Feeding and grazing impact by small marine heterotrophic dinoflagellates on heterotrophic bacteria.

We investigated the feeding of the small heterotrophic dinoflagellates (HTDs) Oxyrrhis marina, Gyrodinium cf. guttula, Gyrodinium sp., Pfiesteria piscicida, and Protoperidinium bipes on marine heterotrophic bacteria. To investigate whether they are able to feed on bacteria, we observed the protoplasm of target heterotrophic dinoflagellate cells under an epifluorescence microscope and transmission electron microscope. In addition, we measured ingestion rates of the dominant heterotrophic dinoflagellate, Gyrodinium spp., on natural populations of marine bacteria (mostly heterotrophic bacteria) in Masan Bay, Korea in 2006-2007. Furthermore, we measured the ingestion rates of O. marina, G. cf. guttula, and P. piscicida on bacteria as a function of bacterial concentration under laboratory conditions. All HTDs tested were able to feed on a single bacterium. Oxyrrhis marina and Gyrodinium spp. intercepted and then ingested a single bacterial cell in feeding currents that were generated by the flagella of the predators. During the field experiments, the ingestion rates and grazing coefficients of Gyrodinium spp. on natural populations of bacteria were 14-61 bacteria/dinoflagellate/h and 0.003-0.972 day(-1), respectively. With increasing prey concentration, the ingestion rates of O. marina, G. cf. guttula, and P. piscicida on bacteria increased rapidly at prey concentrations of ca 0.7-2.2 x 10(6) cells/ml, but increased only slowly or became saturated at higher prey concentrations. The maximum ingestion rate of O. marina on bacteria was much higher than those of G. cf. guttula and P. piscicida. Bacteria alone supported the growth of O. marina. The results of the present study suggest that some HTDs may sometimes have a considerable grazing impact on populations of marine bacteria, and that bacteria may be important prey.

Classification and identification of Pfiesteria and Pfiesteria-like species.

Dinoflagellates can be classified both botanically and zoologically; however, they are typically put in the botanical division Pyrrhophyta. As a group they appear most related to the protistan ciliates and apicomplexans at the ultrastructure level. Within the Pyrrhophyta are both unarmored and armored forms of the dominant, motile flagellated stage. Unarmored dinoflagellates do not have thecal or wall plates arranged in specific series, whereas armored species have plates that vary in thickness but are specific in number and arrangement. In armored dinoflagellates, the plate pattern and tabulation is a diagnostic character at the family, subfamily, and even genus levels. In most cases, the molecular characterization of dinoflagellates confirms the taxonomy on the basis of external morphology; this has been demonstrated for several groups. Together, both genetic and morphological criteria are becoming increasingly important for the characterization, separation, and identification of dinoflagellates species. Pfiesteria and Pfiesteria-like species are thinly armored forms with motile dinospore stages characterized by their distinct plate formulae. Pfiesteria piscicida is the best-known member of the genus; however, there is at least one other species. Other genetically and morphologically related genera, now grouped under the common names of "Lucy," "Shepherd's crook," and cryptoperidiniopsoid, are being studied and described in separate works. All these other heterotrophic dinoflagellate groups, many of which are thought to be benign, co-occur in estuarine waters where Pfiesteria has been found.