PROGRESS IN PROTOZOOLOGY
PROGRESS IN PROTOZOOLOGY
PROGRESS IN PROTOZOOLOGY
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
PHYLOGENETIC RELATIONSHIPS AMONG PROTOZOA 185<br />
quently periplastidial; encystment by endogenous formation of silicified<br />
cyst wall with specific structure, pore, and aperture; very marked<br />
polymorphism with development of microfibrillar part of cytoskeleton<br />
into rhizopodial forms.<br />
Ochromonas, Dinobryon, Synura<br />
It should be added here that in the diagnosis of the class or superorder<br />
CHROMOMASTIGOPHOREA (IDEA) Prof. Mignot specified<br />
also that the mitochondria have ampouliform (inflated) or tubular<br />
cristae.<br />
Opinion has been expressed by several members of the Panel that<br />
the foregoing, and some of the other diagnoses given by Prof. M i gn<br />
o t tend to be too long and detailed. It cannot be denied, however,<br />
that they are very complete.<br />
There were certain praises as well as criticisms voiced during the<br />
session with regard to the Society's scheme of classification (L e v i n e<br />
et al. 1980) as well as with regard to that of Prof. Mignot. It was<br />
pointed out by Prof. Taylor that the Mignot scheme represents<br />
a beginning toward recognition of natural relationships among the<br />
flagellates. He considered CHROMOMASTIGOPHOREA as a good, natural<br />
grouping. On the other hand, he felt that separation of VOLVO-<br />
CIDA from their very close relatives Chlorococcales was unnatural.<br />
Prof. Taylor not only further emphasized the need for a closer collaboration<br />
between phycologists and protozoologists, but felt that such<br />
a collaboration must include also the mycologists.<br />
Class 2. ZOOMASTIGOPHOREA Calkins, 1909<br />
As far as the separation of PHYTOMASTIGOPHOREA and ZOO-<br />
MASTIGOPHOREA is concerned, several members of the Panel, including<br />
Prof. Taylor, felt that it is unnatural and should be eliminated.<br />
The proposed elimination of these two classes while undoubtedly<br />
sound — it would not separate what appear to be related assemblages<br />
at a class level — must be the subject of further discussion. It has been<br />
suggested, for example, that a new scheme should involve elevating<br />
some groups from the taxonomic levels which they now occupy. Prof.<br />
Taylor went so far as to suggest that the dinoflagellates, with<br />
a diversity and distinctness resembling that of CILIOPHORA, might<br />
actually deserve the rank of a subphylum. A number of questions will<br />
have to be answered, as the result of ongoing discussions, before we<br />
can make major changes in the admittedly artificial class ZOOMASTI-<br />
GOPHOREA. Among these are the following: 1. Are there to be no<br />
http://rcin.org.pl