Scribd
Upload
2K views14 pages

Algal Classification

Algal classification

Uploaded by

Abhinav Bharati
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF or read online on Scribd
2K views14 pages

Algal Classification

Algal classification

Uploaded by

Abhinav Bharati
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF or read online on Scribd
amauvurzo0 34 | WHAT IS CLASSIFICATION? Classification may be defined as: “Scientific categoriza- tion of the organisms in a hierarchical series of groups.” Though there are now existing “varieties” and “forms” but “species” is generally considered the smallest group. More similar species are grouped together in a “genus”, similar ‘genera are grouped into “families”, families into “orders”, orders into “classes”, classes into “divisions”, and divi- sions into “kingdoms”. A kingdom (whether of plants or animals) is the highest taxonomic rank ALGAL NOMENCLATURE ‘The Greek word for algae is phykos', and according to International Rules of Botanical Nomenclature, a group Of algae should necessarily be incorporated by the word ‘phykos . Because of such incorporation, the words such as Chlorophyceae, Phacophyceae and Rhodophyceae indicate ‘an idea of ther relation with algae. The International Code of Botanical Nomenclature (Lanjouw, 1956) has recommended the following suffixes forthe different categories of algae: Division > phyta Sub-division :phytina Class: phyceae Sub-class : phycidae (Order alles Sub-onder + inales Family: aceac Sub-family > oideae Tribe eae Genus Generally @ Latin name Species Generally a Latin name Variety A Latin word Form A Latin word ‘According to Prescott (1969), Latins borrowed the word “phykos and spelled it Fucus CLASSIFICATION OF THE ALGAE Therefore, because the words like Chlorophyta, Phacophyta and Rhodophyta end with “phyta", these are equivalent to the status of a division; words like Chlorophyceae, Phaeophyceae and Rhodophyceae end with “phyceae” and therefore are equivalent to the status of a class; and words like Volvocales, Oedogoniales and CCharales end with “ales” and hence are orders in the algal classification. BASIS OF ALGAL CLASSIFICATION Rarely only one, and usually a combination of a few or more of the fllowing characters, are considered by the ‘algal taxonomists while classifying algae: 1, Pigments: Their complement, relative amount, kinds, chemical composition, et 2. External form: Size, shape, appendages and other structures 3. Chromatophore shape: Whether cup shaped, stellate, reticulate, discoid, spiral, girdle shaped, et. 4. Reserve food products: Starch, oil, etc., and their chemical composition 5. Flagella: Structure, type, number, position, anatomy and insertion on the body 6. Cell wall: Submicroscopic wall, its chemical compo- sition, etc, 7. Nucleus: Presence or absence of a definite nucleus 8. Chromosome: Number, arrangement, shape, et. 9. Lifechistory and reproduction: Type of life-history, ‘method of reproduction, shape of reproductive bod- ies, presence or absence of sexual reproduction, etc. 10, Algal physiology: Different physiological details 11, Ecological data: Freshwater, marine, tc. SCHOOLS OF THOUGHT FOR ALGAL CLASSIFICATION Regarding the algal thought fication, there are two schools of Classification of the Aigae According to one school —(supported by Pascher, 1914, 1931; Smith, 1933, 1955; Papenfuss, 1946; Prescott, 1969; tc.) the algae should be divided first into several “phyta” (ie. divisions, such as Chlorophyta and Phacophyta) a then in each “phyta” there should be different “phyceac’ ([Link], such as Chlorophyceae and Phacophyceae). The scientists supporting the second view (Fritsch, 1935, 1945 and his followers) have been ofthe opinion that alga isitself ‘equivalent to a division, and therefore it can only be further divided into classes (='phyceae")andnotinto many divisions (@phyta’). So there is no word like ‘phyta’ in classification proposed by Fritsch and his supporters of the second view: ‘Supporters ofthe first view, who consider that there are present many “phytas” in algac, base thir classification on the following: 1. Pigments differ in different phytas (= divisions) 2. Product of photosynthesis is different in different divisions But the supporters of the second view, who believe that algae should be divided directly into classes (‘phy- cceae"), base their classification on the following. 1. Chlorophyll-a is common to all algae, and so there is definitely a common origin from a common source. ‘Therefore, they all belong to the same group. 2. Internal structure of flagella is similar in all. 3. Product of assimilation may be different but the pro- cess of assimilation is same in all 4. Methods of reproduction are also almost common inal Papenfuss (1951) also proposed that there must not be ‘only “plyta” in a division of algae but the word “phyco” rust also be incorporated before ‘phyta’, specially because of their link with algae. Therefore, instead of divisions like Chlorophyta, Phaeophyta, etc, they should be named “Chlorophycophyta”, “Phaeophycophyta”. et. 3.5 | SYSTEMS OF ALGAL CLASSIFICATION: ALWAYS IN CHANGING STATE. In the words of Prescott (1969): ideas concerning classification systems con- tinually vary as more and more facts are disclosed which require modifications of the previous con- ‘cepts, Further, we may come to realize that as long ‘as there are three men on the earth, there will be at least two different interpretations of the facts, pos- sibly three, and we may find that none of them is correct. 13 In the light of the above statement all the 12 systems of classification of algae proposed by different workers (dur- ing 1800-1982) and discussed in this book, reflect that clas- sification has always been changing. Findings of Ett (1982) also provide support to the same idea, because he has ‘established an absolutely new class “Chlamydophyceae” which includes only those members of Volvocales, CChiorococcales and Tetrasporales which have the 200- spores of Chlamydomonas-type. If such a trend of creating new ‘classes’ continues, time is perhaps not very far when there will be hundreds of ‘classes’ in algae. Findings of Ett (1982) have also been questioned by Dearson (1984), according to whom the creation of such classes will “only Jead toa confusion inthe taxonomy of green algae”. 36 | CLASSIFICATION BEFORE 1800 Linnaeus (1753) recognised 14 genera of algae, of which only 4 are considered among algae these days: Conferva, Ulva, Chara and Fucus 3.7 | CLASSIFICATION PROPOSED BY W.H. HARVEY (1836) Harvey described marine algae from many parts of the world including Britain, Australia, America, New Zealand ‘and Antarctica, and divided them on the basis of their colour (=pigments) inthe following three main groups 1. Chlorospermae (Green algae) 2. Melanospermae (Brown algae) 3. Rhodospermae (Red algae) ‘The classification of Harvey recognized the importance ‘of pigmentation 38 CLASSIFICATION PROPOSED BY A.W. EICHLER (1886) Eichler recognized following five groups in algae: ‘Cyanophyceae Diatomeae Chilorophiyceae Phacophycene Rhodophyceae 3.9 | CLASSIFICATION PROPOSED BY A. PASCHER (1914, 1931, ‘The first evolutionary classification was proposed by Pascher in 1914, revised by himself in 1931, He sup- ported the view that algae is above the rank of a division. So, it should first be divided into some divisions (=phy- tas), and then each division into one or more classes. He classified the algae into following eight divisions: [Link]. Divi Classes ieyvophy ‘Chysophyccas Heterokortae® Diatomeae 2 Phacophyts Phacophycete 3. Pyrrophyta Ceyptophyceae Desmokontae Dinophyeese 4°. Euglenophyta —-Buglenineae $. Chlorophyta Chorophyeeae ‘Conjugatae 6. Charophyta ——_Charopyesae Rhodop! Bangineae Floridinese 8. Cyanophyta——_Myxophyeeae 3.10 | CLASSIFICATION PROPOSED BY G.M. SMITH (1 ‘Smith (1955) also believes that algae should be divided first into some divisions and then cach division should contain some classes. He supported Pascher's (1914, 1931) classification but suggested following modifications: 1. Charophyta should not be ranked asa separate division but it should be treated only as a class (Charophyceae) under division Chlorophyta. The Smith’s classification ‘thus contains only seven divisions in algae. 2 Class Conjugatae of the Pascher's classification should be ranked only as an order (Zygnematales) in Prescott (1969) spelled it Pyrrhophyta. According to him, itis incorrectly spelled Pyrrophsta. ‘6. Under Rhodophyta Smith placed only one class, i.e, Rhodophyceae. ‘Thus, an outline of the classification proposed by Smith is as follows: S. Division Classes Chlorophyccoe | Charophyceae Euglenophyeeae Cryptophyceae Desmokontae Dinophyecac Xanthoptiyceae Chrysophyceae Bacillarophyceae Inogencratae Heterogeneratac Cyelosporac Myxophycene T., Chlorophyts 2, Euglenophyta 3 Pyrrophy Chysophyta $. Phacophyta 6.” Cyamophyta 7. + Rhodophyta Rhedophycene Fritsch believed that algae, as a group, is equivalent to a division and therefore it should not be divided into any more “phyia” (=divisions) but it should be divided only into classes (= phyceae). Hence there are no Chlorophyta, Phaeophyta or Rhodophyta in classification proposed by him. Instead, there are only classes like Chlorophyceae, Phacophyceae o¢ Rhodophyceae. Some other important suggestions of his classification are: 1. Class Conjugatae of Pascher’s classification should be treated only as an onder (= Conjugales) of class Chlo- rophyceae. 2. Division Charophyta of Pascher’s (1914, 1931) classi- fication or class Charophyceae of Smith’ (1933, 1955) classification should be treated only as an order (Chara- les) in class Chlorophyceae. They show similarity in pigmentation and product of assimilation. 3. Fritsch does not recognize Desmokontae, The classification proposed by Fritsch (1935, 1945) has been followed inthis book. ® Smith (1933) used the word Zygnematales instead of Conj- sales Classification of the Algae 4. Fritsch criticized the inclusion of Xanthophyceae, Bacillariophyceae and Chrysophyceae under one single division, ie. Chrysophyta.* According to him, there is hardly any clear similarity between Bacill ‘ophyceae and other two classes (Xanthophyceae and ‘Chrysophyceae) because: i, Bacillariophyceae are all diploid whereas Xanthophyceae and Chrysophyceae are hap- loid fi, Cell wall constituents of diatoms differ from that of Xanthophyceae and Chrysophyceae Mode of reproduction is different in diatoms. and other two classes Pigments as well as the product of assimilation in Bacillariophyceae ae different from those of “Xanthophyceae and Chrysophyceae 5. Members of Euglenophyta were placed by Fritsch in two separate classes, ie. Euglenineac and Chloro- ‘monadineae. If all these five modifications are applied in Pascher's classification, the classification proposed by Fritsch becomes clear. In the system proposed by Fritsch, algae are divided into following 11 classes: 1. Chlorophyceae” 7. Chloromonadineae 2. Xainthophyceae 8. Euglenineae 3. Chrysophyceae 9. Phaeophyceae 4. Bacillariophyceae ‘10. Rhodophyceae 5. Cryptophyceae 11. Myxophyceae 6. Dinophyceae An outline of clasification of algae proposed by Fritsch is given in Table 3.1 spread in p. 15-19. 3.12 | CLASSIFICATION PROPOSED BY G.F. PAPENFUSS (1946) Criticizing Frtsch’s (1935, 1945) classification, Papenfuss (1946) reports: In as much as class is a category below the level of phylum and since there, at present, is no justification for Joking upon all algae as composing a single phylum, the system of Fritsch does not constitute a complete and well rounded arrangement. The system of Pascher thus remains ‘asthe one which is most acceptable. © Sce Paseher's and Smiths classifications. ” Blackman and Tansley (1903) used the word Isokoniae for (Chlorophyceae. 15 Papenfuss (1946) also criticised the Pascher’s classifi- cation on the following grounds: 1. The names ofthe divisions do not contain the old and well-established connotation plykos. “The designation of Chlorophyta as the exclusive name fora group of algue is not proper. He has further mentioned: “if the names of algal phyla contained the connotation phvkos also, they would have the added merit of being explicit as the kinds of plants they apply.” He proposed seven divisions in the 2. algae: Chrysophycophyta Phacophycophyta Pyrthophiycophyta Euglenophycophyta Chlorophycophyta ‘Charophycophyta 7. Rhodophycophyta, Papenfuss (1946) considered the blue-green algae or Cyanophyceae as a class in the phylum Schizophyta, ie, along with bacteria. | Table 3.1 | gy ‘Classification of proposed by Fe itech (08,9905) CLASS. L. CHLOROPHYCEAE ‘Ord, VOLNOCALES ‘Sub-Ord, (a) Chimydomonadineae (enotile) 1. Chlamydoitionadaceae Chlamydomonas 2. Sperellaceie Volvox, Sphaerella 3. Polyblepharidacene Pobblepharides 4. Phadoracede Phacotus Sub-Ord,(b)Tetrasporineae (palmelloid) 5. Tetrasporaceae Tetraspora [Link] Palmelia Sub-Ord,(c) Chlonydendrineae (dendroig) 7. Chlorodendracene Echallocystis, Prasinocladus ‘Ord. 1, CHLOROCOCCALES 1. Chlorococcaceae Chiorococeum 2. Bremasphaeraceae Eremosphacra (Continued) 16 Algae HEXEN contrnes EEE contived 3 Glowlonse Gio A eamaypoas Conan 4. Ooeytcese Oveysis Sub-Or i Deine 5. Selemarsosne Sener $. Damidiaome Desi (Castro, 6 Diconroerissae Revels emilee * deen (Ord. VII SIPHONALES 8. Consens Scones 1 Prtesiphomcese Prcosiphon (rd IH. ULOTRICHALES 2. Caulerpaceae Canter, Boop Sub-Or (0) Ulsichinese 3. Detbesacne Dertesia 1, Ulticcee Uris ‘k Daylaceue “ecaari, 2. Meeps Micro Dasa 3. Ovinrocapcene Ciindncapsa [Link] Cadiun 4. Uiecene ha, Emeromorpha 6. atic Yala Sab-Ond ()Pasioinse 7. Chactsiponacse Chactosiphon 5. Pasilceae Praia 1 Poiponaceae Phyiosiphon Sub Ord) Sphacropenear 0. Vauhercene vonchon 6 trianghese Sphacroplee ona 1x. chananes (Or IV-CLADOPHORALES Cans Chara Niele | drone Cats CLAS EANTHOPHV CEA ont cuseromonatzs ra ETEROCHLONIDALES . src Sah On () Heterchoiese Prchlle 1. Heeocleiacee eteochlrs Draparaliopis Sah On. () Hetrcapinse Depeealdt 2. etcrocapecean Corpoea 2 Trewerblocae cee Sb. On.(c)Hetrodendrinse 3. Colochatacee Coleochate 3. Mschococeacene Machoocens 4. Chacorphariicene Chactsphoeridign ——Sub-Or () Heterictioeae 5. Plmmncocacns Pearcoccs 4 Hescrhicdasne ioletane rd. LOEDOGONIALES (rd, I HETEROCOCCALES 1. Ondoponinose Outi 1 Haomineracne Halophaera areal 2. Myrochloridoceae Mjsochoris 3. Chlorobtrydacene Chlooborys (Ord. VL. CONJUGALES . 4. Corobencese Chorohectum SahOnk (0 Escesopane 5 Opbiccyiseee Ophioeam (0) Mestesoidene (rd Il. HETEROTRICHALES |. Mencacincee Crindocrt ome 1 Tiomemacese Trihanema Pee Spm Zrneme 2. Heteectonincee Heterotendon 3 Mogae Nowreue (rd IV, HETEROSIPHONALES Sirona 1 Bouydiacae Bordon Classification of the Algae 7 Condtued Continued ‘CLASS. I. CHRYSOPHYCEAE 2 Bidulphioideae Tata (Ord. 1, CHRYSOMONADALES. 4. Rutilaicidese uataria (2) Chrysomonadineae (Ord.I1. PENNALES @ Chromuineae (@ Araphidene [Link], ——Chromulina 5 Fragilarioidene Fragiaria 2. Oicomonadaceae Oicomonas (ii) Raphidioideae [Link] _Mallomonas & Banik “Eunona 4 Cyroptonense Conephora ai (i Isoctrysidene : 7. Achnanboidese Achnanthes Kochrvsiacsae Sep (6 Bra 6. Coccolithophoridacese Coccollthus Blaine 7. Symncene a 8. Naviuloideae Navieuda (Gi) ctromenadese 9. Bpitbemioidese Epiohemia {.octmonaicee ——Ochomona Ne Nencchoee chi 9. Monadaceae Monas a Sirella 10. Lepochromonadaceae —Dinobryon v PHY CEAE (argue ‘Ord. L CRYPTOMONADALES (0) Cryptomonadineue 11. Prymnesiaceae ‘Prymnesium ° (oy misntapaiens 1. Cryptomonadaceae Hila 12 Milasdiytderens —‘Rhtrclryals 2. Nephroselmidacene Sennia 13. Lagyniaceae Lagynion (0) Phacocapsinese (©) Chryscepsinese 3. Phacocapsacene Phacoplan 14. Chrynocapencese Cho socapsa Ord. U. CRYPTOCOCCALES 15. Naegeillaceae Nacgeilla 4. Cryptococcacene Teragonidim 16, Miydraracene Hydrarus (CLASS. VI DINOPHYCEAE (PERIDINIEAE) (Ord. Il. CHRYSOSPHAERALES (A) DESMOKONTAE |. Chrysosphaeraceae (Chrysosphaera Ord. I. DESMOMONADALES 2. Crysostomataceoe Chrsasretta 1. Desmomonadaceae Pesmacapsa ‘3. Plsrospormacees? (Ord. Il. THECATALES (Onl. BE, CHREUOERICHALES 2. Prorocentraceae Prorocemtrum 1 Nematochysidaceae Nematochryis Ord. tH. DINOPHYSIALES Phacothamnionacene 2 Phacotbannion am iecplyts Thallocysidaceae is x Thallochrys 4. Amphisoleniaceae Amphisolenia (CLASS. IV: BACILLARIOPHIYCEAE™ (@pINOKONTAE ‘Ord. L CENTRALES 1. Discoidese roel 2. Solenoidene Corethrom "The classification of diatoms adopted by Karsten (1928) and Hustet (1930) has been fllowed by Fritsch (1935). (Continued) "The classification of Dinophyceae given by Lindemann (1928) and Schiller (1931) hasbeen followed by Fritsch (1938) 18 Algae EDEN Cominves EERE Contes (2) Gymnodioideae CLASS. IX. PHAEOPHYCEAE 5. Pronoctieacese Pronoctica ‘Ord. ECTOCARPALES 6. Gymnosiniacese Gymnodinium | etoearpaceae crocus 7. Polykrikaceae Polykrikos (2. Myrionematacesc Myrionema Noctucaceae Noctiuca 3. Blachistaceae alors @ Wormoinene vhosovus 4 Leathesiaceae Leatesia 5. Mesoglocaceae Mesogloea 10, Blastodinicese ‘lastainum cnc ee (by Amphithalea Ample 15 Hoorkiss (©) Kotkwizelloieae Kolbe 8. Splacniiacese Splachniion (6) Peiinioideae 9, Punctrace Panctaria 11. Glenodiniacese Glenodinion 10, Asperococeacae Asperoeoceus 12. Protoceratiaceae ‘Protoceratium 1 Encoctiacese Avengaria 13. Gonyaulaceae Gonvaulax 12. Dietyosiphonaceae Dicyoriphon wa. Pe pints (Ord. IL TILOPTERIDALES. Tlopieris (Ord. 11. CUTLERIALES. Cuteria 15, Ceratiaceae Ceratium Ont [Link] Sous 16. Gonlodomeqasy Goniedeene Ord. V. DESMARESTIALES Desmarestia 17, Certocorysceae Cerawcorys Ord. VI. LAMINARIALES 15, Padolampacese Padolampas Chonda (i) Dinocapsineae Laminaria 19, Dinocapsacese Glocodinium Macrocyts (Gi) Rbizodininese Dinamoebidiu Alaria I. DINOCOCCALES 20. Dinococcaceae Tetradinium Sphacelaria ML DINOTRICHALES Halopers 21, Dinotrchacese Dinothri (Cladostephus 22. Dinocloniaceve Dinoclonium Choristocarpus (CLASS, VII. CHLOROMONADINEAE (Ord. VEIL DICTYOTALES Dieta Ord. 1X. FUCALES Cel Mogens (uch 1935 p21) eg, Temoma, FEE Puce Tacwoaria 2. Wimantalisese Himanthetia 3. Cymoscraecae Gpsophora ‘CLASS. VIN. EUGLENINEAE d supmacne men |. Euglenaceae Exglena 5. Hormosiraceae Hormosina 2. Astasiacene Asaia 6. Durvilleacese Durviltea 3. Peranemaceae Peranems [Link] Ascoscim Classification of the Algae 19 EEIERE Continues EERE continues CLASS. X. RHODOPHYCEAE 9. Hypnencene Tipne Ga BANGIOIDEAE 10 Peni conn onan _ -Sotarrneee leringia es bone 12. Graclrnceae Gracilaria Bengicsse 1B. Mychodeacese Myohodea 2. Porphyidinceae Neevea, Porphira ne ene 1m ‘Acrosicsne ontcwuationatne 15. Phyllophoracese Phoophora NEMALIONALES . 16. Gigartinaceae Gigarina pees ‘ine Ord. V RHODYMENIALES Batrachospermaceae Batrachospermum ‘1, Champiaceac Champia » 2. Rhodymeniaceae Rhodymenia | Nacaracese Nacaria oma Bonnemaisonicese ia See Bomematsois 1. Coramiaesae Coramium [Link] Thorea 2. Delawe’ . Helminthocladiscese bmi 7 . Helminthors (a) Delesserieae Delesseria 8. Chactangiaceae (Choetanginm (b) Nitophylleae Nitophyllum (Ord. Ih GELIDIALES () Sarcomenieae Sarcomenia 1. Geldiacene Gelidium 4 Rhodomelacone ‘Ord. Il. CRYPTONEMIALES (8) Polysiphonieae Polysiphonia |. Glocosiphoniaceae Glocosiphonia (2) Lophodaline Lophoshakia 2. Endocladiaceae Glocopetis (6) Bostychiese Colacopss [Link] Caltymenia (@Rhodomeleae Rhodomela 4. Grateloupiaceae Acodes (©) Chondrieae Chondria ‘5. Dumoatiaceae ikea, Dumontia (0 Laurenciene Ricandia 6. Crworiacene Cruoria (g) Pterosiphonicae Prerosiphonia 7, Rhizophyllidacese hizophylis (0) Herposiphoniese Herposiphonia 8, Squamariacese Ethelia (@) Lophosiphonieae Lophosiphonia 9. Corallinacene Coralling @) Polyzonicse Pojemia 10. Choreocolceae Choreocolar (69 Amansine dalla, Amansia Ord. 1V. GIGARTINALES 4 Dasyaceae Dasa 1. Calosiphoniacese Calosiphomia ‘CLASS. XI MYXOPHYCEAE (CYANOPHYCEAE) ‘2 Meedomacene Piseme ‘Ord. I. CHROOCOCCALES 3. Sebdetianene Sebdenia 1 Chroococeaceae Chroococeus. 4, Furcellariacese Furcellarta Gloeocapsa 5. Soliraceae Anatheca 2. Emtophysalidaceae Placoma 6 Rissoetlacese Rissoella (Ord, I. CHAMAESIPHONALES 7. Rhabdoniaceae Rhabdonia |. Dermocarpaceae Dermocarpa 8. Rhodophyllidaceae Rhodophylis Chamaesiphon 3 Fndonemataccae Endonema 4 Siphononematacene Siphononema (Ord, II PLEUROCAPSALES 1. Pleurocapsaceae Plewrocapsa 2 Hyellaceae Hyella (Ord, IV. NOSTOCALES 1. Oseillatoriaceae Oscillator, Lyngby, Phormidium 2. Nostocaceae Anabaena, Nostoe 3 Microchaetaceae Richelia 4, Rivulariacese Glocotrichia, Rovlaria '. Seytonemataceae Seytonema, Tobypothrix (Ord. V. STIGONEMATALES 1. Pulvinulariaceae Loriella 2. Capsosiraceae Capsosia 3. Nostochopsidaceae Nostochopsis 4. Loefgreniaceae Loefgrenia 5, Stigonemataceae Stigonema 3.13 | CLASSIFICATION PROPOSED BY V.J. CHAPMAN (1: Chapman, on the basis of a combination of the pigments and biochemical differences, together with morphological differences, divided algae as follows: SNe, Divison Clases 1. Euphycophyta ‘Charophyceae Chleropyceae Phacophyceac Rhodophyceac 2 Myxophycophyta_ Myxophyceae 3. Chysophycoptya ——_Chrysopycene Xanthophyceas acilariphyese 4 Pyrrophycophyta Cryptophyceae Dinophycene 3.14 | CLASSIFICATION PROPOSED BY G.W. PRESCOTT (1969) Prescott divided algae into 9 phyla as under: ‘[Link] Phgtam Chases 1 Chlorophyta Chorophyceae (with 17 orders), Charopyceae (with onder) 2. Euglenopnyta (with 2 orders) 3. Chrysophyta (Chrysophyceae (with $ orders) ‘Bocillariophyccae (with 2 orders), Heterokoatae (anthophycea; with $ orders) 4. Pyrhopyta Desmokontae, Dinokontae (with 5 orders) 5. Phacophyta ‘Sub-Phyturm (2) Phacosporeae: Isogenerata (5 orders) (©) Celesporae: Heterogeneratae (5 orders) 6 Rhodophyta Sub-Phytum (@) Bangiideae (with 4 ‘orders, () Florideae (with 6 orders) 7. Cyanoptya Sub-Phylum (2) Coccogonene (with 3 order), (6) Hormogonce (with 5 orders) 8 -Cryptophyta(with2 orders) 9. Chloromonadophyta {ith only 1 ord) 3.15 | CLASSIFICATION PROPOSED BY FE. ROUND (1973) Round (1973) classified algae into two major groups, - Prokaryota and Eukaryota. 1. Cyanophyta, 1 Bnglenoptyta 2. Chlorophyta 3. Charpy 4 Prasinopya 5. Xanthophyta (Continued) ‘SNe. 7 2 Classification of the Algae SNe rowp Phy 6 Haptopiya 7. Dinophyta 8 Bacilroghyea 9, Crysopyta 10: Phacoptyta 1-Rbodopiyta 12. Coyptpiya 3.16 | CLASSIFICATION PROPOSED BY H.C. BOLD AND M.J. WYNNE. Bold and Wynne (1978) followed the suggestion of Papenfuss(1946) in using the word ‘phyco" before “phyta’ in the divisions of algae. They discussed the following divisions of algae: Cyanochloronta”® CChlorophycophyta Charophyta Euglenophycophyta Phacophycophyta Chrrysophycophyta Pyrthophycophyta Cryptophycophyta Rhodophycophyta 3.17 | CLASSIFICATION PROPOSED: BY S.P. PARKER (1 Kingdom PLatar Group 1. Prokaryota Division 1: Cyanophycota Class Cyanophyceae Division 2: Prochlorophycota Class Prochlorophyceae Group 2. Eukaryota Division 1: Phodophycota Class Rhodophyceae Division 2. : Chromophycota Class 1 Chrysophyceae 2: Prymnesiophyceae 3: Xanthophyceae ‘Bold and wyone usd this word for blue-green algae but also mentioned that this designation (Cyanochloronta) “is non- ‘commital with respect to their possible algal or bacterial an-

You might also like