Green algal linage With Chl a and b as typifying pigments, two chloroplast-limiting membranes, and granal-stacked thylakoids, there is little discussion of the accepted monophyly of chloroplasts from flagellated unicellular algae to vascular plants. The common assumption is that the cyanobacterial ancestor lost the phycobiliproteins as accessory pigments and substituted Chl b and certain carotenoids to enhance the absorption capacity. The chloroplasts of the green lineage appear to be rather stable biochemically and structurally. The possibility that Chl a/b Selleckchem NVP-BGJ398 containing prokaryotes

might be regarded as potential progenitors of green LY2874455 plants has not gained much support (La Roche et al. 1996). Other groups, with Chl a and b pigmentation, are euglenids and chlorarachniophytes for which two separate secondary endosymbioses have been suggested (Green 2010, Fig. 1) but with distinctly different

Geneticin mouse hosts. One example is Euglena, a flagellate with three membranes surrounding its chloroplast. A different example is Bigelowiella, which has four membranes surrounding the chloroplasts, has a nucleomorph (Archibald 2007), but is encased in an ameba. Red algal lineage The red algal group appears to be another stable chloroplast lineage with two chloroplast-limiting membranes and a simple photosynthetic pigment combination of Chl a and phycobiliproteins, a pigmentation virtually identical to that of cyanobacteria. Also, this lineage

has one of the oldest and structurally most convincing fossil remnants at ca. 1.2 BYa (Butterfield 2000). Nevertheless, the group has been at the center of the chloroplast dispersion controversy mostly because it has been placed as endosymbiont at the base of the chromalveolates, argued to be a monophyletic evolutionary group (Cavalier-Smith 2002; cf. Green 2010; Janouškovec et al. 2010). The chromalveolates are a diverse grouping distinguished by: the presence of Chl a plus Chl c, carotenoid-type fucoxanthin or peridinin, having ciliated or flagellated hosts, and by some un-pigmented members having presumably lost a once functioning integrated chloroplast. Significant aspects of the chromalveolate PDK4 hypothesis and major questions are provided by Green (2010) in a critical synopsis. She points out some of the unresolved problems, such as trying to reconcile the wide diversity of hosts with a single red algal endosymbiosis and the positioning of un-pigmented species. An important postulation for coherence of the chromalveolates as a natural group is an explanation accounting for the presence of fully heterotrophic members that lack a plastid. A seemingly logical explanation has been to postulate a significant reduction of chloroplast-related genes or an outright loss (Cavalier-Smith 2002).