(Kützing) Brébisson 1838 Category: Centric
TYPE SPECIES: Cyclotella distinguenda Hustedt
In the genus Cyclotella sensu stricto the rimoportula is positioned on a costa, within the ring of marginal fultoportulae (Alverson et al. 2011).
Like the genera Cyclostephanos, Discostella and Lindavia the valve face of Cyclotella has differential ornamentation between the central and marginal areas. The central area of the valve face may be flat to tangentially undulate and smooth to colliculate. Numerous marginal fultoportulae are present.
Cyclostephanos, Discostella and Lindavia have been separated from this formerly broad group of diatoms. Still, features within the remaining species in Cyclotella are variable, indicating that the genus may continue to be an unnatural group. That is, Cyclotella is not an evolutionary lineage, but represents a mixed grouping of taxa.
Cite This Page:
Spaulding, S., and Edlund, M. (2008). Cyclotella. In Diatoms of the United States. Retrieved November 28, 2015, from http://westerndiatoms.colorado.edu/taxa/genus/Cyclotella
The content of the page (text and images) was revised to reflect the recognition of Lindavia based on Nakov et al. (2015).
The type of the genus Cyclotella is changed on this website from C. tecta (Kützing) Brébisson to C. distinguenda Hustedt based on the following:
In 1984, Håkansson and Ross recognized a nomenclatural problem and proposed that the name of the genus Cyclotella be conserved with Kützing’s material of “Frustulia operculata (C. Agardh) sensu Kütz Taennstaedt 1834” as the type. Because the name Cyclotella operculata was based on Rhopalodia, Håkansson and Ross had to propose a new name for Kützing’s “Frustulia operculata (C. Agardh) Kütz. sensu Taennstaedt 1834” and chose to recognize Kützing’s taxon as a new species: Cyclotella tecta Håkansson et Ross (1984) sp. nov. This proposal was approved by the IAPT (Greuter et al. 1988)
Håkansson (1989) next decided to investigate the type material with LM and SEM of several taxa that seemed related to their new C. tecta. In her 1989 analysis, she determined that C. tecta was a later synomym for a taxon that Hustedt described in 1927 from Lunz, Cyclotella distinguenda, that is, C. distinguenda was identical to C. tecta and clearly C. distinguenda was an earlier and validly published name.
So with that background, what is the type species of Cyclotella? Does it remain C. tecta based on Håkansson and Ross (1984) proposal for conservation that was accepted, or does the generitype switch to C. distinguenda because it is the earlier published name for C. tecta?
We propose that the correct generitype for Cyclotella is thus C. distinguenda Hustedt 1927 based on:
Cyclotella (Kütz.) Bréb. , Brebisson, A. de. 1838. Considerations sur les Diatomees. 20 pp. Falaise, Paris.. (nom. cons.) Typus: Cyclotella tecta Hakannson et Ross (typ. cons.). Currently accepted name for the type species: Cyclotella distinguenda Hustedt 1927
Genus conserved and type designated in: Håkansson and Ross (1984)