LSU alignments typically cluster groups 1 and 2 together, whereas ITS alignments sometimes return trees where group 2 strains cluster together with groups 4, 5, and 6 (Gu 2011, Tahvanainen et al. 2012). In the concatenated phylogeny presented here, group 1 appears clearly differentiated, whereas the branching of group 2 is poorly resolved, which emphasizes its low divergence from the respective other groups and puts it into an intermediate position between group 1 and groups 4/5/6. Although the present strain sampling is not fully representative of the global distribution of the A. ostenfeldii

complex, the rDNA analysis indicates some ecological and phylogeographic patterns. selleck Groups 1 and 2 both contain a mix of geographic isolates from shallow and productive coastal embayments or river estuaries (Percy et al. 2004, Bravo et al. 2006, Kremp et al. 2009, Tomas et al. 2012, Table 1). Laboratory studies have shown that many group 1 isolates show optimal growth under mesohaline conditions (Gu 2011, Suikkanen et al. 2013). In contrast, group 2 strains were isolated from higher salinity Small molecule library environments and have been shown to exhibit optimal growth at near oceanic salinities (Suikkanen et al. 2013). Baltic A. ostenfeldii strains have recently been considered a distinct

lineage that has evolved due to physical and physiological barriers after the last glaciation in the newly formed enclosed brackish water body of the Baltic Sea (Tahvanainen et al. 2012). However, this scenario must be reconsidered given that identical genotypes have been isolated from the U.S. East coast. The close genetic relationships of these geographically distant populations suggest recent anthropogenic

dispersal as documented for a number of toxic phytoplankton species (e.g., Bolch and de Salas 2007). Population check details genetic analyses of Baltic A. ostenfeldii using AFLP showed significant isolation by distance within the Baltic Sea, implying that the species has been present here for a long period of time (Tahvanainen et al. 2012). The ecophysiological data available for isolates belonging to groups 3–6 are less comprehensive, but the established salinity tolerance ranges are narrow and clearly indicate adaptation to marine conditions (Suikkanen et al. 2013). In these groups, genetic relationships more clearly reflect geographic distribution patterns. Group 3 and 4 may represent geographically isolated populations with group 3 from Japan possibly being a distinct East Asian genotype and group 4 containing isolates from New Zealand. Closely related groups 5 and 6 consist to a large part of strains from the North Atlantic with group 5 strains representing the western parts and group 6 strains the eastern coasts. However, it is likely that with additional sampling the observed pattern may change and some groups will be found to be globally distributed.