Search

Prymnesium parvum is a bloom forming haptophyte that has been responsible for numerous fish kill events across the world. The toxicity of P. parvum has been attributed to the production of large polyketide compounds, collectively called prymnesins, which based on their structure can be divided into A-, B- and C-type. The polyketide chemical nature of prymnesins indicates the potential involvement of polyketide synthases (PKSs) in their biosynthesis. However, little is known about the presence of PKSs in P. parvum as well as the potential molecular trade-offs of toxin biosynthesis. In the current study, we generated and analyzed the transcriptomes of nine P. parvum strains that produce different toxin types and have various cellular toxin contents. Numerous type I PKSs, ranging from 37 to 109, were found among the strains. Larger modular type I PKSs were mainly retrieved from strains with high cellular toxin levels and eight consensus transcripts were present in all nine strains. Gene expression variance analysis revealed potential molecular trade-offs associated with cellular toxin quantity, showing that basic metabolic processes seem to correlate negatively with cellular toxin content. These findings point towards the presence of metabolic costs for maintaining high cellular toxin quantity. The detailed analysis of PKSs in P. parvum is the first step towards better understanding the molecular basis of the biosynthesis of prymnesins and contributes to the development of molecular tools for efficient monitoring of future blooms.

Many marine ciliate species retain functional chloroplasts from their photosynthetic prey. In some species the functionality of the acquired plastids is connected to the simultaneous retention of prey nuclei. To date, this has never been documented in plastidic Strombidium species. The functionality of the sequestered chloroplasts in Strombidium species is thought to be independent from any nuclear control and only maintained via frequent replacement of chloroplasts from newly ingested prey. Chloroplasts sequestered from the cryptophyte prey Teleaulax amphioxeia have been shown to keep their functionality for several days in the ciliate Strombidium cf. basimorphum. To investigate the potential retention of prey genetic material in this ciliate we applied molecular marker specific for this cryptophyte prey. Here, we demonstrate that genetic material from prey nuclei, nucleomorphs and ribosomes is detectable inside the ciliate for at least five days after prey ingestion. Moreover, single-cell transcriptomic revealed the presence of transcripts of prey nuclear origin in the ciliate after four days of prey starvation. These new findings might lead to the reconsideration of the mechanisms regulating chloroplasts retention in Strombidium ciliates. The development and application of molecular tools appear promising to improve our understanding on chloroplasts retention in planktonic protists.

MixITiN comprises seven work packages (WPs). WP3 is a research work package focusing upon development and deployment of molecular and physiological methods to collectively establish new approaches for measuring and monitoring mixotrophic activity in laboratory and field -based setting, and for their description within in silico activities. [...]

An important functional trait of organisms is their trophic mode. It determines their position within food webs, as well as their function within an ecosystem. For the better part of the 20 century, aquatic protist communities were thought to consist mainly of producers (phytoplankton) and consumers (protozooplankton). Phytoplankton cover their energy requirements through photosynthesis (phototrophy), while protozooplankton graze on prey and organic particles (phagotrophy). However, over the past decades, it was shown that another trophic group (mixoplankton) comprise a notable part of aquatic protist communities. Mixoplankton employ a third trophic mode by combining phototrophy and phagotrophy (mixotrophy). Due to the historical dichotomy, it is not straightforward to gain adequate and correct information on the trophic mode of aquatic protists. Long hours of literature research or expert knowledge are needed to correctly assign trophic modes. Additionally, aquatic protists also have a long history of undergoing taxonomic changes which make it difficult to compare past and present literature. While WoRMS, the World Register of Marine Species, keeps track of the taxonomic changes and assigns each species a unique AphiaID that can be linked to its various historic and present taxonomic hierarchy, there is currently no machine-readable database to query aquatic protists for their trophic modes.

Many protist plankton are mixotrophs, combining phototrophy and phagotrophy. Their role in freshwater and marine ecology has emerged as a major developing feature of plankton research over recent decades. To better aid discussions, we suggest these organisms are termed “mixoplankton”, as “planktonic protist organisms that express, or have potential to express, phototrophy and phagotrophy”. The term “phytoplankton” then describes phototrophic organisms incapable of phagotrophy. “Protozooplankton” describes phagotrophic protists that do not engage in acquired phototrophy. The complexity of the changes to the conceptual base of the plankton trophic web caused by inclusion of mixoplanktonic activities are such that we suggest that the restructured description is termed the “mixoplankton paradigm”. Implications and opportunities for revision of survey and fieldwork, of laboratory experiments and of simulation modelling are considered. The main challenges are not only with taxonomic and functional identifications, and with measuring rates of potentially competing processes within single cells, but with decades of inertia built around the traditional paradigm that assumes a separation of trophic processes between different organisms. In keeping with the synergistic nature of cooperative photo- and phagotrophy in mixoplankton, a comprehensive multidisciplinary approach will be required to tackle the task ahead.

Many protist plankton are mixotrophs, combining phototrophy and phagotrophy. Their role in freshwater and marine ecology has emerged as a major developing feature of plankton research over recent decades. To better aid discussions, we suggest these organisms are termed “mixoplankton”, as “planktonic protist organisms that express, or have potential to express, phototrophy and phagotrophy”. The term “phytoplankton” then describes phototrophic organisms incapable of phagotrophy. “Protozooplankton” describes phagotrophic protists that do not engage in acquired phototrophy. The complexity of the changes to the conceptual base of the plankton trophic web caused by inclusion of mixoplanktonic activities are such that we suggest that the restructured description is termed the “mixoplankton paradigm”. Implications and opportunities for revision of survey and fieldwork, of laboratory experiments and of simulation modelling are considered. The main challenges are not only with taxonomic and functional identifications, and with measuring rates of potentially competing processes within single cells, but with decades of inertia built around the traditional paradigm that assumes a separation of trophic processes between different organisms. In keeping with the synergistic nature of cooperative photo- and phagotrophy in mixoplankton, a comprehensive multidisciplinary approach will be required to tackle the task ahead., Many protist plankton are mixotrophs, combining phototrophy and phagotrophy. Their role in freshwater and marine ecology has emerged as a major developing feature of plankton research over recent decades. To better aid discussions, we suggest these organisms are termed “mixoplankton”, as “planktonic protist organisms that express, or have potential to express, phototrophy and phagotrophy”. The term “phytoplankton” then describes phototrophic organisms incapable of phagotrophy. “Protozooplankton” describes phagotrophic protists that do not engage in acquired phototrophy. The complexity of the changes to the conceptual base of the plankton trophic web caused by inclusion of mixoplanktonic activities are such that we suggest that the restructured description is termed the “mixoplankton paradigm”. Implications and opportunities for revision of survey and fieldwork, of laboratory experiments and of simulation modelling are considered. The main challenges are not only with taxonomic and functional identifications, and with measuring rates of potentially competing processes within single cells, but with decades of inertia built around the traditional paradigm that assumes a separation of trophic processes between different organisms. In keeping with the synergistic nature of cooperative photo- and phagotrophy in mixoplankton, a comprehensive multidisciplinary approach will be required to tackle the task ahead.

Many protist plankton are mixotrophs, combining phototrophy and phagotrophy. Their role in freshwater and marine ecology has emerged as a major developing feature of plankton research over recent decades. To better aid discussions, we suggest these organisms are termed “mixoplankton”, as “planktonic protist organisms that express, or have potential to express, phototrophy and phagotrophy”. The term “phytoplankton” then describes phototrophic organisms incapable of phagotrophy. “Protozooplankton” describes phagotrophic protists that do not engage in acquired phototrophy. The complexity of the changes to the conceptual base of the plankton trophic web caused by inclusion of mixoplanktonic activities are such that we suggest that the restructured description is termed the “mixoplankton paradigm”. Implications and opportunities for revision of survey and fieldwork, of laboratory experiments and of simulation modelling are considered. The main challenges are not only with taxonomic and functional identifications, and with measuring rates of potentially competing processes within single cells, but with decades of inertia built around the traditional paradigm that assumes a separation of trophic processes between different organisms. In keeping with the synergistic nature of cooperative photo- and phagotrophy in mixoplankton, a comprehensive multidisciplinary approach will be required to tackle the task ahead

Many protist plankton are mixotrophs, combining phototrophy and phagotrophy. Their role in freshwater and marine ecology has emerged as a major developing feature of plankton research over recent decades. To better aid discussions, we suggest these organisms are termed “mixoplankton”, as “planktonic protist organisms that express, or have potential to express, phototrophy and phagotrophy”. The term “phytoplankton” then describes phototrophic organisms incapable of phagotrophy. “Protozooplankton” describes phagotrophic protists that do not engage in acquired phototrophy. The complexity of the changes to the conceptual base of the plankton trophic web caused by inclusion of mixoplanktonic activities are such that we suggest that the restructured description is termed the “mixoplankton paradigm”. Implications and opportunities for revision of survey and fieldwork, of laboratory experiments and of simulation modelling are considered. The main challenges are not only with taxonomic and functional identifications, and with measuring rates of potentially competing processes within single cells, but with decades of inertia built around the traditional paradigm that assumes a separation of trophic processes between different organisms. In keeping with the synergistic nature of cooperative photo- and phagotrophy in mixoplankton, a comprehensive multidisciplinary approach will be required to tackle the task ahead., info:eu-repo/semantics/published

MixITiN comprises seven work packages (WPs). WP3 is a research work package focusing upon development and deployment of molecular and physiological methods to collectively establish new approaches for measuring and monitoring mixotrophic activity in laboratory and field -based setting, and for their description within in silico activities. [...]