Cited by 26Protist diversity and phylogenyBiocrusts and Microbial EcologyAquatic Ecosystems and Phytoplankton Dynamics

Taxonomic revision of commercially used Arthrospira(Cyanobacteria) strains: a polyphasic approach

Open access
Papapanagiotou, Georgia, Gkelis, Spyros·2019·European Journal of Phycology

Abstract

The cyanobacterial genus Arthrospira Stizenberger ex Gomont 1892 includes some of the most commercially significant microalgae, commonly known under the taxonomically incorrect brand name ‘Spirulina’. However, the infrageneric classification of the genus is still undefined. Herein, the classification of two Arthrospira strains (Nigrita M1 and Nigrita C1) from a commercial culture installation was studied and a polyphasic meta-analysis approach to a representative number (> 30) of strains was applied, in an attempt to determine the taxonomic relationships among the existing Arthrospira strains. The combined analysis of molecular (16S rRNA, 16S-23S rRNA ITS and cpcBA-IGS sequences) and phenotypic (13 morphological and morphometric characters) data of the studied Arthrospira strains divided them into three clusters/taxa. The main two taxa, namely Taxon I and Taxon II, include planktonic representatives, with irregular and regular helical structure of the filament, respectively. In contrast, Taxon III comprises the benthic representatives of the genus. Arthrospira strains Nigrita M1 and Nigrita C1 fall into Taxon I and II, respectively. The combined phenotypic and phylogenetic analysis suggests classification of Arthrospira strains into three taxa as subspecies of a single species within the genus Arthrospira.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/09670262.2019.1624832

Cites

81 of 81 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Arthrospira has been recently divided into two distinct groups.

    “Moreover, Arthrospira has been recently divided into two distinct groups (see below).”

    From Spirulina/Arthrospira/Limnospira—Three Names of the Single Organism (2024) · cites this paper as [23]

    The Phylogenetic analysis reports two main Arthrospira clusters (I and II), supporting the two-group description. But it also identifies cluster III, and the Polyphasic taxonomy groups the strains into three taxa; the claim omits that qualification. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 83 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. [16]16. Fournadzieva, S., Pilarsky, P., Arvanitis, A., Fytikas, M. & Koultsiakis, E. (2002). Use of geothermal fluids for cul- tivation of the microalgae Spirulina in Nigrita Serres. In 7th National Conference on Renewable Energy Sources (Tsiligiridis, G. & Kaouris, I., editors), 97-104.
  2. [27]27. Hall, T. (2011). BioEdit: an important software for mole- cular biology. GERF Bulletin of Bioscience, 2: 60-61.
  3. [32]32. Jukes, T.H. & Cantor, C.R. (1969). Evolution of protein mole- cules. In Mammalian Protein Metabolism III (Munro, H. N., editor), 21-132. Academic Press, New York.
  4. [37]37. Komárek, J. (2002). Problems in cyanobacterial taxonomy: implications for most common toxin producing species. In Workshop on Freshwater Harmful Algal Blooms: Health Risk and Control Management (Melchiorre, S., Viaggiu, E. & Bruno, M., editors), 6-43. Rome, Italy.
  5. [40]40. Komárek, J. & Anagnostidis, K. (2005). Cyanoprokaryota 2. Teil/2nd Part: Oscillatoriales. In Süss-wasserflora von Mitteleuropa, 19/2 (Büdel, B., Krienitz, L., Gärtner, G. & Schagerl, M., editors), Elsevier/Spektrum Akademischer Verlag, München.
  6. [88]88. Zarrouk, C., (1966) Contribution a l'étude d'une cyano- bacterie: influence de divers facteurs physiques et chimi- ques sur la croissance et la photosynthese de Spirulina maxima (Setchell et Gardner) Geitler. PhD Thesis, University of Paris, Paris, France, 85 pp.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Papapanagiotou, G., & Gkelis, S.
Affiliations
Aristotle University of Thessaloniki (GR)
Corresponding author
Gkelis, Spyros
Venue
European Journal of Phycology
Published
2019-07-11
Volume
54
Issue
4
Pages
595-608
ISSN
  • 0967-0262 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-4433
OpenAlex
W2962149662
Cited by
26
References
83
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2
FWCI
0.41
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
European Journal of Phycology (publishedVersion)
Funders
Aristotle University Research Committee Program “Isolation and diversity of Arthrospira (“Spirulina”) strains used in commercial cultures” funded by ALGI AEGE (Contract No 91771)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protist diversity and phylogeny
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Biocrusts and Microbial Ecology
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Chemistry › Aquatic Ecosystems and Phytoplankton Dynamics
Keywords
Arthrospira, Spirulina, cyanobacteria, taxonomic revision, infrageneric classification, polyphasic analysis, 16S rRNA, ITS, morphometric parameters, subspecies classification

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review