Latitudinal phytoplankton distribution and the neutral theory of biodiversity

Aim Recent studies have suggested that global diatom distributions are not limited by dispersal, in the case of both extant species and fossil species, but rather that environmental filtering explains their spatial patterns. Hubbell's neutral theory of biodiversity provides a framework in which to test these alternatives. Our aim is to test whether the structure of marine phytoplankton (diatoms, dinoflagellates and coccolithophores) assemblages across the Atlantic agrees with neutral theory predictions. We asked: (1) whether intersite variance in phytoplankton diversity is explained predominantly by dispersal limitation or by environmental conditions; and (2) whether species abundance distributions are consistent with those expected by the neutral model. Location Meridional transect of the Atlantic (50 degrees N50 degrees S). Methods We estimated the relative contributions of environmental factors and geographic distance to phytoplankton composition using similarity matrices, Mantel tests and variation partitioning of the species composition based upon canonical ordination methods. We compared the species abundance distribution of phytoplankton with the neutral model using Etienne's maximum-likelihood inference method. Results Phytoplankton communities are slightly more determined by niche segregation (24%), than by dispersal limitation and ecological drift (17%). In 60% of communities, the assumption of neutrality in species' abundance distributions could not be rejected. In tropical zones, where oceanic gyres enclose large stable water masses, most communities showed low species immigration rates; in contrast, we infer that communities in temperate areas, out of oligotrophic gyres, have higher rates of species immigration. Conclusions Phytoplankton community structure is consistent with partial niche assembly and partial dispersal and drift assembly (neutral processes). The role of dispersal limitation is almost as important as habitat filtering, a fact that has been largely overlooked in previous studies. Furthermore, the polewards increase in immigration rates of species that we have discovered is probably caused by water mixing conditions and productivity.

Are Prorocentrum hoffmannianum and Prorocentrum belizeanum (Dinophyceae, Prorocentrales), the same species? An integration of morphological and molecular data.

The taxonomic assignment of Prorocentrum species is based on morphological characteristics; however, morphological variability has been found for several taxa isolated from different geographical regions. In this study, we evaluated species boundaries of Prorocentrum hoffmannianum and Prorocentrum belizeanum based on morphological and molecular data. A detailed morphological analysis was done, concentrating on the periflagellar architecture. Molecular analyses were performed on partial Small Sub-Unit (SSU) rDNA, partial Large Sub-Unit (LSU) rDNA, complete Internal Transcribed Spacer Regions (ITS1-5.8S-ITS2), and partial cytochrome b (cob) sequences. We concatenated the SSU-ITS-LSU fragments and constructed a phylogenetic tree using Bayesian Inference (BI) and maximum likelihood (ML) methods. Morphological analyses indicated that the main characters, such as cell size and number of depressions per valve, normally used to distinguish P. hoffmannianum from P. belizeanum, overlapped. No clear differences were found in the periflagellar area architecture. Prorocentrum hoffmannianum and P. belizeanum were a highly supported monophyletic clade separated into three subclades, which broadly corresponded to the sample collection regions. Subtle morphological overlaps found in cell shape, size, and ornamentation lead us to conclude that P. hoffmanianum and P. belizeanum might be considered conspecific. The molecular data analyses did not separate P. hoffmannianum and P. belizeanum into two morphospecies, and thus, we considered them to be the P. hoffmannianum species complex because their clades are separated by their geographic origin. These geographic and genetically distinct clades could be referred to as ribotypes: (A) Belize, (B) Florida-Cuba, (C1) India, and (C2) Australia.