tion,
date
,an
dco
llect
orA
cces
sion
num
ber
num
ber/
sour
cerb
cLSS
UC
OI
Boe
rges
enie
lla
frut
icul
osa
Cho
iet
al.
(200
1)4
Spid
dal
Co.
,G
alw
ay,
Irel
and
AF4
2752
6(W
ulfe
n)K
ylin
14M
ay19
98,
M.S
.K
imD
igen
easi
mpl
ex(W
ulfe
n)A
gard
hD
igsi
m4
Mab
ibi,
nort
hof
Sodw
ana
Bay
,K
waZ
ulu-
Nat
al,S
outh
Afr
ica
HM
5606
2613
Feb
2001
,D
.W.
Fres
hwat
erE
neli
ttos
ipho
nia
stim
pson
iiC
hoi
etal
.(2
001)
4A
kkes
hi,
Hok
kaid
o,Ja
pan
AF4
2752
7(H
arve
y)K
udo
etM
asud
a09
May
1999
,H
.S.
Yoo
nan
dS.
M.
Boo
Her
posi
phon
iasp
.N
C-1
3IC
W,
Pend
erC
o.,
NC
,U
SAG
U38
5834
07Ju
l20
05,
B.
Stue
rcke
,R
.H
amne
ran
dD
.W.
Fres
hwat
erL
opho
siph
onia
sp.
NZ
04-1
333
Cur
ioB
ay,
Sout
hIs
land
,N
ewZ
eala
ndG
U38
5835
28O
ct20
04,
D.W
.Fr
eshw
ater
and
M.
Hom
mer
sand
Neo
siph
onia
baja
cali
(Hol
lenb
erg)
ME
X04
-92
Blu
eB
ayM
arin
a,C
ancu
n,Y
ucat
an,
Mex
ico
HM
5735
72H
M56
0659
HM
5735
26M
amoo
zade
het
Fres
hwat
er29
Feb
2004
,D
.W.
Fres
hwat
erM
EX
04-1
1AB
lue
Bay
Mar
ina,
Can
cun,
Yuc
atan
,M
exic
oH
M57
3572
HM
5735
2629
Feb
2004
,D
.W.
Fres
hwat
erN
eosi
phon
iaec
hina
ta(H
arve
y)FL
05-7
Wes
tSu
mm
erla
ndK
ey,
Mon
roe
Co.
,FL
,U
SAH
M57
3561
Mam
ooza
deh
etFr
eshw
ater
28Fe
b20
05,
B.
Stue
rcke
FL09
-40
Lak
eSu
rpri
se,
Key
Lar
go,
Mon
roe
Co.
,FL
,U
SAH
M57
3559
09M
ar20
09,
N.
Mam
ooza
deh
FL09
-42
Lak
eSu
rpri
se,
Key
Lar
go,
Mon
roe
Co.
,FL
,U
SAH
M57
3558
09M
ar20
09,
N.
Mam
ooza
deh
FL09
-44
Lak
eSu
rpri
se,
Key
Lar
go,
Mon
roe
Co.
,FL
,U
SAH
M57
3559
HM
5735
0309
Mar
2009
,N
.M
amoo
zade
hFL
09-7
5K
ML
Man
grov
e,L
ong
Key
,M
onro
eC
o.,
FL,
USA
HM
5735
60H
M57
3506
10M
ar20
09,
N.
Mam
ooza
deh
FL09
-76
KM
LM
angr
ove,
Lon
gK
ey,
Mon
roe
Co.
,FL
,U
SAH
M57
3560
HM
5735
0610
Mar
2009
,N
.M
amoo
zade
hM
EX
04-8
2B
lue
Bay
Mar
ina,
Can
cun,
Yuc
atan
,M
exic
oH
M57
3561
HM
5606
58H
M57
3504
29Fe
b20
04,
D.W
.Fr
eshw
ater
ME
X04
-10
Blu
eB
ayM
arin
a,C
ancu
n,Y
ucat
an,
Mex
ico
HM
5735
57H
M57
3505
29Fe
b20
04,
D.W
.Fr
eshw
ater
Neo
siph
onia
elon
gell
a(H
arve
y)M
cIvo
ret
al.
(200
1)3
Pwllh
eli,
Car
diga
n,W
ales
AF3
4291
3K
imet
Lee
120
Aug
1998
,C
.A.
Mag
gsN
eosi
phon
iafe
rula
cea
(Suh
rex
PHY
KO
S-19
962
STR
IR
esea
rch
Stat
ion,
Punt
aG
alet
a,C
olon
,Pa
nam
aH
M57
3574
HM
5606
45H
M57
3512
Aga
rdh)
Gui
mar
aes
etFu
jii14
May
2009
,B
.W
ysor
and
L.
Sarg
ent
PHY
KO
S-22
87W
est
Lim
onB
ayJe
tty,
Punt
aTo
ro,
Col
on,
Pana
ma
HM
5735
84H
M57
3511
17M
ay20
09,
N.
Mam
ooza
deh
Neo
siph
onia
harv
eyi
(Bai
ley)
NC
-62
Ban
ksC
hann
el,
New
Han
over
Co.
,N
C,
USA
EU
4929
09H
M56
0628
Kim
,C
hoi,
Gui
ryet
30Ja
n20
05,
D.W
.Fr
eshw
ater
and
B.
Stue
rcke
G.W
.Sa
unde
rs
Brought to you by | College of William and MaryAuthenticated | 128.239.99.140
Download Date | 1/13/14 7:32 PM
N.R. Mamoozadeh and D.W. Freshwater: Five Neosiphonia/Polysiphonia species from the Caribbean 285
Article in press - uncorrected proof
(App
endi
x1
cont
inue
d)
Spec
ies
Sam
ple
Col
lect
ion
loca
tion,
date
,an
dco
llect
orA
cces
sion
num
ber
num
ber/
sour
cerb
cLSS
UC
OI
NC
-10
Sout
hM
ason
boro
Inle
tJe
tty,
New
Han
over
Co.
,N
C,
USA
EU
4929
09H
M57
3499
04M
ay20
05,
D.F
.K
apra
un,
D.W
.Fr
eshw
ater
and
B.
Stue
rcke
NC
-13
Sout
hM
ason
boro
Inle
tJe
tty,
New
Han
over
Co.
,N
C,
USA
EU
4929
09H
M57
3499
04M
ay20
05,
D.F
.K
apra
un,
D.W
.Fr
eshw
ater
and
B.
Stue
rcke
NC
-16
Lud
ens
Cre
ek,
New
Han
over
Co.
,N
C,
USA
EU
4929
09H
M57
3499
11M
ay20
05,
D.W
.Fr
eshw
ater
,B
.St
uerc
kean
dK
.B
raly
NC
-17
Bog
ueSo
und,
Cor
key’
sH
ouse
,C
arte
ret
Co.
,N
C,
USA
EU
4929
09H
M57
3499
26M
ar20
05,
D.W
.Fr
eshw
ater
NC
-19
Bog
ueSo
und,
Cor
key’
sH
ouse
,C
arte
ret
Co.
,N
C,
USA
EU
4929
09H
M57
3499
26M
ar20
05D
.W.
Fres
hwat
erN
C-2
2So
uth
Mas
onbo
roIn
let
Jetty
,N
ewH
anov
erC
o.,
NC
,U
SAE
U49
2909
HM
5735
0019
May
2005
,D
.W.
Fres
hwat
er,
B.
Stue
rcke
and
K.
Bra
lyN
C-2
3W
righ
tsvi
lleB
each
,N
ewH
anov
erC
o.,
NC
,U
SAE
U49
2909
19M
ay20
05,
B.
Stue
rcke
NC
-31
How
ard’
sC
hann
el,
Tops
ail
Inle
t,Pe
nder
Co.
,N
C,
USA
EU
4929
0907
Jul
2005
,D
.W.
Fres
hwat
er,
B.
Stue
rcke
and
R.
Ham
ner
Neo
siph
onia
spha
eroc
arpa
FL05
-5B
KM
L,
Lon
gK
ey,
Mon
roe
Co.
,FL
,U
SAH
M57
3527
(Bør
gese
n)K
imet
Lee
27Fe
b20
05,
B.
Stue
rcke
FL05
-63
KM
L,
Lon
gK
ey,
Mon
roe
Co.
,FL
,U
SAH
M57
3569
HM
5735
2727
Feb
2005
,B
.St
uerc
keN
eosi
phon
iate
pida
(Hol
lenb
erg)
FL05
-23
Seba
stia
nIn
let,
Indi
anR
iver
Co.
,FL
,U
SAH
M57
3552
Gui
mar
aes
etFu
jii26
Feb
2005
,B
.St
uerc
keN
eosi
phon
iato
ngat
ensi
sPH
YK
OS-
2704
2ST
RI
Res
earc
hSt
atio
n,Pu
nta
Gal
eta,
Col
on,
Pana
ma
HM
5735
70H
M56
0642
HM
5735
18(H
arve
yex
Kut
zing
)K
imet
Lee
21M
ay20
09,
B.
Wys
orN
eosi
phon
iasp
.PH
YK
OS-
3536
2ST
RI
Res
earc
hSt
atio
n,B
ocas
del
Toro
,Pa
nam
aH
M57
3573
HM
5606
49H
M57
3525
09Ju
l20
08,
D.W
.Fr
eshw
ater
Pol
ysip
honi
aan
omal
aH
olle
nber
gFL
09-4
1B2
Lak
eSu
rpri
se,
Key
Lar
go,
Mon
roe
Co.
,FL
,U
SAH
M57
3549
HM
5606
5409
Mar
2009
,N
.M
amoo
zade
hFL
09-7
7K
ML
Man
grov
e,L
ong
Key
,M
onro
eC
o.,
FL,
USA
HM
5735
5010
Mar
2009
,N
.M
amoo
zade
hFL
09-7
8K
ML
Man
grov
e,L
ong
Key
,M
onro
eC
o.,
FL,
USA
HM
5735
50H
M57
3502
10M
ar20
09,
N.
Mam
ooza
deh
Pol
ysip
honi
aat
erri
ma
Hoo
ker
NZ
04-5
122
Mat
aiko
na,
Cas
tlePo
int,
Nor
thIs
land
,N
ewZ
eala
ndG
U38
5831
HM
5606
38H
M57
3537
etH
arve
y16
Nov
2004
,D
.W.
Fres
hwat
eran
dM
.H
omm
ersa
ndN
Z04
-525
Mat
aiko
na,
Cas
tlePo
int,
Nor
thIs
land
,N
ewZ
eala
ndH
M57
3577
HM
5735
3616
Nov
2004
,D
.W.
Fres
hwat
eran
dM
.H
omm
ersa
ndP
olys
ipho
nia
atla
ntic
aK
apra
un2N
C-4
CO
RM
PSi
teO
B-2
7,O
nslo
wB
ay,
NC
,U
SAE
U49
2910
HM
5606
31H
M57
3539
etN
orri
s30
Aug
2004
,D
.W.
Fres
hwat
erN
C-2
6C
OR
MP
Site
OB
-27,
Ons
low
Bay
,N
C,
USA
EU
4929
10H
M57
3539
12M
ay20
05,
J.So
uza,
D.
Wel
lsan
dS.
Hal
lN
C-2
7C
OR
MP
Site
OB
-27,
Ons
low
Bay
,N
C,
USA
EU
4929
10H
M57
3539
09Ju
n20
05,
D.W
.Fr
eshw
ater
and
J.So
uza
Brought to you by | College of William and MaryAuthenticated | 128.239.99.140
Download Date | 1/13/14 7:32 PM
286 N.R. Mamoozadeh and D.W. Freshwater: Five Neosiphonia/Polysiphonia species from the Caribbean
Article in press - uncorrected proof
(App
endi
x1
cont
inue
d)
Spec
ies
Sam
ple
Col
lect
ion
loca
tion,
date
,an
dco
llect
orA
cces
sion
num
ber
num
ber/
sour
cerb
cLSS
UC
OI
NC
-28
CO
RM
PSi
teO
B-2
7,O
nslo
wB
ay,
NC
,U
SAE
U49
2910
HM
5735
3909
Jun
2005
,D
.W.
Fres
hwat
eran
dJ.
Souz
aN
C-3
2C
OR
MP
Site
OB
-3,
Ons
low
Bay
,N
C,
USA
EU
4929
10H
M57
3539
11Ju
l20
05,
D.W
.Fr
eshw
ater
and
B.
Stue
rcke
Pol
ysip
honi
abi
nney
iH
arve
yPH
YK
OS-
2439
Isla
Nar
anjo
Arr
iba,
Col
on,
Pana
ma
HM
5735
5619
May
2009
,L
.Sa
rgen
tPH
YK
OS-
2458
Isla
Nar
anjo
Arr
iba,
Col
on,
Pana
ma
HM
5735
5619
May
2009
,L
.Sa
rgen
tPH
YK
OS-
2461
Isla
Nar
anjo
Arr
iba,
Col
on,
Pana
ma
HM
5735
5619
May
2009
,S.
Schm
ittPH
YK
OS-
2517
2Is
laN
aran
joA
rrib
a,C
olon
,Pa
nam
aH
M57
3555
HM
5606
3619
May
2009
,S.
Schm
itt‘‘
Pol
ysip
honi
abr
evia
rtic
ulat
a’’
NC
-1Sn
ead’
sFe
rry,
New
Riv
erIn
let,
Ons
low
Co.
,N
C,
USA
EU
4929
11se
nsu
Stue
rcke
etFr
eshw
ater
11Ju
l20
03,
D.W
.Fr
eshw
ater
and
F.M
ontg
omer
yN
C-3
CO
RM
PSi
teO
B-1
,O
nslo
wB
ay,
NC
,U
SAE
U49
2911
HM
5734
9719
Jul
2004
,D
.W.
Fres
hwat
eran
dK
.Jo
hns
NC
-5C
OR
MP
Site
OB
-27,
Ons
low
Bay
,N
C,
USA
EU
4929
1112
Jan
2005
,J.
Souz
aan
dJ.
Dor
ton
NC
-7C
OR
MP
Site
OB
-27,
Ons
low
Bay
,N
C,
USA
EU
4929
1112
Jan
2005
,J.
Souz
aan
dJ.
Dor
ton
NC
-14
Ban
k’s
Cha
nnel
(Site
NH
-M),
New
Han
over
Co.
,N
C,
USA
EU
4929
11H
M57
3498
11M
ay20
05,
D.W
.Fr
eshw
ater
NC
-15
Lud
ens
Cre
ek(S
iteN
H-J
),N
ewH
anov
erC
o.,
NC
,U
SAE
U49
2911
11M
ay20
05,
D.W
.Fr
eshw
ater
,B
.St
uerc
kean
dK
.B
raly
NC
-18
Bog
ueSo
und,
Cor
key’
sH
ouse
,C
arte
ret
Co.
,N
C,
USA
EU
4929
11H
M57
3498
26M
ar20
05,
D.W
.Fr
eshw
ater
NC
-20
Bog
ueSo
und,
Cor
key’
sH
ouse
,C
arte
ret
Co.
,N
C,
USA
EU
4929
11H
M57
3498
26D
ec20
03,
D.W
.Fr
eshw
ater
Pol
ysip
honi
abr
odie
i(D
illw
yn)
McI
vor
etal
.(2
001)
3Po
rtaf
erry
,D
own,
Irel
and
AF3
4291
6Sp
reng
el20
Mar
1998
,C
.A.
Mag
gsP
olys
ipho
nia
cons
tric
taN
Z04
-78
Shag
Poin
t,So
uth
Isla
nd,
New
Zea
land
GU
3858
32W
omer
sley
26O
ct20
04,
D.W
.Fr
eshw
ater
and
M.
Hom
mer
sand
NZ
04-2
56Pa
uaB
each
,St
ewar
tIs
land
,N
ewZ
eala
ndG
U38
5832
01N
ov20
04,
D.W
.Fr
eshw
ater
and
M.
Hom
mer
sand
NZ
04-3
082
Ulv
aIs
land
near
Stew
art
Isla
nd,
New
Zea
land
HM
5735
80H
M56
0639
HM
5735
4203
Nov
2004
,D
.W.
Fres
hwat
eran
dM
.H
omm
ersa
ndP
olys
ipho
nia
denu
data
(Dill
wyn
)M
cIvo
ret
al.
(200
1)3
Plym
outh
,D
evon
,E
ngla
ndA
F342
914
Gre
ville
exH
arve
y30
Sep
1998
,F.
Bun
ker
Pol
ysip
honi
ael
onga
ta(H
udso
n)M
cIvo
ret
al.
(200
1)3
Fana
d,N
.D
oneg
al,
Irel
and
AF3
4291
1Sp
reng
el17
May
1998
,C
.A.
Mag
gsC
hoi
etal
.(2
001)
4Sp
idda
lC
o.,
Gal
way
,Ir
elan
dA
F427
529
13M
ar19
98,
M.S
.K
im
Brought to you by | College of William and MaryAuthenticated | 128.239.99.140
Download Date | 1/13/14 7:32 PM
N.R. Mamoozadeh and D.W. Freshwater: Five Neosiphonia/Polysiphonia species from the Caribbean 287
Article in press - uncorrected proof
(App
endi
x1
cont
inue
d)
Spec
ies
Sam
ple
Col
lect
ion
loca
tion,
date
,an
dco
llect
orA
cces
sion
num
ber
num
ber/
sour
cerb
cLSS
UC
OI
Pol
ysip
honi
afi
brat
a(D
illw
yn)
McI
vor
etal
.(2
001)
3M
arbl
eH
ill,
N.
Don
egal
,Ir
elan
dA
F342
915
Har
vey
05A
ug19
93,
C.A
.M
aggs
Pol
ysip
honi
afi
bril
losa
(Dill
wyn
)M
cIvo
ret
al.
(200
1)3
Mar
ble
Hill
,N
.D
oneg
al,
Irel
and
AF3
4291
2Sp
reng
el05
Aug
1993
,C
.A.
Mag
gsP
olys
ipho
nia
forf
exH
arve
yM
cIvo
ret
al.
(200
1)3
Bia
rritz
,A
quita
ine,
Fran
ceA
F342
910
15Ju
l19
99,
C.A
.M
aggs
Pol
ysip
honi
afu
coid
es(H
udso
n)N
C-1
22So
uth
Mas
onbo
roIn
let
Jetty
,N
ewH
anov
erC
o.,
NC
,U
SAE
U49
2913
HM
5606
27H
M57
3496
Gre
ville
04M
ay20
05,
D.F
.K
apra
un,
D.W
.Fr
eshw
ater
and
B.
Stue
rcke
Pol
ysip
honi
aha
vane
nsis
sens
uPH
YK
OS-
2628
2W
est
Lim
onB
ayJe
tty,
Punt
aTo
ro,
Col
on,
Pana
ma
HM
5735
54H
M56
0641
Bør
gese
n20
May
2009
,B
.W
ysor
PHY
KO
S-31
85C
ayos
Zap
atill
as,
Boc
asde
lTo
ro,
Pana
ma
HM
5735
5425
Aug
2009
,B
.W
ysor
and
D.W
.Fr
eshw
ater
PHY
KO
S-31
86C
ayos
Zap
atill
as,
Boc
asde
lTo
ro,
Pana
ma
HM
5735
54H
M57
3522
25A
ug20
09,
B.
Wys
oran
dD
.W.
Fres
hwat
erP
olys
ipho
nia
hom
oia
PHY
KO
S-35
24Is
laA
fuer
a,V
erag
uas,
Pana
ma
HM
5735
53H
M57
3507
Setc
hell
etG
ardn
er16
Jan
2008
,B
.W
ysor
and
J.A
lden
PHY
KO
S-35
252
Isla
Afu
era,
Ver
agua
s,Pa
nam
aH
M57
3553
HM
5606
53H
M57
3507
16Ja
n20
08,
B.
Wys
oran
dJ.
Ald
enP
olys
ipho
nia
how
eiH
olle
nber
gPh
illip
s(2
006)
4Ta
lisoy
,V
ivac
Cat
andu
anes
,Ph
illip
ines
AY
2372
8214
May
1988
,J.
Wes
tPH
YK
OS-
3141
2C
ayos
Tig
res,
Boc
asde
lTo
ro,
Pana
ma
HM
5735
43H
M56
0656
HM
5735
2025
Aug
ust
2009
,B
.W
ysor
PHY
KO
S-35
26Fl
atR
ock
Bea
ch,
Isla
Col
on,
Boc
asde
lTo
ro,
Pana
ma
HM
5735
43H
M57
3521
17Ja
n20
07,
D.W
.Fr
eshw
ater
PHY
KO
S-35
27Fl
atR
ock
Bea
ch,
Isla
Col
on,
Boc
asde
lTo
ro,
Pana
ma
HM
5735
43H
M57
3521
17Ju
l20
08,
D.W
.Fr
eshw
ater
PHY
KO
S-35
28Sw
anC
ay,
Isla
Col
on,
Boc
asde
lTo
ro,
Pana
ma
HM
5735
43H
M57
3520
19Ju
l20
08,
M.
Alb
isP
olys
ipho
nia
isog
ona
Har
vey
NZ
04-1
393
Cur
ioB
ay,
Sout
hIs
land
,N
ewZ
eala
ndH
M57
3578
HM
5735
4128
Oct
2004
,D
.W.
Fres
hwat
eran
dM
.H
omm
ersa
ndP
olys
ipho
nia
kapr
auni
iSt
uerc
keN
C-1
12So
uth
Mas
onbo
roIn
let
Jetty
,N
ewH
anov
erC
o.,
NC
,U
SAE
U49
2920
HM
5606
30H
M57
3501
etFr
eshw
ater
04M
ay20
05,
D.F
.K
apra
un,
D.W
.Fr
eshw
ater
and
B.
Stue
rcke
Pol
ysip
honi
am
acro
carp
aPH
YK
OS-
2561
Punt
aG
orda
,C
olon
,Pa
nam
aH
M57
3545
HM
5735
38(C
.A
gard
h)Sp
reng
el20
May
2009
,D
.W.
Fres
hwat
erPH
YK
OS-
2617
Punt
aG
orda
,C
olon
,Pa
nam
aH
M57
3545
HM
5735
3820
May
2009
,S.
Schm
ittPH
YK
OS-
2627
2Pu
nta
Gor
da,
Col
on,
Pana
ma
HM
5735
45H
M56
0632
HM
5735
3820
May
2009
,S.
Schm
ittPH
YK
OS-
2630
Punt
aG
orda
,C
olon
,Pa
nam
aH
M57
3545
HM
5735
3820
May
2009
,D
.W.
Fres
hwat
erP
olys
ipho
nia
mor
row
iiH
arve
yC
hoi
etal
.(2
001)
4Sa
chon
,K
orea
AF4
2753
208
Mar
1997
,M
.S.
Kim
Brought to you by | College of William and MaryAuthenticated | 128.239.99.140
Download Date | 1/13/14 7:32 PM
288 N.R. Mamoozadeh and D.W. Freshwater: Five Neosiphonia/Polysiphonia species from the Caribbean
Article in press - uncorrected proof
(App
endi
x1
cont
inue
d)
Spec
ies
Sam
ple
Col
lect
ion
loca
tion,
date
,an
dco
llect
orA
cces
sion
num
ber
num
ber/
sour
cerb
cLSS
UC
OI
NZ
04-5
3O
nuku
,A
karo
aH
arbo
r,So
uth
Isla
nd,
New
Zea
land
HM
5735
8323
Oct
2004
,D
.W.
Fres
hwat
eran
dM
.H
omm
ersa
ndN
Z04
-130
Cur
ioB
ay,
Sout
hIs
land
,N
ewZ
eala
ndH
M57
3579
HM
5735
4028
Oct
2004
,D
.W.
Fres
hwat
eran
dM
.H
omm
ersa
ndN
Z04
-132
Cur
ioB
ay,
Sout
hIs
land
,N
ewZ
eala
ndH
M57
3579
28O
ct20
04,
D.W
.Fr
eshw
ater
and
M.
Hom
mer
sand
NZ
04-1
40C
urio
Bay
,So
uth
Isla
nd,
New
Zea
land
HM
5735
7928
Oct
2004
,D
.W.
Fres
hwat
eran
dM
.H
omm
ersa
ndP
olys
ipho
nia
mue
ller
iana
Fujii
etal
.(2
006)
3Fi
ordl
and,
Tho
mps
onSo
und,
Dea
sC
ove,
New
Zea
land
AY
5884
12J.
Aga
rdh
03O
ct20
00,
S.W
ing
and
N.
Goe
bel
Pol
ysip
honi
apa
cifi
caH
olle
nber
gC
hoi
etal
.(2
001)
4B
rady
sB
each
,B
amfi
eld,
B.C
.,C
anad
aA
F427
533
29A
pr19
98,
J.W
arne
bold
tan
dJ.
T.H
arpe
rK
imet
al.
(200
4)3
Seal
Roc
k,O
R,
USA
AY
3960
36P
olys
ipho
nia
pani
cula
taM
onta
gne
Kim
etal
.(2
004)
3Se
noO
tway
,Pu
nta
Are
nas,
Chi
leA
Y39
6041
Zuc
care
lloet
al.
(200
4)4
Four
Mile
Bea
ch,
Sant
aC
ruz,
CA
,U
SAA
Y61
7144
Pol
ysip
honi
ape
ntam
era
PHY
KO
S-19
952
STR
IR
esea
rch
Stat
ion,
Punt
aG
alet
a,C
olon
,Pa
nam
aH
M57
3563
HM
5606
44H
M57
3510
Hol
lenb
erg
14M
ay20
09,
B.
Wys
oran
dL
.Sa
rgen
tPH
YK
OS-
3529
2Is
laPl
anito
near
Coi
ba,
Ver
agua
s,Pa
nam
aH
M57
3564
HM
5606
4315
Jan
2008
,B
.W
ysor
and
J.A
lden
PHY
KO
S-35
30B
ahia
Hon
dane
arE
lB
arra
nco,
Ver
agua
s,Pa
nam
aH
M57
3564
15Ja
n20
08,
B.
Wys
oran
dJ.
Ald
enPH
YK
OS-
3531
Bah
iaH
onda
near
El
Bar
ranc
o,V
erag
uas,
Pana
ma
HM
5735
6415
Jan
2008
,B
.W
ysor
and
J.A
lden
PHY
KO
S-35
32Is
laA
fuer
a,V
erag
uas,
Pana
ma
HM
5735
6416
Jan
2008
,B
.W
ysor
and
J.A
lden
Pol
ysip
honi
ape
rnac
ola
Ada
ms
NZ
04-2
43Pa
uaB
each
,St
ewar
tIs
land
,N
ewZ
eala
ndH
M57
3576
HM
5734
9501
Nov
2004
,D
.W.
Fres
hwat
eran
dM
.H
omm
ersa
ndN
Z04
-244
Paua
Bea
ch,
Stew
art
Isla
nd,
New
Zea
land
HM
5735
7601
Nov
2004
,D
.W.
Fres
hwat
eran
dM
.H
omm
ersa
ndN
Z04
-263
Oba
n,St
ewar
tIs
land
,N
ewZ
eala
ndH
M57
3576
01N
ov20
04,
D.W
.Fr
eshw
ater
and
M.
Hom
mer
sand
NZ
04-2
912
Ulv
aIs
land
near
Stew
art
Isla
nd,
New
Zea
land
HM
5735
76H
M56
0637
HM
5734
9502
Nov
2004
,D
.W.
Fres
hwat
eran
dM
.H
omm
ersa
ndN
Z04
-309
Ulv
aIs
land
near
Stew
art
Isla
nd,
New
Zea
land
HM
5735
76H
M57
3495
03N
ov20
04,
D.W
.Fr
eshw
ater
and
M.
Hom
mer
sand
NZ
04-5
50A
Mur
itai,
Wel
lingt
onH
arbo
r,N
orth
Isla
nd,
New
Zea
land
HM
5735
76H
M57
3495
17N
ov20
04,
D.W
.Fr
eshw
ater
and
M.
Hom
mer
sand
NZ
04-5
50B
Mur
itai,
Wel
lingt
onH
arbo
r,N
orth
Isla
nd,
New
Zea
land
HM
5735
76H
M57
3495
17N
ov20
04,
D.W
.Fr
eshw
ater
and
M.
Hom
mer
sand
NZ
04-5
57M
urita
i,W
ellin
gton
Har
bor,
Nor
thIs
land
,N
ewZ
eala
ndH
M57
3576
HM
5734
9517
Nov
2004
,D
.W.
Fres
hwat
eran
dM
.H
omm
ersa
nd
Brought to you by | College of William and MaryAuthenticated | 128.239.99.140
Download Date | 1/13/14 7:32 PM
N.R. Mamoozadeh and D.W. Freshwater: Five Neosiphonia/Polysiphonia species from the Caribbean 289
Article in press - uncorrected proof
(App
endi
x1
cont
inue
d)
Spec
ies
Sam
ple
Col
lect
ion
loca
tion,
date
,an
dco
llect
orA
cces
sion
num
ber
num
ber/
sour
cerb
cLSS
UC
OI
Pol
ysip
honi
aps
eudo
vill
umPH
YK
OS-
3533
2Fl
atR
ock
Bea
ch,
Isla
Col
on,
Boc
asde
lTo
ro,
Pana
ma
HM
5735
68H
M56
0650
HM
5735
24H
olle
nber
g17
Jul
2008
,D
.W.
Fres
hwat
erP
olys
ipho
nia
schn
eide
riB
ER
MU
DA
Tuck
er’s
Bay
,H
arri
ngto
nSo
und,
Ber
mud
aG
U38
5836
Stue
rcke
etFr
eshw
ater
17M
ar20
09,
C.W
.Sc
hnei
der
and
C.E
.L
ane
FL05
-04
Seba
stia
nIn
let,
Indi
anR
iver
Cou
nty,
FL,
USA
HM
5735
67H
M57
3514
26Fe
b20
05,
B.
Stue
rcke
NC
-2C
assa
mir
Wre
ck(W
R2)
,O
nslo
wB
ay,
NC
,U
SAE
U49
2912
02Ju
l20
04,
D.W
.Fr
eshw
ater
and
K.
John
sPH
YK
OS-
2454
2Pa
nam
aC
anal
Nor
thFe
rry
Term
inus
,C
olon
,Pa
nam
aH
M57
3566
HM
5606
29H
M57
3516
19M
ay20
09,
K.
Lar
son
and
L.
McC
ann
PHY
KO
S-26
89ST
RI
Res
earc
hSt
atio
n,Pu
nta
Gal
eta,
Col
on,
Pana
ma
HM
5735
65H
M57
3513
21M
ay20
09,
S.Sc
hmitt
PHY
KO
S-31
89C
ayos
Zap
atill
as,
Boc
asde
lTo
ro,
Pana
ma
GU
3858
37H
M57
3515
25A
ug20
09,
D.W
.Fr
eshw
ater
Pol
ysip
honi
asc
opul
orum
Har
vey
Kim
etal
.(2
004)
3D
evil’
sPu
nchb
owl,
OR
,U
SAA
Y39
6039
Pol
ysip
honi
asc
opul
orum
var.
NC
-9So
uth
Mas
onbo
roIn
let
Jetty
,N
ewH
anov
erC
o.,
NC
,U
SAE
U49
2915
HM
5735
35vi
llum
(J.
Aga
rdh)
Hol
lenb
erg
04M
ay20
05,
D.F
.K
apra
un,
D.W
.Fr
eshw
ater
and
B.
Stue
rcke
NC
-332
Sout
hM
ason
boro
Inle
tJe
tty,
New
Han
over
Co.
,N
C,
USA
EU
4929
15H
M56
0633
HM
5735
3522
Jul
2005
,D
.W.
Fres
hwat
er,
R.
Yor
k,K
.B
raly
,R
.H
amne
ran
dB
.St
uerc
keP
olys
ipho
nia
cf.
sert
ular
ioid
esPH
YK
OS-
3226
2C
raw
lC
ay,
Boc
asde
lTo
ro,
Pana
ma
HM
5735
46H
M56
0647
HM
5735
19(G
rate
loup
)J.
Aga
rdh
128
Aug
2009
,G
.D
iaz-
Pulid
oan
dR
.R
iosm
ena
Pol
ysip
honi
acf
.se
rtul
ario
ides
PHY
KO
S-35
342
Isla
Afu
era,
Ver
agua
s,Pa
nam
aH
M57
3547
HM
5606
52H
M57
3509
(Gra
telo
up)
J.A
gard
h2
16Ja
nuar
y20
08,
B.
Wys
oran
dJ.
Ald
enP
olys
ipho
nia
cf.
sert
ular
ioid
esPH
YK
OS-
2257
2W
est
Lim
onB
ayJe
tty,
Punt
aTo
ro,
Col
on,
Pana
ma
HM
5735
48H
M56
0646
(Gra
telo
up)
J.A
gard
h3
17M
ay20
09,
D.W
.Fr
eshw
ater
and
N.
Mam
ooza
deh
PHY
KO
S-23
09W
est
Lim
onB
ayJe
tty,
Punt
aTo
ro,
Col
on,
Pana
ma
HM
5735
4817
May
2009
,D
.W.
Fres
hwat
eran
dN
.M
amoo
zade
hP
olys
ipho
nia
stri
cta
(Dill
wyn
)C
hoi
etal
.(2
001)
4Fl
ambo
roug
h,E
ngla
ndA
F427
535
Gre
ville
16Ju
l19
98,
M.S
.K
im3G
WS2
657
Let
ete
Pt.,
New
Bru
nsw
ick,
Can
ada
EU
4929
1614
Mar
2005
,G
.W.
Saun
ders
Pol
ysip
honi
ast
rict
issi
ma
NZ
04-3
9Sh
agPo
int,
Sout
hIs
land
,N
ewZ
eala
ndH
M57
3582
HM
5735
30H
ooke
ret
Har
vey
25O
ct20
04,
D.W
.Fr
eshw
ater
and
M.
Hom
mer
sand
NZ
04-8
0Sh
agPo
int,
Sout
hIs
land
,N
ewZ
eala
ndH
M57
3582
HM
5735
3026
Oct
2004
,D
.W.
Fres
hwat
eran
dM
.H
omm
ersa
ndN
Z04
-147
Lon
neke
rsN
ugge
t,St
ewar
tIs
land
,N
ewZ
eala
ndG
U38
5835
HM
5735
3429
Oct
2004
,D
.W.
Fres
hwat
eran
dM
.H
omm
ersa
ndN
Z04
-246
Paua
Bea
ch,
Stew
art
Isla
nd,
New
Zea
land
HM
5735
8101
Nov
2004
,D
.W.
Fres
hwat
eran
dM
.H
omm
ersa
ndN
Z04
-250
Paua
Bea
ch,
Stew
art
Isla
nd,
New
Zea
land
GU
3858
33H
M57
3532
01N
ov20
04,
D.W
.Fr
eshw
ater
and
M.
Hom
mer
sand
Brought to you by | College of William and MaryAuthenticated | 128.239.99.140
Download Date | 1/13/14 7:32 PM
290 N.R. Mamoozadeh and D.W. Freshwater: Five Neosiphonia/Polysiphonia species from the Caribbean
Article in press - uncorrected proof
(App
endi
x1
cont
inue
d)
Spec
ies
Sam
ple
Col
lect
ion
loca
tion,
date
,an
dco
llect
orA
cces
sion
num
ber
num
ber/
sour
cerb
cLSS
UC
OI
NZ
04-3
07U
lva
Isla
ndne
arSt
ewar
tIs
land
,N
ewZ
eala
ndG
U38
5833
HM
5735
3103
Nov
2004
,D
.W.
Fres
hwat
eran
dM
.H
omm
ersa
ndN
Z04
-552
3M
urita
i,W
ellin
gton
Har
bor,
Nor
thIs
land
,N
ewZ
eala
ndG
U38
5833
HM
5735
3317
Nov
2004
,D
.W.
Fres
hwat
eran
dM
.H
omm
ersa
ndP
olys
ipho
nia
subt
ilis
sim
aN
C-2
12N
euse
Riv
erat
Ori
enta
l,Pa
mlic
oC
o.,
NC
,U
SAE
U49
2917
HM
5606
34M
onta
gne
1Se
p20
03,
R.
Pete
rson
NC
-24
Snow
’sC
utPa
rk,
New
Han
over
Co.
,N
C,
USA
EU
4929
18H
M57
3529
22M
ay20
05,
B.
Stue
rcke
and
J.B
.L
andr
yP
olys
ipho
nia
subt
ilis
sim
aPH
YK
OS-
3271
2ST
RI
Res
earc
hSt
atio
n,B
ocas
del
Toro
,Pa
nam
aH
M57
3575
HM
5606
35H
M57
3528
Mon
tagn
e2
03Se
p20
09,
D.W
.Fr
eshw
ater
Pol
ysip
honi
asp
.PH
YK
OS-
2613
2Pa
rque
deJu
vent
ud,
Cal
lePr
imer
o,C
olon
,Pa
nam
aH
M57
3571
HM
5606
48H
M57
3517
20M
ay20
09,
B.
Wys
orP
olys
ipho
nia
sp.
PHY
KO
S-35
352
Isla
Afu
era,
Ver
agua
s,Pa
nam
aH
M57
3562
HM
5606
51H
M57
3508
16Ja
n20
08,
B.
Wys
oran
dJ.
Ald
enP
olys
ipho
nia
sp.
PHY
KO
S-35
372
Terv
iB
ight
,B
ocas
del
Toro
,Pa
nam
aH
M57
3551
HM
5606
5713
Jul
2008
,S.
Fred
eric
qP
olys
ipho
nia
sp.
PHY
KO
S-26
35Pu
nta
Gor
daW
est,
Col
on,
Pana
ma
HM
5735
4420
May
2009
,D
.W.
Fres
hwat
erPH
YK
OS-
2701
STR
IR
esea
rch
Stat
ion,
Punt
aG
alet
a,Pa
nam
aH
M57
3544
21M
ay20
09,
B.
Wys
orPH
YK
OS-
3144
Cay
osZ
apat
illas
,B
ocas
del
Toro
,Pa
nam
aH
M57
3544
25A
ug20
09,
D.W
.Fr
eshw
ater
and
B.
Wys
orPH
YK
OS-
3145
Cay
osZ
apat
illas
,B
ocas
del
Toro
,Pa
nam
aH
M57
3544
25A
ug20
09,
D.W
.Fr
eshw
ater
and
B.
Wys
orPH
YK
OS-
3538
2Sw
anK
ey,
Isla
Col
on,
Boc
asde
lTo
ro,
Pana
ma
HM
5735
44H
M56
0655
HM
5735
2314
Jul
2007
,D
.W.
Fres
hwat
erP
olys
ipho
nia
sp.
NZ
04-5
154
Mat
aiko
na,
Cas
tlePo
int,
Nor
thIs
land
,N
ewZ
eala
ndH
M56
5963
16N
ov20
04,
D.W
.Fr
eshw
ater
and
M.
Hom
mer
sand
Pol
ysip
honi
asp
.K
imet
al.
(200
4)3
Las
Cru
ses,
Cen
tral
Chi
leA
Y39
6038
Vert
ebra
tala
nosa
(Lin
naeu
s)Z
ucca
rello
etal
.(2
004)
4N
ahan
t,Pr
ovid
ence
,Pr
ovid
ence
Co.
,R
I,U
SAA
Y61
7143
Chr
iste
nsen
Wom
ersl
eyel
lase
tace
aC
hoi
etal
.(2
001)
4N
UIG
Mar
ine
Alg
alC
ultu
reC
olle
ctio
n,It
aly
AF4
2753
7(H
olle
nber
g)N
orri
sF.
Rin
dian
dM
.D.
Gui
ry1
Sequ
ence
publ
ishe
das
Pol
ysip
honi
ael
onge
lla
Har
vey.
2Se
quen
ceus
edin
ML
anal
ysis
ofrb
cLan
dSS
Uda
ta.
3Se
quen
ceus
edin
ML
anal
ysis
ofrb
cLda
ta.
4Se
quen
ceus
edin
ML
anal
ysis
ofSS
Uda
ta.
Brought to you by | College of William and MaryAuthenticated | 128.239.99.140
Download Date | 1/13/14 7:32 PM
N.R. Mamoozadeh and D.W. Freshwater: Five Neosiphonia/Polysiphonia species from the Caribbean 291
Article in press - uncorrected proof
References
Abbott, I.A. 1999. Marine red algae of the Hawaiian Islands. Bish-op Museum Press, Honolulu, HI, USA. pp. 465.
Abbott, I.A. and G.J. Hollenberg. 1976. Marine algae of California.Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA, USA. pp. 844.
Adams, N.M. 1991. The New Zealand species of Polysiphonia Gre-ville (Rhodophyta). New Zeal. J. Bot. 29: 411–427.
Agardh, C.A. 1824. Systema algarum. Literis Berlingianis, Lund.pp. 312.
Almodovar, L.R. and D.L. Ballantine. 1983. Checklist of benthicmarine macroalgae plus additional species records from PuertoRico. Caribb. J. Sci. 19: 7–20.
Athanasiadis, A. 1987. A Survey of the seaweeds of the Aegean Seawith taxonomic studies on species of the tribe Antithamnieae(Rhodophyta). University of Gothenburg, Goterna, Kungalv,Sweden. pp. 174qxl.
Ballantine, D.L. and N.E. Aponte. 1997. A revised checklist of thebenthic marine algae known to Puerto Rico. Caribb. J. Sci. 33:150–179.
Børgesen, F. 1918. The marine algae of the Danish West Indies. Part3. Rhodophyceae (4). Dansk Botanisk Arkiv 3: 241–304.
Chase, M.W. and H.G. Hills. 1991. Silica gel: an ideal material forfield preservation of leaf samples for DNA studies. Taxon 40:215–220.
Choi, H.G., M.S. Kim, M.D. Guiry and G.W. Saunders. 2001. Phy-logenetic relationships of Polysiphonia (Rhodomelaceae, Rho-dophyta) and its relatives based on anatomical and nuclearsmall-subunit rDNA sequence data. Can. J. Bot. 79: 1465–1476.
Clarkston, B.E. and G.W. Saunders. 2010. A comparison of twoDNA barcode markers for species descrimination in the red algalfamily Kallymeniaceae (Gigartinales, Florideophyceae), with adescription of Euthora timburtonii sp. nov. Botany 88: 119–131.
Dawes, C.J. and A.C. Mathieson. 2008. The seaweeds of Florida.University Press of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA. pp. 591.
Dawson, E.Y. 1964. The seaweeds of Peru. Nova Hedwigia 13: 1–111.Freshwater, D.W. and J. Rueness. 1994. Phylogenetic relationships
of some European Gelidium (Gelidiales, Rhodophyta) species,based on rbcL nucleotide sequence analysis. Phycologia 33:187–194.
Freshwater, D.W., C. Khyn-Hanson, S.K. Sarver and P.J. Walsh.2000. Phylogeny of Opsanus spp. (Batrachoididae) inferred frommultiple mitochondrial-DNA sequences. Mar. Biol. 136: 961–968.
Freshwater, D.W., S.K. Braly, B. Stuercke, R. Hamner and R.A.York. 2005. Phylogenetic analyses of North Carolina Rhody-meniales. I. The genus Asteromenia. J. N. Carolina Acad. Sci.121: 49–55.
Fujii, M.T., S.M.P.B. Guimaraes, C.F.D. Gurgel and S. Fredericq.2006. Characterization and phylogenetic affinities of the red algaChondrophycus flagelliferus (Rhodomelaceae, Ceramiales) fromBrazil on the basis of morphological and molecular evidence.Phycologia 45: 432–441.
Gardner, N.L. 1927. New Rhodophyceae from the Pacific coast ofNorth America. Univ. Calif. Publ. Bot. 14: 99–138.
Guimaraes, S.M.P.B., M.T. Fujii, D. Pupo and N.S. Yokoya. 2004.Reavaliacao das caracterısticas morfologicas e suas implicacoes¸ ¸taxonomicas no genero Polysiphonia sensu lato (Ceramiales,Rhodophyta) do litoral dos Estados de Sao Paulo e EspıritoSanto, Brasil. Revista Brasil. Bot. 27: 163–183.
Harvey, W.H. 1847. Nereis australis, Part 1. Reeve Brothers, Lon-don. pp. i–viiiq64, pls I–XXV.
Harvey, W.H. 1853. Nereis boreali-americana. Part II. Rhodosper-mae. Smithson. Contrib. Knowl. 5: 1–258.
Harvey, W.H. 1860. Characters of new algae, chiefly from Japanand adjacent regions, collected by Charles Wright in the NorthPacific Exploring Expedition under Captain James Rodgers.Proc. Am. Acad. Arts Sci. 4: 327–335.
Hollenberg, G.J. 1942. An account of the species of Polysiphoniaon the Pacific coast of North America. I. Oligosiphonia. Am. J.Bot. 29: 772–785.
Hollenberg, G.J. 1958. Phycological notes. II. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club85: 63–69.
Hollenberg, G.J. 1961. Marine red algae of Pacific Mexico. Part 5.The genus Polysiphonia. Pac. Nat. 2: 345–375.
Hollenberg, G.J. 1968a. An account of the species of Polysiphoniaof the central and western tropical Pacific Ocean. I. Oligosipho-nia. Pac. Sci. 22: 56–98.
Hollenberg, G.J. 1968b. An account of the species of the red algaPolysiphonia of the central and western tropical Pacific Ocean.II. Polysiphonia. Pac. Sci. 22: 198–207.
Hollenberg, G.J. and J.N. Norris. 1977. The red alga Polysiphonia(Rhodomelaceae) in the northern Gulf of California. Smithson.Contrib. Mar. Sci. 1: 1–22.
Hommersand, M.H., D.W. Freshwater, J.M. Lopez-Bautista andS. Fredericq. 2005. Proposal of the Euptiloteae Hommersand etFredericq, trib. nov. and transfer of some southen hemispherePtiloteae to the Callithamnieae (Ceramiales, Rhodophyta). J.Phycol. 42: 203–225.
Hooker, J.D. 1855. The botany of the Antarctic Voyage. Part II.Flora Novae-Zelandiae. Reeve Brothers, London, England. pp.211–266.
Hughey, J.R., P.C. Silva and M.H. Hommersand. 2001. Solving tax-onomic and nomenclatural problems in Pacific Gigartinaceae(Rhodophyta) using DNA from type material. J. Phycol. 37:1091–1109.
Kapraun, D.F. 1977. The genus Polysiphonia in North Carolina,USA. Bot. Mar. 20: 313–331.
Kapraun, D.F. 1980. An illustrated guide to the benthic marinealgae of coastal North Carolina. I. Rhodophyta. The Universityof North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC, USA. pp. 206.
Kapraun, D.F. and J.N. Norris. 1982. The red alga PolysiphoniaGreville (Rhodomelaceae) from Carrie Bow Cay and Vicinity,Belize. Smithson. Contrib. Mar. Sci. 12: 225–238.
Kapraun, D.F. and R.B. Searles 1990. Planktonic bloom of an intro-duced species of Polysiphonia (Ceramiales, Rhodophyta) alongthe coast of North Carolina, USA. Hydrobiologia 204/205:269–274.
Kapraun, D.F., A.J. Lemus and G. Bula Meyer. 1983. Genus Poly-siphonia (Rhodophyta, Ceramiales) in the tropical western Atlan-tic. I. Colombia and Venezuela. Bull. Mar. Sci. 33: 881–898.
Kim, M.S. and I.K. Lee. 1999. Neosiphonia flavimarina gen. et sp.nov. with a taxonomic reassessment of the genus Polysiphonia(Rhodomelaceae, Rhodophyta). Phycol. Res. 47: 271–281.
Kim, M.S. and E.C. Yang. 2005. Taxonomic note of Polysiphoniapacifica (Ceramiales, Rhodophyta) complex with focus of Pacif-ic isolates. Algae 20: 15–23.
Kim, M.S., C.A. Maggs, L. McIvor and M.D. Guiry. 2000. Reap-praisal of the type species of Polysiphonia (Rhodomelaceae,Rhodophyta). Eur. J. Phycol. 35: 83–92.
Kim, M.S., E.C. Yang, A. Mansilla and S.M. Boo. 2004. Recentintroduction of Polysiphonia morrowii (Ceramiales, Rhodophy-ta) to Punta Arenas, Chile. Bot. Mar. 47: 389–394.
Kim, M.S., E.C. Yang, H.G. Choi and S.M. Boo. 2005. Phylogeneticrelationships of Polysiphonia and Neosiphonia (Rhodophyta)based on rbcL and SSU rDNA sequence analyses. Phycologia44 (4 suppl.): 54.
Brought to you by | College of William and MaryAuthenticated | 128.239.99.140
Download Date | 1/13/14 7:32 PM
292 N.R. Mamoozadeh and D.W. Freshwater: Five Neosiphonia/Polysiphonia species from the Caribbean
Article in press - uncorrected proof
Kumar, S., J. Dudley, M. Nei and K. Tamura. 2008. MEGA: Abiologist-centric software for evolutionary analysis of DNA andprotein sequences. Brief. Bioinform. 9: 299–306.
Kutzing, F.T. 1863. Tabulae phycologicae, Vol. 13. Nordhausen. pp.i–iii, 1–31q100 pls.
Le Gall, L. and G.W. Saunders. 2010. DNA barcoding is a powerfultool to uncover algal diversity: A case study of the Phyllopho-raceae (Gigartinales, Rhodophyta) in the Canadian flora. J. Phy-col. 46: 374–389.
Littler, D.S. and M.M. Littler. 2000. Caribbean reef plants. An iden-tification guide to the reef plants of the Caribbean, Bahamas,Florida and Gulf of Mexico. Offshore Graphics, WashingtonD.C., USA. pp. 542.
Maddison, D.R. and W.P. Maddison. 2000. MacClade4: Analysis ofphylogeny and character evolution, version 4.0, Sinauer Asso-ciates, Sunderland, MA, USA.
Mateo-Cid, L.E., A.C. Mendoza-Gonzalez and R.B. Searles. 2006.A checklist and seasonal account of the deepwater Rhodophytaaround Cozumel Island on the Caribbean Coast of Mexico.Caribb. J. Sci. 42: 39–52.
McIvor, L., C.A. Maggs, J. Provan and M.J. Stanhope. 2001. rbcLsequences reveal multiple cryptic introductions of the Japanesered alga Polysiphonia harveyi. Mol. Ecol. 10: 911–919.
Meier, R., G. Zhang and F. Ali. 2008. The use of mean instead ofsmallest interspecific distances exaggerates the size of the ‘‘bar-coding gap’’ and leads to misidentification. Syst. Biol. 57:809–813.
Menez, E.G. 1964. The taxonomy of Polysiphonia in Hawaii. Pac.Sci. 18: 207–222.
Millar, A.J.K. and D.W. Freshwater. 2005. Morphology and molec-ular phylogeny of the marine algal order Gelidiales (Rhodophy-ta) from New South Wales, including Lord Howe and NorfolkIslands. Aust. Syst. Bot. 18: 215–263.
Millar, A.J.K. and M.J. Wynne. 1992. Patulophycus eclipes gen etsp. nov. (Delesseriaceae, Rhodophyta) from the southwesternPacific. Syst. Bot. 17: 409–416.
Phillips, L.E. 2006. A re-assessment of the species previouslyincluded in Lenormandiopsis including the description of Aneu-rianna gen. nov. (Rhodomelaceae, Ceramiales). Crypt. Algol. 27:213–232.
Robba, L., S.J. Russell, G.L. Barker and J. Brodie. 2006. Assessingthe use of the mitochondrial cox1 marker for use in DNA bar-coding of red algae (Rhodophyta). Am. J. Bot. 93: 1101–1108.
Saunders, G.W. 2005. Applying DNA barcoding to red macroalgae:A preliminary appraisal holds promise for future applications.Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 360: 1879–1888.
Saunders, G.W. 2008. A DNA barcode examination of the red algalfamily Dumontiaceae (Gigartinales, Florideophyceae) in Cana-dian waters reveals substantial cryptic (overlooked) speciesdiversity. 1. The foliose Dilsea-Neodilsea complex and Weeksia.Botany 86: 773–789.
Saunders, G.W. and G.T. Kraft. 1994. Small-subunit rRNA genesequences from representatives of selected families of the Gigar-tinales and Rhodymeniales (Rhodophyta). 1. Evidence for thePlocamiales ord. nov. Can. J. Bot. 72: 1250–1263.
Schneider, C.W. and R.B. Searles. 1991. Seaweeds of the south-eastern United States: Cape Hatteras to Cape Canaveral. DukeUniversity Press, Durham, NC, USA. pp. 553.
Setchell, W.A. and N.L. Gardner. 1930. Marine algae of the Revil-lagigedo Islands expedition in 1925. Proc. Calif. Acad. Sci. 19:109–215.
Stewart, J.G. 1991. Marine algae and seagrasses of San DiegoCounty: a handbook of benthic marine plants from intertidal andsubtidal sites between the U.S.-Mexican border and Orange
County, California. California Sea Grant College, University ofCalifornia, LaJolla, CA, USA. pp. 197.
Stuercke, B. 2006. An integrated taxonomic assessment of NorthCarolina Polysiphonia (Ceramiales, Rhodophyta) species. MSthesis, University of North Carolina Wilmington. pp. 129.
Stuercke, B. and D.W. Freshwater. 2008. Consistency of morpho-logical characters used to delimit Polysiphonia sensu lato spe-cies (Ceramiales, Florideophyceae): analyses of North Carolina,USA specimens. Phycologia 47: 541–559.
Stuercke, B. and D.W. Freshwater. 2010. Two new species of Poly-siphonia (Ceramiales, Florideophyceae) from the western Atlan-tic. Bot. Mar. 53: 301–311.
Swofford, D.L. 2002. PAUP*: Phylogenetic analysis using parsi-mony (*and other methods), version 4.0, Sinauer Associates,Sunderland, MA, USA.
Tamura, K., J. Dudley, M. Nei and S. Kumar. 2007. MEGA4:Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis (MEGA) softwareversion 4.0. Mol. Biol. Evol. 24: 1596–1599.
Taylor, W.R. 1929. Notes on algae from the tropical Atlantic Ocean.Am. J. Bot. 16: 621–630.
Taylor, W.R. 1941. Tropical marine algae of the Arthur Schott Her-barium. Field Mus. Nat. Hist., Botanical Series 20: 87–204.
Taylor, W.R. 1942. Caribbean marine algae of the Allan Hancockexpedition, 1939. Allan Hancock Atlantic Exped. Rep. 2: 1–193.
Taylor, W.R. 1945. Pacific marine algae of the Allan Hancock expe-ditions to the Galapagos Islands. Allan Hancock Pac. Exped. 12:1–528.
Taylor, W.R. 1960. Marine algae of the eastern tropical and sub-tropical coasts of the Americas. The University of MichiganPress, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. pp. 870.
Taylor, W.R. 1969. Notes on the distribution of West Indian marinealgae particularly in the Lesser Antilles. Contr. Univ. MichiganHerb. 9: 125–203.
Tsuda, R.T. and I.A. Abbott. 1985. Collection, handling, preserva-tion, and logistics. In: (M.M. Littler and D.S. Littler, eds) Eco-logical field methods: macroalgae. Handbook of phycologicalmethods. Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge, NewYork, NY, USA. pp. 67–68.
Williams, L.G. 1949. Seasonal alternation of marine floras at CapeLookout, North Carolina. Amer. J. Bot. 35: 682–695.
Womersley, H.B.S. 1979. Southern Australian species of Polysipho-nia Greville (Rhodophyta). Aust. J. Bot. 27: 459–528.
Womersley, H.B.S. 2003. The marine benthic flora of Southern Aus-tralia. Part IIID. Ceramiales. Delesseriaceae, Sarcomeniaceae,Rhodomelaceae. Australian Biological Resources Study, Can-berra, Australia. pp. 533.
Wynne, M.J. 1998. A checklist of benthic marine algae of the trop-ical and subtropical western Atlantic: first revision. Nova Hed-wigia 116: 1–155.
Yang, E.C., M.S. Kim, P.J.L. Geraldino, D. Sahoo, J.A. Shin andS.M. Boo. 2008. Mitochondrial cox1 and plastid rbcL genes ofGracilaria vermiculophylla (Gracilariaceae, Rhodophyta). J.Appl. Phycol. 20: 161–168.
Yoon, H.Y. 1986. A taxonomic study of genus Polysiphonia (Rho-dophyta) from Korea. Korean J. Phycol. 1: 3–86.
Zuccarello, G.C., D. Moon and L.J. Goff. 2004. A phylogeneticstudy of parasitic genera placed in the family Choreocolacaceae(Rhodophyta). J. Phycol. 40: 937–945.
Zwickl, D.J. 2006. Genetic algorithm approaches for the phyloge-netic analysis of large biological sequence data sets under themaximum likelihood criterion. PhD. dissertation, The Universityof Texas at Austin. pp. 115.
Received 18 October, 2010; accepted 23 February, 2011; online first1 June, 2011
Brought to you by | College of William and MaryAuthenticated | 128.239.99.140
Download Date | 1/13/14 7:32 PM