Discrepancy between conventional morphological systematics and nuclear phylogeny of tintinnids (Ciliophora: Choreotrichia)

Takehiro Kazama, Seiji Ishida, Satoshi Shimano, Jotaro Urabe

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

8 Citations (Scopus)


Tintinnid ciliates have been traditionally classified according to morphological and morphometric features of the lorica. To examine if the morphological characteristics of loricae reflect the phylogenetic relationships, we collected 23 tintinnid morphospecies (11 genera) and reconstructed phylogenetic trees based on 84 partial sequences of nuclear small subunit rRNA (SSrRNA) gene fragments of 44 morphospecies from a total of eight families (55 sequences from this study, and 29 sequences from the literature). We found that tintinnid ciliates could be classified into six clades consisting of five major clades. While one clade consisted of one family, each of the other five clades consisted of more than two families. Although two families were found only in one clade, the remaining six families were found in more than two clades. In addition, each of six morphospecies was found in more than two major clades, indicating that they are polyphyletic. Principal coordinate analysis showed that morphology of the lorica overlapped substantially between the clades. These results imply that most of the morphological and morphometric traits of marine tintinnid species do not reflect SSrRNA genetic distances even at family levels. It is necessary to identify new characteristics that reflect phylogenetic relationships robustly.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)111-125
Number of pages15
JournalPlankton and Benthos Research
Issue number3
Publication statusPublished - 2012 Dec


  • marine ciliates
  • morphological variation
  • nuclear SSrRNA
  • phylogeny
  • Tintinnida


Dive into the research topics of 'Discrepancy between conventional morphological systematics and nuclear phylogeny of tintinnids (Ciliophora: Choreotrichia)'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this