1. Sloan Foundation Workshop to Resolve Microorganism Taxonomic and Culture Collection Problems Arising from the New Barcoding Initiatives Robert A. Andersen CCMP Bigelow Laboratory for Ocean Sciences Frithjof K ü pper CCAP Dunstaffnage Marine Laboratory, SAMS

2. Introductory Remarks 1.Do we envision DNA sequences playing a role in species identifications? 2.Do we see a need to establish a link between classical species descriptions and DNA sequences?

3. Amphidinium Original Description Clapar è de, É. and Lachmann, J. 1859. É tudes sur les Infusoires et les Rhizopodes. Inst. Natl. Genevois 6(1): 410-411 Type locality: Bergen Fjord, Norway

4. CCAP Strains CCAP 1102/4 Amphidinium sp., Kirby Creek, Hamford Water, Essex, England CCAP 1102/5 Amphidinium sp., Scarborough, Yorkshire, England CCMP Strains CCMP119 Amphidinium operculatum, Knight Key, Florida USA, 8-10 µ m x 14-53 µ mCCMP119 CCMP122 Amphidinium operculatum, collection site unknown, 5-12 µ m x 9-16 µ mCCMP122 CCMP123 Amphidinium operculatum, Florida Keys, Tea Table Channel, Florida USA, 13-17 µ m x 19-30 µ mCCMP123 CCMP1344 Amphidinium operculatum, Knight Key, Florida USA, 10-12 µ m x 18-24 µCCMP1344 CSIRO Strains CS-109 Amphidinium sp., Coral Sea, Australia, CS-259 Amphidinium sp., Kirrimine Beach, Queensland, Australia CS-383 Amphidinium sp., Bicheno, Tasmania, Australia CS-787/01 Amphidinium sp., Rock pool Wedge Bay, Tasmania, Australia CS-787/02 Amphidinium sp., Rock pool Wedge Bay, Tasmania, Australia MBIC Strains MBIC10794 Amphidinium sp., Sesoko, Okinawa, Japan MBIC11135 Amphidinium sp., Kin Bay, Okinawa, Japan NEPCC Strains NEPCC670 Amphidinium operculatum, Japan, 31°22'N 113°55'W (Note: originally from CCMP124; this strain is now identified as Amphidinium carterae from Gulf of California, Mexico by CCMP] NEPCC799 Amphidinium operculatum, Knight Key, Florida USA NIES Strains NIES1368 Amphidinium operculatum, Suzu / Ishikawa, Japan PLY Strains PLY587 Amphidinium operculatum PLY450 Amphidinium sp. PLY440 Amphidinium sp.

5. No type or authentic culture, and none is from the type locality. For the sake of argument, let us assume that the barcode sequences are different among the strains. Which strain (and barcode) will be chosen to represent the name Amphidinium operculatum? a. Do we choose the one closest to the type locality? b. Do we choose the one with the most publications? c. Do we choose the first one that was barcoded? d. Do we allow the barcoders to randomly select a strain? e. Do we choose the strain most closely resembling the type description? f. Do we ignore all of these cultures, return to the type locality and search for the organism again?

6. valid spp.total # spp.ink, EM etc.BiologicalCultureDNA Aphelidea118NA13 Apicomplexa42964,541,5003754005100 Apusomonadida112010NA11 Bicosoecida4710010NA34 Cercomonadida7215059NA613 Chlorarachniophyta92140 Choanoflagellida161200140NA1322 Chrysophyceae70020006752550 Ciliates90008000150099 Conjugating green algae700021,00060001000 Cryptomonas126111114 14 epitypes Diatoms10,000100,000998812 Dinoflagellates20003500197030 Euglenids140017001300601512 Foraminifera4000 0010 private cultures Haptophyta30075029010300Edvardsen/Probert Labyrinthulomycota5050040201012 Oomycetes2000500250 0 Phaeophyceae1800200070 in culture Phaeothamniophyceae2810020800 Pinguiophyceae5151440 Schizocaldiophyceae11111 Synurophyceae287175287000 Thaumatomonadida345031NA23 subtotal4333829818296 percent with type DNA0.68% percent with authentic culture 1.15%

7. Workshop Guidelines?? 1.Be visionary 2.Try not to focus on today’s problems 3.Find broad solutions

8. Acknowledgements Alfred P. Sloan Foundation - Jesse Ausubel Canadian Barcode of Life Network - Paul Hebert and many others CBoL - David Schindel GenBank - EMBL - Scott Federhen and Guy Cochrane