, Volume 269, Issue 1, pp 31–38 | Cite as

Freshwater gomphonemoid diatom phylogeny: preliminary results

  • J.P. Kociolek
  • E.F. Stoermer
Life cycle and systematics


A cladistic analysis of eleven freshwater gomphonemoid diatom taxa yielded three equally most parsimonious cladograms. The three cladograms suggest Gomphoneis Cleve is non-monophyletic as originally and recently circumscribed. Gomphoneis elegans and G. transsilvanica (Pant.) Krammer are more closely related to Gomphopleura Reichelt ex Tempère than to other members of the genus. Gomphoneis geitleri Kociolek & Stoermer appears to represent a monotypic lineage. Among the taxa with differentiated apical pore fields Gomphonema kaznakowi Mereschkowsky appears to be primitively astigmate.

The three cladograms vary with regard to systematic affinities among the Gomphoneis herculeana (Ehrenberg) Cleve group, Miocene gomphonemoid species from Idaho (USA), gomphonemoid taxa from East Africa and Gomphonema sensu stricto. Despite variability in number of puncta rows per stria and presence of an axial plate in the Miocene species from North America, inclusion of these taxa in the analysis provided better resolution of relationships than if they were excluded.

Key words

cladistics Gomphoneis Gomphonema Gomphopleura phylogeny 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Anonymous, 1975. Proposals for a standardization of diatom terminology and diagnoses. Nova Hedwigia Beih. 53: 323–354.Google Scholar
  2. Cleve, P.T., 1894. Synopsis of the naviculoid diatoms. Part 1. K. Svensk. Vetens-Akad. Handl. 26: 1–194.Google Scholar
  3. Darwin, C., 1859. On the origin of species by means of natural selection, or the preservation of favored races in the struggle for life. J. Murray, London.Google Scholar
  4. Dawson, P.A., 1973. Observations on some species of the diatom genus Gomphonema C.A. Agardh. Br. phycol. J. 8: 413–423.Google Scholar
  5. Donoghue, M.J., J.A. Doyle, J. Gauthier, A.G. Kluge & T. Rowe, 1989. The importance of fossils in phylogeny reconstruction. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 20: 431–460.Google Scholar
  6. Eldredge, N. & J. Cracraft, 1980. Phylogenetic patterns and the evolutionary process. Columbia Univ. Press, New York, 349 pp.Google Scholar
  7. Gauthier, J., A.G. Kluge & T. Rowe, 1988. Amniote phylogeny and the importance of fossils. Cladistics 4: 105–209.Google Scholar
  8. Gould, S.J., 1991. The disparity of the Burgess Shale arthropod fauna and the limits of cladistic analysis: Why we must strive to quantify morphospace. Paleobiology 17: 411–423.Google Scholar
  9. Kociolek, J.P., Accepted. Valve ultrastructure and systematic position of Gomphonema kaznakowi Mereschkowsky. Diatom Res.Google Scholar
  10. Kociolek, J.P. & E.F. Stoermer, 1986a. Phylogenetic relationships and classification of monoraphid diatoms based on phenetic and cladistic methodologies. Phycologia 25: 297–303.Google Scholar
  11. Kociolek, J.P. & E.F. Stoermer, 1986b. Observations on North American Gomphoneis (Bacillariophyceae). II. Descriptions and ultrastructure of two new species. Trans. Am. Microsc. Soc. 105: 141–151.Google Scholar
  12. Kociolek, J.P. & E.F. Stoermer, 1988a. A preliminary investigation of the phylogenetic relationships of the freshwater, apical pore field-bearing cymbelloid and gomphonemoid diatoms (Bacillariophyceae). J. Phycol. 24: 377–385.Google Scholar
  13. Kociolek, J.P. & E.F. Stoermer, 1988b. Observations on North American Gomphoneis (Bacillariophyceae). IV. Valve ultrastructure and systematic position of Gomphoneis elegans. Trans. Am. Microsc. Soc. 107: 386–396.Google Scholar
  14. Kociolek, J.P. & E.F. Stoermer, 1988c. Taxonomy, ultrastructure, and distribution of Gomphoneis herculeana, G. eriense and closely related species. Proc. Acad. nat. Sci. Philad. 140: 24–97.Google Scholar
  15. Kociolek, J.P. & E.F. Stoermer, 1988d. Taxonomic and systematic position of the Gomphoneis quadripunctata-species complex. Diatom Res. 3: 95–108.Google Scholar
  16. Kociolek, J.P. & E.F. Stoermer, 1989. Phylogenetic relationships and evolutionary history of the diatom genus Gomphoneis. Phycologia 28: 438–454.Google Scholar
  17. Kociolek, J.P. & E.F. Stoermer, 1990. Diatoms from the Upper Miocene Hot Springs Limestone, Snake River Plain, Idaho (U.S.A.). Micropaleont. 36: 331–352.Google Scholar
  18. Kociolek, J.P. & E.F. Stoermer, 1991a. New and interesting Gomphonema species from East Africa. Proc. Cal. Acad. Sci. 47: 275–288.Google Scholar
  19. Kociolek, J.P. & E.F. Stoermer, 1991b. Taxonomy and ultrastructure of some Gomphonema Ehrenberg and Gomphoneis Cleve taxa from the upper Laurentian Great Lakes. Can. J. Bot. 69: 1557–1576.Google Scholar
  20. Kociolek, J.P. & E.F. Stoermer, in press. The diatom genus Gomphoeymbella O. Müller: Taxonomy, ultrastructure and phylogenetic relationships. In P.A. Sims (ed.), Robert Ross Festschrift. O. Koeltz, Koenigstein.Google Scholar
  21. Kociolek, J.P., E.C. Theriot & D.M. Williams, 1989. Inferring diatom phylogeny: a cladistic perspective. Diatom Res. 4: 289–300.Google Scholar
  22. Kociolek, J.P., J.-R. Yang & E.F. Stoermer, 1988. Taxonomy, ultrastructure and systematic position of the Gomphonema grovei M. Schm.-species complex (Bacillariophyceae). Nova Hedwigia 47: 145–158.Google Scholar
  23. Krammer, K. 1982. Observations on the alveoli and areolae of some Naviculaceae. Nova Hedwigia, Beih. 73: 55–80.Google Scholar
  24. Krammer, K. & H. Lange-Bertalot, 1986. Bacillariophyceae. Süsswasserflora von Mitteleuropa, 2 (1). G. Fisher, Stuttgart, 876 pp.Google Scholar
  25. Krammer, K. & H. Lange-Bertalot, 1991. Bacillariophyceae. Süsswasserflora von Mitteleuropa, 2 (4). G. Fisher, Stuttgart, 437 pp.Google Scholar
  26. Mahoney, R.K., 1989. Observations on the diatom Gomphopleura nobilis Reichelt ex Tempère (Bacillariophyceae). Proc. Acad. nat. Sci. Philad. 141: 251–261.Google Scholar
  27. Mahoney, R.K. & C.W. Reimer, 1986. Studies on the genus Brebissonia Grun. (Bacillariophyta). I. Introduction and observations on B. lanceolata comb. nov. In M. Ricard (ed.), Proceedings of the 8th Symposium on Living and Fossil Diatoms. O. Koeltz, Koenigstein: 183–190.Google Scholar
  28. Mann, D.G., 1981. Sieves and flaps: siliceous minutiae in the pores of raphid diatoms. In R. Ross (ed.), Proceedings of the 6th Symposium on Recent and Fossil Diatoms. O. Koeltz, Koenigstein: 279–300.Google Scholar
  29. Reichardt, E. & H. Lange-Bertalot, 1991. Taxonomische revision des Artenkomplexes um Gomphonema angustatum-G. dichotomum-G. intricatum-G. vibrio und ähnliche Taxa (Bacillariophyceae). Nova Hedw. 53: 519–544.Google Scholar
  30. Riedl, R., 1978. Order in living organisms. J. Wiley & Sons, New York, 313 pp.Google Scholar
  31. Round, F.E., 1981. Morphology and phyletic relationships of the silicified algae and the archetypal diatom-monophyly or polyphyly. In T.L. Simpson & B.E. Volcani (eds.), Silicon and siliceous structures in biological systems. SpringerVerlag, New York: 97–128.Google Scholar
  32. Swofford, D.L., 1991. User's Manual for PAUP 3.0. Illinois Natural History Survey, Champaign, 178 pp.Google Scholar
  33. Theriot, E.C., E.F. Stoermer & H. Håkansson, 1987. Taxonomic interpretation of the rimoportula of freshwater genera in the centric diatom family Thalassiosiraceae. Diatom Res. 2: 251–265.Google Scholar
  34. Wiley, E.O., 1981. The theory and practice of phylogenetic systematics. J. Wiley & Sons, New York, 439 pp.Google Scholar
  35. Wiley, E.O., D. Siegel-Causey, D.R. Brooks & V.A. Funk, 1991. The Compleat Cladist. A primer of phylogenetic procedures. University of Kansas Museum of Natural History Special Publication 19, Lawrence, 158 pp.Google Scholar
  36. Williams, D.M., 1985. Morphology, taxonomy and interrelationships of the ribbed araphid diatoms from the genera Diatoma and Meridion (Diatomaceae: Bacillariophyta). Bibl. Diatomol. 8:1–228.Google Scholar
  37. Williams, D.M., 1990. Cladistic analysis of some freshwater araphid diatoms (Bacillariophyta) with particular reference to Diatoma and Meridion. Pl. Syst. Evol. 171: 89–97.Google Scholar
  38. Williams, D.M. & F.E. Round, 1988. Phylogenetic systematics of Synedra. In F.E. Round (ed.), Proceedings of the 9th International Diatom Symposium. O. Koeltz & BioPress, Koenigstein and Bristol: 303–315.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • J.P. Kociolek
    • 1
  • E.F. Stoermer
    • 2
  1. 1.Diatom Collection, Department of Invertebrate Zoology & GeologyCalifornia Academy of SciencesSan FranciscoUSA
  2. 2.Center for Great Lakes and Aquatic SciencesThe University of MichiganAnn ArborUSA

Personalised recommendations